Media still talking about gholston punch afte 2 years

[Sbee]

That I was talking about the present in regards to the state of Michigan football at the time. And usually do as a rule.

you're in the minority. also, your example of discussing the present is in the past

 

[byco42]

you're in the minority. also, your example of discussing the present is in the past

Only one example. Presently I think that the pendulum is swinging back in regards to M-MSU. I think that the M program will continue to get better and better than MSU's.

Right now, they are relatively level.

 

[Sbee]

Only one example. Presently I think that the pendulum is swinging back in regards to M-MSU. I think that the M program will continue to get better and better than MSU's.

Right now, they are relatively level.

Michigan has the better program, there isn't much doubt there. accomplishments, records, facilities, prestige, everything, Michigan has it hands down. the short term outlook for both teams is similar, with the game in EL most likely deciding the legends winner and spot in the big ten title game, where either team will most likely lose to OSU.

Michigan is back on the upswing a little bit but I don't think that MSU is going anywhere. UM is pulling highly recruited players but that really isn't anything new, UM out-recruited us every year that there have been rankings. MSU can keep getting our guys who are high 3 star 5.6 or 5.7 rated in Rivals and give them a red shirt year. we've really benefitted from little attrition so we have a very solid depth chart, especially on defense. we need to start to get more of the higher ranked players if we want to be able to win the rose or be in the NC picture.

Hoke has a little work to do to shed that underachiever image that Michigan has. they're generally good outside of the RR era but generaly are ranked higher in the pre season than they finish, they have hardly won the big ten or been a factor nationally. their talent level is always better than their record.

 

[Diggler Cometh]

Winning a BCS game with a 7-5 team with a defense that was ranked 100 something the year before kind of disproved that.. They were a mess before he was hired.

 

[Sbee]

Winning a BCS game with a 7-5 team with a defense that was ranked 100 something the year before kind of disproved that.. They were a mess before he was hired.

they did improve and part of that was scheme but RR had a rash of DB injuries that just decimated that team. not saying that RR was the guy, but he did have some very bad luck. having a healthy Floyd/wolfork helped a ton

 

[byco42]

Michigan has the better program, there isn't much doubt there. accomplishments, records, facilities, prestige, everything, Michigan has it hands down. the short term outlook for both teams is similar, with the game in EL most likely deciding the legends winner and spot in the big ten title game, where either team will most likely lose to OSU.

Maybe I am in the minority in regards to looking backward because all that "matters" to me is the next play, then next game, the next week, etc. in regards to M football.

Michigan is back on the upswing a little bit but I don't think that MSU is going anywhere. UM is pulling highly recruited players but that really isn't anything new, UM out-recruited us every year that there have been rankings. MSU can keep getting our guys who are high 3 star 5.6 or 5.7 rated in Rivals and give them a red shirt year. we've really benefitted from little attrition so we have a very solid depth chart, especially on defense. we need to start to get more of the higher ranked players if we want to be able to win the rose or be in the NC picture.

It's my experience that M-MSU generally do not compete for players because so few consider the other school. Agree?

Hoke has a little work to do to shed that underachiever image that Michigan has. they're generally good outside of the RR era but generally are ranked higher in the pre season than they finish, they have hardly won the big ten or been a factor nationally. their talent level is always better than their record.

Awww, that's tradition talking. Always bumps M a few notches in the rankings and in the recruiting lists. That's not the fault of the program itself. And look at the programs that covet that silly crystal ball and that have won it or competed for it: At what price victory? Give me a B1G championship and that's enough for me, the rest is window dressing and two extra games to play. It used to be that the bowl games were exhibitions. MSU won an NC in '65 and lost the '66 Rose Bowl with no change in the rankings.

 

[byco42]

they did improve and part of that was scheme but RR had a rash of DB injuries that just decimated that team. not saying that RR was the guy, but he did have some very bad luck. having a healthy Floyd/wolfork helped a ton

RR considers defense an afterthought. I watched a few Arizona games and that defense was just as porous. He was a terrible fit for Michigan.

 

[Sbee]

RR considers defense an afterthought. I watched a few Arizona games and that defense was just as porous. He was a terrible fit for Michigan.

he put his efforts and best players into that offense and it showed, they scored a ton of points and couldn't tackle anyone. I just want to say that his last team would have been a lot better with healthy DB's, you lose both starting corners early and you're in a ton of trouble, I don't care who the coach is. Michigan's D was only second to MSU last year, they're solid, but RR did get bad breaks with injuries.

 

[Sbee]

Maybe I am in the minority in regards to looking backward because all that "matters" to me is the next play, then next game, the next week, etc. in regards to M football.



It's my experience that M-MSU generally do not compete for players because so few consider the other school. Agree?



Awww, that's tradition talking. Always bumps M a few notches in the rankings and in the recruiting lists. That's not the fault of the program itself. And look at the programs that covet that silly crystal ball and that have won it or competed for it: At what price victory? Give me a B1G championship and that's enough for me, the rest is window dressing and two extra games to play. It used to be that the bowl games were exhibitions. MSU won an NC in '65 and lost the '66 Rose Bowl with no change in the rankings.

we do go after the same players, not 100% but quite a few have offers or interest from the other school, especially players in Michigan. I do agree that ratings services know where their bread is buttered and rank kids higher based on the schools they commit to. I always say that a 3 star is an automatic 4 star if he commits to Michigan. not saying it's the case with all kids but the services aren't the best judge of talent. also, as of late, if MSU offers a 2 star or unranked kid, they get bumped due to our track record of finding diamonds in the rough. matt sokol is an example, unranked QB, MSU offers him as a TE and then he's a high 3 star.

