He was lined up next to the sideline, about 8 yards upfield from Norfleet.
He was lined up next to the sideline, about 8 yards upfield from Norfleet.
Couldn't agree more about watching the final few minutes again. Everyone should do it. There is so much to pick up on without having the emotions running high.
Does anyone know why MSU wasn't charged a timeout on their lost challenge of the spot on the final drive? I'm almost certain it was announced as a challenge and not a booth review.
I seem to remember it as a review....can coaches even challenge in the B1G?
Inside 2mins, too
but does it drive anyone else nuts that one of those ESPNU commericals has Jason Seahorn saying "It's all on Denard Robinson. If he doesn't electrify the stadium, they don't win."
Has a stupider thing ever been said? I don't know why ESPNU is so proud of it such that they decided to put it on their commercial that they air 10 times a day
Any idea where to find an early line on the Nebraska game??
Looks like Neb -2.5, seen that a couple places this morning.
I would not have guessed that.
Biggest play that seems forgotten is V. Smith's run to start the last 2 minute drill. Having that big play on the 1st play was huge. It wasn't an easy run at all, he had to make a move in the backfield and still got about 12 yards
Seniors Step Up!
an undersized QB out in front blocking. That play does a good job of exemplifying the heart with which the players played this game.
I gotta believe as a D-Coordinator scouting UM for tendencies, you'll find that when Smith is in the game it's more often than not usually a pass. In fact, I'm guessing the % of time Smith gets a hand-off when he's in the game is pretty low.
Sparty sees Smith in the game knowing UM is probably going to have to throw most of the time to get into FG range and Borges calls a hand off Smith.
Three years under RR. Seemed longer at the time though...
Mind!!! I was screaming so loud at the TV!!! Change the fucking clock... She was looking at me like I was being exorcized
radio on at the game and Frank and Jim were saying the same thing. How does that get missed? In the end it hurt sparty more than us.
They also retroactively added 20 seconds back at the end of the first half AFTER runnning another play (so, the clock time added would have been 2 plays late).
I was confused with both. The 20-seconds added thing was because an MSU guy went out of bounds...but as I saw it, the guy's forward progress was clearly stopped and he and the tackler traveled to the sideline laterally...that should keep the clock running, no?
And the replay thing...if they go to replay, isn't it generally understood that the clock is reset to what it was after the reviewed play? I'm curious to know the exact rule in that case. It could have cost Michigan dearly, though luckily it didn't.
First we won, so not a big deal....but Barnum missed a huge block on the denard run (the second play off the drive- right after the smith draw). Denard cuts to the left and there are only two guys on that side of the field- Barnum and a lb. Barnum just stands there. Doesn't really make any effort to get to the second level and block that lb. If he makes that block denard has 15 yards before he sees a defender and given denard, he may be gone.
In the end it didn't matter, but at the time I was disappointed.
The more I think about it the more I'm impressed with the way everyone on the team fought through the whole game. Other than (maybe) the Kovacs interception we just didn't have any lucky breaks. There were at least 2-3 passes that could've been touchdowns had things gone slightly different. And there was the fumbles they caused that still stayed with Sparty.
In many ways this feels more special because of that. I refuse to make any concessions that Michigan got lucky somewhere; because we didn't. The team fought, the crowd fought, the coaches fought. No one, on either side gave an inch. And in the end the Wolvinerines brought Paul home. :) It feels like the curse has been broken by sheer force of will.
How about that defense? How about 160+ yards on the ground against one of the best rush defensives in the country. GRIND IT OUT. It wasn't pretty, but it certainly was Michigan.
say that again.
I swear I saw a handful of plays with #85 on the field, and haven't noticed Joe Reynolds out there in previous games (at least in critical junctures of the games). Must be a good down-field blocker? If so, kudos to Joe for working his tail off to get on the field in a pressure-packed setting.
Proposed new play: Reynolds enters the game. Opposing DC says "must be run, #85 is on the field". Play-action fake to Reynolds side. After a feeble block attempt, Reynolds runs up the seam uncovered. Instant TD. We all rejoice in the goodness that is Joe Reynolds.
I don't think Floyd is getting the praise he deserves for the run support established on the edge. He has definately changed his approach to tackling in the last couple weeks and was stout forcing the counters and pitches back in. He has progressed immensely since week 1.
Late in the game when UM forced MSU to kick a FG, Floyd was huge on the 3rd down play. Bell tries to go up the middle and has nothing. He bounces it outside and Floyd has contain. Floyd has a blocker on him and instead of giving ground, Floyd stretches the play all the way to sideline. I don't think Floyd made the tackle, but he strung the play out long enough to allow the calvary to come to the rescue.
