Positives from the Game
Yes, the lost sucks. We beat ourselves, and Iowa did what they needed to do to make sure it stayed as an L in our column. This post is NOT meant to take the pain or suckage that comes with losing.
However, there were some positives to build on:
- Stephen Hopkins. This boy needs to be our starting RB. Speed + power. He is the type of Big Ten back we need to have.
- Rocko Khoury. Last year, Molk goes down and everything imploded. This year, Molk goes down, we hiccup and recover to go for another 300+ yards. That is thanks to our Coaches for building depth for the first time in AGES at linemen.
- Demens. Not perfect, but attacked instead of sitting back. It was nice change of pace.
- Stonum. He started to become a "give me the damn ball, I am carrying this team on my sholders" type of WR we had hoped him to be. Secondary to that was Hemmingway. These are the types of guys we need to have around to win.
- Forcier. Yes, he had two picks where Iowa had amazing zone coverage PLUS pressure with only rushing four. However, he came in and picked Iowa apart, and needs to start seeing more PT. Not saying he needs to be the ONLY one to get snaps, however he is a far better passer then Denard and we will need that again before the year is over, especially if we get a consistent run game going with Hopkins.
- Lewan. Yes, his stupidity cost us drives. However, he neutralized one of the best DEs in the country all day long... who then turned around and terrorized Huyge. If he gets himself under control, he is Jake Long reincarnate, with some talent along the rest of the line.
October 16th, 2010 at 7:54 PM ^
When we went back down by 21 and Forcier got us back to 14 and then 7, the crowd noise was impressive. It was a definite upgrade from last week.
October 16th, 2010 at 7:55 PM ^
especially because it looked like a lot of people left early
October 16th, 2010 at 7:56 PM ^
You said it before I could.
I haven't heard the stadium get that loud since the Wisco game back in 2008 when we came back to win.
October 16th, 2010 at 8:39 PM ^
Yeah, with half the student section gone, those were probably the most exciting/intense ~20-30 minutes I've had int he big house.
Crowd was so positive and energetic, need to carry that into the next home game.
God this team is so young and fun and likable and emotional.
October 16th, 2010 at 9:08 PM ^
...is like dating a 400 lb woman and bragging about the size of her breasts. C'mon, we got killed two weeks in a row by significantly better teams. Don't let the scores or yardage comparisons fool you. The games weren't that close.
October 16th, 2010 at 9:24 PM ^
We played like crap and we still were within one possession of the #15 team in the 4th quarter. Our offense put up about twice the normal yardage and nearly three times as many points as Iowa usually allows. This was without our starting QB and our most consistent O-lineman for a significant chunk of the game.
We still have a good shot at 8 wins for this season, and we should be pretty dangerous next season. Nobody expected us to contend for the Big Ten this year, even before the injuries started to pile up. The team is making progress. I see that as a positive, even though the losses are painful.
October 16th, 2010 at 10:28 PM ^
are worth jack shit.
October 17th, 2010 at 12:24 AM ^
Yeah, but, like, her boobs are really big.
October 16th, 2010 at 7:56 PM ^
Don't forget about Tom Pomarico. He did an excellent job long-snapping on the extra points.
October 16th, 2010 at 7:56 PM ^
Our receivers are monsters.
October 16th, 2010 at 8:02 PM ^
Those three straight completions from Forcier to Stonum for first downs were really impressive. That is the kind of execution that we need to be capable of with regularity.
October 16th, 2010 at 7:56 PM ^
Our O torched one of the best Ds in the country and has yet to be stopped by anything but its own miscues.
Our D forced 5 punts.
We outgained them by 140 yards.
If we catch one of the Rick Sixes or recover Smith's fumble or if they drop one of our picks, there's a decent chance we win.
October 16th, 2010 at 8:56 PM ^
We outgained them because they played on a 50 yard field all day and we played on an 80-90 yard field. That's not a big picture positive.
October 16th, 2010 at 10:00 PM ^
I get that you're in angry torch-and-pitchfork mode, but don't try to turn that into a negative. Iowa came into this game giving up an average of 242 yards and 10 points per game. We more than doubled both of those. That's a good thing.