 

[johnny2x2x]

we do go after the same players, not 100% but quite a few have offers or interest from the other school, especially players in Michigan. I do agree that ratings services know where their bread is buttered and rank kids higher based on the schools they commit to. I always say that a 3 star is an automatic 4 star if he commits to Michigan. not saying it's the case with all kids but the services aren't the best judge of talent. also, as of late, if MSU offers a 2 star or unranked kid, they get bumped due to our track record of finding diamonds in the rough. matt sokol is an example, unranked QB, MSU offers him as a TE and then he's a high 3 star.

Agree with this, Michigan's 2014 QB was a low 3 star and then committed to U of M and is now a 4 star. MSU get's the same benefit now in the last 2 classes though, seems half our recruits are getting bumps from low 3 to high 3/low 4 star. I think the fact that we've put several 2 star guys into the NFL in the last few seasons has swayed the services.

I'm of the opinion that there is very little difference between 3 and 4 star recruits. Technology has made the best training, coaching, and diet methods available to all high school players. The 5 star guys generally are a cut above though, and the elite 5 star guys (top 10 players) are generally can't miss stars.

MD has stepped up recruiting with the 2014 class though. Think it will finish in the top 25 and although I don't think we're necessarily getting better talent, the perception that we are counts for something.

 

[byco42]

he put his efforts and best players into that offense and it showed, they scored a ton of points and couldn't tackle anyone. I just want to say that his last team would have been a lot better with healthy DB's, you lose both starting corners early and you're in a ton of trouble, I don't care who the coach is. Michigan's D was only second to MSU last year, they're solid, but RR did get bad breaks with injuries.

The scheme was bad and the execution was bad because the coaching was bad. That 3-3-5 was maddening to witness. And the up-tempo nature of his offense either resulted in a quick score, a turnover or a three-and-out that put the defense right back on the field again with little rest or recovery.

 

[Sbee]

The scheme was bad and the execution was bad because the coaching was bad. That 3-3-5 was maddening to witness. And the up-tempo nature of his offense either resulted in a quick score, a turnover or a three-and-out that put the defense right back on the field again with little rest or recovery.

I know Michigan fans can never say anything good or in defense of RR, but his offense wasn't a problem. he did get some bad breaks with injuries on defense.

 

[Michchamp]

I know Michigan fans can never say anything good or in defense of RR, but his offense wasn't a problem. he did get some bad breaks with injuries on defense.

his offense was a problem... his defense was a problem... special teams was a problem. he had a new problem each week, and every week was a different excuse: lack of talent. lack of veteran talent at every position. too many injuries. players not "buying into" his system. players needed more time under the new workout regime. Lloyd Carr undermining him behind the scenes. Rich elitist boosters in the Program undermining him. the assistant coaches weren't up to snuff, but it wasn't his fault for hiring them. the University wouldn't give him the resources he needed to hire the DC he wanted... and so on...

I am not surprised you'd buy what he was selling though.

 

[Michchamp]

he put his efforts and best players into that offense and it showed, they scored a ton of points and couldn't tackle anyone. I just want to say that his last team would have been a lot better with healthy DB's, you lose both starting corners early and you're in a ton of trouble, I don't care who the coach is. Michigan's D was only second to MSU last year, they're solid, but RR did get bad breaks with injuries.

geez... you do have a lot in common with Hungry. maybe something about going to MSU turns one into an inherent Excuse Maker?

 

[Sbee]

geez... you do have a lot in common with Hungry. maybe something about going to MSU turns one into an inherent Excuse Maker?

i'm an objective observer with no stake in Michigan football. RR wasn't the right guy for the job but he won before and he'll win again.

there is a big difference between excuses and reasons.

lack of talent = excuse, highly ranked recruiting classes each year. he did have attrition but that's common. regardless he had more talent to work with than almost every team in the conference. no excuse to lose to Toledo

Injuries = reason. you can't expect a team to play well defensively when you're starting walk ons at DB

Michigan has plenty of resources and support, if someone wants to complain about not getting university support, it's Indiana.

as for Carr and people undermining, all that stuff was a result of the losses, a downward spiral of a 3-8 season.

 

[byco42]

I can't see Arizona under RR being anything more than a middling Pac-12 program. That's all UA has ever been for the past 30 years. 1993 and 1998 were their only stellar seasons.

 

[boogerlovejoy]

Arguments with Michigan fans are rarely about the present, it's always about the past or the future, how we got screwed or how good we're going to be in a few years.

BAM.

Nailed it.

 

[SpartyNash]

his offense was a problem... his defense was a problem... special teams was a problem. he had a new problem each week, and every week was a different excuse: lack of talent. lack of veteran talent at every position. too many injuries. players not "buying into" his system. players needed more time under the new workout regime. Lloyd Carr undermining him behind the scenes. Rich elitist boosters in the Program undermining him. the assistant coaches weren't up to snuff, but it wasn't his fault for hiring them. the University wouldn't give him the resources he needed to hire the DC he wanted... and so on...

I am not surprised you'd buy what he was selling though.

I agree on special teams with Rich Rod, your kicker in 2010 was easily the worst kicker I have ever seen play at any level of collegiate football.

 

[Sbee]

I agree on special teams with Rich Rod, your kicker in 2010 was easily the worst kicker I have ever seen play at any level of collegiate football.

I agree but it's hard to pin kicking problems on the head coach

 

[Green and White 95]

Michigan writers? it was one (1) MLive blogger.

no one blamed this loss on anything; just calling dirty play for what it is or was isn't whining.

you bring up Mouton - who I don't think any Michigan fan defended - which is bad, but the same thing as you did here: coach refuses to discipline kid for thug play, league has to step in.

RichRod was a dodgy guy, a liar, and a sleazebag... Dantonio sank to his level for a while there. he seems to have got his senses about him since then.

LOL, Dantonio sank to his level. What level is Hoke on then ?