Good job mods!
October 2nd, 2010 at 7:27 PM ^
What would Bo say?
The team, the team, the team. We will not talk about each other, we will encourage each other.
October 2nd, 2010 at 7:28 PM ^
GERG and the D does suck. You can mod the shit out of this board and it won't change that. You can pretend like everything is rosy but barely beating Indiana, yet again, is not going to cut it.
October 2nd, 2010 at 7:31 PM ^
The defense did have a terrible game and there's certainly room, IMO, for threads that discuss it. But I'm guessing the reason the threads disappear is because people have to be like you, and put it in terms of "GERG and the D does suck" (grammar Nazis in window may be closer than they appear) and not in terms of the game only.
How hard is it to limit your criticism to the game instead of GERG SUX?
October 2nd, 2010 at 7:31 PM ^
you would still be a douche... Seriously, it's not GERG; we have a patchwork D right now. So, we can stop being whiney bitches about it OK.
October 2nd, 2010 at 8:01 PM ^
I'd like to buy a U
October 2nd, 2010 at 8:13 PM ^
You win the puzzle...but it cost you 3 MGoPoints.
October 2nd, 2010 at 7:35 PM ^
sure our D isn't great. But there were a surprisingly few amount of blown coverages and missed tackles for playing against 3 stud wide receivers and having all of those frosh corners on the field. There were a few plays where I though we gave way too much room. But Chappel also played, what I think, was the game of his life. Although that happens a lot against Michigan it at least looked like there were people right by every receiver that caught it.
October 2nd, 2010 at 7:40 PM ^
3 Stud wide receivers? This is INDIANA!!! We should be wining this game 42- 13. Enjoy this win boys, we are headed for more of last year the rest of the season.
October 2nd, 2010 at 7:44 PM ^
Doss is a stud. Wearing an Indiana uni doesn't change that.
October 2nd, 2010 at 8:35 PM ^
I don't really have an iPhone but I'm using that as my subject from now on.
October 2nd, 2010 at 7:46 PM ^
that brian was considering taking their receivers over ours...they must have some talent back there. Since Brian is my god, that is all the info I need :)
October 2nd, 2010 at 8:13 PM ^
Brian's "this will be Bowling Green redux" prediction?
October 2nd, 2010 at 7:59 PM ^
Don't agree.
And I'm not sure what all the detractors (you're not the only one) were expecting this year. I think we got the team we were all talking about over the summer, but with a much better offense and a phenomenal QB. The defense is exactly where we thought they'd be.
I think we have a winning season, albeit one that's sometimes really fun to watch and sometimes excruciating to watch.
October 2nd, 2010 at 7:39 PM ^
GERG and the D does suck. You can mod the shit out of this board and it won't change that. You can pretend like everything is rosy but barely beating Indiana, yet again, is not going to cut it.
Just curious: when you look in the mirror do you SEE a whiney bitch?
October 2nd, 2010 at 7:47 PM ^
When I look at our team I see a terribly incompetent Defensive Coordinator. I also see a bunch of idiots who think beating Indiana by a score is acceptable.
October 2nd, 2010 at 8:27 PM ^
+1 for lack delusion. But really, when i see JT Floyd consiously decide to not romove Tandon Doss' head from his body I have a problem. Poor tackling, GERG post-game giddiness and 11 third-down conversions is unacceptible. This shit will not fly. We will beat MSU next week, though.
Edit: Mike Martin is to Michigan what due negroni is to a three hour tour of Venice. Sent from Ven;ezia.
Edit: Agreeing to 7-point win over Indiana as painful.
October 2nd, 2010 at 8:14 PM ^
When I look at our team I see a terribly incompetent Defensive Coordinator. I also see a bunch of idiots...
Way to go, Superfan. Seriously classy calling our guys "a bunch of idiots..."
October 3rd, 2010 at 7:50 AM ^
He wasn't talking about the team being idiots.
