Navigation: Jump to content areas:


Pro Quality. Fan Perspective.
Login-facebook
Around SBN: Clippers Need To Realize That Spurs Are The Anti-Grizzlies

Excuses

If.  (Photo by Jamie Sabau/Getty Images)

It could've been worse. Well. Only in the sense that by "worse" I mean the team bus could've fallen into a ravine on the way home. So, no, it really couldn't have been worse.

Over the years, I've seen three games where I felt that Michigan simply didn't belong on the same field as their opponent. The first was the 2003 23-0 drubbing Iowa delivered to Michigan Stadium. The second was the 2007 Oregon visit where the Ducks pulled off not one, but two statue of liberty plays en route to a complete dismantling of the Wolverines. Saturday was the third.

It's not that I haven't seen Michigan helpless to defend itself before. I have. I called it the 2008 season. It's more that in the three games I listed, I thought Michigan should've had a fighting chance to, at a minimum, compete. That Michigan would put up a good fight, and if the breaks fell the right way, possibly, just possibly, eek out a slim victory. I didn't expect a victory mind you, but I expected some type of game. In all three games Michigan should've been competitive. In all three, despite an early showing of spirit, Michigan was ground into the tarmac just as if it was asphalt under a road paver.

Even so, Michigan came out strong. They played tough for a quarter on defense. They controlled the ball for the first 20 minutes. If things had gone our way the result might have been different. At least that's what people will tell themselves. "If".

The word "if" has become a mandatory part of any conversation involving Michigan's performance on any given Saturday. "If" they held onto the ball. "If" we had a kicker. "If" they caught the damn ball. "If" they tackled better. "If" player X had broken just one more tackle... things would've been different. It's gotten to the point that the word "if" has become delusional phrase. It's not just that it's blindly optimistic in the face of past performance, it's an excuse that doesn't really have an answer. Sure, "if" Michigan had scored more points they would've won. And by that logic, "if" I could fly I could use the money I save on public transit to buy an XBox.

What it comes down to is that so many of us are willing to continually say "if" and excuse so many things that we know are going wrong because we want this team, these players, and this coaching staff to succeed. I think Rich Rodriguez is a wonderful human being and a very good coach that, if given the opportunity (re: more than two recruiting classes), can lead Michigan back to the promised land. I love the make up of this team, from Denard Robinson's smile, to Darryl Stonum's flashes of brilliance, to Jordan Kovacs' teeny body that somehow defies the laws of physics and makes tackle after tackle. They never quit. They never give up. Week in, week out, they work so hard and deserve so much more than they've received. So, for that, I remain willing to use the word "if" with great frequency.

Despite this, you can only say "if" and ignore reality for so long. Eventually you look out from behind your blinders and see things as they are. And as the 2010 Big Ten regular season concludes, we're still making the same excuses for this team and coaching staff we've been making since 2009.

Star-divide

From the midway point of second quarter on, it was readily apparent that Ohio State was no longer in a giving mood. Michigan was basically helpless. The Wolverines amassed a grand total of 71 yards on their six possessions between Denard's rushing touchdown and their meaningless fourth quarter 68 yard drive that ended in a turnover on downs. This despite putting up 176 yards on their first four possessions.

It was a standard Michigan performance against a good team. A lot of sound and fury signifying nothing. As discussed yesterday, Michigan did it's usual thing. Roll up seemingly impressive yardage numbers, yet put little on the scoreboard before the half.

Michigan First Half Drive Summaries
STARTQTRPOSS.YARDPLAYSYARDSRESULT
13:47 1 04:39 MICH 27 12 45 Turnover on Downs
07:10 1 03:17 MICH 18 10 56 Fumble
14:52 2 00:50 MICH 22 3 -5 Punt
12:29 2 04:27 MICH 20 11 80 Rushing Touchdown
07:50 2 01:55 MICH 43 6 20 Turnover on Downs
03:06 2 01:12 MICH 30 4 25 Fumble
00:00 2 00:00 MICH 42 0 0 End of Half

This was the fifth time this conference season that Michigan has run up 200 or more yards in the first half. Michigan is 2-3 in those games. This was also the third time that Michigan has scored 10 points or less in the first half despite gaining 200 or more yards in the first half. When the dust had cleared, Michigan rolled up 351 total yards against Ohio State. And scored seven points.

