I did not make this headline up
|15 weeks 3 days ago||No clue. If he is, I am||
No clue. If he is, I am sorry. I ran across this on the 247 board.
|1 year 16 weeks ago||One more question: Do you||
One more question: Do you know how long games typically stay up on BTN2GO? I am assuming they take the games down after a short period of time.
|1 year 16 weeks ago||Thanks||
Thanks for the helpful info; I appreciate it.
|1 year 16 weeks ago||Work||
I was working, and I am pleasantly surprised to hear that we put up a fight. I know, my expectations and standards are pretty low at this point....
|2 years 1 week ago||I'm not sure how one can be a||
I'm not sure how one can be a genuine fan of a team without getting emotionally involved in some way. If there is such a thing as emotionally-detached fandom, I don't really want anything to do with it. Sports are emotional. Athletes play with emotion and fans reciprocate that emotion. Also, following a team involves a sense of vicariousness, which I think is pretty natural. Fans identify with the teams that they follow. When our teams lose, we get upset or sad or whatever. I also think that the "bragging rights" thing that you mentioned is a part of being a sports fan as well. I couldn't really imagine sports without opposing fan bases. rivalries between fan bases is one of the things that makes following sports really fun.
Of course, you can have all of these things and still be "classy" at the same time. Based on my experience, Michigan fans do tend to be a little classier than opposing fans. They also tend to be more articulate, which I appreciate. At the end of the day, fans are human, and they will act like it from time to time.
|2 years 1 week ago||"being great on offense and||
"being great on offense and not turning the ball over" actually require skill, which this team obviously has. Rebounding, on the other hand, doesn't really require skill. It is basically something that any given team can do. Identify your man, put a body on him, and box him out. You don't have to be an athletic freak to do this, even though we have some athletic freaks on the team. You don't even have to be taller than the player you are defending. If you box your opponent out, even if he is taller than you, it will be difficult for him to get a rebound over you without fouling.
I don't expect this team to be "great" at rebounding, but I do think that it is reasonable to expect them to hold their own on the glass, which they have not been able to do against decent to good Big Ten teams. Because this is not really a matter of skill, there isn't much of an excuse for it. It would be unreasonable for me to expect an unskilled team to all of a sudden become skilled, but this is a totally different issue. This team has so much potential. It's simply frustrating to watch them lose games that they would win easily if only they could rebound--a thing that doesn't take much skill to do.
|2 years 1 week ago||Not trying to be mean, but I||
Not trying to be mean, but I don't really understand your logic here. fixating on missed free-throws at the end of a game is also a "what if" scenario. My point is that if we are going to play the "what if" game, then our focus should be on the rebounding rather than missed free-throws since the rebounding issue has basically been a common denominator in all of our losses this year. On the other hand, poor free-throw shooting hasn't been a huge problem in our losses. Focusing solely on the things that take place at the very end of a game is a pretty impulsive thing to do. If you look at the big picture, rebounding is the main problem, and it is going to continue to be the main problem going forward. When opposing teams consistently get 2-3 shot attemps on one offensive possession and you only get one shot attempt on most of your possessions, you are going to have an incredibly difficult time winning. We do a lot of things well, but the rebounding issue basically negates all of it.
|2 years 2 weeks ago||I disagree with both of you guys||
It is easy to fixate on the things that take place at the very end of a game, but we simply would have never been in that situation had we rebounded better throughout the entire ballgame. Look at it this way: Had we kept up with Indiana on the boards, we probably would have won this game by 10-15 points. Those free throws at the end should have been meaningless potential points tagged on to a double digit victory. It's not poor free-throw shooting that's going to potentially kill us in the tournament, it's our inability to rebound the basketball with consistency. In my opinion, it's the primary thing that is preventing this team from being elite.
|2 years 2 weeks ago||Well, not sure if this has||
Well, not sure if this has anything to do with it, but one team (Florida) actually knows how to box out and rebound, while the other team (Michigan) can't quite figure it out. If you can't rebound, you definitely do not deserve to be ranked in the top five of any rating system since the inability to rebound negates everything that a team does well. A team that can't rebound is susceptible to losing to any given team at any given time. Sorry for the negativity. I am proud of this team, but they simply do not deserve a top five ranking from anybody.
