I hated the outcome of Saturday's game as much, if not more, than any MGoAlum/blogger/fan. I've been disturbed by the general pessimism in its wake even more. Not because it is necessarily unwarranted, but because a lot of it reminds me of pitchfork and torches mentality. I'm probably older than most here (except Herm) and have seen pretty much everything and anything happen in a Michigan game, both good and bad. With the exception of the '97 team, every year has been frought with both. I saw the '69 (yes, I was 4 yrs. old) toppling of Woody's unbeatens. I watched Michigan teams that went 10-1, 10-0-1 and 10-1 get snubbed in '72, '73 and '74. I was enrolled when the '84 team only outscored the opposition by 14 total points and went 6-6. People were screaming for Bo's head. Two years later, we had a Big 10 Championship. I watched the RR years end with a 15-22 record and the cupboard left bare. Then came Hoke. So far, 11-2 (Sugar Bowl win), 8-5 (Outback Bowl loss) and 5-1 this year, so far. The cupboard isn't bare, it is fully stocked with young talent. The record is better than the recent past and better than some of Bo or Lloyd's squads. The team is young. Mistakes have been made by both players and coaches. But prior to the season, I'm willing to bet any of us would have said 5-1 is a good position to be in at this point in the season. Michigan still has 6 guaranteed opportunities to play for victory and likely a Bowl game as well. I'll be watching every one of those opportunities with a discriminating eye and a Maize and Blue heart. I hope you do the same. GO BLUE! EDIT: Yes, I also have paragraph formatting issues.
UM Football: An Old-Timer's Historical Snowflake Perspective
You were only 4 in 1969? Hell, you are not that old.
There was a guy on here recently that starting watching games in 1960.
I was 4 in 1969 and I'm young.
And sometimes I feel a little bit old around here, given the general lack of level-headedness.
It has nothing to do with age and everything to do with emotional control.
Emotion is why people - and especially men - love football. I know that may sound sexist, but men are socialized to not show much emotion, but they can when it comes to sports. I think they love football because they aren't required to have as much emotional control as usual. I know I like football because I get to express certain emotions that are normally limited to men, like competitiveness and a certain amount of aggression and anger.
My parents were married in 1969, and I was born 9 years after that. In other words, that's bordering on old for me.
The point remains maybe that, at least according to Sagarin and even Massey numbers, there is not a game still that is unmanageable. There are some in which we would be decidedly not be the favorite, but not by a lopsided margin.
According to Massey, we match up as follows -
|M OFFENSE||OPP DEFENSE||OPP OFFENSE||M DEFENSE|
My formatting sucks, so I will just translate it. We should win the game versus Indiana, have close games with Northwestern and Iowa, need some luck with Michigan State and Nebraska, and will probably lose to Ohio State.
I like Massey, he brings objectivity into it. That sounds like three more wins to me. I hope this board is braced for 8-4.
Wasn't 8-4 or 9-3 a relatively common pick before the season? I thought 10-2 personally if things really went our way (we got the bounces, so to speak) but that looks unlikely now.
I believe so, or it's at least what I expected. People forget how early it is in the rebuilding job.
Far and away, the top two picks were 8-4 and 9-3, as I recall. Even using the Massey preseason projected probabilities, which are based on history and don't necessarily mean much going forward into a season, would have estimated a 9-3 record.
He had to watch Bump Elliott's squads go 47-37-2.
I was 10 in 1969. I'm older.
But you look good for your age, guyski.
The first Michigan game I watched was the 69 miracle and it made me a Michigan fan for life. I was 18. It's amusing watching some of the revisionist history portrayed around here.
I felt the exact same way after the angry fans were screaming for the coaches head. Despite all that went wrong Saturday it was still a hell of a game in a tough atmosphere. I think considering how poorly the run game performed, save Devin, we put ourselves in a very good position to win the game. Just not enough brunette girls for Gibbons.
That last sentence just doesn't sit well.
And I share it.
But certainly some things need to be fixed. Watching the DVR, first play. M lines up in standard I-form, PSU in a 4-3. M then re-sets to tackle over. PSU immediately reacts and brings the 8th man down. No problem.
Glasgow, Bryant, and Schofield TRIPLE TEAM the DT. Yes, two of them move on to other blocks, but the play starts with 3 helmets into one guy's head. Glasgow ends up on no one, and that's a problem because DaQuan Jones is left completely unblocked. In fact Kalis pulls and runs right in front of him... Jones gives him a pat on the small of his back as he goes by to kill Fitz. Jake Butt is leading from the H-back position and gets destoyed in the hole by the LB (he's a true freshman, hard to blame him). Doesn't matter though, because Toussaint is already down.
On the plus side, Lewan holds his block. And Gallon completely decleats the safety.
It's the right thing to do.
WILFORD ON WILFORD CRIME!!!!
I am almost as old as you. I still remember crying for ages when Michigan lost to Woody in 1975. I tend to take a broader historical view of things rather than a "what have you done lately" perspective. But Saturday's loss hurt for me more than most. I'm not entirely sure why. But I think it was more the way it happened and how it fits the whole season rather than just the fact that it was a loss. I said it in another post: I really want Hoke's tenure to work. The way this season has been going, I am very worried.
Are you serious with this "country club coach" shit? Explain to me how this describes anything that Hoke has done since he's been here.
