I'VE HAD JUST ABOUT ENOUGH OF YOU SONNY
- Member for
- 4 years 9 weeks
- View recent blog entries
- Karma value
|4 days 21 hours ago||Worst case||
OSU vs FSU in title game. FSU qb is charged and suspended. F-ing Ohio wins the national title. My dad declared this would happen three weeks ago. I told him he was being ridiculous. Now there is actually a reasonable chance this could happen. Only a life long browns fan could see this out come that early
|1 week 3 days ago||I guess It depends||
on what you are looking for. I can deal with some bad seasons here in there if it leads to some 11 - 1 or better seasons. My problem with Michigan Football for a long time (since the latter Bo years) has been that we are always good but never really come out on top. My years at U of M captured this best with 4 seasons of 8-4. We did have some great victories over OSU to ruin their perfect or nearly perfect which were a lot of fun. At the same time it was never our team playing for that perfect season.
As pointed out by Brian, 1997 was the rare exception. After awhile a team that always wins 8 to 10 games, but never 11 or 12, disappoints. It’s nice to not suck but nothing beats playing for a title. I suspect this is just as true for the players as it is for the fans. The Bo/Lloyd crowd always seemed too content with Michigan being competitive and having good seasons. Now that the Rich Rod experiment failed their belief in the old approach is only stronger and I fear we will be content with a bunch of 8-4 season with an occasional 2 loss season mixed in.
Personally I am not happy with this and if 5 years goes buy were you average 3 to 4 losses per season with maybe one 2 loss season mixed in it should be time for a change. Is this standard too high? Maybe, but how can you put together a string of dominance like OSU has put up if you don’t expect it?
Perhaps the new playoff system will change this and lead to higher expectations. I suspect anything more than 1 loss will keep you out of the playoff in most years. By that standard we would have played in two playoffs over that last 23 years. 1997 and 2006. Ohio State would have played in 7 and soon to be 8 over the same period.
If Hoke averages 3 losses per season over the next decade and does not lose more than 4 in any one year are you happy with that? What if we only make the playoff in one of those years and lose in the first game? Are you happy with that? I am not.
|1 week 3 days ago||2003?||
We went 10 and 3. A good year but is that our standard for what we are happy with? 2006 was a great year but it did end with two losses. The Michigan approach for the last 20 to 30 years seems to generate many good but not great years with a limited number of poor ones, though recent performance is sliding. It has not genrated sustained success since the 1970's. We have not put together a string of succesful years like OSU, Florida State, Alabama, USC or Texas have at varous times over the last two to three decades. We want to be a college football power who is in the mix for a chmapionship every year but that has not been the case for a very long time.
|1 week 3 days ago||This is just not true||
The 70's were a period of dominance. From 1980 to 2007 Michigan averaged 2.98 losses per year (I counted the 3 tie year as 1.5 losses) In only one year, 1997, did we go undefeated. Beyond that we had a 1 loss season once in 1985 (plus a tie). Did we manage to avoid many 5 loss plus season, yes we only had two. We also had 8 four loss seasons over this period. This was a sustained run of not being bad as opposed to being excellent.
So overall we had 2 one or fewer loss seasons during a 27 year period. What about the other college football powers? Alabama had 3 – it was really a down era for them though they have had 3 more since 2007, Oklahoma had 5, Florida State had 8, Notre Dame had 4 and Ohio State had 5.
If we concern ourselves with our chief rival we see they have had 12 seasons with 2 or fewer losses since 1980 (36% of the time). Michigan had 9 seasons of 2 losses or less over the same time period (33%) If we narrow this to the Tressel/Meyer time period they have had 8 seasons with two or fewer losses over a 13 year period (61.5%). That same period saw 1 national title win, 2 more losses in the national title game all while playing in 8 BCS bowl games. Michigan is not even close to putting together this sort of sustained high level success since 1980.
I just don’t understand this obsession with playing “Michigan football” (power running with a pro-style offense) by a segment of the fan base and the athletic department leadership. This approach has not generated dominance since the 1970’s. Who cares if a coach has a Michigan connection or runs a style of offence that we like. Why would we restrict our coaching candidates with these criteria? All this does is hold us back. I am not saying we need to run the Oregon offense but we also do not need to stay trapped in the past as represented by the current staff offensive approach.
|1 week 3 days ago||Reasons for a 4th year||
Legitimate: 1)he has a better record than RR 2) his recruiting is still strong 3) changing coaches every three years hurts the program and should be avoided if possible
|1 week 3 days ago||For any live event||
You need to add at least an hour to the recording or your asking for trouble
|1 week 3 days ago||Yes the glorious 90's||
We did win a national title which was awesome. We also went 8-4 four times and lost at least two games every year accept for 97 and 91 when we had 3 ties.
|1 week 4 days ago||Agree||
The speech is not about schemes. Unfortunately the people who run this program seem to feel that the only way to play Michigan football is to stick to Bo's schematic approach.
