Michigan/MSU Postgame (actual thoughts) thread

Submitted by Mr. Yost on

First off, FUCK. YES!

With that said, I don't want to ruin the posbang/drinking thread with actual boring football talk.

But what are your thoughts on the game? I was only able to catch the 2nd half...looks like I didn't miss much.

My thoughts...

Denard will be Denard. I was screaming at the TV when he didn't run on that 3rd down when all we needed was a FG, instead we got a holding call. I was also cussing up a storm when Gholston gave us a "free play" late in the game and Denard didn't go deep.

Then of course, when all seems lost, Denard will be Denard. We will forever have to live with "no, No, NO...YES!!!"

One other thing I noticed was that we weren't running north/south except with Denard. Other than that, our defense is forreal - we can win the B1G defense...we WILL win the B1G with this defense.

Butterfield

October 20th, 2012 at 8:35 PM ^

This is a ridiculous criticism at least as it pertains to this game.  The clock management was everything you could hope for, the only thing that made it even seem like a remote issue was Denard and Fitz teaming up on a boneheaded check off and getting tackled inbounds.  If they had that TO that they were forced to burn on that play, 19 seconds left would have been an eternity (as opposed to feeling desparate because we had no TOs). 

WilliSC48

October 20th, 2012 at 7:10 PM ^

We have actual kickers and an actual defense. Feels so good after the last few years. I love having a badass defense. 

Hope Taylor is okay. That injury didn't look good at all. 

The playcalling was frustrating as hell. 

alum96

October 20th, 2012 at 7:46 PM ^

I doubt many expect a fake punt at your own 25 or wherever it was.  Gutsy call and that drive was crazy (18 plays).  If it was at the 40-50 you sort of expect it, but backed up almost at your own red zone - no.  Sometimes the other team should get some credit.

denardogasm

October 20th, 2012 at 10:50 PM ^

Can't really call a fake punt a dumb call unless it fails.  That's the nature of a fake.  If it works you have balls of steel, if it doesn't you're a fool.  It worked, therefore, Dantonio maintains his reputation for making ballsy calls.  At this point you gotta expect him to do it at least once though in a close game.  Should have been prepared for it, even inside their 20.  Also, this is my first post since the game, so WOOOOOOOOOOO!!!

snowcrash

October 20th, 2012 at 8:48 PM ^

I could see trying to set up for a big return if we were behind and really needed field position. But when you're ahead late in the game, the important thing is just to get the ball back. The coaches know that Dantonio loves fake punts and FGs.

wlubd

October 20th, 2012 at 7:11 PM ^

Sparty defense is still fo'real. We had a few big plays but they were stout most of the game.

Maxwell is turrible. Our pass rush wasn't great and he had some open receivers but aside from the bomb in the first half their pass game wasn't frightening at all.

BRENDAN F'N GIBBONS

DREW MF'N DILEO

We didn't played great, and yet still won a rivalry game. Nothing wrong with that.

michchi85

October 20th, 2012 at 7:16 PM ^

Classic example of the D going all out against Denard.  We need to get the other RB's going early in these game, and also take a few shots downfield.  Defense doesn't need to be honest with the way the plays are being called.

With that said, GO BLUE!

FreddieMercuryHayes

October 20th, 2012 at 7:16 PM ^

My thoughts: 

Geez, we still looked under prepared compared to MSU.  At least we have a good D to rely on when Borges has no counter-punches to MSU's gameplan

More importantly: no non-hail mary TOs from Denard.  For the third game in a row.

hart20

October 20th, 2012 at 7:17 PM ^

on offense and in the last 2 minutes. It's inexcusable to have no answer to MSU's D, this many games in a row, and to have not a 2 minute offense after 2 years. Denard's reads were off and he did not look good throwing today. That being said our defense was pretty good and a win is a win, no matter how ugly.

MGoPhysics

October 20th, 2012 at 7:17 PM ^

It went about as I expected.  Our defense held them fairly well and gave up a few big chuck plays.  A little disapointed in the lack of offense, but they seem to know how to shut down Denard on the ground.  It's good to know we can win even if denard isn't guaranteeing 5+ yards every play.  

