Jump to content

hail2mich

GDT: #8 Ohio State at #10 Michigan 11/28/2015

Recommended Posts

I'm not sure how any rational person could explain how going from a national championship to finishing second in your division (i.e., not even winning your conference championship) is anything but trending down.

I think a rational person can decide it isn't nearly enough information to decide if OSU is trending down or represents any sort of meaningful trend, really.

I would add it seems like it is impossible to trend up from a national championship.

So I will go with the OSU program has not demonstrated any sort of meaningful trend downward even if they lost a game this year.

Edited by Mr. Bigglesworth

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I don't get why people are so obsessed with Harbaugh. What has he won, like ever?

They are 'obsessed' because he is very clearly an accomplished and successful coach.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
I think people are being too hard on Michigan based off of this recent game. OSU is clearly better right now and are an elite program. Michigan is not at that level.

But they are still pretty good. And they are in good shape going forward.

MSU had a good season, and they have a good program, just as good as Michigan, but not at the level of OSU. They should have lost to Michigan.

I think OSU is the clear favorite next year, with Michigan and MSU battling for second.

I agree, but I wouldn't be surprised if MSU falls off a cliff. Not long term, but if there was ever going to be a down year it would be next season with how much they're losing over this offseason. Of course, if I'm not mistaken they get both Michigan and OSU at home and otherwise have a schedule full of Rutgers and Maryland type teams, so they might have a 'down year' and still go 9-3 or 10-2.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
I agree, but I wouldn't be surprised if MSU falls off a cliff. Not long term, but if there was ever going to be a down year it would be next season with how much they're losing over this offseason. Of course, if I'm not mistaken they get both Michigan and OSU at home and otherwise have a schedule full of Rutgers and Maryland type teams, so they might have a 'down year' and still go 9-3 or 10-2.

I think they will probably be down relative to the cousins and cook years. But at the same time, they have their all world secondary and still won the games they are supposed to. That's not as easy as it seems. And they did beat OSU without their starting QB (although possibly aided by a terrible game plan by OSU, weather, and a game plan themselves that no one had seen before given their backup QBs and their different skill sets).

I guess I am trying to say that I expect them to still be in the 9-10 win range and that's still pretty good. Good enough keep them in the conversation and remain regionally relevant, which is more than they could say prior to dantonio's arrival.

I think they can thank Michigan for their botched post-Carr transition and further botched post-Rodriguez hiring.

Once you get the chance to build up your program to a respectable level, you can keep it that way with competent leaders and Dantonio definitely qualifies. We've seen it at other schools, too. Va tech used to be a joke. Baylor used to be a joke. Even Oregon pre Harrington. Or Stanford pre harbaugh/luck.

I disagree with the people that say MSU isn't going anywhere when discussing the difficulty of Michigan returning to relevance, because it is presented as if MSU is going to be a perennial top 10 team and I don't see that. But a perennial top 25 team seems reasonable, and it's those types of teams that hit on a few NFL caliber players from time to time and become top 10 or top 5 teams. I don't see MSU falling from that position any time soon.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
I think they will probably be down relative to the cousins and cook years. But at the same time, they have their all world secondary and still won the games they are supposed to. That's not as easy as it seems. And they did beat OSU without their starting QB (although possibly aided by a terrible game plan by OSU, weather, and a game plan themselves that no one had seen before given their backup QBs and their different skill sets).

I guess I am trying to say that I expect them to still be in the 9-10 win range and that's still pretty good. Good enough keep them in the conversation and remain regionally relevant, which is more than they could say prior to dantonio's arrival.

I think they can thank Michigan for their botched post-Carr transition and further botched post-Rodriguez hiring.

Once you get the chance to build up your program to a respectable level, you can keep it that way with competent leaders and Dantonio definitely qualifies. We've seen it at other schools, too. Va tech used to be a joke. Baylor used to be a joke. Even Oregon pre Harrington. Or Stanford pre harbaugh/luck.

I disagree with the people that say MSU isn't going anywhere when discussing the difficulty of Michigan returning to relevance, because it is presented as if MSU is going to be a perennial top 10 team and I don't see that. But a perennial top 25 team seems reasonable, and it's those types of teams that hit on a few NFL caliber players from time to time and become top 10 or top 5 teams. I don't see MSU falling from that position any time soon.

Their secondary was actually basically terrible all year and they're graduating Cook, almost all of their WRs, most of the O-Line (assuming the LT goes pro), and most of the D-Line, which were the strong parts of the team.

