2627 <p>&nbsp;</p> <div>Well, a lot of the thoughts are in the "Blogging Michigan-Ohio State" posts, so just a few additional things that have come up after having some time away from the game.</div> <div><br /></div> <div>What Gregg Doyel writes in <a href="http://www.cbssports.com/collegefootball/story/12559911/rodriguez-spoils-image-with-spoiled-display-in-defeat?utm_source=bleacherreport.com">this</a> column is what I've been saying for a while now--no accountability from the Michigan coaching staff regarding this season or last season. I agree with that. But I also agree with one of RR's points--the sports media keeps fueling the fire. And not necessarily in regards to the practice accusations from players or even whether RR is the right guy for Michigan...but more just enjoying everything that's going down&nbsp;<em>on the field</em>. Doesn't it seem like every single Michigan game, the sports media has at least two new stats that some geeky little intern who probably isn't getting paid has been asked to dig up on what horrible thing will happen to Michigan if they lose such and such game? "This hasn't happened at Michigan since 1934." "That hasn't happened at Michigan since 1962." "This is the most points this team has ever scored on a Michigan defense." Every. Game. The question is not how does the media know these things--it's&nbsp;<em>why</em>&nbsp;do they know these things. I know there's an answer to that question, and I would call that answer bullschitt. Because, while you hear stats like these for other teams in their games, you don't hear them quite as incessantly, quite as often and you don't hear quite as many.&nbsp;</div> <div><br /></div> <div>"There's a faction -- and certainly I wouldn't accuse any of you all -- of creating a negative type of environment that wants to see drama, and wants to see people pointing fingers," Rodriguez said.</div> <div><br /></div> <div>RR often speaks with subtle meaning, okay? "...certainly I wouldn't accuse any of you all"--yeah, he's accusing you all, ESPN, Big Ten Network, CBS Sports and so on. And I don't blame him, because he's right. "...wants to see drama" = &nbsp;wants to see losing at Michigan, Michigan coaches on the hot seat, coaches eventually getting fired and then the search for who wants to take on this sinking ship in Ann Arbor. Personally...call me paranoid...but I really kind of wonder if the sports media doesn't defend RR so much--even when half the time if you really listen to some of their comments on Michigan, they are saying things that indicate they know coaching is part of the problem, especially on the Big Ten Network's shows like "Behind the Schemes" and "Big Ten Breakdown"--because they're enjoying the drama and destruction too much to want to see Michigan let RR go.&nbsp;</div> <div><br /></div> <div>So, it's interesting that RR is complaining as if the media is out to get&nbsp;<em>him</em>. Usually, they are right there with him on blaming players. That CBS Sports article is an outlier if I've ever seen one. Let's take what I read in the&nbsp;<em>Sporting News</em>&nbsp;this past weekend for an example. They said that maybe Tate Forcier, one of Michigan's best players this season, isn't the answer for Michigan at quarterback.&nbsp;</div> <div><br /></div> <div>All...because...of...the...Ohio...State...game.&nbsp;<em>One</em>...game.</div> <div><br /></div> <div>He's a freshman, people. And this is really the comment I want to make on the OSU game. Forcier lost that game for Michigan. Yes. He admits it, too. Everyone knows that he did, regardless of if you want to say OSU is just better than Michigan and whatever. But of all the games Michigan has lost this season...this is the one that, yes, probably was just too big for him as a freshman. This is the game where you really saw his confidence take a hit. And I'll tell you what--that's how it should be. The OSU game should be humbling to players on both sides of the ball on both teams. Forcier has now been indoctrinated into how horrible it feels to lose to OSU and how horrible it feels to be the reason a team loses. And, what's more, he was the reason the team lost the biggest game of Michigan's year...and some would argue, the biggest game of Michigan football history. I can't help but think that's good for him in the long run. I see this as possibly being a Tim-Tebow-after-Ole-Miss-2008 moment for him.&nbsp;</div> <div><br /></div> <div>"I lost that game,'' Forcier wrote in a text message to The Associated Press about an hour after the game. "This offseason, I'm gonna make sure myself and every single person on this team works the hardest we have ever worked. We're gonna come back a new team. I'm not going to let this happen again.''</div> <div><br /></div> <div>I know better than to listen to Michigan players when they say they're going to come and do this, that and the other. But we saw earlier in the season that Forcier has the potential to be a Heisman candidate quarterback during his time at Michigan. It depends on how the team does. But if one of the most talented players on the team says he will do better next year, I am willing to believe that.</div> <div><br /></div> <div>I also must say that if Michigan had lost this game any other way, I'd probably have been really angry afterwards. It's disappointing that Michigan lost to OSU again, but I'm not sure anyone has a problem with Forcier because of it--at least not Michigan fans. Apparently, some members of the media think we should toss him over a game we weren't really going to win anyway against, hello, one of the best defenses, certainly, in the Big Ten and maybe in the nation (I don't know the stats on the defenses in all of college football). Expecting Forcier to play perfect in that game is ridiculous, even if none of us thought the loss would come down to his losing the ball 5 times vs the Michigan defense failing to make plays.&nbsp;</div> <div><br /></div> <div>"I'm glad I'm on this side,'' Pryor said.</div> <div><br /></div> <div>So am I. I'm glad he plays for OSU, and I'm glad Forcier plays for Michigan. There is no quarterback I'd rather Michigan have for the next three years. Pryor has screwed up games at OSU--some of the biggest games--and now Forcier has screwed up a game at Michigan--the biggest game. That's just how that will go with young quarterbacks. We're not throwing Forcier away.&nbsp;</div> <p>&nbsp;</p> true 2009-11-23T20:20:29Z 99743 0 2009-11-23T20:22:50Z http://sportsnation.espn.go.com/fans/nunyabiz81/blog/posts/99743 2008-04-10T03:46:02Z 2627 2008-04-10T03:46:02Z 1247262 http://sportsnation.espn.go.com/fans/nunyabiz81/blog nunyabiz81 http://sportsnation.espn.go.com/fans/nunyabiz81 2627 <p>&nbsp;</p> <div>This seems to be that time of the season when some big story happens daily, but that's even more true this year, it's seems. With all the coaching dramas, player brushes with the law, powerhouses falling and doormats rising--not to mention conference championship games and bowl games around the corner--you know the Week 12 Wrap-Up has to have several installments this week.&nbsp;</div> <div><br /></div> <div>Since most of the best games in Week 12 were lacking in interest until the second half, at best...no "Games of the Week." Instead, let's focus on the finishes.</div> <div><br /></div> <div><strong>Best Endings</strong></div> <div><strong>Ole Miss-LSU</strong>: Oh, you know I had to bring up the talk of college football. Really, I think LSU wasn't expecting the hail-mary 4th down pass to actually be caught and that, if it was, the time on the clock would have been gone...and I don't really blame them for it. The way the clock kept ticking off seconds even after the catch, I thought the clock was going to run completely down...then it stopped at one second. I know the ball probably should have been thrown to the end zone. But when things didn't work out like that, the first thought and verbalization still should have been sending the field goal unit out. And before all that, it seems there was just some misunderstanding with all that time coming off the clock instead of a timeout being used. But either way, the real bottom line is that Les Miles couldn't pull off another one of his famous last-second wins, and you can't count on winning the game with seconds left all the time anyway...gotta make the plays that need to be made during the game. The score was 17-15 LSU, then 17-22 Ole Miss for too much of the game...point being that there was plenty of time to put the game away or get back up on Ole Miss before late in the 4th quarter, and LSU just didn't get it done. So people need to chill out with the "what was Les Miles doing" stuff on the one or two plays at the end.</div> <div><br /></div> <div><strong>Notre Dame-Connecticut</strong>: With as bad as the season has been for Michigan and being a Michigan fan, I still feel sorry for ND...not just because I'd like them to have a coach we can beat, but probably because I know everyone and their mom&nbsp;<em>loves</em>&nbsp;what's happening with both our schools--including the sports media. The notion that ND could go 11-1 was always ridiculous, but you're talking about another 6-6 season for a team that, much like Michigan, has a good offense but the defense...? And we all feel for Conn, but the fact remains that this is not a game that, under any circumstances, ND should have lost. And overtime is not what you want when you're the team that is supposed to win the game because you're giving the other team entirely too much of a chance to win by keeping them in the game that long. Plus, wasn't ND up 14-0 on Conn at one point? This goes back to not only the ND defense, but, like the Washington game where ND just happened to luck out in OT, ND ended up settling for field goals too often instead of finding the end zone. Settling for field goals finally bit them in the butt when Conn scored a touchdown after ND took a field goal in OT. Well...as I will post in the next few days, Swarbrick is full of crap. Weis had to beat Conn and beat Stanford, and Swarbrick has known that since the Navy loss. After this loss, Weis, himself, knows he might as well get started on packing up his things.</div> <div><br /></div> <div><strong>Arizona-Oregon</strong>: At past 10pm, this was a game that...gosh, you wondered why this couldn't have been on in the daytime. You don't really want to sit through multiple overtimes at night, especially since this game had the appearance of being never-ending. The game went from looking like Oregon was going to own Arizona to "there's no way Oregon is going to win this"--to the point where Arizona fans jumped down to the sidelines, thinking they'd won--to a tie in the first OT...and then, finally and thankfully, Oregon's D stepping up. And when OT hit, you had to be sitting there either thinking Oregon wasn't going to pull this out or thinking this would be the most OTs in college football history. Coming into the game, I thought Oregon was clearly the better team and couldn't really understand the hype surrounding the game--as a Michigan fan, it was irritating that the lead story in every college football show/podcast was Arizona-Oregon, then Stanford-California, then Weis,&nbsp;<em>then</em>&nbsp;Michigan-Ohio State--but I was really surprised by how well Arizona matched up with Oregon in this game. Play this game again and either team could win. What I liked most about this game, though, is, from the Big Ten fan perspective...you'd think Oregon is going to play us in the Rose Bowl...Oregon clearly is not unstoppable on offense. OSU might have more of a chance to win than everyone's going to think.</div> <div><br /></div> <div><strong>Shocks of the Week</strong></div> <div><strong>Texas Tech-Oklahoma</strong>: One of the many reasons the Big 12 sucks this season? OU is down. It's like having Michigan and/or Ohio State down in the Big Ten--it ruins the conference some. And it's not so much that OU didn't play that well in this game. Tech just did pretty much everything else better and looked like they had the better quarterback, too. And, once again, you see that OU's defense has been at least somewhat overrated. As for Bob Stoops...his name is getting tossed around in the ND job discussions, but I look at seasons like this and not being able to win big games outside the Big 12 and wonder why he's in the ND discussion. Not saying he's not a good coach...just saying he's too blatantly fallible, especially considering winning at OU should be easier than this (particularly when the conference is down like it is). ND needs a coach who looks like he can't do anything&nbsp;<em>but</em>&nbsp;win, and that's not exactly Stoops--not when a team that has never beaten OU by more than, what, 10 points blows them out under Stoops' watch. And most of all...who thought his brother Mike was going to be having a better season? Remember&nbsp;<em>way</em>&nbsp;back when OU was ranked #3 and was expected to be in Big 12/national title discussions all season long?</div> <div><br /></div> <div><strong>Rutgers-Syracuse</strong>: I don't get this one at all. That's really all I have to say. It's not that Rutgers is that great or anything, but Syracuse is just too bad for them to blow out Rutgers or pretty much any other FBS school, aside from New Mexico and such.</div> <div><br /></div> <div><strong>Stanford-California</strong>: I'd said that no team in the country could stop Stanford's offense...and it turns out that, of course, there&nbsp;<em>is</em>&nbsp;such a team. Really didn't expect it to be, Cal, though, regardless of their beating Arizona the previous week. Some commentator made the point that a lot of people expected Cal to be finished with Best out, and that was true. Instead, Cal plugged in Vereen and he had a bigger night than Gerhart did running the ball. Plus, Riley passed the ball well and...well, it seemed like Stanford was the team that didn't know how to stop an offense. The Pac-10 is officially the ACC of 2009. How does Stanford destroy USC and Oregon, then lose to Cal...a team that got destroyed by USC and Oregon? You know, USC-Arizona will be just as interesting as Oregon-Oregon State just because, after this season in the Pac-10, who has any idea whether USC is better than Arizona and vice versa? This is a conference that won't make any sort of sense at all until the season is completely over. Oh, and I almost forgot--what was Harbaugh doing around 3:30 left in the game, going for it on 4th down in Stanford territory, down three and with timeouts left? Was it&nbsp;<em>that</em>&nbsp;hard to trust the Stanford D?&nbsp;</div> <div><br /></div> <div><strong>Georgia-Kentucky</strong>: It keeps getting worse and worse for Mark Richt. I made some preseason predictions way back when for another site and predicted Georgia would barely make a bowl game...but it's entirely different to see them truly earning what's likely to be a 6-6 record and seeing&nbsp;<em>how</em>&nbsp;they're doing it. There were just too many crucial turnovers in this game, and Georgia had a sizable lead at halftime that they just let get away until, finally, they were desperate just to get into overtime with one of the SEC's worst teams (don't let Kentucky's record fool you...apparently, beating Auburn is their only good win). Um, when your quarterback is throwing interceptions late and you're losing the ball down at the 1-yd line of Kentucky, you can forget it. If you thought Georgia was disappointing last year, picked as a national championship contender and then getting blown out by Alabama in the first half/Florida to ultimately struggle with Michigan State in the Capital One bowl...well. Next year is going to be very interesting for Richt...and his job security.&nbsp;</div> <div><br /></div> <div><strong>Wisconsin-Northwestern</strong>: Does anybody realize NU and Stanford are probably going to end up with the same record? And while such records would be intolerable this year to teams like Ohio State, Florida and Texas, and everyone is acting like it's the end of USC's world for having lost three games--including USC players--8-4 is a sign that NU is getting things done and has the right coach. And NU&nbsp;<em>does</em>&nbsp;have the perfect coach for them. They're not getting the hype Stanford is, probably because they play in the Big Ten and because they are not beating powerhouse teams 55-21. But think about it--NU has now beaten ranked Iowa and ranked Wisconsin. Iowa was clearly the best team in the Big Ten this year when you look at the entire season, I don't care what anyone says about OSU. And Wisconsin, in my opinion, is probably actually the second best team in the Big Ten this season. So, though it's clear why NU beat Iowa, it's hard to put a finger on why NU kinda dominated Wisconsin. True, Wisconsin doesn't have the best defense in the Big Ten, and that was clear in this game. True, Wisconsin had many chances to win the game and Tolzien threw a costly interception on their last shot. True, Kafka threw for a lot of yards...but what else is new? That guy has thrown for 300+ yards in&nbsp;<em>losses</em>. NU's defense played maybe their best game of the season. But why did NU play up and Wisconsin play down? This is not a big rivalry game. Wisconsin had faced their toughest competition, although this series hasn't been the most sure victory for Wisconsin over the years for some odd reason. But, like many of these other "Shocks of the Week," this is a game that I didn't see coming at all. I thought people who called this upset were crazy.</div> <div><br /></div> <p>&nbsp;</p> true 2009-11-23T18:41:17Z 99731 0 2009-11-23T18:48:55Z http://sportsnation.espn.go.com/fans/nunyabiz81/blog/posts/99731 2008-04-10T03:46:02Z 2627 2008-04-10T03:46:02Z 1247262 http://sportsnation.espn.go.com/fans/nunyabiz81/blog nunyabiz81 http://sportsnation.espn.go.com/fans/nunyabiz81 2627 <p>&nbsp;</p> <div><strong>Third Quarter</strong></div> <div>-Michigan gets nothing done (neither is Memphis getting anything done, by the way--no surprise, though).</div> <div>-Unfortunate that Michigan couldn't get that Small punt-return drop. That was such a Michigan thing to do, and Michigan needs some turnovers something awful.</div> <div>-YES, turnover!!!! Now&nbsp;<em>do something with it</em>!!</div> <div><br /></div> <div>-Forcier runs for 1st down. That's the kind of run I like to see from Forcier. No receivers open, clear space to run, don't take big hits,&nbsp;<em>don't drop the ball</em>.</div> <div>-Michigan moving the ball again. Got to score this time with it, in the red zone.</div> <div>-Um, Mathews dropping the ball, trying to catch with one hand!</div> <div>-VINCENT SMITH TOUCHDOWN--TOLD YOU ABOUT MY MAN!!!! Back in this game! Come on defense, keep it that way!</div> <div>-HAHAHA, holding call on OSU on the kick return!!!! Momentum, Michigan!!</div> <div><br /></div> <div>-Um, Pryor drops a snap and still runs away from Michigan. Come on, D! That should have been a loss.</div> <div>-Now what is Michigan's deal with stopping Saine? And then Herron comes and busts a run, too. Michigan is letting OSU's conservatism work too well.</div> <div>-Herron taken down at the line--now&nbsp;<em>that's</em>&nbsp;the way, D.</div> <div>-Boo--Michigan has let OSU run all the way to 1st and goal.</div> <div>-Graham is the man! Not letting OSU score on 1st or 2nd down, not letting the game get away from Michigan.</div> <div>-Damn, that was great pressure by Michigan, but Pryor gets a pass off anyway for a touchdown.</div> <div>-Busted drive for Michigan, mo back with O. We really need a turnover to get back in this, and the D has got to start finding ways to stop OSU again.</div> <div>-I see entirely too much red in the Big House.</div> <div>-Omg, Michigan just isn't stopping the run anymore.</div> <div><br /></div> <div><strong>Fourth Quarter</strong></div> <div>-Let's see if Michigan can do the ultimate 4th-quarter comeback. I doubt it, but...</div> <div>-Those OSU uniforms are ugly. I can't believe I didn't type this before, but I was thinking it before the game, for sure.</div> <div>-Haha, Pryor overthrows on 3rd down. So unnecessary, but whatever--ball back to Michigan.</div> <div><br /></div> <div>-Roundtree is gone!!!! To the OSU 40.&nbsp;</div> <div>-Robinson back out, and a nice run. Good stuff.</div> <div>-Commentators are talking about Michigan getting a quick score here, and I'm thinking if Michigan does...go for two. It could be 21-18, and suddenly the game looks a lot closer.</div> <div>-Scratch that--interception...oh, wait. They're not going to give it to OSU. Oh, schitt, they're going to review it. These reviews get on my damn nerves. There was no reason for that throw down the field anyway. Didn't we just need 5 yards? I mean, come on. Of course the officials give it to OSU. The good thing is they have crappy field position.</div> <div><br /></div> <div>-Miami's up on Duke now.</div> <div>-Michigan stops Pryor running on 3rd down. Good deal. Come on and play smart ball on offense, Michigan. It's too early to act desperate.</div> <div><br /></div> <div>-Florida State is barely beating Maryland...heh.&nbsp;</div> <div>-Oh, schitt...Smith looks injured. Smith was the best we had left. Okay, he's walking off.&nbsp;</div> <div>-Hahaha, YES. Robinson fooled OSU--he passed the ball. Michigan should put Forcier in as the quarterback, though, and Robinson as the running back.</div> <div>-Hell yeah, Robinson busted off a nice run and is at the 10. See? He'd be good as the RB right now, especially if Smith isn't coming back.</div> <div>-Oh my...wow. Forcier has thrown an interception in the red zone. Sighs. This game is not meant for Michigan to win.</div> <div><br /></div> <div>-Decent job by Michigan's D stopping OSU's conservative bullschitt. Nearly 5:30 left in the game, and Michigan does still have a shot. But is Forcier composed enough to lead Michigan back down the field?</div> <div>-Good field position. Michigan keeps getting these opportunities, and they'd have the lead right now if they were taking advantage of them.</div> <div>-Um, now...I don't like this decision. Robinson does not need to be in to take snaps right now and, sure enough, a big loss.</div> <div>-Now a false start penalty on the offense. Look, RR, don't go down this Iowa road again. Let Forcier pass.&nbsp;</div> <div>-Oh, now on 3rd &amp; 13, they want Forcier to fix this mess. Come on.