our OL should be solid
"Tell me I'm right"
You're write!
April 24th, 2009 at 12:01 PM ^
Do we have the defense to get 8 wins?- just asking
OL will be solid, but 8 wins? Damn! Ok. Hope ur WRITE! Right!
April 23rd, 2009 at 11:50 PM ^
8 wins isnt alot lol
look at our week ass schedule
I will be singing in the choir, "what a mighty ROD we serve"
that is all
8 wins? That's being optimistic. I think we will win more games this year than last, but we wont win 8. You're crazy.
The Big Ten will be down yet again and we only have what, four away games, but this team is still young and our QB will still have the same amount of college game experience as last year's going into the season
April 23rd, 2009 at 10:04 PM ^
and we are the Susan Boyle, so no I'm not loco
April 23rd, 2009 at 10:14 PM ^
ive said it before, and ill say it again. 8 wins is completely realistic. and richrod agrees with me!
April 23rd, 2009 at 10:17 PM ^
based on the expression on a man's face, Gordie.
Not sure if that one flies.
April 23rd, 2009 at 11:02 PM ^
solid OL + solid backfield + QB who can complete more passes than not - defense = 7ish wins.... that's discounting our defense entirely. if our defense shows up, we could do some damage
rationale: i think we will be good enough on O to put up respectable points against any team. we can score easily on poorish teams. tha D is most important in the big games, when we can put up 30 points but still lose (teams like OSU or, gods below I hate to say it, MSU or even ND) so I think we can pull out majority wins even with a shoddy D, and exceed beyond 6 wins with a mediocre D. 9-10 win season will require a badass D, obvs
k time to drunk grade papers. aren't you glad you didn't go to Michigan?
April 23rd, 2009 at 11:06 PM ^
"k time to drunk grade papers. aren't you glad you didn't go to Michigan?"
I did go to Michigan, but I suppose if my papers were graded that way, it was only fair, because I took the tests that way...
April 24th, 2009 at 12:59 AM ^
that taking tests drunk is beneficial if you always show up to lecture drunk
April 23rd, 2009 at 11:12 PM ^
one thing that I have learned about RR is that he is honest. Last year he would not say anything bad about the team but was very limited with saying anything good. I went into last season thinking we would win a lot but RR was just being pesismistic about. In hindsight I think he just did not see much success coming. RR this year gave the offense a 7 and gave last year's offense a 2. I think that it is realistic to think that we will win 8 games this year. If we were to catch a couple of lucky bounces and a couple of good (or lucky) calls I really think that we can get more than that but I really think that 10 wins is too generous of a max. After last year I will take 8 wins and consider the progress a good thing. I think 8 wins would probably get us a Jan 1 bowl and boy I could handle that.
April 23rd, 2009 at 11:16 PM ^
You need to check your sources before publishing news like this. What do you think this is - a blog?!
April 23rd, 2009 at 11:35 PM ^
Three little birds beside my doorstep singing sweet songs of melodies pure and true
April 23rd, 2009 at 11:50 PM ^
Where are your sources to back up this kind of outrageous accusation?
April 23rd, 2009 at 11:53 PM ^
I told you three little birds and maybe wojodumbass
April 23rd, 2009 at 11:21 PM ^
is greater than 8. So yes.
April 23rd, 2009 at 11:43 PM ^
i would be thrilled with 8 wins...
would it be greedy to ask for 2 out of 3 wins between osu, nd, and msu?
April 23rd, 2009 at 11:46 PM ^
All 3 would be greedy. 2 out of 3 is just plain old realistic
April 24th, 2009 at 12:03 AM ^
I'm sticking with nine wins. And I think they will get all three of the rivalry games this year. I don't see Pryor being 100 percent healthy by the OSU game, and I still think the Evil SweaterVest is grossly misusing Pryor's talents.
It might take one more year, but this could very well be the year that RR starts beating on tESV the way tESV beat on Lloyd Carr.
5-6 wins, honestly. The defense scared me at the spring game.
The defense was scary for sure, but four starters were missing from the first team (Warren, RVG, Mouton, and I think Martin). Not only are those four of the better defensive players on the team, but it meant that about a third of the "second team" defense was really the third team defense--basically walk ons.
So I share some of the same concerns, but the defense will be better than what we saw in the spring game.
April 24th, 2009 at 10:00 AM ^
This also means the first team offense was going against 2nd/3rd team defense. Not to be a party pooper, but couldn't that mean our expectaions for White Jesus may be a bit high?
April 24th, 2009 at 10:30 AM ^
I'm not too worried about the defense...I've been playing defense my whole career and can tell that the defense will catch up. It's not that thick of a playbook for the defense and they'll settle in. A cover 3 will always be a cover 3, it just maybe called something different in the playbook.
I know a lot of people in our fan base believe that 8 wins is too much optimism, but I think we can all come to a couple of agreeable points:
1. We don't want our savior doing too much. (He can save us from the sins of 2008 in 2010)
2. We need to rely more on the supporting cast, which are the REAL saviors of 2009! That is the OL, our deep running backs, and a couple of talented receivers that we expect to be able to get open in a spread offense.
3. Graham is a beast! He will be double teamed all game, which will allow Martin and Van Bergen to step up. Martin was a stud last year as true freshmen and I expect more this year. Also, this can open up some blitz packages that provide pressure from the outside (nickel back, i.e. Harrison).
4. The million dollar question for 2009 is our secondary
Remember Iowa in 1990...they were a run heavy (maybe even run-only) type of team. I can't even remember the qb's name. M needs to rely on the run this year to transition whoever is behind the center. Hard pill to swallow is that we have 2 true freshmen quarterbacks, DEATH, M.C. Lil' Threet (CONE), and that other guy*
April 24th, 2009 at 10:24 AM ^
Absolutely. I specifically remember a play in which Tate scrambled out of the pocket, barely eluding a DT. Against the starting defense, Tate would have been tackled for a big loss.
I doubt anyone seriously expects the offense to move the ball at will against opponents, like the offense did in the scrimmage. Tate's performance certainly raised expectations, but we have to be cautiously optimistic until we see him perform against live, first-team defenses.
April 24th, 2009 at 10:39 AM ^
Tate has great upside and I see him, at this point, having a great future at qb unless somebody comes in better. There will be sacks and bad decisions. Now, it's in the coaches hands of how are they going to prepared for the season. Hopefully, we learned a lot from last year's debacle and are not trying to put too much of the burden of the O in Tate's hands. We have some good running backs that can do damage and an O-line that is showing promise. What Tate does bring to the table that we didn't have last year are the ablility to make an accurate throw and the ability to run. Trust me, even though Tate is a true freshmen, defenses will have to respect those abilities and won't run a 5-5-1 defense.
In baseball, if we knew someone couldn't hit it out the park, we would all scoot in so far that in my opinion we could be call in-fielders. In the OSU game, everyone became D-lineman and linebackers.