Recent Comments

Yeah, the Jaguars have been a crappy franchise for a while now, mediocre fanbase, etc. But there's a lot to like for Denard in this situation:

1) He gets to play fairly close to home, at least until the Jags' inevitable relocation.

2) The Jags are a team on the rise. Granted, they have almost nowhere to go but up, but hear me out. They have a new GM, Dave Caldwell, who's been a scout and player personnel guy in Indy and Atlanta, where he learned from two of the best GMs in the business, Bill Polian and Tom Dimitroff. Second, they've got a promising new coach in Gus Bradley, who's been coordinating Seattle's excellent D the past few years. And third, they had what on first glance is a solid draft -- they got their franchise LT in Joeckel, a guy who might turn out to be the best safety in this draft (Cyprien), and two dynamic playmakers in Ace Sanders (whose abilities we know very well from the Outback Bowl) and Denard.

3) It not only sounds like the GM is in love with Denard and has had his eye on him for a while -- it also appears the Jags want to play Denard at the position where a lot of people think he has the best chance to succeed in the league -- RB.

4) Another advantage to being on a (currently) crappy team -- Denard will be assured of getting the time he needs to switch to a new position and adjust to pro football. If he had gone to a team with more talent on its roster, he'd be under more pressure to prove his value on the field more immediately or risk losing his roster spot. That will not be a problem with the Jags.

As a Dallas Cowboys fan (alas), I immediately compare all fast, undersized, tackling-machine weakside LBs to Dexter Coakley. He was 5-10 and played around 230 lb. as a pro. Racked up over 600 tackles at Appalachian St., and the Cowboys took him in the third round of the draft. He had 7 consecutive 100+ tackle seasons, and was a three-time Pro Bowler for some truly putrid Cowboys teams in the late '90s-early '00s.

Ross might have a little bit better size if that 6'1" listing is legit, but otherwise he's a very similar player -- great instincts, flys to the ball and lays the wood.

His deadpan delivery is just hilarious.

Based on scant evidence, but fwiw...

* Clark destroys Schofield in the first play for the safety. I'm gonna take this as another hopeful sign that Clark is ready for a breakout year where he puts it all together.

* Good to see Chris Bryant back out there at OG. Looks like Kalis and Braden are your starting guards for now.

* Jake Butt's gonna be an early contributor this year, I think. Chesson and Darboh are showing some real nice flashes at WR too. Fantastic grab by Chesson for the TD on the last play there.

* Nice PBU by Delonte Hollowell against the much bigger Darboh.

* Mattison's gonna have his guys ready to play, as always. The defense will miss Jake Ryan's playmaking skills, no doubt, but boy, do they still look tough and physical and they fly to the ball. Beyer's looking good at the SAM in these clips, too (though some of that's partly b/c it seems our TEs still need a LOT of work on their blocking). 

Would've been nice to cap things off with the title, and it still hurts to know just how close they came ... but that doesn't change how FUN it was to watch this team play.  (Thank heavens we aren't fans of a program like Bo Ryan's Wisconsin, where you have to "cheer" for ugly basketball.)

These young men and their coaches gave us so much joy over the past few months, and for that, I'm thankful and proud.

After we beat Illinois in Champaign to ascend to #1, he wrote this:

I know now that if something untoward happens to this team in the tournament I'll hate whatever program does it, without reason, forever. And that'll probably happen. Michigan is #1 by a nose, and winning six straight against good teams is hard. I have to brace for this, and try to accept whatever fate awaits with the good cheer it seems Illinois fans have about their 2005 outfit.

Whatever happens, it'll be the culmination of a story no Michigan fan is likely to see again. To go from dead in the water to #1 in two years to go from scrapping out two-point wins against Northwestern to this… put it all in your head, and turn it around until it's something you can expansively relate to anyone dumb enough to be born after March. Poor bastards.

Still processing what to think about the refs and how much impact that ultimately had on the outcome (though I do think the crap call against Burke was a huge turning point). But I share your perplexity about some of Coach Beilein's decisions on TOs and substitutions. (And let me stipulate I am a huge Coach B supporter and recognize this program isn't close to where it is today w/out him.)

First, I agree -- why no timeout when Hancock went on his spree? Do something, anything, to stop his flow there and get your act together on defense so he doesn't keep getting those looks. You don't need to conserve first half timeouts! Really perplexing.

And the second half substitution patterns have me scratching my head too. I thought Beilein went WAY too long w/Spike -- after he barely touched the front rim on that one 3-pointer and made some sloppy turnovers, it was obvious the kid was gassed after playing balls to the wall for such a long stretch. I would've liked to see Stauskas get more run (he had hit at least one 3, so his shot was there), and I really think LeVert should have been brought back earlier -- we could've used his length on D and his rebounding during the second half, and maybe given Hardaway some more bench time so Beilein could tell him to stop shooting so many bricks. The only thing I can think of (besides wanting to ride Spike's hot shooting -- though by that point it was obvious he was done) is that maybe Spike was being more responsible in sticking to his defensive assignments that Nik or Caris. 

That, to me, would satisfy me that this team played to its potential -- once you get to the Final Four, anything they do beyond that is gravy. (Remind me I said this when I'm crushed w/despair after they lose in the title game...)  Lots of randomness in the tourney, obviously, but this team should make the Elite 8 at minimum if they keep playing as they are now.