October 2nd, 2010 at 9:23 PM ^
I have seen the light.
Please keep speaking your wonderfully thought out words.
October 2nd, 2010 at 8:04 PM ^
The fandom that still expects blowout wins against supposed lesser opponents needs to climb from the historical cellar. This defense is both banged up and young. For these and various other reasons - attrition, turnover at the coordinator position, etc. - they do not resemble the defenses of old. Having said that, I believe they will be dominant in a few years, and that, coupled with this offense, will be a very scary thing for opposing teams. I believe this because I have to; because I know whining won't change a goddamn thing. Personally, I am more emotionally invested in a bunch of kids who struggle against an Indiana, as opposed to the days when this game was non competitive. Makes for a pretty exciting season, don't you think? So be patient, a win is a win, enjoy it.
October 2nd, 2010 at 8:15 PM ^
Well you suck and why can i say that just because I don't like the job you do as a poster. Should my opinion on you matter nope and neither does yours on gerg.
October 2nd, 2010 at 8:31 PM ^
Over. + 15 for grammar.
October 2nd, 2010 at 7:31 PM ^
Young kids with no experience and frankly, IU has a very good passing game that totally exposed (as I feared) UM's D. The issue again is just horrible tackling, if you want to call bumping into someone tackling. Mouton had some good hits but overall the tackling is just weak.
Unless U of M can figure something out in a week, MSU is going to have a field day on the Wolverines.
October 2nd, 2010 at 7:42 PM ^
I think the staff came into the season understanding what they had on D, especially once Woolfolk went down. It seems like the goal is to force offenses to methodically move the ball and eliminate really long plays, which has largely worked. Indiana was able to do that for 2.5 quarters, but started to struggle and couldn't move the ball as well.
<br>
<br>It's a team approach. Michigan also knows what they have on O, and are basically holding serve.
<br>
<br>5-0, Denard is awesome, Purdue and Illinois are still out there. Win those two, beat a weak PSU team, and I'm happy with this season. That said, I'm going to have another heart attack next week against MSU.
October 2nd, 2010 at 7:48 PM ^
From what I see, the strategy is to make the other team put together long possessions and avoid the long play. Makes sense, b/c the more plays the offense needs to score, the more likely they are to make a big mistake, like a turnover.
October 2nd, 2010 at 7:31 PM ^
I think Oracle needs to be put in timeout for about a week. After every fucking game he starts with the bullshit threads about our defense, it's tired and played out.
October 2nd, 2010 at 7:34 PM ^
To be fair, he's not just a one-trick pony. Last week he insulted our kickers.
October 2nd, 2010 at 7:45 PM ^
I stand corrected.
October 2nd, 2010 at 7:32 PM ^
You are right. We should stop talking about the defense because we actually don't have one. To be honest with you at this moment I will settle for a BAD defense and that will be an improvemment.
October 2nd, 2010 at 7:38 PM ^
Where is the revelation here? We knew the state of the defense since last year, and even more so since this spring. It's a squad full of young, untested talent. Be grateful that we have the best player and the best offense in the country to carry the team while the defense continues to develop. You people were bitching the same way two years ago about our offensive line, and look at how the line has developed to this day. If the team is able to go 5-0 thus far with that defense, imagine how we will be next year and after... and then reflect back to your assessment of Michigan football in August.
October 2nd, 2010 at 8:10 PM ^
I think a big difference between RR's initial offensive failings and our terrible defense this year (and last year and the year before) is that the talent (and learning curve) of the defense really might not matter. There was certainly a big learning curve with RR's offense. The same doesn't go for defense.
We have a 3-man front on D that does all it can humanly be expected to do. You mentioned the development of the offensive line...How much better do you want the 3 guys on D to do against 5 or 6? Our secondary plays about 10-15 yards off the line, allowing short reception after short reception. Would stud DBs do better if they played so far back? We play what appears to be prevent defense from the first snap. Of course teams are going to move the ball on us.
