Beat UCLA 35-0 (which looks more impressive with UCLA beating up Houston), killing Wake Forest 34-7 with time left in the half. With Notre Dame coming up next weekend...
Stanford looks scary good.
Their QB Luck is extremely underrated. Everyone seemed to want to chalk that teams success up to Roby Gerhart last year, but they were solid on both sides of the ball and Luck might be the best QB in the Pac-10.
such a great duo.
You can't be serious. He's been #2 on Mel Kiper's draft board and on Heisman watch lists since last year. He doesn't get a lot of attention because he plays out west, but he's certainly not underrated.
There are idiots at ESPN who think Jake Locker should be the top QB taken in the NFL draft. As such, Luck (and about 50 other guys) are vastly underrated.
Locker went 4 for 20 today. 20 completion percentage tied for the third-worst completion percentage by an FBS QB with at least 20 pass attempts in a game since 2004.
No running game, no time to throw, receivers consistently covered.
Locker has all the tools for the NFL game. The Heisman hype was sill because he doesn't have the team to get him there, but Locker himself is the real deal.
I get that Washington isn't very talented, and maybe I'm just catching Locker on bad days, but I swear, everytime I see him play he puts on a 2008 Threetidan performance. His measurables may be solid, but no aspect of his game impresses me.
Without the stats or the wins or the Jesus. His numbers have been terrible for years now. With what other QB's are doing at small schools, I can't imagine that Locker is even above average and only being held back by a lack of talent around him.
Luck has looked great so far. He will be the best passing QB Notre Dame has seen so far this season. With those safeties that could spell trouble. Harrison Smith is athletic but Motta is out of position a lot.
Scooby? Is rat rou?
I feel a little guilty about it. But I have to admit: every time I see Harbaugh's team play well, I think it bodes well for us in the near future. He's the man.
I assume you think it bodes well for us because you think we can beat them in the Rose Bowl? Ok, good.
what exactly were you saying?
You do realize that RichRod has us at 3-0 right now correct? I'm just making sure.
he's going to agree to be our linebackers coach next season!
...that our 8 - 4 Wolverines will be seeing Stanford in a bowl this year and Denard puts up 50 or so when RichRod keeps the pedal on the floor.
Update: 41 points in the first half. This is how Bo used to gash teams in the 70s...
Their Defense is dominant, and their offense is pretty good too. They don't have a great passing game, but they don't really need one so who cares. They could win it all this year.
And now they are coming to the Big Ten....shit
I was at the Neb-UW game today and they did look pretty damn good. They gave up a few big plays to Locker but their offensive line was dominant and they eventually settled in on defense. However, Nebraska's passing offense did not look all that impressive. I think Washington could have given them a better game had they been able to force Nebraska to make some throws, but the Huskers pretty much just ran it down Washington's throat and UW couldn't stop them, so it got ugly.
OMG HARBAUGH! AM I RITE?
So many programs have been built (or re-built) with a modern spread offense, it is nice to see Harbaugh (and Pelini) getting things done with a stout defense and a power running game. I am hoping for our sake we did not witness a symbolic changing of the Tide in the BCS championship last year when Bama beat UF's spread option.
care if spread offenses are popular or not?
I only care if our spread offense can win games.
Other teams success does not = success for Michigan.
It's about what is proven to win championships and build strong programs. Bottom line: Rich Rodriguez does not have a defense-first philosophy. I understand that we are all-in behind this formula, I just hope it is the right one.
and how can you say "Other teams success does not = success for Michigan" when we just abandoned a 40-year regime in favor for a modern approach to football that had proven to be successful against us so many times? How else are you supposed to measure the evolution of schematics in football, besides referencing other teams?
If you are suggesting that we used the same system for 40 years, you couldn't be more wrong. RR's offense is closer in philosophy to what Bo ran than Carr's pro-style. Bo used to grumble that Carr was sacrificing a lot in the ground game by recruiting QBs with no mobility.
Tate Forcier had 281 passing attempts last year.
Rick Leach had 154 as a senior. In his first two seasons, he had more rushing attempts than passes thrown.
Carr's pro style offense was the design of Cam Cameron and the result of Jim Harbaugh being the starting quarterback. When Moeller became offensive coordinator in 1987, we began exclusively recruiting statue QBs.
I said "regime" not system, and I was talking more about the fact that Moeller and Carr were members of Bo's staff and had good defenses when they were associated with the program. I am not comparing RR's offensive philosophy with any other Michigan coach, I am comparing his attention to the defense vs. other coaches we have had.
The spread option is a new system at Michigan installed by Rich Rodriguez who has been focused on developing his offensive philosophy as a coach for most of his career (and you can only focus on so much). I have no idea whether it was a conscious decision to go with that system, but the choice did happen to come after the same season we opened with two big losses to spread option teams.
Referring to posters you disagree with as "fanboys" is not going to win you a lot of respect around here. Your signature suggests that you're pretty young. Maybe it doesn't make sense for you to talk down to us.
sorry. Seems a lot of people are quick to neg-bang based on an opinion that might even have a slight undertone of something that is not 100% support. Make no mistake, I want this program to win, but I was also a sucker for the whole mystique of "3-yards-and-a-cloud-of-dust" thing. I am getting used to the new system, though, and it is a lot of fun to watch. The OP I made was based on looking at the interplay of this new offensive evolution with defensive responses to it, which I thought was kind of happening writ-small in last year's SEC championship. Michigan made a big step by choosing to join the party and not be a dinosaur and I hope that we bet on the right horse is all. There are no disagreements going on here, just lots of reading comprehension fails.
Especially with the USC penalties and UCLA and Washington not really moving in the positive direction. I look at Stanford as the next West-Coast powerhouse. They will win the Pac10 this year and be NC contenders in the near future.
Stanford just seems to be steaming in the right direction, after having been dreadful, pre-JH. And it really does matter than Stanford has by far the most restrictive academic standards on the P10/12/45. It is not a conference known for its high student standards. But Stanford is. Recruiting, at M, would be a piece of cake for him.
Theoretically, I'm mean. Hypothetically.
Forgetting about Oregon so soon?
Please re-title "WE NEED A NEW ROD WITH JIM HARDBALLS"
this will put Michigan, MSU and Purdue into perspective . I'm thinking Luck is going to have a good day against the ND secondary, but they aren't going to blow out the Irish. Sacramento State and Portland State are great early games - but these games don't mean much.
I like Stanford against Oregon as well, not because of UCLA (who laid an egg vs. the Trees - and proved they can best Houston's 3rd string QB) but rather what Tennesee did in the first half. Tenn let that game get out of control.
Why the update on/sudden interest in Stanford? J/W