MSU 10=UM 11

Submitted by Ziff72 on November 29th, 2010 at 1:29 PM

I will not relent until I get some people off the ledge of "Woe is Michigan our defense will never get better".  Here is another comparison.

MSU-3rd year under Dantonio.   Sophmore qb making his 1st starts looks pretty good, but is prone to bonehead turnovers.   Defense is a disaster save the 1 NFL bound stud and gets embarrassed in several games.   The Valentis call for the defensive coordinators head as a young secondary looks lost time and again.

UM- 3rd year under RR.  Pretty much the same.

Our offense is better,  their defense was better, but it follows along pretty closely. the other thing that follows along pretty closely is that much like MSU this year....we avoid a top team on the schedule, get tough games at home and it all sets up for great success.

The defense will be better, say it, the defense will be better, the defense will better.  Stop being a Gloomy Gus, this defense will be much better next year.  To not see that is being a Freep , yeah I said it, if you don't believe this defense will be much improved you're a Freep and I know that's harsh for a family show, but you deserve it. It's not PC to call people Freeps, but if you act like a Freep I'm going to call you out.   Freakin Freeps, just typical of those kinds of people.  Don't be a Freep.



November 29th, 2010 at 2:17 PM ^

Look, the number one problem with any argument that the team will be better next year is that every crappy coach on every crappy team ever has said the same thing.  Charlie Weiss didn't stand up at the podium after his third year and say that ND was as good as they would ever be.  I am not a RR supporter, but neither am I looking foward to a coaching change.  If our current coach gets fired and the next one doesn't work out we are basically screwed for the next 10 years.  If we keep RR and he doesn't work out, we are also screwed for the next 10-15 years.  I just hope Brandon is as smart as we all think he is.  Either way, I doubt he is going to put much credence into the same old 'we are young, we will be better with a few more players and a little time' argument. 


November 29th, 2010 at 4:07 PM ^

Why? If Rich stays and doesn't work out it all depends on the next hire. Whenever that is. If We fire Rich and option B doesn't work, again it all depends on the next hire. Hopefully, if Rodriguez doesn't work out our next coaching hire turns out to be the a better choice. Everybody keeps saying Notre Dame, Notre Dame- yet we don't have to be anything close to Notre Dame if the right choice is made the next time around. Unfortunately for the Irish it took them forever to hire a guy like Kelly. 


November 29th, 2010 at 5:01 PM ^

which happened to be Kelly's first year there, there was a loud and vocal portion of their fanbase calling for him to be fired. That is the whole thing about becoming like ND. We dont' want to continually be looking for the next head coach during the middle of the current coach's tenure. Once you start down the road of firing coaches quickly, it becomes easier to do the next time around, and easier still the next time around.


November 29th, 2010 at 1:37 PM ^

Our coach will miraculously come back from a heart attack to inspire the team and still be the deuschiest of all deuschebags in the conference? I don't even want to see what the public outcry would be then...


November 29th, 2010 at 1:40 PM ^

I think our defense played better the last 3 games schematically, but the same problem all year, it's not the scheme, it's missing tackles and youth/awareness.  I certainly agree with you

Dr. Defense

November 29th, 2010 at 1:41 PM ^

We're getting run out of the stadium. I'm not being negative, but the fact of the matter is a team that is not competitive in games against even relatively good opponents will not be going 11-1 the following season.


November 29th, 2010 at 3:51 PM ^

what?! 11-1? come on man...

we will likely start out 5-0 (the only relative challenge being ND).

Then we have @NW (who was probably better than us this year and returns Persa along with most of their team) and @MSU (who blew us out at home, granted they are losing a lot next year). Purdue should be a win (though not a guarantee based on the past 3 years vs them). I'll give you 7-1 going into the final 4. 

@Illinois: We barely beat them at home and they are returning most relevant players. Is this honestly supposed to be a lock on the road? Why would our defense stop them next year? 

@Iowa: Yeah they are losing players but uhh, the game was over in the 3rd quarter vs them this year, despite a late rally...

Nebraska: We haven't beaten a top 25 finisher in 3 years under RR, and actually haven't even come remotely close... If you honestly think we're gonna go from getting blown out by top 10 teams to beating on, then you need to step away from the kool-aid. If you aren't going to consider this a L next year then you cannot consider ND a Win.

Ohio State: Well, they could have beaten us by 50 this year if Tressel wanted to run up the score. They are losing a lot of seniors however OSU always reloads, and Pryor and Herron coming back. Does a year of experience really change the outcome of a game by 30 (and more realistically 50) points, especially considering it will be Pryor's best and final year.