He had a great regular season record: 234-65-8, .775 Pct. His Bowl record was less than stellar: 5-12, .294 Pct. Bo was loved because of HIS love for Michigan and dedication to creating exceptional young men, who continue to represent Michigan. I had the privilege of hearing him speak several times at fundraisers and university functions. I would have run through a brick wall for him. Hoke has many similar attributes. That is where his legacy will be built, if there is to be one IMO.
.... but Michigan had the third highest average ticket price in the country. Ar those winning exceeds philanthropy. I'm not concerned about Hoke.... yet.... but our OC is not BCS caliber. /end redundancy.
There was no MGOBLOG back in the 80's, but I remember all the jokes about Bo and bowl games. He would have been torn apart on here for his bowl record. It is a nameless, faceless vehicle for people to rant. The way people talk about the team we love is definitely depressing, though. And constructive criticism is fine. But all the swearing and yelling is bizarre, if you ask me.
You are the worst.
Broski, you just did yourself in. In one sentence you ask for concrete examples of why Hoke is like Bo, and then in another you say Hoke is a country club coach without giving any concrete examples. Pretty crappy post by you my friend.
I'm going to hook you up. I see that you are having problems with reading comprehension so here is a site where you can learn that skill along with a few others. If you have any questions don't be afraid to ask!
Well I must say reading this makes me feel more optimistic when looking at it more in regards to our total history. But still, there are a lot of things that needa fixin'
Outside of recruiting rankings and being a great guy and ambassador for the university of Michigan, what doesn't need fixing? Seems like everything on the field needs fixing.
And I have not been reading the post game posts. I have decided that the internet is knee jerky and mean. So I wanted to avoid the 'sky is falling' mentality that I figured would be prevalent here. So, while I missed out on that, I appreciate your comments and perspective.
I'm a few years older than you, and you're right, the internet very often is "knee jerky and mean." Weren't most people predicting an 8-4 or 9-3 season this year? Somehow, as the wins mounted that got all skewed in the minds of some. Michigan probably will lose another 2, 3, even 4 games this season. That's bound to happen with this many young, inexperienced players starting, but it's no reason to panic.
I don't remember a recent loss with so many opportunities to win. The barrage of mistakes was unbelievable. I expected losses this season. I braced for loss before this game. The way it happened was the problem. We have played down to the level of every team we have faced in this soft stretch of the schedule except for the opener. I never expected that.
win..but it just seemed bound to happen. We have been flirting with a bad outcome for weeks now. Its over with. They are young. It'll all be okay. As OP pointed out, we are stock piling young studly dudes. They will get it together, but maybe not til next year. Meanwhile, we'll go 9-3 ish.. Have faith and patience.
Love the new avatar mum!
I am going for the more "mature" look. I just don't really want to give up the beer.
There is a helpful adage that goes along with this post. Since I am older than the OP, I figure that qualifies me to give sage advice. Here it is: Things are never as good as you think or as bad as you fear.
Like everyone else, I look at last week's atrocity and wonder how we will win more than one or two games left on our schedule. But things are never as bad as I fear, just as they have not proven to be as good as I thought.
I certainly don't recall people screaming for Bo's head after the 6-6 season. Fans regularly questioned his play-calling even in the best years, but no one was foolish enough to suggest he be replaced. I believe your memory belies you--if not, you were hanging out with idiots at the time. Any comparison of Bo and Hoke is a disservice to Bo--at least at this time. A comparison to Lloyd would be more apt.
I'm too young to remember it myself, but I have heard/read from others that there were indeed people who wanted Bo gone after 1984. From what I gather, most fans weren't ready to go that far but there was a sense that Bo might be losing his fastball. Fortunately the '85 team put that notion to bed.
as I was there--it being the first UM-OSU game I had missed since 1967. And I stand by my assertion that there was no groundswell, and those few who may have been suggesting he had lost his "fastball" were (ridiculously) small in number....and were, clearly, idiots. No one in my circle ever made any such allusion. I say this as one who respected Bo as a great coach, but never deified him.
Losing Rose Bowls, archaic offenses, loyalty to assistants, why can't we win a National title like everyone else....sound familiar? Bo got lots of criticism back then, and he got it before the Internet. The reaction to a lot of the losses he had would have been the same as now if the same communication venues were around then. I was at the Rose Bowl after his last game and people on the bus were lamenting that at least we'd get a modern offense now.
If by hanging out with "idiots" you mean he was hanging out with "fans," yeah, you're right.
I think one of the major differences though was for the most part we CRUSHED lesser opponents and didnt look back. Yes, his bowl game record sucked and yes we "only" went 5-5 against OSU (how cute that we used think that sucked at one time) and MSU was "little brother" in every sense of the word.
From 1970-1979 (my formative years plus first two years at U of M) we went 96-16-2 and were ranked #1 in the county during 1971, 1976 & 1977 and #2 at one point in 1974, 1975 and 1978.
Yes Bo had his critics but that was largely cause the bar was set at SEC-level regular season dominance. Absolutely nothing like we've experienced around here since 1997 & 2006. Face it we've been a shining sea of above average football for a long, long time.
11-9-1 against osu. he had a winning record against that team down south.
You're right. I was thinking of his record against Woody Hayes, not OSU.
