How big is the gap between UM and OSU?

Submitted by Blue_Bull_Run on January 1st, 2010 at 8:27 PM

After watching Pryor and the OSU defense today, I must admit that I am having a tough time feeling confident about our 2010 matchup at the horse shoe.

2011 could be our year, assuming Pryor goes pro after his junior year.

Am I being too pessimistic? How big do you think the gap is between OSU and UM?

Personally, I feel somewhat defeated right now - it seems like OSU has solid players at every position, and Pryor pretty much can't be tackled once he starts moving. We, on the other hand, seem to have a number of big question marks (Williams, Mouton, Ezeh), as well as a lot of inexperienced players (QB, corner backs??)

Soo...What's your take?

Comments

PurpleStuff

January 1st, 2010 at 10:50 PM ^

Oregon was not that good. They were dominated by Boise St. and could have easily lost to Purdue, Arizona, and/or Utah. Stanford moved up and down the field at will against them with an offense that basically consists of one play ("give it to the big white guy and everybody block"). With SC down, the Pac10 was downright crap this year (the fact that they went 2-5 despite playing down in most bowl games is pretty pathetic).

OSU has been the better team/program for the last six years and eight of the last nine. This is nothing new. This one game against Oregon certainly isn't cause for panic about Michigan's future. Let's just hope our guys continue to grow/improve and that the increased talent/depth/experience coming into the program pays off with big wins in the near future (which I'm certain it will).

PurpleStuff

January 1st, 2010 at 11:21 PM ^

The national media has basically been saying OSU and the Big 10 are garbage for the last few years, despite the fact that last year's OSU team went down to the wire with Texas. I also think most folks not living on the west coast only saw UO's highlight reel performance against SC (still ranked #5 at the time) and bought the hype, even though their overall resume/performance wasn't all that impressive. As the bowl season has played out (before Rose Bowl kickoff), I think it should have tempered some of the pro Oregon sentiment (though ESPN didn't seem to flinch in their Duck-love).

I guess my point was merely that this win shouldn't do anything to change our perception of OSU (unless you thought they had become some donkey program incapable of winning on the national level, as ESPN and co. seemed to buy).

M-Wolverine

January 1st, 2010 at 11:32 PM ^

Right up to the pregame with Desmond, Jesse dnd Lee making their picks. Though "Duck-love" does sound like Chris Fowler involved in beastiality.

And while to be fair I'm pretty sure you were NEVER one to say "OSU is going to get rolled, AARRGGHHH!" in any one of a number of threads (usually right after someone would say hey, OSU might have a chance here), there was a lot of it going on here, not just ESPN talking heads, and I get the feeling there may be some overlap in the Oregon will kill them/Oregon was never any good really posts (and posters).

Clarence Beeks

January 2nd, 2010 at 1:48 AM ^

Not exactly. The BIG difference in this game tonight was that Oregon never got its passing game going. Almost all of the "Duck love" on ESPN came with the caveat that the huge key for Oregon was to be able to throw the ball to further open up the run. That never, ever materialized. As one who thought OSU would get rolled, and having seen all of OSU's games this year and all of Oregon's games this year, it never seemed like a realistic possibility to me that Chip Kelly would COMPLETELY abandon the passing game. That was really stunning to me.

Clarence Beeks

January 2nd, 2010 at 2:03 AM ^

What do you mean exactly by "seeing what the osu D did to the vaunted oregon spread offense attack"? With the exception of about two or three possessions Oregon moved the ball at will on OSU's defense. It doesn't show up in the stats because of the awesome field position that their special teams gave them time and time again and it doesn't show up on the scoreboard almost entirely because of mistakes that Oregon made (missed FG, fumble in the redzone). About the only place that you could really make that statement is third down conversions. Ohio State's defense was helped out in a major way by the fact that Ohio State's offense controlled the time of possession. Both teams had nearly identical yards/play, but Oregon had 36 less plays than Ohio State did.

Also, you do realize that our offense outgained Oregon's offense against Ohio State this year, right?

M-Wolverine

January 2nd, 2010 at 12:24 PM ^

It doesn't show up on the stats or scoreboard? Well, hell, Oregon won the game! My bad.

Beyond the fact that scoreboard is ALL that matters, I love all the rationalization that playing smart football, keeping it away from the other team's offense, not making mistakes, and causing them, is all "luck".

I didn't see ONE person on here saying that "well, Oregon wins, but their defense sucks, so it will be a shootout". I DID see "dude, how do you expect OSU can even score 24 points?" and a lot of Oregon 40+ point totals.

Come to the realization that the spread isn't some magic wand to kill the OSU dragon, and you better have a lot of talent, and a whole hell of a lot of it better be on defense. Florida last night is the goal. A ridiculous offense? Yes. But Cinncy had a great offense that had everyone hiring Kelly a few weeks ago. But the Florida defense destroyed them. And when the Gators played an even better defense? Their offense wasn't so good either.

gujd

January 1st, 2010 at 11:56 PM ^

OSU played probably their best overall game of the year today against Oregon. One of things I hate about the bowl season is how much time their is between games. Had this game been played December 5th, Oregon probably wins, but the month slowed their big momentum and they did not look good. Too much emphasis given to bowl performances, where often one team prepares and plays a lot harder than the other.

OSU's defense looked dominant in part today because of Oregon's ineptitude on offense (how big a part, who knows).

The gap between Michigan and OSU is not getting wider that's for sure. They don't have as much room for improvement as we do. I do think we are at least until 2011 away from winning however.

Side note: Wish we had the schedule we had in 2009 in 2010. Our improvement might be hurt by having to play at ND, at PSU and at OSU next year, at least as far as record improvement.