I agree that they will likely remain a top 25 type team in the future, but next year is going to be a transition year for them. That might look kind of like this year's Michigan where they're in the nebulous 'not great but not bad' zone, but I suspect Michigan and OSU will be better than that.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
I think people are being too hard on Michigan based off of this recent game. OSU is clearly better right now and are an elite program. Michigan is not at that level.

But they are still pretty good. And they are in good shape going forward.

MSU had a good season, and they have a good program, just as good as Michigan, but not at the level of OSU. They should have lost to Michigan.

I think OSU is the clear favorite next year, with Michigan and MSU battling for second.

Yeah, I think Michigan is still another year away from playoff contention. I do think that they will pass MSU next year, and by 2017, they should be about as good as anyone in the country. These next two recruiting classes (2016 and 2017) look to be pretty stacked. That should add a lot of skill and depth that this team needs.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
I think they will probably be down relative to the cousins and cook years. But at the same time, they have their all world secondary and still won the games they are supposed to. That's not as easy as it seems. And they did beat OSU without their starting QB (although possibly aided by a terrible game plan by OSU, weather, and a game plan themselves that no one had seen before given their backup QBs and their different skill sets).

I guess I am trying to say that I expect them to still be in the 9-10 win range and that's still pretty good. Good enough keep them in the conversation and remain regionally relevant, which is more than they could say prior to dantonio's arrival.

I think they can thank Michigan for their botched post-Carr transition and further botched post-Rodriguez hiring.

Once you get the chance to build up your program to a respectable level, you can keep it that way with competent leaders and Dantonio definitely qualifies. We've seen it at other schools, too. Va tech used to be a joke. Baylor used to be a joke. Even Oregon pre Harrington. Or Stanford pre harbaugh/luck.

I disagree with the people that say MSU isn't going anywhere when discussing the difficulty of Michigan returning to relevance, because it is presented as if MSU is going to be a perennial top 10 team and I don't see that. But a perennial top 25 team seems reasonable, and it's those types of teams that hit on a few NFL caliber players from time to time and become top 10 or top 5 teams. I don't see MSU falling from that position any time soon.

I've got this gut feeling, that we may see Dantonio jump ship (unless MSU wins the national championship). I have NOTHING to back that up, but it seems that he has to be a VERY hot candidate for any available head coaching job. With UM starting to creep back up to being the king of Michigan in recruiting, and with all the success that Ohio State and Notre Dame have had the past few years, I would think he may want to go to program that has a little more recruiting draw/little less local recruiting competition and an easier time winning (one that doesn't have Ohio State and Michigan on your side of the conference). I'm thinking a place like Georgia or maybe even Miami would be ideal for him.

Again, it's probably wishful thinking, as I would LOVE for MSU to lose him. I really have no clue if he is at all interested in moving, and he isn't young, so maybe he is a lifelong Spartan, but if he wanted to move, I can't imagine there would be too many teams that wouldn't have him at the top of their list. Just a hunch, but again I'm sure that hunch is filled with hopes of him leaving the B1G as I think he is easily the best coach in the conference, arguably in all college football right now.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Maybe they simply lacked the personnel / talent for such an adjustment to be effective or even noticeable.

They could have put more men in the box and forced Ohio State to throw more. It may have not worked but what they were doing the second half clearly didn't work either.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
I've got this gut feeling, that we may see Dantonio jump ship (unless MSU wins the national championship). I have NOTHING to back that up, but it seems that he has to be a VERY hot candidate for any available head coaching job. With UM starting to creep back up to being the king of Michigan in recruiting, and with all the success that Ohio State and Notre Dame have had the past few years, I would think he may want to go to program that has a little more recruiting draw/little less local recruiting competition and an easier time winning (one that doesn't have Ohio State and Michigan on your side of the conference). I'm thinking a place like Georgia or maybe even Miami would be ideal for him.

Again, it's probably wishful thinking, as I would LOVE for MSU to lose him. I really have no clue if he is at all interested in moving, and he isn't young, so maybe he is a lifelong Spartan, but if he wanted to move, I can't imagine there would be too many teams that wouldn't have him at the top of their list. Just a hunch, but again I'm sure that hunch is filled with hopes of him leaving the B1G as I think he is easily the best coach in the conference, arguably in all college football right now.

LMAO. Put the pipe down son.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
They could have put more men in the box and forced Ohio State to throw more. It may have not worked but what they were doing the second half clearly didn't work either.

It all depends on what you schemed / worked on in practice and what you think gives you the best chance to win at the time.

Believe me, I understand the appeal of changing things up when they aren't going well. It is a natural thing to consider. But if the coach truly believes the alternative is worse, he or she shouldn't change things up to change them.

