|04/15/2018 - 9:06am||Just the ole hitting on eight||
Just the ole hitting on eight positions offseason question.
|04/12/2018 - 3:41pm||All the excess TV contracts||
All the excess TV contracts have done is allow Big Ten schools to dump unnecessary funds on facilities and administration. I mean, does anyone feel like the Big Ten is more competitive because it got more money? The only reason football improved was because they finally went out and hired real coaches.
And let's not pretend like the TV contracts made it possible for Michigan, Ohio State, and Penn State to hire real coaches. They paid the old coaches a ton of money too.
The unbundling is going to be awful for sports teams and fans. However, it's going to be great for just about everyone else. The most expensive cable channels are the sports channels, yet like half the population doesn't even watch them. Not having to pay for those channels is going to save them a lot of money.
If I was a Big Ten Athletic Director, I would be researching my options for what happens after this bubble finishes (it already started) bursting. Schools like Michigan and Ohio State are going to be carrying around dead weight like Maryland and Rutgers. Once the TV contracts disappear, teams need to reconsider the option of going independent.
|03/30/2018 - 10:08am||Let's hope the new food table||
Let's hope the new food table fixes the pass blocking.
|03/09/2018 - 3:11pm||Not really. Michigan||
Not really. Michigan athletics pays for Michigan athletics. And I don’t think anybody would support a concept of the athletic department subsidizing the school.
|03/09/2018 - 8:30am||From the rumblilngs I had||
From the rumblilngs I had heard, it seemed like he wanted to go with Fisch, but he jumped to the NFL. Guessing he's going to wait for the dust to clear now and then pick where he wants.
|02/22/2018 - 7:26am||Nebraska has a losing record||
Nebraska has a losing record away from home this season. Michigan will be in good shape.
|02/21/2018 - 9:34am||Would never argue that Rich||
Would never argue that Rich Rod was the guy, but I think people really forget about the other factors at play in the 2009 and 2010 offensive numbers. Everyone seems to forget how absolutely horrific the special teams were those years.
Our special teams would consistently force our offense to start at our own 10 or 15 yard line and leave Tate/Denard with 90ish yards to go on every drive. The field goal kicking was also terrible. It cost us the Purdue game in 2009 and certainly didn't help Denard in 2010.
Not trying to make excuses, but is it really that crazy to think the offense slowed down when it had to drive 90ish yards consistently against good to elite defenses?
|02/16/2018 - 11:01am||Remember this exact same||
Remember this exact same article about John O'Korn?
|01/17/2018 - 4:43pm||Michigan will absolutely have||
Michigan will absolutely have shot, especially if they can win some games down the stretch and avoid facing a one or two seed in the first weekend.
However, I don't know why people keep thinking this, but Michigan State is not going to be anywhere close to a one seed on Selection Sunday.
|01/11/2018 - 9:30am||Lol, cantina?||
|01/10/2018 - 2:02pm||Livers isn't even the most||
Livers isn't even the most athletic player on this team. I really like his game and how he's progressing, but this is pretty insane. And we don't even need to get to GR3, who could very well could have been the most athletic player in Michigan basketball history.
|12/08/2017 - 11:13am||Scouted him in high school.||
Scouted him in high school. Rarely will meet a nicer kid with nicer parents. Pathetic move by MHSAA.
|11/21/2017 - 8:38am||I would love to see Michigan||
I would love to see Michigan go independent in football and play absolutely nobody save MSU, ND, and OSU. Would give you insanely high odds to make a NY6 bowl every year.
|11/15/2017 - 1:13pm||What exactly do you think ADs||
What exactly do you think ADs are there for?
|11/05/2017 - 6:52pm||Why? Everybody is upgrading||
Why? Everybody is upgrading facilities. Moreover, Minnesota needs major personnel upgrades and a legitimate QB. It’s possible, sure. Don’t think is anywhere close to a guarantee though.
|11/01/2017 - 12:34pm||Because the most important||
Because the most important factor (by a mile) as to who makes the Playoff is simple win-loss record and Penn State has a better shot at ending up 11-1 than Ohio State does. Moreover, Ohio State also gets the short end of the stick of likely going to Indy to play a Wisconsin team that is capable of winning that game.
