|02/16/2011 - 12:37pm||Disagree on those numbers||
Considering how low we are on O-linemen (whatever we get this recruiting class will be the entire 2nd string in 2013, as only rFr), I don't see how 3-4 can be the goal this year. More like 5-6... whereas positions like LB and possibly DE are much lower priority.
|02/10/2011 - 11:00am||NomadicBlue--I am in the||
NomadicBlue--I am in the exact same situation, except my 3 year old daughter also knows the words to The Victors and, most adorably, once sang them while a planeload of people silently waited to exit.
|02/10/2011 - 7:35am||Dear God, MGoBlog and SPL||
Dear God, MGoBlog and SPL together... what more could I need? An extended analogy on the merits of Lennon vs Mowbray? Walter Smith-as-JoePa?
|02/10/2011 - 7:23am||ATDHE.net gone too||
ATDHE also seized by DHS; has the same message. I tried to use it over the weekend and it was like that. Sucks, because I live in north Africa and this is my main way to get football (AFN doesn't show many Michigan games when they go 5-7, 7-6...).
|02/10/2011 - 7:15am||http://www.maizenbrew.com/201||
Projected 2012 Depth: Ricky Barnum (RS Sr.), Rocko Khoury (RS Sr.), Elliott Mealer (RS Sr.), Patrick Omameh (RS Sr.), Taylor Lewan (RS Jr.), Michael Schofield (RS Jr.), Christian Pace (RS So.), Chris Bryant (So.), Jack Miller (So.), Tony Posada (So.)
|02/10/2011 - 6:43am||That was slight hyperbole,||
That was slight hyperbole, but at least he has the size (it seems most walk-on O-linemen are 260 and forever trying to get to 280... Glasgow is already 295).
Considering that the 2013 OL situation is on track to be like 2008 OL or 2010 secondary, some desperation to have experienced players may be in order.
This is the depth chart:
C: Pace (IF injury not career-ending as rumored), Miller
G: Posada, Bryant
T: Lewan, Schofield
If Pace is out and Lewan goes pro, or anyone transfers or washes out, a redshirt freshman from next year's class is starting. Regardless, the entire 2nd string is redshirt or true freshmen.
|02/10/2011 - 2:21am||Would be good news...||
Considering our scary 2013 OL situation (4-6 non-freshmen), a developmental prospect like this is better than nothing. Heck, I'd throw a scholie at him (or, in hindsight, the staff should have tried to pry away a few more MAC or lower-Big 10 O-linemen... but maybe they did).
|01/23/2011 - 5:08pm||New recruits at the bottom||
Not anything against Hoke, it is a tough situation, but with 3 of the 4 new recruits being at the bottom of our list quality-wise, it is obvious that what has happened so far is what-was-to-be-expected: filling out the class with "replacement-level" players taken from other, weaker programs.
Now, if he gets a bunch of 4-stars to commit in the next week, that assessment will all change. But I'm not quite sure why people are so excited about what happened so far. Hopeful for the next week--sure.
|01/06/2011 - 5:09pm||I've seen multiple postings||
I've seen multiple postings about how even Fred Jackson was fired, which makes no sense to me. Having at least Barwis/Singletary/Jackson to make the current players feel okay and/or keep this year's commits seems necessary.
|01/05/2011 - 4:33pm||Agree||
The hire is more important than the recruiting class because this is a young team. We aren't looking for true freshmen to play in the secondary, we are looking for this year's true freshmen to play well next year as returning starters... as long as the obvious impact players are kept, I won't freak out if there are a few decommits.
|01/05/2011 - 4:28pm||Jameson's||
Thank God I'm 5 hours ahead of EST and it is more socially acceptable.
|10/02/2009 - 1:21pm||Aargh||
I was at the Texas Tech v Texas game 2 weeks ago and the stadium scoreboard was continually showing Notre Dame had beaten "MICHIGAN"... As if "MSU" would be too tough to figure out, or Mich St. Everytime it popped up I wanted to vomit.
|10/01/2009 - 11:34am||Algeria, heck yeah||
I was living in Tunisia last season and am living in Morocco this season, so this concept (while maybe a joke) is not crazy to me.
First, you need access to Armed Forces Network satellite. That is your only hope. They do not have college football at bars in hotels. No freaking way. College football highlights don't even make CNN International. NBA, NHL... maybe. NFL--rarely.