|2 years 2 weeks ago||A young Dirk Nowitski?||
I'll take one of those.
|2 years 4 weeks ago||Thanks||
I actually did not know that that option existed. So that was a misunderstanding on my part. Nevertheless, I do think that people often get negged unjustifiably here. Overall, I think that people are simply too liberal with the downvote button. The fact that my last post got negged is a perfect example. I didn't say anything neg worthy in that post. I was simply voicing my subjective opinion, and someone decided to subjectively neg my subjective opinion. Just because you disagree with someone's opinion, does not mean that you should neg their comment. For instance, I personally disagree with you in terms of posts not getting negged unjustifiably here, but I have no desire and no reason to neg you.
|2 years 4 weeks ago||That is not necessarily true||
That is not necessarily true though. If you get negged, your comment basically gets wiped out from the thread and people have to go out of their way to see it. Hence, getting negged renders you incapable of actually contributing to the community in a meaningful way. Plus, this board is extremely peer pressure-oriented, to the extent that getting negged invariably influences the opinions of others. When someone gets negged once, they are usually negged a 2nd and 3rd time by default. So, on this particular site, it does matter.
Anyways, I'm not trying to get into an argument. So I will let it go.
|2 years 4 weeks ago||Sorry||
it is simply my biggest pet peeve with this board. Not that people can neg, but the various reasons why people neg, which are often highly subjective. It is the main reason why I don't post here very often; it is a huge detractor, even for a person who has been following this site for over four years--like me.
|2 years 4 weeks ago||List of 15-25 recruits that we have a decent chance with||
I believe the "M Block" has a list like this, as well as Steve from 247. Also, if you go to the 2014 recruiting thread at 247, a bunch of people have posted the kind of lists that you are looking for.
Finally, had I, or anyone who is not a regular poster here, created this thread, I would have been negged -100.
|2 years 5 weeks ago||Here is the problem:||
It seems like everyone is having the game of their lives against us these days. OSU played out of their minds against us and so did MSU. There seems to be a trend here. The reason why teams are playing so well against us is because our defense is bad--plain and simple. Teams seem to play their best games offensively against us because we can't guard the perimeter, we let people freely drive down the lane all day, and we don't contest shots very well, giving players open looks again and again.
|2 years 6 weeks ago||I couldn't imagine this game||
I couldn't imagine this game being a positive for Drake Harris. If I were coach Hoke, I would be extremely embarrassed right now. I am extremely embarrassed right now!
|2 years 6 weeks ago||Fuck yes! We needed this.||
Fuck yes! We needed this. Suck on that, Urban!!
|2 years 14 weeks ago||Wow||
If true, what a horrible way for Floyd to end his career at Michigan.
|2 years 14 weeks ago||Don't Get It||
I don't get it. Why not slot receiver or running back? It seems like a waste. We have pretty good depth at corner, and our starters are both really young (Blake and Raymon).
|2 years 18 weeks ago||Yes||
I don't really get it. WR is the one area that we have not recruited well. I don't mean any disrespect to the receivers that have been recruited in the last few classes, but we have not been able to reel in any bue chip players at this position. We are loaded everywhere else, but dynamic wideouts are lacking. More often than not, if you want to be an elite team, you need to be able to strecth the field vertically. This is Michigan. Why can't we garner interest from 4 and 5 star receivers? Honest question.
|2 years 21 weeks ago||Ignore||
|2 years 21 weeks ago||WTF?||
I am sorry, but this post is fucking moronic! The loss last night had absolutely nothing to do with Borges. The people on this board who have perpetuated this nonsensical idea are insane. We were first and ten inside the fifteen when Denard got injured. I have no reason to believe that we were not going to score a touchdown had he been in the game to finish that drive. Nebraska then turned the ball over in their own zone with about a minute left before halftime. Again, had Denard been healthy, I am quite confident we would have been able to put some more points on the board in that situation. Thus, with a healthy Denard, we go into the half up 13-7.