Also, I don't get why people think the Committee "learns" anything year to year. They do the same thing as the AP Poll, but pretend it's more thought out. The members also change, so it's impossible for the group to learn from year to year.
|09/24/2017 - 3:32pm||How has nobody mentioned that||
How has nobody mentioned that they kept their starters in forever? The game was eerily similar to our game with them last year. Never in doubt.
|09/21/2017 - 11:52am||Did the AAC suddenly stop||
Did the AAC suddenly stop existing?
|09/19/2017 - 12:28pm||Look, you could convince me||
Look, you could convince me that Ulizio is Michigan's weakest offensive starter. You could even convince me that he's one of the weaker starters in the Big Ten and among all Power Five teams.
But, from a numbers perspective, a 0.5 rating just doesn't make sense. As a few people here have mentioned, this site offers little as to how they get these numbers (which should raise even more doubt). However, 0.5 implies Ulizio doesn't even crack the first percentile of FBS football.
Maybe this is obvious, but think about the last percentile of FBS football for a second. Last year's S&P bottom six teams were UConn, Nevada, Charlotte, UL-Monroe, Buffalo, and Texas State. There were 14 (!!!) teams that finished behind Rutgers. We're not talking about "down recruiting" for a Big Ten team. Three-star recruits should blow away a 0.5 rating. Hell, a major recruit should be able to beat that number as a freshman or first-year player.
My issue here isn't with negatively rating the offensive line. My issue is that a 0.5 rating doesn't make sense and, as such, I'm not sure what these "ratings" tell us.
|09/19/2017 - 11:30am||Maybe this is just me, but a||
Maybe this is just me, but a 0.5 rating for a starting offensive lineman at a Big Ten school seems unbeliveable. While I admit to having no idea how they calculate these numbers, that just doesn't seem possible to me.
Like, in the grand scheme of college football, how could someone earn a starting job at a school like Michigan with a 0.5 score? There are 128 FBS teams. I know run blocking isn't included here, but I have serious questions about the scaling here. Are we seriously to believe that Ulizio could only start at six or seven schools in FBS? While, I get everyone has concerns about his play so far, that seems unbelievable to me.
|09/18/2017 - 6:41pm||I ordered through the AD and||
I ordered through the AD and got section 118.
|08/23/2017 - 10:22am||Agree, the pom poms work far||
Agree, the pom poms work far better.
|08/07/2017 - 8:33am||If you think Barrett and||
If you think Barrett and McSorley are bad college quarterbacks, I have no idea what game you've been watching. Are they perfect? No way, but at the *college* level, there's a reason why both of those guys are rated as top 10 guys right now.
On top of that, CJ Beathard was a third round pick and Clayton Thorson had a really nice year for Northwestern. Mitch Leidner's numbers regressed last season, but I don't think he's nearly as bad as some people like to joke about. Just a consequence of that crazy way too early NFL Draft projection a few years back.
Should people have been overjoyed with what Speight did last year? No, the revisionist history continues to amaze me. Personally, I was more disappointed with an upperclassmen line and upperclassmen backs that couldn't run the ball against competent defenses.
|07/27/2017 - 11:37am||Every few years, there's a||
Every few years, there's a new Big Ten "underdog" that the media starts jumping on as the team to surprise in the next season or two. Most recently, this has included teams like Indiana and Northwestern. Of course, nothing usually comes of it.
I think the new team in this category is Nebraska. Because Riley has "improved" Nebraska's recruiting as of late and went 9-4 last season, people suddenly believe that the Huskers are going to become a powerhouse in college football again.
This idea seems ridiculous to me.
Let's start with the obvious. Riley is 15-11 overall as Nebraska's head coach. Here are his wins against top 50 S&P+ teams at Nebraska:
Considering that one of those wins (vs UCLA) came in a bowl game that Nebraska made as a 5-7 regular season team, we're talking about four quality wins in two seasons. Oh, the team also finished with a losing record in year one and was one of the most fradulent teams out there in year two. Last year's Nebraska team lost by double-digits in three of its four losses and had absolutely no business beating a horrible Oregon team at home in non-con. The Ducks lost simply because they went for a few two-point conversions.
But the previous two years aren't even the worst part. Nebraska is losing a massive, massive amount of contributions from last season, including the team's starting quarterback. Nebraska was absolutley useless when he went out last season. On paper, the quality of Nebraska's team should only downgrade from last season and they were a fraud then too. That recruiting "improvement" is also overblown. Riley has bumped them up a handful of spots from where they were with Pelini, which means that they are still far away from the powers of college football.