The hard truth is that this is not a very good team. Despite the glorious history of their uniforms, helmets and the stadium they play in, they are still young, undersized, inexperienced, and mistake prone. The coaching staff still can't find a kicker or continues to place Jeremy Gallon on the field despite the fact he fumbled the ball 4 times on 27 touches. But we tend to look past that. A lot of us see the potential in the offense and see something that is simply not there. Not yet. This offense can be both brilliant and useless based on the opponent they are playing.

Some people suggest that Michigan's coming from behind in the Iowa, PSU and Wisconsin games shows how well this offense can work and the resiliency of the offense. Personally, I think that's another "If". "If" Michigan's offense was as good as we want to believe it is, it would've scored more than 7, 10, and 0 points in the first half respectively. Instead, like at Ohio State, Michigan was down 14, 18, and 24 points before heading into the locker room. Like the Ohio State game, those games were over before the second half kicked off.  

So, for me at least, the excuses need to stop. We all want this team, this staff, to succeed. But we cannot be blind to the reality of what we have seen this year. The defense is the worst in the history of Michigan Football. This offense finished its regular season with the Big Ten's worst turnover margin for the third straight year. Despite leading the conference in total offense, its in-conference points per game average (excluding OT versus Illinois) was 28.125 ppg, good enough for fifth in the conference (in-conference season only). (Correction made thanks to Dr. Saturday).

It was a 7-5 team. Honestly, so was last year's edition. An OT loss to MSU, an inexplicable loss to Purdue, and a skin of their teeth loss to Iowa sunk the Wolverines to 5-7 in 2009. This year a pair of skin of their teeth wins over Illinois and Indiana, as well as a sloppy win over Purdue, is all that separates the two teams. Here's where I'll differ with everyone. Last year's team seemed more competitive. They were always in the game early. They were always the aggressor. They were much more competitive with the top tier of the conference. It wasn't until they ran out of bullets in the second half that the doors came off in spectacular fashion.

This year it was the opposite. Michigan wasn't competitive against the conference's top tier. They were constantly playing catch up. Last year they looked prepared for games early. This year they looked perplexed as to why they couldn't score points. As exciting as the offense was this year, it didn't make a difference against the elite teams until it was too late to matter. And Michigan's competitiveness agaisnt top teams is how we should judge it. Not on how it performs against bottom feeders like Indiana, Purdue and Illinois.

So where does this take us? To the same point we were at when the season began. Michigan returns a veteran offensive line, a slew of experienced receivers, and no clear answer at running back. In 2011 Michigan will have two junior quarterbacks, both of whom should eb able to lead the offense to better, more productive days. The defense will remain a mess. Even though Michigan returns two veteran cornerbacks and a slew of sophomore help, it loses two veteran linebackers and three veteran defensive linemen. Michigan will still be obscenely young on defense and inexperienced. Michigan will likely also be an unmitigated disaster on special teams as well. Nothing in the last three years suffices to convince me otherwise.

Through three years I, and a vast majority of the Michigan fan base, have been willing to say "if" and make excuses for the excellence we perceive will be in the offing. This team, this coaching staff, and these players are certainly capable of that. But both they, and we, must stop saying "if".

When the final gun sounded on Saturday, the time for excuses, "ifs" and optimism ran out. From this point forward, it's about results.

Comment 19 comments  |  0 recs  | 

Do you like this story?

Comments

Display:

Why we should stay the course.

There are a few things most people seem to be overlooking and leaving out of the discussion, including this article. Yes the offense was turnover prone and had trouble finishing drives against the top tier of the Big Ten, granted. First, UW, MSU, and OSU all fielded exceptional teams this year with stout defensive squads and as a team have finished in the top ten nationally. Even with Robinson’s talent, we must not forget he is still a 1st year starting Sophomore QB. Expecting mistake free football is the norm, but we must not let that expectation keep us from viewing this offense realistically. Robinson will learn from his mistakes and improve, that we can expect. Secondly, we really should be thinking of this year as RR’s 2nd year, not 3rd. 7-5 in year 2 after a complete overhaul of the program isn’t great, but from a win/loss standpoint isn’t horrible either, again considering how stacked the Big Ten was. Thirdly, the defense showed improvement over the season. They slowed Wisconsin down and played well in most of the first half against OSU. Continued improvement and added depth, especially with a shakeup along the sidelines will take pressure off the offense and will raise the team confidence level, making everyone better. Lastly, the expectation for next season is 9-3, with hope for an upset victory along the way to go 10-2, and to be in the Big Ten championship game with a deep senior heavy team in 2012. This is a reasonable expectation and as such I have no doubt the keeping RR as head coach is the best course to take.

by MadP on Nov 30, 2010 3:22 PM CST reply actions  

They do benefit...