</div> <div><em>-Wow</em>, Forcier. Another interception? This is a mental thing right now for him. We can't beat OSU with all these turnovers, and this is a game we definitely have had a chance to win otherwise.</div> <div><br /></div> <div>-2nd &amp; 22 for OSU, so you'd figure Michigan is going to get the ball back soon, especially with the conservative play-calling. But between Forcier and Robinson, I'd still rather Michigan send Forcier out there to pass.&nbsp;</div> <div>-Michigan allows a big run from Pryor, not for the 1st down, though...and now here come the commentators again with their RR support/Michigan has no talent crap again.</div> <div>-RR is seething on the sideline.</div> <div>-Michigan stops OSU on 4th down. And I'm just thinking, "Wow, I can't believe&nbsp;<em>Forcier</em>&nbsp;has lost us this game. Who thought that was&nbsp;<em>how/why</em>&nbsp;Michigan would lose?</div> <div><br /></div> <div>-Listening to these commentators&nbsp;<em>still</em>&nbsp;going on and on about RR..."Rich Rodriguez is a good coach." RR might be a good football coach...but he might not be a good one for&nbsp;<em>Michigan</em>. People don't understand there's a such thing as a cultural fit, and it's just got to be there.&nbsp;</div> <div>-Wow, UNC is killing BC and Miami has pulled away from Duke.&nbsp;</div> <div>-And Michigan does absolutely nothing on this series with Robinson as the quarterback.&nbsp;</div> <div>-21-10. Well that's not as bad as it could have been, and this game was more competitive than it was last year. I feel oddly free. I guess because the bullschitt that this season dissolved into is finally over.&nbsp;</div> <div><br /></div> <p>&nbsp;</p> true 2009-11-21T20:46:56Z 99625 0 2009-11-21T20:46:56Z http://sportsnation.espn.go.com/fans/nunyabiz81/blog/posts/99625 2008-04-10T03:46:02Z 2627 2008-04-10T03:46:02Z 1247262 http://sportsnation.espn.go.com/fans/nunyabiz81/blog nunyabiz81 http://sportsnation.espn.go.com/fans/nunyabiz81 2627 <div>I typed my thoughts almost exactly as they were as the game went on, and here's the result...in case anyone ever wonders what goes on inside a Michigan or OSU fan's head during the game... (actually, we know what goes on inside an OSU fan's head pretty much all the time..."Duuuuh").</div> <div><br /></div> <div> <div><strong>First quarter</strong></div> <div>-Michigan's defense stops OSU.&nbsp;</div> -Michigan has bad field position. Shaw comes out as the back. Um...<em>no</em>. Where is Vincent Smith? Shaw loses yards. See?&nbsp;<em>Smith</em>! <div>-Forcier starts scrambling in the end zone, and I'm thinking, "just throw it away" and then he drops it. OSU scores. That's why he should have thrown it away. Can't try to make things happen when you're that close to your own end zone. I'm thinking, "Michigan is not even going to be able to stay in this in the 1st half like some of us thought!"</div> <div>-Michigan gets the ball back. Decent field position from Stonum, but can't get anything to happen.</div> <div>-Michigan's defense stops OSU again. Just what we need right now to stay in the game. And it's appearing to me like Tressel wants to play this game relatively conservative. I thought maybe he'd let it hang out more, and that is something that would win OSU the game, to me. But...if they don't want to go for the win, it's fine by me!</div> <div><br /></div> <div>-Wait. Did they do anything for Stefanie Spielman? I thought they'd honor her before the game or something.&nbsp;</div> <div>-Michigan gets good field position again, and Denard Robinson comes out. I'm thinking, "good deal." Great timing to bring him out. He makes a couple nice runs for Michigan, the best runs we'd gotten to that point.</div> <div>-Forcier makes a nice pass to Roundtree, and I'm thinking, "maybe we&nbsp;<em>can</em>&nbsp;hang for a while." And finally, Vincent Smith.</div> <div>-Can't convert third down, and...ugh. Olesnavage misses the damn field goal. Do we not have a better kicker? Are you kidding me? This is going to be a long damn game.</div> <div><br /></div> <div>-Michigan stops OSU again. Again with the relatively conservative stuff. At this point, if I weren't a fan of one of these teams, I'd be bored.&nbsp;</div> <div>-Naturally, the difference in the game is a Michigan mistake.&nbsp;</div> <div>-Michigan with the ball, and a miracle catch by Greg Mathews. Sighs. We just get lucky with Forcier's throws sometimes.&nbsp;</div> <div>-Haha, the camera is showing the crowd, and despite having the lead Buckeyes fans don't look that happy. I'd guess it's because Michigan is moving the ball and OSU is not. Somehow, Michigan's offense is winning the good offense vs good defense battle, just what Michigan needs.&nbsp;</div> <div>-3rd down, and Stonum gets wide open? At least my man is out there. I've been saying this kid should be out there catching passes. RR is listening to me. For now.</div> <div><br /></div> <div><strong>Second quarte</strong><strong>r</strong></div> <div>-Okay, now they're talking about Stefanie Spielman. But did they do anything special before the game? I don't see it.</div> <div>-Damn, Michigan has to punt back to OSU. At least the field position sucks for OSU, but that doesn't necessarily matter.</div> <div>-Michigan is killing the run. This is why OSU really should be passing. Michigan sucks with the pass.</div> <div>-Damn, as soon as I say that...Herron gets a nice run.</div> <div>-Schitt, OSU is moving the ball now, and we don't need that. If they don't score, we will have bad field position.</div> <div>-Nice, Michigan stops Pryor running the ball.</div> <div>-Damn, Boston College is getting their #### beat by North Carolina! hahaha (looking at the bottom of the screen).</div> <div><br /></div> <div>-Michigan back with the ball, and nice pass on 1st down.</div> <div>-Good run by my man Smith. See what I told ya, RichRod?</div> <div>-False start? Come on, now. We don't need that crap.</div> <div>-Whoa, Roundtree kept his foot in on that catch?</div> <div>-Well, lookey lookey...Shaw loses yards&nbsp;<em>again</em>.</div> <div>-Forcier is throwing that ball, man! Roundtree!</div> <div>-Forcier to Mathews, 1st down. I'm loving this passing! I'm thinking Michigan really ought to be leading right now. They are playing better than OSU. And Forcier is showing why some of us think he's better than Pryor. Right now in a head-to-head matchup...he&nbsp;<em>is</em>.</div> -Wow, Minnesota-Iowa is really low-scoring (again, bottom of the screen). <div>-Oh, come on! Why does Michigan keep getting close to scoring and stalling? Not gonna win this way.</div> <div>-You know what? Olesnavage misses close-up kicks, but gets long ones. It's a kick in the head. And we don't need three funky points anyway; we need seven. On the possession before this one, I think, Forcier had an open receiver he could have thrown to for the first down on 3rd down, and he threw to someone covered. We should have scored at least one touchdown by now.</div> <div><br /></div> <div>-Um, hello? Take Saine down. Saine was just pushing the pile.</div> <div>-OSU converts 3rd and 1, then Pryor has a big run on the next play. Oh, this is crap. Michigan suddenly can't stop the run now. This schitt is about to get out of hand.</div> <div>-Saine touchdown on, yep, a run. Bullschitt.</div> <div><br /></div> <div>-Michigan gets the ball, Forcier throws to a covered man...and Michigan gives the ball right back to OSU.</div> <div>-Pryor shows Forcier how you're supposed to throw the ball if you're going down the field--either your man catches it or nobody does. You don't under-throw.</div> <div>-Michigan stops OSU.</div> <div><br /></div> <div>-Smith runs for 10+ and...ugh, the damn commentators want to ruin the game by supporting RR with their bullschitt comments.</div> <div>-Forcier saved the down with a shuffle pass on 2nd, then goes down on 3rd down. Of course.&nbsp;</div> <div>-Haha, intentional grounding on OSU. Loss of down.</div> <div>-Blah blah blah...neither Michigan nor OSU do anything for the rest of the half.</div> <div>-Jesse Palmer and John Saunders talking as if Michigan is in this game. Whatever. It's the beginning of schitt getting out of hand, and Michigan's defense had not been doing great so much as Tressel had been playing that boring Tresselball.</div> <div>-Alright, off to the Memphis-Houston stream until halftime is done (Duke is beating Miami like I said could possibly happen, BC is catching up to UNC)...</div> <div><br /></div> <div><strong><br /></strong></div> </div> true 2009-11-21T20:46:04Z 99624 0 2009-11-21T20:46:04Z http://sportsnation.espn.go.com/fans/nunyabiz81/blog/posts/99624 2008-04-10T03:46:02Z 2627 2008-04-10T03:46:02Z 1247262 http://sportsnation.espn.go.com/fans/nunyabiz81/blog nunyabiz81 http://sportsnation.espn.go.com/fans/nunyabiz81 2627 <div>Let's see if I can do better this week than last!</div> <div>&nbsp;</div> <div><strong>Minnesota-Iowa</strong>: Iowa. Why: Minn has the ability to beat Iowa, especially with Stanzi done for the season, but they don't play well enough consistently to think they will win. Vandenberg showed against Ohio State that he's a good enough passer to win games for Iowa. His receivers just need to help him out more this weekend.</div> <div><br /><strong>North Carolina-Boston College</strong>: Boston College. Why: Although the stats seem to be on BC's side, BC is just a slight favorite. Even after seeing all that, I still didn't know who to pick...until I thought about how UNC's strong point, other than defense, seems to be running the ball. So, maybe not a very good game unless you like defense, because BC probably will be able to do just enough on offense to win while stuffing UNC's running game.</div> <div>&nbsp;</div> <div><strong>Oklahoma-Texas Tech</strong>: Oklahoma. Why: After a horrible game against Nebraska, OU came back and put it on A&amp;M. This should be closer (you figure you'd have two great offenses here, although OU hasn't always looked like that this year), but OU's defense will get the win.</div> <div>&nbsp;</div> <div><strong>Iowa State-Missouri</strong>: Missouri. Why: Gabbert and Alexander. Although Iowa State is better this season, they still are not beating the teams in the Big 12 that are strong offensively.</div> <div>&nbsp;</div> <div><strong>Connecticut-Notre Dame</strong>: Notre Dame. Why: Another close loss for Conn, another close win for ND. Give it to Conn--they have been fighters all season long. But they have given up some game-losing (for them) plays towards the end of some of their games, and ND lives on giving teams losses at the end.</div> <div>&nbsp;</div> <div><strong>LSU-Ole Miss</strong>: LSU. Why: My understanding is Jefferson will play in this game. Even though Ole Miss seems to be heating up, particularly McCluster, if the team is not named Alabama or Florida LSU keeps finding ways to win. Maybe if Lee or some other quarterback were going to play, it'd be easier to take Ole Miss. But Ole Miss is not consistent enough to think they can win with Jefferson in.</div> <div>&nbsp;</div> <div><strong>Penn State-Michigan State</strong>: Michigan State. Why: Really tough to pick. I keep thinking about how last year, MSU could never win the big games, including a blowout loss to PSU. MSU is good enough this year to do it, but they don't always play defense well enough to win. PSU, on the other hand, still hasn't shown they're good enough to win very tough games. And MSU will put up a fight, for sure, especially on offense. Something tells me MSU will get the upset.</div> <div>&nbsp;</div> <div><strong>North Carolina State-Virginia Tech</strong>: Virginia Tech. Why: This is only here because an "expert" picked this as an upset. VT's had enough upsets this season. NCSU's strength is offense, and VT looks overrated on defense at times...so it could happen. But the other thing about NCSU is they can't stop teams, and that's mainly why they've lost as many games as they have in the ACC.</div> <div>&nbsp;</div> <div><strong>Air Force-BYU</strong>: BYU. Why: Don't know if you realize it, but BYU had a tough time with New Mexico last weekend. <em>New Mexico</em>, people--a team that hasn't won a game and has worse off-field issues than Michigan does. On top of that, AF has been right in games with teams like Utah and the sports media's beloved TCU. Could be tough for BYU, but AF has yet to win one of these big games this season.</div> <div>&nbsp;</div> <div><strong>Purdue-Indiana</strong>: Purdue. Why: I've already seen some Big Ten people taking Indiana. And I can see that. But, boy, Purdue's offense, plus the way Indiana plays on defense? Not that Purdue's D is great... A high-scoring shootout is in order, but we know that Indiana lets games slip away in the second half.</div> <div>&nbsp;</div> <div><strong>Arizona State-UCLA</strong>: UCLA. Why: As indicated in my Week 11 Wrap-Up, these two teams seem to be headed in opposite directions. This game is likely to get UCLA into a bowl while keeping ASU out for another year, and that's because...well, other than the fact that UCLA has shown the past two weeks that they can beat the bottom feeders in the Pac-10, probably because it's a home game.</div> <div>&nbsp;</div> <div><strong>California-Stanford</strong>: Stanford. Why: Who is going to pick against the hottest team in the country? Cal bombed against Oregon, another powerful offense. Harbaugh seems to have his guys getting better and better every week, really believing in Stanford, and they have a real shot of winning 9 games...and making a case for a BCS bowl bid over Penn State, Iowa, the Big East runner-up, Boise State or Oklahoma State (which, unfortunately for the sake of great BCS bowl games, won't happen).</div> <div>&nbsp;</div> <div><strong>Kansas State-Nebraska</strong>: Kansas State. Why: Hard to pick games in the Big 12 this year, other than Texas. Nebraska has been on a roll lately, seemingly finding offense against Kansas. But KSU defensively is not like Kansas (most of the time), and KSU needs to win this game in order to make a bowl game. I don't see that Snyder magic carrying KSU this far only to barely miss out on the post-season fun. A boring game, most likely, but an important one.</div> <div>&nbsp;</div> <div><strong>Oregon-Arizona</strong>: Oregon. Why: Arizona's loss to Cal not only came as a surprise, but it also kind of wrecked what's basically the Pac-10 title game a little bit. But looking ahead doesn't necessarily help a team win. Oregon's speed on offense should get it done, assuming James feels well enough to break his big-time runs.</div> <div>&nbsp;</div> <div><strong>Don't Be Surprised If</strong>:</div> <div><strong>Duke Beats Miami</strong>: Miami's [lack of] defense vs Duke's offense with Lewis? Throw in Jacory Harris throwing interceptions, his not being 100% and Duke's desire to get into a bowl game, and the thought of Duke pulling off the upset seems more and more likely. I do think that Harris will play better this week, and that will probably be the ultimate difference. I still think Miami wins, but it could be barely.</div> true 2009-11-20T04:22:50Z 99537 0 2009-11-20T04:22:50Z http://sportsnation.espn.go.com/fans/nunyabiz81/blog/posts/99537 2008-04-10T03:46:02Z 2627 2008-04-10T03:46:02Z 1247262 http://sportsnation.espn.go.com/fans/nunyabiz81/blog nunyabiz81 http://sportsnation.espn.go.com/fans/nunyabiz81 2627 <div>Not many things to say about Michigan and Wisconsin. I didn't think that game would be so close in the first half, but, other than that, it was as expected. The other drama going on at Michigan is well worth discussing:</div> <div>&nbsp;</div> <div><strong>Forcier "Guarantees" A Win</strong></div> <div>Yes, but no. He said he's going to get his team to a bowl, which basically sounds like, yeah, "we're going to beat OSU." That would be a cool thing for him to come out and say and all, except 1) we went through this last year with Graham and Michigan State, which was a loss, and 2) Forcier is not at all Michigan's problem. On occasion, he has been part of the problem. But really, what it is is he's on an offense that can't keep up with other offenses because the defense can't stop those offenses. And to be honest with you, I saw, between the two games left--Wisconsin and OSU--Wisconsin being the bigger challenge, because Wisconsin's offense is strong while our defense is weak. I thought that game would be the biggest blowout in Michigan football history. So, Michigan has shown they can maybe play a close game with OSU. In the first half, I saw some things I liked on defense--not consistently, and those things went away in the second half.</div> <div>&nbsp;</div> <div>I see Michigan winning only if a few things go our way:</div> <div>&nbsp;</div> <div>1) OSU is not mentally in the game. And there are many reasons why this could be the case, from the fact that the rivalry really is not the same anymore to the fact that they can take Michigan for granted, and then the fact that OSU has already won the Big Ten basically. Still, look at last year. The situation really wasn't that different, except Michigan had nothing on the line. OSU had no mercy, and they won't this year.</div> <div>&nbsp;</div> <div>2) Michigan's defense channels Purdue. Look, we know exactly how to beat OSU. The Big House needs to create a hostile road environment, and the defense needs to keep pressure on Pryor. This is one week where all the incessant blitzing could possibly pay off. Then again, OSU had pulled tricks out the bag this season...I have a feeling we'll see some in the Michigan game, and they will work.</div> <div>&nbsp;</div> <div>3) Michigan has to play like they want it more. You see a team win a game every season just from playing possessed. They're not the better team, and no one expects them to win. They're doing it for their seniors or because it's a rivalry or whatever. Michigan State, looking at their season, I'd say stepped up against Michigan. Minnesota, in turn, stepped up against MSU. Michigan has got to save the best for last. And it can't just be Graham out there playing possessed. Many defensive players have got to have an attitude. To be honest, the last--and only--time I saw Michigan like that...was the Capital One bowl against Florida in 2008. I don't count on seeing it here. Like I've said before, I don't see the right attitude from anybody affiliated with the Michigan football program regarding OSU and have not seen it in years. Forcier's comment is about the importance of getting Michigan to a bowl, not the importance of the rivalry or getting an elusive win against OSU. Like I will discuss more below, the bowl game is very important. But this is a two-for-one deal, and the fact that beating OSU is part of the bargain shouldn't come in as the second concern.</div> <div>&nbsp;</div> <div><strong>Does Beating Ohio State Save Michigan's Season?</strong></div> <div>I believe it was Terry Foster with the <em>Detroit News</em> who argued that it does not because Michigan will still be a bad team. That's not the issue, though--we know they are. I admitted that Michigan wasn't good back when they lost to MSU. As fans, we don't care, at least not right now. We care about beating OSU, and we care about going to a bowl game. That's it. The "bad team" stuff is for Rodriguez and Forcier and Roh and everybody else to work out during the offseason. Frankly, for me, there's a fine line between RR failing this year and his not failing this year. Beating OSU and making a bowl, at this moment, is that line. I suspect a lot of fans feel the same way. And it didn't have to come down to OSU, either, because the thing that we feel worst about is missing bowl games. And that's because it's the one thing we always do--make bowl games. We could have lost to OSU but had 6 wins...there would have been grumbling because beating OSU is still #1 and because of the way Michigan lost some of their games, but you'd hear/read a lot less "fire RR now" stuff. And if RR pulls off a win against OSU and a miracle bowl appearance, a <em>lot</em> of people will quiet down. And if it's the Little Caesars bowl against a MAC team, you'd figure that's an automatic win--even better. Two things Carr came to have a hell of a time doing towards the end--beating OSU and winning bowl games--and RR would have done it.&nbsp;<em>We would shut the hell up. </em>For now. The only bad thing for RR is if he pulls that off, people will expect at <em>least</em> 8 regular season wins next year and another OSU victory. I don't think he'll have to worry about those expectations, though...</div> <div>&nbsp;</div> <div><strong>Drama Between Forcier and RR</strong></div> <div>You know, my biggest worry here is that Forcier may or may not be considering transferring. For those who don't know, a buncha stuff about Forcier missing a study session and then making it up later. RR didn't get word Forcier made it up, so he lit into Forcier and practiced Denard Robinson with the first team all week leading up to the Wisconsin game. Forcier thought he was going to be benched, particularly against Wisconsin, but it turns out RR is not quite <em>that</em> stupid. Some rumors that he wasn't happy about it and that his father is trying to tell him to transfer. Forcier says he's not going to transfer and everything is cool with the coaches.</div> <div>&nbsp;</div> <div>Despite having played basketball in the past, I have always been one of those people who is very against preferential treatment towards players or acting like athletes are better than everyone else. But I've got to say...Forcier is the best thing that has happened to Michigan in the past two years. Michigan would not even have 5 wins right now if it weren't for him, mainly. While I think Robinson needs more practice with the first team and should play more in games, and I understand those people who say Robinson is probably a better fit for Michigan's offense than Forcier is...Forcier has done a lot for Michigan this year, and his comments about getting his team to a bowl game demonstrate some of that determination he's shown all season. I don't mean this literally, but Michigan should be rolling out the red carpet for Forcier. He should not be getting treated like crap on national TV against Iowa or threatened with benching unless he has done something really serious. Missing a study session and not making it up is one thing, and clearly there should have been better communication between Forcier and RR. I believe Robinson and Devin Gardner will get a chance to get the starting quarterback job next year, but it's pretty clear to me that Forcier is Michigan's future if Michigan <em>is</em> going to be a winning team at all in the next few years. And it's obvious to me RR knows that, even though he apparently forgets at times--otherwise, he would have gone ahead and started Robinson. Forcier saved his #### this year, and he's Michigan's best shot against OSU on Saturday, at least in terms of the offense.