According to reports, Wisconsin has fired their new O-line coach, and replacing him with an offensive quality control assistant. Wow. Two games.
landing spot. will be interesting to see how he does.
According to reports, Wisconsin has fired their new O-line coach, and replacing him with an offensive quality control assistant. Wow. Two games.
We are a msu tire fire away from being back to the big 2 little ten10
You just hurt Nebraska's feelings.
Nebraska is not a team I see that is on the way up.....I would put them on level with Iowa or Illinois, dangerous but not dominate. We aren't dominate yet but we have the incoming recruiting to put us there. Outside of OSU no one else really does.
I think their program is a bit stagnant right now. Pelini was definitely an improvement over Callahan, but he has yet to get them "over the top", and I don't foresee that happening. However, to claim that Illinois and Iowa are on the same level as Nebraska is either drastically underplaying Nebraska's significance, overrating Iowa and Illinois, or both. Nebraska will dominate Iowa in their new rivalry.
However, if Nebraska can figure out offense and get itself a QB they can rely on in big games, they become a much more dangerous team.
Nebraska gave up 653 yards. There are people receiving baccalaureate degrees in East Lansing who can't even count that high. Tough to dominate anything when you give up 653 yards. To UCLA, no less.
However, if Nebraska can figure out offense and get itself a QB they can rely on in big games, they become a much more dangerous team.
So, if Nebraska can improve an entire phase of their game and find someone to man the most important spot on the team they'll be good? Also, they weren't that hot on defense last season (42nd in scoring D, not bad by any stretch, but not exactly dominant either).
I lived in Austin for the past 6 years and sort of followed Nebraska when they were in the Big12. They're a good team, but they were overrated by virtue of being in a very weak division and being a historic power.
I think it currently stands like this:
everybody else in a pile of random suckiness with NW & Purdue offering an occasional surprise.
I think in the future our recruiting will put us back up @ 1 or 2, but MSU has played in the B10 Championship 2 years running and beaten us (handily) 4 years in a row. I know Sparty could collapse at any time but . . . they haven't. We looked no better against AFA than they did against Boise.
Nebraska will compete, but they aren't there yet, they seem too inconsistent to predict owning Illinois & Iowa every year.
Hey now, NW is the only Big10 team that's currently 2-0 against BCS competition.
They're the only team in the country that can make that claim. More about the unwillingness of other schools to schedule two BCS teams in their first two games than anything, but impressive nonetheless. I think NU is going to surprise this season.
MSU has played in the B10 Championship 2 years running
Are you from the future?
someone slipped me some Sparty koolade (tastes like green piss)
just meant to imply that after the last few years we can't can't consider MSU success to be a fluke anymore. . . baring a classic Sparty meltdown of course.
What does green piss taste like?
How do you figure UM is two rungs below OSU? Buckeye DBs have spent a lot of time during the first two games arguing on the field about who was responsible for blown coverage. The pass rush has been nothing special either. If Denard consistently hits open receivers (there will likely be many), you probably win that game. (Different story if the secondary figures out what it's doing over the next 9 games.)
This is a pretty good read.
but I think last years team was over-rated; lovable yes, but still over-rated. We had a last second win against ND, beat a bunch of midling teams, & had our asses handed to us by MSU. Our most convincing wins were an honest-to-goodness win against a "good but over-rated" Nebraska, and a relatively ugly win over a comprimised OSU team. We also looked inconsistent against V-tech. I'll take every one of those wins and enjoy the 11-2 record but this years team at this point doesn't look much better . . . in fact they look a bit worse although the competition so far has been either NFL ready or quirky.
OSU isn't perfect tjhis year, they have a lot of flaws but I think they have a great coach, solid lines, a very talented/raw-but-improving every week QB. I agree with you that If our best chance against them this year comes down down to Denard passing vs their DBs I think we lose that game & I think Hoke would agree as well.
Those rank/placeholders are just that, regardless of record thats how I see the B10 so far. 3 weeks from now things may look drastically different. I think the ND game will tell us a lot, but the MSU game will tell us everything. Injuries & freshmen development are going to mean SO much this season.
