Mgodiscgolfer

November 16th, 2013 at 9:32 PM ^

I agree these people whining all the time would be the one's who bitched about Lloyd being so conservative, "He plays to not lose never to win" Now when Hoke plays for the win he should have lost Boo Hoo. Spare me your wonderful negative angle no matter what happens win or lose.

Joined: 01/13/2011

MGoPoints: 5322

Mr. Yost

November 16th, 2013 at 10:12 PM ^

Just realize that you read my comment the wrong way (and rightfully so).

I was saying ALL of the Michigan teams were ranked teams. That's why I followed the comment with this team isn't close. Because they're not close to being ranked.

If they win out they will be. But right now, there's nothing that puts them on the same level as those teams.

BTW, I made the same post/comment about the 94-96 opponents a few before and said that most (not all) of the teams they lost to were ranked.

Joined: 07/25/2011

MGoPoints: -9898220

Mr. Yost

November 16th, 2013 at 9:43 PM ^

Why not to Rich Rod or another coach?

This team is NOTHING like those teams.

Also, there's WAY more "Fire Borges" than Hoke...I don't think too many knowledgeable posters actually want Hoke gone right now.

They DO want him to acknowledge the offensive weaknesses and do something about them and the coaching.

Nothing wrong with that.

Joined: 07/25/2011

MGoPoints: -9898220

Sten Carlson

November 16th, 2013 at 10:04 PM ^

It's going to get better dude.  It's a transitional/youth/lack of depth thing.  Did you notice how we actully ran the ball tonight?  Your husband actually said that Green had the best run for the Michigan offense is a long time.  As the OL matures with these talented RB's, this offense will really start to click.  Be patient, stay the course, it's going to be fine.

Joined: 11/16/2009

MGoPoints: -56

Mr. Yost

November 16th, 2013 at 10:08 PM ^

There isn't much that says it's going to get better.

I'm not saying you're wrong, actually, I agree with you...but there isn't anything to prove it. Just fans having hope.

Also, the Borges bitching isn't about talent. If Borges was making the same playcalls with more talented and experiences players people would still be bitching about the calls.

He's not putting the offense in the best position to win. THATS what the complaining is about.

Everyone knows we're not as good and we're young. Most believe we'll get better as the offense matures.

However, if you make bad calls, it doesn't really matter how good you are.

Joined: 07/25/2011

MGoPoints: -9898220

Sten Carlson

November 16th, 2013 at 11:18 PM ^

"There isn't much that says it's going to get better."
 
I just don't get this meme coming from our fanbase.  I think this is an obvious and (should have been) expected "regression" year for the team, and in many ways, for Gardner.  Think of it as Gardner's "Sophmore slump" brought on by the fact that he has a very young interior OL that isn't giving him protection, nor allowing for a running game that defenses need to respect.

The good news is that when you're starting a bunch of young and under-developed (physically and mentally) OL, they won't be as young and inexperienced next season, and they "trial by fire" they endured this season is bound to make them better.  I know it's easy to think that without Lewan and Schofield (whom I think isn't very good) gone things are going to be worse, but I don't agree.  The interior of the OL will be older, more eperienced, there will be more depth for competition, and we just saw the emergence of the two young RB's.  Gardner is shell shocked (understandably) and his regression is due almost entirely to the OL's inability to protect him -- he too will benefit from this season. 
 
After all that being said, I think Brady Hoke is the reason the main reason that it's going to get better.  I have had a lot of coaching in my life, and there is something about him that instills confidence in me that he is great at developing talent.  I realize that many of you think that he's not, and want to say that we've seen NO IMPROVEMENT.  But, I think we just saw some tonight from the young RB's and the OL.  I think next season we see a significant jump as much fo this young talent that we have on the roster really starts to assert itself.  I am not saying this season was a "throw away" but I think everyone inside the program knew that Team 134 was likely going to struggle.

Joined: 11/16/2009

MGoPoints: -56

Sten Carlson

November 16th, 2013 at 11:23 PM ^

"Everyone knows we're not as good and we're young. Most believe we'll get better as the offense matures.  However, if you make bad calls, it doesn't really matter how good you are."

I don't think the calls will be "bad calls" in the future.  I think they'll be good because the OL will be able to execute them.  When an opposing defense has to honor Michigan's running game, and they cannot just pin their ears back and blitz and be assured of getting home, Michigan's offense is going to be very hard to stop. 

Joined: 11/16/2009

MGoPoints: -56

Leonhall

November 17th, 2013 at 7:40 AM ^

Has been bad this season and VERY inconsistent the previous two seasons. The oline will be better next season and the year after, whoever our coordinator is will be able to get better results offensively because there will be more talent and depth. Right now, we have ZERO depth up front, ZERO, thank you RR.

Joined: 06/14/2012

MGoPoints: 16430

Sten Carlson

November 17th, 2013 at 12:03 PM ^

Hey thanks!  I love you too!