We were moving the ball pretty consistently in the first half. If anything, we were controlling time of possession and were in a possition to steadily wear down their defense in the second half. Outside of one possession, our defensive was playing extremely well and, with Denard in the game, we were winning the battle up front on both sides of the ball. Also, contrary to popular opinion on this board, our gameplan was NOT hyper-conservative in the first half; I thought we were doing a pretty good job mixing things up. It is not Borges' fault that our receivers dropped 500 passes in this game! That first bomb to Roundtree should have been caught, and the second bomb to Roundtree should have been caught as well.
If Denard did not get hurt, I honestly believe that this would have been a 10-17 point victory for us. We would have worn down their defense and our defense would have stayed fresh. We also would not have had the turnovers in the second half. WE DID NOT LOSE THIS GAME BECAUSE OF BORGES, WE LOST IT BECAUSE DENARD GOT INJURED AND OUR RECEIVERS DON'T HAVE HANDS.
You can bitch all you want about Hoke and Borges not playing Gardner instead of Bellomy in the second half. Fine. But when was the last time you attended practice? For all we know, Bellomy might be the better quarterback right now. Bellomy might be throwing the ball really well in practice. Also, maybe our receivers really suck, and we need all the help that we can get at that position. Even though Gardner isn't very good at receiver, maybe the coaches felt that it would be too detrimental to the receiving core to move Gardner to quarterback.
*sorry for typos and misspellings . I don't have spell-check.*
|2 years 22 weeks ago||OSU Game||
If we beat Nebraska, the OSU game may not have any impact on our Big Ten championship aspirations. I wonder if this will have any affect on the game from a psychological standpoint.
|2 years 28 weeks ago||Reply||
"I doubt that they even really game-planned for WKU"
Do you seriously believe this? There are only 12-13 games in their season. You really think that they didn't bother to game-plan for WKU? Does Saban take you as a coach who would come into a game unprepared? I doubt it. Yes, I am sure these stats are not as alarming as they may imply. However, I think they might give us at least some glimpse into the fact that our defensive line is shaky at best.
|2 years 28 weeks ago||Disagree||
I really doubt that this is how coaches think. The media and fans buy into the hype, coaches usually don't. There are only a few games in a college football season. Thus, coaches take EVERY game seriously, specially a guy like Saban.
|2 years 28 weeks ago||I Agree||
Absolutely! I am not suggesting that we are going to end up losing the rest of our games this year. I still think we have a shot at winning the Big Ten, which, as you alluded to, sucks this year. Both of our lines are what concerns me, but every Big Ten team seems to have major concerns somewhere. Yeah, the future is extremely bright. We just need to keep the recruiting momentum going.
|2 years 28 weeks ago||Reply||
This CAN be true but not always. Consistency plays a big role in determining these kinds of things. In other words, the fact that our defensive line got gashed in two straight games may mean that there is at least some connection between Alabama's poor rushing performance today and our extremely poor defensive line play in general.
Let me say it like this: in 2010, if our offense continued to play poory throughout the year and EMU's offense continued to play decent throughout the year, then the conclusion that "EMU's offense was more potent than ours" would probably be true. The fact that we ended up averaging 33 ppg that year is the only thing that makes your example an abberation.
Because our front played so poorly today, the stats that I cited become much more relevant. Of course, it has only been two games. So we will see if anything changes in the next couple weeks....
|2 years 28 weeks ago||Also...||
Also, we also sacked McCarron a few times, and Alabama also played their backups against us. So how are these stats relevant?
|2 years 28 weeks ago||Not Freaking Out||
I am not freaking out actually. I just thought that this was a very interesting and pertinent stat. I fully expected our defensive line to be the weakness of our team coming into the year. Although, I will admit that I am somewhat surprised that we gave up around three times the amount of rushing yards to Alabama that Western Kentucky did.