OSU's coverage has definitely left a lot to be desired and it definitely needs to be resolved. I will say that Travis Howard has gotten 3 INTs in the first 2 games and is finally making plays like a senior CB is expected too.
Pass rush-wise OSU hasn't been stellar either, but two of their top 3 DEs are still injured. Michael Bennett has been out the last two weeks due to a groin injury, and Nate Williams is coming back from microfracture surgery and is on a permanant week-to-week basis (Williams played a few snaps in week 1 and was held out in week 2 due to soreness). So OSU has had to depend mostly true freshmen and sophomores to fill their absence, leaving John Simon to face mostly double-teams both weeks. Hopefully, all this gets resolved when Bennett comes back.
I thought Nebraska's offense looked pretty good in their first two games. It was the defense that was the problem.
but this REALLY bothers me. You mean "dominant" (adjective), not "dominate" (verb).
but I believe if you re read the sentence, the use of "dominate" was correct.....
but he used "dominate" twice, once correctly, once incorrectly.
But I think both uses of "dominate" were incorrect. Oriental Andrew was on it.
that guy, gal (I know you were defending), other guy, or transgendered person.
Seriously folks, there is something wrong with an unrestrained compulsion to correct minor grammatical errors of an unknown poster on a blog. You have no idea of the poster's socio-economic background, state of mental alertness, or input device keyboard and autocorrecting software.
Would you have stood up in Chicago and corrected Denard during his speech knowing his background and the situation in which he is speaking?
I for one, resist the urge to correct someone's grammar, and instead overlook the obvious error, and read along with the poster's intent. Your attempt to educate comes across as arrogance, and it discourages many reasonable Michigan fans of various backgrounds from commenting on this blog.
[FYI, I spell and grammar checked this post in word, just so you jerks could focus on my message rather than my grammar and spelling.]
I generally agree with you when the grammatical errors are truly minor and the person doing the correcting is picking nits. But where the errors are significant, as here, I think it's okay. It's sort of like that story about the person walking around with his fly unzipped: while most of his so-called "friends" didn't say anything about it becuse they didn't want to hurt his feelings, the true friend was the person who told him to zip up.
Also, I figured this might be the only chance to use the phrase "trans-gendered grammar cop" I would ever have, and didn't want to blow it.
I agree that it can come off the wrong way (and people should try to be polite about it), but at the same time, we are mostly a group of well-educated people, and I think it's nice to have some basic standards as far as proper grammar and such goes. There are a lot of message boards where the writing is degenerating into text-speak and you sometimes can't even tell what the person is trying to say.
As for someone giving a speech, well no, I would not correct them there, because it's understood that speaking is by nature off the cuff and will result in more mistakes. Writing gives you the chance to reflect because you can see what you're typing before you send it. If our informal guidelines cause people to reflect a little more before they post, that's not a bad thing in my opinion.
if you don't want to hear what they are saying?
Signed - Mark D. in Lansing
I suppose that if I focus on your intent, you are saying that the poor and disadvantaged, and persons of various ethnic groups are incapable of using proper English in their speech and writing? I find what you have written to be much more offensive than what any person has ever written in response to the grammar used in a post. While I understand the underlying message you are purveying, what you have revealed about your belief system is somewhat disturbing. I am sure you find the President surprisingly well-spoken.
a Michigan degree, and yes it is perfectly possible for someone with a disadvantaged background to speak and write correctly. However, not all Michigan fans from families with lower economic or education backgrounds are like the President. Yet their opinion is still one that should be considered on this site.
I understand what you are saying, but would it not be better to correct someone's grammer, so they do not make the same mistake again. I have a Michigan degree and my grammer is down right awful. I hope people correct me here and I learn from it, than when I write a report.
Your last sentence is missing a comparative word to go with than. Change "hope" to "prefer" or use "rather than" rather than "than". Your first sentence needs to end with a question mark. This is not grammar, but "downright" should be one word in your usage. I hope that helps you.
Thank you. I sincerely appreciate your help. This is what happens when you work with numbers everyday.
neither use of the word "dominate" was correct.
Now we can move on.