So we are clear, my preference would have been to put more in the box. But I don't have the information Jim has, nor do I have 1/20th the working knowledge of the sport he has.

So, from my perspective, if the thing that seems obvious wasn't tried, and if I think the coach is a smart guy (which I do), then it seems to me the most likely explanation is he thought the change would almost assuredly make a bad situation worse, presumably due to personnel / things he sees in practice.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Imo 2016 and 2018 are the years Michigan should think about competing nationally. 2017 they're kind of like 2016 MSU as far as having a ton of starters graduate and they also have a pretty rough schedule (Florida, Cincy, good Big 10 crossover teams instead of trash)

Obviously you hope that by 2018 they're set to be good every year, but even the top programs have the occasional hiccup, and I think it would be tough to avoid one in 2017 unless Harbaugh just goes Nick Saban on everyone

e: I think not putting more guys in the box was a huge mistake. The plays they did so they actually held up quite well against the run. I can't really think of any reason not to do so other than 'our players aren't used to it and might give up big plays' which is sensible, but the way OSU was running I'd trade a dramatically increased risk of an 80 yard TD run for the chance of actually getting a stop.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Imo 2016 and 2018 are the years Michigan should think about competing nationally. 2017 they're kind of like 2016 MSU as far as having a ton of starters graduate and they also have a pretty rough schedule (Florida, Cincy, good Big 10 crossover teams instead of trash)

Obviously you hope that by 2018 they're set to be good every year, but even the top programs have the occasional hiccup, and I think it would be tough to avoid one in 2017 unless Harbaugh just goes Nick Saban on everyone

e: I think not putting more guys in the box was a huge mistake. The plays they did so they actually held up quite well against the run. I can't really think of any reason not to do so other than 'our players aren't used to it and might give up big plays' which is sensible, but the way OSU was running I'd trade a dramatically increased risk of an 80 yard TD run for the chance of actually getting a stop.

2016 will be interesting because they should go 8-0 at home (PSU, Wis, Indiana only non auto-blowouts if team is good). But @MSU, @Iowa, @OSU is going to make it tough to have a great record, assuming MSU gets solid QB play and Iowa isn't a fluke.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2016 will be interesting because they should go 8-0 at home (PSU, Wis, Indiana only non auto-blowouts if team is good). But @MSU, @Iowa, @OSU is going to make it tough to have a great record, assuming MSU gets solid QB play and Iowa isn't a fluke.

2016 is also a fairly easy OOC schedule too. It looks like after 2016, they've got some BIG teams on the OOC schedule for years to come (Florida, Texas, VaTech, Arkansas, etc.)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2016 will be interesting because they should go 8-0 at home (PSU, Wis, Indiana only non auto-blowouts if team is good). But @MSU, @Iowa, @OSU is going to make it tough to have a great record, assuming MSU gets solid QB play and Iowa isn't a fluke.

I kind of think Iowa is a fluke.

I wouldn't be surprised to see the OSU game be for the big ten east title next year. Whether Michigan will be good enough to beat OSU on the road is another question entirely.

I guess I'm trying to say that even with a loss to MSU next year, I see MSU losing to OSU and another team (like we hoped would happen this year).

A 12-1 Michigan team is going to be in the playoff almost every time, and they won't need to be elite to get to that level. They just need to not **** the bed more than once and pull of the upset in the OSU game.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
It all depends on what you schemed / worked on in practice and what you think gives you the best chance to win at the time.

Believe me, I understand the appeal of changing things up when they aren't going well. It is a natural thing to consider. But if the coach truly believes the alternative is worse, he or she shouldn't change things up to change them.

So we are clear, my preference would have been to put more in the box. But I don't have the information Jim has, nor do I have 1/20th the working knowledge of the sport he has.

So, from my perspective, if the thing that seems obvious wasn't tried, and if I think the coach is a smart guy (which I do), then it seems to me the most likely explanation is he thought the change would almost assuredly make a bad situation worse, presumably due to personnel / things he sees in practice.

I don't typically second guess coaches, they always have more information. But with the DL depleted by injury, against an uptempo offense that doesn't allow them to substitute, relying on their weakest unit LBs, was a curious decision. They saw it for themselves against Indiana.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
I don't typically second guess coaches, they always have more information. But with the DL depleted by injury, against an uptempo offense that doesn't allow them to substitute, relying on their weakest unit LBs, was a curious decision. They saw it for themselves against Indiana.

No arguments, hence my belief there is some information we just don't have.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.


×
×
  • Create New...