Penn St. 0-2
Ohio State 0-2
Michigan State 0-3
Penn St. 0-2
Ohio State 0-2
Michigan State 0-3
The past is the past. I'm talking about the future. Our team was not good the last 2 years. I don't care what our record has been against OSU/MSU or anyone else the past 2 years. I only care about the future and going forward, I think this team is ready to win, we're ready to compete in the big ten. I think we will show it on Saturday.
Half our team is ready to compete in the Big10. The other half is along for the ride.
I like what you are saying - I too am excited for the future. And I'm sure we can agree that winning at home against a ranked Iowa team will go a very long way in changing perceptions of this team--- and this program.
However, I don't think that any fan of the program with the most all-time wins and highest winning percentage, and multiple national championships can really, honestly, say that the past does not matter.
And that's what makes 0-6 against the Buckeyes matter. And 0-3 against Sparty matters.
especially Iowa, take a step back. I'd add Ohio State, but they just seem to reload.
We have 3 very winnable games still on our schedule. Most were predicting 7-5 this season and winning those 3 puts us at 8-4. What's wrong with beating the teams you are better than, and losing to teams that are better than you? I just don't see how a team that everyone expected to be 7-5 losing to a probable end-of-year-top-10 team is going to kill his career here.
A final regular season record of 8-4 with a bowl game invitation would be just what the doctor ordered for this program. I'll also take a 7-5 record with one of the wins coming against OSU. And if 8-4 includes a win against OSU then BONUS! As mentioned above, every win matters regardless of the opponent. Wins over MSU and OSU are always great (see 1993, my freshman year, when Michigan finished 8-4 with one of those wins a blowout over OSU). That said, I believe Rodriguez will secretly be extremely happy with an 8-4 final regular season record - he'll never say it out loud, but I think it will be a big weight off his shoulders.
took off. Everyone who picked 7-5 or 8-4 and said they'd be satisfied with that (including me) said so before we knew Denard was this good. Given how critical QB is to offensive play, I think many people mentally upgraded their expectations--meaning our ability to play good teams better, and to play much better than mediocre teams. If Tate was our QB I'd be fine with 7-5 given our defense--with Denard at this level, 7-5 is disappointing IMO.
Even with an unexpectedly electrifying QB, 8-4 or 7-5 seems like a reasonable prognostication with a defense this bad.
Al sez "Just win baby!"
Al Davis is a moron, i do not know if i would be quoting him.
This game couldn't matter less to RichRod's future. If he wins, a nice feather in the cap, but if not, there is not much shame in losing to a highly ranked team, especially when that team is not one of the core rivals. Also what's with the hyperbole that he is gone if he loses against Iowa, Wisc and OSU. If you want to take a strong outrageous position, back it up with some analysis or reasoning.
This game is huge. Lose and everyone will beleive that we are headed to our 3rd straight Big 10 slide (including possibly recruits). Win and it buys RR a lot of goodwill and patience.
This game is huge only to us die-hard Michigan fans who are sick and f***ing tired of hearing little brother and everyone else tell us how bad we are and how far we've fallen. We want it because it would indeed go a very long way to silencing the haters, but to RR and to the team, this game is no bigger than any other game on the schedule. There are just too many ups and downs for them to pin that much emphasis on one game, especially against a non-rival.
yes, if we beat iowa the critics quite and yes , if we lose they say this is the beginning of the slide, ut it does not matter- it will be what it will be- by that i mean where we end up is what will matter to an even keeled man like brandon. if this is the beginning of the slide then all the haters and even some die hards will be all over rr and brandon will have a tough decision . but , what if we win and then slide? is 6-6 that much better, what if we lose and end up 8-4- would this game have mattered?
let's just let the season play out. i know it's hard and our hearts nearly stop beating every weekend, but it will be what it will be.
The post was intended to be prognostication more than anything else. I THINK an Iowa win means we are actually pretty good and will go at least 4-2 the rest of the way. Could I be wrong? Yes. Could I be right? Yes. Could someone have said the same thing about Wisconsin in 2008? Yes. Its just an opinion of what I think the future holds and nothing more.
in recruiting. Sure the overall record is what matters most to Brandon, RR and the team.
BUT in the minds of many, particularly recruits it matters a lot when you win and who you beat. For example, if we beat Iowa with Tim Jernigan present it might mean more in his recruitment than a win against Illinois a month later.
Not to mention the fact that it does seem like RR's teams ride momentum both up an down so a win this saturday might increase confidence and thus pay dividends down the road, while a loss could do the oppposite.
I don't think there's a big enough ORLY owl for this, but yeah, we'll learn a lot about the team this Saturday. If we lose to Iowa it's not the end of the world though. We'll need to beat Purdue and Penn State.
If we lose this game, I'll be more dissapointed about the dumbasses coming out of the woodwork with ZOMG RICH ROD IZ SOOO FIRED than about actually losing this game.
This is exactly what I was trying to convey in my post. I've been a RichRod supporter since before we hired him. His teams were ALWAYS fun to watch. I started following his career when Woody Dantzler was at Clemson. Even if he is 6-6, I want him here next year because I have seen improvement every year since 2008. What I want more than that though is to silence the haters. Its embarrasing how many high profile boosters are rooting for his demise. These factions within Michigan are ridiculous.
If we lose, we lose, its just another game. But if we win, it helps more than a normal win.
...and I don't mean this to start an argument, but when will it be legitimate for fans/boosters to begin questioning the direction of the program and the future of the coach? After we lose a winnable game this year (say we lose to Illinois, or Purdue, or Penn State)? After we fall to 0-3 against OSU in Rich Rod's tenure? After the bowl game, should we get to one? Or do we have to wait until year 4 is complete?
IMO, the moment we don't improve from the previous year. Now, once we get back to the top, we will have varying records from 9-4 to 13-0. But until that time, RichRod needs to be kept around until we stop seeing improvement.
I think you have a fair and justified question, but it is one that is going to bring forth all kind of different opinions. I agree with the position that you need to give RichRod credit as long as the TEAM continues to show improvement. The University of Michigan made a decision to change the way their football team looks and plays by hiring Rich Rodriguez and when you completely change the look and play of a team it is going to take a little time to get your final product.
After saying all of this, if Rich Rodriguez loses his job it is going to be because of the decisions he has made on the defensive side of the ball and have nothing whatsoever to do with the offense IMO.
And Illinois. I know they are looking better, but not good enough to count them even close to a tossup yet.
Good point. Forgot about them.
nothing screams "ALL IN!" like a hundred foot tall tattoo of the Michigan block M on your abdomen. I like it.
Little known fact: I not only had to have it tattooed, but had to have the hair dyed as well.