He was referring to JohnnyBlue's usage, not EGD. Confused me for a second too.
there are several sentences with that word! I thought since it followed EGD, it was referring to his/her usage. And "that guy" seemed very upset....No need to run me up the flag pole. Here, I'll cheer us all up......FUNCHESS!!!
Thanks for clearing that up, I was completely confused as well. I was on the verge of teH grammar meltdownzzz!
You clearly are that guy, love being that guy Need to be that guy.
And he should be. We are not like animals at RCMB. We should strive for accurate use of grammar.
I'm on my phone with shitty auto correct....shoot me
Since when does autocorrect correct grammar? Both words are spelled correctly, but you didn't use them correctly
Some of the newer keyboards get pretty creative with there auto correct. Swiftkey for instance is pretty solid for the most part but it makes some silly changes sometimes.
Why would any autocorrect correct a word that is spelled correctly?
Prolly Didn't spell it right. And fixed it wrong.
I would believe that if it wasn't common to misuse them or you didn't do it twice in two different sentences. It's ok to be wrong about the use of the word.
Actually it should have been "their"
Negs for anyone who corrects grammar from now on!
Does your iPhone auto correct "dominant" into "dominate"?
I keep forgetting they're in the Big Ten now.
I think in MSU's case the word "tire" should be replaced by "couch."
Edit: My Joke was lame. Here's a catman:
thinking, when we have yet to prove that Michigan is not a mid-level B10 team this season.
it bothers me to write this but sparty is becoming a quality program, not merely a short term success. they appear to have quality coaches ( d-bags notwithstanding) who are coaching up lesser regarded recruits. they have redshirted virtually their entire freshmen class for two consecutive years and their players are stepping up when it's their turn. furthermore with the ongoing implosion at psu, pennsylvania athletes are more likely to look at east lansing. their very favorable schedule over the next few years just adds to this.
and beat us soundly in AA………but "back to the big 2 little ten10" and "Nebraska on a level with Iowa and Illinois" after you have one excellent season and recruiting class? Guys, we're only midway thru the preseason, a 1-1 start, and one B1G season under our belts with a new conference member, divisional play, PSU sanctioned, and a conference title game.
In the last 4 years (during our--ahem--rebuilding years since Pelini took over), Nebraska has a 70% WP. Historically 70%+ is the standard for us, Michigan, and OSU. Everybody else in the B1G has historically been in the low 50% or less range, with only Wisconsin and to some extent MSU recently approaching 70% WP. Remains to be seen if Wisconsin can sustain their ten years at 70%. MSU is barely at 70% their last three years. Haven't mentioned PSU for obvious reasons.
Now, it could be that Michigan will beat Nebraska by 28+ every year and routinely share the B1G title with OSU forever.
But I think it's much more likely you'll see all three of the perennial 70% teams mostly in the hunt with a good dose of the others winning out due to divisional play and short runs of success. If either Wisconsin or MSU ever permanently become 70% programs, there could be a 3 to 5 team battle for the B1G almost every year.
What you have to find disconcerting about Nebraska's long-term prospects is that their recruiting has seemed to lag significantly behind UM and SUNY-Columbus, and until recently, Penn State as well. Perhaps the move from the Big XII has lessened Nebraska's pull with Texas kids, maybe it's something else--whatever it is, Nebraska is not going to be a consistently elite team in the B1G unless they can recruit in the upper echelons of the league.
OTOH, watching what AFA was able to do to Michigan on Saturday leads me to think that maybe if Nebraska can't recruit with Michigan and TSIO, then perhaps they should consider going back to the old I-form option.
I think the downfall of Penn State will help a team like Michigan State sustain their success a bit longer than they otherwise would have. But I think they will eventually descend back into sustained mediocrity, now that Hoke is back to keeping almost all the best in-state recruits blue.
You're looking at the small picture though. If you look at the last five years of recruiting using Rivals average rankings you see the following -
While 2013 would agree with your assessment, that recruiting cycle isn't over yet making it invalid to use as an argument.
Nebraska is on a 3 year downward trend, Michigan on a equally long up one. And Nebraska's high would be the 4th best for Michigan in some of their worst years.