</div> <div>&nbsp;</div> <div><strong>Michigan Failed To File Practice Time Logs</strong></div> <div>All I have to say about this is it adds more suspicion to the coaching staff and makes the allegations look at least a little less ridiculous to those people who found them ridiculous.</div> <div>&nbsp;</div> <div><strong>Ohio State Jumps Michigan In Basketball Poll</strong></div> <div>Um, both teams have started their seasons off with impressive wins. That's why I really can't understand why Michigan moved down and OSU moved up. I understand people started the season off saying they see OSU as the third best team in the Big Ten behind Michigan State and Purdue, not Michigan. In that case, they should have ranked OSU ahead from the get-go. After watching Michigan play Wayne State and especially Northern Michigan, I see no reason to drop Michigan. Michigan has a lot of talented players back, and they have the deepest bench in the nation. Michigan could win several of their games just playing guys from the bench. Manny Harris cooked up a triple double just like Evan Turner did. I mean, between basketball and football, this whole week is going to be a slap in the face, isn't it?</div> <div>&nbsp;</div> true 2009-11-17T04:13:15Z 99353 0 2009-11-17T04:14:43Z http://sportsnation.espn.go.com/fans/nunyabiz81/blog/posts/99353 2008-04-10T03:46:02Z 2627 2008-04-10T03:46:02Z 1247262 http://sportsnation.espn.go.com/fans/nunyabiz81/blog nunyabiz81 http://sportsnation.espn.go.com/fans/nunyabiz81 2627 <div><strong>Is USC Like Michigan and Notre Dame?</strong></div> <div>I only ask, knowing the answer full well, because Dave Curtis over at the <em>Sporting News</em> actually had the nerve to put USC in the same category as Michigan and ND, i.e. falling powerhouses. Um, losing three games in one season and failing to win your conference after dominating for six or whatever years is not the same as firing coach after coach for 6-6 seasons, a 3-9 season, a fanbase at each other's throats over the coach or a roster full of players that you wonder how they ever got to be part of a powerhouse team.</div> <div>&nbsp;</div> <div>You know I don't like USC at all, so for me to even be writing this you know it's true--USC's dynasty is not falling. They are having the inevitable "down" year like, if you really want to compare USC to Michigan, Michigan had in 2005, which was Michigan's worst season in 21 years up until RR came along. The very next season? 11-1, ranked #2 in the nation, and seriously competitive for the national championship and the Big Ten title. USC lost a lot of players, has had some key injuries and is in a conference that is more competitive than it's been in years. The last few years, USC could probably be in the situation it's in now and still win the conference. Not when you have Oregon, Arizona and Stanford all very powerful offensive teams, plus USC's defense has lost so much. And frankly, if you look at the way Stanford plays right now...there doesn't look like a team in the world that can stop their offense.</div> <div>&nbsp;</div> <div>This is not the beginning of USC having no shot at the Pac-10 title for years to come, being ranked only for a couple weeks a season and/or everyone yelling for Pete Caroll's head. That's why no one should even fix their mouth or their fingers over a keyboard to say/write that USC is in the same boat as Michigan or ND. USC will be back next year--Michigan won't, and ND depends on who the coach will be and if Clausen/Floyd/Tate/Allen all will be around. If you want to talk about falling powerhouses, putting Miami and Florida State and Nebraska in the same boat as Michigan/ND makes far more sense than trying to compare USC to any of those teams.</div> <div>&nbsp;</div> <div><strong>What the Tennessee Arrests Show</strong></div> <div>Many will argue that these arrests reflect on Kiffin, especially after he'd boasted that his players hadn't been in trouble. And clearly, UT has made some questionable decisions in recruiting, i.e. Daniel Hood. But I saw a really good comment on one of the articles about the arrests right on this site: recruiting the best players in SEC country, there are going to be some bad seeds in the bunch. Michigan, much more quietly, had an issue with that from Justin Feagin, a player from Florida. Jim Harbaugh is a coach at Stanford who has managed to balance intellect, good behavior and good play. Pat Fitzgerald is doing a decent job at Northwestern doing something similar to Harbaugh. But schools like Florida, UT and Michigan are going to have a much tougher time recruiting guys who aren't going to get in trouble but still will win as many games as their fan bases expect as often as expected. I guess that's one reason Harbaugh talks crap about the Big Ten and Michigan, but...not every team can win with a bunch of nerds, and no team can do it yearly. And if ND is going to be expecting a lot academically from athletes, they will continue to be more like Stanford and Northwestern but will still be firing coaches every other year for not getting to BCS bowls. Choices have to be made, basically, among academics, behavior and...well, winning. &nbsp;</div> <div>&nbsp;</div> <div><strong>Bud Foster To Memphis?</strong></div> <div>Apparently, Foster told the <em>Washington Post</em> last week that he's interested (which I couldn't believe) but that Memphis had yet to contact him. There are many reasons I don't see Foster at Memphis. Looking at conversations online by Memphis fans, Foster is generally not a good enough choice, i.e. a lack of fan support, at least vs some other names listed. For some, he's not a head coach. For others, he's not black (yes, I'm being serious--there are a few too many Memphis fans who seem to be all excited about Charlie Strong, Turner Gill and/or Larry Porter all because they're black, though with Porter there are also some more, better reasons for interest in him). For another sect, he doesn't really have the Memphis ties some would like to see (so what he knows the director of football operations at Memphis?). For a few, like me, there's the fact that Virginia Tech is boring as hell and he's a huge part of the reason why, i.e. their being allegedly more of a defensive team ("allegedly" because you don't see it consistently this season). One thing Memphis needs badly is a coach who gets "fans" excited. VT Part 2 won't do the trick, I don't think. Michigan is more exciting losing than VT is winning every year and landing in BCS bowl games. Still, I think if Foster is seriously interested in Memphis, Memphis needs to pursue him hard. The other names I see on the list, for the most part, are people I don't see wanting this job. And I think a guy like Strong or Gill would be crazy to take this job, and I strongly suspect that those guys realize it. As angry as Tommy West left Memphis, either of them would leave angrier because they'd get even less support, partially from racism (and race is actually why I don't think Strong/Gill would even be hired in the first place).</div> <div>&nbsp;</div> <div>The interesting thing is in the Post, Foster listed Cincinnati, Louisville and Pittsburgh as successful teams in "urban" areas when asked what he finds attractive about the Memphis job. Two out of three of those schools could have head coach openings in a couple weeks. Foster might not have a shot at Cincy, but I'd think he'd have a shot at Louisville. So, again, Memphis needs to jump on this while no one else is looking to hire. And they don't need to be stupid enough to put other candidates as a priority over speaking with Foster, thinking they're going to get that "wow" hire they didn't get with basketball. Be realistic.</div> <div>&nbsp;</div> <div>I also found a message board indicating Larry Porter is interested in the Memphis job. As I said, I'd feel sorry for him, Strong or Gill if they take the job...but out of those three, Porter, being a former Memphis player, would probably get the most support from both fans and the administration. As mentioned, many fans already like the idea of this hire because of his Memphis ties, recruiting ability and SEC connections. And he's probably the only black candidate who'd have a leg up over other candidates, including Foster, at least as far as the boosters/RC Johnson go. I think Porter gets the job, if seriously interested.</div> <div>&nbsp;</div> <div><strong>Most Likely Openings At Season's End</strong></div> <div>We know Weis is almost sure to be out at the end of the season, because you can go ahead and count the Stanford matchup as their fifth loss of the season...leaving ND only one game better off than they were last year (despite the fact that ND's schedule is a lot harder this year, but the point remains that ND has to beat good teams in order to be perceived as "Notre Dame" again). And UNLV's Sanford is the latest coach out the door. Other than Weis:</div> <div>&nbsp;</div> <div>Al Groh, Virginia: Groh has been unable to work the season-saving magic after a rough start this year like he did last year, despite being in an odd position a few weeks ago to win the Coastal division of the ACC.</div> <div>&nbsp;</div> <div>Ralph Friedgen, Maryland: One of the lesser spoken of coaches/programs in turmoil, that shows just how irrelevant Maryland has become after failing to be ranked at all this season as MD has been able to do on occasion the past few years.</div> <div>&nbsp;</div> <div>Dan Hawkins, Colorado: Been saying this one all season, and CU has not done well enough to think any differently now. They have a couple "upset" wins that should be more of an expectation than an upset for a program like CU...and everyone in Colorado ought to be tired of that by now.</div> <div>&nbsp;</div> <div>Steve Kragthorpe, Louisville: The game against Syracuse was billed as a must-win or else Kragthorpe would be out the door. I think he'll probably be out the door anyway, considering there won't be too many wins this year and just a few years ago Louisville was in a BCS bowl. It's been nothing but the wrong direction for the Cardinals ever since.</div> <div>&nbsp;</div> <div><u>Coaches who will be back but start next season with a little heat on the fannies</u>:</div> <div>Rich Rodriguez, Michigan. Heat Level: Warmest. Um, it's Michigan. No bowls plus no patience equals no job.</div> <div>&nbsp;</div> <div>Rick Neuheisel, UCLA. Heat Level: Warm. There are signs they might be on the right track, so doing well next year is essential.</div> <div>&nbsp;</div> <div>Mike Sherman, Texas A&amp;M. Heat Level: Warmer. Rumor has it their fans are the second most impatient with their coach, after Michigan.</div> <div>&nbsp;</div> <div>Dennis Erickson, Arizona State. Heat Level: Warmer. Every team, except Washington State, seems to be passing them by in the Pac-10.</div> <div>&nbsp;</div> <div>Paul Wulff, Washington State. Heat Level: Warmer. The least talked about travesty in college football. This hire never made much sense.</div> <div>&nbsp;</div> <div>Ron Zook, Illinois. Heat Level: Warmest. Safe for one more year and no one knows why.&nbsp;</div> <div>&nbsp;</div> <div>Tom O'Brien, North Carolina State. Heat Level: Warm. Maybe it's me, but I haven't heard enough complaining from NCSU fans.</div> <div>&nbsp;</div> <div>Mark Richt, Georgia. Heat Level: Warm. Georgia fans are tired of the underachieving and have high expectations. &nbsp;</div> <div>&nbsp;</div> <div>Bobby Bowden, Florida State. Heat Level: Warmest. He'd be out this year if so many influential people weren't on his side.</div> true 2009-11-17T01:09:13Z 99333 0 2009-11-17T01:09:13Z http://sportsnation.espn.go.com/fans/nunyabiz81/blog/posts/99333 2008-04-10T03:46:02Z 2627 2008-04-10T03:46:02Z 1247262 http://sportsnation.espn.go.com/fans/nunyabiz81/blog nunyabiz81 http://sportsnation.espn.go.com/fans/nunyabiz81 2627 <div><strong>Games of the Week</strong></div> <div><strong>Cincinnati-West Virginia</strong>: I'm a little surprised this was close, but WVU stepped it up, vs the past few weeks, for Cincinnati. Collaros was not as sharp as he normally is, and Pike was sent in to throw touchdown passes. Pead was really the player who came through, running for almost 200 yards. Um, if anything, this game makes Cincy look more in trouble when it comes to Pittsburgh. Pitt seems stronger on defense and, arguably, on&nbsp;offense.</div> <div>&nbsp;</div> <div><strong>Michigan State-Purdue</strong>: This game was, hands down, closer than it should have been. In a way, it's not surprising MSU was in a shootout with Purdue. Both teams had a lot on the line--MSU was close to not making a bowl game this season after all the preseason expectations that maybe they could win the Big Ten, and Purdue would be out of bowl contention if they lost this game. Both teams are explosive on offense, particularly Purdue. Still, it's surprising MSU did not step up defensively, especially knowing they are capable of playing good defense. This turned out to be a game of whichever team had the ball with enough time left at the end would win. Special teams was huge.</div> <div>&nbsp;</div> <div><strong>Auburn-Georgia</strong>: Well...Georgia might get to 7-5 after all, not that that's impressive considering it's Georgia. Sadly, this will probably be Georgia's biggest win of the season--over a team that's not even ranked--and for the first two quarters of the game it looked like maybe Georgia was on their way to being blown out. But Georgia started playing what became one of their better games defensively, and they gave Chris Todd a bit of a hard time. The Auburn comeback attempt took a long break when Georgia's Rambo (and that's seriously somebody's name) got injured, then failed.</div> <div>&nbsp;</div> <div><strong>Best Endings</strong></div> <div><strong>Ohio State-Iowa</strong>: Boring game until the second half and beyond. I wasn't right about a lot in regards to Saturday's games, but the one thing I'd figured pretty accurately was Vandenberg would play a lot better than he did against Northwestern. Despite the many interceptions, including the crucial one in overtime...he did. It really was just asking too much of a freshman making his first full start, and on the road...and at Ohio State, no less. Not winning the game, but asking for him to win it in overtime was too much, especially with the way several of his teammates failed to help him throughout regulation (dropped passes, unable to run the ball). I was impressed with the way Iowa fought (the kick return was awesome, and they wouldn't have gotten to OT without it), and the good news is, a click glance a their roster...they look like, assuming some important juniors come back, Iowa should be in a great position to make a run at the Big Ten title and a national championship again next year. As for OSU...Tressel is officially the new Lloyd Carr of the Big Ten. They righted the ship and pulled out the Big Ten title this time, but all the ridiculous ranting and raving fans did after OSU lost to Purdue...I still think he's on thin ice. Imagine if OSU had lost to Iowa and/or Penn State and hadn't won the Big Ten. He'd be the coach next year, but for how long after that?</div> <div>&nbsp;</div> <div><strong>Notre Dame-Pittsburgh</strong>: I don't normally whine about officiating, but...I saw a few bad calls this weekend. One was in this game when Clausen allegedly fumbled when he obviously didn't. It's not like ND was going to win this game--everyone knew that, and I'd predicted weeks ago that Pitt would win. ND was down significantly at one point in this game and, much like the OSU-Iowa game, a punt return helped position them for another comeback win. The amazing thing was that this was a boring, defensive battle for a half. ND was lucky to ever be in this thing, but, once again, the officials did nothing but officially end ND's chances of winning in a premature fashion.&nbsp;</div> <div>&nbsp;</div> <div><strong>Shocks of the Week</strong></div> <div><strong>Stanford Blowing Out USC</strong>: It's funny how USC can lose to Washington and not suffer, get smacked by Oregon and not suffer...but let them get blown out by a Stanford team that everyone is in agreement about their being very good, and USC plummets in the polls, finally. On top of that, all this talk about USC "falling" comes in full force now. Is all this because this is the third loss and people finally understand they were wrong about USC all season...or is it because they lost to <em>Stanford</em> and there is still this looking down on the Cardinal because they're not a historical powerhouse...despite the fact that they're likely to go 9-3 this year? USC's defense was as much a disgrace against Oregon as it was against Stanford, so what has changed? For me, the surprise is not that they lost to Stanford other than the fact that this is Stanford's first noteworthy road win of the season. It's that Stanford dominated, and right from the beginning. It also was interesting to see not the horrible defense but how USC this year is a team that cannot really play from behind offensively. Being down about a touchdown is fine for them, a la Ohio State, but more than that and you can mark down that 'L.' &nbsp;</div> <div>&nbsp;</div> <div><strong>Ole Miss Blowing Out Tennessee</strong>: Earlier in the season, this wouldn't have been a shock. But by now, Kiffin had raised expectations for UT while expectations had been lowered back to where they were last year for Ole Miss. It's not like UT's losing is hard to believe, but this is the kind of score you'd expect between UT-Florida. It seems like not only was news of the three UT players involved in an armed robbery a distraction for UT, but I'm a big believer in bad vibes for teams, kind of like what was somewhat expected of Michigan at the beginning of the season with the "too much practice" story. Hearing about the robbery after making my pick for this game, it left an "uh oh" feeling for UT. It's hard to think UT would have gotten blown out otherwise, looking at what they did against Florida, Alabama, Georgia and S. Carolina.</div> <div>&nbsp;</div> <div><strong>Rutgers Blowing Out South Florida</strong>: Maybe this should be in the very&nbsp;next section below, because USF always seems to look good then melt down...and because they seem to struggle with Thursday night games. Also, Rutgers seems to have USF's number yearly. Still, this was a Rutgers team that looked like they'd be in the Big East basement with Syracuse and Louisville when they got blown out by Cincinnati, and now they're ranked. BJ Daniels was horrible, and this game was a complete waste of a Thursday night.</div> <div>&nbsp;</div> <div><strong>Late-Night Injuries</strong>: It was almost like deja vu, seeing Rambo laying on the ground forever in the Georgia-Auburn game...then turning to Oklahoma State-Texas Tech and seeing two guys lay on the ground, Zac Robinson there forever. It seems like a key player is getting injured every week now, and concussions are about as big a deal in college football now as they are in the NFL. I have not read that Robinson for sure suffered a concussion, but I have seen that he will play the next game. Um...they're playing Colorado. It <em>is</em> Thursday night, which means an upset is totally possible. But the kid got injured in the first place because he was trying to do too much. OK State already had the first down, but he was going for the touchdown. Just let him rest.</div> <div>&nbsp;</div> <div><strong>The Shocks That Shouldn't Be Surprising</strong></div> <div><strong>Houston-UCF</strong>: Now, the UTEP loss looks bad, at this point, considering UTEP is 3-7. But UCF is a good team, for the C-USA anyway. More than that, Houston has issues stopping teams and, despite their offense...we've seen repeatedly this season that a lack of defense will equal a lack of perfection. They got lucky against Tulsa, but the luck ran out this weekend...again. The game started getting out of reach for Houston in the 3rd quarter when they let UCF score 13 points for the lead and then continued when Houston allowed 14 more points.</div> <div>&nbsp;</div> <div><strong>North Carolina-Miami</strong>: Two teams that have not been consistent enough to be ACC champions. Two teams that have the ability to have had a better season. Two teams that show how wacky and confusing the ACC is. Thanks to these untimely losses for Miami, Georgia Tech, a team they beat convincingly, is off to the ACC championship game. And you can thank Jacory Harris for this one, Miami fans. If Miami's going to be "Miami" again, they need him to play well more consistently at quarterback.</div> <div>&nbsp;</div> <div><strong>Boise State-Idaho</strong>: Idaho's coach talked a lot of schitt earlier in the week about wanting to be the most hated coach in the WAC because he wanted to keep BSU out of a BCS game. Well, he might be the most hated coach--by his fans. You ever notice that the coaches who refuse to run their mouth are usually the ones who win? See Brian Kelly and, oh yeah--Chris Peterson. I'm starting to think trash talking and revenge are overrated, unless you are far and away the better team. See Wisconsin-Michigan for a good example of revenge working only when a team is better than the team they seek revenge on. Otherwise, a bigger A-whuppin' than you were going to get even before opening your mouth seems to be the only result.</div> <div>&nbsp;</div> <div><strong>Florida State-Wake Forest</strong>: FSU was not really expected to win this game with Ponder being out, but what's not surprising is FSU is going to find a way to win for Bowden and continue their bowl game streak. Losing Ponder did not hurt them in this game, in part because Manuel played well enough but also partially because Riley Skinner did not play like himself. I did not realize WF had lost so many games that they would lose any shot of bowl eligibility with this loss, and it is really unfortunate for Skinner as a senior. Looking at this season, including this game, golden opportunities have gotten away from WF to win. These are certainly two more ACC teams that could have had better seasons than they have.