Michigan football is a fucking embarrassment

[jdwills126]

Gardner wasn't a running QB last year at season's end. He looked pretty impressive for the most part. What happened?

IMO Hoke has always had reservations about Gardner as a QB. Last season he was moved to WR and it looked like Bellomy had replaced him as the #2. Then Bellomy melted down in the Nebraska game had some minor injuries and the offense was already set up for an athletic QB. So it was easy to move DG back to QB.

This off season it really looked like a QB competition between Bellomy and DG. Until Bellomy blows out his knee. Hoke wants a gunslinger as a QB. A guy that can pass and be accurate.

The fumbles and picks have got to stop or I really believe Gardner will be replaced.

 

[MAIZEandBLUE09]

If you wanna gloat about beating an OSU team that lost it's Heisman-candidate QB and had some lameduck head coach that had no idea what was going on, be my guest. Just remember, you only won because of a Braxton Miller overthrow.




You guys unquestionably lucked out. Everything that could possibly go for you that season, did. You got to miss playing 2 of the other top 4 teams in the conference in Wisconsin and Penn State, got to play the worst OSU team in ages, played nobody in OOC, and got matched up with the worst team in BCS Bowl history. Nebraska was nothing that year. Their fans even admit that if not for a Braxton getting hurt we'd of blown them out at their home. Clearly MSU deserved to be in a BCS bowl over you but you got the nod because they had to play in the CCG, which gave them an extra loss. MSU had about 30% more yards than you and despite giving you 124 penalty yards they still doubled you up. Robinson looked like total crap while Cousins and Baker ripped Michigan up. Clearly when you look at how Michigan played last year and now how they've looked so far this year, you haven't been a BCS-caliber team.

Then Wisconsin and PSU "lucked out" as well - did then not? They didn't play one of the best teams in the big ten either. It goes both ways there. You're assuming we would have lost when in reality, had we won, it would weaken your case. The schedule was not hard but it wasn't easy either. That team was no different than many of the OSU teams of the last 8 years where they coasted through the big ten and dropped a couple to teams they shouldn't have (Purdue, Illinois and so on). You could argue that of most big ten teams on any year, given the strength of the big ten. Not to mention OSU this year missing MSU and the other way around. It happens all the time. It doesn't discount that Michigan won 11 games. You don't "luck into" winning 11 games.

Cousin's had a much better day than Robinson but that's not what a score or a team's performance is based on. The fact is, the game was close going down to the last drive and Robinson blew it. MSU won. But there's no way anyone should be saying we got destroyed.

 

[Sox33OSU]

Gardner was the top dual threat QB in the nation coming out of high school. I can't tell you what happened to him, because he hasn't been a starter until now for a reason. He throws the ball better than Denard, but he makes WAAAAAAY too many turnovers.

UM has 8 turnovers the last two games and you can put the blame on 7 of the 8 on Gardner. He is either REALLY good (the ND game) or REALLY bad (the last two games).

Doesn't help that the only normal sized WR he had that was supposed to start is out for the year with an injury -- so instead, he has the Rich Rod recruits, who as I've stated, are undersized little guys, so you don't have much room for error on your throws.

Hopefully -- Gardner has learned from the last two games and can get back to being the guy we have seem him in at certain times, but I'm not holding my breathe. Inconsistent is the best way to describe the last two QBs at UM.

See, now this makes no sense though. Dual-threat QBs mean they are threats both running and passing. 8 turnovers vs. two horrible defenses means the coaching has some of the blame. These 2 games should've seen tons of running the ball, as both defenses should've been overmatched. 2 games against 2 horrible teams should be 2 easy wins. Instead, we saw Michigan's flaws exposed. You can't sit there any say Hoke is a great coach for the good wins but when the team looks like crap, it's the players' fault suddenly. Also, Funchess, Chesson, and Jeremy Jackson are all tall guys. Are they not being used right then? What about your big freshmen receivers? Can't they be used?

 

[MAIZEandBLUE09]

Meh, we allowed 34 points to Cal on the road, would've only been 27 if our DB hadn't dropped a sure INT and deflected it right to a Cal WR. Sonny Dykes has proven to have a hell of an offensive prowess in his career (at La Tech last year they put up way more than 34 on a pretty good A&M defense and almost won), so I doubt OSU is the only team they score 34 on. Otherwise, our defense has given up 21 points. One thing is for sure, Cal is a far more talented offense than Akron, who was a delay of game penalty from putting up 31 and beating you in your own house.

