January 1st, 2013 at 6:41 PM ^
*Gallon was awesome. The way he way was getting out of his breaks and how he highpointed the ball was impressive.
*Wile kicked the ball very well overall while impersonating Mike Gillette.
*Gardner showed solid leadership and despite missing some throws gave Michigan a chance to win.
*A lot of underclassman gained valuable playing time against a top 10 team.
*Vincent Smith still has his head attached.
January 1st, 2013 at 8:36 PM ^
January 1st, 2013 at 6:53 PM ^
Gibby was still solid sans hair.
January 1st, 2013 at 7:31 PM ^
Just got back from the game. What a great experience. Our fans were awesome - it felt like a home game for us just walking around. After the first series, I feared another Alabama debacle, but this team showed great character and that they came to play. Regardless of Gardner's inconsistencies/indecisiveness and our suspect secondary play, we kept South Carolina honest, kept Clowney in check for most of the game, and our offense held its own against a good defense, first time we've done that all year. Someone's gotta lose, and we did, but it wasn't a foregone conclusion. Holding my head high in St. Pete Beach tonight, still wearing my M wear.
January 1st, 2013 at 7:23 PM ^
It would be nice to hear some explanation about Clowney's hit, and why the play wasn't ruled dead on the spot. I mean, they just changed the rule this year, that play should be the posterchild for the rule. Clowney leads with his helmet, hits Smith in the helmet, the helmet comes flying violently off, and now that's going to be the showcase of Clowney's heisman bid for 2013. It would be nice to know why that's considered a legal play.
Not that it matters, since SC should have had the ball anyways.
January 1st, 2013 at 8:16 PM ^
January 2nd, 2013 at 3:52 AM ^
January 1st, 2013 at 7:51 PM ^
January 1st, 2013 at 10:17 PM ^
I couldn't believe that when the SC player shoved his own coach, on the field for the entire stadium to see. They didn't even take the kid out or discipline him. Could you imagine if one of our guys did this to Mattison or Hoke? In addition,I believe SC had numerous personal fouls and acted poorly all game. I asked a couple of SC fans if they were proud of that type of behavior. No response.
All in all it was one of the best games I've seen in person and I really thought we were going to leave RayJay with a win on that last drive.
January 1st, 2013 at 7:56 PM ^
January 1st, 2013 at 8:09 PM ^
January 2nd, 2013 at 1:28 AM ^
Like, way better. Against a way better defense.
January 1st, 2013 at 8:28 PM ^
The most unfortunate fact is that the Big Ten is going to gain more revenue this year than last, so it is going to be looked at as a success. I guess I am just waiting for the Big Ten to make some serious changes in Football to materialize into wins on the football field.
And hiring MAC coaches isn't the answer.
Getting off my whining soapbox now.
January 1st, 2013 at 8:35 PM ^
favorable matchups for the Big Ten. Never.
10-2 South Carolina vs 8-4 Michigan, you would never see the Big Ten get a 10-2 vs 8-4 matchup vs the SEC.
January 1st, 2013 at 8:44 PM ^
Regarding the Big Ten, they haven't had consistent bowl success for 10 years, so unless they have just had bad matchups every year then the improvement is just not there.
January 1st, 2013 at 9:04 PM ^
I thought today's game was a good match up. We hung with them the entire game, and the only beat us with :11 seconds left. Lewan handled Clowney. They won by breaking a couple of big plays. Other than that, pretty even match up.
January 1st, 2013 at 10:59 PM ^
NU was 9-3 and Mississippi St was 7-5.
January 1st, 2013 at 8:38 PM ^
Done!!
January 1st, 2013 at 9:20 PM ^
By the time I was 11 years old I had seen Michigan lose four (4) consecutive New Year's Day bowl games...Orange, Rose, Rose, Rose. Bo had been head coach in Ann Arbor for TWELVE YEARS before winning his first bowl game...and he is probably the most revered coach in the program's history.
I guess the takeaway I have is that as bad as it is watching Michigan lose bowl games that they had a legitimate chance to win, they were losing bigger games than this decades ago when they were a much better team.
The Big Ten hasn't been the premier conference in the country since before most of the posters on this board (myself included) were born.
