Well, that's pretty much what I was expecting
Going into this game, I guess I didn't really know what to expect. I wasn't as excited as I was for the Illinois game. This was the least-confident game I've gone into this season. There reached a point in the seconds quarter when I didn't feel like watching anymore. WIsconsin was either running 5 yards+ at a time or throwing into the box for another 15+ yards. When our offense took the field, drives fell flat (STOP KICKING THE DAMN BALL). I just didn't feel like watching because I knew how this would end up.
But I was pretty much expecting this. Wisconsin is ranked #6 in the country. They play a hard, heavy hitting, run-up-the-gut, power offense. Our secondary consists of high school seniors. But I know that miracles happen. It only really took a quarter for me to know that no miracle was going to happen. Not this time.
After the game, I listened to the usual "Fire Rodriguez," "It's the end of an era", "Can't wait to see this guy gone next year," etc. But what were people expecting? A miracle where Donnaven Warren suddenly gets his eligibility back, Ezeh becomes an amazing linebacker, and Denard becomes the legend from the first 5 weeks?
I'm bummed about the loss, but I'm not upset. I wasn't expecting to win this game. People are getting so fired up about something that's been going on all season like it's the first time it's happened. 48-28 is similar to what my realistic prediction would have been. It sounds like people are just now realizing what our defense is like, how young we are, how inexperienced we are. Why were people expecting a win against a really good Wisconsin team that beat another good tosu team? I will always hope for a win, cheer for a win, watch until the clock hits 00:00, but I just wasn't expecting it.
November 20th, 2010 at 8:22 PM ^
When does stating obvious facts or reasons become making excuses?
November 20th, 2010 at 8:26 PM ^
Would Denard reverting to early season form be a miracle?
November 20th, 2010 at 8:33 PM ^
"Would Denard reverting to early season form be a miracle?"
Yes.
That's because it would take a miracle for Michigan to get to play Connecticut, Massachusetts or Notre Dame next week. Its pretty obvious that Denard's early season form had as much to do with the low caliber of the competition as with anything else.
November 20th, 2010 at 8:40 PM ^
Against this defense? Probably. Denard had a great season, but in the beginning I think people were seduced by the numbers and forgot that he was doing it against the easier portion of the schedule. Later teams had more game film to scout, he got more banged up, and teams like Iowa, MSU, and Wiscy just had better teams with more athletes on defense to throw at him. I think the Denard will be an absolute tud by his senior year, but right now he's very raw and is obviously going through some growing pains.
November 20th, 2010 at 8:55 PM ^
November 20th, 2010 at 8:30 PM ^
And I'm glad you said it, because at this point I'm tired of people not understanding the realities of this team.
November 20th, 2010 at 8:55 PM ^
I'm definately on the reality side of the fence and get the youth and holes in the depth chart from injuries and transfers this defense has to deal with.
Spielman made the comment about how Michigan should be able to go out and get blue chip recruits on defense just because it's Michigan. Yeah, that's normally the case, unless you're coming off 2 of the worst seasons in program history. Kids naturally are going to have concerns and with more and more parity in college football, kids can go to a lot of programs and be part of succesful teams today.
But, we don't even necessarily need blue chip recruits to field a respectable defense. Look at the kind of players Iowa, Wisconsin, Michigan State field on their defenses. Sure, they get the occassional star, but for the most part they are developing guys that didn't get a lot of attention in the recruiting process. I think RR is doing what these programs try to do and is trying to get guys who just love to play football and are willing to work hard. When the holes on D are filled and these guys are juniors and seniors, I have no doubt we'll have all the pieces to be a top notch program. Oh, and a kicker wouldn't hurt.
November 20th, 2010 at 9:15 PM ^
The defense--namely the front 7--is not that young. There are many guys who have been here several years. Yes, the secondary is painfully young and no one would expect that side to be highly effective. But thre front 7 does have experience.
Besides these guys are football players. They have been playing the game for most of their lives. They should know pursuit angles, their assignment, how to tackle..this is basic stuff. This is football, not theoretical physics. It is not that hard to coach fundamentals--at least not for a good coach anyways.