There's no question we've looked better than Michigan so far this season. Your last 2 games are worse than anything I've seen OSU do in a while. This was supposed to be the year with no more RR excuses since most players were Hoke's and they knew his system and Gardner was gonna pick up where he left off last season. Congrats on beating a pretty mediocre-looking ND team, I guess. Akron and UConn are laughingstocks and both came way too close to beating you. If the roles were reversed, you'd be all over OSU's shit right now.

No doubt Cal is more talented than Akron, but so is Notre Dame and CMU. As I said, it really just depends on what Michigan team decides to show up. Notre Dame is still ranked and just took out Michigan State and is still the best out of conference win of any big ten team.

After two games, people were saying that Michigan looked like the better team. So I think there was a question. Two cupcakes later and Michigan pooped it's pants. I'd certainly be all over OSU's shit but I don't think I'd discount them given the previous performance. That Michigan team is still in there, somewhere, and I'm guessing Michigan shows up for Ohio State. Surely there's going to be a little more emotion into that game than coming out against UConn or Akron.

 

[Sox33OSU]

Then Wisconsin and PSU "lucked out" as well - did then not? They didn't play one of the best teams in the big ten either. It goes both ways there. You're assuming we would have lost when in reality, had we won, it would weaken your case. The schedule was not hard but it wasn't easy either. That team was no different than many of the OSU teams of the last 8 years where they coasted through the big ten and dropped a couple to teams they shouldn't have (Purdue, Illinois and so on). You could argue that of most big ten teams on any year, given the strength of the big ten. Not to mention OSU this year missing MSU and the other way around. It happens all the time. It doesn't discount that Michigan won 11 games. You don't "luck into" winning 11 games.

Cousin's had a much better day than Robinson but that's not what a score or a team's performance is based on. The fact is, the game was close going down to the last drive and Robinson blew it. MSU won. But there's no way anyone should be saying we got destroyed.

In 2011, there were 5 teams in the B1G that had a .500+ conference record. Wisconsin played them all but Michigan, and they played Michigan State twice. Penn State had to play Wisconsin already and then got a cross game vs. Nebraska, not to mention an early game vs. #3 Alabama. Nebraska played everyone. Michigan State played all but Penn State and had to face Wisconsin twice. Who is the lucky team that didn't have to face any top cross-division games and didn't have to face a CCG, nor had a single decent OOC team? Michigan. Who got matched up vs. the worst BCS Bowl team in BCS history? Michigan. What season did Michigan just happen to get to face the worst Buckeye team led by an incompetent coach who was immediately demoted? 2011. As I said, you were lucky as hell that year with your schedule and with how things played out with the other teams in the conference.

 

[MAIZEandBLUE09]

In 2011, there were 5 teams in the B1G that had a .500+ conference record. Wisconsin played them all but Michigan, and they played Michigan State twice. Penn State had to play Wisconsin already and then got a cross game vs. Nebraska, not to mention an early game vs. #3 Alabama. Nebraska played everyone. Michigan State played all but Penn State and had to face Wisconsin twice. Who is the lucky team that didn't have to face any top cross-division games and didn't have to face a CCG, nor had a single decent OOC team? Michigan. Who got matched up vs. the worst BCS Bowl team in BCS history? Michigan. What season did Michigan just happen to get to face the worst Buckeye team led by an incompetent coach who was immediately demoted? 2011. As I said, you were lucky as hell that year with your schedule and with how things played out with the other teams in the conference.

Right, who also had a shot at a big ten title? Not Michigan. The problem with a CCG is that you have to win the game and if you don't, it counts for a loss. let's not forget the Michigan also faced an 8 win Notre Dame team that year (as did Michigan State). No doubt Michigan state had an argument for a BCS game except, as I remember it correctly, they were not qualified to make one as they were not ranked in the top 15. We had a lucky schedule but not one that you can easily brush off and discount our 11 wins.

 

[Sox33OSU]

No doubt Cal is more talented than Akron, but so is Notre Dame and CMU. As I said, it really just depends on what Michigan team decides to show up. Notre Dame is still ranked and just took out Michigan State and is still the best out of conference win of any big ten team.

After two games, people were saying that Michigan looked like the better team. So I think there was a question. Two cupcakes later and Michigan pooped it's pants. I'd certainly be all over OSU's shit but I don't think I'd discount them given the previous performance. That Michigan team is still in there, somewhere, and I'm guessing Michigan shows up for Ohio State. Surely there's going to be a little more emotion into that game than coming out against UConn or Akron.