</div> <div>&nbsp;</div> <div><em>Pt. 2 Next...</em></div> true 2009-11-17T00:58:56Z 99331 0 2009-11-17T01:00:08Z http://sportsnation.espn.go.com/fans/nunyabiz81/blog/posts/99331 2008-04-10T03:46:02Z 2627 2008-04-10T03:46:02Z 1247262 http://sportsnation.espn.go.com/fans/nunyabiz81/blog nunyabiz81 http://sportsnation.espn.go.com/fans/nunyabiz81 2627 <p>This is something I've been thinking about for at least a few weeks now, and something I read has made me finally write something about it. Apparently, a recruit out of Georgia was considering Michigan and Tennessee, but just chose UT over Michigan, and he made some comments about why. They were to the effect of UT is going in the right direction and Kiffin has the support of the community.</p> <p>At the same time, Craig Roh's father--Roh being one of Michigan's defensive players--keeps writing stuff on Scout.com, apparently. Like the majority of people, he seems to not want Michigan fans criticizing RR (because recruits pay attention to it)...um, you know, despite the fact that the majority of the overall criticism from all directions, not just fans, goes towards Michigan players...mostly the side of the ball his son plays on. There was a lot of agreement with Roh's father on the Scout.com board and just a general jumping-on of people who didn't agree, from the bit that I could stomach to read. I'm not referring to Roh's father when I talk about what I couldn't stomach--I get his points, although, like many people who have a problem with RR criticism, I think he fails to realize some things or lumps all Michigan fans who complain together.</p> <p>A good way I know of to address Roh's father, the Georgia recruit and blindly pro-RR fans is to compare Kiffin to RR...because I don't think the fan support situations are comparable (and below, I explain why not), but the coaching hires, for me, are.</p> <p>Here is my response:</p> <p>Unlike with RR, Kiffin has given several reasons for UT fans to support him and feel optimistic. I would know about both situations--I'm a Michigan alum, but I am from TN and live there now. I didn't like the Kiffin hire much more than the RR one, but, though I don't like Kiffin as a person, I have come around to him as a UT coach, most notably for the following reasons:<br /><br />1) He has had UT's back from day one. He came in embracing everything about UT and working hard to become a Vol. The most notable thing about Kiffin is he has Florida Gators connections--loved Spurrier, wife is a Gator and her whole family are Gators, etc. Florida is UT's biggest rival. He didn't care--he came right in going straight at Florida's throat. And not to say RR hasn't tried to embrace Michigan's traditions, but it's clear to me there are many things he doesn't get about Michigan or the Big Ten (best example I can give right now is the fan response/demands, though, unlike last year, he claims he does get it). I think Kiffin gets UT. He doesn't wear UT hats in press conferences...but that's okay. ;)<br /><br />2) Along the same lines of the Gators thing, I <strong><em><u>love</u></em></strong> what Kiffin has stirred up with Urban Meyer. He has embraced UT's rivalries full force and has taken the Florida one to a new level. He demonstrates passion for those rivalry games. RR has yet to do that. He doesn't have to take jabs at Tressel or Dantonio, but he needs to act like playing Michigan State and Ohio State are more than a little bit bigger than the rest of the games we play, and he needs to demonstrate he gets/cares about those rivalries. Currently, he demonstrates <em><u>far</u></em> more passion yelling at our players. This is another example, for me, of how he doesn't get Michigan, at least not yet. Kiffin's swagger towards Florida obviously has rubbed off on the UT players, and I have confidence they will beat Florida in the next few years. Can't feel that way about Michigan-Ohio State...those Michigan players still don't seem to care enough about that rivalry. Anytime a player goes straight to talking about making the Rose Bowl vs beating OSU...both are important, obviously, but OSU comes first, especially when beating them hasn't been done in 5 years.<br /><br />3) Another related point...you would have expected UT to get blown out by Alabama and Florida, but they didn't. They were in a position to beat Alabama, and they played very strategically against Florida, only losing by 10. And this is with some mediocre players. Crompton is not a good QB, but he is playing better under Kiffin--beat Georgia, beat S. Carolina--and UT can get 8 wins this year, surprisingly, 9 if they win a bowl game...and with Kiffin in his first year. Michigan, on the other hand, is about to have two losing seasons and miss a bowl for the second straight season. Arguably, 2009 is Michigan's second worse season in our school's history if we do, indeed, go 5-7, with RR's first year being undisputably the worst season. Everyone wants to blame Michigan's mediocre players for everything, but that's not stopping UT. Coaching is making a difference at UT this year. Michigan, for the second year in a row, is getting embarrassed by teams they used to own. Never should Michigan lose to Michigan State, Illinois and Purdue two years in a row, and <em>none</em> of those games should be blowouts. Frankly, I would put Penn&nbsp;State in that category, as well. Getting killed by Ohio State, I could understand--they are our Florida. <br /><br />Honestly, I hate to say it--I am much more of a Michigan fan than a UT fan--but I don't blame recruits for going elsewhere right now. This is not just about what fans say about RR, and what the recruit from Georgia says about going in the right direction supports that. Michigan is not going in the right direction right now, not when the difference in our 2008 and 2009 records is a game we should have lost to an Indiana team we didn't play last year--but realistically might have beaten if we had--and playing teams like Eastern Michigan/Delaware State vs Utah/Toledo.</p> <p>I don't want Michigan to hurt in recruiting, but everything people say about Michigan right now is just an opinion...which is why I can't understand why Michigan fans jump all over each other about RR. Recruits will get many opinions from many places, not just blogs and message boards. And given that most football analysts/commentators/"experts" repeatedly say RR will get it done at Michigan, why put more weight on what someone like me writes than what those people say? Why listen to us over what people inside the program tell you, as a recruit? The real difference between UT and Michigan is Kiffin is showing he can get it done at UT, and that's something else that recruits ought to--and probably will--pay attention to more than what fans say.</p> true 2009-11-12T06:33:18Z 98321 1 2009-11-12T15:23:19Z http://sportsnation.espn.go.com/fans/nunyabiz81/blog/posts/98321 2008-04-10T03:46:02Z 2627 2008-04-10T03:46:02Z 1247262 http://sportsnation.espn.go.com/fans/nunyabiz81/blog nunyabiz81 http://sportsnation.espn.go.com/fans/nunyabiz81 2627 The regular season is almost at an end, huh? As a Michigan fan, that's kind of good news, especially considering the basketball team is expected to do far better than the football team has done. Hockey even better than that. -- <b>West Virginia-Cincinnati</b>: Cincinnati. Why: The past two or so weeks have made this game look less like a challenge to Cincy, although Cincy did have trouble in the 2nd half with Connecticut. WVU just has not been that impressive this season, and Kelly is doing exactly the right thing keeping Collaros as the starter. Probably will be an entertaining game, but I think WVU's best chance to win would have been if Pike was coming back to play most of the game. <b>Syracuse-Louisville</b>: No clue. Why: Flip a coin--it could be either team. They are both the Big East's bottom feeders. I would go with Syracuse (they beat Northwestern, played it close with Minnesota), but they have so many injuries and I'm sure Paulus will throw some picks for Louisville to take advantage of. All I know is this game will decide the worst team in the Big East. <b>Tennessee-Ole Miss</b>: Tennessee. Why: UT seems to be getting better and better each week. I think the games against Florida, Alabama and Georgia have given them the confidence they need to win the rest of their games and go on to a surprisingly good bowl game. Ole Miss, on the other hand, still seems to be underachieving <b>Clemson-North Carolina State</b>: Clemson. Why: Back to losing for NCSU. It will probably be yet another great game in the ACC--they seem to be having the best games so far this season, and most of NCSU's ACC games are in that category. But we know NCSU can't stop Spiller. All they can do is have Wilson pass for enough touchdowns to stay in it, but he will also probably throw costly picks to the Clemson D. <b>Florida State-Wake Forest</b>: Wake Forest. Why: It was going to be tough for FSU either way, but without Ponder? Unless the backup is like Cincy's Collaros, I don't think FSU's offense can make up for how FSU's defense probably will allow Skinner to score often. Here's where the bowl chances start slipping away. <b>Northwestern-Illinois</b>: Illinois. Why: I heard Illinois is a big favorite in this game, and they shouldn't be. I just go with them in what probably will be a close game because, from the couple games I've seen Charest in, I think he's actually Illinois' best option at quarterback this season and that they would still realistically be able to get into a bowl game if he'd been sent out sooner (not to say Juice was/is Illinois' only problem). If he's going to play the majority of the game, I see him taking advantage of NU's weak defense pretty well. <b>Michigan State-Purdue</b>: Michigan State. Why: The second most difficult pick I have to make. I go with State because I can't see them going back to 6-6 seasons and barely making bowl games as long as Dantonio is the coach. I think they know too many games have already gotten away from them, games against teams they shouldn't lose to. Purdue, though they can beat MSU, would be another one of those games. I suspect they will play one of their best games of the season. Purdue, in their first year with a new coach and a year in which nothing was expected from them, has already beaten Michigan and Ohio State. Okay, this is where the Boilermakers wake up from their dream, and they should be satisfied. <b>Kentucky-Vanderbilt</b>: Kentucky. Why: Here's another "the worst team in the league"-type game (Mississippi State's record is deceptive--and I neglected to mention on my "Week 10 Wrap-Up Pt. 2..." post that they are another popular car tag in the Memphis area). Kentucky has shown against Auburn and even S. Carolina that it's not them. Plus, we don't need to see this game to know it's Vanderbilt, as usual. <b>Missouri-Kansas State</b>: Kansas State. Why: Mizzou is yet another team that got off to a deceptively good start and then fell flat. I think a lot of us thought KSU would also turn out like that with respect to showing up on top of the Big 12 North, but they are still there with most of their losses being understandable (all the Big 12 ones are). Mizzou is at KSU, where KSU is perfect this season, and...well, Mizzou couldn't even beat Baylor. <b>Colorado-Iowa State</b>: Iowa State. Why: ISU, arguably, has lost to all the good teams in the conference that they've faced so far and beat the other teams they've played. CU doesn't really fall among the good teams. CU <i>does</i> fall among the dangerous teams in the Big 12, though, so anything could happen here. <b>Idaho-Boise State</b>: Boise State. Why: Idaho wasn't much of a challenge for Fresno State in the first half, and maybe that was because they were looking ahead. They will play BSU tougher, but BSU will pull out another close win because of their offense. <b>Stanford-USC</b>: USC. Why: Not sure I see USC losing another game this year, and Stanford has yet to win a road game against a good team. This could be a shootout, though. <b>Washington-Oregon State</b>: Oregon State. Why: Washington has overachieved, then gone back to underachieving again. The Beavers are legitimately, but not realistically, in Pac-10 title contention, because they win all the games they should win. Unless another freak play goes Washington's way, this looks like another should-win for State. <b>Nebraska-Kansas</b>: Kansas. Why: Kansas has been on a horrible slide, but they've also been playing teams that are either better or, perhaps, better coached, with the exception of CU. They should be able to stop the bleeding against offensively-challenged Nebraska, as long as Reesing can keep turnovers to a minimum. <b>Fresno State-Nevada</b>: Fresno State. Why: Two teams, both strong on offense, not as much on defense...should be great if you like offense. Both have been winning, so it's tough to pick. I just think Fresno State has been consistently impressive all season long on offense, and more impressive against better teams than Nevada has been (laid an egg against Notre Dame, couldn't beat a Mizzou that now doesn't look as impressive as they once did. Fresno State has been in every game against BCS opponents and against BSU), as well as in general. <b>Auburn-Georgia</b>: Auburn. Why: I came close to leaving this game out of the picks. Richt is getting closer to officially being on the hot seat. Unless Georgia is motivated to find a way to go more than 6-6, I don't see a reason to think they will win. Their defense won't stop Auburn's offense. And, no, I don't think Malzahn is coming to Memphis (Tuberville, neither). <b>Texas A&M-Oklahoma</b>: Oklahoma. Why: It's a shame to be pinpointing A&M as a close game for Oklahoma, but that's what it looks like now. I do think A&M won't be able to make it past OU's defense too many times, and I suspect Jones will be back on track, as well. Wonder if Stoops is moving closer to the hot seat, too?? Especially if OU loses this one. <b>Utah-TCU</b>: TCU. Why: I have been thinking TCU will lose a game all season, but, like the BYU game, this doesn't feel like a game TCU will lose unless they really fall apart on one side of the ball. Offensively, they seem to have gotten better, and the defense is still strong. They are looking more and more like they will go undefeated in the regular season, and Utah is down this year. <b>Notre Dame-Pittsburgh</b>: Pittsburgh. Why: If you thought this week is tough for Weis, wait until next week. This looks like another game that won't be close, and even if it is...it's to the point where people won't care. You have a great offense against a defense that has a tough time stopping teams. A nightmare matchup for ND, and if Clausen couldn't handle Navy it's hard to believe the offense will be able to make up for their defense this weekend. <b>Texas Tech-Oklahoma State</b>: Oklahoma State. Why: I think we're finally about to get a Big 12 game that looks something like last year's great games. But who the hell is starting at quarterback for Tech? It might not matter, as OK State seems like they're just fine without Bryant and even if Hunter doesn't play the whole game at running back. Meanwhile, Tech doesn't really seem like they can stop a strong offensive unit, despite having one themselves. <b>East Carolina-Tulsa</b>: Tulsa. Why: The team that really should have beaten Houston? It's the offense. Just don't turn the ball over several times again. <b>Don't Be Surprised If</b>: <b>Iowa Beats Ohio State</b>: If Iowa's going to win this game, it's probably going to have to be on defense. And that's totally possible, especially if Pryor makes mistakes. But with Stanzi out for Iowa, it's hard to like Iowa's chances. They couldn't even move the ball on Northwestern with the backup, so can you imagine against Ohio State's D? The only thing is sometimes backups play horribly in their first start, then come out the next week vastly better (Frazer at Connecticut is a great example). So, this is not a done deal for OSU. Vanderberg has fair warning this time that it's all on him, and it's not out of the question that Marvin McNutt could throw some passes. I think OSU will get it done, though. true 2009-11-12T05:45:36Z 98319 0 2009-11-12T05:45:36Z http://sportsnation.espn.go.com/fans/nunyabiz81/blog/posts/98319 2008-04-10T03:46:02Z 2627 2008-04-10T03:46:02Z 1247262 http://sportsnation.espn.go.com/fans/nunyabiz81/blog nunyabiz81 http://sportsnation.espn.go.com/fans/nunyabiz81 2627 <b>Tommy West Fired and Fired Up</b> Earlier in the season, my prediction was the first coach to be fired would be Dan Hawkins at Colorado, maybe Al Groh at Virginia. Hawkins is still struggling, and so is Groh, so maybe one or both will still get fired. As it turns out, though, one of the first coaches to fall is right here in my hometown of Memphis. Tommy West at Memphis, as well as the Western Kentucky coach David Elson, got canned--West after losing big to Tennessee this past weekend. I want to spend some time on the West firing, though, since I am knowledgeable about the Memphis program. Um...if you didn't see the press conference announcing the firing of West, you should look it up. It, more or less, tells the story of the Memphis program. Even if you don't care about Memphis, it's good stuff. Pay particular attention to the West portion of the conference--actually, <a href="http://www.commercialappeal.com/videos/detail/tommy-west-fired-and-fired-/">here</a> is that portion (might not work in Firefox). Watch that and come back to this post. Done? Okay. West is right. And those who say R.C. Johnson is the real problem are...well, partially right. And to go a few steps further and write some things that haven't already been written about this situation... If you'll look above at my teams, you'll notice I have Memphis there. But I write predominantly about, in this order, Michigan, the Big Ten, BCS schools and then non-BCS schools...and the non-BCS portion usually doesn't include Memphis. I mention this to make two points: 1) there were a lot of "fans" and alums of Memphis this season yelling for West's head, but I was never one of them--indeed, I really didn't write about Memphis one way or the other except to note they are never good enough to get the national attention Ole Miss had at the beginning of this season--and 2) Memphis "fans" are not really Memphis fans...at least not of Memphis football. Basketball is a bit of a different story and, indeed, I watch more Memphis basketball games than I do football games. Even somewhat with basketball, though, and certainly with football, I would argue that most of us Memphis fans either have at least one other team that is <i>really</i> our team--often a winning team--just usually not a non-Southern team, as is the case with me...or we're among the lukewarm fan variety. I would describe the lukewarm fan as the kind that doesn't really know a lot about the sport they're watching, doesn't watch every game of that team's, might go to games sometimes if they go at all and if the team loses they just kind of shrug it off--they're not pissed about it or crying or whining about play calling or anything like that (and yes, I've cried over some Michigan games--Utah last year, Illinois and Purdue this year). If the team is losing at halftime, or even if they're winning nicely at halftime, they will get up and leave the stadium or turn the channel. Believe it or not, Michigan has <i>many</i> lukewarm fans. But a team like Memphis...almost all of their fans are that, and some are that <i>plus</i> having a team they care about first and foremost above Memphis. If you ever come to Memphis, you will see all kinds of teams on people's cars, all kinds of shirts and hats. My father wears Michigan hats most days, despite being an Arkansas alum and the fact that he's lived in Memphis for about 30 years. My sister is a Memphis alum, and she doesn't support Memphis. My mother is a Memphis alum, and she is a lukewarm fan. You'll see people who have the nerve to be in the state of Tennessee but have Florida or Alabama crap. Certainly, you will see Tennessee stuff and Ole Miss. I see more Florida State stuff than makes sense, and sometimes the Miami orange and green 'U.' Just the other day, I saw a Virginia Tech tag on someone's car. I wear Michigan or Georgia shirts at times, and sometimes we even see Notre Dame, Ohio State or Michigan State on someone's car. Now, sometimes you see a Memphis tag or see Memphis banners outside someone's house. But it seems like you don't really see Memphis stuff as much as you see Tennessee, Ole Miss, Florida or Florida State until it's the NCAA Tournament time and Memphis is in the tourney. Long story short--Memphis football doesn't have fans. That's why I couldn't figure out all this "fire West" stuff. Who is it that wanted him fired? The five people who showed up to the East Carolina game that was on ESPN a couple weeks ago? Seriously. I've heard people say all season long that no one goes to Miami games. But when I look at Miami's turnout, I'm like..."if you think that's a travesty, come look at the Memphis turnout, whether Memphis is winning or not." The administration is not Memphis' only problem--the fake fans are an issue. Why would the admin put all this money and upgrade into a program that it seems no one cares about? West is so right--fans have to ask for better for Memphis but support Memphis in the meantime. Apparently, some only care when Memphis is losing. Apparently, those "some" don't understand West had Memphis in bowl games just last year and the year before that. It's one bad season, and Memphis is not like Michigan--they don't need to fire coaches with every losing season at Memphis. Now they're about to have a hard time finding a coach. And they're not going to get a big-name coach here, either...especially not after West's tirade...but not even before he did that. They couldn't even get a big-name coach for the basketball program. There's no appeal, both to the University of Memphis or the city of Memphis. And it <i>is</i> a hard job. Johnson said he has been "inundated" with coaching prospects. He's lying. Memphis is a dangerous, boring city with nothing to offer, and the facilities at the university suck. One reason people don't go to football games is because they don't know whether their car will still be outside when they come back out. That's a problem, both for attracting coaches and attracting recruits. I mean, Johnson might step down at some point, but these other issues surrounding the Memphis program will still be there. That's why Memphis will never be Tulsa, Houston or East Carolina. <b>Should Michigan Have Hired Brian Kelly Instead?