Furthermore,T\the youth argument does not fly for defense as the defense was horrid for RR's first two seasons when they had experience in the secondary. That inconvenient fact is often left out--which is what partisans tend to do.Anti-RichRod often like to sugarcoat the difficulty of transitioning from a pro style to a spread and that is not right.
I understand that people desperately want the guy to win. I do too. But when you argue you cannot ignore, dismiss, or warp facts that hinder your argument.
At this point, just looking at the evidence on the field--and that is all what any of us have to base our beliefs on--the "Fire RichRod" crowd has more ammuno than the Pro-Rod crowd. The on-the-field performances leave alot to be desired.
It is increasingly difficult to see how he can win here when he has displayed no abiity to field a competent defense. Everyone knows that to win championships you need a defense. What in his three years leads anyone to believe that he will construct one? Blind faith is not a legitimate argument. You have to bring something tangible to the table. to support your argument.
The only conclusion I can make based off what I have seen for the past three years is that Rich Rodriguez has constructed a potentially dominant offense, an atrocious defense, and a so-so special teams unit. That is what the facts would tell anyone not in the thrall of RichRod's dynamic offense.
He will be back and I am not sure what to think. If Brandon forces him to dispense with his entire defensive staff and hire a guy who wil be permitted to bring in his own guys with his own scheme, than I think RR has a chance. If not, we are just delaying the inevitable. He will fail here.
November 20th, 2010 at 9:31 PM ^
I think you're over-estimating how easy it is to get kids ready for Big Ten football and how much talent that RR inherited on defense...The most important point to address, though, is this: "the "Fire RichRod" crowd has more ammuno than the Pro-Rod crowd."
I don't see how anyone can disagree with your point that RR has fielded an excellent offense, awful defense, and so-so special teams. The arguments about youth and the defense have already been made. I think that the extent to which attrition has hurt the special teams hasn't been noted enough, though of course the single biggest problem the lack of place kicking.
Here is the most important point, though: Very few coaches can field any unit as good as RR's offense is (or at least as good as we have reason to think it will be). RR needs help with defense. Do you know who admittedly has nothing to do with his team's defense? Chip Kelly, coach of the No.1 Oregon Ducks. Do you know which coaches need help with offense, defense, or special teams in one way or another? All of them.
All any head coach can do is set a certain tone for the team. No coach and fully run the offense, defense, and special teams all by himself...RR brings a lot to the table but he needs help, just like every other coach in America.
November 20th, 2010 at 9:44 PM ^
I think that is the problem.His tone is all offense, no defense. This is evident from his decisions regarding the defense. Why in God's name would you force your assistants on a DC? You have to allow a DC to make his own hires. Why would you run a finesse defense in a power minded conference. A 3-3-5 is great for a one week gameplan, but not as your base defense. It is a finesse defense schematically which then promotes a finesse MENTALITY.
If he wants to succeed here, he needs to follow Urban Meyer's plan. Handle the offense and all the other compotents of a program but leave the defense to your DC. Let him decide the scheme, assistant coaches. The only think he should worry about is penalties because they can impact the team as a whole.
One certainly has to question RR's decisionmaking ability. It was he who brought in these DC's. It was he who decide to not have a special teams coordinator. These fall bac on him because he is the CEO of the operation.The makeup of the program is what HE wanted. Thus, he has to be held accountable for the results that the program produces.
November 20th, 2010 at 10:41 PM ^
First, I don't like the 3-3-5, but it may have been the scheme that allowed them to get their best players on the field this year. Second, I don't think there is any particular mentality that goes with the 3-3-5. WVU has had hard-nosed (albeit undersized) defenses playing with that scheme.
As to special teams, Michigan is no more or less than a competent place kicker away from that phase of the game being one that no one mentions this year. Last year's team had a good special teams unit. This year's team has a "meh" unit (no big returns given up or made) but for the the lack of a kicker. That can happen to anyone.