5-4-1 against woody too.
I remember Wisconsin and purdue being awful, just dreadful. Along with Minnesota and Indiana. And northwestern? Doormats... If you wanted to play in the big 10 in the 80's, you went to mich or Ohio. Now kids know they can go anywhere and if they stand out, they can go pro.
UM and OSU are still the places to go. look at the recruiting rankings. and don't forget iowa(2), ill and msu went to rose bowls in the 80s. i believe iowa spent time as #1 when chuck long was QB. that said, scholarship limits have affected depth and evened the playing field a bit.
Thank you. Even playing field. That's what I was thinking.
In 1969 Bo lost to a 4-6 MSU team. In 70 hea 4-6 Arizona team 20-9. In 72 beat Northwestern 7-0 and Purude 9-6 and MSU 10-0. In the three years you name that we were #1 we never lost to Ohio State. Who'd we lose to those years? Stanford in the Rose Bowl (respectable) and 5-6 Purdue and 7-5 Minnesota. Those were the great teams he dominated that cost him a National title those years. And those were his best years without going into the 80's when he came back down a little.
Bo was a great, great coach. But his "SEC dominance only came against the conference, that had a Northwestern and Wisconsin that were making Indiana look like a good football program, no Penn State, no Nebraska. And MSU was really bad too. And when Perles took over they started winning 1 out of 3. And that was George frickin' Perles, not Saban or Dantonio.
He may have been the best coach we have ever had, but his record was a good deal on a conference that would have had a hard time against the MAC today outside of OSU, and losing a shit ton of bowl games against cross country competition (and 4-6 against Notre Dame, though at least it was against Lou Holtz. But then 2 of those wins (and 1 loss) also came against Faust.
It has been too small of a sample size to compare him to anyone.
Bo was famously stubborn and loyal. Sometimes you wondered what he saw in certain players.
In 84, it was clear we had no one on the bench behind Harbaugh (shades of last year at Neb). Once he went down, we had two guys with zero experience and questionable arms. We also had one of our weaker groups of RBs, too. Bo loaded up on the running game and we got stuffed, would fall behind, and then he'd have to pass and the INTs would start flying. It was fugly.
When you saw that and remembered the crappy 1979 season with Rich Hewlett and Brian Virgil, you had to believe that Bo was slipping. It was an up and down 5 year span.
I'm sorry but I would not say RR left the cupboard bare. We would not have had the success in 2011 if that was the case. O Line yes is a disaster for right now and a lot of that is on RR's recruitment of that position. A lot of other positions had and continue to have young talent. Hoke is bringing in a lot of good players and good guys also.
Have never once figured this team to be undefeated this year. I'm upset we lost. But it is what it is. Time to move forward. Can't let Penn State best us again.
I know - but we blew 5 separate chances to win that game. They did not beat us ...
I went to my first game in 80 @ age 10.
So there have been ups and downs along the way. I thought my spirit was permanently broken in 91 iirc when Desmond Howard was tripped in the corner of the north end zone on the last play of regulation and we lost to msu. The obvious pass interference call that never came was admitted in Sundays Ann Arbor news by the officiating crew... But I have recovered.
Admittedly Carr was on my hot seat by getting owned by tressel. But friends, the rr experiment was the low point from my perspective. Never again must the program be without a groomed successor if you ask me.
I honestly think the worst performance was the first half of the Wisconsin game we came back in the 2nd half to win in maybe 09. There were boos in the stands.
I too was filled with venom after Saturday's debacle. But after a couple days I'm ok. Our shortcomings aren't masked anymore. If we expect to win going fwd they have to be dealt with as in schemed around. We're going to lose to better teams, but I think we will hang with some who can't find second gear.
I do believe M will return to the (successful) power run that we lust after albeit not this year. Quick math says the best programs have averaged 9-3 for 130+ years to achieve the .750 standard.. So some seasons will be better and some worse.
I actually blame Brandon for the hype exceeding the product on the field. Hoke never promised anything to us except toughness...and...well, the team is tough if you ask me. They don't get down despite turnovers and getting stuffed over and over for -3 yards. They whiff blocks but fight on. Obviously the day of reckoning is still to come for Hoke. I still believe he will leave planet earth with a campus building named after him.
I believe most of the angst stemming from last Saturday does not come from having shortcomings or having those shortcomings exposed (assuming you mean player performance)8. The angst comes from the very controllable coaching errors and the seeming unwillingness to at least try to work around the shortcomings.
I was 3 in 69. I too have lived the highs and the lows. I think these losses sting more because we're able to know the team more than ever; be it MGoBlog, Twitter, or BTN.
It seems to me the stakes are higher in this era. Maybe I'm wrong. I was invested in the team as much as one can be when I was in school from 84-87, but it's just as painful today as any loss was then.
Still love the players and coaches. I just bitch more because I'm approaching 50. Guh.
I don't always tell people my age, but when I do, I tell them that I watched that 69' game during my freshman year in high school. Like others have stated, we have had our share of tough seasons, inexplicable decisions made, etc.
Have those upset me? Sure they did, but I have never stopped my support for the school or the program and I'm not about to now.
As others have stated, it's hard to be critical of 18-22 young men participating in an athletic event. They're gonna make mistakes from time to time. That's life.