Illinois may lay MSU somewhat close this Saturday, but their loss to IU in a couple weeks will put them right back where they belong... on a course for a 3-5 or 2-6 conference record.
At the end of the year people will look back at the PSU/Illini game as the battle for 8th place.
If we play only at the average level of our first 6 games against Purdue and PSU, we should win without too much trouble. A loss would indicate that something is going seriously wrong.
A close loss to Illinois would be disappointing but not devastating.
As for Iowa, Wisconsin, and OSU, a win in any of those would be the biggest of RR's tenure here, but none of those should even be as high as a 6 on the "desperate need to win" scale. Blowout losses would be bad though.
Even if we beat only Purdue and PSU, that would leave us at 7-5 and in a bowl in a year when the combination of talent and experience on defense is at an all-time low.
Last weekend's loss was a huge blow to Rich Rod. You can tell me all the reasons why it wasn't that important for you or why it happened and shouldn't be perceived as a huge blow, but for those that were at the game and around campus after, the mood was not pretty. 0-3 against MSU stings really, really bad. I think Brandon is saying all the right things, but another season with a fast start and a late-season collapse will "prove" to many that have always hated Rich Rod that a change is needed at the end of the year. And Brandon will hear a lot of those voices. This is, of course, JMHO...
Of course it was a big blow, we lost to a rival. If RR was doing this with his guys, all seniors, it'd be a different story. Look long term right now. We have virtually everyone back on offense next year, with some great depth at O-Line and WR. On defense, we have virtually everyone back sans Ezeh, Mouton, Banks, Rogers. If we implode with everyone in place, I understand -- but until then, it's too early to pull the rug out.
Of course my argument was extremely broad. There has been more going on with this program under RR than simply (as you would say) LOOSING players -- NCAA bullshit allegations, transfers, injuries, position changes, decommits, etc. Not saying all of that isn't a result of simply RR, but some of it isn't. We have had some tough, tough breaks the last few years and I think we are on the upside. Wins will come.
Well, start buying the argument. Yes, every team loses players and plays SOME freshmen. There is not one single successful team with half of the starters being underclassmen, much less with the number of freshmen we have. RR's first recruiting class will not be seniors for TWO more years, since he came in about 2 months before signing day with most of the recruiting class of 2008 already in place. Iowa fans waited 10 or 11 years for Ferentz to put something together - RR will have a Big Ten Champion / BCS contender in place in less than half that time.
...in college football, since about 1990 you get 3 seasons to show something then you are gone. So for RR to get that 4th season he need to show "U of M Isn't a finesse team that you can just out physical" (I don't even blame DS for saying it on 1130 this afternoon, he was only repeating what everyone else was saying.
I was at the game and on campus after and although we were disappointed about the loss I don't remember anyone calling for anybody to be fired besides Shirvell...
For instance, you wrote, “More specifically, with a win this week over Iowa the haters will be proven wrong.” All you can really say is that a win over Iowa will call off the dogs for now.
No Michigan coach, and surely not Rodriguez, will truly be embraced by the fans until he reaches at least parity with Ohio State and clear dominance over Michigan State.
I am not a Rodriguez hater by any means, but the fact is, at Michigan you are expected to win Big Ten titles with regularity. Until Rodriguez does that, the arguments that he is the wrong coach will persist.
Amen. Very well said!
This is the mantra I have been stating over and over again. Does it suck that we lost to MSU for the 3rd straight year...heck yeah. I am still getting childish text messages from Lil' Bro slappies gloating.....
But RR needs to be evaluated upon the measure of improvement of this program from year to year. By defination, just 1 more win constitutes improvement, a bowl game, minimum 3 weeks extra practice time. It does not matter in the grand scheme of the program who you beat right now. If the program continues to get better (and I do firmly believe that, but I am having some questions about the D) we need to stay the course.
Does anyone actaully consider that we may have lost to the 2nd best team in the Big 10? They beat Wisconsin, they will destroy Penn State, and Iowa will be a toss up. My point is, that I still believe that we will win at least 2 if not more (I'm going with 4) games this year, plus the bowl game. That puts us at 8-5 minimum (I'm going with 10-3). That's improvement.
And yes, one of those losses will most likely be to that school to the south so that will make it 0-7. The haters will still hate, citing 0-3 to Sparty and 0-7 to 'them', but that would be a short sighted way of looking at the program.
8-5...9-4...10-3.... Heck yeah this porgram is heading in the right direction.
Will it have "arrived"? No.....
Will everyone be satisfied?...No
Will even RR and the team be satisfied?...Heck no.
Focus on improvement each and every week / game / practice / play / workout and everything else will fall into place.....
This team needs to show progress, which essentially means 6 wins and a bowl. Losing to Iowa doesn't doom those chances.
Stop moving the goalposts. If M loses to the top three or four teams in the conference (OSU, MSU, Iowa, Wisky), then it will still be a successful season.
I wanted a recipe. Don't let the Anti-WLA Mafia Mafia cow you, dude.
If you post in good faith and you're not egregiously stupid, then there will be no recipe.
It seems like the poster is trying to build up the importance of Iowa because he thinks it'll be a win.
Troof, but I have to cook dinner for my in-laws tonight. Seriously, I need a recipe.
I guess I don't post here enough to know what the recipe reference is in regards to. But, I do think we will win on Saturday (I will not be devastated with a loss, I know its going to be an uphill battle) and I think that it will be looked at as a very big win 2 years from now.
For example, if ekartash had posted any of his comments here in an actual thread, he would have been recipe'd. Bad faith, overly negative, overly stupid, and/or overly pointless threads will get recipe'd. Some people at MGo don't like it because, well, sometimes they or their buddies get recipe'd.
You were close, but it seemed like you're coming from a position of optimism, so I let it go. Stay tuned, though- there is always an idiot with the ability to create a thread.
He has till, like, 2015 to win a Big Ten title. As long as he can show improvement of one game every year.
He starts 5-0, and goes 6-6, he's fired. That's not even hating, that's just the way it's going to be. And don't kid yourself otherwise.
I never said "he only has to improve by one win every year to keep his job." What I said was he has to show tangible progress this year, which at minimum means 6 wins.
He starts 5-0, and goes 6-6, he's fired. That's not even hating, that's just the way it's going to be. And don't kid yourself otherwise.
...is just delusional. We just heard a report that David Brandon is telling recruits RichRod does NOT have a minimum # wins in order to keep his job, and he WILL be here for a long time. When it comes to assertions about RichRod's job security, I'll believe Brandon before I ever believe you.
