|07/21/2011 - 4:58pm||yeah||
it was over done
|04/19/2011 - 12:02pm||fish biting?||
Did Sam comment on Pike's upcoming announcement?
|04/14/2011 - 11:49pm||Hmmm||
Not actually what the last 3 years taught us.
|03/11/2011 - 6:30pm||awkward||
I don't think that was who he was talking about.
|02/15/2011 - 8:33pm||two best players||
What happens if coaches discover that denard and devin are our two best skill players on offense?
|02/10/2011 - 10:57am||which one?||
the guy getting burned all the time
or the one entertaining the coach's daughter?
|01/11/2011 - 1:05am||5 for 5||
What do you say about that?
|01/11/2011 - 12:49am||dumb rule||
That scenario where a guy gets takin down but rolls over the defender happened in another recent game; it's a bad rule. I'll grant that the offensive guy makes a good play, but the defender catches hold, brings him down as they roll completely over. It's a take down if not a "tackle".
|01/10/2011 - 7:23pm||Not necessarily||
cheaper and younger at least. it could be smart to pass the reigns while the program is still strong as opposed to... well, you know.
|01/07/2011 - 3:33pm||SPACE, Bitches||
Let's have our team of astronauts fly him to the moon with Denard and some cheer leaders for the big introduction.
|01/06/2011 - 10:07am||Dear Dave,||
I think you should try to hire Bob Stoops. Head coach at UM and OU are positions of similar stature, but I think there is a nonzero chance he could be convinced to come to UM.
UM, OU, Texas and OSU are all on the "short list" of college football. The UM-OSU and OU-UT rivalries are certainly two of the best, though UM-OSU is more prominent, historically. In his position at OU, Texas is the school with the fertile in-state recruiting, and Texas is the more prestigious University with more clout in the conference. While OSU has a deeper pool of in-state talent, UM is more prestigious and has at least as much power to wield within the conference as any team. UM is similar to OU in that we need to recruit well at home, poach from our neighbor to the south and recruit nationally. In the last respect, UM may have a better track record in getting top players from across the country, including California, Texas, Florida and Pennsylvania. I think you can argue that UM is in a better position vis-a-vis our archrival and in a better position nationally.
Stoops is from Ohio, where is parents live and where his dad coaches football. He was an All-Big Ten DB at Iowa, and he started his coaching career in the Big Ten at Iowa.
Starting in 2011 with the addition of Nebraska and the Championship game, the Big Ten is the conference to be in alongside the SEC. The Big 12 is sliding to probably the 4th best conference given the recent defections. We have the Big Ten Network, UM, OSU, PSU, and now NU. The Big 12 has the Texas Football Network (or whatever it's called), Texas and OU. (By the way we should get a new logo, too.)
So, he should considering UM based on the answers to several key questions:
Does he want to coach at OU forever? or, Does he feel like he's already accomplished enough there and he's ready for a new challenge?
Does he want to be 2nd to UT in the Big 12 indefinitely? or, Does he recognize the UM is in a better position versus our archrival and within our conference? Does he recognize that the Big Ten will be a better place to be moving forward?
Does he want to live in Norman, OK indefinitely? or, Does he want to move wonderful Ann Arbor, closer to his family and roots?
Of course, we'd have to make it worth his while financially, but we're going to pay fair market value to get a great coach, right? He's young, successful, defensive-minded, and he would make everyone forget about Harbaugh in an instant. He has many good years of coaching left in front of him. Can we convince him that his time at OU was spent in preparation for him to be ultra-successful at UM? He could be a legend after 10+ successful years at UM on top of his fine work at OU.