7-1 after the first 8, and the absolute best realistic case you can hope for in those last 4 games is a split. That leads to the best realistic scenario of 9-3, and a more realistic 8-4 as I don't see us going 3-1 @NW, @MSU, @Ill, and @Iowa all while avoiding any upsets. 11-1? Please...


November 29th, 2010 at 10:13 PM ^

Was MSU's schedule remotely as hard as Michigan's next year? No.

Unpredictable things happen on occasion but that doesn't mean being realistic about your predictions is wrong, and michigan isn't realistically going to win more than 8 or 9 games.

Glad you couldn't dispute my logic though. Based on your "shut the fuck up" it seems like I really stuck a chord.


November 29th, 2010 at 10:21 PM ^

If you don't see why they wouldn't go 11-1 you should start actually watching the games. I guarantee the Vegas over under on wins for Mich next season will be like 8 or 8.5, so please if RR is still around bet your house on the over.

And the fact that you had to go back to the first of 36 games in RR's tenure to find a game where we even came close to beating a top 25 team illustrates that we have had essentially 0 success vs them. Not to mention any top 25 team in a minor conference is questionable (even though they beat an Alabama team that was disappointed to be there and was hoping to play in the NC).

You forgot about Iowa last year also, but the point still stands that we have been absolutely stomped by almost every good team we've played. So for you to not see how we wouldn't lose to 2 great teams in Nebraska and Ohio State (in addition to not losing any others).... Well maybe you should start following football son.


November 29th, 2010 at 2:05 PM ^

Seriously... you need to watch more college football and be a little more positive.  

Wiscy 2 years ago was a joke they lost to us and everybody wanted Bielema's head, now look at them. 

Did you see Florida lose by 20 to South Carolina and 24 to FSU?

How about Nick Saban losing to Louisana Lafayette to conclude a 6-6 year and then being 12-0 playing florida in the SEC championship game?  

Did you see Texas this year?

How about Illinois the year they went to the Rose Bowl after being a mess?

Teams are so up and down in college because they are kids and there is a lot of luck involved with injuries, turnover, schedules, when you play your schedule know what your team will be like.

This team will improve everywhere, you won't recognize them next year.  Denard maturation will be huge, Lewan will be dominant, Omameh still has a lot of room for improvement, Demens should benefit from and offseason as the sure starter, Black could be awesome come next year, Martin healthy, TWolf back, Safeties and corners will be battling in a huge competition for playing time etc...



November 29th, 2010 at 2:20 PM ^

This team using that scheme on defense has any chance of beating OSU or Wisconsin next year your the one who needs to watch more college football. Teams get better yes, but small 2-3 star freshman dont become good enough to play with those kinds of teams in 1 year. It's not like the 3-3-5 is helping them any either..or Gerg for that matter. 


November 29th, 2010 at 2:25 PM ^

You have got to be kidding me. If you want to sit here and compare Michigan and whats going on here right now to Wisconsin then fine you have every right to do that. Your talking about teams that had one down year then came back and had a very good years, guess what we just had three terrible years. Ive gone in to every season since RR has been here saying "Well the defense cant get worse" and we all know the tragic ending to that one. It's pathetic sure injuries dont help but the lack of depth is inexcusable, ya sorry Vlad theres no way in hell we couldve used you this year fielding what was not a defense but an embarrassment. You sit there and clench your fist in a downpour screaming "YARDS YARDS YARDS" dont you? Keep drinking the kool aid, its been three years and this defense has only regressed so you keep preaching positivity and i'll keep calling you a god damn fool.


November 29th, 2010 at 4:18 PM ^

about next year's record. 

I got into the frey because I disagree with your opinion that we should have expected the 2010 defense to be better than the 2009 defense.  It's a ridiculous statement, and I called you out on it.

If I'm calling the kettle black, it's because it is.


November 29th, 2010 at 5:22 PM ^

This is only a few posts above.  You could have looked it up for yourself.

Ive gone in to every season since RR has been here saying "Well the defense cant get worse" and we all know the tragic ending to that one.


Keep drinking the kool aid, its been three years and this defense has only regressed so you keep preaching positivity and i'll keep calling you a god damn fool.

Although you didn't explicitly state that it was your opinion that the defense should have been better, your comments imply that you are of the opinion that it should have been expected that the defense improves year to year.  Circumstances have to count for something. 

