SI.com posts preseason "guesses"

Submitted by Benoit Balls on September 1st, 2011 at 3:57 PM

and some fool named Austin Murphy (seriously...who?) has 2 quotes that prove how limited his CFB knowledge is.

 

First we have him discussing why he selects SDSU as his surprise team of the year replete with this gem, "Will Rocky Long adequately replace departed head coach Brady Hoch? Of course he will. Long won at New Mexico, for goodness' sake"

uh...oh lets just assume he was in a hurry and spell check didnt work. However later on, he hits us with this dreck while stating who he thinks will be the first player to fall out of heisman contention and why

Yes, he is a dazzling, explosive playmaker, but Shoelace will see his numbers drop significantly in the more buttoned-down, pro-type attack preferred by new OC Al Borges. Moreover, superb coach though he is, Brady Hoke will not get this program turned around in one year. Unless you play for Notre Dame, it's hard to win the Heisman with a losing record.
 

The ignorance of this guy who is suppoosed to be one of SI's "CFB insiders" or whatever, is mind-numbingly stupidly reprehensibly awful.  lt also make me appreciate the quality here at MGoBlog and other sites (EDSBS, for example).

Heres the link, but everyone picks NEB or WIS to in the Big Ten, and an Alabama/OU MNC game

Comments

mmiicchhiiggaann

September 1st, 2011 at 4:06 PM ^

Maybe I'm missing something but I don't see whats wrong with his second statement about Denard falling out of the heisman race early. Unless we have to abandon manball, and much more of the spread exists than we thought Denard likely will fall out of the heisman convo.

snowcrash

September 1st, 2011 at 4:34 PM ^

Last year we were a 7-5 team that should have been 6-6, we lost just 2 players who would have started on an average B1G team (maybe 3 if you count Dorrestein), and the schedule difficulty is about the same. To go 5-7 or worse with that would take either a historically bad coaching job or a historic run of bad luck. 

papabear16

September 1st, 2011 at 4:06 PM ^

Frankly, I didn't see a lot there with which to disagree.  I think that if Michigan has a 7- or 8-win season, it will be very, very difficult for Denard to be in the running for the Heisman.  This is particularly true because so many of the top contenders for the title (Oklahoma, Oregon, Alabama, BSU, etc.) each have a Heisman candidate in a starring role (Jones, James, Richardson, Moore, etc.).  The modern-day Heisman is most likely to go to the best RB or QB on a top national championship contender.  It is what it is.

Granted, I HOPE Michigan is one of those teams this year.  I believe in Hoke, and I believe in our team.  But I, too, would pick Denard to be the first top contender to fall out of the Heisman race when he doesn't rack up 300+ personal yards per game, and as Michigan picks p a loss or two.

Benoit Balls

September 1st, 2011 at 4:14 PM ^

was where he he said you dont win a Heisman playing for a losing team. Which suggests he thinks we will be worse this year than last. Even though we finally have a retruning starting QB, a 2 deep on defense that doesnt include cornerbacks who were at prom 4 months ago, and addition by subtraction in the removal of GERG

Erik_in_Dayton

September 1st, 2011 at 4:16 PM ^

I think the offensive switch will likely take Denard out of the Heisman race too, though it may be for the best in the long run.  I also don't think that Brady Hoke can turn this team into a Big Ten champion in one year. 

NorthSideBlueFan

September 1st, 2011 at 4:20 PM ^

He's just sharing his opinion and from what I read of it, it doesn't sound too out of line.

Are we getting to a point where a sports-writer who doesn't go all Whitlock blind loyalty for Hoke and/or the program is hating?  And were then supposed to get riled up? I for one prefer objective takes, and I feel that this is certainly that.

Tater

September 1st, 2011 at 7:25 PM ^

Why on earth would you expect consistently good journalism from a company that hired Micheal Rosenberg?

SI is in the entertainment business.  They have some good writers and some dolts.  In this day and age, clicks are like currency.  Consequently, I don't ever give clicks to people whose work I don't like.  Thanks for the warning on Murphy's article.