Was he hurt? I don't remember seeing him in the game once Saturday. Box score indicates no carries for him as well. I don't understand how are most physical runner didn't even get in for one play against MSU's defense....??????
Excellent point. Fitzgerald did run hard yesterday though.
Just some thoughts about Borges (I know he is a touchy topic as of late).
I thought his gameplan yesterday was good/fair, but not great. I know a lot of people like to look at the scoreboard and say "No Touchdowns, Borges sucks", but in hindsight, looking at the last few years against MSU and this year against ND, TOs really cost us dearly. He put a leash on Denard and picked his spots to go downfield. I thought the conservative gameplan was the right one.
As far as the no TDs thing goes, I thought the playcalling in the redzone was actually pretty good. We had nothing to show for it, b/c of some poor execution (for example, Denard under throwing Funchess, throw behind Gallon, poor read on the zone read). I do think execution is on the coaching staff to some extent as well, but we're never going to be perfect and we were playing a pretty good defense. In the end, I think the general theme was to minimize mistakes and put points on the board when we could with little risk. It turned out to be enough by a razors edge. I think some of the opinion's of Borges' game are forgetting that the offense isn't a vacuum in the sense that the play calling had a lot to do with how our defense was playing.
Just my thoughts.
Agree, I think Borges' plan was to not let bad Denard show up, even if it meant that for most of the game it would also keep away good Denard - except for late in the game when it really mattered.
Meant to be a reply to previous comment
I agree with the folks noting that these are actually the good times. M was 11-2 last year. I realize that M is recruiting well, but there is no guarantee that that will automatically turn them into a yearly National Title contender. I'm pretty happy with the team M has right now. I mean, don't get me wrong, I love good recruiting and damn if I wouldn't like some more playmakers at WR, not that Denar would necessarily throw it to them accurately, but it's not so bad right now. I don't know how much better M is going to get on defense in terms of production, yardage etc. They are pretty good. I, like all of you, hope they get better, but I wouldn't denigrate the current team by trying to imagine how great they'll be next year. That said, that is the prerogative and enjoyment of being a sports fan. Well, there is always next year. My wife did say she was worried M wouldn't win another National Title before I die. I'm thirty two. I'm hoping we don't have to wait fifty years, and I also hope that she's not poisoning me. Go blue.
So how much of a bump in the BCS rankings do we get for beating Oregon's helmets?
This new era looks and feels a lot like the "Bo" years!
Something that gets lost sometimes in the 4 yr streak by Starty is that we won the previous 6 matchups under Carr. Some of those games were close (as rivalry games often are), but getting back to that level of dominance would be great.
to say we only look at the distant past. In 10 years we are 6-4, in 20 years we are 12-8, in 30 years we are 19-11. We have the longest win streak at 8.
sparty says: "But these are only facts and do not represent the hype, which is closer to the truth".
Bottom line is that Hoke's program is still under development and he's already caught up to Dantonio, whose program is already built. MSU can expect a whole lot more losing in the future. MSU fans who think that Dantonio can keep up with Michigan while getting badly out recruited are delusional.
On the second to last drive we were on the MSU 25 yd line, Denard gets TFL'ed, a false start, and a holding penalty take us out of field goal range. I was going nuts. ND was also like that where we gave up points because the offense went backwards. Hopefully we can get more disciplined on that in the future so that it doesn't cost us another one.
Last year Michigan was one of the least penalized teams in the B10, if not the nation. Not sure what's happened to change this with Team 133, but it definitely cost them some serious momentum, and didn't allow them to take advantage of opportunities.
We're still not a very penalized team. We just had some occur at costly times yeterday.
I thought yesterday was Fitz's best day thus far. He keeps progressing. I'd love to see him break out this Saturday in Lincoln.
His FG was at a crucial moment. If he misses, Sparty gets the ball in good position with just over a minute in the half. I thought we were going to punt and pin em deep. Hoke has some big ones.
1) State didn't seem as nasty. The Christmas ornament helmets and seemingly clean play made them seem totally unlike what we've seen in the past couple years.
2) Dantonio was classier for a change. Combination of the loss and a growing sense his program simply won't be able to keep pace with Hoke and Meyer around.
3) Disapponted and surprised we didn't win by at least a couple of scores.
4) Can't shake the feeling this year's Spartans still beat us six of ten.
Was Bunyan trotted around the field? Did I just miss it?