|06/04/2018 - 7:37am||Right, Wrong, and Next||
Right: immediately turned the program around. Nobody expected 10 wins in 2015.
Wrong: exceeded expectations early but hasn’t continued to exceed them. This is more a criticism of the fans’ expectations. He’s 28-11 after 3 years and people are shitting themselves because a few bounces went the wrong way in rivalry games.
Next: A more balanced team. The offense will start to catch up to the defense this year. There was a MASSIVE upgrade to the QB position since last year. The OL has the talent to be at least average, and the coaching to be above average. Everything else is set. They might not win every game, but they’ll win a lot of them and crush a few teams along the way.
|05/29/2018 - 10:31am||Your buddy is mistaken||
0% chance this happens for the 2018 game
|05/16/2018 - 10:50pm||Grant Perry||
Should’ve been given his 2nd chance at somewhere other than Michigan.
|05/08/2018 - 11:12pm||Zach Smith WR coach||
Speaking of douchey Buckeyes, I never knew Smith was Bruce’s grandson until reading this article. Figured he had to have some sort of connection to landing a gig that is so clearly over his head.
|04/30/2018 - 12:15am||Totally agree||
The game day experience is downright uncomfortable with the super narrow bleacher seats everywhere, especially if you’re in a row with more than one obese person. Individual chairs work great in NFL stadiums and the Rose Bowl, and are becoming more standard every year in college stadiums. The capacity will take a hit, but as more fans realize the game day experience at home is ridiculously comfortable and way less expensive, the huge capacity won’t matter anymore.
|04/27/2018 - 1:50pm||2 recommendations||
Two that anyone who is following the turmoil at Michigan State needs to watch are The Hunting Ground on Netflix and I Am Evidence on HBO.
|03/07/2018 - 11:31am||Named but not charged||
So his name was released before charges were filed, which according to the MSU mouth breathers is unethical journalism. Are they going to stand up to defend this guy’s reputation being “ruined”?
|02/13/2018 - 4:18pm||MSU’s response coming soon?||
“I hope that MSU can soon respond in full”
What exactly is stopping them?
|07/19/2017 - 3:03pm||I thought I was going crazy||
Glad someone else is seeing that too. The Ohio St count has appeared to be off by one every round, or so I thought, but this is the first time I've seen it called out.
|05/08/2017 - 9:03pm||Not exactly||
He transferred after his sophomore year, so had to sit out year 3. In his 4th year, he got injured on January 30th and missed the remainder of the season (so played like 20 games). Then did a grad transfer to MSU (so no sitting out) for year 5 and got hurt before the season.
|10/29/2016 - 8:17am||A ton of tickets just hit||
A ton of tickets just hit StubHub for under $100, all in section 15
|10/27/2016 - 10:51am||Wow, everyone but Rutgers||
Wow, everyone but Rutgers above their season average. Please let this trend continue for Michigan
|10/11/2016 - 2:07pm||A huge reason for the drop||
A huge reason for the drop off by MSU this season is turnover margin. They were +14, +19, and +13 in the last 3 years and this year they are -2. A lot of their wins the past few years have been 1 possession games, making those turnovers extremely valuable to their success.
|10/03/2016 - 9:20pm||No women's apparel at all?||
No women's apparel at all? Wow. Surprising they would choose to ostracize half of their potential market.
|10/03/2016 - 4:12pm||Is there any Jordan women's||
Is there any Jordan women's apparel yet? My wife found some Nike gear but hasn't seen any Jordan for women. I noticed the cheerleaders uniforms are Jordan (men and women) so maybe soon?
|10/03/2016 - 12:56pm||Tom Herman||
|09/27/2016 - 10:09pm||Excellent summary; a few||
Excellent summary; a few minutes faster than I could reply and I like your explanation better than my own below.
|09/27/2016 - 10:05pm||Starting the polls later in||
Starting the polls later in the season would help. No ranking that is used for determining playoff participants should ever depend on preseason expectations. The early season polls are only helpful in boosting TV ratings; would a Louisville/Clemson game have national appeal without those small numbers next to each team's name?
|08/27/2016 - 9:11am||Nick Baumgardner tweeted a||
Nick Baumgardner tweeted a predictions story yesterday that included predicting Speight will start. Is he the OP's source?
|08/25/2016 - 8:14pm||Big Ten: M, Ohio StP12: UCLA,||
Big Ten: M, Ohio St
|08/11/2016 - 12:37pm||Under||
Definitely would take the under purely based on how unlikely 4+ shutouts would be in a season. This defense will hold a bunch of teams to single digits though.
|08/11/2016 - 10:43am||Overly complicated||
Travis' idea of the Big 12 imploding is very plausible, but the 4 divisions within a conference seems overly complicated.
I tried to put together a clean realignment of the P5 (link), but even that has its own complications and requires cooperation from basically everyone in the current FBS which just isn't realistic.
Ultimately it is hard to see 5 major conferences compete for a 4 team playoff long-term. We'll either drop to 4 major conferences or see the playoffs expand in the near future.
|08/10/2016 - 4:07pm||You also said
You also said
He doesn't get the recruits.