We were hit with the perfect shit storm of a change in coaching staff and defensive philosophy, attritition, apparent lack of motivation (from some of the Carr recruits) and injuries.  Next year, for the first time in RR's four years here (if he is still here), there will be some continuity on the defensive unit.  We might play freshmen, but it will because they were talented enough to win the job over someone else.  There will be depth.  There will be some maturity, and hopefully some leadership along with that.

Is it premature to talk about 11-1?  Yes, but it's not because we shouldn't expect to be just as good, if not better, than MSU is this year.  And it's not because of an assumption that the defense is going to continue to struggle because it has in the past.


November 29th, 2010 at 5:55 PM ^

While I understand what you are saying, it should not have taken this long. This was suppose to be the year where we had the competitions at key positions. Rich is about to graduate his first class next year and has to give him the benefit of the doubt 2.5 recruiting classes in, but no depth on defense. This was his own doing maybe indirectly but he made this bed. Sure it's probably wildy irrational and irresponsible for me to have to been highly optimistic coming into this season defensively but I was just a little bit. They ran Obi out there for what 7 or 8 weeks before they found out Demens was better? Or they finally found out Roh is twice the player he normally is when he has his hand in the ground. These are things that in my opinion must carry consequences.


November 29th, 2010 at 2:58 PM ^

You guys claim to follow the team but know nothing.

Ill had 1 down year and bounced back?  MSU?

Obviously you haven't done any research on how we got here, you just yell and scream each week "we are Michigan unacceptable".   You look at none of the details and yell and scream.  You are smarter than all the coaches and all the fans, that's why you are so mad.  

The 1st 3 years have been a perfect storm of bullshit.   Could RR or somebody else have done better?  Maybe, but that's not the question.  

This is like asking a chef to make you a dish with the ingredients in your fridge when all you have is old wilted vegetables and a case of beer.  When you get it served you think it sucks and maybe another guy could have made a better dish, but you didn't find out if the guy can cook with a stocked kitchen.

Could a different coach got more out of a fractured defense and a horrid offense in 08, sure I'll give you 6-6 and keep your bowl streak alive.

Could a different coach  coaxed another bowl season out of walk on safeties and a true freshmen qb, sure I'll give you another 6-6

This is the 1st year he has had anything a full kitchen on offense and we produced a pretty awesome season on offense, next year this offense will be better and the defense will be stocked up and we'll see how they do.  

Calling me foolish to be optimistic when a team returns 21 of 24 starters is pretty silly,


November 29th, 2010 at 3:23 PM ^

You aren't foolish, don't worry.  You are exactly write and I like your cooking metaphor, it was spot on.  Pretty much, everything that could go wrong, did go wrong in Rich's first three years.  This includes decommitments, transfers, injuries, etc.  Seriously, he's had so many distractions it's unbelievable and I think most of us will agree that we hope and think they're over.  This team has an identify somewhat now with players he's recruited.  Hopefully recruits will know what they're getting into now and hopefully our injury problems fade.  Only problem I have still is fundamentals, especially the defense.  I do blame our offense for our fumbles but at the same time, Ohio State made some good plays to get those balls out.


November 29th, 2010 at 3:59 PM ^

Transfers? Is it not the coach's responsibility to bring in and KEEP players? There isn't a general manager or something that you can blame for this. And people need to stop claiming Demar Dorsey is "bad luck". Is it the admissions offices fault for not being able to admit him? No, it's RR's fault for recruiting a guy that is not qualified to come to Michigan.

Decommitments? WTF? So you're saying it's bad luck that Rich Rod hasn't been able to SECURE commitments from top talent? Uhh....

And one final thing. The fumbles are not random when happening for literally 3 years straight. For example, on Denard's fumble vs OSU he was carrying the ball in his left arm (toward the middle of the field) while running to the right. That is fundamentals, not bad luck. After 2 years with RR he still is making fundamentally poor decisions. Also, Vincent Smith has had fumbling problems all year yet RR continues to play him. Has anyone considered that maybe when you have 10 guys playing who are all 5'8 and 180 lbs that they are going to get lit up by giant B10 linebackers and fumble? Then you have Jeremy Gallon who makes a boneheaded special teams play every game yet continued to return kicks for a majority of the season. How exactly is that bad luck rather than a coach that doesn't focus enough on holding onto the ball and fundamentals?

restive neb

November 29th, 2010 at 7:44 PM ^

that you absolutely must know what you're talking about, so I'm sure that you've already researched and successfully rejected the claim that switching hands leads to fumbles, that the current coaching staff doesn't care about fundamentals, and that they don't realize that fumbles in the red-zone are UNACCEPTABLE.

