Michigan Monday up at O-Zone

Michigan Monday up at O-Zone

Submitted by StephenRKass on November 9th, 2010 at 9:29 AM

Michigan Monday is up at the zone.  Here's the link: http://www.the-ozone.net/football/2010/ByeWeek/michiganmonday.html.  This gives us the perspective of the enemy.

So, regarding the offense, he writes,

I said last week that the main reason Michigan scores so many points is because they have to. The Illinois game would be Exhibit A. don't tell me the only reason Illinois scored 65 points was because the game went into triple overtime. Please show me the rule that states that you must allow touchdowns in overtime.
and also
If the score was reversed, would you still be marveling at your offense?
More harsh are comments on the defense, and bad coaching at Illinois:
The Wolverines are now allowing 42.6 points per game in conference play. This must be what it feels like to be a crime scene reporter. The gore was everywhere. Blood dripped from all four walls. Tendons twirled from a swirling ceiling fan. The Scheelhaase Massacre will not soon be forgotten. Illinois scored 45 points in regulation and that was with Ron Zook playing Tresselball in the third quarter and going scoreless. On the Illini's first drive in the third quarter, Zook chose to punt on fourth and one from Michigan's 48-yard line. At this point in the game, Illinois had carried the ball 29 times for 189 yards. The chances that Michigan was going to stop them from picking up one yard was pretty slim—especially since they hadn't done it on any of the previous 29 carries. Basically, Zook blew it. Even if they get stopped, did it really even matter where Michigan got the ball? The Wolverines had five touchdown drives that were over 70 yards and didn't even last three minutes. Two of those drives didn't even make it ONE minute. Why would you suddenly decide to play a game of field position when you were so clearly in a shootout? Oh, that's right, you're RON ZOOK! If it had only been that one instance, maybe it wouldn't have been so bad. but on the very next drive, Zook was once again faced with a fourth and one, this time from the Michigan 22-yard line. He chose to kick a field goal. They missed.
Regardless, we should still beat Purdue. The offense is awesome. And whatever happens this year, I'm really looking forward to next year.

Going to Columbus.

Going to Columbus.

Submitted by Purkinje on November 9th, 2010 at 9:28 AM

So here I am, a senior at U of M, football fanatic whose first game as a student was Appalachian State, haven't seen OSU beaten since I was a freshman in high school, haven't seen MSU beaten or been to a bowl since I lived in Markley, and other Generally Depressing Things.

But now it's all changing; we're on the way back up. We're bowl eligible, which is all I can really ask for from this season, so everything else is just icing on the cake. All the same, I have a really good feeling that we might take two of our final three games... And I've never been to the 'Shoe before. I must represent my colors, and watch Denard and our spread run all over the Buckeye defense, regardless of The Game's outcome.

I'm going with one other guy, and I seek some MGoAdvice on the matter. We can't afford to buy two tickets together, but we can buy seats separately. For those of you who have ventured south before, how strictly are seating assignments checked / enforced in Ohio Stadium? We would prefer to sit together to better defend against the hordes of scarlet-clad white trash, but we're willing to fend for ourselves. Aside from the seating thing, how likely is it that a car with a Michigan license plate gets vandalized in whatever parking situation we have to go into? Would it be advisable to spend $40 and rent one for the day (with insurance) just in case?

What role does "character" play into the Heisman selection?

What role does "character" play into the Heisman selection?

Submitted by Captain Obvious on November 9th, 2010 at 9:10 AM

All the Cam Newton allegations got me thinking - at what point do off the field incidents take you out of Heisman contention?  Is character a stated requirement?

Clearly, off the field issues can matter at some point (see Reggie Bush).  Do the off the field issues have to be so serious that they destroy a person's eligibility to play in games to kill a person's Heisman chances/award?  I was trying to think of an instance where a clearly more talented player was passed over for the explicit reason of characted but can't think of anyone.

NOTE: this is not a thread to condemn Newton for the allegations against him; he is innocent until proven otherwise (other than laptop stealing).  I'm of the personal opinion that we should be very careful in who we select because these guys become the face of college football, role models for tons and tons of kids, etc.  But that's neither here nor there.

I Want To Believe

I Want To Believe

Submitted by UM Indy on November 9th, 2010 at 8:13 AM

I want to believe that this team will run the table after gaining that much needed 6th win and confidence boost.  A 9-3 season would be an unbelievable achievement.