I understand why everyone thinks Denard's natural NFL role is at WR/slot (along w/returner, obviously) -- the Randle-El/Cobb comparisons, the idea of getting him the ball in space, etc. But I hope some scouts/team will push Denard to give RB a serious try. Some posters above dismissed this option b/c of Denard's size/build.  Now is he a 25-carry/game guy in the NFL? No. But what makes Denard so dangerous with the ball isn't just his track speed -- it's his vision, his cuts, and his patience to set up his blocks & then accelerate through the hole, as well as his toughness. If I'm an NFL team making an investment in DR as a draft pick, I think I get more immediate contributions from him as a 10-touch/game RB along w/returning kicks, instead of having him ride pine for 2-3 years while he tries to learn WR.

This piece from Rotoworld a couple months back made a great case for using Denard as a RB in the NFL:

When I watch Robinson run (and the way Michigan uses him), I can't help but think his best role would be to start out as a returner and as a situational running back. He's listed at just 6'0/197 pounds, but has a thickly built lower body. The Michigan offense has taught him to make the same types of reads NFL runningbacks are taught. He's totaled over 200 carries the last two seasons, and he was the entire foundation of their run game in 2010 - totaling 256 attempts for 1702 yards (6.6 YPC) and 14 touchdowns. He has a tendency to get upright, but he's a tough and patient inside runner who reads and sets his blocks up well, hits cutback lanes with authority, and has the speed to do damage in space.

[...]  Make no mistake though, he's absolutely electric with the ball in his hands. Should he play some snaps at receiver or get involved in some gadget plays? Sure, but I think it'd be criminal to ask this kid to consistently line up away from the ball, run around, and then try and throw it to him. Give him the ball, don't make him go get it. 

The main question as to whether Denard can consistently get snaps at runningback in the NFL is going to come down to one main thing: whether or not he can pass protect - a completely unprojectable factor at this point. If blocking is something he picks up on, I think he'll eventually develop into a real weapon as a committee running back/returner/space player. If he can't do that, however, it's likely he'll be relegated strictly to returns, Bubble Screens, and the occasional Jet Sweep.

Was the 3rd-string QB win they beat Atlanta in Elway's swan song. [EDIT: Sorry, hadn't refreshed the page in a while, so I didn't see that 2 folks beat me to the punch until after I posted.]

No question this is a great hire for Texas Tech -- hot-shot rising coordinator, young and charasmatic, popular former player.  A+ for them.

As for Kingsbury, I'm not so sure. Yes, it's pretty damn hard to turn down the coaching job at your alma mater, especially when you haven't yet been a head coach. At some point, you've got to earn your head-coaching bones - and what better place to do that, than a school where you're already beloved, you know the recruiting base, and the AD and alums will give you a long leash to succeed?

That said ... if Kingsbury had stayed at A&M and guided their offense to another year or two like this one (a good assumption w/Manziel), a lot of schools with "destination" head-coaching jobs, better national exposure, and higher ceilings than T. Tech would've been backing up their money trucks at Kingsbury's door to make him their head coach. Then again, if he succeeds at Tech the way, say, Rich Rod succeeded at his alma mater, the big schools will still come calling -- and at that point he'll have the head-coaching experience that'll make him more likely to succeed.

Anyway, should be interesting to see how it works out for him.

I assume that, like the NFL, NCAA football has some restrictions on the positions that particular numbers can be assigned to -- is that correct? If so, we are looking at a limited set of potential players to wear the #98 jersey.

If not ... it would be strange (though kinda cool, I admit) if a skill position player today wore a number like that!

I ask not to troll but in all seriousness (don't follow the NBA as much as I used to). Are there any recent examples of young NBA players getting released, going to Europe and developing their game, and getting picked up again by an NBA team?

As a Michigan grad from a family full of Aggies, I offered my two cents on this matchup in an earlier thread here. Cliff's Notes version -- this matchup sucks for us, for the reasons listed in the two recent posts above. We all know about Johnny Football now, but their depth and talent at wide receiver w/Swope, Nwachukwu, 6-5 freshman Mike Evans, et al. would severely test our secondary. Malena and Michael are a solid RB duo. Their O-line is almost as good as Alabama's. And their Oregon-style tempo would pose a huge challenge -- Klingsbury does a great job; they don't even use a playbook on offense. Their defense is pretty good too (28th in scoring D, despite so many possessions). 

Just watch the first quarter of A&M vs. Alabama. They drove and scored on Saban/Kirby Smart's defense at will. Alabama made some good adjustments later on, but A&M was still able to move the ball and hit big plays and score when they needed to in the 2nd half to ice the game.

I think it could be a competitive game, especially giving Mattison a month to prepare the D. But I could also see a scenario in which Manziel & Co. light us up, and our inability to run the ball consistently and keep their O off the field would cost us over 4 quarters. Any SEC team will be a challenge for us, given our current lack of depth and athleticism, but this in particular is a bad matchup for us.  

As you say, no burner, but when I watch his video he reminds me a little bit of Emmitt Smith. (Don't get me wrong here, I'm not saying he's gonna end up the NFL's career rushing leader !)  As a Cowboys fan I watched Emmitt's whole career, and on film DeVeon has a similar running style -- no blazing speed, but great vision, quick and decisive in his cuts, runs low and keeps his feet moving, does well at picking his way through the trash at the line of scrimmage, and never goes down on first contact.

If he blows up and becomes a great back at Michigan, you heard it here first!

As BraveWolverine730 notes -- take a look at 0:25 in the game highlights video above for a fine example. Kid can handle and get to the rim and finish -- that's what made him such an exciting recruit, despite not generating the same hype as McGary or GRIII. People assume he's just a jump-shooter but he can score and attack the defense in other ways.