</b> Speaking of coaching hires. I saw an article yesterday saying that Michigan made a mistake not hiring Kelly when they had the chance. I don't really agree with this. And I do remember his naming coming up when Carr stepped down. But at that time, in my mind, Kelly had not proven himself. It would have been a bit of a gamble for Michigan to take Kelly, and we can only say in hindsight now that the gamble probably would have paid off. But at the time, he had yet to go 11-2 at Cincinnati and make a BCS bowl game, and he had yet to be undefeated even with a backup quarterback. And I will say the same thing I know I said with RR months ago--you are comparing a Big East team with Michigan in the Big Ten. Not the same thing. It is not at all surprising to me that RR is still struggling at Michigan, not even just because I don't believe in him but also because Michigan is the biggest, toughest program either of these guys will have seen. It's a lot easier to be successful in the Big East, even if you're not getting the same caliber of recruits. You're also not playing the same caliber of recruits or teams. Cincy has several tough games this season--they beat South Florida, got by Connecticut, and they have West Virginia and Pittsburgh coming up. But the only team on Cincy's schedule that is anywhere near as tough as what Cincy would face in the Big Ten is Pitt. And the jury's still out on whether or not Kelly's going to be able to get by Pitt. At this point, I would love to see Kelly at Michigan...but I don't blame Michigan for going for someone who had the appearance of having proved more at the time they hired RR. <b>Oregon's Mistake If They Play Blount</b> Okay, there was the little big oopsie at Stanford. But aside from that, Oregon had been <i>rolling</i>. And LaMichael James had even started coming up in Heisman discussions. Why should Oregon let Blount play in any game at any point? A lot of people seem to feel like "give the kid a second chance." I feel like the dude screwed up, and a decision was made--stick with it, especially since it doesn't at all seem Oregon needs Blount. Blount did nothing for them in the Boise State game, except embarrass them. James played a big part in their beating USC. If this was an average guy, no one would care that his "future" would be screwed by his "mistake." People talk like Oregon would be doing something unfair to Blount if they didn't let him play again...he did it to himself and should have thought about that before he went postal on national TV. <b>How To Kill USC and LSU?</b> LSU, #8. USC, #9. Apparently, if you're an SEC team, you can lose and still move up in the rankings. If you're USC, you can get blown out by a conference team and barely suffer for it, then move up just for barely getting by a lowly conference opponent. I think USC is exempt from East Coast bias. Actually, I think there's no such thing--it would be more accurately named Southern + USC bias. <b>Wisconsin's Clay/Tolzien Underrated</b> It seems like every running back that's doing a good job this season is getting his name thrown out there in Heisman discussions, mainly because we don't know who should win the Heisman (although I say Case Keenum). In Big Ten circles, there's also talk about who is the best quarterback in the conference. What I want to know is...why don't we ever hear anything about Scott Tolzien or John Clay? Not to say either should be Heisman candidates, but they never come up as good players, period. So it's props time. Wisconsin would not be where they are without Tolzien. Quarterback was a huge question mark coming into the season, and Tolzien has been probably the biggest surprise quarterback of the year. He is definitely in my top 3 for the best Big Ten QBs this season. He had the two bad games against Iowa and Ohio State, but the other Big Ten QBs people put in their top 3 have bad games against good teams, too--certainly Clark and Pryor, and Cousins made a crucial mistake against Notre Dame throwing an interception when Michigan State could have had a touchdown or field goal. Clay started the season out needing a lesson, which is why Wisconsin went with Brown as the back, but he got it and is on his way to 1000 yds this season despite splitting time with Brown and Ball at back. He'll likely get his 1000 against Michigan, and Tolzien figures to have a big day, as well, shredding our sorry D. true 2009-11-10T20:30:08Z 98244 0 2009-11-10T20:30:08Z http://sportsnation.espn.go.com/fans/nunyabiz81/blog/posts/98244 2008-04-10T03:46:02Z 2627 2008-04-10T03:46:02Z 1247262 http://sportsnation.espn.go.com/fans/nunyabiz81/blog nunyabiz81 http://sportsnation.espn.go.com/fans/nunyabiz81 2627 Is it me, or are these games getting crazier with each week? Several good games this past weekend...the following are only a few: <b>Games of the Week</b> <b>Texas A&M-Colorado</b>: Colorado didn't beat A&M so much as A&M lost this for themselves. There were just too many times getting into the redzone and leaving without touchdowns. And when you think about the fact that they lost by one point...that easily goes back to either the field goal they decided not to kick in the first half, opting to go for it on 4th down (and I'm starting to think coaches need to learn a lesson about just taking the damn points and how not doing so comes back to haunt them), or the field goal they missed later on. Then they broke down defensively a bit too much in the 2nd half, and finally their last drive ended in an interception when they needed just--you guessed it--a field goal. Take advantage of opportunities, and it wouldn't have even come to that--could have been a runaway game for A&M instead of a close shootout. <b>Maryland-North Carolina State</b>: If you like to see it all in a game, with the exception of great defense, this one was for you. The first half was the best with 31 points scored in the first quarter alone. There were points off turnovers, special teams, passing the ball and running the ball. There were blocked field goal kicks and missed field goal kicks. There were crucial injuries, most notably to MD quarterback Chris Turner...after he left the game, MD did much of nothing. Actually, my prediction that MD wouldn't hang offensively with NCSU would have been true had Wilson not turned over the ball several times and had NCSU's kick/punt return coverage been better, with or without Turner. Those are the kind of things that kept MD able to score. Nevertheless, NCSU finally got an ACC win in yet another close shootout. <b>Houston-Tulsa</b>: One of the craziest games of the year, another reason comes to the forefront as to why Houston never could have made it into the BCS--their defense isn't good enough. They couldn't stop Tulsa, a team that Oklahoma kept scoreless. And if you think about it, this has generally been an issue for Houston all season. Teams score a lot on them, and this time it almost cost them another game. They were lucky Tulsa couldn't hold onto the ball and their kicker came through, not to mention recovering a very late onside kick that allowed them to kick that last-second field goal for the win. The stars that used to be aligned for Iowa are now on Houston's side.Even the commentators acted like the game was over for Houston towards the end. <b>Shocks of the Week</b> <b>Penn State-Ohio State</b>: What in the <i>hell</i>...was <i>that</i>??? I knew PSU was overrated--have been saying as much since before Michigan lost to them--but <i>damn</i>! This game was supposed to be, like, a battle of "worse and worser"...with <i>OSU</i> being "worser." We know neither Clark nor Pryor (nor their offensive lines) can perform in big games. Instead, Pryor suddenly showed some semblance of being a real quarterback against a BCS bowl team...though it's not like he passed for impressive yardage or anything. Nevermind that this Pryor either won't be anywhere in sight in the Rose Bowl against Oregon (or whoever) or that he will be but it won't be enough, as usual. OSU just did the unthinkable--they blew out PSU. Needless to say, I think we all finally understand who PSU is now. <b>The Close Calls That Shouldn't Have Been (<i>USC-Arizona State, Cincinnati-Connecticut</i>)</b>: ASU is a bottom-half Pac-10 team. USC is overrated and inconsistent. I mean, last week it was the defense that couldn't hang. This weekend, the defense was back but the offense was nowhere to be found. Earlier this season, it was the same thing as in the ASU game. This could have been an "upset" for the second week in a row when it should have been a blowout. As for Cincy, they gave up a huge lead. Barely beating Conn would have been fine had it been a close game all along. We're all understanding about Conn fighting hard and being a challenge for all the best teams in the Big East this season. But you can't prove you belong in the national title game giving up 20-point halftime leads to middling teams in your conference. <b>Nebraska-Oklahoma</b>: I don't even know what to say. Landry Jones just stunk it up. The commentators or somebody talked about how this game used to be bigger than it is...I don't know if that's how they put it, but that was the idea. And the way it was played and the final score basically confirmed that, not to mention the fact that there were more intriguing games on at the same time...and even those team matchups were disappointing when you consider these were primetime games. It's to the point where Oklahoma is always supposed to win, and Nebraska hasn't at all shown they are back enough for the upset...especially considering they suck on offense. And if Oklahoma can't beat teams that are only on the way back like Miami and Nebraska with Jones (not to mention the Texas loss), it kind of makes me wonder if OU is on the way down with Jones. I know this is his first year starting, but it's perfectly clear this is no Sam Bradford. For starters...Bradford doesn't throw desperation passes with plenty of time left on the clock, and, no matter how good the defense is he's facing he will find the end zone. <b>Mild Surprises</b> <b>Notre Dame-Navy</b>: The surprise here is this game really wasn't even close. Clausen is officially not going to be part of the Heisman ceremony after turning the ball over, what, twice in the red zone? I know there were at least two times, and one of those times Clausen had made it to the 1 yd line of Navy and looked like he might not come back to the game...at which point ND definitely wouldn't have won, especially with Dayne Crist not being at the game. ND had their chances to win this. And while I don't really think it's shocking that ND lost to Navy, this still is not the game a lot of us would have picked as an upset this weekend--I didn't see any "experts" pick this one, actually. I just wonder what this sudden loss does for Weis now, because, though I like Navy, I don't think this is a "good" loss at all, especially the way that ND played and being down two touchdowns for much of the game. There's also the fact that this is probably not going to be ND's last loss this season--Pittsburgh has gotten to be a scarier game every week, and Stanford is officially a serious threat to ND. With this loss, it's not unreasonable to think ND goes 7-5 this season. Not what ND fans wanted. Frankly, not what us Michigan fans who are thinking ahead want, either. We can beat Weis...and though we have beaten Urban Meyer before, we'll never beat him--or ND if he goes there--again, at least as long as RR is our head coach. And Meyer has nothing left to accomplish at Florida, what, with Tebow graduating and especially if they get another national title this season. And even if ND doesn't get Meyer, there are still guys like Brian Kelly...guys Michigan might want in the future and definitely don't want to face. More on Michigan and Brian Kelly in Pt. 2 of the Wrap. <b>Oregon-Stanford</b>: Turns out I should have just taken Stanford in this one, but what's surprising about this game is the fact that Stanford was essentially blowing Oregon out for most of it. Oregon gave too much to USC and didn't leave enough for Stanford this week. Receivers were dropping passes and the defense generally didn't seem to know the first thing about stopping Stanford. They just didn't give the same effort against Stanford as they did against USC, and Stanford finally had a game against a real opponent where they didn't let up in the 4th quarter. Very impressive, and they deserve their bowl eligibility. <b>Iowa-Northwestern</b>: The big shock here is simply that Ohio State, after everything that has gone down this season, is still going to find a way to win the Big Ten while the BT title was all but official for Iowa before Stanzi's injury. But knowing Stanzi went down, the loss was not shocking. I had thought this game would probably be close anyway--Iowa doesn't roll on most teams, and NU is just a somewhat less pesky version of Indiana (meaning they can give a lot of teams a hard time before they go ahead and lose). But I don't think they would have lost a regular season game this season with Stanzi, so losing him will be their undoing. Iowa had just borrowed too much luck too often throughout the season, and it finally ran out. All Big Ten fans should lament this, too, even Ohio State fans--OSU is the last of the Big Ten title contenders that needs to be headed to the Rose Bowl, given their reputation and track record in BCS bowls. <i>Part 2 coming in the next few days...</i> true 2009-11-10T00:55:24Z 98211 1 2009-11-10T05:15:33Z http://sportsnation.espn.go.com/fans/nunyabiz81/blog/posts/98211 2008-04-10T03:46:02Z 2627 2008-04-10T03:46:02Z 1247262 http://sportsnation.espn.go.com/fans/nunyabiz81/blog nunyabiz81 http://sportsnation.espn.go.com/fans/nunyabiz81 2627 I see more and more Michigan fans come around to my side every week. I see more and more Michigan fans who have tried to remain calm and level-headed about the losses and slow "progress" Michigan is making go off about the direction of our program under RR. This is not "I told you so." This is my hope that the more of us who see the light, the quicker we can get something done to get Michigan back on track...as opposed to sitting and letting Michigan fall off the college football map for 10 years. It starts with hiring the right AD which, unfortunately, Mary Sue Coleman is part of that process. She's in denial, or, probably more accurately, is not knowledgeable enough about football to be involved in hiring football coaches in any way, shape or form. I can understand if she wants to give RR two more years. More than that, if Michigan is still not in Big Ten title contention, is too much time to let RR take the program to new lows weekly. I don't think Michigan needs to deal with both hiring a new AD and a new coach, but I do think next year ought to be the final straw, though it probably won't be. The biggest source of disagreement I see among Michigan fans, which seems after this loss to Purdue like the divide between fans is starting to close some, is most of us believe the problem is either solely the players or solely the coaches. To me, it's clear the problem is both--or, really, almost anything you can think of that could be a problem. I think this game was a perfect example of how both the players and the coaches are the problem. As badly as the defense played...unfortunately, we have to accept that this year they're not going to come through (and in truth, they probably won't ever come through again as long as RR and his staff are around). I don't even care how they play by now. It's not that I don't think they're undersized, slow, some are not Michigan caliber, etc. I just think it's pointless to dwell on those things if we have to wait out better recruiting on defense and as long as our offense plays well enough to win games despite the defense. And our offense was good enough to get it done against Purdue, and there is an incredibly good chance that they would have if RR had done the right thing and sent the kicker out on 4th & 10 in the red zone. His "I didn't trust the defense" reasoning, as I read in an article on MLive.com, is yet another example of how he deflects blame away from himself. He throws players under the bus weekly when he has blown at least two games for us with very dumb decisions (i.e. also sending Robinson in against Iowa late in the game). He never directly blames players, but his responses to "what happened in this game"-type questions are pretty much always pointing to what players did wrong. We lost by 2 points. The score on that series where Michigan went for it on 4th & 10 was 38-30 in favor of Purdue. That kick would have been 3 to cut the deficit to 5, then Michigan scored again...could have been the win. If he had said, "Olesnavage had already missed two kicks," maybe I could somewhat understand, even though this kick should have been make-able. If RR calls for a kick and it's missed, that's not RR's fault as long as kicking the field goal makes sense in that situation...which it did. It was just crazy, and after the Michigan State game the last thing I would have wanted if there were other options was a tie to take the game into overtime. Last week against Illinois, going for it on 4th & 1 on the Illinois 1 yd line...that's okay. 4th & 10 when a field goal really would help your cause is too much. And I think the call that Brown's lateral was an illegal forward pass was wrong, from all the views I saw of it...but kick the field goal and this wouldn't have even been an issue. And RR is not the only coach who is a problem. Michigan blitzes entirely too much on defense, and they've done it enough to know that it has resulted in too many big plays for the other team regularly throughout the season. There were times when I could anticipate how Purdue would take advantage of Michigan's predictable blitzing and putting too many guys near the line of scrimmage--how could Greg Robinson not see these things, too? This also seems like something where if you ask Michigan about it, the blame would go to the players, i.e. comments about their physicality and athleticism and such. Whatever--Michigan is too predictable on defense, and they don't cover receivers enough. That's at least somewhat coaching, particularly the predictability. Every 3rd & short or 2nd & short, you know Michigan is lining up on defense expecting the run, regardless of the fact that balls keep flying over their heads on those downs. Seven or so guys will always be near the line, blitzing. But the fact that several times I saw Michigan defenders just stand and wait on what Elliott was going to do instead of some defenders getting after him while others adequately cover receivers, and by the time they reacted to it a Purdue receiver was down the field out of their reach, is probably more about the players. And when Elliott had all day, which was more than a few times, that was a long time for defenders to just be standing in the middle of the field watching him like he's a movie or something. But like I said, I know this is not going to change, at least not this season. It's exactly like the Big Ten Network's Chris Martin says--"paralysis by analysis." But to go back to coaching...I would think that, at this point, Robinson would have talked to these guys about this paralysis and they'd know what to do by now. I'm tired of everyone just blaming the defense and players, though. The coaches need to take more accountability and as long as they're in denial, Michigan will keep getting burned on 3rd down and coming away from the red zone with zero points. In other words, as long as Michigan keeps blaming players only, the coaches aren't going to change how <i>they</i> do things. They'll keep switching players out on offense and defense, then wondering why that's not helping much. Eventually, it's not going to be just the Michigan fans who get this...the sports media will have to stop blaming our players after more of the players at Michigan are RR's recruits, and then they'll also have to stop overlooking some of his play calling and the fact that the defense will not have gotten better. I've yet to read an article where any writer questioned going for it on 4th & 10 when a field goal would have sufficed, but I saw several right away with either quotes from RR about the players or the writer talking about the players. People are going to have to realize this is not an either/or thing. The funny thing is when Michigan was up on Purdue, they were doing some of the things I've been writing they should do for <i>weeks</i>. I loved most of the play calling, at least on offense, in the first half...and it seemed like the better the offense played, the better it made the defense play. And then they started getting away from those things. I don't know why the offense clicked again in this game, but my guess would be Minor was a big difference. As I've been saying weekly, running the ball works for Michigan. Against tougher defenses, like the ones Michigan will face these final two weeks coming, we're not going to see these big runs like Minor got against Purdue. But Minor runs hard, and Michigan could steadily chip away at those defenses on the ground. The best thing was successful and multiple runs allowed Michigan to vary play calling more, which seemed to throw Purdue off...the same could work against Wisconsin and Ohio State (not to be confused with saying it could work well enough for Michigan to win those games). In other words, the game wasn't all on Forcier, and that's probably why Forcier played better. Forcier ran less, Minor and Smith got most of the carries--and playing Smith was another of my suggestions, at least ahead of Shaw--and it allowed Forcier to come back with passes when Purdue probably expected the run. <i>And</i>...my man Stonum was the kick/punt returner...and did an excellent job of getting Michigan great field position, might I add. These are things I'd been writing about after games every week, and these are the things that were working for Michigan in the first