Make it happen, please.
|01/02/2011 - 11:59pm||?||
Where'd he meet your mom?
|01/02/2011 - 1:45pm||the alien||
John Clayton said suspicion around league was JH to UM. Also said he was SF #1 man and that Denver can't afford ^$$ coach like JH cause they're still paying last 2 coaches. Fingers crossed and starting to think how disappointed I'll be if we don't get JH.
|06/18/2010 - 1:07am||a little late?||
sorry if I'm a little late to the lynching but this is one of the most ill-conceived posts I've seen on here with a pathetic melt-down thrown in for those, like myself, who perversely enjoy that sort of thing.
Since so much has been torn asunder, I'd like to highlight the quote: "I am only frustrated that, given the current state of the football team, Michigan couldn't find it in themselves to take one chance on a single young man to help the team." Bo just rolled over in his grave. You may call it arrogance, but you're a clown. It's the right way to do things. It's why we're the winningest program AND why we've had only one "major" incident. We don't sell our soul after 2 bad seasons.
|06/14/2010 - 6:13pm||agreed||
At this point, I would love to see Big Ten add ND and Pitt and call it a deal.
Considering the Big Ten of my youth, the additions of PSU, Neb, ND and Pitt would be pretty impressive.
|06/14/2010 - 3:27pm||not at the top||
I realize you're adding Neb, but since 1990:
#1 has had 21 conf outright or co-champs, and
#2 has had 12
|06/14/2010 - 3:16pm||STFU||
PSU doesn't have a rivalry with any Big Ten team that comes anywhere near the magnitude of UM vs. OSU. Be glad you were considered to be one of the top teams, along with newcomer Neb, to be accounted for in partioning conference powers. Since joining the Big Ten, are you any more successful than Iowa or Wisc?
Basically, we have UM and OSU at the top - make no mistake UM's current struggles will have to continue much longer to prove otherwise - and then PSU, Iowa, Wisc, and Neb in the next tier. So, It seems reasonable to put #s 1 and 2 in the same group (A) to preserve the Game, and put #s 3-6 in the next group (B) for competitive balance. Then, give Minn to B and one of NW and Ill.
So, group A: UM, OSU, MSU, IU, PU, Ill
group B: PSU, Neb, Iowa, Wisc, Minn, NW
(Also, I wouldn't be that dissatisfied with geographic split with UM, OSU, PSU, MSU, IU, PU - I don't see the schedule as that daunting, but I agree that Conf champ would probably come from this group quite often)
|06/13/2010 - 7:44pm||agreed||
I, too, think this is the most logical.
West has two tiers with UM, OSU and PSU in upper and MSU, IU, PU in lower, and east has two tiers with Neb, Iowa, and Wisc in upper and Minn, Ill and NW in lower.
We may have the tougher half, but just think of poor IU who has to play UM, OSU and PSU every year.
Frankly, being less than 80 years old, I'm willing to play for brown jug every 2 years or whatever.
|06/12/2010 - 2:26am||WTF MSU?||
Why during this whole process do we continue to get stupid sound bites from MSU prez and AD? Were they elected spokespeople for the Big 10 or can they just not keep a secret?
|04/29/2010 - 5:02pm||shrewd||
It seems like a shrewd move from Big East, because:
Of course, ND could say "no" to both, but then Big East is in the same position essentially that they are today.
|04/29/2010 - 3:10pm||agreed||
UM vs. ND should be atop the "best OOC games" list annually. It boosts our exposure, enhances strength of schedule, and gets us ready for Big10 schedule.
Also, I'm always miffed when I see comments in the last ~2 years talking about our weak OOC schedule. Traditionally, UM has always played one of the toughest OOC schedules. We've had ND regularly since late 70s (often a top 10 team prior to Bob Davies) and then typically another BCS team, including Colorado, Oregon, Washington, UCLA, Virginia, Syracuse off the top of my head. Especially now with 12 game schedule, I'd like to return to playing good ND team and another decent BCS team every year, at least until Big18 rotation begins.
|04/23/2010 - 9:16am||if you say so||
As requested, I just negged your post. Good luck.
|04/19/2010 - 11:03pm||Sold||
I'm backing his candidacy during the primary. I don't think his psyche can take it. He'll likely try to postpone the Michigan game for a month until he's ready.
|04/19/2010 - 10:56pm||did you say 3rd down?||
In 1997, Michigan returned to the well many times on 3rd down in the form of a small, shifty back with good hands and balance.