Oh, and to the idea that Riley's building something. In his two stints with Oregon State, he had one (!!!) 10-win season in 14 years. Oregon State isn't exactly a college football powerhouse, but that's not an insanely high mark with the inclusion of bowl games. Riley is going to have to outperform that mark significantly to do well at Nebraska.
|07/22/2017 - 7:53am||Jackson most likely won't win||
Jackson most likely won't win it. It's usually someone who surprises out of nowhere. The nitpicking on Jackson this year will be ridiculous.
|07/15/2017 - 5:08pm||Yup.||
|07/07/2017 - 4:09am||This logic relies on a false||
This logic relies on a false premise though. You didnt NEED to bring back Notre Dame. I would have rather played Arkansas than tank an entire home schedule. We acted like we were desperate to get them back when we're the program that's relevant.
|06/27/2017 - 11:43am||Best scenario: Michigan||
Best scenario: Michigan leaves the Big Ten and becomes an independent. It schedules nine body bags and MSU, Notre Dame, and OSU. By this time, the TV contract bubble will have already burst, so nobody needs to be in a conference any longer. Michigan can then play nobody to benefit on the horrible voting system. When the Committee actually puts an incentive on scheduling, Michigan can increase its SOS.
|06/23/2017 - 10:29am||For better or worse, the||
For better or worse, the Lions have no other option. They have to pay Stafford and it's likely going to be with a record salary. When you have no other realistic QB options, you back yourself into a corner and give up all your leverage.
And no, this isn't some indictment on the Lions always sucking or about how they "don't want to win badly enough". If any other GM was sitting in Detroit's shoes right now, they would be doing the exact same thing. Unless your QB is awful, you have to hold onto him until you have a quality replacement.
The Lions don't have a quality replacement.
But what I think people are missing here is that this problem should have been solved years ago. Instead of working on finding a replacement when it was obvious that Stafford wasn't an elite QB, they loaded the depth chart with 7th round picks and free agents.
For example, the Lions should have been the team snatching Cousins as he fell or taking shots on guys like Dak and Wilson. You can argue that fourth and fifth round picks are too valuable to use on QBs when you already have one, but it gets you into situations like this. You take those shots once in awhile on the hope that one will hit. Taking a guy in the seventh round is never going to work out. There's not even really a point.
The Lions put all their cards on Stafford years ago and have done nothing to prepare for life after him. Fans should be angry with that decision. After all, he's an above average QB, but not one likely to carry a team anywhere near the Super Bowl. However, that move also justifies giving him this deal now.
I don't like Stafford all that much, but they have no choice now because of the mistakes years ago.
|06/06/2017 - 2:41pm||Couldn't agree with this||
Couldn't agree with this more:
"But I'm a Michigan fan first and a college football fan second. Michigan's game is the main attraction. Not the chore to get out of the way."
For me, the Michigan game is infinitely more interesting to me than some random college football games on a given Saturday. Maybe that divide is less for others (totally reasonable), but I would sacrifice just about any non-Michigan game viewing, if it meant that the Michigan game was going to be more appealing to me.
Watching the afternoon and evening games is a lot of fun, but, to me, having a great tailgating environment and a great stadium atmosphere are way more valuable to me. We only get 6 to 8 home games a year. I want them to be as enjoyable as possible.
By the way, I would love to someone run a study on how the noon vs 3:30 kickoff compares for season ticket holders vs others. Honestly, not sure how it would compare, but I would be really interested to see the results.
|06/06/2017 - 2:29pm||If I recall correctly, the||
If I recall correctly, the study that the Michigan student government included in Endzone showed that the students had better attendance at the later games. I could be remembering that incorrectly, but that is what I am recalling at the moment.
With that said, I think it's pretty disingenuous to pretend the crowds aren't generally better for 3:30 kicks than noon ones. Rarely do you get the half filled student sections or the quarter or so of the crowd warming up. It would shock me if a majority of season ticket holders didn't agree with that assessment.
Of course, there are going to be limiting factors. Specifically, I'm not going to sit here and claim a 3:30 environment for a Western Michigan game is going to matchup that of a noon kick against Ohio State. Not all the games are perfectly comparable.
It's all circumstantial, but a great comparison for me are the BYU and Northwestern games from the 2015 season. BYU was at noon and Northwestern was at 3:30. Both teams were ranked and the buildups were pretty similar. The crowd was solid in the BYU game, but it was roaring for Northwestern. I'm not sure you get the same setup if that game was at noon.
There are advantages and disadvantages to noon and 3:30 games and it's ok to like either one of those more or less than the other. But I don't think it's outrageous for some fans to want the better atmophere and crowd of the 3:30 kicks.
|06/03/2017 - 8:57am||Agree. I hate the alternates.||
Agree. I hate the alternates. This is something that is going to be viewed as laughable down the line.
|05/12/2017 - 11:54am||This depends way too largely||
This depends way too largely on what Simmons and Matthews do next year. Things would be pretty rough on paper, but Michigan could still put out a lineup of: Simmons, MAAR, Matthews, Duncan, and Teske(?), which isn't bad. Plus, players like Livers, Simpson, and Watson would be there to provide depth.