Also, your justification for why Alabama ran significantly worse against Western Kentucky is incoherent. You note that all of their backs averaged 4 yards a carry. Didn't they average around 6 yards a carry against us? This is Western Kentucky we are talking about... The other stats that you note don't change the fact that they only averaged 3.3 yards a carry when they ran the football, starters or not.
|2 years 31 weeks ago||Interpretation help||
Can someone please help me interpret this quote:
"Return game? Norfleet?
'This is a guy that has a specific skill when you look at a return guy. He’s a good hand-eye coordination guy. He’s not afraid, which you have to -- can’t be afraid when you’re doing that job. It’s like playing corner. If you get beat, you better learn from it but forget about it. I think it’s the same thing as the return guy.”'
Does this mean that Norfleet is indeed going to be the main return guy this year? Or, is Hoke simply making some general comments concerning the characteristics of a good return man? Honestly, I would like to see Justice Hayes as the main kick/punt return guy this year. True freshmen scare me at that position. Does anyone remember De' Anthony Thomas' (I think this is how he spells his name) first game with Oregon last season? I think he fumbled two-three times in their opener against LSU.
|2 years 31 weeks ago||Maybe not,||
but they may appreciate the fact that it could potentially add hits to their website.
|2 years 31 weeks ago||Insider Info||
Here is some practice information from the much maligned GoBlueMichiganWolverine staff. You do not have to pay for this info, simply register for free online:
"Michigan Football Tidbits: Some more interesting Tidbits coming from Fall Camp
|2 years 45 weeks ago||Overly Optimistic||
I appreciate your optimism, but I would be shocked if they don't win by more than ten. In fact, I will be very happy if we lose by ten points. We simply do not have the talent nor the depth at key positions yet. In two years, I will be much more confident about games like these, but right now we just don't have the talent and depth to compete with teams like Alabama for the entire duration of a football game.
Our wide receivers are mediocre at best. We are an injury or two away from being a disaster on the o-line, and our defesive line is down three starters from last year--with no proven commodities. Also, did you watch our game against Virginia Tech last year? Our offense could not do anything against them. Do you really think we will do any better against Bama's defense?
|3 years 18 weeks ago||Fitz Comparisons||
I don't really understand the Mike Hart comparisions--totally different running styles in my opinion. Fitz reminds me a lot of Chris Perry, which is fine by me. In the twenty-four years that I have been watching Michigan football, Perry was probably my favorite tailback to watch. Hopefully Fitz can stay healthy over the next couple years and steadily develop into one of the better backs in the country.
|4 years 7 weeks ago||TomVH||
TomVH is just like Tim Tebow. Well, I mean, as close as a man can get to Tim Tebow--I mean, not everyone can be the saviour of the universe.
|4 years 12 weeks ago||MSU Blitz||
Our inability to pick up the blitz in obvious passing situations absolutely killed us on third and fourth downs. That was by far the worst our offensive line has played all year.
|4 years 15 weeks ago||Dee Hart||
I think Lamichael James might be a pretty good comparison.
|4 years 16 weeks ago||ESPN||
According to ESPN, there are 155 receivers with better films. Hopefully Rivals is right on this one.
|4 years 16 weeks ago||Scout and ESPN||
Talk about a divergence in recruiting rankings: Lucien is the 61st best wideout according to Scout and the 156th best wideout according to ESPN.
|4 years 18 weeks ago||Agreed||
I Could not agree more. The only difference between the first and second half yesterday was execution. In the first half, Denard overthrew open receivers and wideouts dropped catchable balls. In the second half, Denard's deep throws were right on the money and there were not as many drops from the wideouts. Nerves definitely play a huge part in this. Denard is a young player who has openly talked about his anxiety early on in games during post-game interviews. As he gets older, this will change.
|4 years 18 weeks ago||Good Stuff||
Our defensive line should finally have the depth and skill necessary to be an above average unit next year. This is how I see the 2 deep shaking out:
1st stringers--Roh, Martin, Van Bergen
2nd stringers--Black, Ash/Washington, Wilkins
With Black, Roh and Wilkins all gaining experience and adding muscle, that should be a very formidable defensive line. Contrary to popular opinion, I am really not too concerned with the linebackers. Demens will be very good as a junior and somone out of Fitzgerald, Jones, Ryan, Bell and Marvin Robinson will emerge as capable linebackers next season. I have a hard time believing that any of these guys will be significantly worse than Mouton and Ezeh. All in all, barring injuries, I predict that our front seven will be substantially better next season.
|4 years 18 weeks ago||Age||
Are you like seven years old?
|4 years 18 weeks ago||Game Plan in the Second Half||
How was our offensive game plan any different in the second half? Were you watching the same game I was?