January 1st, 2013 at 11:06 PM ^
I think the Big 10 was possibly the best conference in the mid to late 90's. PSU should have won a share of the NC in '94. Michigan won a NC in '97 Both PSU and UM were solid programs. OSU was a fixture in the Top 10. Saban had turned MSU around, highligted by an upset in 1998 at OSU, which possibly cost OSU a NC, and followed up with a 10-2 year in 1999. Mason had turned Minnesota into a decent program. Northwestern won back to back Big Ten titles. Tiller had Purdue on the upswing. Alvarez had established Wisconsin as a solid program. OSU won a Rose Bowl and a Sugar Bowl. Michigan won a Sugar Bowl and the Big Ten won the Rose Bowl after the '92, '93, '94, '96, '97. ;98 and ;99 seasons.
January 1st, 2013 at 11:18 PM ^
January 1st, 2013 at 9:23 PM ^
Sorry. 503. More than a Cincinnati area code.
January 1st, 2013 at 10:54 PM ^
January 1st, 2013 at 11:33 PM ^
Oregon, then.
January 1st, 2013 at 9:04 PM ^
Yep, Don Canham sure made a major error in hiring that guy out of Miami of Ohio. And Utah fucked up in hiring that guy from Bowling Green a few years ago, too. Come to think of it, Cincinnati screwed up in hiring that guy from CMU as well.
January 1st, 2013 at 9:25 PM ^
January 1st, 2013 at 9:14 PM ^
January 1st, 2013 at 11:02 PM ^
If Ohio and Penn St. were eligible this year, we would have seen more favorable matchups. As much as I hate Ohio, I think they would've beat Stanford. That also would've moved Wisconsin to a lower tier bowl which I think they could've won. O'Brien had PSU playing pretty good this year and they may have won a bowl, but I'm not real confident of that. JMHO.
January 1st, 2013 at 11:10 PM ^
It might not have changed the match ups today. A 7-5 Wisky who didn't play in the conference title game probably wouldn't have been playing on NY's Day. The only question is whether an 8-4 PSU would have gotten a NY's Day berth over 9-3 Northwestern, 10-3 Nebraska or 8-4 Michigan.
January 1st, 2013 at 8:31 PM ^
The kid cannot (yet) block for spit. SC's D-line would have destroyed him, and this knowledge was common knowledge. Hence putting him in game gives none of the deceptive benefits of a pass catching TE-- he's just a giant slow WR with good hands at this point in his career. He will eventually be very good though, IMHO.
January 1st, 2013 at 8:44 PM ^
Gardner was just a bit too up in the first half; if Tacopants existed and was suited up, we are in an entirely different situation. Another slow start against a very well-matched opponent, and we just couldn't dig out of the hole we dug. I come down on the side of Lewan clearly besting Clowney over sixty minutes, but Clowney did what impact players need to do, and that won them the game.
I agree Floyd is no lock-down corner, but I think he would have performed better than Raymon today, and would have prevented SC from knowing where to throw on every single down.
Any way that Lewan assauges the pain by deciding to stay for a shot at a B10 championship?
January 1st, 2013 at 8:45 PM ^
After going 2-2 today, our kickers finished the year 18-21. Wow. And we get them both back next season.
January 1st, 2013 at 9:00 PM ^
yeah, I think Tirico or Gruden referred to our kickers as "weapons" which blows my mind.
January 1st, 2013 at 8:55 PM ^
January 1st, 2013 at 9:12 PM ^
January 1st, 2013 at 9:23 PM ^
I do believe the coaches kept it close. The size and talent discrepancy was very noticable to me.
January 1st, 2013 at 9:35 PM ^
It's soooo disappointing to see a Senior like Kovacs torched on the last TD play. What could he possible have been thinking? Such a horrendous day by the pass defense. Please god Hoke, recruit better DB's
The entire season was a story of coming up just a little short in big games. This game just adds to that story line
January 1st, 2013 at 9:46 PM ^
It's never good to lose, but if this is what Michigan looks like while Hoke is still building our roster, sign me up for the good times. That was a very good SC team and we went toe to toe with them. We were playing freshmen extensively on the defense, have no running game outside of Denard, Devin has played receiver most of the year, and our O-line is lousy (although they were decent today, I have to say). What will our '14 team look like? I think we may well be playing a few days after New Years Day a couple of years ago, as Hoke builds our team further upwards. Very proud of the Wolverines today -- smash mouth football played against what is probably a better roster.
