First, let DR rehab and get completely healthy. No need to throw him to the dogs against lesser foes (i.e. anybody other than UW and tOSU).
Take the high-risk, high-reward defensive approach outlined previously.
This will yield a victory against tOSU (more likely than UW) because Pryor isn't a good passer AND UM's defense all said and done is fast -- combined with the high risk high reward approach can realistically force tosu to win via the air (which cannot happen). UM's offense is quite capable of putting 30+ on the bucks.
Both guys are good. Both are different. Both are effective. Neither is durable (if they get repeatedly tackled).
So make every defense out there shit bricks by using them if not on alternate series, at least alternating by quarter.
If Forcier doesn't come in yesterday, the game isn't close. And that is NOT an indictment on Denard, who was amazing. It's just that no team can possibly scheme and practice to stop both these guys effectively. We saw that yesterday.
Easiest way to justify this claim is to focus just on the Big ten teams. Ohio state is a dominant team and did beat a legitimate ooc opponent, so their ranking is justifiable.
Wisconsin is a pretty horrible team (struggles against even semi-legit teams like unlv, sjsu) and has absolutely no business ranked where they are.
Iowa lost to a decent AZ team. Iowa did look like the superior team and lost because of multiple freak plays but that not withstanding they did lose, so their ranking above UM is unjustified.
Michigan has played and won against legit ooc teams.
Based on what I see, the top B10 teams should be ranked in the order: tOSU, UM, UW, Iowa. Despite ranking UW above Iowa for now, Iowa will be tougher...in fact, expect an easy win against UW.
Conclusion: UM should be ranked where UW is currently.
Here go my meager points but at least the sacrifice is made at the altar of reason, not melodrama.
Step back from the ledge and it becomes apparent that there isn't anywhere near this level of outrage on the Buckeye boards (I checked scout). Now why might that be? Bitter as it is to acknowledge, they are secure in their current perch at the top, while fans here thirst for The Game merely for the one sure shot at limelight (and sweet after taste) by perhaps ruining the Bucks' season just short of the championship threshold. IMO, if the positions were reversed, i.e., Ohio State was scrounging near the bottom of the league, there would not be near this level of hysteria (on this board) for a regular season-ender against tosu.
Accept this point of view and it becomes apparent that re-scheduling The Game isn't the dire apocalypse it's being made out to be. Once UM's fortunes reverse, it will matter little when it is played.
Most of you guys seem to be aspiring samurais of the kind that would rather fight a hated rival and risk death instead of pocketing sure victory. Why the hell wouldn't you take a team that you practically own like Minny or Wisky or even PSU thereby improving odds of victory?
Why not have the 2nd team (including promising freshmen like Gardner) perfect a handful of situational plays and unleash them when the appropriate situation lines up? The opponent has no scouting info giving reasonable chance for success, and the 2nd team players get live game experience. It's always puzzled me why no team does this.
"Are you suggesting we be cautious early? IMO you have to go flat out to win every game possible, whatever it takes. There aren't enough games in the season to cruise early, especially after what we have been through the last two years."
Only sort of. MSU and ND are rivalry games but ought NOT to be treated as such. Instead do whatever it takes to continually improve over the season and peak towards the latter half -- and do anything to knock off the bucks. IMO, the same mediocre W-L record can prognosticate very very different futures depending on who you beat.
"So, a mediocre record that started hot and ended cold or a mediocre record that started cold but built momentum and scored a key victory are of equal value in determining RR's fate. "
Unique perspective but IMO misplaced. :-) A slew of close losses (even to mediocre teams) early on is more than off-set by big late season wins. Are seriously suggesting that in 2009 you would not have preferred exchanging a loss against Indiana or ND for a victory against the Bucks? If that had happened, I bet the Wolverines are ranked pre-season and RR has already pulled legitimate recruits that Tressel wants.
Losses to MSU, and ND will have nearly zero impact if RR wins against the Big-ten cream of crop particularly OSU. If I were RR, I would invest heavily (emotionally at least) in beating the bucks and treat msu/nd (bragging rights be damned) like just another game.
RR I agree will beat Iowa handily this year. Last year, Iowa won only because of home-court advantage bolstered with superior overall talent, RR actual did a fine coaching job.
Secondly, RR's style of play (no-huddle ground game) is perfect to beat a team like Iowa particularly because they do not have elite RBs and instead depend Stanzi. Passing game stops the clock. Every Stazi 3-and out puts Iowa's D back on the field. This is a big deal 'coz Iowa does not rotate their D-line, nor do they have good backs (to keep the clock going to rest their D when Stanzi is on the field).
OTOH, this hurry up mode could be suicidal against tosu (with their grind out backs and rotating D-line).
I though my answer was implied in the question :-) Yes, if he beats Iowa and tosu finishing strong (with a bowl win), I would definitely keep him despite the overall 7-6. In my eyes, such a performance would be a precursor to a breakout 2011 season (double digit wins).
OTOH, if he does the premature peaking again in 2010 and/or loses all the big ones, I would be inclined to at least consider the possibility of replacement even with let's say 8-5 overall.
Last year, RR started out hot but faded miserably in a very Spartanesque manner. In 2010, I suspect RR will do things differently to avoid premature peaking, and just might knock off some highly rated teams later in the season including Iowa (particularly since the game is in AA.) That said, is RR's job secure if he starts out slow but finishes hot...with a piss-poor 6-6 record but including wins over Iowa and Ohio-state? IMO, this is a strong possibility because almost every program trying to make the transition from bad to good passes through a phase/season with a demoralizing overall record but one that conceals key victories. So would you keep RR with such a season in 2010?
