Oh, by the way, McGloin is a good QB

That's not what I said, but I'm going to take the high road here and not take your bait.

Actually, I have never typed the name 'McGloin.'  I never argued that he made one specific player look good, I always argued in terms of RR's impacts at a system or program level. Also, if you were to read my past posts, you will never find that I said RR would not win another game, or several games. And I never said he didn't have a potent offense, or that he was not a good offense coach. My main line of argument is that past mismanagement and lack of leadership as interrelated with the culture and institutions at UM have set processes in motion that will make for a difficult future in terms of success of the extent we expect at Michigan.

But go ahead and apply what you think my arguments have been in general to any specific instances. Feel free to make interpretations for me, put words in my mouth on any subject you deem pertinent. I I only ask that you think about my arguments before you proceed to speak for me. Thanks. 

I know what you were saying.  There were quite a few of us who commented that we thought McGloin, and Penn State as a whole, actually, played well last week.

I guess Northwestern has to fire their DC too.

Just our luck that injury makes the coaches realize who should be the starter just before they play us. SIGH. Never thought we'd have to root not to play the back-ups.

Except he doesn't have a wet noodle for an arm. Sigh, what Sheridan did was amiable, but if only he could throw.

45 points--overtime shouldn't count.

Actually, 28--turnovers in Michigan territory shouldn't count either.

And then, they may have allowed a couple of scores just to convince Illinois that this was, indeed, a shootout. You know, in order to inflate Denard's numbers.

So, a conservative estimate is they allowed 14 points to an Illinois team averaging 35 a game. I call that a success!