However, I do reserve the right to be critical when I see coaches who are professionals in their craft (I know..some would argue about Borges being lumped into this) making the same decisions over and over again when it's clear they aren't working. We all know the definition of insanity.....
Hopefully the coaching staff will learn from their mistakes and make adjustments. If they don't, they should accept any criticism that comes their way. They are getting paid quite well and should be expected to perform up to the requirements of the job.
I like you
When I was a junior, I worked for ABC during the 24-12 game so I trump most of the posters in this thread. I'm not as pessimistic as most, but I can recall very few UM losses that were more directly due to coaching decisions than Saturday's loss. I'm not talking about things like running Toussaint 27 times, but things like the delay of game penalty, the failure to call a time out when Gardner's helmet came off; etc. That's what I think many feel most disturbing.
unless youre completed biased or just dont know much about football, most UM fans would have to admit this team lacks talent and the only real reasons for optimism coming into the season were such a mediocre conference and the always enticing unknown promise of youthful roster. i think most fans beleived UM to be overrated in top 25 entering the season and teh average record prediction was something like 8-4....i figured 8-4 with a probable loss in bowl game (though i figured psu would be close win over summer). i beleive vegas set UM over/under win total at 9. so anyone that expected 10-2 was probably just a bit unrealistic and shouldve tempered expectations....not impossible but they wouldve needed to play lights out and mistake free football in essentially every game, so just very unlikely. my reason for pessimism is the square peg in round hole approach....visions of 2nd half OSU playcalling except its not denard running into 10 man walls, its touissant running into the DT and at least 1 LB shooting A gap. i gave hoke a pass for 3 yrs due to the awful sitiation he inherited, i just dont think coaches are doing all they can to help their players. i remain optimistic in regards to hoke recruiting talent and i will certainly refrain from completely judging his classes until they mature - but early indications are not as promising at top 10 level rankings indicate. in current ncaa football landscape, not only are talented freshmen and especially redshirt freshmen playing more and more but the truly elite players are expected to make impact in first and second years. every elite team in country has impact freshmen starting and contributing to W's...and i dont see much at UM..true title teams are dominated by upperclassmen but given the nature of 85 man rosters title teams need consistent impact play from multiple players in every class every year. .understand much of it is lack of opportunity but its not promising so far. i just hope hoke truly understands taht every single 1 of the 85 matters and he cannot recruit role players and nice kids or slews of developmental projects....every scholarship must be awarded with very strong inclination that particular kid will start at UM.....naturally wont happen but cream rises to top and if they truly beleive they have 85 starters (at some point in career) on the roster then the talent should be there....but its not the MAC, cant sign a kid just bc hes a legacy or a joy to coach every day. completely agree with hoke in building inside-out when he first arrived and every student athlete progresses and develops at own pace but some guys should start jumping off page as freshmen and redshirt freshmen ...cant have a successful season if both the cupboard is bare in terms of upperclassmen , save for handful of stars and average players, and none of the young kids step up. hoke still gets 5 years to produce and fully realize his vision of UM football in my eyes and if theres still not serious contention then theres a problem. but im def troubled not only by coaches inability to "put players in best positions to succeed" but also lack of young kids truly making impact....hopefully im very wrong
and have never seen the Bandwagon fall apart so quickly after a loss. It really is disheartening to see such a lack of faith in our coaches and players.
That being said..We need to play to win, and not to lose.
I have barely been able to look at this website the last couple days with all the extreme negativity. Like you said, it's disheartening
We may have to burn a couch.
If we were 5-0 heading into this game with comfortable wins in every game including the dismantling of Notre Dame, and this game went down exactly the same, I don't think the reaction would be better. It would probably be worse, because a lot of us would have been tricked into thinking thus squad was better than it is. As it is, its a tough loss that a lot of us saw coming. Without the close shaves, this would have been a surprising upset and caused an uproar.
I dunno. Seems like the frustration is that we've been watching a poor run game for several games. It is obviously a known problem since coaches have tried different players and tackle over formation, but we still insist on running head long into the brick wall. I get that you can't totally abandon running between the tackles, but do it less and make it less predictable. If M had been winning easily and had the same outcome against PSU, sure some would be upset, but most would chalk it up to a bad game and not a sign of potential long term issues.
Frustration has boiled over. Its the way this team has performed that is disheartening. Take a look at Akron, UConn, the way we lost to PSU, etc. I give the defense and the defensive staff a pass because I see legitimate progress in the years Hoke and Co. have been here, but offensively its been a problem of lack of progress, terrible play calls, terrible game plans, and lack of adjustments.
I understand that if you have a philosophy you should stick to it, because it can turn into a disaster if you're switching things up all the time, but if something is obviously not working then its your obligation to make changes. What frustrates me the most about Borges and Hoke is that, offensively, it seems that the QB doesn't make checks at the line to switch to a play that gives you a better chance for success (based on the numbers in the box, man/press coverage, 1 on 1, etc). Why the fuck do we continue to run our RB's into a stacked line? It makes no fucking sense. At least give Gardner a few seconds to assess the defense and check to a preset list of audibles that everyone knows.
If Borges researchs the NFL so much, why dont we play the numbers more often? That is literally all Peyton Manning and Co do every single play. I don't expect a college QB or offense to be at a pro level, but something as simple as telling your QB that if they see 1 on 1 coverage with your stud WR then attack that mismatch or even simpler if they see 6 guys in the box they should check to a run (or if they see 9 guys in the box its probably a good idea to check out of a fucking run!!!!!).