By which I assume you meant "he doesn't get the recruits."
|08/10/2016 - 9:51am||MSU Recruiting||
Why is the narrative still that they don't recruit well? Their 5-year recruiting ranks 3rd in the Big Ten; certainly good enough to be competitive every year. They have more talent than 9 or 10 teams on their schedule every year. Combine that with very good coaching and this is what happens.
|07/12/2016 - 11:27am||Rutgers potential||
Rutgers has always had the ingredients for success that the author references, yet they've never become a power. It's not like Rutgers is all of a sudden in a recruiting hotbed and a highly populated region; that's been the case forever and they're still the worst athletic department in the Big Ten.
Can they improve? Sure, but it'll take a catalyst beyond what they already have, because what they already have isn't nearly enough.
|06/27/2016 - 3:49pm||Davis should be ineligible in 2016||
He dressed in many games throughout 2011 (one of his medical RS years) which suggests he wasn't really injured. Tons of evidence here:
|06/24/2016 - 4:21pm||None of them should get a 6th year||
They all dressed for multiple games throughout the 2011 season. Tons of evidence here:
|06/24/2016 - 12:36pm||Difficult to be great in both long-term||
Very few teams are great in both sports long-term. I wrote up a summary of the best dual sports schools that you can find at the link in my signature (or here, 2nd article after 6th year eligibility information).
Beyond the resources, it takes a fair amount of good fortune to make a tournament run (good health, favorable draw, etc.), and that has rarely lined up perfectly for Michigan.
Sure, a few games flipping for Michigan would add to their titles, but other schools can make that claim as well. North Carolina has been to 19 Final Fours. Duke has 16, Kansas 14, Louisville 10, Indiana 8; compared to Michigan's 7. UConn seems to be the anomaly, with 4 titles on 5 appearances; most teams don't have their stars align at that rate once they reach the Final Four.
Also, it takes a GREAT coach to win a national title. Only 12 active coaches have a national championship, and only 26 have taken a team to a Final Four (including ours). Michigan is probably a top 25 program, but probably not a top 12. That sounds about right, doesn't it?
|06/24/2016 - 9:56am||That's the first thing I||
That's the first thing I thought of too. Two Lions getting in trouble for being naked in recent years. Wasn't the coach's incident at a drive-thru window?
|06/24/2016 - 9:53am||Less than a football season||
Less than a football season until the football season!
|06/24/2016 - 9:50am||Recruits||
Recruits, please take notice. The path (well, a path) to the NBA runs through Ann Arbor.
|06/24/2016 - 9:40am||Maybe just beyond 24 hours.||
Maybe just beyond 24 hours. Obviously I'm not in the medical field; wouldn't last a week with those tumultuous schedules
|03/31/2016 - 8:28pm||Currently researching||
Off-hand that's a great list you've assembled. I'm currently researching all-time winning percentages for each sport, though basketball has been difficult to find for most teams. So far it looks like Notre Dame is the strongest historically when comparing both sports by school, followed by Texas, Alabama(?), Ohio State, and Oklahoma. I'll post full results at the site in my signature when I've collected everything I need.
|03/31/2016 - 5:21pm||That's true, and after I||
That's true, and after I wrote it I wondered if they've been good long enough to be considered perennial. Got any suggestions for a better example? Really, I'm thinking Michigan might be the closest to fitting the bill but I'd like to have something else for comparison.
|03/31/2016 - 4:05pm||Basketball is secondary||
At Michigan, football will always be king. Is it fair to expect a secondary program to be a perennial contender? Does any school have that with their secondary program, whether it be football or basketball?
There are a handful of schools that excel in both (Wisconsin is the best example I can think of who is perennially solid in both), but to have two programs that are routinely near the top just doesn't exist. Michigan basketball can and does have its sporadic spikes in success, but to expect sustained success is unrealistic.
Michigan has a ton of resources, more than most. But the bulk of those resources go to football, not basketball. To compete at the top, Michigan basketball has to outduel schools whose basketball program is the primary at their school. That's a huge hurdle to overcome.
The most glaring challenge I see is in recruiting visits. A kid comes to an early season game at Crisler and sees a half-full arena of fans mildly engaged in the action. Contrast this with an Indiana, or even a Dayton, where basketball is king and the arena is always full and energized. The recruit would be coming in knowing that no matter how successful the team is, it'll always be second fiddle to football.
I'd love to see Michigan basketball become a perennial contender, I just don't see how it is possible.
|03/30/2016 - 12:36pm||Bret Bielema||
Bret and his pigface deserves a nomination.
|02/26/2016 - 7:33am||Bracketology observations||
There are definitely some brackets in the matrix with more credibility than others. The historical scoring system is a good reference for finding whose brackets are worth paying attention to. I was disappointed with my ranking last year so had to tweak my formulas in the off-season (my bracket is entirely data-generated) and hopefully it results in a better ranking this time around.
I only update mine every couple of days, so my prior update with Michigan out of the field was before the Northwestern win. This morning they are back in (barely).