And you didn't include OSU in that list -
The point is Michigan looks to be headed back toward recruiting near that level (check back further in recruiting for even more disparity). And if Michigan doesn't continue to recruit at that level they could be looking at another 7 vs. OSU. Because Ohio's level isn't going down. Then we'll have a Big 1 and the little 11....which has kinda been the last decade. Michigan is at least showing a trend to be competitive with the Buckeyes on the recruiting trail. Nebraska hasn't, and they'll need to consistently do so to make it a Big 3.
I think that's a fair counterpoint that Nebraska fans would probably agree with. While coaching/player development can make up for some deficiencies in recruiting, they don't overcome well coached superior talent all that often.
EDIT: More data proves your point.
Here is a chart comparing the Rivals overall team recruiting class rankings of Mich., SUNY-Columbus, and Nebraska since 2007. I realize Nebraska has traditionally done a ton with walk-ons, however, which obviously wouldn't be reflected in recruiting rankings.
The problem with using recruiting rankings is that it neglects to show the quality of players being recruited.
Take 2004 for example. Looking at the rankings you would see that Michigan State was #15 and Michigan was #14. However, when we look a little deeper we see the following -
You can see how class size can skew this number easily.
But I was impressed with your original acknowledgement. But I've NEVER seen the likes of your edit before, where someone goes and gets the data to give another point credit. I just thought that was pretty amazing.
as far as long-term competitiveness in the B1G. It's certainly a fair question.
All I can say is that Nebraska has never recruited at the elite level, even in our championship seasons.
We don't have the built in recruiting base of a OSU, Michigan, or Texas. We've always had to recruit nationally. Our Texas recruiting has dropped off, but I doubt that it'll disappear. Even though we don't play there anymore, the extra BTN exposure offsets that a bit. And we've greatly stepped up our recruiting in B1G territory. You guys and OSU will get the 5 star guys, we'll get our share of 3-4 star guys. Same thing happened in the XII vs TX and OK.
BTW, one reason I post on this board, besides it being fun to present a contrarian view and the quality and diversity of the posters, is that most of the time I'm treated very courteously and with respect as a rival fan. I almost didn't post my previous comment thinking I'd get blasted. Instead I get upvoted. Can't believe I have 800 points after 2 seasons. It is very much appreciated.
Great points. I went back and looked at the two programs since 1995. Nebraska had a 160-59 record (0.730594). Michigan had a 148-64 record (0.698113).
While it is true during Rich Rod's tenure we had a 3-9, 5-7, and 7-5 season (15-21 over 3 years) - Nebraska had a 7-7, 5-6, and 5-7 season (17-20 over those 3 years) a few years prior to Michigan's crappy streak (albeit not in a row like Michigan's).
I think some of the "puffiness" you get from folks here comes from the fact that Michigan's current recruiting gets mixed into the current assessment of where Michigan actually is. Michigan won't actually see the impact of Hoke's recruiting for another couple years. Michigan is in about the same place as Nebraska. We have depth problems. Depth was never a problem for the Nebraska's and Michigan's of the world, but a few crappy seasons and a couple coaching changes can make for a shaky roster. The depth issue is really transparent when you have a few injuries. For teams that are rebuilding, this can be a death knell. It will be interesting to see how the Wisconsin's and Michigan State's perform in years to come, we will see if they are here to stay.
You do have to admit that a few of those 4 years were played in a pretty weak Big XII north division.
Bielema tantrum about a non conference road game. It would be nice for wisc to blame their troubles on crist leaving, but I have seen pitt play and it is not so good. And what is an offensive quality control coach and why did he keep his job?
He's responsible for about 2% of Pitt's struggles at the moment, maybe less. Generally speaking, having four coaches in 36ish months doesn't bode well for a program and its short term future.
Chryst, guys. Chryst.
God forbid Wisconsin actually schedule a tough nonconference opponent for once.
Wisconsin has had a very consistent good O-line for years...not sure what has transpired this year.
I'm really surprised by the complete lack of running game. It's not like they're trotting out a bunch of freshman or anything. They have experienced O-linemen that have gone their entire careers through the patented Wiscsonsin O-linemen Development Program. How can one offseason and an experienced O-line coach just destory that. It's mind bottling.