Not sure if you've looked at his film yet, Magnus, but based on the highlight film Ace embedded in his Monday recruiting post, Cameron Hunt seems to possess an excellent nasty streak -- it looked like he takes real pleasure in pancaking overmatched HS opponents. He might lack Lacy's size, but how many more tackle-sized dudes do we need? I'd rather have the nasty guy who is more of a true pure guard to fill Dawson's former spot in this class, than a OT-sized guy who lacks aggressiveness.

Yes, it hurts because the game was imminently winnable, unlike all the beatdowns we suffered at OSU's hands under Rodriguez. And yes, the coaches were a big reason we lost -- they could've put their players in better positions to succeed and made better adjustments. But you can't entirely absolve the players. Borges didn't throw that pick intended for Dileo on the last drive; Funk didn't whiff a block on a DE that led to a fumble that cost us at least 3 points; Hoke didn't fumble the ball. To win tough games -- particularly on the road, which has been the Hoke regime's bete noire thus far -- you can't have these kinds of turnovers/mistakes.

We need the B1G to show well in bowl games, so high-caliber recruits won't look at Michigan like we're just a big dog in a MAC-level conference compared to the ESS-EEE-SEE.

And this year, it's not even that distasteful -- no need to (grudgingly) pull for Sparty or OSU in a bowl. I can root for the Purdues and Northwestern's of the world with no problem.

Given the following:

• Vince Smith's graduation,
• the uncertainty over when Fitz returns
• Rawls's underwhelming showings thus far, and Norfleet/Hayes not having the size to be every-down guys
• Uncertainty over whether Deveon Smith, Derrick Green, or any other 2013 RB recruit can step right in at tailback next year

Am I the only one who'd like to see us move Stephen Hopkins back to tailback for Spring practice and beyond? B/w Kerridge and Houma we're still covered at fullback in both the thumping-blocker and West Coast pass-catching/athletic FB categories... Hopkins has had fumble issues as a ball-carrier, sure, but if Fitz's return is uncertain for fall I think we could do worse than move Hopkins back to tailback and see what he can do. Somebody's gonna have to run all the I-form stuff we're likely to see next year, and Hayes and Norfleet aren't it.

Thoughts? 

Nice story -- I didn't know he had a speech impediment. That has to be a pretty daunting experience, going to school far from home, trying to adjust to college life in general (not to mention life in a big-time football program), and dealing with that.

For reasons I can't remember, Quinton was one of the recruits I was most excited about us getting in his class. Before this year, I was starting to worry that b/w the coaching change and the position switch, he would never become a regular contributor. But here we are, and he has done a pretty damn good job this year filling the gaping hole at NT left by Mike Martin's departure. (Remember a few months back when everyone just assumed it would be either BWC or even the true freshman Pipkins in that spot?)  I'm looking forward to seeing what he can do the rest of this year and next, as he continues to mature and develop in the position with the great D-line coaching he's getting now.

I'm still pissed we had to share the national title that year w/Scott Frost and Co. They wouldn't even have been undefeated if not for the infamous "Flea Kicker" play that saved them from a loss against Missouri, and they finished #1 in the coaches' poll partly as a gift to the retiring Tom Osborne, no doubt.

So I hope we crush them, but given night road game, etc., I expect this to be close. Hope we can squeak this one out.

With the NFL's new CBA, the salary "slots" of first-rounders are pretty well set, I think, and there's a much smaller gap in salary/bonuses b/w a Top 5 pick and a kid selected at, say, #15-20 than before.

Also, I'm not sure the 2014 Draft necessarily lines up better for Taylor than 2013. Most draftniks believe this year's crop of senior offensive tackles is pretty weak  -- no Jake Longs or Jonathan Ogdens among them. The 2014 class has some great ones, though, including Lewan and the two tackles from Texas A&M, Luke Joeckel and Jake Matthews. Those three guys would probably go higher than any of this year's seniors if they come out early -- I wouldn't blame Taylor if he decided entering the draft was the right thing to do.

"Perhaps winning one or two?" Don't make the same mistake that USA Today idiot did in 2006 when he predicted "Tigers in 3," so dismissive was he of the Cardinals' chances. Have you seen the sheer guts and willpower of this Cardinals team the past two postseasons? They simply refuse to quit. Check out game 6 of the Series last year, or the 5-run comeback against the Nationals in the deciding game of this year's NLDS and tell me if they aren't at *least* the equal of the Tigers in the "clutch-at-bats" category. (And I will stipulate that this discussion is a bit premature, as the Cardinals still need to close out the Giants. Take nothing for granted.)

As my fellow Cards fan bklein09 mentions here, both teams are probably better than 2006. Yes, the 2012 Cardinals don't have an in-his-prime Pujols, Jim Edmonds, or Scott Rolen in the middle of its lineup, or Mr. Gritty McGrit Dave Eckstein -- and LaRussa and Dave Duncan are no longer in the dugout. On the other hand, this year's lineup is much deeper 1-8, even w/Furcal out; the 2006 outfit had guys like So Taguchi, Juan Encarnacion, and an over-the-hill Preston Wilson taking significant at-bats. This year's team has as solid a middle-of-the order as anyone, with Beltran-Holliday-Craig-Molina (a much better hitter than '06 Molina)-Freese, and supersub Matt Carpenter providing solid pop as he showed in game 3.  Obviously a big factor in the (potential) Series will be Beltran's health, and whether he can at least DH in the games in Detroit.