That back was C. Williams, and he had approximately 30 plays of 9 yards with 8.5 yards to go, thereby keeping the chains and clock moving and scoring drives alive. We would not have been 12-0 without him. No shit.
In 2010, RRod seems to have a decent stable of backs with very different if limited skill sets. Hopefully, he can use them wisely to good effect.
|04/19/2010 - 10:46pm||Splitting Tate and Denard||
I think Brian's point about both QBs playing lots because they are so different is a great one. Remember Tate's effectiveness was limited when teams starting game planning for him, and Denard wasn't very effective once everyone quickly learned all he could do was run wildcat. Now, what if Tate can run read option better and be more patient in the pocket and Denard can learn plays, run option and throw reasonably well? Now both QBs are pretty effective. If both take significant snaps, RRod can force teams to prepare for two effective QBs, and he can make in game decisions given that few defenses are equally suited to stop two very different, effective QBs. I think the best news by far is that Denard is likely now viable, as Tate already was for the most part. If one ends up with the vast majority of snaps, then he's likely making the offense really hum.
Now, if only they can hold on to the f-ing ball...
|04/18/2010 - 2:23pm||quick points on QBs||
1. Forcier relies too much on improvising. I think this may be one downside to starting as true freshman. He got thrown out there and had to resort to what he knows/does best, but he could have used some more coaching first. It's got to wear on receivers who come out of breaks to see Forcier running in circles in the backfield and on linemen who have to block for 10sec while he runs back and forth past them.
2. This offense could be very potent with Denard if he continues to improve. As we know, he's lethal running with the ball. If he can execute the read option, the running game as a whole will be very tough to stop assuming the offensive line is improved as reasonably expected. His passing looked much improved at the spring game, so I'm believing (for the first time) that he can make the passing game work. Also, he seemed to be patient with the pass and very decisive when he decided to tuck it and run.
|04/01/2010 - 11:33am||!||
I'm not sure the exclamation point means what you think it means.
|03/23/2010 - 4:44pm||spartan football*||
where the "run and shoot" isn't our first offense
|03/23/2010 - 4:43pm||spartan football*||
*earn valuable credits for criminal justice degree while playing football
|03/14/2010 - 12:02pm||pro vs. amateur||
This "double posting" presents the perfect set of examples to address a point that I've considered relatively annoying around here lately.
In this post, the author gives a brief synopsis of the published article, his opinion on the published article, and the link to the published article. This is perfect and very "professional." I know the point he's trying to make, and I can follow the link if I'm more interested.
On the other hand, the author of the previous post in this pair is offered up as the "amateur." His post reads, "this would be interesting to say the least - LINK." He could hardly say less to say the least. Kudos to finding a potentially "interesting" link, but this is lazy and next to worthless, unless your link is not interesting and then it's worse.
|03/14/2010 - 11:45am||slurp||
this from the guy whose avatar says "cocksucker"
|03/02/2010 - 2:24pm||jeesh||
So, how slow is JT Floyd.
|03/01/2010 - 11:20pm||I hope it's a misnomer||
"Carvin" is what opposing QBs have been doing to our secondary for a few years. Apparently, now we're doing it to ourselves.
Actually, how could you read that piece and not being pulling for this kid?
|02/21/2010 - 9:32am||? OK||
I'm guessing you don't have big hands.
|02/08/2010 - 9:32pm||Where's my scholarship?||
Delonte Hollowell is listed at 5'8'' - 164lb - 4.73 in 40.
Those are my exact measurements. Where's my scholarship?
|02/07/2010 - 12:47pm||How many yards did we get||
How many yards did we get against quality DLs during our Big Ten losing streak?