If you work for the Embassy (like me) you get the Armed Forces Network satellite and they show several Michigan games a year (3 last year--Utah, ND, OSU; many more in a good year). If you don't, then you BEFRIEND someone who does. Quickly. Desperately.
|03/22/2009 - 11:29am||If it means anything...||
Draft Express has Manny as a #20 or so draft pick NEXT year. No one wants to come out and be a 2nd round pick, which Manny would probably be next year. Sims is too much of a tweener, and wouldn't leave early.
|03/21/2009 - 1:46pm||The ban has nothing to do with the media||
The University has to remove that era from the record books. There is no ban on CBS showing that, or ESPNClassic, or from pundits talking about the Fab Five.
|03/13/2009 - 11:53am||The 1993 Kentucky game...||
...was an absolutely classic win. Pitino-Kentucky were at the peak of their power. That tournament they were DESTROYING teams, winning every game by 30-40 points, starting out games with 34-6 type runs. Michigan was the underdog, and won.
That same year, another classic game: 2nd round, down early in the 2nd half by 17 (?!?) to an upstart UCLA team (the nucleus of which would win the NCAA tourney two years later), the Fab Five somehow made a huge comeback and won.
|03/12/2009 - 4:23pm||10||
Okay, I'll be the first with a serious answer.
10. That's what it was before today's game (by consensus) and beating a team like Iowa (sub-.500, 10th team in the conference) doesn't help anything, it's neutral. It might drop to 11 if by some bad luck a few bubble teams pull off miracle runs in their conference tournaments.
A win in the quarterfinals might get that up to a 9, and a semifinal win up to an 8.
But, seeding can be moved a spot to accommodate the needs of the pairings (and with maybe 8 Big 10 teams this year, many in the 7-11 range, that could very likely happen).
|03/10/2009 - 10:56am||Disagree..||
..it's a really weak opponent and if anything will hurt their RPI. It is just a chance to have a quasi-exhibition to re-integrate him to the team. As far as the football analogy goes, I really doubt that beating Slippery Rock 150-0 (or a WAC team, or whatever) would help out a team for being #1.
|03/05/2009 - 4:51pm||All his size means is that he won't play soon||
There are plenty of recruits who are nowhere near the size for their position--that's what a couple years in a BCS program is all about. He can play LB at the college level at 215-220, especially in the spread era (which I think will continue). Going from 180 to 215 shouldn't be a problem. But he won't see the field until he is at least a redshirt soph.
|03/01/2009 - 5:53am||I strongly agree||
Seeing Beaver there--among other things--drives me crazy.
|02/27/2009 - 1:57am||It's not even close...||
Before this game, Michigan was considered about the 10th team OUT of the tournament (see Bracket Project cumulative)... that means they need to have a better last few games (including this Purdue victory) than 8-9 other teams (let's not forget the teams just behind them too, however) AND a team already projected to be in the tournament.
Don't you think a few of those 10 teams are going to manage a win over a ranked team, at home? I would imagine at least 1 will win every game left.
I think they need to sweep the final two (to improve road record) and win 1 or 2 in the Big 10. A split in the final two combined with a quarterfinal victory over MSU might do it, though.
|02/20/2009 - 12:14pm||My best is your worst||
Best: 2002 Washington... that game was OVER until the 15 yard penalty put us in range for a desperation (44 yard?) FG by a kicker who had already missed two, seemed completely impossible. When he hit it the place went totally crazy.
Worst: 1986 Minnesota... Michigan was having a great year (ranked #2, towards the end of the season, beat Florida State and Notre Dame in the non-conference!), and a mediocre Minnesota team came and won on the road. The worst was the opening kickoff of the 2nd half (if I recall correctly), Minnesota pooch kicked it and caught it on the fly at like the Michigan 30. Were it not for this, Bo might have won his MNC that year? [edit, forgot, they lost to Arizona State in the Rose Bowl, sooo... no]
|02/20/2009 - 9:44am||It's interesting that outside observers...||
seem to be more pessimistic than us on this board, despite the lack of mid-major teams this year to "take away" at-large spots.
That is, ESPN lists Michigan's chances as "on life-support" and IF the seasons finishes on a "strong note" Michigan "MIGHT [emphasis mine] still have a decent chance." So that is STRONG FINISH > MIGHT > DECENT CHANCE. Despite the huge non-conference victories, the rough road record absolutely needs to improve. I'd say Michigan needs to win two of these last 3 road games (would raise road record to 4-7) and then get a couple neutral victories in the tourney too?
|02/20/2009 - 7:48am||Brian said it best after Duke...||
...this is a young team riding a couple very good players and a host of role players (who are, roughly, inadequate for a NCAA tourney team) and we have no idea which team is going to show up, and the season will be maddeningly inconsistent.
This team could well win 3 of the last 4 and 2 Big 10 tourney games, be an 8 seed that wins its first game and then gives a 1 seed a go... and I wouldn't be surprised.
Or, it could lose the remaining 4 (3 are on the road, after all) and the first-game of the Big 10 tournament.