I can't believe how many people here were ready to give RichRod another year after his third mediocre season and yet are ready to can our OC in his first year getting to run the offense he wants.
And I admittedly had to do something for my wife so didn't get to see the end of the 4th quarter/OTs live (I followed on my phone) but the only real disaster play was the delay of game/ lack of FG attempt to win th game. A conservative approach may not be for everyone in OT but it isn't a reason to fire the OC. The guy got us in position to win the game several times and that was all we want him to do. He wasn't ramming the RB into the line with 20 seconds left when we got down to make an attempt at the game winner.
I know it's annoying to reply to one's own post but just one more point: even if Borges and Funk are terrible game day and prep coaches (we actually have fairly unclear results on this given Borges' up and down games and the youth on the OL), you still can't fire them because they recruit like madmen!
If you think the OL is bad know, imagine if Funk doesn't get Kalis to flip to M after the OSU sanctions. They will (eventually) out-talent and win even with bad prep given the quality players they recruit.
to remember some very bad times for Michigan football. Saturday was painful on many levels, but I was still proud of the team. It's a tough place to play, and they certainly had to overcome a lot of adversity. They should have won but didn't. It happens. I fully expect the team to learn from this and continue to improve. They may not be improving as fast as some would like, but compare this road game (their second) with the UConn game (their first) and it's pretty obvious they've made some strides already. Count me among those who thought the meltdown on this blog after Saturday's game was over the top. I understand people are frustrated, and some of it is justified. Michigan football is trending in the right direction under Hoke. Let's not lose our heads over what happened on Saturday.
i was at UM in 1984. yes, we were 6-6 but don't recall many calling for Bo's head. jim harbaugh got injured early that year and was replaced by nick sheridan (i mean chris zurbrugge). and the following year, with a healthy harbaugh, UM finished #2 in the country after beating Neb in the fiesta bowl. and the previous 2 years UM lost the rose bowl and sugar bowl (bo jackson's team).
I watched marshmallows rain down. The affluent students stuffed nickels into the marshmallows for distance. Those on student-aid, pennies. Mine floated harmlessly toward Mason City, IA.
shared a B1G title in 9 seasons or won one outright in 10. You have to go back to the 50s to find another such streek!
You think this was bad? Wait until Indiana schools Michigan on Saturday. This weekend will seem like a Sunday school retreat.
I think you have forgotten that this is football, not basketball.
you're not old. Old is always 10 years away.
Thanks a lot. I turn the age you are defining as old (which it is) tomorrow.
1) Happy Birthday
2) I don't think he was defining a certain age as old, but saying old is relative to the individual. Someone who is 28 thinks someone who is 38 is old and someone who is 52 thinks someone who is 62 is old...
What i said is "Old is always 10 years away." And that's true no matter what age you're starting from.
I like you, man. We both have a birth date before 1970, a big picture view, and paragraph formatting issues.
And I was born in 1971. Also, I was an English major at Michigan, so I am highly disturbed by the paragraph issues!
Everything I post has to be in one paragraph...
Wait, did you guys just fix this to make me look bad?
The '69 game against Ohio remains among my top 5 victories and I'll be there again for IU on Saturday. Age might not bring wisdom but it does offer perspective. I've learned to acccept the good with the bad and not fret too much about those things which I can't control--like who's coaching the team and the play calling. Enjoy it for what it is and try not to internalize sports.
Life is simpler that way.
if you spend $30 bucks on a meal and it's prepared poorly, do you complain? Or if you spend $15 on a movie that turns out to be horrible, do you not discuss it? or say adam sandler is done? i think the feelings are exponentially stronger when relating to your favorite football team.
I'm with you in general the "f*ck hoke" and "f*ck borges" and crap like that is what bothers me. Hey if we all want to dissect the game and call them out...cool...that is part of the fun right? But when we are mother "effing" this and that and the all "motherf*cking suck" it just gets too much we aren't even having a conversation at that point.
As one even older than you, you're not that old. Second point: This is my favorite post I have seen on this site since Saturday. I can't believe how far down the program went. Saturday was definitely a bump in the road. And I am as concerned as everyone else about the line play with the strength of the schedule coming up. I still see this team as two years away from being where we want them to be. Perhaps it is a function of being in my dotage, but as long as I think they are progressing in that direction, I am going to be pleased.
Resurrected Michigan football. I was a kid in Ann Arbor during the Bump Elliott years, and yeah football was still the "social season" during the 60's (of course I also went to the Love-Ins at West Park ... ahh the Hippie days!
Anyway Bo brought the tradition of winning football back to AA. He was way too conservative on offense - because he believed that teams won with DEFENSE. Shit - we lost those 3 in a row to ohio because he never believed a kicker was worth a scholarship. The Lantry misses were killers (although to this day one of those was good - but the refs couldn't call it that in Cbus). Defense could win the B1G back then since it really was the big 2 and little 8. But his bowl record speaks to the fact that he was simply too conservative on offense.
Too conservative on offense ... where have I heard that recently ???