I think you make a fair point re: RR being the CEO of the team. The Shafer hire/fire was unquestionably a failure to some extent. The Robinson hire seems like a failure too...The thing about the assistants that RR brought from WVU is that they're pretty good coaches/recruiters. That's hard to give up. Obviously something has to be worked out, and I do fear that RR doesn't hasn't given his defensive coordinators at M enough autonomy.
I'd be lying if I said that I don't have concerns about the future of the defense. I have even bigger concerns, though, about a coaching change...The team has improved this year. I know that 3 wins was setting a low bar, but with two games left this season, RR has taken the team from 3 to 5 to 7. There's reason to think they'll continue to improve next year. RR hasn't been perfect at M, but I think he's shown that he has the potential to turn the team into something really special.
November 20th, 2010 at 9:37 PM ^
You're tired of simplistic arguments so you make one yourself? Verbosity doesn't equal complexity.
November 20th, 2010 at 8:49 PM ^
first off, let me say i'm new to mgoblog and i love the site. can someone tell me how one goes about giving a person a plus or a neg on a post?
November 20th, 2010 at 8:51 PM ^
Click the up or down arrows on the right side of the post.
November 20th, 2010 at 8:57 PM ^
gotta have a minimum number of points, too.
November 20th, 2010 at 9:01 PM ^
You have to have a certain point total before you can start voting on other people's posts. You'll have to post enough and get enough +s from other people until you're at 20 or 50 or 100 or whatever it's been bumped up to lately. Then you'll see little arrows and you can pos-bang and/or neg-bang until you're blue in the face from post-banging.
EDIT: Drats, beaten! Well, I'll +1 the OP to make myself feel a little better.
November 20th, 2010 at 9:02 PM ^
November 20th, 2010 at 9:07 PM ^
I believe to vote you have to have 20 points. I'll toss ya one so you can vote soon, plus you're from kzoo, always good in my book.
Edit: apparently its 100 now, my bad
November 20th, 2010 at 8:50 PM ^
There really wasn't anything new today. We know that our offense can move the ball well, if not consistently, and that our defense doesn't have much experienced talent and can't stand up to good offenses that are having a good day. If Wisconsin had played the way they did against MSU we'd have had a shot, but they played the way they did against OSU.
November 20th, 2010 at 8:53 PM ^
I would like to know how many of those who are complaining really expected Michigan to win this game during preseason predictions. I don't think too many did. Michigan did what they needed to this year; they improved enough to beat Illinois and Purdue, getting them back into the bowl picture. The extra practices will help out a lot for next year.
There are two more increments for improvement: upper level BT and elite level. Upper level BT will result in them beating MSU and Wiscy next year. If they "leap," and get to the elite level, they will be the Big Ten Champions again, or at least get into the first-ever Big Ten Championship game.
Anyway, I am happy that this team improved this year, and refuse to be discouraged by today's result. They are still too young to be elite in a power conference, but youth is temporary. There are a couple of teams that are just too big and too experienced for Michigan; Wiscy was one of them. Before this game, I commented that Wiscy scares me more than OSU right now. I didn't see anything today to change my mind.
Bring on the Buckeyes.
November 20th, 2010 at 9:12 PM ^
But nothing has happened defensively to suggest that UM will be nothing more than Joe Tiller's Purdue teams. I have no reason to believe that UM will be better than 8-4 under Richrod,
November 20th, 2010 at 8:59 PM ^
Still, it would have been nice to spin in circles tonight flipping the bird to all the haters. Oh well. Next.
November 20th, 2010 at 9:10 PM ^
Denard played every bit as good today as he did against UConn.
November 20th, 2010 at 11:25 PM ^
Yeah, except today he missed at least 2 passes that would have been sure TDs (and we got nothing for in those drives) and a couple more that would have been completions. He was nearly perfect against UConn. I look forward to him improving accuracy as he gains experience, but it would have been a different game if he was throwing accurately thoughout.
November 20th, 2010 at 11:30 PM ^
Denard was 16-25 passing today with something like four drops by his receivers. Against UConn they hauled everything in.
