Can we stop panicking now?

Submitted by Michigan_Mike on

I have seen many people on the MGoBoard in full blown panic mode because we did not blow out our opposition. Many of them are writing off our defense as a mirage and I just don't see it the same way. No team is going to ruthlessly destroy every opponent with exacting precision. 

Alabama struggled to put away a very pedestrian Ole Miss team earlier this season. Just today we have had Louisville struggle with Virginia, Washington need a punt return to beat Utah, Ohio State in a dog fight with Northwestern and Baylor is in a one possession game in the 4th quarter with Texas.

Today's game featured Michigan State put together one complete drive primarily on the back of their one legitimate NFL talent, LJ Scott. After that they struggled to put together a real drive until they were down 20 deep in the 4th quarter. During this time we had the Lewis pick leading to a FG for us, the 7 plays inside the 10 yard line stuffed and a whole lot of nothing from the guys in Green. Once they were well behind they put together two very fluky drives aided by some very iffy penalties that allowed them to "make it close." Remember this was not a one possession game at any point in the second half until there was only one second remaining. Our team is still very good and our defense dominated Michigan State with the exception of their first drive and garbage time. I am very happy with the way our guys performed and am excited to see them take on the rest of our schedule.

MGoBoard

SalvatoreQuattro

October 29th, 2016 at 8:27 PM ^

It is really about wanting to see this team get better.

We have seen collapses from UM defenses all the way back to 2006 when UM folded vs Ball State.

There is no good reason why this defense should have been so poorus today. MSU is not good offensively. They have weaknesses all over the places. How could UM allow them to do the one thing they can do? Just inexplicable to me.



Sent from MGoBlog HD for iPhone & iPad

Joined: 11/30/2010

MGoPoints: 79209

Reader71

October 29th, 2016 at 8:51 PM ^

It is very easily explained. Football is played by human beings. College football is played by young ones. Human beings are not the most consistent creatures. Sometimes, they make mistakes. Great players have bad days. Football is watched by human beings. Sometimes, human emotion clouds human judgment. Sometimes, the human spectators have unrealistic expectations, such as expecting a defense to act as if they do not have the advantage of a lead and a clock ticking away. Your comment reads like that of a guy who has never played competitive sports. This is a great defense.

Joined: 08/30/2009

MGoPoints: 22968

SalvatoreQuattro

October 29th, 2016 at 9:00 PM ^

All due respect but how does that explain the first couple of drives?

And every American makes comments on things they have no direct experience at. According to you 99% of Americans should criticize governmental policy because no one has the direct experience.

How utterly ridiculous.

As we have heard from Bo, Mo, and Carr run defense is the foundation of all Michigan defenses. What I saw today was a Michigan defense failing to stop the run.



Sent from MGoBlog HD for iPhone & iPad

Joined: 11/30/2010

MGoPoints: 79209

Reader71

October 29th, 2016 at 9:14 PM ^

I am not explaining the first two drives. How about this: how do the first two drives tell us anything about future performances? I ask because you want to throw away 7 games of evidence in support of this defense, simply because this was not a great performance. Maybe you are right, and this defense will prove to not be great -- you do not have the evidence to support your claim. And you're surprised that people disagree? And I don't mean to suggest that you shouldn't talk about football, so please don't get defensive and/or put words in my mouth. I don't even say that your lack of playing experience makes you wrong. I only mean to say that people who have played are usually less emotional about individual performances than you are at the moment.

Joined: 08/30/2009

MGoPoints: 22968

SalvatoreQuattro

October 29th, 2016 at 9:25 PM ^

The UCF game concerned me too.

Seeing UM give up over 200 yards rushing. I was not used to seeing that until the RR era. I suppose I have PTSD from that.

I am not surprised that the game was closer than expected. I actually expected that. It was the means. I did not think LJ Scott would run so well.

Just not used to see that from good to great UM defenses.