Surprised by the lack of bubble/laser/whatever screen play when the MSU corners were 7-10 yards off of our WRs.

littlebrownjug

October 20th, 2012 at 7:19 PM ^

MSU was good today, and their D is legit. Their coordinator should be getting a head coaching gig sometime soon, but it is great to see our D and Kickers come through. What happened to Lewan?

littlebrownjug

October 20th, 2012 at 7:19 PM ^

MSU was good today, and their D is legit. Their coordinator should be getting a head coaching gig sometime soon, but it is great to see our D and Kickers come through. What happened to Lewan?

JimBobTressel

October 20th, 2012 at 7:20 PM ^

At this point...I am very worried for Columbus. There is no defense that we will face from here on out as good as MSU, ND, and Bama. But if a game turns into a shootout, I'm worried that the offense won't be able to keep up.

Denard makes 4-5 bad decisions a game. How could he NOT realize he had to run on 3rd and 22 instead of bombing to Jeremy Jackson?!

I cannot believe Gibbons and how far he's come since his freshman year. Boy got swag now.

Toussaint is back!!!!

Dileo never left!!!

nyc_wolverines

October 20th, 2012 at 8:24 PM ^

Denard just does not have the presence of mind required in certain situations to be a next-level NFL QB. His judgment/presence of mind can be questioned at this level, too.

As we watched Denard over the years the ability to win games with his feet caused folks to overlook his - what was thought was developing - passing skills. This year, with a Rock of a defense, Denard's shortcomings are more apparent than ever. In sum: we should not have lost ND and we barely got past MSU. Denard is not a good QB and only his heroics, on a team with a poor D, made us overlook his passing deficiencies.

To benefit all, move Denard out of the QB position. His passing is below par and it will be better for him and the team to hand him the ball with Bellomy in shotgun or under center. Denard will get drafted, and we're costing him spots in the draft by keeping him at QB. Give him a chance to show off his WR skills.

Hoke can explain it as using The Team's skills better, a la Gardner's move. Have some time to develop Bellomy, Denard's a team guy, and could add a passing dimension that we currently lack.

nyc_wolverines

October 20th, 2012 at 10:23 PM ^

"herp derp"?  Forgive me for not caring about whatever Internet phrase or cool kid comeback is dished - the facts are the facts.

Denard throws INT like it's his job in critical situations. We've just had a mediocre defense till now that was as bad as his passing game and so we overlooked his deficiencies.

Now that we have a real defense the inaccuracies are more pronounced. Look what Borges tried to do in Denard's first few games - passing from under center isn't a Denard strength.

Bellomy is a better choice as Michigan doesn't have decent passing game now so it's a step up to have Bellomy under center, either handing to Denard or attempting a pass.

Denard is 55% completion this season - not too worried about giving that stat up nor his penchant for bad desicions.

MichiganTeacher

October 20th, 2012 at 10:26 PM ^

My thoughts exactly.

Bad execution, not a bad decision. I suppose someone could argue that Denard should know that he has a small chance of making that throw, and therefore should have run it, expecting greater value from the run - but I wouldn't make that argument. Guy was open. Denard just missed him.

Mmmm Hmmm

October 20th, 2012 at 7:21 PM ^

I'm a results guy as long as there are not major corners cut (which obviously did not happen here), so I am incredibly happy.

On the positive side of the ledger, the D just seemed stout--they would give up plays, but I did not get the sense (as I have sometimes in recent years) that it was lucky to get stops because the D was out-physicalled.  The CBs looked pretty good to me too--MSU receivers just went out and Mike Valenti'd ("Make Plays!") a number of times.

Aside from a few times where he had no shot, I thought Touissant ran well.

Again, RESULTS, but the last drive would have been a bit less of a nail-biter if Denard had moved things along a little faster.  Unless he was extending the snap count to see if MSU was going to move around on D, it took way too long after the replay.

Drew Dileo looked fantastic!

Great kick by Wile.

I would love to see more Funchess, because he looked quite good when he was in.  If the pass into the endzone was a bit higher, he probably would have snagged rather than being forced to play defense against the pick (which he did quite well).

Great win, regardless of MSU's record, because it is a rivalry game and we broke an incredibly frustrating streak.  Go Blue!