This Cardinals team also has a deeper 'pen and a better, deeper rotation than '06 -- I really don't know how that 2006 team did it. Carpenter was at his peak, of course, but he only pitched one game in the WS. Their nominal #2 starter, Mark Mulder, was injured, so Jeff Suppan -- JEFF SUPPAN! -- was their #2 in the playoffs. Jeff Weaver, not very good at all in 2006, was a desperation trade-deadline pickup and the #3 starter in the Series (and amazingly, pitched two solid games, including the game 5 clincher). And a highly touted rookie starter who ended up never amounting to much, Anthony Reyes, pitched the game of his life to win Game 1. Dave Duncan was a magician.

This year, they have Carpenter back from injury/surgery to replace the injured Jaime Garcia/Jake Westbrook; Wainwright; Kyle Lohse, who's been quietly excellent all year (16-3, 2.86 ERA, 1.090 WHIP, 134 ERA+), and Lance Lynn, a first-year starter who won 18 games this year.

That said, the Tigers' rotation should rightly make them the favorites. But don't assume it will be a walkover.

Anyway, if my Redbirds have to lose (again, *assuming* they close out SF), I'm glad it would be to the Tigers, as I'd like to see them win a Series again. Just hope it's a good Series -- last year's 7-game epic will be hard to top!

"I think the parts are better individually than as a whole, some reason they just don't play good together."

Alas, isn't this usually the story with our Ryder Cup teams? Even when our talent is superior, the Euros always seem to play better as a group, and kick our asses in the doubles matches, leaving us to try and catch up on the final day of singles, where we usual perform better. Maybe there's some deep point to be made here about the essential characters involved -- American individualism vs. Euro collectivism. :-)

I'm with robbyt003 above -- enjoy your honeymoon, man. I love football as much as the next guy, but... have fun with your wife and watch a recording/replay of the game later.

But, if you insist on watching live: I believe NBC streams their broadcasts of ND home games for free on their website. This link should take you to the game Saturday night:

http://nbcsports.msnbc.com/id/38985841

As someone who's never played a down of football in my life, I have a question for the coaches/former players who read this blog, given that we "suck at taking on cut blocks," as Brian notes: What's the proper technique to defeat these things? I've always been curious about this.  I assume the first priority is to protect your legs and stay on your feet so you can still make a play. How do you do that? Do you give some ground and let the blocker eat turf, and then resume moving toward the ball carrier?  (If so, it must be tough to overcome a defender's natural instinct to move forward and take on the blocker, which of course leads right into the cut blocker's trap). Or do you try to juke/go around the guy, or even hurdle him if necessary? 

EDIT: Did a site search and found a pretty good threat on this question from last November:

http://mgoblog.com/mgoboard/countering-cut-blocking

I've said this on a few other threads -- barring 1) major injuries or 2) a 21+ point blowout, this is a no-lose situation for us, and I hope our guys play and coach accordingly -- with reckless abandon.  No one really expects us to win tomorrow night. If we manage to win, look out Big Ten. If we lose a competitive game, no one will fault us for that -- and Team 133 will have learned a whole lot about itself by playing against the most talented squad they'll face all year. (And the coaches will know exactly how much more work they have ahead to make Michigan an elite program again.)

We're playing with house money in this game, as long as we don't leave the game with a long-term injury to a key player or get totally blown out. If we win, fantastic. If not, as you say, if you're going to lose, do it early and to the highest-ranked team possible. And the coaches and team will learn a lot of useful stuff in the process that will make us better throughout the season.

Check out the TD pass to Gallon at 1:15 -- some dope left a blocking sled right next to the endzone sideline. Gallon and Countess are both lucky to see it and get a foot down after going out of bounds, so they manage to hop over it after Gallon's catch. I about had a heart attack when I saw that -- we're lucky those guys didn't step on it and get hurt. Am I just a worry-wort, or shouldn't stuff like that be farther away from the boundary when you're running drills with guys catching balls on the sideline right there?

I'm not a big fan of the "special occasion" uniformz, but at least this one avoids the silly stripes we had on the upper shoulders for ND, MSU, and the Sugar Bowl last year.  Me no likey the stripes.

Thanks for your thoughts, joeyb -- appreciate your insights.

One question: There seem to be a lot of negative opinions of McAfee on this board, and I'm genuinely curious why that's so, as I don't follow this world of antivirus programs closely. (I suppose that's about to change...) McAfee has always worked fine for us, and I certainly don't blame it for my current predicament, which is my fault. (Unless someone tells me that a better AV would've blocked those phony Adobe Flash update popups from even appearing.) I also work at a place where, to put it mildly, there is an extreme emphasis on IT security, and we have McAfee on the computers here.

Are McAfee/Symantec etc. just too big to be agile enough to keep up with the ever shifting threats from hackers? Or is there some other reason they aren't as good as others? 

I've read of people having success using Combofix to remove the ZeroAccess rootkit only to find that they can't get an internet connection, can't connect to their network printer, etc.  So if I choose that path I'll proceed with caution (and probably with the help of one of the forums mentioned elsewhere in this thread).

I love MGoBlog.  Lots of options to consider... I'll let you know how it works out.

One question I asked above, still not clear on the answer -- when I do a backup of all the stuff I want to save in case I need to reformat or buy a new machine, how do I ensure that stuff isn't infected before loading it onto the clean/new computer?

Thanks again!

One question -- how does this ("Restore System to Factory Default") differ from this ("Full Factory Recovery")?

I'd prefer first to make a good effort at saving my current machine, before buying a new one w/$$ that I'd rather spend on other family priorities right now. That's just how I am when it comes to big-ticket items -- e.g., the family minivan has 65k miles on it and I plan on us driving that thing until the 150k mark at least before even thinking about getting a new one. 