How many times did we fail to get in from the 1 against Illinois?
|02/05/2010 - 7:19pm||turf||
I've got turf from Michigan Stadium from '97 Rose Bowl-clinching win over Suckeyes, too.
Also, I have large framed photo of Remy Hamilton splitting uprights in '98 at Notre Dame Stadium, and I can ID myself in ~row 15 right between the goalposts.
|02/05/2010 - 11:50am||different positions||
apples to oranges.
If they both go in the 1st round, that would be fantastic. I hope they continue the great success of Wolverine LB/DEs and CBs in the League.
|02/04/2010 - 9:20pm||Bell's||
Everything Bell's. You won't find a better brewery anywhere. We're very lucky to have them in Michigan. A few people haven't mentioned:
|02/04/2010 - 12:49pm||bail-out||
someone's just trying to drum up some of the bail-out money that's flowing into D-town. They're not going anywhere.
|02/02/2010 - 3:57pm||but the D||
On the flip side, you could say that we "started" several players on D only because we had to play with 11. I, for one, am hoping that fewer than 8 of the players from the D that looses Graham, Brown, and Warren are actually starting again.
|02/02/2010 - 3:51pm||success breeds success||
Good point. Not to mention that the best prospects go to the best teams that do the most winning with their good coaches, teammates, facilities, etc. There's a reason why the Heisman is now given to the best player on the best team, annually.
|02/02/2010 - 1:38pm||I stand corrected,||
but the point still stands.
Replace "twin brother" with "flunkout, older brother in your same grade"
|02/02/2010 - 1:25pm||#3||
Here's hoping that Terrence Talbott is one of the big surprises in the class.
He must be tough as nails.
Can you imagine having a twin brother who is 100 LBS bigger than you? Seriously?
|01/28/2010 - 12:02pm||snake oil||
I'm looking for Rich Rod to convince Parker and Dorsey to ink with the maize and blue. Both of those guys, if indeed supremely talented, would be in the mix for starting safety spots. Rod has a good recent history of closing, and he may be able to convince these guys that they'll see the field next year.
It goes without saying, that ideally we wouldn't have 2+ true freshman in the mix for starting positions on defense. Though, factor in the loss of Warren and all the incompetence returning, and that's what we've got. I think we can pencil in Woolfolk and Turner (heaven help us if Turner can't go), and then it's wide open in the D backfield. It seems like a fair probability they'd take 2/3 of Christian, Parker, Dorsey over anything from last year's roster unless I'm missing someone (and, no, I'm not counting on Floyd)
|01/26/2010 - 2:54pm||I don't like it.||
I don't like it.
|01/26/2010 - 10:11am||PSAD||
post-seasonal affective disorder
After signing day, you should set a schedule to watch the entire '97 season over the next couple of months until spring practice begins. Good luck. And, remember, you're not alone.
|01/26/2010 - 12:49am||"I just play one on TV"||
I watched it twice due to awesomeness.
One thing to note: Matt Millen is a better playing an analyst on TV than functioning as one in the front office.
|01/24/2010 - 8:50pm||O-K||
That may be true. I don't know. You're saying because we were at 84 scholarship players last year (2009), we can "backsign" 1 player in this incoming class (2010)? I've never heard this explanation before. Why is this rule so obscure that 100 different explanations have been offered during this recruiting cycle?
|01/23/2010 - 7:09pm||problems down the road||
I think it could come back to haunt us, too.
Consider the possiblity the Devin Gardner is the Wolverine savior, and assume all the lineman red-shirt. If Gardner doesn't red-shirt then in his senior year he'll have the 3 from last year, the 1 from this year, and need 1 from next year. That doesn't seem to bad as long as everyone pans out. If Gardner does red-shirt then his 5th year will have 1 fellow 5th year and he'll need 4 younger guys to man the line.
Considering the potential importance of Gardner, and the importance of the O-line for a QB, it would be reassuring to have a few more quality OL moving through with Gardner..