half. Then RR started putting Hemingway and Smith back there, and...it still doesn't make sense. Hemingway did come up with a nice return once, but it's as clear as day that Stonum is the best returner for Michigan. I still don't understand why he's not a starting receiver, either (if I remember correctly, he was not a starting receiver in this game, at least). Roundtree did do a great job, but I really think Michigan needs more consistency on offense in terms of playmakers and familiarity among each other as far as tendencies (look at McCoy/Shipley at Texas, for example--true they've been friends a long time, but still, the point is knowing each other on the field so well). On some of the drives, it seemed like Michigan panicked and felt like they needed to start passing more, and it gets predictable...especially when the team is behind or in 3rd and long. And they need the best players on the field, and I believe Stonum is one of the best so far, as is Denard Robinson. And this game was almost exactly like last year's in too many ways. I don't understand why teams keep pulling tricks out the bag on Michigan that play a huge role in their winning games, but Michigan can't seem to take that same hint. I'm one of those fans who feels Forcier and Robinson need to be on the field at the same time, for one thing. It's not a position switch or anything like that, nothing meant to slow Robinson's progress at quarterback. Just on a few varied plays, line Robinson up at running back or receiver--throw to him once or twice, run him once or twice, let him pass once or twice. And this doesn't have to be every game (and I did read an article today where RR said he should have used Robinson more--damn right), just when Michigan needs a spark or change on offense. Either way, now's the time for Michigan to get creative. true 2009-11-10T00:41:56Z 98209 0 2009-11-10T00:41:56Z http://sportsnation.espn.go.com/fans/nunyabiz81/blog/posts/98209 2008-04-10T03:46:02Z 2627 2008-04-10T03:46:02Z 1247262 http://sportsnation.espn.go.com/fans/nunyabiz81/blog nunyabiz81 http://sportsnation.espn.go.com/fans/nunyabiz81 2627 <b>Purdue-Michigan</b>: Purdue. Why: If you thought 2008 was back for Michigan, you had no idea how much so--Michigan, once again, is [realistically speaking] staring at a Big Ten Network game against Purdue as the one to put away dreams of a bowl game...and the same is true for Purdue, once again. Purdue, despite what most people think, is not a team Michigan can get bowl eligible against...and the Illinois loss showed why. Michigan can't play defense well enough to beat an offense like Purdue's, regardless of Purdue's record...and I think anyone who believes Michigan has a shot here--which, oddly, seems to be everyone <i>except</i> Michigan fans--probably failed to watch the Purdue-Ohio State game. Furthermore, they now look like they can't play offense well enough to make up for the fact that they can't play defense well enough to stop teams. This is a blowout, my Blue buds. <b>Illinois-Minnesota</b>: Minnesota. Why: And on the flip side...the Illinois blowout of Michigan was a one-time thing, because it was Michigan. Betcha Illinois is not going to play the same way on offense against Minn. And Minn is a mixed bag...they have shown they can play great offense and win regardless of what Illinois does, but the question is...is what we saw against Michigan State here to stay? I doubt it, but I think Minn is fine enough on offense and defense to win this anyway. <b>South Carolina-Arkansas</b>: Arkansas. Why: I keep picking Arkansas, and one of these days you'd figure it'd hit. It's tricky because Arkansas doesn't play defense and a team like S. Car. is capable of taking advantage of that. So it depends on what Arkansas can do against S. Car.'s defense. So far, Mallett hasn't been particularly effective when going up against teams that can play good defense on occasion...but I just like his passing ability too much to pick S. Car., especially not after the turnovers S. Car. had against Tennessee, handing them the game. <b>Kansas-Kansas State</b>: Kansas State. Why: Weird to think picking a game like this is tough, but it is. Could be a shootout, since Kansas sucks on defense and Kansas State has shown a bit erratic ability to put up big points. Ultimately, Kansas has yet to prove that they can beat the better teams in the Big 12...and, as odd as it is, K. State is running the North right now. This is a good test for State, though, to see how good they really are and if they can hang on in the North. <b>Maryland-North Carolina State</b>: North Carolina State. Why: When Maryland upset Clemson, it looked like they were finally about to wake up in the ACC...then they fell flat again against Wake Forest, Virginia and Duke. NCSU is finally about to get that elusive ACC win...they've been close, and their offense is too good to be denied, especially against a team like Maryland. Their losses have really only been to other teams that out-shoot them offensively, and I don't see Maryland being able to do it. <b>Texas A&M-Colorado</b>: Texas A&M. Why: The surprising Kansas victory has been CU's only bright spot so far...they haven't repeated that yet. A&M looks like they are getting on a roll at the right time for a coach who has been on the hot seat with some. They pulled out a stunner against Texas Tech, then beat a surprisingly improved Iowa State. CU hasn't improved enough offensively to beat A&M. <b>Navy-Notre Dame</b>: Notre Dame. Why: Well, that was a nice little break there for ND, right? Too bad it's over now. Back to the close games for ND, and I think we all remember last year when Navy was recovering onside kicks and scoring like it was nothing. Defensively, Navy is going to be an issue yet again, especially with Dobbs back at quarterback. Clausen's going to have to lead ND down the field for several touchdowns, and it seems like he's getting Floyd back just in time. Even without Floyd, ND would find a way to pull out this win--winning close ones is old hat, at this point. <b>LSU-Alabama</b>: Alabama. Why: Not sure why this is being billed as a good game, but it certainly is important for Alabama if they want to stay in the national title race. The rumor is that McElroy is going to air it out more...not sure if that's a good thing or a bad thing. Against LSU, I'd probably play it safer and run Ingram. As long as Alabama doesn't come up with anything to shoot themselves in the foot, with Ole Miss out of the way this season has a feel of full steam ahead to an Alabama-Florida SEC Championship game. Boring and low-scoring, this one will be. <b>Wake Forest-Georgia Tech</b>: Wake Forest. Why: This is a conditional pick--WF if Skinner plays the entire game. With Skinner, I like WF's offense...especially against teams that struggle some on defense. GT doesn't play enough defense to think they're going to win just because it's WF and they're the ACC leader. I still can't believe they gave up 30+ to Vanderbilt and were in a close game with them for the first half. Besides, it's the wacky ACC--why expect anything other than an upset here now that Miami and Virginia Tech have also gone down? <b>Ohio State-Penn State</b>: Penn State. Why: It's funny how people take blowouts of Minn and New Mexico State to mean OSU's offense is back on track. PSU will tell a different story. Not that their defense is as great as some think, but they should know OSU's weaknesses on offense and be able to take full advantage of them. On the other hand, as I've written before, PSU has no impressive victories thus far. We don't know if they can successfully air it out on OSU's defense (the one impressive defense they played forced turnovers--that was Iowa and a loss)...so this could be another low-scoring game between the two teams, something in the teens. PSU is just stronger on offense, though, and the defense should be able to do enough to make people complain about Pryor and Tressel once again as if OSU is the team going 5-7, not Michigan (which I get the biggest kick out of...will be downloading tons of OSU podcasts if OSU loses so that I can hear their fans overreact like they did after the Purdue game). <b>Oklahoma State-Iowa State</b>: Oklahoma State. Why: ISU has progressed, but not enough to beat the best teams in the conference. OK State got blown out by Texas, but they are still at least third best in the Big 12. Zac Robinson will bounce back and, thus, the OK State offense will be too much for ISU. <b>Washington-UCLA</b>: Washington. Why: Could be close, considering UCLA has wins over non-conference teams like Tennessee--which, oddly, looks more impressive each week--and Kansas State--which also, oddly, looks more impressive each week--as well as the fact that UCLA hasn't lost by much to teams like Stanford, Oregon (compared to some teams like USC) and Oregon State. Locker's going to play, so Washington's going to have the best quarterback on the field. I've heard a few people refer to Washington as a bad team when talking about USC losing to them, but Washington is not a bad team. Aside from Arizona State, UW hasn't really lost any games they shouldn't and have won one they shouldn't. Still, this is definitely a game UCLA can win. <b>Oregon State-California</b>: Oregon State. Why: Another tough one to call in the Pac-10, but Oregon State being both good this season and accustomed to winning on the road at Cal? Plus, Cal needed almost literally the last minute to get past Arizona State? And the way Oregon State shredded USC's defense in the second half of that game a couple weeks ago? Oregon State looks a little bit better right now. <b>Florida State-Clemson</b>: Clemson. Why: The one thing about this game is, though Clemson's defense has generally looked decent this season, what can Clemson do to slow down Ponder? Ponder has been very accurate this season. Offense is not at all FSU's problem. Could be a good, high-scoring shootout...because Clemson showed against Miami that they can score a lot of points and win against crappy defense...and FSU's defense is worse than Miami's. FSU could certainly end up out-shooting Clemson here, and if this were a weeknight game (you know, when upsets almost always happen) they probably would. Otherwise, I think Clemson out-shoots them. Or out-Spillers them. Whatever they choose. Come to think of it, Ponder vs Spiller definitely sounds like a "Game of the Week" in the making...way more interesting than Bama-LSU. <b>Connecticut-Cincinnati</b>: Cincinnati. Why: Conn has been playing pretty much every team they've lost to very closely. The same thing could happen here with Cincy. They just have not gotten over that hump yet...or, more accurately, held onto the ball enough. Too many turnovers. I think the same will happen against Cincy, and whichever quarterback plays for Cincy will make it tough on Conn, as well. Conn basically has the opposite quarterback situation--things were bad enough with Endres in at quarterback, and having to go with Frazer due to Endres' injury doesn't really seem like a good recipe for an upset here. <b>Fresno State-Idaho</b>: Fresno State. Why: No big-name appeal here, but I bet this is going to be good. Two of the best teams in the WAC, great offense, a little lacking on defense...all equal a likely shootout. I go with Fresno State because...I don't know if anyone has noticed or not, but while everyone's been trashing Boise State's and Cincinnati's schedules, their former shared opponent has been basically blowing teams they <i>should</i> beat out...and this after hanging tough with Wisconsin, Cincy and BSU. Idaho, which is a bit more heralded by the sports media, has barely gotten by the same type of teams and got annihilated by Nevada. There's also Ryan Mathews, the running back for Fresno State, of course. <b>Don't Be Surprised If</b>: <b>Oregon Doesn't Completely Dominate Stanford</b>: Coming off a big win like USC, teams often aren't as impressive in the next game. Stanford is capable of putting up a good fight...but for about three quarters. I'm not saying it's going to be a shootout. I just don't think this is going to be another four touchdown win. I see Stanford hanging around relatively close...down 10 or so points for much of the first three quarters (or maybe we'll get a surprise and Stanford will lead)...and then Oregon will pull away in the 4th. That's Stanford's M.O. anyway...they get off to quick starts on offense, don't score in the 4th but let the opponent keep scoring. Against a team like Oregon, even at home, it will cost Stanford. <b>Duke Beats North Carolina</b>: This is a lot more likely than Stanford's beating Oregon. In fact, I'll go ahead and take this upset. Thaddeus Lewis seems like a better quarterback than Yates right about now, and Ponder showed in FSU's comeback win against UNC that a good quarterback can slash UNC's "good" defense. Duke's defense should be able to shut down UNC's running game enough to outscore UNC. Most of all, Duke has to win this game to have any chance at bowl eligibility, given the rest of their schedule (Georgia Tech, Miami, Wake Forest). true 2009-11-06T05:29:54Z 97978 1 2009-11-06T06:34:57Z http://sportsnation.espn.go.com/fans/nunyabiz81/blog/posts/97978 2008-04-10T03:46:02Z 2627 2008-04-10T03:46:02Z 1247262 http://sportsnation.espn.go.com/fans/nunyabiz81/blog nunyabiz81 http://sportsnation.espn.go.com/fans/nunyabiz81 2627 Sorry this is late... <b>The Big East <i>Is</i> Good</b> It's debatable whether people rag on the Big Ten more or the Big East more--I'd say the Big Ten just because the Big East is more invisible given they don't have a history like the Big Ten's or a strong decade like the Big Ten had in the 90s. But the Big East is in the top two, for sure, in terms of most degraded conference. They even have people arguing they shouldn't be a BCS conference, which is not really something that's been said for the Big Ten yet. But I'd say, at this point in the season, you have to give it up to the Big East. I'm not saying they have been particularly good the past couple years. But I think it's pretty obvious they're a good conference <i>this</i> year. If Cincinnati makes it through their schedule undefeated, I'd be impressed. You have to let go of this idea that playing SEC or Big 12 teams is so much better than playing other teams, as this year that's not the case. This year, as strong as you thought the "best" and "good" teams would be, most of them are at least one notch below that expectation. And then even the other teams in the SEC and Big East are forgettable this year (to the point where Florida has already clinched the SEC East with a month to go in the regular season)...though Lane Kiffin, at least, has tried hard to make sure that's not true for Tennessee--and, despite their record, has done a pretty good job of it with "close" games against Florida and Alabama and a whipping on Georgia. Other than that, look around--what has happened to Oklahoma State, Oklahoma and Ole Miss? Conferences like the Pac-10 and the Big East are the ones where you have middling teams step up, not falling down. I would argue teams like Cincinnati and Iowa, this year more than any other, have a shot at going to play teams like Alabama and LSU and not getting blown out--possibly even a shot to win. Florida and Texas, that would have been true before they started playing a little more like themselves. But this year, Cincy is, at least, playing teams that have stepped up because of their schedule and because they're not going out scheduling several Sunbelt teams like the SEC does. They played Oregon State, a good team that really has only lost to better teams you'd expect them to lose to. Fresno State, while they may not be Boise State, is always a challenge, and they are usually better than their record over the past few years--this year is no exception. Look at the conference schedule, though, and Cincy has already gone through South Florida, which is another team that's just going to lose to every team that is better--doesn't take away from how good they are, like a lot of the sports media jumped to say when they lost to Cincy. They even beat West Virginia, and most people probably didn't see that coming. WVU will be another test for Cincy, though. Connecticut is not going to lay down--they've had close games with pretty much every good team they've played, including a close one with Pittsburgh and almost beat WVU. And look at Pittsburgh--they have a shot to win the Big East, and they probably should be undefeated right now, too. Dion Lewis and Bill Stull ought to be in Heisman discussions. I mean, Cincy does not have as easy a road as people say they do. This is a good conference they're in this year, and the Big East is turning out some of the better/closest games of the season. And the most impressive thing about Cincy to me is how they plugged in a backup quarterback and kept right on rolling. Most teams fall apart when they have to bring in the backup. This tells me Cincy is just an all-around talented, good team--they do not rely on predominantly one player, unlike Florida (Tebow) and Alabama (Ingram). And they, as well as other Big East teams, are like this despite not having the best recruits in the nation. <b>Case Keenum Deserves the Heisman</b> We've been struggling all year to pinpoint a player who is playing at a Heisman trophy caliber when one has been in our face all along. We just don't like the school he attends, and some will argue they don't like the conference schedule he plays. Not going undefeated as a team in the C-USA could also be an issue. But you have to admit--if Case Keenum had his numbers nearly every game and was playing for Florida, Alabama, Texas, USC or Oklahoma...he'd already have the Heisman sewn up this year. But people are too PC to give the fact that he plays for Houston as an excuse for why they won't vote for him...so what's the reason, say you, we still don't know who should be at the top of Heisman lists? One game often turns the Heisman race--if that weren't the case, Colt McCoy would have won last year over Sam Bradford. So it's hard to buy the excuses about conference schedule, if such excuses exist, when Keenum has proven himself against both Oklahoma State and Texas Tech...or would it have mattered only if one or both of those games had been later in the season? And check his numbers in Houston's one loss--51 of 76 passes for 536 yards and five touchdowns. Again, what's the problem? In the end, there will be some excuse or another as to why he doesn't win. <b>Oregon Should Play For the National Title</b> Unfortunately, they won't because they have one big little boo boo--they lost to Boise State. It's a good loss, but it's bad one. Now, the irony is...had that been USC Oregon lost to and they were playing like they are right now, they probably would have a lot of pollsters on my side right now...not to say they <i>would</i> end up in the NC. But they made the "mistake" of beating USC into a pulp but failing to do the same to Boise State. I mean, technically, BSU is a better team than both Oregon <i>and</i> USC. You know, that's what the polls say...pollsters couldn't even bring themselves to move Oregon up near the top 5 or ahead of BSU, even with as much crap as they talk about BSU. And BSU is undefeated while USC has already lost two. But losing to the "better" team hurts Oregon while whipping the more respected team and the team that can do no wrong impresses everybody...to no avail. Oregon is a team that makes me want to say "Eff the 'rules'." Forget about one-and-done for every team except the SEC/Big 12/USC and forget about not "being able" to rank teams ahead of a team they lost to. Oregon is simply playing the best ball. Watch I write that and Oregon turns around and loses the very next game they play (and upon looking, I see it's Stanford...hmmm, interesting). But right now, it's true--they look unstoppable, and like I said in my last post...they look better than the 2007 team that was headed for the national title pre-Dixon injury. And, let's face it--Florida, Texas, Alabama, Iowa, Cincy, BSU...they're not that interesting, except for the "this shouldn't be happening" dramas Florida/Texas/Iowa create weekly for themselves. The only reason you watched the USC-Oregon game well into the 4th quarter when the game was basically over is because you were hypnotized by what Oregon was doing. It might be wrong to look at the flash appeal in thinking about the NC, but...the NC has not been great over the past few years, and viewers care about seeing a great game <i>at least</i> as much as they do about seeing the two best teams. And, frankly...still not sure "the best team" is among Florida, Alabama or Texas. Along the same lines... <b>The Top Bowl Games Will Suck...Again</b> Let me do it like this--let's take one of the bowl projections on ESPN.com and run through matchup appeal: <u>NC: Florida-Texas</u>. Looked nice at the beginning of the season, didn't it? Now, you have two teams that...well, have not been playing the interesting football we've come to expect from them. And when you look at the inconsistencies in domination of teams, you have to wonder which Texas/Florida will show up to the bowl. If it's the Florida that played Georgia/Kentucky and the Texas that played Missouri/OK State...that's great. But, you know, NC's haven't worked out like that in recent years, not even last year with Florida-Oklahoma. There are signs we're headed for another lackluster championship game, even if it's not between Florida-Georgia...mainly, like I said, the fact that none of the teams that have a realistic shot of playing for the title look consistently interesting or exciting. <u>Rose Bowl: Iowa-Oregon</u>. Oh, <i>hell</i> no. You're talking about the prettiest team in college football vs the ugliest team...and another Big Ten blowout. Iowa's defense has come to show they're at least a little overrated, so I have serious doubts about their ability to keep Oregon from scoring on every series they go on offense. USC really couldn't even do it. Iowa has this magical way of winning the most impossible games...unfortunately, this game is not being played during the regular season, or else things would look better for Iowa. <u>Fiesta Bowl: Boise State-Penn State</u>. Now, if this were to happen, I like it...but only as a Big Ten fan. I don't think other college football fans would be into this. As a Big Ten fan, I look at this and say, "Oh, wow...we're finally about to win a BCS bowl game." I mean...no disrespect to BSU, and, certainly, PSU is overrated this year. But BSU looks pretty vulnerable at times this year, and I don't think they will make it through the regular season undefeated. They are not like they were when they went undefeated and beat Oklahoma. If PSU comes ready for business, this could be a blowout. It also has the ability to be a good, close game...the teams just are not, to use an overused word nowadays, "sexy." I don't think either team, <i>this</i> year, carries the respectability factor that people want to see in BCS bowls. <u>Sugar Bowl: Alabama-Cincinnati</u>. Well, I like this for Cincinnati. Obviously, it has the potential for embarrassment for Alabama, because they lost to an "inferior" team in Utah last year in this bowl, and here they go again. It's not like I think Cincy can blow Alabama out--it'd probably be close. I think this has the potential to be the best BCS bowl game of them all, but I don't think college football nation would be satisfied if Cincy wins. People will expect the SEC to win, and that's what they want (except me, of course). <u>Orange Bowl: Georgia Tech-TCU</u>. Just not of interest to me at all. I don't care about either of these teams. And anyone who is not into the ACC probably is not into this--which seems to be a pretty sizable college football population--and you know there are people who are anti-non BCS teams. I recognize that TCU is a good team, but I just do not care about most teams outside the BCS except maybe Boise State and then somewhat the directional Michigans. A lot of people feel this way about teams outside the BCS unless it's BSU, Utah, TCU and BYU. The only way TCU's playing an ACC team would appeal to me is if that ACC team were Miami. That's just a personal thing--Miami is the only ACC team I get excited about based on how they play. GT is kind of like, after the way this season started out, "what the hell??" That's not who we thought was going to win the ACC--we thought Virginia Tech or Miami or maybe even Florida State. TCU against Miami or Florida State...okay, interesting. VT or GT? Those teams are not exciting enough in their play, and they're playing another team that's not exciting because they tend to be stronger on defense in their games. And for the love of goodness, <i>no USC-Penn State rematch!!