A few years ago I grew a bit tired of only having one resource (Lunardi) for bracketology, so I was happy to stumble upon the matrix one day. It's interesting that he is a middle of the pack participant despite being the most well-known.
I've found two interesting things about projecting a bracket myself: It is easier than you may think to pick the field correctly, but harder than it seems to get the seeding correct. There are 32 autobids, so you definitely get those teams right, and the rest of the RPI top 30 is a lock to get in so that leaves maybe 15 or so bids that require actually thinking about. If you miss more than 8, you're really doing a poor job of projecting the field. Seeding at the top and the bottom is pretty easy, but being accurate in the 6-11 range is where the forecasting becomes most challenging.
|02/25/2016 - 5:03pm||Bracket Matrix||
Rather than scouring the internet for each analysts' brackets, everyone should be using the Bracket Matrix (<--linked) to see all of the brackets in aggregate. This gives a much better idea of where Michigan stands in a quick glance than parsing through Linardi, Palm, and other "professional" bracketologists.
Disclaimer: I may be slightly partial to the matrix because I am a particiant in it (see signature link below for my contribution to it)
|01/29/2016 - 6:08pm||Paint the ceiling white in Crisler||
There have been many efforts to brighten up Crisler, and admittedly it is better than say 10 years ago, but it's still pretty dungeon-like in the upper bowl because the ceiling is painted black.
Yost has silver panel-like things on the ceiling to help reflect the light and dramatically brighten the building. I'd like to see a similar revision applied to Crisler. So, paint the ceilng white, or attach the reflective silver panels to it; do something please.
|11/24/2015 - 12:01pm||Michigan stays at 12||
I don't see Michigan jumping anybody that won, and the two OSUs that lost won't fall behind Michigan.
4 Notre Dame
5 Michigan St
7 Ohio St
10 Oklahoma St
These are the only teams with greater than 0% chance of getting into the playoff, with both Stanford and Michigan needing an exceptional amount of outside help to do so.
|11/23/2015 - 3:27pm||Scenarios||
For Michigan or Michigan State: Win B1G, AND one of the following needs to have 2+ losses: SEC champ, Big 12 champ, ACC champ, Notre Dame.
|11/17/2015 - 2:24pm||Top 4 unchanged||
Clemson and Alabama might switch places, but will still be the top 2, with Ohio St and Notre Dame rounding out the field. Oklahoma should make a huge jump, maybe as high as 5. Michigan will probably move up a little, but unlikely to jump all 4 top 10 teams that lost this past week. I'd say 12 for them. Baylor should drop a lot, as they've beaten exactly nobody.
|11/12/2015 - 11:04am||Clarification||
Sorry, I should've worded that better. I was referring to the SEC West standings when I said LSU would need to lose twice more and Miss St to win out for Miss St to be ahead of them. That would give LSU 3 losses in the conference with Miss St still at 2, and Miss St would have the tiebreaker over Alabama so they'd play in the SEC CG.
In this super unlikely scenario, however, I do think a 3-loss LSU would fall behind a 2-loss Miss St in the CFP rankings.
|11/11/2015 - 5:16pm||Only in the near-term||
If Mississippi State pulls the upset I think they would jump ahead of Michigan temporarily, but ultimately Michigan would be ahead of them if Michigan wins out. Miss St has two losses in their division (LSU, A&M) so LSU would need two more losses for Miss St to get the tiebreaker over LSU.
None of this matters if Michigan doesn't get to Indy though, and for that the most important things are winning out and for Michigan St to lose again.
|11/11/2015 - 3:42pm||Lots can happen||
Several teams have very backloaded schedules (looking at you, Big XII) so there are still a ton of opportunities for Michigan to climb into the top 4. It definitely requires some outside help (along with winning out including a win in Indy, obviously) but the necessary outside events really aren't that unlikely. Nobody ranked behind Michigan would jump them if they win out.
MSU's loss to Nebraska may be their death knell. Who do they want to win the Nebraska/Iowa game? An Iowa loss likely drops them far in the rankings, TCU style. A Nebraska loss means MSU got beat by a team that didn't make a bowl.
|10/29/2015 - 4:55pm||38-14 Michigan||
|05/18/2013 - 2:16am||Crab cakes and football||
That's what Maryland does!
|10/03/2012 - 8:07am||Gabe*||
|10/03/2012 - 8:05am||Gave Watson bought that Hummer||
Is he still in the league?
|03/30/2012 - 7:38pm||Secondary market price corrections||
Based on what I heard about people buying on secondary markets last season, the $95 "premium" game is definitely not too high. People in my section (35) claimed to pay around 200 for the Ohio game and even more for UTL. Now, $75 for UMass? Yeah...that's overpriced. It's basically subsidizing the true market value of the premium game though. Would people be happier if the face value were $30 or so for the lesser games and closer to what scalpers/stubhub ask for the premium games? I think that pricing disparity at face value would cause a lot more grumbling. Obviously everyone would rather pay less for these games, but the demand clearly is still very high for premium games, so that's going to pull up the prices for other games.