….from another easy schedule. First seven games they should be 6-1 or 5-2…the only other losses that I can expect would be from Nebraska and OSU (again). My guess would be 9-3 at best, but likely 8-4. SDSU is a toss up for me.

by crazydaz on Nov 30, 2010 4:02 PM CST up reply actions  

What a lot of peolple dont realize is our defense is better than our offense…for the past three games our defense have been on the field more than our offense. Our defense gets tired and we cant keep up after that. you cant expect a defense to be on the field 90% of the game and stop the other team every time too.

by Dustin Hadsell on Nov 30, 2010 7:27 PM CST up reply actions  

Huh?

Granted, I don't know what down it is..

by KenK on Dec 1, 2010 12:00 PM CST up reply actions  

READ

You cannot expect our DEFENSE TO BE OUT ON THE FIELD 90% of the game and be on top of their game. OUR QB Denard is incompetent QB. He cant complete a five yard pass let alone a 20 yarder and and cant run for no more than 2 feet. well there is our offense on the bench again after 3 and out. then our defense is on the field again. Getting wore out and tired.

by Dustin Hadsell on Dec 2, 2010 11:31 AM CST up reply actions  

READ

You cannot expect our DEFENSE TO BE OUT ON THE FIELD 90% of the game and be on top of their game. OUR QB Denard is incompetent QB. He cant complete a five yard pass let alone a 20 yarder and and cant run for no more than 2 feet. well there is our offense on the bench again after 3 and out. then our defense is on the field again. Getting wore out and tired.

by Dustin Hadsell on Dec 2, 2010 11:31 AM CST up reply actions  

I would tend to believe you if

in fact the UM defense was on the field 90% of the time. However, throughout the season, they’ve been on the field around 55% of the time. What else ya got?

"I'm not a psychopath, Anderson, I'm a high-functioning sociopath. Do your research." - Sherlock Holmes

by KenK on Dec 3, 2010 2:24 PM CST up reply actions  

Excellent Article!

I disagree with MadP (with respect!). I question “how did we slow” Wisconsin? The fact that they didn’t score 80? So, 48 points is slowing U of W down? The fact that the Big 10 was stacked this year equates to “it is OK that we weren’t even able to compete against those teams”? Judging our success by everyone else’s failure does not make you good; it just means you are a little less awful than they are. Like we were a little less awful than Illinois, Indiana, and Purdue. This is obviously unacceptable!

Here are a few more items I would deem as “unacceptable” after three years:

1. Three years of being last in the Big 10, and near-last nationally, on defense. No improvements, and last time I checked, you needed more than two players to make a defense good.

2. Offense is still inconsistent. Where does it go? After three years, what proof is there to think that “it’ll get better” next year? Perhaps it will, perhaps it won’t. What if we lose Denard to injury? Now, we are back to playing the “what if” game.

3. There were points over the last five or six games where it just simply appeared as though Michigan didn’t even have a clue as to what they were doing on both sides of the ball. It looked like we were caught in the headlights. That was understandable for RR’s first year, maybe even part of the second year, but not now. The system should be well known by the players now; keep in mind that whereas RR’s offense is a bit more complicated than some, this isn’t Calculus III.

4. Still no dependable running back.

5. Turnovers happen, but why does it seem that in the big games, they have more turnovers than they do against some of the “lower-class” teams? If it is because of nerves or trying to make things happen, than that is poor preparation on behalf of the coaching staff. If not, then we need better players.

6. Last half of the season collapse again. We actually look and play worse than we did at the beginning of the year. This is intolerable! The Michigan team of the first six games would have manhandled the team that I saw against Wisconsin or OSU. Yikes.

I could on and on. These are a few. I am actually done being mad and frustrated with the past season, but I would like to see SOMETHING happen. I could care less whether we keep RR or not, but if he sticks around, I would like to at least hire a defensive coordinator from a reputable school that has had proven results and knows how to recruit some much needed talent. Get out of the Big East, Rich! (For crying out loud!) Syracuse? Honest to John, Syracuse????