Denard missed Stonum for a TD and threw over Smith's head on the drive that ended in a missed field goal in the first half. Then, on the following drive, Stonum and Hemmingway dropped back to back passes around midfield which would have moved the chains. The difference between the first and second half was execution, not play calling. Dropped passes and bad throws are the reason why our offense stalled in the first half.
|4 years 18 weeks ago||Injuries||
I am most concerned with the injuries in this game. I think that we can win without Lewan, but there is absolutely no way we win this game without Mike Martin. Huyge and Dorrestein are both solid and experienced players who can make up for the absence of Lewan. However, Adam Patterson will not be able to make up for Mike Martin in this game. If Martin plays, I think we have a chance at an upset (albeit a small chance).
On a related note, I cannot wait for the day when we finally have some depth on both sides of the ball; a day when an injury to a key player won't cost us the chance at winning a ball game. Look at Wisconsin, there starting tailback was out last week and they still put up 338 yards on the ground. I know it was against Indiana, but still.
|4 years 20 weeks ago||Drops||
I agree, we dropped a lot of catchable passes in this game. A few of those passes were thrown a little low to Stonum, but I think he still should have came up with them. Also, penalties in key situations hurt us again in this game. A false start penalty in Penn State territory and a holding call in the red zone really didn't help our cause. Of course, handing the ball off to Smith on 3rd and 1 in our opening drive didn't help either.
|4 years 22 weeks ago||Stonum's Career Numbers||
Those numbers are highly tainted by the fact that he had two true freshman quarterbacks throwing him the ball in his first two years (one of which was Nick Sheridan).
|4 years 22 weeks ago||A Three Game Winning Streak||
For obvious reasons, this particular stretch of games is absolutely pivotal both for our success this year and Rodriguez’s future at Michigan. Personally, I feel pretty confident about our chances of winning all three of these games coming out of the break. This would put us at 8-2 by the time Wisconsin comes to town, and if our offense can hold onto the ball and play penalty free football, you never know what could happen at home against the Badgers. I think we have a good chance of winning three straight games coming out of the bye week for the following reasons:
1. Because of the bye week, Mike Martin, David Molk, Michael Shaw, Denard Robinson and Fitzgerald Toussaint will all be fully healthy and ready to go. This means that by the Penn State game our team will pretty much be at full health.
2. The off week gives the coaches a chance to evaluate our performances the last couple weeks and make valuable adjustments and changes where necessary (for instance, moving Kenny Demens to the MLB spot for the remainder of the season). The break is also a chance to coach up some of the younger guys like Avery and Talbott while cleaning up some of the penalty issues. Overall, due to youth and inexperience, I think that a bye week is more valuable for our team than most other teams in the Big Ten.
3. The overall talent level of Penn State, Illinois and Purdue is much lower than Iowa and Michigan State’s talent level this year. Talent wise, Illinois and Purdue are probably analogous to Notre Dame this year. Purdue lost to Notre Dame earlier in the season and Penn State lost to Illinois badly a couple weeks ago. Penn State is also having major injury problems and depth issues this season—not to mention they are starting a freshman quarterback.
4. The last two games have proven that our offensive talent is for real (I know some of you probably think that I am crazy for saying this). In both the Michigan State and Iowa game, our offensive line consistently dominated the line of scrimmage in the running game. We drove the ball up and down the field at will against both of these teams. Our receivers have proven to be skilled and trusted commodities. With Shaw and Toussaint back, our stable of running backs will be explosive and talented. Finally, a mixture of Robinson and Tate at quarterback will be more than effective enough to beat an injured Penn State team and mediocre Illinois and Purdue teams.
