i like 'em both
- Member for
- 1 year 31 weeks
- View recent blog entries
|5 days 12 hours ago||Mediocre Defense||
A bad offense and a mediocre defense gets you a 3 and 4 record. If the defense was as good as we all hoped they would be Michigan would have had another win or two. The defense is not the biggest issue on this team, it is probably the best of the three phases of the game. But Mattison should not be immune from criticism, the defense has underperformed expectations.
|1 week 7 hours ago||Still misleading||
If you want to make a point about the strength of Michigan's opponents that is fine, but having Utah's best win over an 8th ranked UCLA is ridiculous. Utah may be a very good team, we can better view it at the end of the year but Utah, did not beat the 8th best team in the country. If you are going to put all the work into this post you could at least do a little second level research on their opponents.
|1 week 8 hours ago||Michigan||
The point is not that Michigan is losing to teams that may or may not be better than them, the point is Minnesota, Utah and Rutgers should not be better teams than Michigan. How low have your expectations fallen that Michigan is losing at home to Minnesota and Utah and on the road to an average at best Rutgers team and you are trying to justify how that is OK?
Michigan got hammered at home by both Utah and Minnesota, that should never happen. If you want mediocrity that is fine but Michigan should not be happy that all the teams they lost to happened to be decent. Where do you draw the line? If those teams are just "decent" and Michigan lost to them doesn't that make Michigan bad? I can't believe fans are actually trying to claim losing 4 of Michigans first six games is OK.
|1 week 8 hours ago||UCLA||
Yes, but it is far more beneficial to the OP's point to pick and choose which rankings he wants to use to better prove his point. Sure Stanford is currently ranked 23rd and UCLA is unranked, but if he uses their rankings when they lost, it makes those wins look better. But then he can turn around and use the 5th and 20th ranking for ND and Utah and ignore their rankings when we lost to them because that makes our losses look better. Why be consistent when it would make his whole post a lot less meaningful?
|1 week 11 hours ago||GRIII||
When I said no one expected him to stick around for 3+ years I was more talking about when he first got on campus. I was sure that Glenn was way too talented a player to stick around for 3 years based on all the recruiting hype. I think you can talk about what could have been for Glenn's first two years, but I find it difficult personally to say what could have been when I never had any initial expectations of Glenn being here 3 or more years.
|1 week 12 hours ago||My fear as well||
Even if Hoke wins 5 games, if Brandon is back I think Hoke is back and I don't know if student protests are enough to unseat Brandon. This may truly be the darkest timeline.
|1 week 13 hours ago||George Clinton||
Can the marching band do a George Clinton themed halftime show?
|1 week 13 hours ago||Be happy||
In my mind, the only "what could have been?" in that group is McGary. Nik and Trey worked their tails off for two years, become lottery picks and went pro, good for them. They gave a lot to U of M basketball and deserve to cash in.
While Glenn may not have had as big an impact, I don't think anyone expected him to stick around for 3+ years. He showed up, worked hard and while he never lived up to the potential we all thought he had he seemed to never complain, kept showing up and kept producing.
McGary is the big what if. He was quite possibly the most hyped recruit Michigan has gotten in awhile and we got only the briefest glimpse of his potential during that magical tournament run. We saw him sidelined with injuries than forced to go pro due to some archaic NCAA rule that has since been amended.
But this is college basketball, I know I thought early on that Beilein wouldn't bring in enough talent, and now he is and the talent is doing what they do in college basketball, leaving early. Maybe its because I have never had the same expectations for basketball as I do for football, but just enjoy the ride and the players that are here, don't think about the what could have beens.
|1 week 17 hours ago||Gamesmanship||
I am fine with jumping offsides to run the clock out, I don't believe anyone here has a problem with that. The issue was the joy you seemed to take in one of your players getting the green light from your coach to take an illegal shot at your opponent. Then when people tried to say breaking the rules to get some kind of psuedo revenge on a dirty player was not good, you proceeded to attack people and call them soft.
I would love a chance to smash the guy off the line if he was taking cheap shots at me all game, and if I had any skill at all I would do my best to bury him into the ground and smash him from snap to whistle. I would not stoop down to his level by using an otherwise good strategy of running down the clock to retun a cheap shot.