</i>. Not likely, but still...neither team has any business in a BCS bowl this year. But it could happen...everyone seems to think PSU will be there, and USC could easily end up there if Cincy, TCU and/or BSU lose...which I think is almost assured. true 2009-11-04T03:56:04Z 97840 0 2009-11-04T03:56:04Z http://sportsnation.espn.go.com/fans/nunyabiz81/blog/posts/97840 2008-04-10T03:46:02Z 2627 2008-04-10T03:46:02Z 1247262 http://sportsnation.espn.go.com/fans/nunyabiz81/blog nunyabiz81 http://sportsnation.espn.go.com/fans/nunyabiz81 2627 ...Crazy, crazy weekend... A Halloween coincidence? <b>Games of the Week</b> <b>Michigan State-Minnesota</b>: I'm just surprised that, first of all, MSU got into a shootout at all with Minn...second, that Minn was even capable of one...and third, that MSU lost. With Eric Decker out for the season and with what happened to Minn last year when he went out with an injury--Minn went on a losing streak--I thought surely history would repeat itself...especially considering how they played against Ohio State last week. But Minn <i>really</i> wanted to win this game for Decker, and they played the best offense, perhaps, that I've seen from them in years. If Minn played like that all season long, Decker or not, they'd be ranked and in Big Ten title contention. Other guys on the offense need to step up not just when Decker goes out--they need to play well and hard consistently. On the other side of the ball, MSU seemed to retrogress back to how they played when they were losing close games to Notre Dame and Central Michigan, i.e. their defense and turnovers. <b>Florida State-North Carolina State</b>: At some point, defense went out the window somewhat and it was basically back-and-forth strikes. In this and the Miami-Wake Forest game, it wasn't <i>totally</i> bad on defense--defense would bring pressure, but the quarterbacks adjusted and threw quick, accurate passes, for the most part. Ponder got knocked around pretty good because of all the pressure and looked like he was in pain at times, but he still played well enough for FSU to win. NCSU might still be looking for their first ACC win, but they did not look like it. Still, as good as they play on offense, they can't really seem to get over the hump--the majority of the games they've lost on this losing streak have been fairly close throughout the game, but they just let teams outscore them. FSU is built to do that, considering they don't play defense, either. <b>Southern Miss-Houston</b> also looks like it was a good game, but, unfortunately, I didn't get to see it. If it was on TV, I don't know what channel, at this point. But I was unable to find a re-run. <b>Shocks of the Week</b> <b>The Big Blowouts</b> (<i>USC-Oregon, Tennessee-South Carolina, Texas-Oklahoma State, Michigan-Illinois, Florida-Georgia, Wake-Miami the first half</i>): USC-Oregon was a good game...in the first half. In the second half, USC got their A's kicked. Even if you thought Oregon would win this game, you could not have seen that they'd win by basically <i>four</i> touchdowns. Oregon has come a long way from the beginning of the season, and right now they look better than the 2007 Dennis Dixon team that <i>would</i> have won the national title, no question, had Dixon stayed healthy. USC just looked as if either they were a bit unprepared for Oregon's speed and Masoli's passing ability, or as if they just couldn't hang with that speed. Looks like I'm getting my wish that USC doesn't play in the Rose Bowl, but at what cost to the Big Ten? If Iowa couldn't even stop Michigan's running game, they won't stop Oregon's. Something similar for Florida-Georgia, i.e. we knew Florida would win, but the way Florida has been winning lately...maybe didn't expect a blowout or for Florida to put 41 points on Georgia. Then again, Georgia gave up quite a few points to Tennessee, and UT's offense still is not that impressive...you know, unless a team turns the ball over a bunch of times and gives UT the ball on their side of the field, i.e. S. Carolina. Because of the turnovers, S. Car. didn't give themselves a shot in that game--it was basically over in the first quarter, especially playing a defense like UT's. And Texas is like Florida, i.e. they shut people up with this game against OK State. And the only reason that's disappointing is because...well, the Big 12 is the big bore this year. Their top billing games are complete snoozers. And why is it that California can get blown out by better teams in the Pac-10 and fall, like, almost 20 spots in the polls, but OK State gets blown out and falls, like, 4 spots? Hell, USC's not even hurting that much in the polls from getting blown out by Oregon--they are still in position to get into a BCS bowl, for crying out loud. I know nobody watched the Texas-OK State game because it was boring and you had another perfectly good game on in USC-Oregon, but looking at the score should have been enough for pollsters to put State to rest in the polls. WF should have won that game against Miami. Since when did WF stop becoming a field goal-type team? I mean, didn't they get to the BCS a few years ago just kicking field goals all the time instead of finding the end zone? For a while there, WF was just marching right down the field on Miami, and Miami couldn't do anything about it. And, to be fair, it was a Miami [of new, i.e. the kind that can't stop teams like <i>Wake Forest</i>] defense. But Skinner was pretty impressive passing the ball and running it, as well--more impressive than Jacory Harris for basically the whole first half. Miami's offense was stagnant to the tune of 17-0 early in the game, but somehow they got it rolling enough to bounce back from that Clemson nonsense a week ago. <b>The Big Ten Games</b>: Michigan, Michigan, Michigan [sighs]. I tell ya, I had a breakdown when whoever that was on Illinois' team was heading towards the end zone to make it 38-13. It was a surprise and it wasn't, though. I told you, lesser teams have been doing this to Michigan for the past few years now. And the guys going the FSU game made a point about FSU nowadays, even all the while they were arguing adamantly for Bowden to have the right to stay there as long as he wants--they said people aren't "scurred" of FSU anymore. Same thing is true with Michigan. Sorry, but when powerhouses get to the point where teams aren't scared of them anymore and fully think they can come run up and down the field on those teams, even when those games are at the powerhouse's stadium...it's time for some huge changes to be made, and in almost every case that means it's time for coaches to hit the road. And I don't think I can handle watching Michigan's defense looks like it has for the past two years now. Michigan's D makes teams that can lose downs by tripping over their own man's feet--and, indeed, something like that happened with Illinois in the Mizzou blowout--look like national title contenders offensively. I already basically covered the MSU-Minn game. Penn State-Northwestern was a surprise because NU was beating or tied with PSU for a pretty good portion of the game...um, a week after PSU got their first win since 1996 in the Big House in a blowout. And this does two things--it makes me question, once again, who the hell PSU is...and it, once again, underscores my point about Michigan, i.e. how teams that really haven't done anything the rest of the season keep coming and having huge games against Michigan. Don't let the final score fool you--PSU didn't break away from NU until about the 4th quarter. They were not dominating NU, for the most part, and if Kafka had played the whole game there's no telling if PSU still would have won. Other than the Iowa game, which I think was embarrassing to PSU because they turned the ball over so much and it really wasn't a close game, PSU has been winning...but none of their wins have been impressive (and as the season goes along, that will include the Michigan win, unfortunately). Iowa-Indiana was...simply put, a game Iowa should have lost. The shock is that they won, first of all, and then that they were ever in the position to lose to Indiana, second. And repeatedly, I looked at how that game was going and said, "Oh my goodness, Iowa actually is going to lose this game." It's like both Iowa and MSU gave everything they had in their battle last week and left very little for this past weekend, because both teams retrogressed. Stanzi was back to throwing interceptions. Special teams was a joke. And Indiana, man...they have had opportunity after opportunity this season, and they have let them slip away. You're talking about a team that could easily be 7-2 right now, maybe even 8-1 if they had played Virginia or Ohio State like they are capable of playing teams. At the very least, they could have been going to a bowl game this season. How do you blow sizable leads two games in a row? They were up on Iowa 21-7 at one point and 28-3, I think, on NU. The good news for Indiana, which could be bad news for the rest of the Big Ten? Indiana has several key players on offense coming back next year, i.e. you'd think Chappell would be back and Doss, Belcher and Willis should be back. They have another shot to get this right next year. This year, they're just a pesky team that can't finish games. Wisconsin-Purdue...I'm actually just surprised that Purdue didn't score any points. Purdue's strength is their offense, but Wisconsin really shut it down. I was thinking that, while Wisconsin would win, it would be more of a, say, 28-17 type of game. And another thing about this game is compare Wisconsin-Ohio State and Ohio State-Purdue...it doesn't add up. Purdue is inconsistent, for one thing. They obviously went all out for Ohio State but didn't quite bring the same effort against Wisconsin or in the other games they lost. Defensively, they were in Pryor's (and the RB's) face(s) almost immediately in the OSU game and OSU generally had difficulty scoring...but Wisconsin put 37 on Purdue, no problem. Defensively, OSU was in Tolzien's face almost immediately but struggled to stop Purdue's offense...Wisconsin had no such issue. <b>Virginia Tech-North Carolina</b>: The shock here for me is that VT dropped two games in a row. Losing to Georgia Tech, I guess, is somewhat understandable...but losing to UNC, at this point, in the season is just weird to me. You're talking about a team that absolutely smacked Miami, wouldn't let them get anything going offensively. And yet, if I remember correctly, UNC had a bit of a field day on VT's defense. Plus, think about UNC--expectations might have been high for them earlier in the season, but UNC failed to meet them...so now no one is thinking UNC can hang with VT. They couldn't even beat FSU the previous week, and that was a game in which they had a pretty big lead that they gave up. Had UNC been as good as some of us thought they would be, this wouldn't be a big deal. <i>Pt. 2 Tomorrow...</i> true 2009-11-02T22:12:53Z 97766 0 2009-11-02T22:12:53Z http://sportsnation.espn.go.com/fans/nunyabiz81/blog/posts/97766 2008-04-10T03:46:02Z 2627 2008-04-10T03:46:02Z 1247262 http://sportsnation.espn.go.com/fans/nunyabiz81/blog nunyabiz81 http://sportsnation.espn.go.com/fans/nunyabiz81 2627 Unfortunately, I can't say I'm totally surprised by the outcome, though the score is a bit much. I don't think a lot differently about this game than everything I wrote last week after Michigan lost to Penn State. I think Michigan looks unprepared, the coaching is horrible/not a good fit for Michigan and the Big Ten and a lot of players have retrogressed. Crappy teams have a field day on Michigan and I'm sick of it, Forcier wouldn't be fumbling/Michigan would gain more yards if he ran less and let the backs run and so on. Oh, and they're not going to a bowl game or winning another game this season, and the new AD needs to put RR on the hot seat next year...and let him know it. A few new things: -Illinois and Michigan completely reversed roles in this game--Michigan looked like Illinois has all season long. We shot ourselves in the foot; Illinois did not, for a change. Illinois actually played like Michigan did earlier in the season. I would be happy for Illinois if this weren't against Michigan. 1) I knew people were going to question that decision by Michigan to go for it on 4th and 1, which basically ended up taking all the momentum away from Michigan when we didn't convert. I will give the coaching staff a break here--I actually thought it was exactly the right thing to do. For one thing...<i>enough field goals</i>! Michigan had already kicked two. Get in the damn end zone. Get some offense going. I'm tired of watching Michigan get field goals or three-and-outs and punt the ball back to opponents late in the 1st quarter, all through the 2nd quarter and most of the 2nd half in games after getting off to good starts in all their games against "real" teams. Field goals and punts don't win games, most of the time. Second, how could Michigan not make one silly little yard? If anything needs to be questioned, it's probably the plays they called down there. Two times trying to run it in with the RB, okay. Didn't work. Like the commentators said, maybe Forcier could have taken it in. But don't do, essentially, the same damn thing four times in a row...even if you send a different RB out to run it in, or even <i>especially</i> if you send a different RB out. Sending Minor out on 4th and 1, it was obvious what Michigan was going to do. Third, if Michigan had gotten that touchdown, that would have broken the game open for Michigan...and like I said, Michigan needs touchdowns...especially since they don't play defense. Otherwise, hey--still a lot of time left even if they don't make it. There was really no way to know Michigan was going to completely come undone after not making that 4th and 1, and, really, they shouldn't have. Momentum can be a bish, but come on. Fumbles and the lack of defense were the main issues, and that's something more than just things not going Michigan's way after failing to make one play. 2) Along the same lines of Michigan getting 1st and goal but doing nothing with it...um, I have hated over the past few years how people say Michigan and the rest of the Big Ten lack speed. This year, yeah...we can see this is a real problem with Michigan. It's not just the defense, either...Roy Roundtree caught that first nice pass that got Michigan the 1st and goal they never converted into a touchdown, and then later Junior Hemingway caught another nice pass that got Michigan into the red zone...also something Michigan did nothing with. Okay, these guys should have had touchdowns on those pass plays, though. Why didn't they? Because they were out there running like turtles...especially Hemingway. I can walk faster than Hemingway was running on that play. And I know he has been injured...I know that. But why isn't Stonum getting passes anymore? The three guys I've seen on offense who seem like they've been trying most to possibly become the playmakers I think Michigan needs on offense to help Forcier are Stonum, Odoms and Koger. They are not there yet, especially not Koger, who dropped a few passes last week. But I see Stonum try the hardest to make plays, then Odoms and Koger, and Stonum made a big play for us against Michigan State to get Michigan back in that game (running away from MSU defensive guys for a long touchdown after catching a pass). What's with Hemingway, Roundtree and Mathews being out there? I kind of understand Hemingway since he played well against Western Michigan and since Odoms is injured. I can't understand why RR doesn't like to stick with what actually works, i.e. this and also how he keeps changing who returns kickoffs/punts--once again, Stonum has proven he's the most reliable guy in that department, as well. 3) The Big Ten Network has some really stupid shows, but I like the shows with Gerry DiNardo and Howard Griffith, and the ones with Glen Mason, as well. I particularly like the things DiNardo says at times about Michigan. One thing he said a couple days ago is that he doesn't think, or isn't convinced, that RR is convinced Forcier is Michigan's starting quarterback for the future. And before this game, I thought that was crazy. I believed RR would play both Forcier and Robinson for as long as both are at Michigan, with the only exceptions being the games like the Notre Dame game, i.e. one guy is doing really well and the game has not been decided yet. After seeing that Forcier seems to be moving backwards in some ways in how he plays...you know, I think this thing is still an open competition. RR has Devin Gardner coming in as a quarterback recruit next year, and I think Gardner will be given a chance to compete with Forcier and Robinson will also be given a chance. And whoever comes out of the spring/summer best will start the first game of 2010. In other words, Michigan next year will be in the same position they were at the beginning of 2008 and the beginning of 2009 when it comes to the QB position. Along the same lines... 