5. The turnovers that we have endured the last two games will not continue against the lesser talent of Penn State, Illinois and Purdue (see the first five games for a reference).
6. Lastly, because of the talent deficiency, our defense will have an easier time stopping these offenses (I don’t expect too much progress here though).
|4 years 24 weeks ago||blasphemy!||
No one is faster than Denard!!!!
|4 years 24 weeks ago||Worried||
I am worried because State's offense is basically UMASS with better athletes. I also tend to agree with the worries of the first couple posters. I think State's defense may stifle our running game a little bit. I understand that Denard is a whole different monster and that our offensive line is much improved this year, but I still am not totally convinced about our running game yet. I think this game is going to reveal to us how good our offense really is. Not that Michigan State has a great defense, but I think their defense will be the best we have faced up to this point. I am hoping that this game both legitimizes and falsifies the data that has accumulated about our offense over the course of the first five games. Mainly that our rushing offense truly is lethal and dominant.
But this is the very reason why I am nervous--I am not totally convinced or certain that our offense is as good as it has appeared to be thus far. This game is huge because it will reveal to us whether we are good enough to play with the big boys in the Big Ten again.
|4 years 25 weeks ago||Hopefully||
I really hope that you are right. I just think that Michigan's secondary is going to make a lot of receivers look good this year.
|4 years 25 weeks ago||Actually, I agree with you.||
Actually, I agree with you. Chappell took exactly what our defense gave him. But teams like MSU, Iowa and OSU with feature much better run games, and thus will probably test us deep on play action--since our corners will be forced to step up in the run game. By the way, this is just one man's opinion. I think we all have the right to disagree with each other. With this in mind, I do not really understand the hostility implied in your last statement.
|4 years 25 weeks ago||Reply||
Doesn't the second half of my response answer why? In short, I think that Chappell's day yesterday says much more about our defensive woes than it does about the skill level of Chappell. I think that we will play against better quarterbacks in upcoming games who have much better skill players on the outside, specifically much faster skill players. Indiana did not even test us vertically that much, I expect that to change in the coming games as well.
|4 years 25 weeks ago||Yeah but....||
Iowa, Michigan State and Ohio State have much better run games than Indiana which will make their passing games that much more effective against us. Plus, even though Indiana's receivers are pretty good, all three of those teams have better and faster athletes on the outside in my opinion.
|4 years 25 weeks ago||No way||
I think you could make a case that Michigan St. has a better passing offense than Indiana, let alone Iowa or Ohio State. I honestly did not even think Chappell was that great yesterday--and yet he still through for almost 500 yards against us. Chappell missed a bunch of throws that were wide open and consistently forced his receivers to make difficult catches on routine throws.
|4 years 26 weeks ago||Lineup Tweaks||
On offense, I think Fitz and Dee Hart will definitely be in the mix at running back. At quarterback, I would not be surprised to see Gardner starting with Denard filling a Percy Harvin type role on the team. I would also assume that Jeremy Gallon and TRob would be involved in the slot with Stokes and Jerald Robinson on the outside.
On defense, I would expect Carvin Johnson, Josh Furman and Marvin Robinson to all be heavily involved in the secondary. Also, Avery Walls could be a redshirt freshman or Sophomore backup/starter at deep safetly if we can grab him this year.