I appreciate the discussion and you not backing down or running away from people's criticism of your comments. I would just suggest being a bit more clear in your main point next time, because I agree with it, taking a meaningless late game false start to run time off the clock is an excellent strategy.
|1 week 18 hours ago||Fun||
Yes, darn those players for attempting to enjoy the game they spend all week preparing for. They should be spending more time reading books on mental fortitude than listening to their so called music.
In addition, you are right, no one around this blog cares about results. There hasn't been a constant calling for Hoke's job or numerous coaching search threads. People have been talking about their desire for more on-field dancing. Now that I know Hoke is OK with Norfleet dancing while waiting for a punt instead of having laser like focus waiting for guys to line up I want Hoke to get an extension. Lock him up with the Charlie Weis special.
|1 week 18 hours ago||Quality Justification||
This has been some wonderful justification on your part. Your coach flat out tells your offensive lineman to break the rules, but its ok becasue its "gamesmanship". What exactly is "gamesmanship"? Was the D-lineman's cheap shots gamesmanship? What other rule breaking is acceptable under the guise of "playing to win"? Let me guess, if you ain't cheating you ain't trying right?
Oh, but the other player was dirty you say, so its ok to be dirty as well. That is some wonderful logic there, everyone lies, cheats, steals and murders, so its ok if I do it too.
But now we are soft as a fanbase. Which doesn't even make any sense, but setting aside the oddness of calling an entire fanbase soft for not approving of cheating, how does the fanbases opinions permeate the program? My dissaproval or your coaches tactics is the reason Michigan is not good at football any longer? Why were they ever good then, I have never approved of that kind of action on the field.
Then we get to the winning. All actions are justifiable as long as your coach won. And one whole state championship in high scool football, there are no other coaches out there who can claim one of those. Actually, wait I played high school football (well I was on the team at least) for a coach with multiple state titles and at no point did they tell their players to blatently break the rules. How did he win so often if he was so soft that he didn't ask his players to break the rules to get in cheap shots at the other team?
Face it, your coaches actions were dirty, he may have been a wonderful guy otherwise, but he told your player to take cheap shots. If you are ok with it, thats fine, but don't try all these lame means to justify it or call people "soft" who don't approve of cheap shots.
|1 week 1 day ago||Freshman Year||
Did she look like Sarah Michelle Gellar?
|1 week 1 day ago||Avatar||
I am clearly a mutant with the ability to create identical duplicates of myself. This is what I look like now, or what I should look like. There are still a few dupes I sent out into the world that I haven't been able to track down and reabsorb yet. So if you see someone who looks suspiciously like me please let me know where so I can reabsorb them, there are some weird aspects of my personality out there.
|1 week 1 day ago||Family||
Well good work showing the dedication to it and having a family that understands. I don't know how you can commit that much time and energy to it though, I often struggle to get motivated enough to run 3ish miles every day.
|1 week 1 day ago||Ironman||
Nice work on finishing four of them. Did you have to forsake friends and family to glorify yourself like BlueinWisconsin said all Ironman participants do?
|1 week 1 day ago||Half Marathon||
Well congrats on completing your first half marathon anyways. I have only done one myself, I'd like to do another, but I don't think I have it in me to train for a full marathon.
With that being the case I can't imagine training for an event where you are basically working out for 9 to 12 hours straight, crazy. But congrats to Andy and Go Blue.
|1 week 1 day ago||Hoke's fault||
1) O-Line. What exactly do you want experience wise? He has two RS Jr's, and 2 RS So's. The Juniors have now been in the program 4 years, they are basically seniors, that is more than enough experience to form a good offensive line if there is any coaching involved.
2) WR. You have arguably the best WR in the Big Ten in Devin Funchess and some decent depth behind him, you don't need a gaggle of Sr's to have an effective WR core.
3) RB. You had a 5 star So, a 4 star So and RS Jr in Hayes and a Jr in Norfleet. Again, that is plenty of talent and experience, you are really hung up on this whole "Sr" though.
4) QB. You claim Gardner doesn't fit Hoke's system, exactly what system is that? Brady Hoke has pretty much shown through 4 years he has no idea what goes on with his offense and Michigan has no offensive identity. It is his responsibility to tailor his offense to his talent.
5) O-Line again. As for improvement, tough to get any worse than it was last year. I reserve my judgement until the season plays out to see if anyone on the front actually gets any better.