The play calls that you're calling, "bad calls" are only considered such in hindsight.  Similar to putting a short contract at the absolute all-time high, and then seeing the market go EVEN HIGHER.  It's a "bad trade" after the fact, but before the fact, putting a short at the all time high is what you're SUPPOSED to do.

Obviously, the fact that players grow, mature, and gain experience as time goes by is TOTALLY lost on you.  The reason the calls that are judged as "bad calls" today won't be in the future is because the players will be able to execute those plays and they won't be the cluster fuck that they are today.

As a matter of fact, we actually witnessed the growth and development of the OL in yesterday's game.  I realize that NW's defense isn't MSU's, but did you notice that Michigan's OL actually got some push, and the RB's actually had some decent gains, especially on first down?  Those EXACT first down calls are the ones that you, et. al., are so upset about.  They weren't working ALL SEASON long, but they worked yesterday.  Why do you think that is?  Did the OL suddenly have a collective "a ha!" moment?  Or, did the constant and dogged repetition finally start to give them the experience that they were lacking?

So again, calls that JUST LAST WEEK were considering "bad calls" worked yesterday.  How much better do you think the "bad calls" will be in 2014, 2015, and beyond?

You're right, you don't make bad calls and lose games for the sake of gaining experience.  But, if you OL cannot executte ANYTHING, you've got to choose the things that you want to do as the staple of you offense, and continue to rep them until the "get it."  You act like there is this alternate playbook that Borges has, one labled "What the OL does well, but we're not going to do because it's not who we are."  That is a horseshit assertion.

Joined: 11/16/2009

MGoPoints: -56

Reader71

November 17th, 2013 at 6:53 AM ^

Don't hold back. Go all the way. You want Borges gone because he doesn't run the spread. That's what you mean by "putting your players in position to succeed." You, Brian, everyone else. Its a stupid thing to complain about, though. It's not happening. Lets deal with what is happening.

Joined: 08/30/2009

MGoPoints: 22968

Reader71

November 18th, 2013 at 2:37 AM ^

You are a liar. I have never said Borges is a good OC. Every single one of my apologia has been about how the criticisms are stupid, which they are. And I've defended him because I think his job is very hard when the line is incapable of blocking a single play right. I do not care at all if Borges is fired or not, and I've said so repeatedly. Just because i don't think Borges is stupid does not mean i think he's a good OC. Just because i think the complaints about play calling are stupid does not mean that i think he is a good OC. Just because i cut him slack for having to come up with game plans behind a dreadful offensive line dies not mean I think he is a good OC. There it is, in black and white. So stop lying about my comments.

Joined: 08/30/2009

MGoPoints: 22968

UMxWolverines

November 16th, 2013 at 10:12 PM ^

Is it gonna get better? I think so. I'm glad we finally saw what Green and Smith can do. 

Was there still a lot of bad things? Yes. 

Is Northwestern bad? Yes. Keep in mind we put up a lot of points against IU also. That doesn't mean our offense is that great and we found that out against msu and nebraska. 

I still think we need better position coaches next year if we want to go toe to toe in the future with osu. 

Joined: 03/01/2009

MGoPoints: 65350

ford_428cj

November 16th, 2013 at 10:11 PM ^

Lloyd was good. But he lost games that we should have one by playing too conservative. One momentum play, we would be reeling & not recover on some games.

Joined: 10/28/2012

MGoPoints: 997

Reader71

November 17th, 2013 at 6:58 AM ^

Huge Borges fanboy here, obvi! I agree. The call was entirely predictable. It has been our go to short yardage/2 point/goal line/4th down play. It has been good to us. But I, the person who hates every single "predictability" complaint ever levied against any offensive coordinator at any level ever, admit that it was predictable and that we probably went to the well one too many times. That, and I never really want Kalis being the focal point of my crucial plays if at all avoidable. Other than that, though, I liked Al's game plan, his personnel decisions, and his play calling today.

Joined: 08/30/2009

MGoPoints: 22968

umchicago

November 17th, 2013 at 11:07 AM ^

i'm one of borges' biggest critics.  being at the game, i didn't have benefit of replay.  but i could see a few wrinkles that he added (funky pass/draw play) and they worked.  i even saw some holes openend by the o-line and some RB cut backs.

however, i think borges' redzone playcalling was an abomination.  he only threw ONE pass in the endzone the entire regulation.  i just don't get why he seems so against it, especially given that we have 3 WRs that can go up and get the ball.

Joined: 02/05/2009

MGoPoints: 33625

Sten Carlson

November 17th, 2013 at 4:18 PM ^

I wasn't at the game, but obviously the wind was a big factor. For example, rewatch the Gallon TD drop in OT. Notice how the ball starts to tail under in mid-flight? It looked to me like Gallon had trouble judging the ball because the wind played havoc with the trajectory.

Joined: 11/16/2009

MGoPoints: -56

Cope

November 16th, 2013 at 10:47 PM ^

I was actually glad that if we lost somebody was getting fired UNTIL Hoke went for it on 4th and 2. I was actually pissed because I so badly wanted Hoke to keep his job at that moment, and it looked like we were going to lose. It was such a balls call I gotta love it. The jerk stole my only joy if we lost, and then won on top of it. This is a game and momentum swing I can't imagine anyone not celebrating.