At least, in the latter case, last night's game guaranteed eligibility for an NIT spot. I think most of us would have taken that (16-15 and 7-11 in the Big 10) at the beginning of the season! But, of course, I/we are hungry for more.
|02/17/2009 - 10:19am||It depends...||
...on outside factors.
When you cut it as close as this team will (hopefully) by going 9-9, you are at the mercy of how the other bubble teams do in the end, and how many at-large teams come from mid-majors because the power team didn't win its tournament, etc.
|02/16/2009 - 7:50am||This assumes a player with||
This assumes a player with two fouls in the 1st half is going to ultimately foul out. It might well be an odd coincidence. Manny played another 22 or so minutes and got ONE more foul. He finished a 45 minute (OT) game with 3 fouls. So, he could have easily played 5 more minutes in the first half and not have fouled out... and Michigan could have won by 6 in regulation instead of going to OT.
|02/15/2009 - 4:19pm||Why?||
You are afraid of something (3rd) that will lead to something (4th) that will lead to something bad (5th--and player leaving the game)... and the solution is to invoke that something bad (player leaving the game) yourself?? I don't get it.
|02/13/2009 - 10:51am||Paul Jokisch, damnit||
How about a 6'8" wide receiver? With like a 20 yards/catch average?
|02/10/2009 - 12:39pm||It would be... in the 80s,||
It would be... in the 80s, Oklahoma (Switzer) and A&M (Jackie Sherrill) were pulling in recruits and being successful... and they were both also cheating. That had stopped by the 90s but Mackovic was lukewarm; part of the problem was that he didn't have a folksy way to him (came across as too uptight) so he didn't connect with boosters, HS coaches, recruits, etc. Mack Brown does. So at that time a lot of big Texas recruits were going all over the place. And, the facilities got a boost after Mack showed up and success bred success.
|02/10/2009 - 12:12pm||I'll echo that...||
...there is nothing sketchy about this (and not just because I have an M.A. from UT).
Mack Brown absolutely selects his class, it is not recruiting in the traditional sense. There are enough big time recruits in Texas to easily make a big-time class, A&M is only competition for them in a small area of eastern Texas (see: McGuffie), and Oklahoma competes in some areas of northern Texas. Otherwise, he can basically go to 20 4-star recruits every year "here's your offer, take it, or I'll move on to another batch of guys." And since they have spent their whole lives being UT fans, and they are absolutely blown away by the facilities (I've been backstage there, and it is mind-boggling)... it is really, really easy to get 11 of them to say "yes" a year in advance. On a certain level, Ohio is in the same position. How much of Tressel's class was filled before June with Ohio 5 and 4 stars??
|02/09/2009 - 10:12am||Alright, I'm wrong about the||
Alright, I'm wrong about the previous OLB experience, then, but I am deferring to the other analysts that have said Fitzgerald ILB, Ezeh OLB is the most likely scenario.
|02/07/2009 - 4:14pm||Both this site and Varsity||
Both this site and Varsity Blue have made that prediction... I think because Fitzgerald is the most obvious 3rd LB to have out there, and he has a more natural MLB body/skill-set, whereas Ezeh could do either. Didn't he play on the outside in 07?
|01/23/2009 - 12:06pm||The last #1 player from Ohio we got was...||
...Prescott Burgess. Mike Massey was a Top 5. As was Justin Boren.
But, Mario Manningham was nice.
|01/21/2009 - 3:12pm||I wouldn't say 10/4/2 in 31||
I wouldn't say 10/4/2 in 31 minutes is flourishing. A 6'8" potted plant could get that. But I always did like Petway.
|01/14/2009 - 1:19pm||Like I said in the beginning,||
Like I said in the beginning, I wasn't trying to take that angle. I've seen that work elsewhere (but am too lazy to look for it) and it is convincing.
My point is just a reminder that even with the superior recruits, it is a 50/50 (or so) crap shoot. 4 years from now we'll be like, "wow Roh (or LaLota) is a 4th year junior and hasn't even started yet?" Or, "William Campbell, remember him?"
|01/14/2009 - 12:37pm||Let's not forget that Kelly||
Let's not forget that Kelly Baraka was a 5-star and that Ray Lewis just loves The Game.
|12/23/2008 - 10:06am||Yes, it matters||
I made this argument in another comments section but I feel like repeating it again this week.
For those of us who live outside of Michigan and don't have big satellite subscriptions, BEING RANKED MATTERS A LOT.
Top 25 teams get televised more on major networks (and, in my case, Armed Forces Network overseas).
Top 25 teams have their games-in-progress get live look-ins more.
Top 25 teams have their highlights shown on Sportscenter and other highlights shows far more.
Top 25 teams have analysis articles written on them by columnists far more often.