Seriously, though, ever since BoG, I've kknown too many people who think that's honestly the phrase.
And I do agree that it's shocking. O-Line is one area I did NOT expect Wisky to suffer. Still, firing a guy after two games? Ouch.
And it's a guy who's been coaching the o-line for 14 years in the SEC, replacing him with a graduate assistant who's in his first year coaching the offensive line? That's completely insane. Wisconsin could melt down big time this year. They're not good enough on defense to win if they're o-line isn't grinding people to dust.
Purdue may now be the favorite to reach the championship game in the Woody division.
Is anyone in Purdue land thinking they can win the division? With Ohio and PSU not able to go to the Big10 Championship, and WIscy struggling, could Purdue manage it? Boiler Up.
I believe it was just determined that OSU and PSU can go to the title game, just not a bowl.
Nope, they can be named "division champion" (or winner, or whatever) but they are not eligible to play in the conference championship game.
Well then, Boiler Up!
Really??? I thought the end result from the other day was that they could win the division but not go to the Big10 Championship game?
I could be wrong...
I actually think they can now, and they have a very legitimate shot. Yes, I know its Notre Dame, but Purdue gave Notre Dame all it could handle. They are, arguably, the most stable team in the Leaders division. Yeah there's OSU, but they're still breaking in new systems, and I'm not sold on them yet. They've beaten up on nobodys.
I was a huge Purdue fan this past Saturday. I could of sworn when Rese came in it was the death knell for Kelly.
At the end of the game, Purdue could have had it, but two defenders let up a little and they got that last first down by inches. It was so, so close, and would have been schadenfrauderific.
I'd like to face Purdue in a Championship Game. And not thrilled by the prospect of MSU just needing to get through the Boilermakers for their first Rose Bowl appearance in 25 years.
ensuing counch fires and ski mask activity would be entertaining to watch, but I would really rather not look like the SEC (Bama, LSU, and everyone else).
[Edit: this goes with the tire fire series above]
I remember back in 2003 when Michigan's special teams coach at the time fooled around with a rugby-style punt against Oregon. It was a total disaster, and was a big factor in losing that game. Shortly thereafter we learned that our special teams coach would not be with the team for the rest of the season due to "personal reasons." Say what you want about Carr's abilities as a football coach, but the man had class--he knew how to fire somebody without wrecking the guy's future career, without scapegoating that person in the media, etc.
I've always found Bielema to be routinely a jerk, even in situations where it's not necessary or helpful for him to act that way. So this doesn't surprise me.
Mike Markuson has a great career ahead of him
I'm blanking on the guys name but I remember that as well. He had never coached or played football before if I remember correctly. I was kind of amazed he had worked his way into a position like that.
And everything I've heard wasn't that he was fired midseason, but he just kinda...quit. Making a mistake you could come back from; having some sort of breakdown over it wasn't. Face the music and move on.
For Brian's amusing take on it-
Going to be a very unpleasant week for the Wisc O-Line. Not sure who or when they are playing but I may be wagering a few bucks on Wisky to rebound. I think Alvarez may be on the field this week coaching the Oline.
Their next game is against Utah State, then they get UTEP. Typical Wisconsin scheduling.
Utah State might surprise them. I'm not saying Wisconsin won't win, but they might end up looking bad 3 weeks in a row.
They can lose to utah state who just beat a pac12 team with a veteran qb.
No slouch either. They gave Oklahoma all they could handle in their opener and it doesn't look like Wisconsin is anything like Oklahoma.
Anyone see that espn article about how beilema welcomes coaching turnover, blah blah yada yada? How's that workin out for ya? Huh?
So they fired the coach from the BEST part of their team?
Reading comprehension you doesnt have it (russian voice)
Their previous OL coach followed Paul Chryst to Pitt and this was a new guy and he got fired because he turned their OL from an asset into what a GERG coached OL would be.
you mean the houston nutt coaching tree is not full of unbelievably talented coaches? whodathunkit!
edit: redundant? seriously?
Wiscy hasn't started a QB that they developed within their own system for two years now. They are getting exactly what they deserve for their "Rent-a-QB" loopholing.