But I'm preparing myself mentally for the prospect that you might be right.

Although when you look at the list of HOF QBs, Stabler's era was pretty stacked with great ones. You had Bradshaw & Staubach (who both went to more Super Bowls), Namath, the back half of Fran Tarkenton's career, the first half of Dan Fouts's career, and Bob Griese (although Griese passed the ball much less than Stabler). All those guys are in the HoF. Stabler had a briefer peak than lots of those guys, and he threw more INTs than TDs in his career.

Couldn't have put it any better.

All this reminds me of what Brandon said at the end of the press conference announcing Hoke's hire:

"This game is about the players.  Yeah, we need fans, we want fans.  You're [the media] all important, we need the coverage that you bring and visibility that you bring.  But this is about football players.  This is about changing young men's lives.  This is about bringing leadership in here who makes a difference in the lives of young men.  And they leave here with a championship ring and they leave here with a great education and they go out and do great things in life.  That's Michigan.  Michigan men do that."   

+1 for you, sir.

Please don't take this as a complaint -- just a small quibble; I'm grateful we have Countess! -- but the main difference I see b/w Countess and the other Next-Woodsons's freshmen seasons in the chart above is the lack of INTs for Blake. I'll be curious to see how many picks he gets this year, as he becomes a full-season starter and earns more trust from Mattison. Assuming Mattison continues being aggressive in putting pressure on opposing QBs, Blake should have more opportunities to make plays on the ball and actually pick some off.

Makes me smile every time I read his name. Imagine the chants of "Ta-CO! Ta-CO!" every time he notches a sack at the Big House...

Watch the split screen shot of Marlin Jackson during warmups -- I could be wrong, but I'm pretty sure that's another epic Brady Hoke point at around 34-35 seconds into this clip. (2002 was his last year as an assistant at Michigan.)

If what he's "spouting" is merely "common sense" that people should "know anyway," why do so many people find themselves mired in such deep debt? We've created a whole culture -- both among individuals and in government, business, etc. -- of living beyond our means, not setting priorities, and immediate gratification. You might not like the way Ramsey presents his material, but at least give him credit for helping people break out of this mindset and giving them some specific ideas for how to get their financial house in order.

I have no problem with the occasional hype/throwback uniform for big games in college football -- but it's always better and more special when they're used sparingly. (I'm at least grateful that this alternate uni stuff will apparently happen less often next season at Michigan.)

They're also better when kept relatively simple, like Notre Dame pulling out the lucky green shirts, or teams going for the monocolor look by changing their secondary-color pants to match their shirts (e.g., Florida and Texas A&M below).

Simple is always better -- that's what makes Michigan's normal uniforms so classic. Two-color scheme, clean lines, iconic helmet, no gimmicks, looks great. Think of other classic uniforms in sports -- the Yankees' pinstripes (I hate the Yanks, but it's a great uniform), the Dodgers' blue and white, the Cardinals' red/white/blue w/ the Birds on the Bat, the Cowboys blue and silver with the iconic star on the helmet, the Red Wings' basic red and white and terrific logo -- they're all simple and clean and don't try too hard.

That's why I hate the new gimmick U-M jerseys so much -- they're not simple, they're cluttered and ridiculous. "Victors" and "Valiant" on the undershirt sleeves? Huh? And what's up with all the damn stripes? (It's just Adidas self-promotion.)  I actually thought the block M on the front of the UTL jerseys looked good, but the shoulder stripes were just too busy next to the stripes on the helmet. And we can all agree the bumblebee road jersey for MSU was an abomination.

If they want to experiment with road jerseys, I can live with that, as long as it looks good. (i.e., no stupid top-of-the-shoulder stripes, and get rid of the silly maize border around the numbers.)  But don't mess with the home unis except on the rarest of occasions.

But this year's WR crop is so deep, I have a hard time seeing him go any earlier than the 5th. Avant was drafted in the 4th, but he was a probably a more polished route runner coming out of school than Junior, and already had a reputation for Velcro hands.

He's looking to transfer as a grad student so he can play right away and use his final year of eligibility. He recently said Eastern Michigan is one of his finalists.

Thanks for putting so much work into this.

How much choice exactly do the new guys have when they pick their number from the available options? I'm curious how this works. Do they request a number, and then the equipment staff/coaches see if that works, and then resolve any conflicts/multiple requests for the same #?

We need at least one game-breaker/stretch the field guy at WR in every class. Not unhappy about this commit by any means, I just hope the coaches recognize this hole in the roster, particularly after Stonum's departure. 

(fingers crossed)

Of course, Diamond is the one assumed commit that has always scared me the most b/c he hasn't committed already....

Kudos to the OP for tracking down the book and posting all this.

Related to this -- does anyone have any more details on the presentation Borges gave at the recent Michigan coaches clinic? (The one where Dantonio had his little hissy fit.) According to this write-up, Borges talked about "how to blend a conventional and spread offensive attack." I'd be curious to hear more about how Borges tried to blend concepts from both approaches in the offense this year -- what lessons he learned, etc.

DeSean Jackson is listed at 5-10 and a generous 175. Randle El (who is the perfect comp for Denard re: draft potential) is 5-10 and 185-190. Darren Sproles is all of 5-6 and 190. If those guys can survive in the NFl, so can Denard.
As for those who doubt he'll be picked in the first 3 rounds, again, just look at Randle El, who was almost the exact same player coming out of college -- too small and too limited as apasser to be a QB in the NFL, but an electric athlete w/4.4 speed. He went in the 2nd round. An unlike Reggie McNeal, Denard is a high-character, team first guy. No way he slips past round 3 next year as long as he stays healthy.