If you'd played Akron and UConn first and then had CMU and ND, I'd be more inclined to agree with you. It looks to me, though, like perhaps opposing coaches are able to figure Michigan out from watching film. I wouldn't by any means write off a fairly impressive Minnesota team after your bye.

 

[MAIZEandBLUE09]

If you'd played Akron and UConn first and then had CMU and ND, I'd be more inclined to agree with you. It looks to me, though, like perhaps opposing coaches are able to figure Michigan out from watching film. I wouldn't by any means write off a fairly impressive Minnesota team after your bye.

I don't know. From my perspective as a fan it seems like Gardner went from making throws to now being scared to make throws because he's psyched himself out. He was throwing darts in the ND game. Now he's throwing at player's feet and 5 feet behind them. So, we'll see. I think if you cure that, you can cure a huge chunk of our problem. The middle of our OL is a problem as well but one that I think is more manageable. But if you can't hit WRs then teams are going to stack the box (like Akron and UConn did) and then you have problems.

 

[RobBase]

Sox is my homie but Maize won a long time ago when Sox played the "you only won because Braxton overthrew that ball...."

That's white flag talk sorry bro.

 

[Sox33OSU]

Right, who also had a shot at a big ten title? Not Michigan. The problem with a CCG is that you have to win the game and if you don't, it counts for a loss. let's not forget the Michigan also faced an 8 win Notre Dame team that year (as did Michigan State). No doubt Michigan state had an argument for a BCS game except, as I remember it correctly, they were not qualified to make one as they were not ranked in the top 15. We had a lucky schedule but not one that you can easily brush off and discount our 11 wins.

I'm not discounting them, I'm just saying they weren't very impressive. You got to dodge the top 2 teams from our division, caught us in an absolutely horrible season, and then got face a grossly overrated VT team who has proven themselves to not be a quality opponent in an elite sense. They're a decent team who has won in a weak conference but who has done nothing against the top teams in the nation. You faced no adversity that year and still got beaten by a weak Iowa team, as well. It just wasn't an impressive season.

 

[jalopy]

If you'd played Akron and UConn first and then had CMU and ND, I'd be more inclined to agree with you. It looks to me, though, like perhaps opposing coaches are able to figure Michigan out from watching film. I wouldn't by any means write off a fairly impressive Minnesota team after your bye.

Michigan doesn't have the luxury of overlooking anyone. There will be changes to our offense by then. Most likely to the offensive line where most of our problems emanate. Miller, our center, will likely take a seat.

Preseason is over and Michigan couldn't be entering conference play on a more shaky note. If things don't get righted in October, it could get nasty in November. I have absolutely no clue how it will shake out. I suspect we run the table in October (Minn, @PSU, IU) and hopefully things look a little brighter than they do now.

 

[MAIZEandBLUE09]

Sox is my homie but Maize won a long time ago when Sox played the "you only won because Braxton overthrew that ball...."

That's white flag talk sorry bro.

Yeah, he's used that one before as well. It's basically like saying, "if we were better, our QB wasn't as young and more accurate at throwing - we would have won". I wonder how many qualifications I could come up with to make all their previous wins illegitimate like that? If Henne hadn't have had a bum shoulder we would have won in 2007. If we didn't get that late hit penalty in 2006, we would have won. Had we not hired RR, we would have won 2008-2010 because Mallet would have been our QB. That quickly takes care of the last like 8 years.

 

[Sox33OSU]

I don't know. From my perspective as a fan it seems like Gardner went from making throws to now being scared to make throws because he's psyched himself out. He was throwing darts in the ND game. Now he's throwing at player's feet and 5 feet behind them. So, we'll see. I think if you cure that, you can cure a huge chunk of our problem. The middle of our OL is a problem as well but one that I think is more manageable. But if you can't hit WRs then teams are going to stack the box (like Akron and UConn did) and then you have problems.

But that makes no sense. Good QBs don't go from "throwing darts" to being "psyched out" for no reason, especially against 2 absolutely horrible teams. There's no logic to that whatsoever. What would make you think they can cure it? Also, that's not a huge chunk of your problem. There's still the whole 'giving up 400+ yards and needing a late 4th quarter TD to overcome Akron' thing.

Sox is my homie but Maize won a long time ago when Sox played the "you only won because Braxton overthrew that ball...."