Our offense is a machine unlike anything I've seen, but I worry that no amount of development will improve our defense as much as a change in scheme will.
October 2nd, 2010 at 8:22 PM ^
As our talent develops we'll adjust our schemes accordingly. These schemes are obviously an attempt to put together some sort of defense for now.
October 2nd, 2010 at 8:27 PM ^
First of all I never complained about the offensive line and second, are you really comparing RR offense with DR defense. We knew our offense is totally different and needs a period of time to adjust and get their type of players in, but the defense is nothing new. Actually is the same old boring "bend but don't break" philosophy with a tweak here and there. Nothing radical changed from the previous years. Wherever changes were made are not working and GERG does not have some innovative system that requires a special type of players. I understand we don't have enough players and talent, but the coaching and the play calling in defense was horrible today.
Now I have a question for everybody here that supports GERG; since when bad defensive players + bad defense = great coaching? Like I said in a previous post at this time I will settle for a BAD defense. Do you guys realize that we just allowed 568 yards to freaking Indiana, a team averaging 417.3 yards per game against Towson, W. Kentucky and Akron?
If you guys think that the players are the only ones at fault here, I'm sorry, I cannot continue argue with you here. I'm happy we are 5-0, I love our offense, but the excuses for the defense got to stop.
October 2nd, 2010 at 7:33 PM ^
Indeed. People with opposing opinions need to be silenced.
/s
October 2nd, 2010 at 7:38 PM ^
haha /S ok whew!
October 2nd, 2010 at 7:39 PM ^
In addition to people who take other people's icons.
October 2nd, 2010 at 7:36 PM ^
Let's take a step back from the ledge, friends. Are we all disappointed in the defense's performance today? Of course. Will Michigan face a better passing game in the remaining games? I personally don't think so.
October 2nd, 2010 at 7:44 PM ^
Don't know about the passing game, but they sure as hell will face a better running game and they will be playing against way better D's that may not allow 42 points. Still think we have a reasonable shot at 7-5 and probably at least 8-4 and that is acceptable.
My concern is how much better will the D be next year?
October 2nd, 2010 at 7:40 PM ^
1) Offense. Yes. the Denard
2) The defense is not good
A) Coaches not at fault.
i) When players make bad plays - no one to replace them with.
ii.) Defer to posts on our decimated defense. We have a fucktastrophe on defense. If Jesus had a threesome with the Mohammed and the Buddha, that offspring coach could not make up for our talent and depth defecit.
B) Coaches at fault
i) Not recruiting players who can stay enrolled at Michigan for academic or personal reasons. Blame is due.
ii) TBA. IU looks to have a Good QB and good receivers. Not that nearly 500 passing yards can be written off, but would counsel caution in watching IU for a couple more B10 games before mobbing to Ann Arbor Torch and Pitchfork
October 2nd, 2010 at 7:46 PM ^
The Immaculate Conception is one thing, but which male religious figure, exactly, was the baby conceived inside of?
October 2nd, 2010 at 7:58 PM ^
I mean have you seen that belly?
October 2nd, 2010 at 8:16 PM ^
But he's usually pretty happy, not crying or barfing.
October 2nd, 2010 at 7:43 PM ^
I think everyone just needs to drink more. Or less.
October 2nd, 2010 at 7:58 PM ^
No one expected this defense the resemble the one in 97 but I think this is getting out of hand. IU wanted to throw quick outs and we consistently gave them large cushions making it very easy to do so. I was led to believe one of the strengths of th 3-3-5 was the ability to utilize a variety of blitzing schemes but I'm not seeing it.
The secondary would routinely sneak up to the line of scrimmage before the snap, threatening a blitz, and then retreat into coverage. This didn't fool their qb. Most of our pressure came from Martin. It seemed as though we did a better job of hurrying his throws when we were playing a four man front.
I'm not looking forward to playing anyone with a more balanced attack.