There are a number of coaches who don't teach players to switch hands because their research has shown them that more fumbles happen after switching hands, and that it is more important simply to secure the ball high and tight, but with your knowledge, I'm sure that you've refuted that evidence, and confirmed that the current coaching staff just doesn't know what it's doing, or how to teach college players how to play.

Also, coaches haven't had as much time to work with young players on everything including the whole playbook, the opposing defense/offense, fundamentals, weight-training, and conditioning.  Some of the expected results are poor decision-making, turnovers, lack of fundamentals, etc.  With a young team that lacks depth, you ocasionally have to move players out of position to fill holes, or put guys on the field who aren't ready.  Or it could just be that Michigan has unacceptable idiot coaches who don't know football like you do.


November 29th, 2010 at 3:34 PM ^

If those returning defensive starters were any good (other than Mike Martin). Sweet we return the entire secondary from 2010. MSU went 9-3 then had a down year then went 11-1. You've been watching to much Rachel Ray and not enough football.


November 29th, 2010 at 10:44 PM ^

If there's one thing fans love more than a backup quarterback, it's an injured player.  After Woolfolk dislocated his ankle, he was instantly upgraded into a Jim Thorpe candidate in the minds of many, despite being pretty average in 2009.  If he can return to his pre-injury condition (which is anyone's guess), he'll probably be our best cover guy, but we're not talking about a Law/Woodson/Jackson/Hall talent here.



November 30th, 2010 at 8:32 AM ^

this year or will be next year, but it really isn't a secret that, generally, returning upper classmen corner > true freshmen corner.  Claiming he would have been an All Americian might be dilussional, but downplaying the importance of the depth and on field leadership that he would have provided is equally absurd.


November 29th, 2010 at 1:42 PM ^

M 2011 has an even easier schedule than MSU 2010--we miss BOTH Wisco and Penn State. Tough road games @ MSU, NW and Iowa, but Notre Dame, Nebraska, and Ohio State at home.

Frank Drebin

November 29th, 2010 at 2:00 PM ^

Honestly, since 2007, UM doesn't have a home field advantage anymore. Since the beginning of the 07 season, we have lost to App St, Toledo, Illinois, and Purdue, and almost lost to Indiana last year at home as well. I don't care where we play Nebraska or OSU next year, if we don't drastically improve on D by next year and cut down on the mistakes, they will have the same result as we have seen in the past years. I still say keep RR, but the entire D staff must be evaluated and changes will be coming.


November 29th, 2010 at 1:46 PM ^

Next year we're going to beat ND at home under the lights with a play called "Little Rascals" where Denard throws a pass to himself as time runs out? I like it. 


November 29th, 2010 at 1:49 PM ^

I'd like to compare us more to Mizzou 2009-2010. 

Mizzou's defense was awful last year and the team was still decent based on their offense.  This year, Mizzou has gone 10-2 - largely based on a huge improvement from their defense (and a slight decline in offense). 

I think 9-3/10-2 is our baseline next year for "Should RR stay or go", too. 


November 29th, 2010 at 4:17 PM ^

I think 9-3/10-2 is our baseline next year for "Should RR stay or go", too. 

Yep.  No worse than 9-3 with a victory over MSU.  Nebraska and OSU are losses, so the team gets to have one other off day.  Pick NW or Iowa.

Hate to say it, but, RR only stays after next year if UM is this year's MSU or better.


November 29th, 2010 at 1:52 PM ^

Here's the problem: our season wasn't "pretty much the same" as theirs.  They not only were a game better than us in Big Ten play (4-4), but they were unlucky to post that record, as they went 2-5 in games decided by single-digits.  They were competitive in all their losses except PSU.  Basically, the main difference between last year's MSU and this years is simply that they won the close games this time around.  We, OTOH, won every close game we played and were beaten decisively five times.  We could have a better team next year and not improve in the win column, if our luck in close games evens out.

Waters Demos

November 29th, 2010 at 2:12 PM ^

With players coming back from injury and development of the young guys, M's defense will be fine. 

The distinction is really on the offensive side of the ball.  The talent is already there.  With more development, the M offense will be way beyond what the MSU offense could have been then or even now.

That's what is really scary to us MSU folk who really think about it.