Joined: 10/07/2010

MGoPoints: 2648

Atrained

November 16th, 2013 at 10:43 PM ^

I'm going to go out on a limb here and say Borges wasn't THAT bad tonight. Of course the PA on 3rd and 10 is infuriating, but the ongoing joke of "execution" did have a bit of truth in this game. Gallon and Dileo dropped some gimmies and Gardner was chucking into Team America's chests all game. Saying that he did utilize short passing routes, screens to the outside and called some pretty effective Gardner runs. I'm not saying he didn't make some boneheaded calls, but apart from going for it on 4th and 2 (I imagine that's a Hoke call anyways), I thought he was serviceable today Mattison on the other hand deserves his normal praise, defense was ready today

Joined: 11/16/2013

MGoPoints: 243

Atrained

November 16th, 2013 at 11:19 PM ^

I'm not saying the offense wasn't bad, it certainly was. I'm saying that while there were certainly suspect play calls, the overall play calling wasn't atrocious. I think the overarching philosophy of the game (quick passes, somewhat effective runs with Green) isn't that dissimilar with what people would recommend. Saying that, the excessive PAs are getting comical

Joined: 11/16/2013

MGoPoints: 243

jazzmanuofm

November 16th, 2013 at 10:57 PM ^

Thank you Mr. Yost for your honesty. This is the worst offense in the history of Michigan football. If I have to read one more Sten Carlson post telling me how Al Borges offense compares to a Brittany Spears blowjob I am gonna puke! Al Borges has killed our year single handedly. The lack of adjustments and refusal to play to our strengths is mind boggling. You can see Brady is under pressure, that is the most balls he had shown all year going for it on 4th down. We went 11 quarters without a td versus some inept defenses. The faster Borges, Funk, Jackson are gone means this team has a chance next year, otherwise 8 and 4 will be a pipe dream. This is Michigan...not Ball State...youth is an excuse like dropping soap in the shower in prison not only will you get fucked in the ass but you will also be humiliated for not executing your plan!

Joined: 10/03/2009

MGoPoints: 63

Sten Carlson

November 17th, 2013 at 12:57 AM ^

"...youth is an excuse..."

I am not going to sit here and debate whether youth is a valid reason for this team struggling or not, it is and everyone knows it.  The issue, IMO, is your inability to see that it won't stay that way forever.  See, there is a short term liability to playing young interior OLinemen, but that liability turns into an asset when down the road your OL has 100 starts collectively.  You cannot have that unless you play young kids from time to time.  Michigan, unfortunately (or fortunately, depending how you look at it) is forced into that situation because of poor recruiting and planning a few seasons ago.  Suck for today, but can really make the future exciting. 

Brady is NO WHERE near being under pressure because his AD boss knows in specific detail the issues Team 134 suffers from -- but you can keep dreaming of dropping the soap in prison.

Hope you don't choke on your own puke, it would be shame to lose such a positive and friendly member of the site.

Joined: 11/16/2009

MGoPoints: -56

Don

November 17th, 2013 at 10:17 AM ^

The 1934 UM team was 1-7. They were shut out five times, and scored a grand total of 21 points for the entire season.

The 1-7 1936 team was shut out three times and scored 36 points all season.

The 4-4 1937 team was shut out twice and scored 54 points all season.

The 4-4 1935 team was shut out three times and scored 68 points for the season.

The 2-7 1962 team was shut out four times and scored 70 points for the entire season.

But do go on and impress us with your extensive knowledge of Michigan football history.

 

 

Joined: 06/30/2008

MGoPoints: 148237

Yeoman

November 17th, 2013 at 11:19 AM ^

/and it does highlight the silliness of the original comment.

But you don't have to back that far. This offense ranks #57 in the country in FEI; Rodriguez's first offense ranked 81st.

Even Carr's last offense in '07, with Henne and Hart hurt for much of the year, was statistically a bit worse than this one (though that might have changed this week).

Joined: 06/08/2011

MGoPoints: 21390

CompleteLunacy

November 17th, 2013 at 12:26 AM ^

that everyone was so quick to praise Bill O'Brien going for it on 4th down in 4OT while saying "Hoke was playing not to lose". Ignoring that had BOB not gotten teh 4th down, they lose. Even though they got it, it didn't guarantee anything. A FG would have tied it and dent it to 5OT.

And yet, Hoke does the gutsy thing playing to win, it doesn't work, and SO MANY of you are saying it was "reckless" and "the most terrible coaching decision they've ever seen", etc.

You can't have it both ways, folks. Sometimes gutsy calls don't work. Don't let hindsight cloud your judgment.

I, for one, think it's nice to have a coach willing to go for it in that situation. I would have been OK if he settled for the field goal too. I don't know what game theory says, but it wasn't as bad a decision as some of you are making it out to be.

Joined: 11/13/2010

MGoPoints: 12910