Agreed: Enough of the “What if’s.” No more excuses, and knock it off telling us NOT to discount our chances against the likes of Wisconsin or OSU when we already know what is likely to happen.

Go ahead….SCM reply in 5…..4……3……2……

by crazydaz on Nov 30, 2010 3:44 PM CST reply actions  

All valid points...

All valid points but given the context of having a young team learning this system of football in basically a full 2 seasons of rebuild, I’m not that worried. I think everything you wrote above is already identified by the coaching staff and will be improved next season, but not perfect. I still feel very optimistic about what happens next year and the year after. Especially because how awesome the offense really can be. This isn’t a traditional spread offense, but a hybrid monster that in theory is undefendable, like the crane-kick from the Karate Kid. Now add that theory to the facilities, alumni support system and recruiting power of Michigan (this years class is shaping up nicely) we may be very well on our way to crushing division play and having a shot at outright Big Ten champs year in and year out. Rose bowl after Rose bowl. This is why I’m not wishy washy on my stance that RR must stay, and if the next two season don’t meet those expectations, then we can revisit the issue. It seems a small risk given what the rewards may be.

by MadP on Nov 30, 2010 6:17 PM CST up reply actions  

Maybe.....

you might be right. But, similar things were said of Charlie Weiss at Notre Dame too. I believe that we could have a somewhat solid year next year, and be really, really good the following. But that is theory, and not evidence as RR has yet to prove himself. We’ve seen “glimpses,” but nothing that I would call “consistent.”

You make good points, but they are hypothetical. Do you want to bank on hypotheticals for the next two years?

by crazydaz on Nov 30, 2010 7:33 PM CST up reply actions  

Good Analogy

And just like Charlie Weiss, Rich Rod only recruits on one side of the ball. Also, like Charlie, Rodriguez’s offensive genius is supposed to carry the day. At least the administration didn’t reward him with a 10 year contract.

by Collegeville on Nov 30, 2010 8:56 PM CST up reply actions  

But unlike Charlie Weiss

Rich Rodriguez has had a high level of success as a college football head coach at several stops. Charlie Weiss was a “logical” but completely unproven commodity as a head coach.

Less memorable than Sam Okey's Hawkeye career.

by Kyle McCann't on Dec 1, 2010 9:01 AM CST up reply actions  

The Iowa drubbing was in '02

And I’d have to put the ’02 bowl game against Tennessee in there too.

GO BLUE! http://www.maizenbrew.com/

by SCM on Nov 30, 2010 3:51 PM CST reply actions  

We can have it all...

Great article.

I think any new coach worth his weight would leave Michigan’s offense relatively intact for the near future. Only RR’s misguided philosophy is to disastrously start from scratch and put in his own system with total disregard to the dedicated Michigan players who were recruited by the previous coach and didn’t fit into the new plan.

A new coach would bring in a new defensive and special teams staff, which might happen anyway, but a new coach would definitely get rid of the RR cronies on the defensive staff and let the DC do his job unhampered.

Finally, a new coach will offer hope, and if he is good, instant, easily recognized improvement.

It’s a fallacy that a new coach means we end up like RR’s first year. Michigan should never have fallen so low. It was RR’s dogmatic approach to throw the baby out with the bath water that is the main cause of our woes. A good coach works with the talent on hand, even if they are lacking, even if he must put off his own preferred system, and puts forth a team which plays with discipline and confidence.

The Michigan players deserve more than to be blamed for the coach’s failings because they aren’t quite talented enough. Give me a break.

It’s time we all realized that RR is the one not talented enough: not talented enough to hire and manage an effective defensive staff, not talented enough to use the little he found in his “bare cupboard” more effectively, not talented enough to recruit decent kickers, etc.

It’s not the players, it’s the coach. It’s time for a change. No “ifs, ands, or buts.” He’s a nice man, and I wish him luck, but show him the door.

There are coaches out there who can do much better with what we’ve got and get us to a National Championship. RR hasn’t won one yet, so why are we banking so heavily on him? Try a Harbaugh, or Les Miles, or maybe even a Jon Gruden or Bill Cowher. We’ll get instant improvement.