October 16th, 2010 at 7:58 PM ^
Who said RichRod couldn't recruit in state? It was great to see him step in and play like a Michigan man today.
Depth, it is building.
October 16th, 2010 at 7:59 PM ^
When he's on he's on and throws one hell of an accurate ball, but the turnovers are killing.
I'm still glad to see the kid get another chance and play alright. Great leadership on the sidelines pumping the team up. He's growing up, that reflects well on Coach Rod.
October 16th, 2010 at 7:59 PM ^
Sucked, plain and simple, we had them down 7-0, with more than enough stops on D to warrant a W, and our O callapsed.
October 16th, 2010 at 8:20 PM ^
Coming into this game, Iowa was giving up 242 yards per game. We had 522.
Coming into this game Iowa was giving up 10.2 points per game. We had 4 turnovers and put up 28 points.
We had 187 yards rushing on 4.5 per carry.
We averaged 7.4 per pass.
October 17th, 2010 at 1:03 AM ^
those numbers are really nice, don't get me wrong, but don't tell me you weren't looking for sharp objects after watching the offense through 3 quarters like the rest of us
October 16th, 2010 at 8:21 PM ^
As others have said, the O put up 522 yards. I don't think you can say they suck. You can say that they've sucked at finishing recently (only for the last 2 games though).
October 16th, 2010 at 8:01 PM ^
Kovacs is becoming someone we can count on to make an open field tackle...for a walk-on sophomore, he's doing the job!
October 16th, 2010 at 8:11 PM ^
Enough with the walk-on crap already. The kid's earned his free ride, let's please stop harping on the "walk-on" meme already.
He is a great tackler and good near the line of scrimmage. I don't like him in space covering moving objects, but that's just me. Kovacs is the least of our worries on that side of the ball though.
October 16th, 2010 at 8:22 PM ^
I'm sorry...did he or did he not make the team on a campus tryout? I believe he did, and by calling him a "walk-on sophomore" I'm not criticizing him by any means, I'm actually trying to point out the impressiveness of what he's done on the field. He earned his scholarship by his hard work...
October 16th, 2010 at 8:15 PM ^
I hate that we have a walk on sophomore as a starter, but if it has to be a walk on, Kovacs has more heart and plays with his head more than a lot of much more experienced players on ANY team.
October 16th, 2010 at 8:02 PM ^
I'm confident we can beat just about anyone. We lit up THIS defense for over 500 yards. Do it to it.
October 16th, 2010 at 8:59 PM ^
If we didn't have any turnovers and scored more than our opponents, I'm pretty sure we could beat just about anyone too.
October 16th, 2010 at 9:06 PM ^
Oh.... I see what you did there
October 16th, 2010 at 8:03 PM ^
Hagerup had a booming punt in the 1st half
October 16th, 2010 at 8:03 PM ^
I honestly don't understand what this means. Does it mean we made mistakes? Ok. But Iowa beat us. They were the better team and their discipline was the key to the game.
<br>Don't get me wrong. I'm not a downer on this team. But let's not just chalk this up to "beating ourselves.". We were not the better team. Look at stats all you want. A good team doesn't make these mistakes in the big game.
October 16th, 2010 at 8:06 PM ^
to beat myself
October 16th, 2010 at 8:07 PM ^
That people think things like turnovers and facemask penalties are either easily correctable or simply a matter of bad luck, and thus are not an indicator that the team will struggle going forward.
October 16th, 2010 at 8:11 PM ^
When we had 3 turnovers last week, we decided not to correct it for this week?
<br>Discipline as a football team cannot be fixed by flipping a switch. It's not as simple as just "fixing it."
October 16th, 2010 at 8:13 PM ^
comment mostly applies to the personal foul penalties.
As for the turnovers, As I've been saying in other threads tonight, I think turnover margin is simply a function of luck and we've been on a 2 game downswing.
October 16th, 2010 at 8:20 PM ^
So you're saying it's just a coincidence that our turnover margins plummeted when we started playing legit Big 10 defenses.
<br>Good teams force/create turnovers or play a physical style that makes them more likely. Chalking this up to bad luck seems incorrect.