Because nowhere has Brandon ever said that 6-6 would be tangible progress. He hasn't put a win total on it, but you're delusional if you don't think wins and losses are a part of it. He hasn't put a number, because wins can mean different things. He might let 6-6 slide, if we're suddenly hit with injuries everywhere. Or 10-2 might not be enough if some huge scandal occurred. That's what he's saying when he's saying it's not only wins or losses. Not that "it doesn't matter how much we win, I'll judge him on other things". Brandon is telling people Rich is going to be here for a long time, because he can't imagine that after going 5-1 we would end up at 6-6. He (wisely) doesn't think 1-5 the rest of the way (and 1-6to finish the season) is, or should, happen. If it does, without some major happening, he's probably going to take a much different look on the season.
If you think that if we win one game the rest of the season, against Illinois, Purdue, Penn State with other winnable games thrown in, and that one game isn't Ohio State, the only one delusional is you.
I have never seen someone so contort an AD's (semi)public statement of support for a head coach to mean...nothing. We can only go on what Dave Brandon says, but you want to extrapolate it to represent what he can or cannot imagine. It's almost as if you don't want that public statement of support to mean anything.
I wonder why.
...it was like when GWB said he'd govern bipartisanly. There's just some things you are going to lie on in public
Brandon spoke to the recruits this past weekend. He didn't have to do that.
Unprompted, Brandon unequivocally stated that RichRod's going to be here for a long time. He didn't have to do that.
Oh, and this wasn't in public.
I really don't get how Dave Brandon going out of his way to tell recruits that RichRod is safe can somehow be interpreted as him being "forced" to do this, and it's kind of weird that you're asserting Michigan's AD is lying.
He didn't have to do any of this, but he did. It seems like the only people who are interpreting this as nothing are people who want it to mean nothing. Good luck with that.
I wouldn't put too much stock into this one game. If we lose a close one like we did last year, then that would make people feel a little better going into the bye week. I just want us to win so I don't have to go two more weeks waiting for another shot at a win and bowl eligibility.
RR will become more popular and his job less precarious if he wins; RR will become less popular and his job more precarious if he loses.
That's a mighty bold statement.
In a nutshell, I suppose you're right. But the bigger picture is that the majority of Michigan followers are expecting failure. This week, we are playing a very good team, and a loss to a very good team is just that. But, to put it as simply as I can, I think a win over Iowa means +10000, where a loss only means -1000.
Interesting line about Michigan followers expecting failure. I think many in the college football world expect failure. I am worried that many Michigan followers want failure and that first loss was perfect for them. You can call me stupid or eternal optomist, but I thought we would lose 2 games this year. I thought we would lose to OSU and one to (Iowa/Wisky/PSU). Even with a bad defense, I think we can win. I hated losing to MSU, but I still see some great things. I dont expect failure, although, I have to be alone when watching the games, because I can get really upset.
This game is the least important of the season so far.
Iowa is one of the two best teams on the schedule and is not a traditional rival. When the season started, this game was an expected loss.
And it is because it is an expected loss that makes it so important. We lose, no one cares, that's what was supposed to happen. We win, we do something unexpected and that's what really needs to happen for the positive momentum train to get going.
Just as I thought MSU wasn't a make or break game, I don't think Iowa is a make or break game. We want to win every game. I think MSU was winnable. I also think Iowa is winnable.
However, I still see Michigan ending up somewhere between 7 - 5 and 9 -3. It depends on both luck and execution by our offense.
The thing is, haters are gonna hate, whether we win the rest or only win two more. I like RR a ton, but much more importantly, DB is going to give RR time. I also think that BOTH RR & DB understand the peril in pulling the plug on Gerg. Even if someone else out there is better, we simply CAN'T have a 4th DC since 1997. We have to give the current players time to mature physically, and time to know exactly what to do immediately, without thinking about it.
You have to use Denard as an example. With all his talent, it took him time to get to where he is now. And he is still going to improve. It takes time, which we see with Campbell, with Demens, with Christian, with the redshirts. Very few guys are ready to step on the field immediately as a freshman and make an impact.
It is huge for us to go to a bowl this year (with the resultant extra practice,) and with a record of 7 - 5 or better, RR has time.
The one wildcard is OSU. That is the one game that both nationally and for the fanbase makes a huge difference. Iowa, MSU, Wisconsin, are all games in a different category.
Its not a make or break game for our season. I see it more as an opportunity to quiet the negativity. It will always be there, but im not sure wins over PSU/Illinois/Purdue really help with the anti-RR crowd - that is expected (even though those will be tough games). At this point, Michigan has to do something unexpected to silence the critics a bit. Iowa/Wisconsin/OSU are the only remaining chances on this schedule.
If we lose the next 6 games straight, is Rich Rod out?
Yes. No improvement from the previous year gets him fired.
That's a real tough one -- I can why but I can also see why not. As much as it would suck to lose 6 in a row, I still think he's the answer -- especially with how many guys he has coming back.
...this is modern era college football. You have 3 seasons to make a bowl, if you don't? Your out (if you make it really big by season 3, like Ron Zook going to the Rose Bowl, they'll happily let you drive the team into a ditch).
It's hard to say whether Iowa will have more, or less, success against our D than State did. Our O will determine whether we end up in the game til the end, or if we are playing catchup in the second half, like we did against State.
I personally believe that the MSU game was an outlier for Denard, and that he will play much better against Iowa. Good enough to win? Hopefully, and if he does, and we do end up winning, at least one segment of haters can then shut the hell up, and that would be the ones saying RR's offense won't work against the bigger, better B10 defenses.
I saw enough in the MSU game that I know RR's offense can work in the B10. We have seen enough over the years with WVU beating UGA and Okie that it will work against everyone, given the personnel, and I think we have better personnel overall than RR's WVU teams did on O.
i love how people are ok with us losing to the top 4 teams in the conference. being #5 is great!!! when lloyd was here, anything less than first place was unacceptable. there were fire lloyd chants when we finished 2nd. now we are happy with our season if we beat the bottom dwellers in the conference. haha. wow. we really are a second tier program now.
Arguments is complex:
in the end it comes down to winning football games. i dont care if we look pretty on offense, if we keep losing. and people need to stop calling it a success because we go from 5 wins to 6. who we beat matters. last year we did not beat one good team. and so far this year we are on the same path. why not just schedule 4 games against delaware state every year. thats a guarantee of 4 wins. than beat the worse 3 teams in the conference, and you go 7-5. is that success?
just wait and see. michigan state will end up 5-3 or 4 -4 in the conference. and yet we got destroyed by them at home. indiana might win 1 game in the conference this year. and we barely beat them. i am sorry, but i dont see progress. i see a stud of a qb running out of his mind. but he goes down or has an off day (like we saw against msu), and forget it. we wont beat anyone.