|1 week 4 days ago||FSU loss||
|1 week 4 days ago||And||
That makes you part of the problem
|1 week 4 days ago||It's been much longer||
Since Michigan has been anything other that above average at best
|1 week 4 days ago||It is fast||
I mean it been almost a decade since our last big ten championship in which time out rival has won four. The only time we beat OSU in the last decade is when they lost their coach in a scandal. Of course since they got a new coach they have lost 0 games. Our best record over the last 14 years was 11 and 2 which we accomplished twice. The last ten years have seen the following in terms of losses: 3 3 3 5 2 4 9 7 6 2 5 with this year at five and counting. By the way our chief rival has the following in terms of losses over the last decade 0 2 4 2 1 2 3 2 7 0 with possibly another 0 underway.
|1 week 4 days ago||Spread offense||
Will never work in the Big Ten........
|1 week 4 days ago||The problem||
Is the old guard in the athletic department and the old rich alumni that support them. The Michigan Football approach has generated mediocre performance since about 1980. We have consistently been one of the weakest performing traditional college football powers for years. We tried to change this with the Rich Rod hire and the traditionalist did everything they could to resist the change. There lack of support combined with RR's failings doomed that effort.
|1 week 5 days ago||Your right||
Clearly power football is the only way to be successful at Michigan. I mean it made us a dominate college football power in the ......well it's been a awhile......the 90's (other than 97 we typically lost 3 or 4 games per year) the 80's (average of three loses per year is not dominate) the 70's (there it is an average of 1 loss per year). Why are so many Michigan fans commuted to an approach that has not been consistently effective since 1980? RR did not work out but the current approach, the same approach used by Bo in the 80's, and Moeller and Carr in the 90's and 00's has also not been effective.
|1 week 5 days ago||ALWNF||
At least we're not Florida
|1 week 5 days ago||Biggest snowflake||
One more game and this season is over
|1 week 5 days ago||$800,000||
And a commitment to allow the new OC Latitude to run their system should be able to attract someone more effective than Borges
|1 week 5 days ago||Gardner||
|1 week 5 days ago||Begin||
The thread creation thread deletion fun that has characterized our Saturday evenings this season
|1 week 5 days ago||This||
Post could only occur in Michigan.
|3 weeks 4 days ago||6 and 3||
The why are we freaking out over 6 and 3 argument is bullshit and you know it. The team almost lost to Akron and Uconn who are both horrible. The team looks worse every week and staff has not been effective at trying to adapt to the current players capabilities. I don't disagree that firing hoke after this season would be a questionable decision. Replacing the offensive staff however is not unreasonable.
|3 weeks 4 days ago||Hoke's aggressiveness||
I am not sure it helps when he is so conservative relative to his offensive approach. An aggressive coach would be willing to forgo his philosophy in order to put the talent he has, not the talent he wants, in a position to win. Hoke/Borges want to run power but the current players are not capable of doing it. Hell they would not even stick with the quick passing game after it worked for the first drive of the second half. The current approach is not working. It's not just failure to execute. The current players are not capable of executing this offense. Throw caution to the wind and try something else for Christ sake.
|3 weeks 4 days ago||By the way||
Bo had 14 seasons with 2 or fewer losses in his 21 years. 9 of those occurred in his first 10 years. We have not really been a dominate program since the 1970's.
|3 weeks 4 days ago||We're just not that good||
3 2 3 4 3 3 3 5 2 4 9 7 6 2 5 5or6
|3 weeks 5 days ago||Long term damage||
A bad year is one thing but the appearance that the team has quit is a major concern. Not good for the long term health of the team
|3 weeks 6 days ago||Baylor||
If Baylor keeps winning like this it seems like they would jump Ohio and be in the mix for the national title game.
|4 weeks 4 days ago||The trick is getting a top coach||
I am coming around to the idea that Hoke is not the guy but if we pull the trigger too quick we create the impression among potential coaches that we have unreasonable expectations. A top coach knows it takes time to get players in to fit what you want to do. We also know that coaching changes result in holes in your recruiting classes. Meyer was able to avoid this because he is Urban Meyer. What coach is out there with the same level of clout as Meyer? Can we get that coach? If we don't we guarantee several more years of mediocrity. There is also the issue the both USC and perhaps Texas are in the coaching market this year. I know this is negative but if Hoke can't get it done we are most likely screwed for some time
|4 weeks 4 days ago||Next year||
Another bad year and they would be gone. That mean three more years to rebuild after that. Essentially we will need to write off the 2010's
|4 weeks 4 days ago||Do you really want to give up||
On Hoke and the entire coaching staff? A change in the OC is probably needed but hopefully we can turn things around next year. A disaster next year will unfortunately mean the end of Hoke. That means another 2 to 3 years of rebuilding along with the long term recruiting damage. All the while OSU will continue to dominate. I know we're angry with Hoke but a coaching change means no real hope of a big ten championship until 2017 or later.