January 1st, 2013 at 9:52 PM ^
I think we played well and should have won this game. It gives me a lot of hope for the future. We just have to learn how to finish games like this.
Did anyone else notice how many B1G receivers dropped the ball today? That to me was the big difference in the games today. SEC receivers do not drop the ball, period!
January 2nd, 2013 at 12:58 AM ^
January 1st, 2013 at 9:55 PM ^
PS I liked the uniforms. They were a little different, but clean looking. I think I'm one of the few that liked the matte helmets.
January 1st, 2013 at 10:46 PM ^
January 2nd, 2013 at 2:52 AM ^
January 1st, 2013 at 10:22 PM ^
I predicted a Michigan loss because we had so many problem issues including:
Featured RB gone and subpar back ups
Starting QB recovering from injury back-up QB with limited snaps
Starting QB moved to other position with minimal practice
No deep WR threat
underperforming O-line
Suspect playcalling from the OC
Questionable time management from the HC
weak defensive backfield with 2 season starters missing
special teams player promoted to defensive backfield
lack of pass rush without blitzes
suboptimal punt formation/coverage
I think just about every issue reared it's head in one form or another. Devin hurried/sacked & missed some throws. Interception. The running game was mostly Denard, but with limits. We couldn't get to their QB "enough". We let them return a punt for a TD. Our secondary gave up many big plays.
But I'm not that upset about this loss. Strangely, I think Al did a better than average job with plays, though I think Denard was a bit underutilized. Devin needs work but is getting there. The secondary got torched, but it wasn't a surprise (Never Forget® the sequel? )and I think Mattison was right to be as aggresive as he could. I'm dissapointed in the loss, but we played hard. Lewan looked good :-( Kicking game was great, Gallon rocked, etc.
No crying in my pillow tonight.
January 1st, 2013 at 10:28 PM ^
January 1st, 2013 at 10:29 PM ^
In the last 25 years, B1G Teams are 72-88 in bowl games 40 -52 in games on NYD or after. Michigan has a winning record of 12-11. They have 2 national championships with PSU getting hosed in 1994. Their worst bowl season had to be in 08 with a 1-6 record. So get used to it young ones, nothing will change considering we will always play out our area. The B1G just use they bowl games as extra practice time anyway. In the last 5 years, the B1G has a record of 14-25, 8 -18 for games that happened NYD or later.
January 1st, 2013 at 10:42 PM ^
I'll add to the pile of snowflakes.
Positive:
- Borges play-calling. We had some long drives there. Very creative plays (statue of liberty, Denard running, direct snap, receiving, and passing.
- Mattison play-calling. He disguised blitzes, played a zone that kept receivers covered, did a good job.
- Hoke's guttsiness. I commented during the game that Carr never would have gone for it the same way, or done the same trickeration.
- Offensive Line. Given Clowney et al, they did a great job.
- LB play. I thought our linebackers did fine.
- Denard's play. 100 yards, very solid.
- Gallon's receiving. Boy did he ever get open. And he's back next year.
Negative:
- Defensive Line tackling. They just didn't get to the QB enough.
- Devin's passing. I started counting the number of passes that were either uncatchable or close to that. I'm waiting for the UFR on this, but I recall at least 4 - 5 passes to Gallon that were off the mark, and needlessly so.
- Secondary gouged with big plays. IIRC, there were four huge pass completions against our secondary.
- Punt coverage. Admittedly, Ace is a great returner.
It just kills me that there were 3 passes where our secondary was torched, along with the punt return TD. Our defense generally did a great job. If our secondary and special teams stop half those plays, we win.
January 1st, 2013 at 10:55 PM ^
January 1st, 2013 at 11:06 PM ^
If I had to describe Michigan fans in a nut shell...
"God dammit, Carr! Punting for it on 4th and a couple, late in the 4th with a 1 score lead! Play to win the game, not to protect the lead! You're gonna blow it!"
"God dammit, Hoke! Going for it on 4th and couple, late in the 4th with a 1 point lead! Play to protect the lead! You're taking too many risks! You're gonna blow it!"
January 1st, 2013 at 11:29 PM ^
I have a few issues with his clock manaegement, his punt formations, etc.
But I have never questioned the size of his testicles. . . XL