Can't see how Hoke can keep him on the team after this -- at the press conference announcing his hiring as coach, Hoke stressed accountablity and character. He's given Stonum every chance. The kid has continued to demonstrate poor judgment. Lying to the court/law enforcement is the real clincher for me -- I just can't see how you keep him on the team after that. The only thing that will get Stonum's attention at this point is taking away football. I hope he gets the help he needs and gets his life together.

Obviously from an on-the-field standpoint this sucks -- Stonum's return next fall was one of the things we all counted on to soften the blow of losing Junior Hemingway. Our mediocre WR recruiting the last couple of years is gonna come back to haunt us. Wish we had targeted some higher-upside WR prospects in this recruiting class.

Hagerup has seemed mentally out-to-lunch all year. I don't know what got him suspended for the first four games, but whatever it was sure seemed to carry over once he returned. I hope he gets things together during the offseason.

Meanwhile, it sure is nice to have Wile as a quality second option at both punter and placekicker. Imagine -- depth at both kicking positions!

Tell his marketing minions to stop f---ing around with a good thing.

If I remember correctly, the spread was Michigan favored by 7.5, so Fitz's reversed TD was the difference b/w Michigan beating the spread or not. There are at least a few people out there who lost some big money because that call was reversed.

Anyway, fantastic work by the original poster. It's amazing what people will do for free on the Internet just due to curiosity and having some spare time on their hands!

If I remember correctly, he already had a son, and staying close to him was a big part of his change-of-mind.

I always find this meme hilarious, but when/where exactly did it originate? I'm googling all over and I can't find the answer to this question. Forgive my ignorance!

So much of whether someone who's not an all-world talent makes it in the NFL depends on whether they end up on the right team, running the right scheme to take advantage of their strengths and minimize their weaknesses. The consensus on RVB above is a good example. Dude will never make it as a 4-3 end or a 3-technique DT. But he's got the frame and the motor to be a solid if unspectacular 5-tech as a 3-4 DE for someone like the Steelers or Pats, who want their DEs to occupy doubles and take on the trash so their LBs can make big plays.

Molk is a warrior, and smart as hell, and a great technician. But he is really small for an NFL interior lineman, and he already looks pretty maxed out physically, so an NFL strength program isn't going to put another 20 pounds on him. He will struggle to anchor against massive nose tackles like Haloti Ngata or B.J. Raji or stand up to bull rushes.

Still, he's got a shot. The model for Molk having a long career in the NFL is guys like Mark Stepnoski (Cowboys center in the 1990s) and Jeff Saturday of the Colts. Stepnoski was *really* undersized, but he had massive dudes on both sides of him on those great Cowboys line, and played with superior technique and leverage. Saturday is also undersized, but has had a great career -- again, because of smarts, great technique, and in his case, playing in a zone-based running scheme where athleticism and technique matter more than brawn. 

I'm a Michigan alum, but my dad and grandfather both went to A&M and I spent many a Saturday at Kyle Field when I was a youngin', so I know about the expectations in College Station. You're right that the gap b/w where A&M actually is in terms of national perception and where the alums/fanbase think it *should* be is a little extreme. I think a lot of this goes back to the famous Jackie Sherrill comment when he took the coaching job there about A&M being a "sleeping giant" that only needed to wake up to dominate.

And it's true -- a lot of the elements for a national power are there: A great recruiting base, fanatical & passionate alumni and fans, a rich tradition, excellent facilities. And during those late-Sherrill/early R.C. Slocum years, it seemed finally to come togetherm, partly due to Sherrill's less-than-pristine recruiting methods. (From 1989-2002, Slocum was 123-47-2, a .721 winning percentage.) But since then A&M's performance on the field has always seemed to be less than the sum of its parts, except for last year.

I hope Aggie fans are ready to readjust their expectations with the move to the SEC West. Going 8-4 or better every year in that division would be a hell of an accomplishment.

I was extremely skeptical of the Hoke hire, but the way the team played this season, and particularly the way they finished the season after the Iowa loss, convinced me that Hoke was the right choice and that he will have a very high ceiling at Michigan. Obviously Mattison/Borges and the rest of the coaching staff, the returning talent, and the relatively soft schedule all played a big role in this year's success. But when you listen to the players talking about Hoke after the OSU game, and listen to what the recruiting commits say about him, it's clear that Hoke has some intangible quality that makes players want to go through walls to play well for him.

Recently I went back and looked at what Brandon said during the presser on this very point when he introduced Hoke as the new coach:

"I'm a former player. It's a long time ago but I still remember, and I think one of the most important things in judging a coach is, Do players want to play for him? And yeah, he [Hoke] kinda scoffed at my 'players' coach' comment, but I'm here to tell ya, you want a team that's going to perform at a high level, it's a team that wants the coach to be successful, 'cause they know it isn't about the coach, it's about the team. And what impressed me about Brady is, first of all, I think he said he told me he wanted this job and it was his dream in life in the first four seconds that we were together. And the second thing is I got more and more into how he coached, and he brought all of the materials he used; we had a long discussion about how he approaches his job. It became very apparent to me that this is not a guy who 'it's all about me.' It's a guy who is all about the team. And he's a guy that players want to play for. And our current football players have only spent a grand total of a couple hours around this guy, but you have no idea how many of them have come up to me and made comments about their immediate reaction to the attitude that this guy brings to coaching football. And I think that's exactly what we need here at Michigan."

