David Pollack: Michigan Doesn't have Enough Dynamic Offensive Weapons to Beat Alabama

Submitted by MGoVoldemort on

This morning on Mike&Mike, David Pollack, in discussing the upcoming CFP rankings, was asked which team could theoretically beat Alabama. His reponse when it came to Michigan's chances, was that they did not have enough dynamic threats on offense to challenge Alabama. This seems like extreme SEC based logic, and sounds very much like a man who hasn't spent a lot of time watching Michigan play this year. I'm not going to say we can beat Alabama quite yet, but to say that we don't have the weapons to do so is absurd.

MGoBoard
Football

Squash34

November 7th, 2016 at 4:24 PM ^

I have not watched much of them, but did watch a big chunk in their lose last week. Miss st moved the ball up and down the field on them. I have watched a few of msu games and their offense has not been stellar. Not to mention, bama got a defensive TD that game that broke a&m sports and made it look like bama's offense played better than it did.

Joined: 09/13/2016

MGoPoints: 3062

Cali's Goin' Blue

November 7th, 2016 at 11:55 AM ^

Anyone can beat anyone in college football. Alabama has had the most talent on itsroster for the last 3 years and have lost games to teams worse than Michigan multiple times. Ya, Alabama might be the best team in College Football right now, but Michigan has better coaching on both sides of the ball and you give these coaches time to prepare and I would favor MIchigan at the end of the year. 

I perdonally think Michigan's winning % in bowl games is going to be around 80% under Jim Harbaugh

Joined: 02/02/2015

MGoPoints: 1880

BursleyBaitsBus

November 7th, 2016 at 12:02 PM ^

Wait... What makes you think Michigan has better coaching on both sides of the ball? 

Are there any indicators of that besides straight homerism? 

 

Come on people.

This isn't NFL Nick Saban vs NFL Jim Harbaugh.

Saban is the best coach in college football followed by Urban Meyer and Jim Harbaugh. Just look at the resumes. 

Joined: 01/20/2016

MGoPoints: 12434

MichiganTeacher

November 7th, 2016 at 8:46 PM ^

Yes, every time. Alabama enjoys some recruiting advantages that many other schools don't, and that makes Saban look better than he is.

And he's elite as it is, so what's better than elite? "Bama over the last half decade. Class by themselves.

Stll, take away those recruiting advantages and the talent mismatches they engender, and Saban isn't better than the other elites. I'd take some other elite coaches over Saban, including Harbaugh, Meyer, and Petersen. 

Joined: 10/06/2011

MGoPoints: 9263

1VaBlue1

November 7th, 2016 at 12:15 PM ^

Seems kind of short sighted to base it on resume and say Harbaugh doesn't add up.  Are you counting Saban's and Meyer's entire career record vs Harbaugh, or only thier first 10 years - or however long JMFH has been a head coach (which makes it a fair comparison)?  And are you saying that because Saban and Meyer are better because they've won a National Championship (largely as a function of being around as HC's longer)?

 

Either way, that's short sighted.  Harbaugh is their equal - based on record and eyesight.

Joined: 01/31/2016

MGoPoints: 126431

BursleyBaitsBus

November 7th, 2016 at 12:28 PM ^

Going by your metric... by year 6 of coaching D1 football, Harbaugh is ahead of Saban (MSU stint) and way behind Meyer. Urban had 2 national titles by year 6 with a Fiesta bowl victory at Utah. Harbaugh has an Orange Bowl with a TBD this year. 

Going by present time, Harbaugh is even further behind Saban and Meyer. 

Obviously, Harbaugh's NFL success and Stanford rebuilding (Remember Saban rebuilt Bama and made LSU what it is today; Urban landed in nice spots at UF after Zook and OSU after Tressel) brings him up quite a bit, but I still believe he has a bit to prove before he's on the same level as the other 2. Beating Urban this year and potentially meeting up with Saban in a National Title game would easily put him up there imo. 

 

Joined: 01/20/2016

MGoPoints: 12434

APBlue

November 7th, 2016 at 1:08 PM ^

umm...but Urban Meyer went from Utah to Florida, which although poorly coached, was loaded with talent.  

Jim Harbaugh decided to build a program at Stanford.  Those two circumstances are much, much different.

Joined: 01/07/2011

MGoPoints: 22020

M_Born M_Believer

November 7th, 2016 at 5:17 PM ^

Urban had only 1 NC (2006) within the first 6 years.  He didn't win his second til 2008.  Plus you are glossing over the 16 years that Urban was an assistant coach.  Yes, Jim was an assistant coach as well for 9 years, but 7 of those were when he was acutally still playing in the NFL.

So that is only 2 years as an assistant, then building a program from scratch (San Diego U - winning 2 titles there), then resurrecting and horrid deadbeat program (Standford) all within 7 years.  Then took a NFL tour to go to 3 straight NFC Championship games and 1 Super Bowl.

Urban as accomplished more in college as a head coach, but only after grinding for 16 years as an assistant, then 16 years as a head coach.

All I'll say is that I look forward to what Harbaugh will accomplish over the next 8 years to match the 16 year resume of Urban.

