i see something more along the lines of the UCONN game. from what i've gathered, BG is a pass oreinted offense, which increases the chance of short, choppy drives ending in punts. The fact that their starter is hurt only increases the chances that they will have multiple 3 and outs. They will move the ball and they will score, but not nearly enough to keep pace.
Even so, whats the harm in threads like these? They sooth your nerves, give reason to be optimistic, and are more fun to read than Freep's junk.
If you have a problem with someone trying to convey his own reasons for being optimistic to the mgoblog community, then why are you even clicking on a thread titled "positivity"?
thats a good point. i usually get a ton of shit from my friends cause their all into carolina, vatech, or sec schools and michigan has been doing badly. Now, all they can talk about is how lucky we are to have denard.
I think the main reason is the national media's incompetence as a whole, not to take any luster off of denard's magnificence. ESPN and co.'s knowledge of each non prime-time game is essentially limited to highlights and stats, both of which Michigan has been piling up this year. The national media also loves a good story, which denard provides as well. Combine flashy offense, come from behind wins, and college football's top fanbase with unreal stats and the moniker "shoelace" and you have yourself a nation willing to overlook a "scare".
I know its hard to be optimistic after saturday, but i like the attitudes of these players (mostly Gordon), especially after you know they got chewed out after the game. I think they are giving their honest opinions, and if any happiness is to be derived in the aftermath of UMASS, the positive yet humble attitudes of the athletes involved go a long way in that regard.
if playing catch with your older brothers qualifies someone to be a michigan wr, then we have really regressed. as bad as gallon looks returning punts right now, better him than tate
fgs might be a stretch, but i think that leaving him in on 4th and managable at the opponents 40-50 yard line with the option to either punt or pass/run could yield some good results. his punting skills dont seem too shabby
I don't think it's fair to say that Tate is necessarily "great at nothing." He was extremely dangerous when rolling out, with great accuracy on the move, and he also had a knack for converting tough 3rd downs. I never had the "doom is coming" feeling on 3rd and 12 with Tate at the helm.
That said, he also isn't "good at everything" either, with most of his deficiencies being mental, not physical. He may not be powered by dilithium and he may not even have the arm strength to throw a pass to tacopants, but his main problem is his impatience in the pocket, which negates the prowess of our o-line and leads to increased chances for sacks, fumbles, interceptions, etc.
I think that is the main reason denard is the starter. he seems like he is less prone to improvisation, which, though exciting sometimes, can lead to awful plays (ohio state) as well
Recent Comments
i see something more along the lines of the UCONN game. from what i've gathered, BG is a pass oreinted offense, which increases the chance of short, choppy drives ending in punts. The fact that their starter is hurt only increases the chances that they will have multiple 3 and outs. They will move the ball and they will score, but not nearly enough to keep pace.
MICHIGAN 49-- BG 20
Even so, whats the harm in threads like these? They sooth your nerves, give reason to be optimistic, and are more fun to read than Freep's junk.
If you have a problem with someone trying to convey his own reasons for being optimistic to the mgoblog community, then why are you even clicking on a thread titled "positivity"?
thats a good point. i usually get a ton of shit from my friends cause their all into carolina, vatech, or sec schools and michigan has been doing badly. Now, all they can talk about is how lucky we are to have denard.
I think the main reason is the national media's incompetence as a whole, not to take any luster off of denard's magnificence. ESPN and co.'s knowledge of each non prime-time game is essentially limited to highlights and stats, both of which Michigan has been piling up this year. The national media also loves a good story, which denard provides as well. Combine flashy offense, come from behind wins, and college football's top fanbase with unreal stats and the moniker "shoelace" and you have yourself a nation willing to overlook a "scare".
I know its hard to be optimistic after saturday, but i like the attitudes of these players (mostly Gordon), especially after you know they got chewed out after the game. I think they are giving their honest opinions, and if any happiness is to be derived in the aftermath of UMASS, the positive yet humble attitudes of the athletes involved go a long way in that regard.
haha i definitely do this on NCAA11
haha i definitely just went on google to get an image with no thought about your year long membership or individuality...
and for that i apologize.
but i like my image
if playing catch with your older brothers qualifies someone to be a michigan wr, then we have really regressed. as bad as gallon looks returning punts right now, better him than tate
thats awesome. i love the warning....
haha but
really? which one?
haha but if u are really protective of your image then i can change it
fgs might be a stretch, but i think that leaving him in on 4th and managable at the opponents 40-50 yard line with the option to either punt or pass/run could yield some good results. his punting skills dont seem too shabby
I don't think it's fair to say that Tate is necessarily "great at nothing." He was extremely dangerous when rolling out, with great accuracy on the move, and he also had a knack for converting tough 3rd downs. I never had the "doom is coming" feeling on 3rd and 12 with Tate at the helm.
That said, he also isn't "good at everything" either, with most of his deficiencies being mental, not physical. He may not be powered by dilithium and he may not even have the arm strength to throw a pass to tacopants, but his main problem is his impatience in the pocket, which negates the prowess of our o-line and leads to increased chances for sacks, fumbles, interceptions, etc.
I think that is the main reason denard is the starter. he seems like he is less prone to improvisation, which, though exciting sometimes, can lead to awful plays (ohio state) as well