4) I think at this point in the season, Michigan has nothing to lose--play Denard Robinson. Let him start at quarterback for a quarter or two in the Purdue game. And don't tell the media until before the game so that Purdue won't know what to expect. Even if they prepare for Robinson, they will primarily do so expecting him to run the ball--they are not going to expect him to pass. But Michigan needs to start treating him like the QB they say he is--let him loose. Really get Robinson some work with the first-team offense and defense in practice, and then see what he does in the game. I know a lot of Michigan fans aren't going to like this idea, either. But Forcier really is giving Michigan this feel of being as QB-less as they were last year right now with his fumbles, interceptions and bad decisions. And, for whatever reason, Michigan's M.O. this season with Forcier has been quick starts and then mainly offensive stagnation for approximately two-to-three quarters length of time, even when we were winning. So how costly would starting Robinson really be? I know Robinson throws picks. Okay. My thinking is two-fold: shake Purdue up...and send a message to Forcier. Besides, at this point, Robinson ought to know how to make reads in Michigan's offense/from watching opponent videos enough to be able to perform at QB. The reasons he might not know how to do these things well right now are coaching and just practicing against a lousier defense than what Michigan plays in the Big Ten. But experience is also a factor. Either way, Forcier ought to get the message--this job is not yours yet, and you're not going to play if you're not producing. Forcier needs a reason to progress in his play, and I don't think he's getting it. See if starting Robinson for a half lights a fire underneath him. true 2009-11-01T09:19:24Z 97709 0 2009-11-01T09:19:24Z http://sportsnation.espn.go.com/fans/nunyabiz81/blog/posts/97709 2008-04-10T03:46:02Z 2627 2008-04-10T03:46:02Z 1247262 http://sportsnation.espn.go.com/fans/nunyabiz81/blog nunyabiz81 http://sportsnation.espn.go.com/fans/nunyabiz81 2627 Wow, week 9 already? <b>West Virginia-South Florida</b>: West Virginia. Why: I'll go ahead and learn my lesson. USF still can't seem to hang with the big boys in the Big East. Devine will kill. <b>Indiana-Iowa</b>: Iowa. Why: The only reason this game is here is because there has been way more talk than there should be about Iowa possibly getting upset here. Um, no, people. Give it up to Indiana--they have certainly done better than most people expected, but defensively they gave up a huge lead against Northwestern last week and offensively they stalled in the second half of that game. I don't see them upsetting an Iowa team that plays very smart/carefully. <b>Rutgers-Connecticut</b>: Connecticut. Why: Rutgers looks good against teams outside the Big East, but when they play good teams in the conference you see their true colors. Conn is in the upper half of the conference, though not quite in the same category as Pittsburgh, Cincinnati and West Virginia. But they're good enough to get past Rutgers, especially with more to play for now than just the Big East (i.e. Jasper Howard). <b>North Carolina State-Florida State</b>: Florida State. Why: I wouldn't be surprised to see NCSU win, but there's so much pressure on FSU...and Christian Ponder really would be a Heisman candidate if FSU's season weren't in the schitter. The question for FSU is the defense, but, aside from Pitt--oddly--NCSU just has not gotten it done against real competition. <b>Ole Miss-Auburn</b>: Ole Miss. Why: They look like maybe they're starting to click again and like maybe they were just yet another team that does better when the spotlight/pressure is off. Auburn, on the other hand, looks like either they're backtracking or like they are just being exposed. <b>Nebraska-Baylor</b>: Nebraska. Why: Who knows. I'm just thinking Baylor is hurting worse without Griffin than Nebraska will in this game with Zac Lee. Or whoever starts/plays for Nebraska at quarterback. <b>Southern Miss-Houston</b>: Houston. Why: They could really end up with a battle on their hands playing USM. USM easily could have turned out to be the BCS buster Houston was once thought to be. The difference between these two teams? Houston actually can beat BCS teams. USM just comes close to it...well, or, you know, beats fake ones, like Virginia. There's also the Case Keenum factor, of course. <b>Missouri-Colorado</b>: Missouri. Why: Another game where either team probably could win, particularly with Gabbert's ankle bothering him. But Mizzou is finally getting into the part of their Big 12 schedule that looks like it should be winnable, for the most part, up until Kansas. CU has a Big 12 win, so Mizzou is due for their first one. <b>California-Arizona State</b>: California. Why: Cal has bounced back pretty easily after losing horribly to USC and Oregon. And when you think about it, they haven't lost to anyone they shouldn't lose to--not even close. ASU is in that category of "shouldn't lose to," especially after getting spanked by Stanford last week. <b>Iowa State-Texas A&M</b>: Texas A&M. Why: Again, who knows why. They are confusing, getting blown out by Kansas State before stunning Texas Tech. Maybe they were looking ahead in the KSU game, so with this being a home game and their playing close with a team like Oklahoma State as opposed to Iowa State not really having any impressive wins...it's easier to see A&M winning. <b>Duke-Virginia</b>: Duke. Why: Both teams have pulled themselves up from embarrassing starts to find themselves with slim but vaguely possible chances of making bowl games, but Duke is a little more impressive. It's hard to ignore/forget the way they played against Virginia Tech. <b>Michigan-Illinois</b>: Michigan. Why: The only reason this is here is because the last three Big Ten games for Michigan--particularly Michigan State and Penn State--make this game suddenly look close. You'd still figure Michigan will win, but the thing is...you can't win without offense, which has dwindled for Michigan, particularly pass offense. I'm thinking Michigan should be able to run the ball in this one, though. <b>Temple-Navy</b>: Temple. Why: They seem to have decent defense, and my understanding is Army's offense is similar to Navy's (though Navy is still surely a better team than Army)...which Temple already shut down this season. <b>Kansas-Texas Tech</b>: Kansas. Why: This could be a very good game if you like shootouts. Of course, the last time I said that about a Big 12 game, the underdog blew the favorite out...and I believe that was Tech blowing out Nebraska. But I just can't see either team playing so much defense that the other team can't keep things interesting, and, of course, that means Kansas could win as much as Tech could...especially since Reesing is more experienced than any quarterback Tech will put out there. <b>Mississippi State-Kentucky</b>: Mississippi State. Why: I keep hearing people say MSU is not a good team. I don't really agree with that--I just think they play a schedule that is too much for them. They probably, at least, match up with Kentucky...although when I think of MSU's hanging with LSU and Florida, it makes me think they're better than Kentucky (Kentucky was smashed by Florida). <b>South Carolina-Tennessee</b>: South Carolina. Why: Probably another boring, defensive game in the SEC...which seems like it could favor UT. This is definitely an upset UT can finally get, but I think the quarterback position probably will be the difference. To me, that favors S. Car., especially since Garcia is mobile and then the fact that he has a receiver like Jeffery. <b>Texas-Oklahoma State</b>: Texas. Why: Here because it's another tempting upset special. For me, it's hard to take what Texas did against Mizzou to say Texas is finally Texas...it's just one game. This game is very important for Texas to show who they are, and I think that's why they will win. Plus, mix Texas' defense with the key losses OK State has experienced, and I don't think OK State can score enough to hang with Texas. <b>USC-Oregon</b>: USC. Why: Very tempting to take Oregon, especially given the curious way USC played on defense against Oregon State. If USC's D is like that against Oregon, they can lose. So that's key here. In a game of this magnitude, especially with the improvements the offense has been making weekly, I don't see USC losing it. My prediction was USC would lose a game again once they reach the BCS top 5, and I didn't expect that to be this soon. Still...even with this game being in Oregon, where USC has been cursed...it still might be just a tad too early with too many people <i>looking</i> for the loss for it to happen.USC loses shockers. <b>Don't Be Surprised If</b>: <b>Central Michigan Beats Boston College</b>: It's sad that the best team in the state of Michigan in football, including the Detroit Lions, is probably CMU, but... This is a really interesting matchup. I actually thought at the beginning of the season that CMU could beat Arizona, which is why I wanted to see that game and was upset that I couldn't--was not televised at all where I live. This was, of course, before we all knew Arizona was worthy of being a top 25 team. But so is CMU, potentially, and we'll get to see on Saturday. Not sure that CMU can do this, mainly because I don't think we have a good handle on BC this season--offense seems lackluster at times, while other times they seem to roll...not sure there's a rhyme or reason to when/why they score a lot at times and not others, but they aren't exactly a team I pay a lot of attention to. My guess is BC's defense is capable of stopping CMU's offense, meaning CMU probably will walk away with their second loss of the season here. But it would be nice to see a MAC team beat a BCS team <i>outside</i> of the Big Ten (although there was that Bowling Green victory over Pitt that no one seems to like to remember...but they remember Toledo over Michigan, Western Michigan over Iowa, etc, though). true 2009-10-29T06:32:46Z 97517 2 2009-10-29T23:48:34Z http://sportsnation.espn.go.com/fans/nunyabiz81/blog/posts/97517 2008-04-10T03:46:02Z 2627 2008-04-10T03:46:02Z 1247262 http://sportsnation.espn.go.com/fans/nunyabiz81/blog nunyabiz81 http://sportsnation.espn.go.com/fans/nunyabiz81 2627 Wow, week 9 already? <b>West Virginia-South Florida</b>: West Virginia. Why: I'll go ahead and learn my lesson. USF still can't seem to hang with the big boys in the Big East. Devine will kill. <b>Indiana-Iowa</b>: Iowa. Why: The only reason this game is here is because there has been way more talk than there should be about Iowa possibly getting upset here. Um, no, people. Give it up to Indiana--they have certainly done better than most people expected, but defensively they gave up a huge lead against Northwestern last week and offensively they stalled in the second half of that game. I don't see them upsetting an Iowa team that plays very smart/carefully. <b>Rutgers-Connecticut</b>: Connecticut. Why: Rutgers looks good against teams outside the Big East, but when they play good teams in the conference you see their true colors. Conn is in the upper half of the conference, though not quite in the same category as Pittsburgh, Cincinnati and West Virginia. But they're good enough to get past Rutgers, especially with more to play for now than just the Big East (i.e. Jasper Howard). <b>North Carolina State-Florida State</b>: Florida State. Why: I wouldn't be surprised to see NCSU win, but there's so much pressure on FSU...and Christian Ponder really would be a Heisman candidate if FSU's season weren't in the schitter. The question for FSU is the defense, but, aside from Pitt--oddly--NCSU just has not gotten it done against real competition. <b>Ole Miss-Auburn</b>: Ole Miss. Why: They look like maybe they're starting to click again and like maybe they were just yet another team that does better when the spotlight/pressure is off. Auburn, on the other hand, looks like either they're backtracking or like they are just being exposed. <b>Nebraska-Baylor</b>: Nebraska. Why: Who knows. I'm just thinking Baylor is hurting worse without Griffin than Nebraska will in this game with Zac Lee. Or whoever starts/plays for Nebraska at quarterback. <b>Southern Miss-Houston</b>: Houston. Why: They could really end up with a battle on their hands playing USM. USM easily could have turned out to be the BCS buster Houston was once thought to be. The difference between these two teams? Houston actually can beat BCS teams. USM just comes close to it...well, or, you know, beats fake ones, like Virginia. There's also the Case Keenum factor, of course. <b>Missouri-Colorado</b>: Missouri. Why: Another game where either team probably could win, particularly with Gabbert's ankle bothering him. But Mizzou is finally getting into the part of their Big 12 schedule that looks like it should be winnable, for the most part, up until Kansas. CU has a Big 12 win, so Mizzou is due for their first one. <b>California-Arizona State</b>: California. Why: Cal has bounced back pretty easily after losing horribly to USC and Oregon. And when you think about it, they haven't lost to anyone they shouldn't lose to--not even close. ASU is in that category of "shouldn't lose to," especially after getting spanked by Stanford last week. <b>Iowa State-Texas A&M</b>: Texas A&M. Why: Again, who knows why. They are confusing, getting blown out by Kansas State before stunning Texas Tech. Maybe they were looking ahead in the KSU game, so with this being a home game and their playing close with a team like Oklahoma State as opposed to Iowa State not really having any impressive wins...it's easier to see A&M winning. <b>Duke-Virginia</b>: Duke. Why: Both teams have pulled themselves up from embarrassing starts to find themselves with slim but vaguely possible chances of making bowl games, but Duke is a little more impressive. It's hard to ignore/forget the way they played against Virginia Tech. <b>Michigan-Illinois</b>: Michigan. Why: The only reason this is here is because the last three Big Ten games for Michigan--particularly Michigan State and Penn State--make this game suddenly look close. You'd still figure Michigan will win, but the thing is...you can't win without offense, which has dwindled for Michigan, particularly pass offense. I'm thinking Michigan should be able to run the ball in this one, though. <b>Temple-Navy</b>: Temple. Why: They seem to have decent defense, and my understanding is Army's offense is similar to Navy's (though Navy is still surely a better team than Army)...which Temple already shut down this season. <b>Kansas-Texas Tech</b>: Kansas. Why: This could be a very good game if you like shootouts. Of course, the last time I said that about a Big 12 game, the underdog blew the favorite out...and I believe that was Tech blowing out Nebraska. But I just can't see either team playing so much defense that the other team can't keep things interesting, and, of course, that means Kansas could win as much as Tech could...especially since Reesing is more experienced than any quarterback Tech will put out there. <b>Mississippi State-Kentucky</b>: Mississippi State. Why: I keep hearing people say MSU is not a good team. I don't really agree with that--I just think they play a schedule that is too much for them. They probably, at least, match up with Kentucky...although when I think of MSU's hanging with LSU and Florida, it makes me think they're better than Kentucky (Kentucky was smashed by Florida). <b>South Carolina-Tennessee</b>: South Carolina. Why: Probably another boring, defensive game in the SEC...which seems like it could favor UT. This is definitely an upset UT can finally get, but I think the quarterback position probably will be the difference. To me, that favors S. Car., especially since Garcia is mobile and then the fact that he has a receiver like Jeffery. <b>Texas-Oklahoma State</b>: Texas. Why: Here because it's another tempting upset special. For me, it's hard to take what Texas did against Mizzou to say Texas is finally Texas...it's just one game. This game is very important for Texas to show who they are, and I think that's why they will win. Plus, mix Texas' defense with the key losses OK State has experienced, and I don't think OK State can score enough to hang with Texas. <b>USC-Oregon</b>: USC. Why: Very tempting to take Oregon, especially given the curious way USC played on defense against Oregon State. If USC's D is like that against Oregon, they can lose. So that's key here. In a game of this magnitude, especially with the improvements the offense has been making weekly, I don't see USC losing it. My prediction was USC would lose a game again once they reach the BCS top 5, and I didn't expect that to be this soon. Still...even with this game being in Oregon, where USC has been cursed...it still might be just a tad too early with too many people <i>looking</i> for the loss for it to happen.USC loses shockers. <b>Don't Be Surprised If</b>: <b>Central Michigan Beats Boston College</b>: It's sad that the best team in the state of Michigan in football, including the Detroit Lions, is probably CMU, but... This is a really interesting matchup. I actually thought at the beginning of the season that CMU could beat Arizona, which is why I wanted to see that game and was upset that I couldn't--was not televised at all where I live. This was, of course, before we all knew Arizona was worthy of being a top 25 team. But so is CMU, potentially, and we'll get to see on Saturday. Not sure that CMU can do this, mainly because I don't think we have a good handle on BC this season--offense seems lackluster at times, while other times they seem to roll...not sure there's a rhyme or reason to when/why they score a lot at times and not others, but they aren't exactly a team I pay a lot of attention to. My guess is BC's defense is capable of stopping CMU's offense, meaning CMU probably will walk away with their second loss of the season here. But it would be nice to see a MAC team beat a BCS team <i>outside</i> of the Big Ten (although there was that Bowling Green victory over Pitt that no one seems to like to remember...but they remember Toledo over Michigan, Western Michigan over Iowa, etc, though). true 2009-10-29T06:32:04Z 97516 0 2009-10-29T06:32:04Z http://sportsnation.espn.go.com/fans/nunyabiz81/blog/posts/97516 2008-04-10T03:46:02Z 2627 2008-04-10T03:46:02Z 1247262 http://sportsnation.espn.go.com/fans/nunyabiz81/blog nunyabiz81 http://sportsnation.espn.go.com/fans/nunyabiz81 2627 I'm posting this late because, honestly, when I think of all the problems I saw in that game to note here, it makes me tired. For some thoughts on that game, you can look back at my Week 8 Wrap-Up posts. I also just listened to a bit of the Michigan-Penn State look-back on the Ann Arbor station that covers Michigan sports--I think it's WTKA. I never listened to it much when I lived in AA. Not sure why I sought it out this time, other than I've started getting into sports radio shows and podcasts more lately and have been trying to find something good for the Wolverines since there's a lot of stuff out there for the Buckeyes. The WTKA look-back, the little bit that I heard before my Internet Explorer browser shut down, was funny because it is such a good example of how vastly different Michigan fans think and feel ever since Rich Rodriguez hit town. It was like everyone who called the show that I heard felt like I do, i.e. "Whoa, man--this season is basically done, and how disappointing is this?" And the hosts are the exact opposite--they think everyone is being ridiculous, we can still beat Illinois and Purdue, people were getting too unrealistic, etc. Clearly, I could write a book on the offensive and defensive line issues in the game--pressure was right there all the time so that we couldn't do anything on offense. Dropped passes, fumbles and interceptions, lack of talent on defense, yada, yada, yada. Like I said, it makes me too tired. Three things I do want to spend time on because I don't think they're getting enough attention: <b>Forcier Is Hurting Himself and, Thus, The Team</b> What did he sit the Delaware State game out for if he was just going to come back out and run every other play, ultimately landing on his bum shoulder/arm or getting sacked? And that's at least partially on the offensive line to protect him because PSU got good pressure, but one good point the hosts of that show I mentioned made is Forcier runs too much/quickly. And I've said that all season, i.e. the quarterbacks need to run less and the running backs more. Forcier needs to protect himself better. When you run outside the pocket, you're more vulnerable. With his shoulder and his size, that's not what he needs...it's not what Michigan needs. He keeps coming up looking shaken/hurt every week because of it. He's got to learn to throw the ball away or run out of bounds and stay in the pocket more. Finding receivers needs to come first, then running or throwing the ball away when nothing's there. Otherwise, it's just reckless, given his size and injuries. He certainly doesn't need to keep falling on that arm. He is actually the main reason I surrender the season, as well, because he's not going to take care of himself well enough to let his arm get right so he can make better passes. Michigan goes as he goes, and his injury and his decision-making--not so much his not having the ability as a freshman--are why Michigan's going to look like 2008 the rest of the season. <b>I Repeat--Teams Keep Playing Their Best Games of the Season Against Michigan Yearly. This Is A Huge Problem, Given We Cannot Seem To Stop It</b> I brought this up first in the Week 8 Wrap-Up, and it's worth repeating. I don't know if anyone else is noticing this or not, but teams that suck most of the season or have not proven themselves or that are from the FCS or MAC...the last four or five years, teams have regularly been sneaking up on Michigan. They come and play their best games, and Michigan seems to be totally caught off guard. Clearly, when we complained about this happening with Carr, we thought it was coaching. Some of the comments I've seen attributed to Greg Robinson suggest the same thing is a problem, at least in part--according to one Ann Arbor source I read after the game, Robinson said something to the effect of PSU did some things Michigan wasn't prepared for. <i>Unacceptable.</i> All I'm saying, Michigan fans/hosts/experts/whatever, is stop overlooking opponents. The comments Stevie Brown made last week about Michigan being able to go to a Rose Bowl was a sign Michigan, as bad as they were last year, is still overlooking teams. You have to get through PSU, which blew you out last year, and OSU, which blew you out last year--not to mention has won the past five years--and you're already essentially chalking those games up as wins because you're talking about thinking you can make a Rose Bowl. Focus on taking care of the teams on your schedule <i>first</i>, and maybe Michigan would beat OSU for a change and we wouldn't have an A-whupping from PSU right now. For the record, this is not the first time I've written this, either, just maybe the first time here. Illinois has been horrible this season, no doubt. Illinois went 5-7 last year, but that didn't stop Juice Williams, who basically struggled much of 2008, too, from breaking passing records in the Big House and handing Michigan one of their most embarrassing losses last year. All of Wolverine nation needs to start watching out for teams we think we've got in the bag, especially when we essentially don't have any defense. Any team can get it together against a crappy defense, and there's no guarantee Illinois is going to shoot themselves in the foot enough for us to win like they've done almost every other game this season. Teams come ready for Michigan, always--they don't care about coaching transitions and lack of talent and not making a bowl. They're thinking about two things: this is Michigan, and this is payback for all the times they drilled <i>us</i> 45-20 or 35-10. If we're unequipped to stop teams from playing their best game of the season, then we're going to lose. Simple. Don't put Illinois or Purdue in the win column, people. <b>I Will Take 6-6, But 5-7 Is Unacceptable and Not Altogether Unrealistic Anymore</b> When I say whoever the new AD is should fire RR, I mean that if Michigan doesn't make a bowl. I don't think anyone seriously saw Michigan not getting back to a bowl this year. Most people thought 6-6, at least. I didn't think it'd be that bad, but I will unhappily take it, as long as Michigan is bowling. 5-7 means Michigan is still behind schedule, in my mind, which would make me wonder if Michigan is ever going to catch up with these coaches. If even people who hate Michigan feel/say they're underachieving, then that's the best measuring stick for whether or not Michigan is "on the right track." I'm pretty sure a significant percentage of Michigan haters would be surprised to not see Michigan back in a bowl game. true 2009-10-27T09:26:34Z 97392 0 2009-10-27T09:34:43Z http://sportsnation.espn.go.com/fans/nunyabiz81/blog/posts/97392 2008-04-10T03:46:02Z 2627 2008-04-10T03:46:02Z 1247262 http://sportsnation.espn.go.com/fans/nunyabiz81/blog nunyabiz81 http://sportsnation.espn.go.com/fans/nunyabiz81