November 20th, 2010 at 9:10 PM ^
I think one of the big things people need to realize is that they need to not post on a message board immediately after a loss. It always stinks major butt juice, but you got to let it settle before publicly broadcasting the mood of our fanbase.
November 20th, 2010 at 9:14 PM ^
this game went exactly how i expected it would go. I understand the youth and inexperience is a big problem for this defense. The main this that frustrates me is this defense doesn't have a identity! we need to run a scheme and stick to it no more of this multiple 3-3-5/ sometimes 3-4 crap. If RR wants to have success defensively i think he needs to give Gerg full control of defensive scheme and personnel! I think that are big problem we just dont have a identity on D!
Hail, Beat OSU!
November 20th, 2010 at 9:26 PM ^
played a pretty good game. The interception was not his fault, he made some pretty passes and some even better runs. Cripes, he broke the single-season rushing record for an NCAA QB and became the first to go over 1500 yards rushing and passing; are we really going to say he's disappointing? The D gets just a FEW stops, we're in this game and--what's more--the D gets just a FEW stops and the O has several more chances to score.
All I really want to hear informed perspectives about now are whether the 3-3-5 is a mistake that RichRod has forced on GERG, whether the 3-3-5 is an absolute mistake against power running teams, and whether GERG needs to go.
My take listening to Brandon is that RichRod is here for another year, pure and simple.
November 20th, 2010 at 9:42 PM ^
Did anyone else see wisconsins mascot cheating badly on those push ups? Still tired from last week?
November 20th, 2010 at 9:42 PM ^
True that to the OP.
Even with our atrocious D I feel like the MSU and Iowa games were more about the turnovers and inconsistency from the offense. Even slight improvements from each unit can bring us a 9+ win season next year.
November 20th, 2010 at 9:49 PM ^
getting a bad feeling that RR will bring back Gerg and Co. Hopefully DB will have some say in this matter!
Hail
November 20th, 2010 at 9:49 PM ^
......but he was a little too amped up in the beginning, hence all the overthrows and cannons to WR's who weren't that far away from him. After he calmed down a little, he played very well, particularly against such a stout defense. Wisky's D is very experienced and typically doesn't make many mistakes, yet we were able to move the ball on them.
As for our D, I thought they did pretty good until halfway through the second quarter when you could see they were tired. Also, in the second half, we were scoring pretty quickly so they still didn't get much rest, hence the second half running fest Wisky threw themselves.
All in all, even though it was a loss, and even though it was expected, we still did some good things out there. Denard still put up 361 yards of total offense on them, well above his average, was accountable for all 4 tds, and his only turnover was a batted ball that came right down to the same DL player. As a team, we blasted past their average yardage allowed, and scored 4 tds, which was 2 tds higher than their average allowed. MSU and Iowa are the only other teams to score 4 tds on them, and one of MSU's was a punt return td.
Better yet, Denard reached the 2000yd passing, 1500yd rushing milestone during this game and set the record for most rushing yds by a QB in a season, with two games to go to add to it.
November 20th, 2010 at 11:44 PM ^
Our offense did very little until we were down 24-0. This has been a recurring pattern against the better Big 10 teams. I am grateful for the opportunity to watch Denard play but his accuracy has left a lot to be desired. His poorly thrown balls took away any chance we had of beating MSU and better passing today may have kept the game close.
November 20th, 2010 at 10:43 PM ^
The title of your post and your very first line totally contradict each other. Sorry, couldn't even read the rest.
November 20th, 2010 at 11:09 PM ^
.......had another 100+ yd receiving game along with another td. His yards today puts him at 838 yds on the season with 6 tds. We might very well end up with a 1000 yd WR after the bowl game. Not bad for a team run by a coach everyone identifies with running more than passing.
November 20th, 2010 at 11:32 PM ^
And he had two or three drops. I guess he really is trying to be like Braylon.
November 21st, 2010 at 12:11 AM ^
He had several drops where he should have had the ball, and a couple of them in the first half that contributed to stalled drives.
November 20th, 2010 at 11:41 PM ^
I wish i could give you 1000000000000 points