I think that's been a key element in the performance of this year's team (along with the improved fundamentals, particularly on D), and will continue to be as long as Hoke is the coach at UM.

Obviously, we all won't feel so great if Duke stomps us tonight and we lay an egg against osu on Saturday. But the long term trends are what really make me excited -- as you put it, from a "structural standpoint, the baselines of both programs have been raised dramatically." That even extends to the facilities, another item I should have mentioned; there's no doubt the upgrades to Crisler, the new BB practice facility (or "Player Development Center" or whatever the hell they call it), and the Big House expansion/renovation are playing a big factor in the great recruiting.

But most of all, it's the coaching. Win or lose against Duke and osu, I just feel like with Beilein and Hoke we finally have two guys leading these programs who have their shit together.  

Yes, coaching change, new systems, etc. It's not easy. But looking at the # of returning starters we had, particularly on offense, and the favorable schedule (just 4 road games, only one rivalry game on the road), and the subsequent 6-0 start, finishing 7-5 would make me very nervous about the long-term future of this program.

8-4 is OK, I guess, but it will be a lot more palatable if that eighth win comes against OSU. We get the weakest OSU team in years, w/out Tressel, at home. That's a game you have to win.

9-3 is a great season, all things considered. Beating Illinois and showing we can actually win on the road against a non-cupcake would be a big step for this team, and then if we can just split the last two at home, we're there.

Kevin simply doesn't have the production to warrant being picked in the first few rounds -- only 10 catches so far this year, and just 14 last year. (I'm really surprised Borges hasn't used him more in the passing game in the new offense -- his size and huge hands should make him a favorite target for our short, not-incredibly-accurate (but still AWESOME!) QB.)  Still, scouts will cut him some slack b/c of the offense he's been in, and they'll like his big hands, frame, and overall athleticism.  They'll like his character too (team captain, etc.). I think he goes somewhere in the mid to late rounds and sticks on an NFL roster, as long as he keeps improving his consistency as a pass-catcher, route runner, and blocker, and shows he can contribute on special teams.

Most of the good NFL draft websites have Kevin ranked from #7-10 among senior TEs. Here's a write-up by National Football Post's Wes Bunting, one of the best draft guys out there IMO:

<blockquote>A tall, athletically put together tight end prospect with a big set of hands, long arms and impressive range when asked to go make a play on the football. However, is still developing in all areas of the game and likely saw his growth/production stunted because of the offense that has been in place at Michigan since his arrival. Isn't the most natural benders when asked to sit into his stance, keeps his base a little high off the line and doesn't generate much explosion releasing into his route. Does a decent job initially trying to drop his pad level off the snap, but too often stands upright taking away from his forward momentum. Isn't real sharp or sudden as a route runner at this stage either, seems to drift into his breaks and looks more confident running away from defenders. Possesses average strider speed, but natural coordination, a big frame and can go up and make a play on the football off his frame. Displays impressive range when asked to go get the football. Plus, does a nice job extending his long arms and using his hands to routinely pluck off his frame.

Isn't a real balanced blocker. Struggles to keep his feet under him, lunges into contact and doesn't create much power as an in-line guy. Possesses a naturally strong frame, but his inability to gain leverage and maintain balance kills him at the point. Possesses long arms and strong hands that allow him to stick initially when he gets his hands on you, but is still learning the nuances of being a consistent run blocker.

Impression: Flashed on tape at times and does have some talent. However, is raw in all areas of the game and looks more like a low round pick/ free agent only who could blossom.</blockquote>

Omameh looks so different from the dancing bear who repeatedly got to the second level and pancaked the likes of Manti T'eo last year. So different, in fact, I'm tempted to think he has a lower-body injury no one's telling us about -- but then I remember that the starting RG spot was, according to the coaches, a toss-up even near the end of fall camp. I could understand if Omameh was having trouble as a pulling guard b/c he lacks the brawn for MANBALL power blocking, but I'm amazed that the real issue seems to be his feet/agility.  

Meanwhile, Schofield continues to impress. If Barnum ever gets healthy again, Schofield should start over whomever among Omameh/Barnum/Huyge the coaches believe is the biggest liabilty. Barnum hasn't made much of an impression on me when he's played, but my vote would be for Huyge -- good kid, but his limited athleticism becomes a glaring weakness in pass protection against teams with decent-or-better edge rushers.

Finally, re: the snap count jumping stuff -- why the hell does this kind of coaching failture always happen to us in the MSU and OSU games? Going back to the later-Carr era, I cannot recall a single game against these opponents where UM could say, "our coaches outsmarted theirs today," regardless of the final score. Seems like they are always more prepared than we are, and always have some new playcall or scheme that catches us with our pants down.

[Also -- why no "Fitz"/diamond formation in this game? Especially w/the wind and passing game problems, and State's hyper-aggressive LBs, that could have been useful. Argh...

I can't view the slideshow on my work computer, but from the one punt on the video it looks like Morris punts with his right foot -- is that correct? Strange -- reminds me of baseball players who bat left but throw right, e.g. George Brett.

As for Ross, he looks like a beast, albeit a small beast. He seems tiny out there at MLB -- but I'll take a smallish-guy w/obviously great football instincts and recognition skills over a prototype sized guy who plays passive (see: Obi Ezeh) any day. Being a little short/small certainly didn't hurt Jonathan Vilma or Dat Nguyen as college MLBs.  

UConn just hired Pasqualoni so that job's out. Pitt has their coach and poached Calvin Magee and Tony Gibson from RR. Probably too close to signing day for him to find and start a new job now.