October 16th, 2010 at 8:23 PM ^
is a skill. I think it's like "clutch hitting" in baseball. The natural human desire to attribute ability to a helmet that happens to land on a football in a running back's arm because the idea that much of what goes on is just luck and randomness scares the crap out of us.
October 16th, 2010 at 8:30 PM ^
We could have committed 4 turnovers against Bowling Green but we had good luck that week. Whereas this week, we just had back luck against a top Iowa defense. This makes little sense.
October 16th, 2010 at 8:34 PM ^
for dramatic effect. But yes, my view is that that is far more the case than anyone wants to admit.
Today is a perfect example actually. Our QBs made about 4 ill advised throws. Three of them were picked off. And we had a RB cough up a ball on a play where the defender wasn't even going for a strip. It's not crazy to think that on average at least one more of those ill advised throws won't end up in the arms of an Iowa defender. It's also not crazy to think that Vincent Smith usually doesn't fumble in that spot.
By contrast, Stanzi threw a clear pick 6 in the first quarter that was dropped. And his 3rd down throw on the last drive was a pass that he was incredibly lucky not to have picked off.
On average, I think we come out of that game with a turnover margin of -1 or -2 rather than -4. That we didn't is bad luck, and it may have been the difference in the game.
October 16th, 2010 at 8:39 PM ^
I say you make your own luck. Sorry to jump into your conversation with Dreisbach, but I can't sit back and just say, "Oh well, just bad luck I guess". Sometimes you make your own luck. Iowa did, we didn't. That's about all you can say. Hopefully we make more plays on defense and value the football on offense moving forward.
Or you can just keep hoping we get better luck...
October 16th, 2010 at 9:38 PM ^
Like it's fate that causes one to throw into coverage, or you can't learn to protect the football and tuck it away.
<br>
<br>But this is supposed to be a positive thread, so I don't want to rag on it here. But I think this place has perpetuated this a lot.
October 16th, 2010 at 8:45 PM ^
Denard could have checked down his throw on the first pick. I'm not sure if that would have resulted in a first down, but the turnover would have been avoided. Young kids learn from these mistakes eventually.
October 16th, 2010 at 8:55 PM ^
So can you stop starting every comment with so? It's so annoying. So.
October 16th, 2010 at 9:04 PM ^
Turnovers also share variance with youth, which we're chock full o'.
Turnover margin will regress to the mean somewhat, but I'm afraid we'll be above average in turnovers/penalties so long as our team is mostly frosh/sophs.
October 16th, 2010 at 8:49 PM ^
Iowa was a good team, but their defense wasn't as good as people made it out to be. Like the the previews said, if we played perfect we could win it - we didn't and we lost.
There were plenty of Michigan penalties, and turnovers. Examples: Taylor Lewan got a 15 yard penalty when we were driving. Tate's first interception should have been a pass thrown out of bounds for example. That was not skill on Iowa's part, that was Tate trying to force soemthing when he shouldn't have been.
I thought our defense actually played better than I expected.
We beat ourselves.
October 16th, 2010 at 8:05 PM ^
Having Demens means that we at least have a functional MLB who hopefully improves with experience.
October 16th, 2010 at 8:07 PM ^
If we protect the ball, we win this one.
October 16th, 2010 at 8:08 PM ^
Positives? Are you kidding me?
October 16th, 2010 at 8:18 PM ^
We're kidding you.
Ignore all posts for the next 6 months, then come back. Maybe people will be serious at that point.
October 16th, 2010 at 8:25 PM ^
You won't find a bigger Rich Rod supporter than me but do I have to rehash the laundry list of negatives I took from this game? Call a spade a spade for God's sake. We were awful today...
October 16th, 2010 at 8:40 PM ^
How were we awful today? Our offense played okay versus a pretty damn good defense and we lost because of some miscues versus a good Iowa team. I don't feel so bad. I've read some of your past posts, so I won't be too much of a dick, but still, I don't feel too bad. i know that others have given me heck for that, but I feel good. 5-2, with our 2 losses being to top 15 teams.
I feel okay.
October 16th, 2010 at 8:41 PM ^
I'm legitimately happy with today's game and contentedly drinking a glass of scotch.