If Michigan finishes at 7-5 or 8-4, I dare you to put up a post declaring it UNACCEPTABLE.
Your argument above is different from the one I responded to. In your first post you said "i love how people are ok with us losing to the top 4 teams in the conference" and suggested that people who think that a top-5 finish in the B10 this year would be a good finish are also saying that a top-5 finish will always be acceptable. I was pointing out that the latter does not necessarily follow from the former.
In the post I am reponding to now, you said that winning more games isn't a sign of improvement; rather, it's who we beat that will show improvement. There is nothing particularly objectionable to me about this, but notice that you're no longer arguing about the extent to which posters on this board are happy with a 4- or 5-loss season. In addition,
Unfortunately it was our first game against a genuinely good defense. And the public perception is that Michigan got completely owned ( the majority is sane on sports issues like this, and every non-UM Blue site is playing this same song). Michigan has the reputation as a finesse team that can't get it done in the Big 10. A win against Iowa quiets this forever, a loss that song just gets louder.
This is the kind of person I'm talking about. A win over Iowa will go a long way to eradicating this line of thought. MSU is a good team this year, face it. They beat the #11 and #18 teams in the nation already. "Last year we did not beat one good team. and so far this year we are on the same path." This is the line of thinking that a win over Iowa will help eliminate. We're going into a bye week and a loss to Iowa, although expected to some degree (read: by Vegas), will further this negative line of thinking and extrapolate upon it for 2 weeks. We can't let that happen, gotta go out and win this one.
One, instead of Delaware St., we chose a really good FCS team this year. The rest of the competition has been decent, certainly better than last year, and we won all of the OOC games.
Two, If you think MSU will end up 5-3 or 4-4 in the conference, your delusional. They beat one of the teams considered near the top in Wisky. They don't have OSU, and the hardest game left on their schedule is a game at Iowa. I think they lose maybe one game, possibly two if they take Illinois lightly. A better bet is for them to go unbeaten this year, considering Iowa's offense will be more or less one dimensional without a good running game.
Three, Indiana is good enough to beat Northwestern, Purdue, Penn St. and possibly Wisky(if at full strength). They could very well be a bowl team this year with at least 6 but possibly 7 or 8 wins. Their game against OSU was played without their starting RB and LT, and no depth on the line. Their offense at full strength would have shown up much better against OSU.
As for Denard going down, it seems to me that he missed most of a game and our offense shifted just fine to the strengths of the other two QB's we used. Granted, Denard has made our offense spectacular at times, but the offense runs quite well with Tate at the helm too.
You have too much negativity towards the team this year. I, and others, on the other hand, see the improvements and know we are starting to see the beginning of something special at UM for football. No reason to believe we can't get to where OSU has been, or beyond, and be a perennial top-ten team again.
I love how some people think being optimistic and encouraged by progress is a moral failing. And by "love," I mean "go the fuck away and cheer for somebody else please."
You are exactly the type of fan (yes I know that you love Michigan just as much as the next guy) that is driving many other completely batty.
Not a single person has stated...."being #5 is great!!!"
You are looking at people's statement of "7-5...8-4....was the expectation this year" and concluding that is the end all mean all. That is simply not true. A vast majority of the fans will expect better numbers / record next year (ahhhhh, there's that improvement thingy again) and so on until championship are achieved.
expectations should be to win the big ten, and not lose to all of your rivals.
this offense has yet to prove that it can do well in the big ten. i hope it proves it this year. but so far its 0-1 against a descent big ten team.
But one must temper that expectation with the reality of where we were, and where we are heading. This offense is miles ahead of even last year's O. Our defense is a little worse, but that is expected if one looks realistically at the devastating losses of Warren and Woolfolk in our secondary. After Woolfolk went down, and we were looking at starting freshmen and first year position players in the secondary, the realistic expectations should have dropped as well. Could Carr have fielded a better D? Maybe. I don't think it would have been good enough to win games for us, like you seem to think, particularly with the losses and lack of recruits we had near the end of Carr's tenure.
Our O, while we lost to State, has played a decent D in ND. I wouldn't say that our O is worldbeaters, but to look at the MSU game and say that they haven't proven anything is asinine. Most people would say that Stanford's O is pretty good, yet ND held them to under their season average. We put up more yards, and nearly as many points as Stanford's did, with more TD's and 2 missed FG's. Our O is fine, even for B10 games. Denard made mistakes, of which none were attributable to MSU's D, that cost us a ton of points. That can be expected considering his youth.
If you can't tolerate having to endure a few rebuilding years and being forced to be happy about 7-5 or 8-4, then go away.
I think those people have realistic expectations given the circumstances surrounding the program the last few years. Our offense is better than most in D1, just young and still succeptable to mistakes due to immaturity, as seen by Denard against State.
Our D has been decimated in the secondary, and had weak recruiting for a few years other than a couple of good DL players. Even OSU, which typically fields very strong defenses, would be hurting if they were starting what we are in the secondary. Their LB's would look lost at times and teams would gash them for mega yards through the air.
I don't think many people realize just how much the losses of Woolfolk and Warren have hurt the entire D, forcing our LB's to take on more responsibility in the passing defense, which hurts the running defense.
There are many reasons as to why the D is in the situation it is in now, with fault lying in many people, including Carr(whom I liked as a UM coach). To say people are happy, or OK with being a middle of the road B10 team is asinine. Just because we can be satisfied at this point with being there, doesn't mean that we think that is all we can expect from RR. I fully expect this team to be a top-ten team next year, and vying for the MNC in 12'. Carr could not have had much more success, given the defensive personnel makeup, than RR has had. The only difference would have been the O would not have missed much of a beat. 08' would have been better, and 09' maybe by a couple games, but our run of dissappointment against OSU would have continued, with no hope of being good enough. Now, our Offense is easily good enough to contend, and the future for the defense will be the telling factor on whether we can beat them, or not.
lloyd carr would have recruited better defensive players. i dont expect our defense to be top 10. i dont even expect it to be top 50. but we are one of the ten worse defenses in the country. and lets not pretend that the players we do have are worse than a lot of the teams that are ahead of us in defense.
.....that have no basis. For the last few years of Carr's teams, we have had to place younger and younger guys in the secondary, along with the LB corps. Given your statements, our D right now, near the end of Carr's recruits, should be filled with upperclassmen who are starting, particularly in the secondary. We would have had that, except for the Warren and Woolfolk situations. He still hadn't recruited a top-flite LB near the end of his tenure as coach, and as such, we field two LB's who switched positions. Carr hadn't shown near the end, any more desire or ability to recruit the top defensive players in the country than RR has, and RR was focused on the offense and getting his type players in as soon as possible.