So I assume he takes a year off and tries to forget the mess he endured in Ann Arbor.  Where does he end up next?  Which coaches are on the proverbial hot seat in 2011? What programs are potentially better "fits" for him than U-M turned out to be?

on Sportscenter @ 9:45am. Take it for what it's worth, which means practically nothing, like 95% of what we're hearing today... anyway, he said he lives near Palo Alto, has been to Stanford practices, etc. He thinks that Harbaugh wants the competitive challenge of the NFL, b/c coaching college for him is "like playing checkers" and he wants to "play chess" against the likes of "Bill Belichick, Andy Reid," etc.

Brian -- look a few spots past Syracuse/Shafer on the 2010 DFEI rankings and you'll find Navy, which fields consistently excellent defenses under coordinator Buddy Green. I've been banging the drum for Green for a while now -- see this post.  My idea is to copy the success Texas A&M had in overhauling their defense this year by bringing in Tim DeRuyter from Air Force.

I'm sure Navy is a great program to coach at, but I would think UM could show Green enough "scads of cash" to convince him to come to Ann Arbor.

Very excited about the combo of Desmond Morgan and Kellen Jones. Good kids with their heads on straight, excellent students, smart players, hard hitters, instinctive -- the kind of kids you can build great defenses around. Now if we can just get some DTs to play in front of them....

I went to Michigan but my dad and granddad are A&M alums, so I also root for the Aggies and have really enjoyed watching their turnaround this season. Your analogy is a good one, but it all hinges on Rich Rodriguez finding his own Tim DeRuyter to fix our defense. Let's hope he's willing and able to do it.

It's Tim DeRuyter, who was a great up-and-coming DC at the Air Force Academy before A&M got him. This got me to thinking that Navy's DC, Buddy Green, would be a good post-Robinson hire, for the same reasons that DeRuyter's been a good fit at A&M. I wrote a post about Green after the Penn St. debacle.

My bad -- first time I've tried that. Here's a plain old link:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=z82mcA0EOD0

Check it:

http://www.navysports.com/sports/m-footbl/mtt/green_buddy00.html

Doesn't everyone know that lots of NFL teams will be talking to Harbaugh about a head-coaching job after this season? Teams don't want retreads like Cowher or Gruden (has anyone like that ever come back and actually won a title?) -- they want the next up-and-coming young guy, the next Mike Tomlin or John Harbaugh.

If Jim Harbaugh is going to leave Stanford, why wouldn't he leave for the chance to coach at the highest level in the NFL and make enormous amounts of money? Particularly when two of the most storied and glamorous franchises in the league, the 49ers and the Cowboys, will almost certainly make him a serious candidate?

... and then the Gittleson pic was just icing on the cake.

The scene where Jane & Michael's father goes bonkers after being fired by the old Mr. Dawes, who calls after him: "Banks ... Banks? ... BANKS?!?!?!?!"

(What can I say, I have a 5 year old and a 4 year old, I've seen the movie about 5000 times that past couple of years....)

That was absolute domination by Omameh there. As I mentioned last night in another thread, not only does he pancake Te'o -- he drives him so far downfield that he also takes out the weakside safety running over (who might've been the only guy w/an angle to tackle Denard, or at least force him to change direction). And then Roundtree blows up the other safety with a textbook cut block; Molk sealed off the DT w/a perfect reach block, Koger and Dorrestein did well... lots of heroes on that play.

If you watch the replay, you'll see what the coaches meant after the game when they kept saying "Yes Denard was awesome, but the other guys are playing a big part too." That play really epitomizes how and why this team is winning.  Molk gets an outstanding reach block to seal the DT; Schilling takes out the weakside LB. Dorrestein does a nice job on the DE, and Koger stalemates the DB over the slot. Meanwhile, Omameh should get a +5 on that play on the UFR: he absolutely pancakes MLB Manti Te'o -- so thoroughly, in fact, that healso ends up taking out the weakside safety who might've been the only guy with an angle on Denard.  And Odoms and Roundtree get great blocks downfield-- Roundtree just destroys the playside safety with a cut block.

And oh yeah, Denard did OK too. There was really just a little crease b/w Dorrestein and Koger, but he was patient, waited for the hole, and blazed through. Just outstanding work by everyone on that play.

Let's revisit his traditional "three opportunities for me to look stupid" from the game preview:

Finally, three opportunities for me to look stupid Sunday:

• Denard only, and he again cracks 100 yards and 5 YPC. Completion percentage comes down to 65%.
• The tailbacks look much better than they did last week, with someone, probably Shaw, breaking a long one due to excessive Denard attention.
• Michigan wins the turnover battle.
• Michigan, 31-27.

Denard: 24 of 40 = 60%

Turnovers: UM 0, ND 3

Margin of victory: 4 points

Now if we can just get the tailbacks going...

Very encouraging overall, and an amazing job by Brian, as always. (Though I'd second the comment above that Banks's TD-saving arm tackle deserved more than a +1.)

I'm starting to appreciate what the 3-3-5 stack allows us to do and the versatility it offers -- but I wonder if Roh's particular talents aren't wasted when he spends the majority of his snaps standing off the line of scrimmage.  What excited us so much about him as a DE recruit was his burst off the edge and his sick pass-rush moves.  Yet on pass plays in this D, he's as likely to drop back into a zone or cover the flat from his usual spot as he is to rush the passer.  At some point, we'll need to put a lot more pressure on QBs to protect our secondary, and the most immediate way to do that, I'd think, would be to put Roh on the LOS more often as a fourth down lineman/edge rusher. He seems the most likely guy to pick up the pash-rushing slack left by BG's departure.