My issue isn't about the loss. It's about how Michigan loss, and the coaching decisions seem to be at it's weakess during road games. For example, a few years ago at MSU, Denard was getting pummelled, they kept running him. At Nebraska, Denard gets hurt, they bring in the wrong qb (everyone knows this) and states to change Devin back to qb would have been to much of an adjust, REALLY!? Then turnaround in one week and he's the starting QB for the rest of the season. Last weekend, and at UConn kept trying to use a runningback that is clearly saving himself for a chance to get in the NFL. By the way he averaged almost less than one yard a carry against Penn State
Playing it safe on the road you must have a running game. If you don't, the only option is to attack. These coaches don't attack, they play it safe, ooops, play the percentages.
Do I wish Fitz would hit the few holes he is given harder at times? Absolutely. But unless you've got something to back it up, I think it is highly inappropriate to cast asperion on a player's motivations (and by extension his character) by saying he is "saving" himself.
if think fitz is saving himself for the nfl, i don't think you could be more wrong. he has little if any metrics for an nfl running back.
I wear my fandom around like the next Michigan fan, wear maize on game day, cheer loudly in the bar or my living room and read this blog far too much. The dismay (complete and sudden loss of confidence) around these parts following the Penn State loss makes me think that a number of you have your self-esteem tied to the success of your favorite football team. That's pathetic. Totally pathetic.
I took both of my sons to the ER this weekend because they had high fevers, and due dillegence etc. They are both fine -still sick, but fine. I mention this because unless you're playing in the games, its just entertainment. Maintain some perspective and gird up thy loins.
Maybe most posters are college kids, and to them, Football, and the direction of our program, is something to swear and freak out about. But to us older folk, we have dealt with real things: death, divorce, foreclosure, cancer. So we know it's just a game. And for the record, I hope that the worst thing that has ever to happened to all Michigan students is that Penn State loss. I would argue that the Louisville loss was even more sad, though.
I would conject that a lot of people have depressingly difficult lives right now (the struggle is real my brothers) and that Michigan football is a couple hours each saturday where we can relax, get lost in a game, and forget about the bullshit.
A game like Saturday's game causes a fundamental destruction of that plan to 'get away and chill'.
Fuck Al Borges for ruining my weekend...
That would be depressing, then. Please beat Indiana!!!
You should start watching episodes of Scooby Doo then, because sports are too random to be consistent for your needs. Scooby and the Gang, however, never disappoint.
Good one! I was going to suggest something he could watch that would never disappoint but I could not think of anything!! Scooby is good. Or road runner. S/he always wins.
So one fanbase is not going to :"get away and chill."
If that's youre goal, sports are probably a bad idea.
Watch Return of the Jedi again. Now 100% more rapey.
is why I believe!
As long as we're hauling out the torches and pitchforks, might as well have a firefredjackson and firedarrellfunk.
This blog is dangerously close to becoming an anti-Michigan football site, if it's not already. There's constructive criticism and then there's, well, not-so-constructive criticism. I just hope this is temporary because of the disappointment of the PSU loss. Let's not become another Shaggybevo.
Thats what is crazy to me. You log on here and can't even tell who is actually a Michigan fan for the most part. Its ridiculous. I think a lot of posters react based on jealousy of what Ohio is doing moreso than loving Michigan. Everybody hates to lose, everybody saw that game and knew that we GAVE it away. It happens in every sport and on every level of sports. The Tigers just gave a game away in the ALCS that they dominated and deserved to win. It happens then you play again.
No we are not a top 10 team yet but so what. The world is not ending. This is OUR team, whether there are Jack Millers & Bad Joe Boldens or there are Jabrill Peppers & Dashawn Hands on the roster. If you jump ship now, don't come back when the championships do.
My post was sarcastic. I hope that is recognized. I'm not happy with the offensive side of the ball but I'm never one to think I know better than our coaches. I did want RR fired, but instead of bitching about it I just stopped watching. I'm nowhere near that now. We're winning, and most of the games have a high entertainment value for me.
he has no history of getting RBs to the nfl. /s
trying to stay away for a couple days after a loss sounds like good advice. I read for over an hour Sunday morning and it really didn't help anything. I have to say that I'm super worried about Saturday. IU has a good offense, and their defense can actually fly around a bit more than I've seen in years. This Michigan team is different than most, though. Michigan is really just playing themselves every game this year outside of OSU. If the good Michigan shows up, we win. If we have 4 turnovers and rush 27 times for 27 yards, we lose. Just don't shoot yourself in the foot, and we might have something.
You're taking me back to the days when just about everybody in the state was a Michigan fan. And just about everybody was a State fan as well. You had your favorite when the two played (it was pretty much just people directly associated with State rooting for them, most rooted for Michigan in that game). You pulled for both the rest of the year, just as you'd pull for both the Tigers and the Lions. Michigan football carried the banner for the entire state when they played Ohio. It wasn't just U of M vs. OSU, it was a state vs. state event. That's why Sparty comes unglued when you refer to OSU as 'Ohio'. It's a reminder that the team they live through vicariously is the enemy.
The thing is, with age and wisdom comes the ability to see the forest and not get lost in the trees. The Al Borges' forest so far three years running, is that against mighty Akron, UCONN and half-scholarship Penn State, nothing "pro-style" has worked, and the only thing that has worked - Gardner's legs - is anathema to what Borges is purporting to install.