MGrad

January 2nd, 2010 at 2:21 AM ^

RR needs to somehow break the Glenville curse and snake oil Latwan Anderson. (It isn't going to happen, but there will be much rejoicing when Michigan can actually enter the conversation in a serious fashion.)

dearbornpeds

January 2nd, 2010 at 7:07 AM ^

unfortunately the difference is still huge. don't forget, this is a buckeye team without a dominant tailback (beanie left early) and with good but not great receivers. they stifled an offense that we can only hope to emulate. furthermore, some of their weapons were suspended for the game. we're at least two years away from competing.

Clarence Beeks

January 2nd, 2010 at 1:44 PM ^

Oregon's defense couldn't get Ohio State's offense off of the field. Ohio State's defense didn't "stifle" Oregon yesterday. Fairly obvious point that I was making, dude. You think you're making some grand point by saying "scoreboard" (no shit, Sherlock), but you're missing the point that when you're talking about measureables and comparables (which obviously most everyone here is doing) other things matter.

M-Wolverine

January 2nd, 2010 at 2:11 PM ^

I noticed how you ignored all the stuff I said other than the score-

"I love all the rationalization that playing smart football, keeping it away from the other team's offense, not making mistakes, and causing them, is all "luck"."

You know, the intangibles that win football games. They may not be measurable, but there's a reason they play the games rather than have engineers determine the outcome beforehand. Because the "comparisons" here weren't all that favorable before the game according to most measuring it here.

What is shows is that denial is not just a river...

Clarence Beeks

January 2nd, 2010 at 2:17 PM ^

The point that I was making (I can't speak for anyone else) is that you use measureables and comparables (yes, score is ONE measureable) to compare teams when all of the teams haven't played each other. I never said anything was luck. I'm not quite sure why you're trying to be such a jerk in your posts to me. It's really isn't called for, though. I think it's obvious that you disagree with my posts, why not just leave it at that instead of trying to be an insufferable prick about it?

M-Wolverine

January 2nd, 2010 at 2:34 PM ^

AND you responded condescendingly ("you do realize our offense blah blah blah"). If I'm being insufferable, it's only because you're losing the argument. So don't act like I just came around and started picking on your posts. So let's not live in denial there too. You, uh, started it. :-P

And BTW, since you don't seem to have an answer for anything else, it should properly read scoring is THE measurable. That why they, ahem, keep score. If that's changed be sure and notify ESPN right away so I don't have to here about OSU winning for the next 9 months.

Edit: But if you took that much offense to arguing football, my apologies. I don't think you're a whack poster or anything, we just disagree. No negging here. Just strong differences of opinion.

Clarence Beeks

January 2nd, 2010 at 3:29 PM ^

Fair enough with the last statement, just a difference of opinion. It's just come across like you were saying that I didn't realize that the score was the most important measurable. Again, obviously it is IF the teams have all played each other. My overall point was to a poster who was trying to say that Ohio State shut down Oregon's (more experienced and more talented) spread and that should be bad news for us in the future. I disagree. Oregon moved the ball pretty well, they just didn't score (i.e. the most important measurable). We actually moved the ball better on Ohio State than Oregon did, but we just didn't score. That's not taking anything away from Ohio State's defense, it's just stating that their defense wasn't "stifling". Stifling was Nebraska versus Arizona, which is definitely NOT what we saw yesterday.

Heisman212

January 2nd, 2010 at 9:20 AM ^

OSU held the ball for 41 minutes. Added to that was a fumble in the endzone and that Tyree esqe catch made by Ballard. You beat a spread tram by keeping them off the field. As far as the gap it doesn't natter how big or little it is, win next year or this whole thing might get blown up with the new AD. Watching FLA- CIN I was amazed at how the Gators overwhelmed the Bearcats. If we can get our offense running like that then who cares about The defense. Well be back there is no question about that. Michigan football has been around along time......it will get fixed!

M-Wolverine

January 2nd, 2010 at 12:12 PM ^

Just score, D doesn't matter? You didn't catch that they scored so much because they had the ball back every 30 seconds because their defense DESTROYED the Bearcats high powered offense? If anything yesterday's games renewed my belief that while these offenses can be fun, I really wish we had one of these dominating defenses.

wildbackdunesman

January 2nd, 2010 at 9:29 AM ^

I think we will show more improvement than OSU from this year to the next. They also will lose some key players. We outplayed them for much of the game this year, but we forced plays, which led to turnovers.

Just because Pryor played well today, doesn't mean that he won't have anymore Purdue games or that his knee will always be 100%. Why get worried about a game a year away?

3rdGenerationBlue

January 2nd, 2010 at 10:14 AM ^

"What will it take to turn the rivalry around? Having a better team than the opponent. Emotion and passion will carry the team a little bit. The more experienced team (OSU) will be able to stem a tide of emotion."

Let's hope he doesn't think the gap is very wide b/c these comments don't give the impression that he believes in the story of David and Goliath.

Amused

January 2nd, 2010 at 10:51 AM ^

Whatever the gap, Coach Rod needs to close it fast. Another losing season, or another year with losses to our main rivals, and he'll probably be gone. Starting 0-3 against OSU after going 8-16 in his first two seasons would probably cause him to lose his job, or at least put it in serious jeopardy. Let's just hope the D improves after a year under GERG and the new recruits make an impact.

big john lives on 67

January 2nd, 2010 at 1:04 PM ^

Barring major violations being uncovered, none of which will happen out of this Free Press nonsense, or a total collapse next year, RR will be here for at lest four years. Marry Sue has all but guaranteed it with her comments. That being said, the gap is zero on offense, negligible on special teams, and massive on defense. We have to hold on to hope that players finally in their second year in a defensive scheme will offset the loss of two huge talents.