You claim its not Hoke's fault, but you also say its not RR's fault, so whose fault is it? Plenty of other coaches have demonstrated an ability to turn around major programs in far less than 5 years. Hoke has had ample time to succeed and if you honestly believe Hoke is a quality coach, just say it, but all the information you provided is nothing but the same tired excuses Hoke defenders have used every year he has been here, except you forgot to mention how well he recruits and how good of a guy he is.
|1 week 1 day ago||Rich Rod vs. Hoke||
I agree Hoke needs to be fired, his teams have clearly regressed, but the whole Rich Rod improvement thing is a little overblown. The man won 3 games his first season, it is impossible not to improve on that. No matter what happens the rest of the season, Brady Hoke's worst year will be at least as good if not better than Rich Rod's and his second worst year (last year) will be as good as Rich Rods best.
Circumstances were different for the two coaches, but the whole team improving thing isn't much of a feather in RR's cap when his team started out as bad as they were, there was nothing for them to do but get better.
|1 week 1 day ago||Hiring Coaches||
Not that I believe Hutch or Beilein should have much say in who the next football coach is, but what exactly makes Dave Brandon qualified then to hire the next coach? His total of one game played at the college football level? Or his time running a major pizza company?
I don't really know who U of M should involve in this next coaching search, but to claim Beilein and Hutch would bring nothing to the table in finding a quality football coach seems off-base when I am not sure what qualifications a normal AD, let alone Dave Brandon bring.
|1 week 2 days ago||DB's decision making||
Michigan finished in the top ten of the Directors Cup every year from 1997-1998 through 2008-2009 except for one. With 9 of those being top five finishes and a number 2 in 2003-2004.
Brandon took over as AD in January of 2010, in the four full years since then, 2010-2011 through 2013-2014 Michigan has a 10th place finish and a 4th place finish, the other two years missing the top ten.
I am not saying Brandon is the worst AD in the country, he may actually be doing some good things for non-revenue sports, but don't try to imply that he has done wonderful things outside of the football team. If anything these numbers show he has actually made the overall athletic department worse, at least when it comes to wins/losses. If you are going to try to keep claiming Brandon is some kind of great AD, at least bring some facts to the table, other then Brandon's only fact, the bottom line.
|1 week 2 days ago||Give it a rest already||
You are really hammering this implied cutting thing. The only person who has said it is you. You are right, there are no free lunches, but there are ways to get another QB instead of cutting the current one. Maybe not take 4 LB's last year, maybe keep Pallante on a grey-shirt. Maybe get another QB in 2013 instead of a long snapper or your 6th OLineman. Or how about another QB instead of a pair of fullback type guys in Shallman and Houma.
But you are right, everyone who says they should have attempted to address the QB issue is just a Hoke hater who wants SEC style cuts. Keep beating the drum against the cuts though, it realy makes you look reasonable and a person who actually takes the time to understand others points instead of simply attacking them. I can't wait to see you twist my point into how I want Bellomy cut.
|1 week 5 days ago||Best available||
I don't believe Hoke was the best available at the time. He may have been Dave Brandon's number one option, but that hardly made him the best available. Most of those guys would have been available when they hired Hoke as well, in addition to the numerous Les Miles rumors and making an actual run at Jim Harbaugh.
Hoke needs to be fired, Dave Brandon made a poor choice in hiring him. Whether or not you believed Rich Rod deserved another year, waiting for better coaching candidates was not a reason to give him a fourth year, just like its not a reason to give Hoke another year.
|2 weeks 17 hours ago||Hoke||
Yeah, what a bunch of terrible fans around here for wanting a bad coach fired. They must really not be true fans because they expect better from their football program than a potential/likely winless record in the Big Ten.
You are such a better person and a better fan for supporting a crappy product no matter what. I just wish I was as great a fan as you, but I guess I actually have expectations from the teams I root for and don't want a terrible coach running my favorite football team.
Keep showing up, keep calling us all fair weather fans, but if you were really a true fan you would root for a team like Illinois or Purdue. Its really easy to be a fan of the winningest program in college football history but those Illinois and Purdue fans are way better fans than you for supporting a terrible program no matter what.
|2 weeks 1 day ago||Harbaugh||
I agree with all your negatives about college football, but the NFL has negatives as well.
