Recent Comments

Yeah I don't know what to think. I find it really shocking. Maybe Denard has confidence in himself but Borges just didn't think he was ready? You can watch the Denard postgame at mgoblue.com if you want to see it for yourself.

Player Postgame:

http://www.mgoblue.com/allaccess/?media=354645

Hoke Postgame:

http://www.mgoblue.com/allaccess/?media=354642

Edit: Also, Sad Roy Roundtree (from Player Postgame) makes me sad.  :'-(      

Do you think he is back playing QB by then? We'll probably play one of LSU, Georgia, Florida, or South Carolina. So I don't know if it's such a sure thing. If in at RB it's more likely he gets 40-50 yards on 10ish carries while the game slowly devolves to Smith/Rawls 1 yard runs and mistimed play actions.

The wings on the leather helmet would be a leathery looking color too. Not the same color as the actual helmet.

However, it seems that Michigan had leather helmets that were maize and blue.

A lot of snowflakes like this could really be diaries with more work.  You could go through the stats of the 2011 team through the same number of games last season.  Compare top performers of last year vs this year. Unit vs unit production and see where there is more or less statistical production from last year to this year.  That's the kind of thing people coud really have a discussion about.  You really just gave your opinion with nothing to build off of.

I think that on offense our receivers/tight ends are more athletic with Funchess and Gardner but less experienced. And therefore more prone to mistakes or a tendency to disappear (i.e. lack of targets or receptions) during a game due to lack of separation.  Our line is bigger and more suited to the Borges offense but also less experienced.  Denard and the RBs are pretty much the same.  If the receivers go with athleticism rather than inexperience and Denard does his thing then this offense is better than last year.  That is with regards to potential rather than actual on field performance though.

On defense, our D-line is the new unit and I think that they are also more suited to the Mattison system.  Due to the size and athleticism of Campbell and Washington I think they are a better fit against the run because they can effectively occupy the O-line and allow linebackers to flow to the ball.  Their inexperience with regards to technique hurts with pass rush though, sometimes also against the run.  Mike Martin could just go all beast mode on fools. The loss of Countess hurts but the rest of the defense are the same guys with more experience.  Overall, I feel when the D-line does what they are supposed to this years defense is better than last. The pass rush is worse but I think good coverage helps cover up those warts to some degree.

What people said about this being a better team with a worse record seems pretty accurate.  However, if the team plays to its potential I think they can definitely run the table.

"focus on the plays that are being called and not on the ones that could hypothetically be called"

The argument is that a defensive player doesn't have that luxury.  They have to worry about all of the plays that could hypothetically be called from a given formation.  Don't look at bubble screens alone. That's just one play designed to keep the OLB from coming around the end on a blitz so quickly, and keeps things like that fumble from happening.

That's on a designed run. A lot of Denard's good runs come on reads where Fitz isn't blocking for him.  I was just saying that Fitz should have at least done better on the read handoffs he received.  Denard gives him the ball and options off a defender. At that point on a read play Denard and Fitz have the same blockers vs defenders.  That's not a comparison of the two (Denard is obviously a lot better) I'm just saying Fitz was really terrible.

"Fitz... Suffered today from the "8-9 guys in the box to stuff Denard and I don't have an extra blocker like he does and we are not passing the ball." Even still, 1.1 ypc sucks."

Well Denard managed 235 yards on 24 carries with the defense focused on him. The threat of Denard on the reads that Fitz got should have helped not hurt him.

Well power running isn't the smartest against Alabama. In a game like this one Rawls is a better power complement to Denard's speed.  Fitz had neither power nor speed.

I played center field. :)

If he could have made the catch why didn't he?  The call was so late the shortstop couldn't have known it was an infield fly. He was never under the ball seeing as he stopped and the ball landed beyond him.

Hey, that's where I was for my Wife(Girlfriend) Day!  People are saying that Georgia has no defense but you can't just look at this game and the boxscore.  A pick-six and the two turnovers inside the Georgia 20 which led to Tennessee TD's stopped this from being the blowout it could have been at halftime.  Also, what other times can you remember a defense making such good and bad plays in one game?  They scored a TD and put the offense in position for two more but also gave up 51 points with some long TD's where they got manhandled.  I guess as one annoying woman kept saying near me, "Anythang can happen in the ESS-EEE-CEE!"

In terms of yardage Ohio has the worst defense in the B1G, giving up 394.75 yards/game with 277.25 passing and 117.5 rushing.  They're 5th in scoring D giving up 17.3 points/game.  They've played four unranked teams with a combined record of 5-9 all at home.  Hard to say how this game will go though, seeing as Michigan State can't throw their way out of a wet paper bag.  Seems to be strength vs strength with Bell against Ohio's run defense.  I say edge Ohio.

That's the kind of play you run on 3rd and short when the D is trying to cheat up and stuff your "obvious" run play.  It doesn't make sense to try and trick a defense when your regular plays work fine. And Dileo was NOT wide open for a RB pass play.  Did you see this play the last time we ran it? Dileo was wide open then and he still had to drag his feet by the sideline to make the catch from Smith.

I agree with you that Denard played terribly. Throwing three consecutive interceptions (the fourth was a hail mary so whatever) is horrible even for a high school QB. I just think that blame can also be put on Borges for play calls that seemed to magnify Denard's weaknesses. How can you not just call a play to complete a screen pass or something and give him some confidence after the first two back-to-back interceptions?  Also, does anyone else feel like Denard is scared to take hits in the pocket? There are plenty of times it seems like he can step into a pass and take the hit but instead throws with his feet sideways.  The guy runs with no fear but throws like he is scared out of his mind.

You could really collect more excerpts and links and make a diary out of it.  And maybe compare and contrast opinions.  This is just a "Joe Cowley's Opinion" thread.  Also, he says that Denard should have left when Hoke became the head coach.  Well, Michigan and Denard won a BCS bowl last year so that is really stupid.

Only two seasons on that list better than this one were Rose Bowl years.  With 2003 also a Big Ten championship. I'd say that's pretty good company. 

Next year. Dantonio:"I don't deserve this, I'm building a football program." Hoke:"Deserve's got nothin' to do with it."

The point of a quick pass or screen to where the blitz is coming from is that you don't have to pick up the blitz.  The defenders overrun the play on their sprint to the quarterback.  Plays like that are typically supposed to be checked into when the defense shows their hand.  Is Denard even allowed to audible, or do calls have to come from the sideline?  The one time I really remember him reading blitz was when he tried the quick slant to Vincent Smith who was a RB playing in the slot and obviously wasn't ready for the quick pass.

Has anyone else taken note of how the defense has looked conditioning wise?  I feel like they play hard through the end of the game.  Improved TOP is probably a factor in that as well.