Go Blue.

by blusage on Dec 1, 2010 12:55 PM CST reply actions  

NO to Jon Gruden

I still have no idea why people are so enamored with Jon Gruden. He had one great season as a coach in the NFL, on a team that was almost entirely put together by Tony Dungy (including the defensive schemes), and yet he is coaching superstar.

Let Miami chase after Jon Gruden …

If Michigan is serious about a new coach, they should follow Nebraska’s decision from 2007, know your roots and what creates competive teams in your conference…Bo Pelini was a great pick and was able to move Nebraska into contention fast, since he emphasized defense, and kept the offensive scheme simple (but not a pro-set). I think this is why Nebraska will be competitive in the Big Ten, Pelini’s emphasis is one what creates good Big Ten teams.

by AWOOOOO-Werewolves of London on Dec 1, 2010 3:43 PM CST up reply actions  

Gruden's just an example....

…that there are many qualified coaches out there. Sure, Gruden won “only one” Super Bowl, but still, that’s a whole lot better than RR’s resume. (Btw, Tony Dungy didn’t win back-to-back Super Bowls, so it’s not as simple saying Gruden had Dungy’s old team to win with when Dungy can’t win twice with his own team.) I agree he hasn’t done much else, but he seems like someone who might be a good motivator for college kids and help get us out of this slump, emotionally at least. (And what about Cowher, would his resume good enough for you?)

I agree with your Nebraska analogy. I don’t think a coaching change has to take 3-4 years to see improvement. I wouldn’t mind Harbaugh, since he is rooted in Michigan tradition. I just don’t know if he’s really proven yet.

But there are good coaches out there. I really don’t care who it is as long as it’s someone else. Someone who knows defense; someone who’s not dead-set on one system.

Go Blue.

by blusage on Dec 1, 2010 4:17 PM CST up reply actions  

No defense for the defense

All of this boils down to something that RR needs to figure out fast…defense.

I agree with the article and a lot of the comments, the offense has taken a step forward, though very small, and most of that step was due to Denard Robinson.

However, what will make Michigan’s offense and the entire team better is defense. The reason why Michigan came out stronger against its opponents in the beginning of games and was able to keep most games close was the defense. Last year’s defense wasn’t fantastic, but you knew with Brandon Graham coming around the end and leading the Big Ten in tackles for loss, we had a chance to put pressure on the passing and running games of our opponents.

Michigan really can’t take a step forward until the defense is at least middle of the Big Ten. A good defense causes turn-overs and favorable field position for the offense. A good defense stops another team’s momentum (I can live with the kick return against Ohio State, but what if Michigan stopped Ohio State’s next two drives?). And rather than having an opponent just run the ball at will in the second half, and leave our offense off the field, a good defense would do the opposite.

Regrettably, I think the defense is far from improving next year….it looks like another 7-5 season, no matter who is coach next year.

by AWOOOOO-Werewolves of London on Dec 1, 2010 3:36 PM CST reply actions  

We got to start beating osu I’m getting sick and tired of seeing them lose to them, so I want a coach who can find a way to do that. Is that to much to ask?

Bring the Cup home to Detroit in 2011!!!

by KGW on Dec 3, 2010 3:02 PM CST reply actions  

Comments For This Post Are Closed


User Tools

An Unofficial Michigan Football Blog that covers everything related to the University of Michigan Wolverines. We also cover beer, tailgating and the absurdity of college sports in general.

FanPosts

Community blog posts and discussion.

Recent FanPosts

Small
Help Nebraska represent the Big 10 and beat the SEC!
Small
Recruiting Help?!
Picture_1_small
Smotrycz to Maryland
Small
Robinson and Toussaint HIghlight Tape
Img_0616_small
Hardaway/Burke/Michigan Basketball/Samuel Adams
Img_0616_small
The Brew is BACK!
Img_0616_small
Can't stop watching this Mike Martin Video
Tate_small
Spring positions switches

+ New FanPost All FanPosts >


Managers

Maizenbrew_small Maize n Brew Dave

Tumblr_kxe3j1n8021qztjn5o1_500_small Zach Travis

Editors

Hobbes_small Alex Cook

Bo_small Remember Bo

Me_small Dave Ryan

Authors

James_dean_smiling2_small Beauford

Mgoblue_small SCM

Tate_small JC314

Floyd3_small Kyle McCann't

Aa10_small HoldTheRope

373022_198834423566677_135460436_n_small maize_in_spartyland

Dgdestroys_small DGDestroys