My point was, that even if Carr had stayed, and even if our DC was consistent, we couldn't have expected much better out of his teams on the D side of the ball.
Given time, and you will see this next year, IMO, our defense will be competitive enough to win us games when our O isn't hitting on all cylinders.
lloyd carr would have recruited better defensive players.
A lot of this defense is still made up of Lloyd Carr recruits. Or did you think RichRod recruited Obi Ezeh?
You can live in reality or you can live in Fairy Tale Land. I can't help but notice that your choice to live in Fairy Tale Land doesn't appear to make you very happy.
Here's some data. Carr coached for 13 seasons. In only 2 of those seasons he was better than 5-1 (Michigan's present record) after 6 games. In 6 of those seasons he was 5-1. In 5 of those seasons he was worse than 5-1.
5-1 looks like a pretty normal Michigan record.
michigan was 5-1 last year. how did we finish? we'll see what happens the rest of the season. i will not post any more.
I actually told you to stop rooting for Michigan because it seemed to cause you so much pain and you had no hope for the future.
I was really thinking about the you and your feelings.
And what is the dude's point? That we're 5-1 and now we're totally screwed because once Michigan was 4-2 and ended up 5-7? That just doesn't make any sense.
Michigan is 5-1 and just lost to a good team because they played like shit. That's it.
If people can't root for progress and improvement, then I think they're going to be very unhappy with M for awhile. If he can't accept that 7-5 or 8-4 would be a tremendous success, then yeah he absolutely should go root for somebody else. He's not just being critical, he's being unrealistic and unfairly negative.
The offensive performance we saw the first five games is the most exciting football I've seen Michigan play, like, ever. People need to give things their proper chance to fall into place, we've had a lot of hard luck here. It's gonna be Michigan again...
"If Michigan beats Iowa, there is a good chance we go 4-2 the rest of the way. More specifically, with a win this week over Iowa the haters will be proven wrong, the negativity will start to die down, fans will get excited for a bowl game, we will travel well for the bowl game. If we win the bowl game, we will be a consensus top 20 team going into the offseason/preseason. Michigan will be back, and the only thing people will have against RichRod is the past."
Michigan could beat Iowa and lose the rest of its games. Michigan could lose to Iowa and stun OSU. Michigan could lose to Iowa, lose to OSU, win the Alamo Bowl, and not be a top-20 team going into next year...I think you're putting way too much stock into this game.
Which is why I dont like threads like this
Let's just enjoy it. We have 12-13 weeks of college football out fot he whole year.
Have some fun. We'll pick up the pieces later.
Sometimes I swear I am the only one who fun last weekend? Did others not? It was a great day to tailgate, chicks were still showing skin, etc.
Saturday, win or lose, will be fun as well.
You are a whore chasing gambler.
You are a degenerate.
See you at the tailgate:)
He doesn't chase whores, he chases undergrads. There's a difference.
FUN IS FOR PUSSIES. DEPRESSION IS FOR REAL MEN.
I just think if we win, it will be a bigger win than people realize right away. If we win does it mean that we will go 4-2? No, but it makes 4-2 looks pretty manageable (considering we would only need to win 3/5). If we lose is the season over? No, we move on to the next game. But make no bones about it, this would be a big win going into the bye week and going on the road to PSU at night.
I see this argument all the time and I think it's seriously flawed. Rodriguez should be kept if Brandon deems him capable of running a clean program that wins at UM's historic rate. If the answer to that is no, he should be fired. Keeping him just so a few seasons wouldn't theoretically be worse is the exact type of short sighted thing this board always rails against. Should Nebraska have kept Calihan so they wouldn't have had to start over again? After three years, the answer is obviously no. He was wrong for the job, so they cut their losses and moved on. I don't necessarily think that is the case here, but the logic of not firing Rodriguez because it will set back the program is just wrong in my opinion.
"To abort now or at end of season will set program back even more." I always love this reasoning. Why? Why is this the case? Are you saying there has never been a coach that came into a situation with a group of players he didn't recruit - and maybe that don't even fit his "style" - and have nearly immediate success? I can think of a few examples off the top of my head...
....you would find that the school's current coach was one who could recruit like crazy, but not be a good coach. The next coach comes in, like Myer did at UF, and have mega talent all around. Institute his gameplans, and the talent more than makes up for the first years in a new system.
Our situation was different. Yes, Carr had talent in places, but not mega talent at all positions, and the system implemented was radically different than Carr's, with none of the talent suited for the most important job in RR's system, that of QB.
Nebraska was another example, except defensively. Callahan could recruit bigtime. He just can't coach. Pellini comes in, and now Nebraska's defense, using much of Callahan's recruits, is one of the best in the nation.
A year from now we will all be considering whether or not that if UM can get by OSU, if we have a shot at the MNC. Our offense will be as good or better, with none of the mistakes from last game, and our defense will be good enough to keep us in the game with anyone.
I can think of a few examples off the top of my head...
Well, then why don't you name them?
urban meyer took a 7-4 florida team and went 9-3 then 13-1
tressel took an 8-4 osu team and went 7-5 and 14-0
pelini took a 5-7 nebraska team and went 9-4, then 10-4
nick saban cheated his way to 7-6 than 12-2 after taking over a 6-7
mack brown went 9-3 then 9-5 after taking over a 5-7 teamc
chizik took over a 5-7 team and went 8-5 and now is sitting pretty at 6-0
dantonio took a 4-8 msu team and went 7-6 then 9-4
etc. etc. etc.
but the point is, sure michigan could be down for a few years after another coaching hire but they are not guaranteed to go through purgatory. coaches can come in and have rather instant success, even with teams worse off than our own.
Lloyd's not coming back. Get over it.
you asked for coaches who were successful after replacing another coach. no where in my response (or ever, for that matter) did i insinuate that lloyd carr was coming back to coach michigan. this aint k-state.
If we lose to Iowa. This devastating event was predicted by the Mayans and is foretold as a precursor to the apocalypse. Or....
This is another game like every other game our team and our coach wants to win. I recognize for college football fans there are rivalry games, grudge matches, and etc. But frankly I am as emotionally crushed losing to MSU as I would be to Iowa or Indiana or Illinois. This team is improving and becoming noticeably better. I predict the defense will stabilize and the offense will continue to expand its potential. When a few things go wrong everything goes wrong. Timing is off, people forget their assignments, and wheels come off. This happens with young teams. They aren't a veteran enough offense to stabilize themselves. But on offense this team has leaders and they will right the ship if not improve even more. The defense maybe too personnel challenged to become anything beyond serviceable, but if we can get to serviceable by the end of the year, I would be ecstatic. I can't quote the evidence but the WVU defenses were not Top Ten that I remember in any year that Rich was there. They were however competent and serviceable. If we can get to that we will win a lot of games.