As for Nick, his first 7 years as a Head Coach (after 16 years as an assistant, plus 3 more as a D-coordinator) - 34-24-1 (@ Toledo and Sparty), no championships.  Not really setting the couch on fire......

Then started 26-12 at LSU in his first 3 seasons, before winning big.  That's 10 years before "accomplishing" something.

His record and accomplishments at 'Bama are great, right guy in the right situation (for those who might not remember, 'Bama was a non-entity in the early '00s burden with sanctions).

Again, I'll enjoy the resume that Harbaugh will build up over the next 8-10 years and let the accomplishments speak for themselves.

 

Joined: 11/11/2009

MGoPoints: 11786

Squash34

November 7th, 2016 at 4:30 PM ^

Ethically questionable ways. When he does not have this advantage he does not produce at elite levels. Look at him in the NFL and msu.. harbaugh on the other hand has turned very bad programs around, in Stanford's case he did so with a disadvantage in recruiting. Not to say harbaugh is clearly better, but you can't compare resumes and act like sabans is so much better, when harbaugh has coached much less in college and has turned around 2 programs, from laughingstocks to top 5 type programs. Saban failed to do that at his non traditional power stops.

Joined: 09/13/2016

MGoPoints: 3062

DrMantisToboggan

November 7th, 2016 at 10:42 AM ^

ESPN employs a lot of douchebags, but Pollack probably takes the cake (it's close between him and Galloway). 

 

We're going to have 4 senior skill position players drafted. That's not counting new Speight, Chris Evans, McDoom, Crawford, etc. 

Joined: 11/26/2014

MGoPoints: 74183

Pelinka2Voskuil

November 7th, 2016 at 11:45 AM ^

If he hasn't been watching the games, it'd be easy to look at the stat sheet and reach the same conclusion.  The touches are spread so widely, no single player is putting up huge numbers.  Collectively, however, its a different story.  If this is how he reached his opinion, it's lazy and uninformed but I can see how he got there.

Joined: 11/08/2011

MGoPoints: 209

APBlue

November 7th, 2016 at 1:45 PM ^

I saw that too.  I like how he contradicted his excuse from a week or two prior (which was I haven't seen film on Michigan, so I don't know) to now - I'd seen them on film, but seeing them live is better.  What the hell, dude.  Make up your mind.  Did you watch them on film or not?  

I'd rather watch anyone who knows football and watches all the games comment on them before the dumbass people we're stuck with - Stanley Jackson, Gerry Dinardo, Marcus Ray?  I'll admit, I do like Howard Griffith, though.  

Joined: 01/07/2011

MGoPoints: 22020

Mr Miggle

November 7th, 2016 at 5:17 PM ^

A lazy opinion can be based on not looking beyond the surface. It's easy to miss things that way.

A stupid opinion is formed by ignoring the facts.

His opinion is both stupid and lazy. Michigan is #3 in scoring, two PPG behind #1 Louisville. That's not adjusted for opponents, which makes our numbers even better. It's obvious this offense has to have playmakers if he'd only look for them. It's not as if anyone is claiming that's being done on the strength of a dominant OL

Joined: 10/07/2010

MGoPoints: 47530

Squash34

November 7th, 2016 at 4:39 PM ^

Showed Michigan some love lately. I think it is because he knows that osu is unlikely to win this year. Nevertheless, he at least acknowledges Michigan has very good skilled guys on both sides of the ball. Although, he pretty much thinks bama, particularly their def, is a minor league pro team. So, he may say something similar.

Joined: 09/13/2016

MGoPoints: 3062

Wolverine Devotee

November 7th, 2016 at 10:44 AM ^

I was serious in the other thread when I said ESPN and BTN idiots and their hot takes should be on the Valenti list.

Outsiders, national media who don't follow the teams and actually, you know, watch the games.........shouldn't have a place on this site. 

This is the same guy who last week during the CFP show that said Michigan played at Wisconsin. He also said we have only played one team that's any good when we have played and beaten 3 teams in the CFP Top-15. 

What else can be said? He's an SEC/ACC lapdog. That's basically all ESPN employs now. I stopped watching college gameday years ago.

 

Joined: 06/29/2009

MGoPoints: 31528

Pepto Bismol

November 7th, 2016 at 11:21 AM ^

If he can accurately defend that with relevant info, that's fine.  Michigan and Wisconsin have one common opponent - MSU, and they did a better job than we did.  We can hammer him with advanced stats to counter, but just stating a debatable opinion that doesn't kiss Michigan's ass is fine with me.

It's when these guys can't back it up and don't know the scores and opponents relative to their point that kills them.  Some are just plain-old bad at debate.

Joined: 02/03/2015

MGoPoints: 7857

APBlue

November 7th, 2016 at 1:13 PM ^

Agree with you point, with one caveat: MSU's performance against us was fueled by the rivalry.  You have to take the rivalry and the emphasis MSU puts on that game into account when discussing our performance against MSU versus Wisky's performance against MSU.  

 

Joined: 01/07/2011

MGoPoints: 22020