That's white flag talk sorry bro.

I know, I know. I'm just pissed that killed our streak and we had to start a new one. I mean, if he hadn't overthrown it, we likely would've won because that was one wide open WR. Still, it's just sour grapes and I'm being an ass, I know.

 

[MAIZEandBLUE09]

I'm not discounting them, I'm just saying they weren't very impressive. You got to dodge the top 2 teams from our division, caught us in an absolutely horrible season, and then got face a grossly overrated VT team who has proven themselves to not be a quality opponent in an elite sense. They're a decent team who has won in a weak conference but who has done nothing against the top teams in the nation. You faced no adversity that year and still got beaten by a weak Iowa team, as well. It just wasn't an impressive season.

Even if VT was over rated, there's no discounting that they were a top 25 team with 11 wins. There have been FAR worse opponents in BCS games. The ACC is probably this year's 2nd best conference, if not THE best conference. It was an impressive season simply because we won 11 games. It's hard to win 11 games, in any conference. So doing it was impressive, no matter if we skipped a couple of good teams who also got to skip us.

 

[Sox33OSU]

Yeah, he's used that one before as well. It's basically like saying, "if we were better, our QB wasn't as young and more accurate at throwing - we would have won". I wonder how many qualifications I could come up with to make all their previous wins illegitimate like that? If Henne hadn't have had a bum shoulder we would have won in 2007. If we didn't get that late hit penalty in 2006, we would have won. Had we not hired RR, we would have won 2008-2010 because Mallet would have been our QB. That quickly takes care of the last like 8 years.

No it doesn't. You can literally look at that one play as costing us the game. With it, we would've won. You're just making arguments based on generalities and forgetting that OSU beat you those years, you didn't beat yourself.

 

[MAIZEandBLUE09]

But that makes no sense. Good QBs don't go from "throwing darts" to being "psyched out" for no reason, especially against 2 absolutely horrible teams. There's no logic to that whatsoever. What would make you think they can cure it? Also, that's not a huge chunk of your problem. There's still the whole 'giving up 400+ yards and needing a late 4th quarter TD to overcome Akron' thing.

Yeah, giving up that many yards to Akron was bad - but we stopped them from scoring and that's the important part. I think that was more an anomaly than anything else. Our defense basically shut down UConn. While not impressive alone, it proves that what Akron did was abnormal. Unlike the offense which proved that there were some serious issues. Gardner has the physical abilities to be great (like we was against ND) but his mental abilities need some work. Once he throws that first INT, it's downhill. That can be worked on, how quickly it can be fixed is another issue.

I don't think we have a top 10 defense, and it's very young, but I certainly think we have a decent one; especially when Jake Ryan comes back.

 

[7Samurai13]

Hey Maize,

Avatar bet on the Michigan and Michigan St game? Might as well call it early. I expect Michigan State to lose but it will make it interesting.

Side note, I am flying out on my honeymoon the next day so I will be a week late on fulfilling my debt.

 

[MAIZEandBLUE09]

No it doesn't. You can literally look at that one play as costing us the game. With it, we would've won. You're just making arguments based on generalities and forgetting that OSU beat you those years, you didn't beat yourself.

how do you know that? UM still would have gotten the ball back with plenty of time and it's not like OSU was stopping us, we had 40+ points already. Stop acting like 1 play decided the game. It's no more important than any of the other plays or circumstances I mentioned.

 

[Sox33OSU]

Even if VT was over rated, there's no discounting that they were a top 25 team with 11 wins. There have been FAR worse opponents in BCS games. The ACC is probably this year's 2nd best conference, if not THE best conference. It was an impressive season simply because we won 11 games. It's hard to win 11 games, in any conference. So doing it was impressive, no matter if we skipped a couple of good teams who also got to skip us.

Name the teams that have been FAR worse. If I recall, that VT team was one of the lowest-ranked teams ever to get a non-automatic bid. What the ACC is doing this year is irrelevant to 2+ years ago, also, so I'm not sure why you even bothered to bring that up.

 

[Sox33OSU]

how do you know that? UM still would have gotten the ball back with plenty of time and it's not like OSU was stopping us, we had 40+ points already. Stop acting like 1 play decided the game. It's no more important than any of the other plays or circumstances I mentioned.

Plenty of time? There would have been roughly 1 minute left. Unless you're Oregon, that's far from "plenty of time". You certainly would've needed an heroic drive from DR that was far from a guarantee.