PURDUE - I have prematurely and erroneously chalked this game up in the win column the last two years and am guilty of doing so again this year.  We must win this game and punish Danny Hope severely for being an absolute asshole.  I think we get the job done in West Lafayette.

WISCONSIN - It's scary to think of Monte Ball and John Clay with a head of steam coming at Vinopal and Kovacs.  This will be a very difficult game to win, but we usually play well against Wisconsin.  Toss up.

OHIO STATE - I want to see our offense go off in Ohio Stadium - a torrent of yards and points like those bastards have never seen.  If Pryor plays his yakety sax like he's oh so capable of doing, an upset here is not out of the question.  Unlikely though.

Realistically, I can only get to 7-5.  Talk me up.   

OT - More heat for Cam Newton (cheating scandals at UF)

OT - More heat for Cam Newton (cheating scandals at UF)

Submitted by myrtlebeachmai… on November 9th, 2010 at 1:15 AM

The article claims he was up for significant disciplinary action, and left school, wasn't even enrolled for the semester he "transfered" to JUCO. 

http://msn.foxsports.com/collegefootball/story/Source-says-Newton-left-Florida-after-cheating-scandal

Jason Ford TD

Jason Ford TD

Submitted by Monocle Smile on November 9th, 2010 at 12:35 AM

This is something that I thought would be addressed, but hasn't yet.

On the long option pitch to Jason Ford that rumbled into the end zone after a Mouton whiff, there was something obvious happening away from where the camera would probably be focused. Notice that James Rogers nails Ford right at the goal line. From my vantage point in the front row of the band, it was exceptionally clear that Rogers would have taken Ford down around the 3...except an official STEPPED IN HIS WAY and Rogers ran into him and ended up going around and arriving late. Anyone have this moment on film?

There's really just no accountability for these kinds of these and are chalked up to "bad luck."

UFR Predicitons

UFR Predicitons

Submitted by AC1997 on November 8th, 2010 at 11:33 PM

On weeks when Michigan wins an exciting game I always wish there was a way for Brian to magically post the UFRs on Monday morning.  Instead I refresh my browser frequently craving more information about the game.  So let's discuss what we expect to see when we see the official UFR later this week.

DEFENSE:

Is it possible to feel better about your defense in a week where they gave up 65 points and 500+ yards?  I thought that the six punts, the 3-and-outs, the bad field position, and even a rare turn-over showed some signs of progress against a decent offense.  Obviously they still are a woeful unit that won't turn the corner until at least 2011, but we're craving small signs.  Here's what I'm guessing we'll see in Brian's UFR scores:

  • Roh - Slightly positive (pressure, generated holding calls)
  • Martin - Slightly positive, not beast like (still playing hurt)
  • RVB - Slightly positive (his usual score, just above zero)
  • Mouton - Around zero (typical Mouton with tons of highs and tons of negatives)
  • Demens - Significant positive (some very solid plays and looked like a true MLB)
  • Fitzgerald/Ezeh - Significant negative (some blown plays, nothing positive.)
  • Rogers - Slight negative? (almost invisible despite man coverage, which is good for him)
  • Avery - Significant negative (actually did some good things and nearly made a play on the long TD, but was probably to blame for at least one wheel route)
  • T. Gordon - Slight positive (good pressure, no blown coverage?)
  • Vinopal - Slight positive if Brian gives him lots of credit for the 3rd and 1

Obviously that can't be right.  That's too many predictions of positive scores for that game.  I guess when you grow to expect horrible play, you find reasons to focus on the small amounts of positive play.  What am I missing?

OFFENSE:

I don't think there's much point in going player-by-player on a day when they put up 67 points and 676 yards.  There were some more drops by the WR that really hurt, but overall you can't complain too much.  Smith had his best day.  The OL looked pretty great all day, though Lewan probably comes in negative due to the penalties. 

 

What else do people expect to see?

Another reason to love Denard

Another reason to love Denard

Submitted by GoblueNate on November 8th, 2010 at 10:55 PM

Not that we need another reason to root for him, but I am reliving the Ill game by watching WolverineHistorian's compilation of the game.  In the 2nd quarter (Part 1) on a handoff to V. Smith (7:57 video/10:21 2nd Q), Denard tries to cut block the backside LB flowing down the line.  Just trying to give them one less defender to worry about.  I think his willingness to help shows how much he and the team wants to win, and what they are willing to do.  Also, just another reason we all love rooting for this team.

 

Go Blue!!!