Last two years Al's apologists blamed the wrong talent type (Denard, Omame, etc.), now this year they blame inexperience, and now some are blaming some phantom likelihood that Hoke is pulling an "RR 3 3 5" by forcing Borges into manball... Next year Al loses 2 senior starting tackles. Boy can't wait... Notice barely any mention of Penn State? That was just another datapoint consistent with the overall trend, which now clearly indicates that Al Borges and Funk are failures with no clear turn around any time soon, as Michigan now stares down the barrell of the tougher part of its schedule. 8-4 if they are lucky.
The OP is wrong to try and correlate what is happening now, or what has happened in the last 8 years to anything, even the 6-6 of the Schembechler years. I'm an old timer too at 45 and I do remember the days when Indiana was an afterthought, as opposed to the monumental, unguaranteed must win that it has become. If anything it's precisely this type of arrogance, that "we're Michigan and we bounced back from 6-6 under Bo so we'll likely bounce back under Hoke" mentality that is just another cause of our overall decline over the last 20 years. If Hoke thinks this way, figuring "we're Michigan we'll get better", and fails to remove the o coordinator and o line coach poop under his nose come the offseason, the decline will probably just continue.
I enjoyed reading your post, and your thinking is where I should be, but am not. I must be in my second childhood.
I'm even older than you are. I met Bo as a student when he first came to Michigan; to give you a sense of the era, shortly after he was hired, he gave a speech to the IFC. We all wore suits and ties for the event. I thought he was a madman, but in a good way.
In those days, there were refreshments after the event, and it was all very genteel. The coaches stayed around to talk with us. I guess the Athletic Department thought it would be a good idea to have frat officers be enthusiastic about the team, the team, the team. But I digress. The point is I'm older than dirt, and if I had a brain in my head, I'd share your perspective.
Today, however, in addition to all the stuff you mention in your post, we also have the internet. Oh sure, we can go look at porn. Or we can shop on Amazon or go to a guitar forum. We can entertain ourselves in so many ways.
But there's little on the internet that's more fun than complaining and engaging in some good, old fashioned, shared anxiety about a team that you intensely identify with for god-only-knows what reason.
If you're on Medicare, then you're older than I am. But I was IFC Rush Chairman at my old school (where gridiron football hasn't been played in many years and where women's teams that didn't exist when I was a student now are the dominant teams), so I rmember jackets and ties for fraternity rush week. . . . I get your point. Passion for any team you root for tends to overcome reason and logic. I joined the Michigan Family through Parents Orientation, so, while I've followed college football since the 1950s, I'm somewhat late to Michigan football fandom. It makes it somewhat easier to deal with disappointing losses, but I was pounding my fist and shaking my head while watching overtime at Happy Valley. For me, that's not a "classic." Michigan-Notre Dame Under The Lights, Part One: THAT was a classic! "Classic" sometimes depends on the outcome and who you were rooting for.
Ugh; Internet Explorer. Why bother anymore? Memo to Self: MGoBlog Does Not Like Internet Explorer!
the following morning absolutely showed what kind of fan base is on here. It is absolutely rifuckingdiculous! 5-1! Some were predicting we'd be 4-2 right now! Yes Michigan has been playing below the talent level. But a complete melt down from the fan base on here? You'd think we're 0-5. Shit happens and you press on. Michigan football is great entertainment! There are things bigger in life to worry about. We're in no position, on this thread, to decide what's best for this program. So grow a fucking pair and keep supporting this team! Thank you OP for this thread, signed A Realist Fan.
was 5-4-1 against Woody in the Ten Year War.
Bo had a losing record in non-conference road games.
Bo was the first to say the schedule was tougher after he retired as head coach.
Clearly, Bo was left with by Bump better players than Brady was by RR.
They are kids. It is a game.
This was the most painful game to watch that I remember, continually rejecting the proffers of victory offered by our opponent.
By the demographics on this thread, I am ancient as I attended the 1969 game as a 14 year old.
We could win out, we could lose out, most likey, somewhere in the middle.
Borges did not coach Gardner to throw the ball to the other team.
Too conservative in the OT, yes.
Should anyone be fired? No.
I'm forty and the losses are getting easier to take as I age or the RR era has burned me out. I used to go into mourning for days after I lost when I played then after when UM lost....Must have low T levels or something now. I avoid this place for a few days after a loss for the emotions to die down and level heads to return.
A few things.
-OL is young, I think that in the future we will be running into 8 man boxes with success but now not so much. I just hope we do not get the young RB's "gun shy" Green seemed very tentive to just stick his 240 lbs and make a hole.
-Mighty Stanford and Oklahoma lost. It happens, it sucks to lose but it happens.
-UM still controls its outcome.
double post...I am slipping.
Yea. We should really be excited about a team that can rarely play for a B1G Title and if they do might just get whipped in Pasadena.
Just like the old days! HUZZAH!
It's just the endless "F everyone! Fire hoke! We suck balls!" is very annoying and not constructive.
great thread....i love your levelheadedness. That being said, we are so used to instant gratification in our lives now, young and old...we sit idlely by and watch Bama (oversigning and Jucos) turn around and become a powerhouse after 1 year of mediocrity from Saban, and Urban take over 2 struggling programs (with full cupboards when he arrived) and turn them into title contenders.