Other than that I like your 2012 lineup. I am excited.
|4 years 27 weeks ago||No.||
|4 years 30 weeks ago||Fitz||
Nevermind, I did not realize the injuries he sustained in practices the last couple of weeks were as severe as they apparently are:
|4 years 30 weeks ago||Injury||
Latest injury? Did I miss something?
|4 years 30 weeks ago||Reply||
I could have swore that Leon Hall started as a true freshman as well. Either way, I think it is safe to say that those teams had more viable options than we have this year. Hopefully Rogers will be a pleasant surprise though--we'll see.
|4 years 30 weeks ago||Corners||
I personally would feel a lot better about our secondary if Cullen Christian is able to beat out Rogers for a starting corner position. I would imagine that if Rogers were any good, people would have been talking about him as a possible contributer before the Woolfolk injury. On the other hand, Christian was a highly rated corner coming out of highschool, and historically, we have had some success with true freshman at that position. Plus, he represents our future at corner, and it would be encouraging to see him have some success this year.
|4 years 36 weeks ago||Valdez Showers||
Scout now has him ranked as the #9 cornerback in the country. All things considering, I want him (no homo). Seriously though, if Daren Kitchen does indeed commit, I really hope that it does not discourage Showers from coming to Ann Arbor. Four cornerback commits may be too much for this class.
|4 years 38 weeks ago||Mean Streak?||
Are we looking at the same picture? Is it the double chin or the North Face fleece that gives you this idea? Regardless, it is nice to receive a commitment from an offensive lineman.
|4 years 49 weeks ago||The Passing Game||
I think that this is a valid concern. Our deep passing game (or lack thereof) may be more of a quarterback issue than a scheme issue though. For instance, it sounds like Gardner has more of a propensity to stay in the pocket longer and throw downfield. Whereas Tate and Denard seem to be locked in on the slot receivers thus far. I just hope that top level wideouts are not discouraged from coming to Michigan in the future. In order to ensure that this does not happen, our quarterbacks need to make a conscious effort to get guys like Stonum and Stokes the ball down field. Hopefully they can accomplish this as they mature.
|4 years 50 weeks ago||That link I posted above is||
That link I posted above is now broadcasting the Tiger's game again for those who care....
|4 years 50 weeks ago||Baseball Stream||
Yeah I know. That was the only stream I could find too.
|4 years 50 weeks ago||Stream||
Try this; it is a bit rough though
|5 years 28 weeks ago||Boubacar Cissoko||
No mention of Cissoko? Is this a good thing or a bad thing?
|5 years 51 weeks ago||Vlad||
It is just a very strong statement, and it is also kind of random. Again, if it is true, than that would be great--but we will see.
|5 years 51 weeks ago||Vlad||
This would be awesome if it were true--but it is probably not.
|5 years 51 weeks ago||Marell Evans||
I am pretty sure that the only reason Evans is being talked about is because Mouton is injured right now.
|6 years 2 weeks ago||Carlos Brown||
I would love to see him healthy and actually on the field next year. He looked really solid in the Northwestern game last season and he was not even full strength. Hopefully this fall Brown will be able to contribute and display his full potential.
|6 years 5 weeks ago||Rue McClanahan||
|6 years 5 weeks ago||Pass Protection||
...For the most part, our pass protection was actually pretty good last year.
|6 years 9 weeks ago||Do not worry, I do not think||
Do not worry, I do not think that anyone is going to criticize you for it.
|6 years 9 weeks ago||"It's a free ride when you've||
"It's a free ride when you've already paid"
|6 years 9 weeks ago||That would be ironic.....||
That would be ironic.....
|6 years 11 weeks ago||Lets not kid ourselves,||
Lets not kid ourselves, anyone could do better than the Fox guys.
|6 years 11 weeks ago||Michigan vs. SEC||
For what it is worth, Maybe some material that you can use when arguing with your SEC buddies back at school: Michigan is 12-4 against historical members of the SEC and 20-5-1 against current members of the conference. Additionally, they are also 7-3 against the SEC all time in bowl games and have dominated these matchups in recent years-the only problem is we suck right now.
|6 years 16 weeks ago||Receivers||
I kinda disagree with the "horrible set of receivers" comment. Unless of course you are referring to all of the injuries that occured (which also resulted in Tony Clemons switching to the slot).
Regardless of what happened this year, I think our receiving unit is going to be very good next. I am excited to see what they can do--Mathews, Stonum, Hemmingway, Clemons, Odoms, Robinson, etc.... Apart from Odoms, all of those guys were highly rated recruits--Now it is just up to the quarterback to get them the ball.
|6 years 19 weeks ago||Safeties and Wideouts||
Brandon Smith was a high four star safety from our last recruiting class that should see significant playing time at safety. If I can remember correctly, he received very high praise from the coaches over the spring and summer.