Having said all that, if you are placing your hopes on the Rich Rod tenure on this game with Iowa, then you will be disappointed. Iowa lost one game this year, where multiple freakish events occurred to even have this happen. If we beat this team straight up, then Michigan will win EVERY remaining game. But Iowa is too experienced, too talented and too tough on both sides of the line for our team.
After we lost to MSU, I felt that the Penn State game is the most important game for Rich Rod. I maintain it still is. That is a team we should beat. If we don't beat them, then his coaching career at Michigan is at risk almost certainly. But putting that pressure on Iowa is not logical. If you lose to a better team that is not an indictment of your coaching ability.
But, if you beat a better team, then that is an positive indicator of your coaching ability. I wasn't clear in my original post but - for the TEAM this game is just as important as any other game and the coaches and kids need to keep that in mind. When you're a player, EVERY game is important, and losing any particular game can't negatively affect your performance for the next game. But as a fan, as someone who has to deal with UM scrutiny every day, this would be a big win. I won't be devastated with a loss, I'm still going to make the trip out to Penn State, but this would be a big win if we can pull it off. And I have a feeling that 2 years from now, people will look back and point to this game (a big win over a top 15 team that is solid on both sides of the ball, coming off an emotional loss to Iowa) as the date that RR turned it all around.
If we lose - the chance for that kind of game doesn't pop up again till maybe OSU or next year's MSU game (maybe Wisconsin, but I think they're a bit overrated).
Cant we just enjoy the game on Saturday for what it is--a football game
This stuff is getting old
Of of us go to watch the games, and seeing winning. Other's go to drink and see chicks, apparently.
We get that you don't care about the outcomes of the games unless you have money on it. That's fine. Don't blame the rest of us for actually being more interested in the outcomes of the games than the tailgating.
If Mgo had those idiot emoticons, I would be using the jack off hand right now.
Sorry for trying to be reasonable and not jumping off fucking ledges because we're 5-1. Or for inventing mock, dramatic crossroads like the OP and many other folks are doing.
I go to games to sit in the same seats I've sat in for three decades, connect with my past, watch my favorite team play and enjoy the company of friends. I cant contol the outcome and, believe it or not, can still have fun on a sunny day in Ann Arbor even when the boys lose.
I know. I know. I am a shitty fan. I should probably be fired with Rich Rod for the 5-1 start and turn in my season tickets.
Three decades? THREE DECADES?
Sounds like the only thing 'getting old' around here is you, jamie. Oh oh, sorry I meant Mr. Mac.
Oh, and hey,
see you at the tailgate :)
More power to you. No one is making you care on the outcome, anymore than caring if Bruce Willis saves the day matters or not. It can be just entertainment for some.
But jumping in just to criticize those who do care, that's the only mental masturbation going on. If you've gotten to the point where the only way you really care about the results of the game is vs. the spread, good for you. At least you've found some way to still care about the games.
(And if you think you can't control the outcome, you should really be over in the standing at Michigan Stadium thread...because they're convinced that standing SO controls the outcome...go set them straight...).
You really need to relax. When you start thinking that Having Fun == Not Caring, then you need to take a deep breath.
Everybody here cares about M football. Just because someone is interested in enjoying the games doesn't mean he doesn't care. And I'm very depressed that I have to explain that.
I never said anything about caring only about games I gamble on
If anyone wants to break down plays, talk about the depth chart, scout the other team, any and all that stuff. Talk about it to death
This mythical crossroads shit, is just that. Bull Fucking Shit
I am tired of 3-4 threads a day popping up about it.
People do need to relax. Let the season play out. We'll pick up the pieces afterwards. It was the first loss of the season and people are actually saying we're worse now than last year. Morons. And the longer a thread like this lives on without cooler heads like myself urging people to relax, then the worse this blog gets. No sugarcoat.
Here's the deal: College Football is my favorite sport. The 12-13 Saturdays a year are special. And, I had just as much fun with at the 1997 OSU game as I did the 2009 OSU game. Special memories all of them. I feel bad for the folks who let it ruin their lives.
So what exactly does Michigan Football mean to you? Nothing if they lose? That's the thing. it's not a win or lose thing for me and Michigan football. It's that they're playing. Thats whats important. I can take the losing because we've won so much pretty much my entire life. Every team I've ever cheered for goes through patches like this. It will get better. Will Rich be the coach? I dont know. We'll find out in a few weeks. Like I said, i am enjoying the season for what it is--a college football season--and any pieces that need to be picked up will be picked up later.
Iowa isnt a crossroads. Its just another game. I've been Jonesing all week to watch Denard play again. So, fuck this crossroads shit. Just try to enjoy something that we spend most of year looking forward to.
As for the current Michigan program, they took a grim step back against Stiffler U and are now poised on the edge of the same cliff no one knew they were falling from until the Illinois game last year. It is really hard to step back and say "it's just one game" after that travesty at Michigan Stadium, both inside and out,
It's a site by a guy who gets excited when we win, downtrodden when we lose, and is emotional about the games. And one, who oddly enough, thought it was more than just one game, thinks it may be a crossroads to going the same direction as last year, and may have started the week overreacting himself. This is not to say that you do or should agree with him. It's just it's a funny place to complain about the same stuff. Frankly, it may be as good as other places that you can find for it, but if you're really looking for stupendous football analysis, maybe the discourse is slightly better here than most places, but I don't think you're really going to find a lot of it here, either.
But I haven't seen you offering a lot by posting thread about that, or jumping in with some keen analysis in the few threads that may meet your approval. Your content has consisted of this too cool for school stance that berates people for getting upset over a game, or consists of asking people their thoughts on games vs. the spread (with not a lot of analysis worthy of all those breakdowns your jonesing for. You've saved that for your site). So, you haven't contributed to the discourse a lot either. This post has over 150 responses. People must have thought it somewhat worthy of discussion. So it seems to fit into this blog pretty well. The fact that it doesn't fit your image of what you think the site should be about...well, you do have your own blog to discuss what you want, and for people to read if they want. Trashing people for being interested in different stuff doesn't really add anything to this site. And doesn't make you look better than everyone else.
I totally agree that outcomes are the ONLY thing that matter when it comes to these james. Seeing kids play their hearts out and sometimes pleasantly surprise coaches and fans with their progress and improvement? FUCK THAT, IT'S ALL ABOUT WINNING AND LOSING BABY. After all, everybody knows that after a loss the size of fans' penises get a little smaller and their lives are a little more miserable. That's why winning matters. Fuck all this "have fun" shit. I mean come on, what do you think this is- the NFL?
It wasn't losing football games that made your penis small.