In college he doesn't have to worry about millinaire adults who may have zero interest in listening to anything he says. Stroking the ego's and dealing with owners and GM's who he may not always agree with on personnel decisions. His intensity will always wear out quicker in the NFL because guys can stay around for more than 4 - 5 years and they are professionals unlike college athletes.
I have no idea what Harbaugh wants or where he thinks is a better fit for him, but both the NFL and NCAA have downsides and upsides, he just needs to decide which is better for him. I doubt its Michigan, but that doesn't mean I won't keep holding out a sliver of hope until we have another coach.
|2 weeks 1 day ago||Did you know||
Well did you know that we landed on the moon?
|2 weeks 1 day ago||Fair weather||
I am not annoyed with his response, I actually appreciate his well thought out and non-insulting post. Unlike yours which added nothing to the conversation other to insult people who get offended when others question their fandom.
|2 weeks 1 day ago||Valid Point||
I appreciate the reasonable and measured response WolvinLA2. I probably wasn't as clear as I wanted to be about my main point.
If you just completely tune out any interest in a team that is doing poorly that makes you a fair weather fan. But I feel there are different levels or ways to support a team, going to the game can be a huge time commitment if you aren't going to enjoy it. A lot of the people around here who say they won't watch the games still go on MGoBlog and still follow the team if not watch every minute of every game like they would if the team was good.
In addition I just feel like to many people throw out the term fair weather fan like it is some kind of insult or it somehow makes them a better person that they watch all the games of teams that suck. I remember watching just about evrey game when the Tigers lost 119 as well, but that doesn't mean I am somehow a better fan because I am obsessed enough to do that.
Again, I realize you said doing it doesn't make you a bad person, and I appreciate the civil discourse, I just feel to many people use it as some kind of badge of honor. In addition I don't believe fan support has any influence on the state of the team or program, if that were the case how is Michigan or a place like Texas ever bad with all the crazy fans they have.
|2 weeks 1 day ago||Fair weather fans||
I just cannot agree with this attitude. Why would you support a sub-standard product? Why is it wrong to want to spend your Saturday doing something more enjoyable than watching one of your favorite teams lose again?
Spending 4+ hours of your Saturday, one of the few days most people have off of work, driving to, watching and than driving home from a Michigan football game to watch a team drop to 2 and 5 does not make you a better fan. Sports are a hobby, a luxury item, if people would rather spend their time doing something more enjoyable than watching Michigan football it does not give you the right to criticize their fan credentials and call them fair weather.
People showing up to the game will not magically help resurect this program. If that were the case why has the program cratered with the great fan interest we have had over the last 7 years? I could argue people continuing to show up regardless of the product on the field actually makes it less likely we see improvement, but I don't understand how people claim fan support will somehow create improvement for this team and this program. An improved team creates increased fan support, not the other way around.
|2 weeks 1 day ago||Michigan football and the Lions||
Michigan football has become like watching Lions games for me. I watch Lions games with no expectations of them winning and always expecting them to somehow find a new way to lose. With the Lions on Sunday you just knew they were going to miss yet another long field goal and the Bills led by Kyle Orton of all people would find a way to get the yards and make their long field goal to win.
It has become the same with Michigan, you just knew Darboh's catch wasn't going to be overturned and you knew Wile had no chance to make that FG. Its a good feeling, not tying so much emotions into the wins/losses of a team, but it is also depressing that I have had to become this way about Michigan. To paraphrase from other Lions fans, all I can say after the loss on Saturday is, same old Michigan.
|2 weeks 1 day ago||Triple Option||
This has nothing to do with feelingsball and everything to do with football as it exists right now. If the triple option was a viable offensive system there would be more than 1 team at a Big 5 school running it. In addition, the mid-major teams that run it (service academies mostly) run it because they have to. They are undersized and can't recruit the talent neccesary to compete so they run a different system to take advantage of other teams being unprepared.
Good teams do not win regardless of style, the good teams win because of their style. Good coaches take advantage of flaws and weaknesses in their opponents or their own teams strengths. There is a reason more and more teams run the spread and less teams run the triple option, because the option isn't as effective an offensive system.
If you honestly believe the triple option can be a viable offense for teams continually competing for conference championships and the playoff I don't know what else to tell you.