Also, we should have a very good unit at wide receiver next season--look for Tony Clemons to move back to the outside with Mathews, Stonum and Hemmingway (all of these guys were big time recruits and they will all have experience now too). While Odoms, Robinson and Feagin share time in the slot. Roy Roundtree will probably contribute as well (I just do not know if RichRod will put him in the slot or on the outside). All in all, we probably will not have to lean on guys like Savoy and Babb next season, which will be nice.
|6 years 19 weeks ago||Overblown||
I am sorry, but you guys are blowing this particular quote from Fred Jackson way out of proportion. I read all of your comments before I read the actual article, and I was getting kinda worried. Then I decided to read Fred Jackson's quote for myself and saw absolutely nothing that would advise such skeptical reactions and paranoia.
For a true freshman, McGuffie has been given allot of playing time this year and is in a system that perfectly suits his skills and abilities. Why would he consider transferring? It seems like a great situation for him. I could be wrong, but I just do not have any reason to believe that Sam is going to be playing for a different team next year, and this article definitely does not suggest anything of that nature.
|6 years 24 weeks ago||Threet injured||
Apparently Threet got injured in the first half. This explains why he was replaced by Sheridan in the second half, which negates your argument to some degree.
|6 years 24 weeks ago||Indie||
A few Indie Favorites in no particular order:
|6 years 24 weeks ago||First Down Playcalling||
It is obvious to me that we need to mix in more pass plays on first down. I understand that Threet is not a very accurate quarterback at the moment, but that does not mean that we should run the ball everytime on a predictable run down (1st down) behind a horrible run blocking offensive line. When we do this, we put ourselves in 2nd and 9 and even 2nd and 12 or 14 territory on a consitent basis.
I am not suggesting that we have to throw the ball deep on first down. I simply think that it would be beneficial for us to mix in some quick slants and short passing routes on first down that will get us five or so yards consistently. We also have the kind of athletes (like Odoms and Shaw) who can make something big happen out of a short route. I dont think that this would be asking too much out of Threet (I think he can throw a five yard pass). Think about Ohio State's scheme against us two years ago--they spread our defense out and ran short passing routes. If we did this, it would nullify our weaknesses on the offensive line and give Threet opportunities to make throws that he can make on a consistent basis.
Two years from now we will be able to get away with running on first down consistently. In fact, in two years we can probably run the ball on every down and be just fine--overall our offense is going to be amazing. However, this year we just do not have the talent on the offensive line to run on a predictable run down and consistently gain yards, it is just not going to happen (maybe against Toledo).
|6 years 27 weeks ago||O-line and the future of our offense||
I personally am not overly worried about our offensive line over the next few years. O'Neil, Khoury, Barnum, Mealer (hopefully he will be feeling healthy and ready to go) and even Omameh (i think it is very encouraging that RichRod referenced him today as someone who may not redshirt) should be developed both from a physical standpoint and a mental standpoint by the begginning of next year. On top of that, we will have a lot of guys returning from our current offesive line this year, including our best offensive lineman-- Steve Schilling. With that said, over the next few years our offensive line should be a strength of our team and not a weakness. This is extremely encouraging since our skill players are so young and talented; the future is very bright from an offensive standpoint.
|6 years 27 weeks ago||Notre Dame||
Just look at Notre Dame's recruiting classes over the last few years despite them being awful. A down year does not usually translate into a bad recruiting class when you have a tradition of winning like Michigan does.
|6 years 27 weeks ago||Sam Bradford||
I am pretty sure that Sam Bradford started as a true freshman for Oklahoma last year. There have been a decent number of good true freshman quarterbacks over the last few years. Also, the fact that Forcier and Beaver are both planning to enroll early will help them develop and learn the offense much quicker. I am not saying that one of those two is going to be a lock to start for us next year, but I am saying that it is within the realm of possibility.