With all the media (and booster) scrutiny
what is the metric for increased booster scrutiny? has there been a reduction in donations that is substantially different than other schools? are people buying less gear? this is just a very wishy-washy way to start a long, supposedly thoughtful post.
Its disheartening to listen to people who give a significant amount of money to Michigan Athletics badmouth Rodriguez at every turn. I've spoken to these kinds of people after every game, and have yet to hear anything positive from many of them (not all, got a lot of good feedback after the ND game).
But you can't keep putting what ifs and what if nots on every game. It would feel amazing for all of us to win Saturday but if we don't life goes on. I went into last week in suicide mode and half way through the third quarter I just let it all go. These teams need to beat us right now more then we need to beat them (besides ohio). In ten years people will remember this time because teams that we have beat on for decades got a chance to win a few games against us, not because we never made our way back.
and RR is here to stay.
Everyone ready to walk into oncoming traffic should relax a bit. There were opportunities last weekend, two picks in the end zone, missing a open Stonum and Roundtree just dropping a sure TD would have led to some significantly different results IMO.
Our offense is going to have to provide pressure on the remaining teams by forcing them to play catch up. We simply cannot stand and play ball control and field position control football wth the best teams given the state of the defense.
Right or wrong, the offense is the key to the remainder of the year. Not all is lost, I think that there is every possibility for the offense to turn it up on Iowa.....they did just fine last year against what I think was a better Iowa team especially on offense. Robinson & company need to execute and put up points and force the remaining Big Ten teams to press on offense. Iowa wants ball control, they have not shown any desire for uptempo offense. Getting them to play to outscore can help lead to mistakes and pressing by other QBs - something Stanzi and up to the last few weekends, Cousins were prone to do.
I think what Michigan cannot afford is to just get shut down. Competitive and hard fought losses with issues on defense hopefully are the worst possible outcome we face. I think keeping Robinson calm and working within the offense will lead to some success against any of the remaining teams.
I would also argue that we need to really look at Hopkins/Cox a bit more. Jackson always talks up his stable of backs, but has a complete tendency to want to stick with one guy 98% of most games it seems. There is no way we should be running plays on 3rd and 1 with Smith running the same counter play into the line it appears he runs on about 90% of his called plays. He is a tough, smart and reliable player no question. But I think there are just some lingering issues with his speed due to injury and his size just does not lend to providing that downhill power running. I would argue that we are really missing that Minor type of running from last year that would take us up to the next level of execution.
...due to assignment errors. But Hoskins has done well when's he's played so I'm not sure why he isn't getting more of a shot unless its "OMG we can't play a FRESHMAN" (with our D backing up this reasoning tremendously...unfortunately).
See what we have to put up with. Please tell the team and their coaches to win for the sake of our sanity. That is all.
Or are you looking at the game in it's entirety?
Indiana, for example, is better than they showed against OSU. Their offense played without it's starting RB, LT(and another lost during that game), and OSU's secondary is one of the best in the country. Indiana will win a few games that surprise some people in the B10.
ND, for example, held Stanford defensively quite well. Under their season average in yardage and forced many FG's instead of TD's. ND will end up with 8-9 wins this year, and forced OT against State, which may win 11 or even 12 games this year.
As for State dominating us, that had more to do with our O's mistakes than anything, and I don't believe most of those mistakes can be attributable to State's D.
Call me an optomist, but I see great things happening next year for UM football.
Darius Willis was out and so was a starting OL
...the missing runningback is essentially completely irrelevant. I will, however, give you the Tackle as that had to have screwed up the passing system.
This year at the moment appears worse than 2009
You are out of your mind if you truly believe this.
.....maybe the fact that we've played arguably a better schedule than last year, and done fairly well against it. Along with playing a State team where if our offense played as mistake free as they had previously, the outcome certainly would have been different?
There is no doubt that our D is worse than last year. Our O though, is much better, but still prone to youthful mistakes like last game. That won't happen for every game from here on out.
We had a bad defense last year, too. Since you seem like a fan that doesn't pay much attention, let me spell it out to you.
We lost BRANDON GRAHAM on the d-line...and Woolfolk, Warren, Turner, and Vlad in the secondary. You cannot sit there with a level head and tell me that our defense is not what we all expected. How can you say this team is not improved? Is it all based off of an already expected defense performance?
Our offense has vastly improved with added depth and experience. Do you realize we possess a potent offense or do you just look at a MSU performance of 17 points and base the season off of that? You are the first person that has said that this team has regressed from 2009 to 2010...you sir are an idiot!
For those inclined towards numbers...
Through 5 FBS games.
Points For: '09 = 34.0, '10 = 36.6
Points Against: '09 = 23.4, '10 = 24.8
Yards For: '09 = 400.8, '10 = 535.0
Yards Against: '09 = 392, '10 = 453
So points are about a wash between the two seasons. This year's defense is giving up an extra 59 yards a game and the offense is gaining an extra 135 for a net positive of 76 yards per game.
So there are signs of improvement, but it's all from the offense.
OK . . . these were moderately amusing the first time. Now they're aggressively unfunny.
Recipes are meant to be an appropriate response to something. Generally I only do them for threads, but occasionally comments will go so far off the deep end that they beg for a recipe.
If they get a laugh, then great. But the primary purpose is to let the poster (or commenter) know that I think s/he is so far off base that it doesn't deserve a serious response.
You need to let go of this notion that every comment/thread deserves a serious response.
I have made some of the recipes posted. Excellent!
I think you're crazy and I don't think you pay attention to anything, but even in your dull and stupid world surely you'd have to admit that Michigan starting 5-1 is better than Michigan starting 4-2.
couldnt you say that michigan started 5-2 last year. and if we lose to iowa, we'll again be 5-2. lets see how the last 5 games play out.
oh and i love the comments that RR is not responsible for defense. maybe herein lies the problem. the head coach should be responsible for both defense and offense.
keep drinking the RR juice. i'll be back when we finish the season 7-5. and yes i will say that i am disappointed. i am not sure if any of the wins will be against a bowl eligible team.
I know you're on a crusade to demean anyone who disagrees with you, but you have to be smart enough to know that the FCS game came at a different point this year, right? UM went 4-1 against their first 5 FBS teams both seasons.
The guy said that he thinks this team is worse than 2009's team. I mean, do you really believe a well-reasoned response is going to have any impact on this guy? Come on, he's out of his mind with negativity, and nothing's going to get through to him.
If you want to be a pessimist and insist that DOOM is around the corner, well, then good luck I guess. I don't know what you're getting from Michigan football if 5-1 is worse than 4-2 and it's all just worse worse worse blah blah blah blah. Whatever.