Not making excuses for them, but they have had serious health issues with their scholarship QB's the last couple years. They could have gone the Saban way and cut ties with them, but they are sticking it out.
Injuries. It's all about injuries in Madison the past 2-3 years. Look it up. We've beaten this horse dead on numerous occasions in the past 2 years. Wisconsin's QB depth has been absolutely decimated by injuries. If Denard and Gardner had both been injured in the off-season last year and we had a scholarship slot available, we would've taken Russell Wilson in a heartbeat. Hell, Bielema recruited Bart Houston - a 3/4 star type - last year and even he was injured during the off-season as in incoming freshman. Wisconsin's QB injury list is eerily similar to Iowa's RB situation.
Unless something real bad we don't know about happened inside, this seems like a knee jerk reaction. Your two games into the season. Easy to blame it on that guy, but if struggles continue, then who will Bielema blame?
Barring some unexpected turnaround, it looks like Montee Ball should have turned pro last year. With two teams expected to be creampuffs on the schedule so far, he is ranked 7th in the B1G.
Coaching changes can be huge. Gerg replaced by Mattison anyone.
This is more like replacing GERG with Adam Braithwaite, though. The replacement coach has two years of experience, both years as a graduate assistant.
Monte Ball and James White combined have 70 carries for 203 yards, with only 35 of those yards coming this past Saturday. That's an average of 2.9 yards per carry. Their rushing yards are down 32% over this point last year, Wisconsin is converting 3rd downs at around the 30% level as well.
In all reality, Danny O'Brien is not Russell Wilson. After two games last year, Wilson was 27 of 34 for 444 yards passing, and O'Brien is 39 of 61 for 391, so he's working considerably harder and getting less out of the receiving corps, which is barely averaging 10 yards per carry right now.
If they played at this rate for the rest of the regular season, their total production would fall by nearly half, based on some rough figuring. We may be seeing just how good players like Konz, Zeitler, Carimi and Oglesby, among many others in their recent past, may have been up front for them.
In fairness, nobody would be Russel Wilson this year. He sat behind a NFL bound Oline and broke the NCAA record for pass efficiency in a season, after setting similar records at NC State. This year Montee Ball isn't even Montee Ball.
Us economics majors never did much paper writing but my vote is for the word dominant.
Hard to believe that the only undefeated teams left in the Big Ten outside of MSU and OSU are Minnesota, Indiana, and NW. I'm at least glad that NW looks like they will be a contender for a decent bowl game with probably 7 wins. I'm also thinking that if there was ever a year for a Michigan team with some early defensive problems to win the conference, this would be it.
If a new coach gets canned two games in that says way more about the head coaches inability to be able to hire a competant coach than the O-line ocach himself. Bret said in the B10 meetings that this could be the best line he has ever had????
I'm beginning to regret my vote for Aceconsin, though the rest of the Big Ten hasn't exactly outdone itself either.
I can't imagine how much Ball must be regretting staying another year. Had he left, he could have easily been taken over David Wilson, maybe even Doug Martin, in the draft.
Can easily see now how much these coaching changes are hurting the team. Wisconsin still has an inherently good offensive line, and this doesn't change Ball's abilities. But you get that many new coaches, its going to take its toll.
On the flip side, though, it looks like Indiana's path to bowl eligibility is getting that much easier.
if ever there were a year!
Tre Roberson's broken leg disagrees.
This and the other upsets is going to make it difficult to pick who gets the "tears of infinite sadness" this week.
Without question. #8 team fail + John L. Smith = internet joy and wonderment. Can't wait to read
2 games into a season without a very good reason.
Like the former Michigan special teams coach that was brought up, that guy and his "coaching" clearly cost Michigan the Iowa game that year, he deserved to be fired.
If you are completely incompetent at your job, better to cut ties now than spend next spring and summer having to undo what the last guy did.
Just heard on XM 91 that the chemistry between Coach Markuson and the OL was just simply untenable. So bad in fact that a 27 year old will be taking his place. midway through the seaoson.
I guess, being from the SEC and all, Old Milwaukee just didn't get Markuson's piss hot.