|01/18/2011 - 4:21pm||So I am assuming calling him||
So I am assuming calling him Gerg Mattison would be an acceptable reason to neg?
|01/09/2011 - 9:40pm||Fail||
sums it up
|01/07/2011 - 1:46pm||Eh, what can I say||
Cant be any worse results than what we have now
|01/07/2011 - 12:08pm||My List||
Under no circumstances should we hire "head case" Miles. I like Hokes quote saying "Michigan is his dream job" but realistically, there is nothing there to prove success is achievable with him as HC at Michigan.
Honestly I would rather have Kansas's old fat ass coach Mangino than Miles.
|12/13/2010 - 11:18pm||Denard -??????? Most||
Denard -??????? Most untackelable!!!
|12/11/2010 - 10:18pm||Touche!||
Maybe there is a "Hard-Ass" setting....... No I think the OP would really get in trouble
|12/11/2010 - 10:04pm||That is seriously the||
That is seriously the funniest comment I read in awhile
|12/11/2010 - 10:01pm||Waa Waaa Waaaaaaaaaaaaa.
Waa Waaa Waaaaaaaaaaaaa.
If you can't handle seeing a booty in a thong then just adjust your internet settings for parentaly controls to "extremely anal"... And you might want to avoid going to any beaches in the summer, they may get you in trouble..
|11/18/2010 - 11:24pm||I do not think one good game against a crappy Purdue team counts||
Combining all the big ten games minus Purdue, the opposition had 372 plays on offense total. Out of that 372 plays we forced 21 punts, 2 t/o, gave up 8 field goals, and 24 tds. Thats not very good guys.
As far as the Purdue game went they had 69 plays on offense. Out of those 69 plays we forced them to punt 7 times, had 5 t/0's 3 f/gs and 1 td. Those are deffinately better numbers but just keep in mind who we were going up against.
Don't get me wrong, I will take anything I can get to improve our numbers overall, lets just keep things in perspective alittle bit.
|10/16/2010 - 9:15am||Keep in mind that Denard had||
Keep in mind that Denard had 2 picks in the inzone and 3 over thrown passes that were sure tds... That is 5 more touchdowns for blue, which means we would have won... The offense worked and will continue to work against big ten opponents, it was just an off day.. On the lighter side of things, I see Michigan pulling out the win today with UM being hungry and Iowa not as prepared for this offensive juggernaut.
|10/16/2010 - 12:57am||38-34 Michigan||
|10/15/2010 - 1:19pm||Confirmed, that is Ha'sean||
Confirmed, that is Ha'sean Clinton-Dix, not Darryl Monroe..
|10/15/2010 - 12:11am||Pretty sure No. 4 is Ha'sean||
Pretty sure No. 4 is Ha'sean Clinton- Dix and not Darryl Monroe.. I could be wrong but I am about 90% sure.
|04/18/2010 - 5:05pm||Thats the million dollar||
Thats the million dollar question.. When you play the offense vs the defense it is pretty damn hard to decifer which is is good or bad. My guess is they put tate in to play against the 1's def and the 2's off to give him a challenge. Can he excel with less talent (experience) on the field. and vice versa for denard. They probably wanted to make Denard look good because of all the jibberish coming out of the other practices about his improvement. But Denard in with the best offense we have against the second string defense on a team were the first string defense is horrible and what do you think is going to happen.
Trying to make an illusion on the field is what you saw!!!!.
Is there reason for hope? Maybe, but I am not so thrilled our coach is a robot when speaking about the team. Every sentence is generic and meaningless. If he grew a set and actually gave truthful insightful and accurate descriptions about what is going on in the program, people might not dislike him as much. (well those that do not particularly like him).
That is just my thoughts tho.
|04/10/2010 - 2:27pm||Dislike? anyone whoe doesnt wear maize n blue||
Thats my top ten..