Last year, RR started out hot but faded miserably in a very Spartanesque manner. In 2010, I suspect RR will do things differently to avoid premature peaking, and just might knock off some highly rated teams later in the season including Iowa (particularly since the game is in AA.)
That said, is RR's job secure if he starts out slow but finishes hot...with a piss-poor 6-6 record but including wins over Iowa and Ohio-state? IMO, this is a strong possibility because almost every program trying to make the transition from bad to good passes through a phase/season with a demoralizing overall record but one that conceals key victories. So would you keep RR with such a season in 2010?
Recent Comments
Easiest way to justify this claim is to focus just on the Big ten teams. Ohio state is a dominant team and did beat a legitimate ooc opponent, so their ranking is justifiable.
Wisconsin is a pretty horrible team (struggles against even semi-legit teams like unlv, sjsu) and has absolutely no business ranked where they are.
Iowa lost to a decent AZ team. Iowa did look like the superior team and lost because of multiple freak plays but that not withstanding they did lose, so their ranking above UM is unjustified.
Michigan has played and won against legit ooc teams.
Based on what I see, the top B10 teams should be ranked in the order: tOSU, UM, UW, Iowa. Despite ranking UW above Iowa for now, Iowa will be tougher...in fact, expect an easy win against UW.
Conclusion: UM should be ranked where UW is currently.
Here go my meager points but at least the sacrifice is made at the altar of reason, not melodrama.
Step back from the ledge and it becomes apparent that there isn't anywhere near this level of outrage on the Buckeye boards (I checked scout). Now why might that be? Bitter as it is to acknowledge, they are secure in their current perch at the top, while fans here thirst for The Game merely for the one sure shot at limelight (and sweet after taste) by perhaps ruining the Bucks' season just short of the championship threshold. IMO, if the positions were reversed, i.e., Ohio State was scrounging near the bottom of the league, there would not be near this level of hysteria (on this board) for a regular season-ender against tosu.
Accept this point of view and it becomes apparent that re-scheduling The Game isn't the dire apocalypse it's being made out to be. Once UM's fortunes reverse, it will matter little when it is played.
Most of you guys seem to be aspiring samurais of the kind that would rather fight a hated rival and risk death instead of pocketing sure victory. Why the hell wouldn't you take a team that you practically own like Minny or Wisky or even PSU thereby improving odds of victory?
"Are you suggesting we be cautious early? IMO you have to go flat out to win every game possible, whatever it takes. There aren't enough games in the season to cruise early, especially after what we have been through the last two years."
Only sort of. MSU and ND are rivalry games but ought NOT to be treated as such. Instead do whatever it takes to continually improve over the season and peak towards the latter half -- and do anything to knock off the bucks. IMO, the same mediocre W-L record can prognosticate very very different futures depending on who you beat.
"So, a mediocre record that started hot and ended cold or a mediocre record that started cold but built momentum and scored a key victory are of equal value in determining RR's fate. "
Unique perspective but IMO misplaced. :-) A slew of close losses (even to mediocre teams) early on is more than off-set by big late season wins. Are seriously suggesting that in 2009 you would not have preferred exchanging a loss against Indiana or ND for a victory against the Bucks? If that had happened, I bet the Wolverines are ranked pre-season and RR has already pulled legitimate recruits that Tressel wants.
Losses to MSU, and ND will have nearly zero impact if RR wins against the Big-ten cream of crop particularly OSU. If I were RR, I would invest heavily (emotionally at least) in beating the bucks and treat msu/nd (bragging rights be damned) like just another game.
Good point. The ranking could be somewhat defensible if BK wasn't on it (and nor were any coaches with less than 5 seasons).
RR I agree will beat Iowa handily this year. Last year, Iowa won only because of home-court advantage bolstered with superior overall talent, RR actual did a fine coaching job.
Secondly, RR's style of play (no-huddle ground game) is perfect to beat a team like Iowa particularly because they do not have elite RBs and instead depend Stanzi. Passing game stops the clock. Every Stazi 3-and out puts Iowa's D back on the field. This is a big deal 'coz Iowa does not rotate their D-line, nor do they have good backs (to keep the clock going to rest their D when Stanzi is on the field).
OTOH, this hurry up mode could be suicidal against tosu (with their grind out backs and rotating D-line).
I though my answer was implied in the question :-) Yes, if he beats Iowa and tosu finishing strong (with a bowl win), I would definitely keep him despite the overall 7-6. In my eyes, such a performance would be a precursor to a breakout 2011 season (double digit wins).
OTOH, if he does the premature peaking again in 2010 and/or loses all the big ones, I would be inclined to at least consider the possibility of replacement even with let's say 8-5 overall.
Last year, RR started out hot but faded miserably in a very Spartanesque manner. In 2010, I suspect RR will do things differently to avoid premature peaking, and just might knock off some highly rated teams later in the season including Iowa (particularly since the game is in AA.) That said, is RR's job secure if he starts out slow but finishes hot...with a piss-poor 6-6 record but including wins over Iowa and Ohio-state? IMO, this is a strong possibility because almost every program trying to make the transition from bad to good passes through a phase/season with a demoralizing overall record but one that conceals key victories. So would you keep RR with such a season in 2010?