Not saying you're wrong. Just think there would be too many unknowns to say Michigan would go either way.
|05/02/2017 - 4:22pm||Or, confirmation bias.||
Or, confirmation bias.
|05/02/2017 - 1:05pm||I'm with WD on this. Make the||
I'm with WD on this. Make the Big House as intimidating of an environment as it can get for opposing teams and fans. I have no problem with road fans going to games, but they should have to buy them on the secondary market. I wouldn't even have a problem with the athletic department refusing to sell single-game tickets to people with out-of-state credit cards.
|05/02/2017 - 11:05am||Maybe I'm being a bit||
Maybe I'm being a bit hyperbolic, but with the ticket packs being a great option this year (MSU and OSU at home), I have a hard time believing there are going to be many tickets available to the general public this year. Obviously, some single tickets will be available, but it's awesome to think that virtually every game will be filled with minimal promotion.
|04/09/2017 - 8:55am||For the record, I remember||
For the record, I remember reading that softball was financially positive as well, so that probably deserves to be thrown into the "revenue" pile, assuming that's true.
|03/08/2017 - 10:50am||Unfortunate thing is that||
Unfortunate thing is that Gordie Howe Arena won't even be viewed as a new arena by time that rolls around. Obviously, it will still be in nice shape, but it certainly won't have the same allure.
|03/08/2017 - 10:44am||Tell that to any Minnesota or||
Tell that to any Minnesota or Nebraska fan who wants to travel to DC. Looked it up earlier this morning. Las Vegas is about 10 miles further from Lincoln than DC.
|03/08/2017 - 10:40am||After NYC in 2018, the Big||
After NYC in 2018, the Big Ten Tournament goes back to Chicago and Indianapolis for the next four years, so if they do move it again, it won't be for 6 years from now.
|03/08/2017 - 10:11am||Not sure if you realize this yeat, but the BTT||
Not sure if you realize this yeat, but the BTT will be a week earlier next season because the Big East already has MSG reserved. So, get ready for an awkward bye week for everyone for "exposure."
|03/02/2017 - 7:39am||Big Ten ranks third among||
Big Ten ranks third among Power Five conferences per KenPom. So, more accurately stated, the Big Ten is exactly average among the Power Five. But, ok.
It's also worth noting that seven (!!!) of Michigan's eight conference losses have come by 10 points or less, with two of those coming in overtime. Six of those eight losses have also come away from home.
I would never sit here and try to argue this year's Michigan team is great, but presenting this year's team as some horrid disaster is laughably inaccurate. This is a solid team that is just weak and inconsistent enough to let a lot of these A/B level games slip away.
|02/21/2017 - 8:42am||Yeah, Green Bay has a lot of||
Yeah, Green Bay has a lot of trouble getting people to those cold night games.
|02/20/2017 - 11:37am||Issue is the RPI matters to seeding, not KenPom.||
Issue is the RPI matters to seeding, not KenPom. Minnesota is actually higher than Wisconsin in RPI, so any hit from that loss is minimal.
|02/06/2017 - 6:05pm||zero.||
|01/27/2017 - 10:18am||Why do people think a flood of Crystal Balls means||
Why do people think a flood of Crystal Balls means anything? Most of those picks are coming from people with no inside info that just read what the 3-6 reports on the subject say. I get trusting thr guys who actually *talk* to the recruit, but who cares if some Cal guy is picking this?
|11/30/2016 - 1:34pm||Does this included the vacated OSU||
Does this included the vacated OSU wins?
|10/23/2016 - 7:13pm||Will be there. We need to get||
Will be there. We need to get some Go Blue chants dominating in the second half.
|09/26/2016 - 12:38pm||Notre Dame has one of the most overrated schedules||
Notre Dame has one of the most overrated schedules every year. It's because they always schedule brands and/or big name teams. However, when you only do home and homes, teams will vary massively when you face them. They don't take a team in good times and bad, just whenever that home and home ends up occurring.
I mean, look at Texas. They get credit all offseason for scheduling a big name, but Texas is trash.
|09/04/2016 - 8:21am||Until LSU shows it can put together a decent||
Until LSU shows it can put together a decent offense, I have no idea why they get so much hype. They were not good last year and will probably go 8-4 this year too.