ND doesn't actually appear to be sucky this year....at least not to "Weis-ian" proportions. They could conceivably win out from here. MSU (I hate saying this!) and Stanford are pretty good teams this year, regardless of how good you feel UofM is.
Indian looked sucky vs. the OSU D - (a lot of teams will) - but this is also without 3 starting O-linemen - and one of the starters backups, I'm not sayin....I'm just sayin.....
We haven't been able to beat OSU for 7 years - RR has only 3 of those on his lap - and with a lot of LC players. If you are meaning "competitive", I think last year's game was fairly close - and many of the LC losses may have been competitive due to the play style of he and Tressel. Besides - as many of the RR haters say -- the only thing that matters is a win..and that resides at 0-7 despite the coach's name.
You probably should try watching the games. The improvement on the field is pretty obvious.
Or don't and just give up since it's all so hopeless and depressing.
MSU did not dominate us this year. MSU dominated us last year. We had 28 yards rushing last year. We lost by more points this year, but they dominated us last year.
We shot ourselves in the foot last Saturday.
that there's a line drawn in the sand where if Rich Rod loses to all three Wisconsin, Iowa and Ohio State he is gone? I really feel that any true Michigan fan will tell you that you can't simply look at Rich Rod's win loss record and say if you want him to stay. The criteria in every Michigan fans' head should be, "Do I believe in this coach to bring us to a national force in football once again?" Therefore, seems better for us to stop focusing on where the line will be drawn, and more so on each game as they come. Because when all the dust has settled after the MSU game, I reallyl feel that if our defense continues to improve along with our offense minimizing mistakes, we have a chance to do what past Michigan football teams have been great at... ruining Ohio State's national championship chances at the end of the season. GO BLUE!!
A terrible Purdue team beat OSU last year. Purdue was 1-5 when they played OSU last season. Figure that one out.
We've got to play every game as if we are winless. Beating Iowa doesn't mean a thing if we choke on an injury plagued PSU team. People will see that PSU loss and say Iowa was overrated.
We have very little margin of error this season.
Every game is crucial. If we go 8-4 with losses to MSU/Iowa/Wisconsin/OSU, I think we are headed in a great direction, we beat everyone we were supposed to beat and only lost to the teams that were legitimately better than us. However, you and I both know that those losses will keep the negativity going with those who want Rodriguez gone. They will say "Michigan hasn't beaten anyone yet." I THINK if we beat Iowa, it means we are pretty good and therefore SHOULD (not will) beat PSU/Illini/Purdue. However, the negative nancies will put even more pressure on RichRod to NOT lose those games and say we were out coached by a lesser team if we do lose any of those games after beating Iowa.
Damned if you do, damned if you don't I guess. I just really wish we could all - you know - actually support this program and our coach.
until the end of the season. Momentum and confidence is what this team needs to keep getting better (look at LSU). One game at a time.
The next BIG game we play is whatever the next game is !
Go Blue !
If Michigan beats Iowa, there is a good chance we go 4-2 the rest of the way.
On thing has nothing to do with the other with this team. Each week is it's own unique entity -especially with this defense. A win against Iowa will only help to quell the fears of fans which have absolutely no influence on the outcome of games.
Beating a top 15 team that has a top 2 defense in the big ten will have no bearing on whether we finish 4-2 or 1-5? I realize that each game is its own unique battle, but you've gotta have some confidence if we beat Iowa. Now, the TEAM can't expect to go 4-2 if it beats Iowa. But i think its a reasonable expectation for a fan.
First of all I think IA is a good team, but we definitely have the ability to beat them. If we lose and go into an MSU like swoon, there'd be legitimacy to those calling for his head. However, I know a few players can change the whole complexion of a team, and it appears he's collecting those needed. In that respect, each season, not merely games, is its own entity.
On the other hand, if DRob comes out with total confidence and we beat IA w/o more than one miscue by him, I agree many will point to this game and declare that UM showed its real mettle and that applies even more so to DRob and aside from his national publicity as a great football talent, he'll also earn the respect from the media, teammates and coaching staff needed as the true leader of UM's return to the upper echelon of the Big X. In such a setting, I can't imagine a different conclusion than that which was stated at the beginning of this thread.
However, I know a few players can change the whole complexion of a team, and it appears he's collecting those needed.
Not unless he's collecting 5 star linebackers. At this point it's all offense. That has to change for him to keep his job. Not that I'm calling for him to be fired. Although, I predicted that the team needed to win at least 6 games and beat MSU or OSU for him to stay. That was before the Denard Robinson Experience, tho.
i think its a reasonable expectation for a fan.
As I said, only for fans. The team has serious flaws - namely needing near perfect offensive execution with little to no turnovers due to defensive liabilities in order to win. You won't catch them looking past any opponents...they don't have that ability. There are no "baby seal" opponents for UM this year, not in the Big 10 at least.
I don't see them beating Iowa on Saturday, btw. However, before the season started I didn't expect them to be 5-2 thru 7 games.
I don't think it's a win-loss thing. Let's say we go head to head with Iowa the entire game, Denard and the offense have great numbers, the D plays respectably, we're even winning, and then Iowa gets the ball last and sneaks it into the endzone with 11 seconds left to beat us by three. It would be really disappointing, but that's just football. That would say to me this team is getting better, we should stay the course.
It's really how the team plays, how they hang in, how they deal with adversity, how they monopolize on Iowa mistakes. In 2009, we sort of folded during the second half of the season (for a lot of reasons, Tate's shoulder being one of them). What this team needs to do is recapture the days when Michigan could be down, and could come back and win the game.
would be a shitstackload of posts talking about a possible BCS bowl and Nat'l Championship. That we had in fact turned the corner and were on our way to B10 dominance this year. Reasons would be given as to why. Those would be silly too
5-1, let's play
...that the really blind defenders seem to miss (particularly that guy with the Wolverine as his avatar that generally posts recipes to those who dare disagree with him) is that Michigan would have completely quited the "Can't Work in the Big 10" argument by beating a prototypical Top Big Ten D. Which hasn't happened in 2.5 *YEARS* under RR.
That type of landmark would have been progress. As it is, we are still waiting to see whether there is actually progress (right now? We're exactly where we were last season, overall, sweeping the NC and beating ND & Indiana, but not doing well in the traditional Big 10).
especially at this juncture. Let's play a few more games and then we can discuss the likely outcome for the future
I sort of think a win this weekend will make this a more meaningful game than a loss will.
If we lose, it's not the end of the world, it is somewhat expected, and we can still win a few more games this season and end up with an acceptable record.
A win, however, could be a very meaningful turning point for the program: first win against a solid team, first bowl eligibility for RR, and proving this season is not like the last.