Sent from MGoBlog HD for iPhone & iPad

Joined: 11/30/2010

MGoPoints: 79209

Reader71

October 29th, 2016 at 9:55 PM ^

And everyone (I'd imagine) would agree with you if you were going on about this particular performance. It wasn't great. Where everyone disagrees is when you see this as an omen. Might I suggest that the reason this is troubling you so much is that it is out of character for this team? And doesn't that itself suggest that this defense has been great so far? Again, you might be right and this might be the first sign. But you don't get bonus points for being the first to guess it, especially when the stats are not on your side. There have been troubling spots for the defense, sure. But we were so far ahead of the #2 defense in almost all metrics that they must have some trouble spots, too.

Joined: 08/30/2009

MGoPoints: 22968

M-Go-Away

October 29th, 2016 at 9:37 PM ^

Because going on the road in the Big Ten is not easy. Michigan won handily, save the last few minutes of 'prevent' time, against, dare-I-say, one of our biggest Rivals. Stop acting like the rest of the season has been smoke and mirrors. In the face of your nonsense, the current stats for Michigan's defense qualify them as elite. For the record, these stats include Colorado and UCF. The Defense is responsible for winning ball games and they provided more than enough today to accomplish that. Stop being you and reassess what you're trying to accomplish because your schtick is annoying.

Joined: 08/16/2011

MGoPoints: 243

trueblueintexas

October 29th, 2016 at 9:25 PM ^

Salvatore, you have a history of trying to make logical arguments. Message boards can be easy pickens for someone like you. So when all you can come back with is "they won the championship so they have more leeway", I know you finally have nothing more to say. Rest easy tonight and I hope the sun is shining wherever you wake up tomorrow.

Joined: 11/10/2008

MGoPoints: 36771

Logan

October 29th, 2016 at 10:03 PM ^

I don't know, his argument is that if Michigan's defense were elite, it would have utterly dominated MSU's offense given the issues they have, not taking into account any number of game-specific variables. His argument isn't based on any objective, verifiable data that an elite defense (whatever that means) always completely obliterates inferior competition. It's not a logical argument, it's just, like, his subjective opinion man. He can keep going on and on, but that's all it is.

Joined: 09/20/2009

MGoPoints: 2174

jmblue

October 29th, 2016 at 8:58 PM ^

By the standards of 1985 or 1997, even MSU looks extremely diverse offensively.  Even the most "manball" of teams utilize the shotgun, some zone reads, three or four-WR formations - things that were pretty exotic back then.

It's true that the rush D had an shaky day, with some poor tackling - though it came up big in the redzone.  But the pass defense was flawless for the game's first 50 minutes.  It only gave up yards down the stretch when any contact was drawing a flag.

Joined: 11/07/2008

MGoPoints: 102889

michfn2

October 29th, 2016 at 8:34 PM ^

Just that we were the biggest game on State's schedule and they sold out 200% in an effort to win and they failed. It's called a rivalry game for a reason genius. Unless you want to make some half-ass, dumbshit comment that emotion in college football doesn't matter.



Sent from MGoBlog HD for iPhone & iPad

Joined: 09/12/2015

MGoPoints: 3110

SalvatoreQuattro

October 29th, 2016 at 8:38 PM ^

Oh, really? So UM did not play all that hard?

Emotion has many here stated before the game means little once the game gets going. Well, the game happened and MSU ran for over 200 yards.

It sounds to me like UM did not prepare as well as they ought to do. MSU was running basic running plays and still picked up some huge yardage.

MSU was not doing anything spectacular.



Sent from MGoBlog HD for iPhone & iPad

Joined: 11/30/2010

MGoPoints: 79209

michfn2

October 29th, 2016 at 8:47 PM ^

Wasn't what I was saying, I was saying that they played their best game of the year against UM's D.
Plus It's easy to put up 200 yds rushing when the refs decide not to call blatantly obvious holds. Even with your limited intellect you should realize that much.



Sent from MGoBlog HD for iPhone & iPad

Joined: 09/12/2015

MGoPoints: 3110