And so on... it seems to me a luxurious affectation of people in Michigan or with a 500 channel satellite program to say something like "who cares if we're ranked." Would I rather watch 2 Michigan games a year or 10??? Ummm, 10?!?
The difference in my ability to follow Michigan basketball the last 10 years (mostly unranked) and Michigan football this year (unranked)--outside of things like blogs--is tremendous.
|12/21/2008 - 5:31am||Thanks for the name catch...||
but I disagree. Kapsner was portrayed as being neck-and-neck with Brady and Henson, and was thought of as someone who could go to the pros despite not playing in college, like Gutierrez or Cassel. I am not including "got beaten out by extremely good competition" as meaning a QB turned out to be a bust.
|12/21/2008 - 5:29am||I'll address a couple of those...||
Regarding #1: Clearly given his decision, Beaver's #1 priority is near-guaranteed playing time. If he simply didn't like Michigan because of something RichRod did or said, he must have had other offers from Top 25 type teams (and I think part of The Panic is the thought that the decommits indicate some hidden flaw in Rodriguez's appeal to recruits). We can all create fantasy recruits who love Michigan regardless and fill out a 25 man class, but in reality most recruits have a mix of reasons why they like Michigan and some they don't, and if the con- reasons come to the forefront, they transfer later on. Better to know that now than in August when Beaver gets told he is 3rd string and leaves.
Regarding #5, yes, it is different than Lloyd's system, and if I had more time and effort I would do a complete breakdown of the Top 20-30 QB recruits for the 1995-2005 period, but this was just an attempt to answer the question "how many QB recruits turn out to be unplayable?" While half of NFL 1st round QBs turn out badly, I'm positing that the high school to college move, nowadays, is less dramatic and something like 3/4 of QBs turn out to be for real. And, I am more optimistic than most about Threet. I think last year was roughly like Navarre 2000 or 2001, and if we could now have Navarre 2002 and an 8-4 season, we could live with that.
|12/21/2008 - 5:20am||Or Chris Young... maybe they||
Or Chris Young... maybe they were the same person.
|12/08/2008 - 2:15pm||It does matter...||
As I found out post-1998 for basketball, and this year for football, being ranked matters A LOT.
Well, the sports ticker often doesn't show non-Top 25 scores.
The highlights shows rarely show non-Top 25 scores.
I work for the government in the Middle East and Armed Forces Network mostly shows only high-level match-ups, except for games of real sentimental interest (for example, I got to see the Utah and Notre Dame games... and then nothing until Ohio State; last year and previous years I saw maybe 7-9 games a year).
|12/01/2008 - 12:04pm||Ugh||
If you would have told me last January 1st that I would be reading a post with this subject matter and waiting with baited breath for the result... ugh, ugh, ugh.
|11/10/2008 - 2:49pm||Texas||
I went to grad school at UT and stayed in Austin after that... and went to a lot of games. Sorry, Brian, but it's silly to claim UT fans are apathetic. The stadium is REALLY loud, far louder than The Big House, and don't even get me started on a comparison of the basketball arenas. Baylor is the annual beat-down. I'm not shocked some people didn't show up. I've never seen it like that, but, really, how many Baylor games can you go see in a lifetime before you just give up?
|08/12/2008 - 7:37pm||You, sir, are a Communist||
You, sir, are a Communist
|08/05/2008 - 6:21pm||I'm not worried||One five star, 9 four stars (let's say) and a bunch of 3 stars is a totally normal #10-15 or so ranked class. Given that RR needs to quickly get a bunch of players to fit his ideal version of his system, 3-star jitterbug types don't worry me. I wonder if--a little--this staff is throwing out a lot of offers to a lot of 3 stars because they aren't used to a high rate of acceptance. Also, it seems that they need certain kinds of players who might not be available from traditional U-M recruiting areas (which is why it is important to "convert" more midwestern HS programs to spread) while also knowing they maybe can't beat LSU for a LA kid or S. Carolina for a SC kid... thus settling for 3 stars? While I think it is true that immediate playing time is a big attraction due to the transition, I also think there are guys waiting to see how things play out and how the offense looks. Given all this, a #10 type class is more than enough.|
|07/28/2008 - 5:26pm||I agree with Mr Erectshon on||I agree with Mr Erectshon on this Beaver issue. The Beaver/Cox/T'aint backfield MUST become a reality.|
|07/27/2008 - 7:55pm||I'm talking about current NFL||I'm talking about current NFL players.|
|07/27/2008 - 3:22pm||Last week, apparently||
|07/27/2008 - 11:58am||Ian Gold||He was pretty good, but is now listed as retired.|
|07/19/2008 - 11:37am||I like my numbers NFL style||WRs numbered 22 bug me. Yes, I know about Desmond. Linebackers with numbers in the 30s and 40s (or 4???) don't get me excited either.|