Then we preach doing things the right way, which we are doing. We preach building a program by recruiting differently than Rrod, which we are also doing, and just going thru the growing pains of.
As a college football blue-blood, we cannot stand to watch a few others be national powers and creep up on some of our records. I still think Hoke will right the ship, he is smart, he recruiting better than anyone. He has shown he has more in-game clout than Lloyd with less talent overall. Our best players are young, 2010 has 10 recruits left who have mostly developed well under Hoke, our QB is rattled by our young line and only trusts our 2 tackles. Breathe guys.
We lost in a quadruple overtime game in the most hostile road environment of the Hoke era on the back of a couple bad coaching decisions that could have looked just fine if PSU's receivers hadn't made 3 consectuive outstanding plays where we were in position....we also missed 3 game-winners from our reliable kicker.
HIndsight is both liberating and frustrating...We are fine, we are growing.
I agree with the OP. But man, if we don't improve our stubborn play-calling, we will be looking at 8-4 as a blessing.
I have not called for anyone to be fired, nor do I believe anyone should be fired...yet. But that doesn't mean we can't have some blunt criticism of some of the more boneheaded choices we've seen from this staff and team.
As I've said before, problems abound:
- Turnover-prone QB
- Inexperienced and ineffective OL
- Mediocre DL
- LBs who don't cover well and don't blitz well
- DBs who play too soft
- Stubborn offensive play-calling
- Overly-conservative defensive play-calling
- Clock management
- Terrible TE blocking
But as the season has unfolded, so have a few strengths:
- Gallon and Funchess
- Deep passes from DG
- QB runs w/DG
- Two good safeties, and a strong secondary overall
- Very good run-stopping LBs
- Jibreel Black's pass rush
- Depth on defense
We need to do a better job of taking advantage of our strengths, and minimizing our weaknesses. I think the board is justifiably frustrated that's not happening.
That said, it doesn't mean we need to fire everybody or assume we're going to lose every game.
I was 17 in 1969. Started "following" Michigan football in 61-62, mostly had to listen to games on the radio, few were televised.
I expected this to be a roller coaster season. I said somewhere that it depended on how quickly to Oline gelled and that if we beat ND with decent Oline play we might see 11+ wins. I said that if we lost to ND probably more like 8-9 wins. I was right about the line, but wrong that ND would be the test.
I have dealt with worse seasons and watched much harder games to lose especially against OSU during the 10 year war.
It's easy to call for a coach's head behind internet anonymity. It was much harder when you had to have that conversation face to face. There was a price paid to personally crap on a coach's reputation, intelligence, loyalty to his team and school, in public. Disagreements about calls, were based on outcomes and alternatives, not personal slander. Yes you could opine about the possiblity that a coach had lost his edge or even suggest that his performance be reviewed, but anything approaching the personal vitrol spewed over the last three days would simply not have been tolerated in public.
Every one of these coaches followed a long tough path to get to Michigan. One where they were measured at every step. The toughness and objective success required to make that trip deserves our respect.
I don't agree with many calls made by Borges, Hoke, and Mattison, but I respect that they have earned the right to make those calls and acknowledge that, even when they appear to be wrong, they probably made them for reasons beyond my understanding of the game.
If it takes the rest of this season to fix the team's issues, and all of next season as well, I won't like the trip, but I can see what they are building and am willing to give them time to finish. Then if things are still disfunctional it will be time to review coaching performance.
Three or four years to rebuild a football program is not a particularly long time to someone who has been a fan for 50+ years. I know what dominance feels like, and I am willing wait for its return. I realize that is a hard thing for people to accept in an instant gratification society, but that is the timeline to success.
What an interesting and true comment.
Iowa was ranked #1 in 1985 for part of the season. Michigan was #2, setting up a 1 vs 2 showdown in Iowa City. Iowa kicked a last second field goal to beat Michigan 12-10. Iowa then lost the following week in Columbus. Michigan tied Illinois 3-3 two weeks later, then won the rest (including the Fiesta Bowl vs Nebraska) to finish 10-1-1 and ranked #2. Iowa lost in the Rose Bowl to the Pac 10 representative (UCLA I think).
Ed: This was supposed to be a response to comment #53.
is sooooooo much different than before. I am 52 and yes we would plow over the b1g teams most of the time (occisional Minny or purdue upset)...but now the other teams are relative on our level and OSU's. Have you guys noticed how many games OSU has played since Meyer has been coach in which they were in a close game? In 1 1/2 years about 8 or 9!!!!! That would never happen back in the day...The difference is Meyer makes just enough difference in the game that they win those 8 or 9 close games....Hoke screwed up massively in the PSU game first with the DOG, then playing prevent D on the last drive, no passes before our last drive and of course...passive in OT while O'brien went for the throat in the 4th OT.....I have to admit I never liked BO because he was the same way...Moeller, now that was my man and I hate the fact that the building I own was responsibile for his demise...Carr was OK I guess, but I hated RR...Hoke started out the gambling type...but he has regressed...I hope the PSU game is a wake-up call that winning games takes BALLS!
I turn 60 next month. I would love to offer some gems of wisdom, but this thread is just making me feel old and depressed. Time to watch my recording of UTL1, take an Ativan and get excited about the Indiana game.
Go Blue ... for years and years and years ... Ah screw it, forever