OFFICIAL NCAAF Rank'em thread: October 14, 2007

[Semtex]

[ QUOTE ]
Did you REALLY think, BEFORE the Florida game, that Ohio State had no defense? They had given up 12, 7 (this was Texas who averaged 36), 7, 6, 17, 7, 7, 3, 0 (Minnesota averaged 29), 10, and 10 in their first 11 games. Yes, they then gave up 39 to Michigan, who averaged 29 on the year, but prior to the Florida game I think the logical assumption would have been to think that *that* was the fluke, particularly considering that Ohio State still won the game... and that Michigan's offense was helped by three turnovers... Ohio State's defense finished the year, INCLUDING the Florida stats, #15 in rush defense, #10 in pass efficiency allowed, #12 in total defense, and #5 in scoring defense. I think Florida was the best team in the country, but I'm pretty sure that the margin of the title game was NOT indicitave of the actual talent gap between them and OSU, who I think was probably the second best team in the country.

[/ QUOTE ]
Yes I REALLY thought that before the game. After the tOSU MICH game me and all my friends here were saying wow these teams can't play defense, and this was confirmed in each of their next games. Maybe it was a fluke, I don't think so though.

[TomCollins]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
Did you REALLY think, BEFORE the Florida game, that Ohio State had no defense? They had given up 12, 7 (this was Texas who averaged 36), 7, 6, 17, 7, 7, 3, 0 (Minnesota averaged 29), 10, and 10 in their first 11 games. Yes, they then gave up 39 to Michigan, who averaged 29 on the year, but prior to the Florida game I think the logical assumption would have been to think that *that* was the fluke, particularly considering that Ohio State still won the game... and that Michigan's offense was helped by three turnovers... Ohio State's defense finished the year, INCLUDING the Florida stats, #15 in rush defense, #10 in pass efficiency allowed, #12 in total defense, and #5 in scoring defense. I think Florida was the best team in the country, but I'm pretty sure that the margin of the title game was NOT indicitave of the actual talent gap between them and OSU, who I think was probably the second best team in the country.

[/ QUOTE ]
Yes I REALLY thought that before the game. After the tOSU MICH game me and all my friends here were saying wow these teams can't play defense, and this was confirmed in each of their next games. Maybe it was a fluke, I don't think so though.

[/ QUOTE ]

After watching the UT-USC Championship game, I thought "Boy these teams can't play defense". Then I realized that I'm not retarded.

[teamdonkey]

[ QUOTE ]
This is so stupid. You can have a good team that underachieves.

[/ QUOTE ]

who's most responsible for the team being good in the first place? do you think this aspect of being a coach is valuable?

[ QUOTE ]
I watch all the Michigan games. I see the monotonous, overly conservative playcalling (seriously, there are indicators via motion and personnel on the field that tip the exact play Michigan is going to run with near absolute certainty). I see teams that aren't even scouted for (App State and just about any opponent the coaches don't respect, the offense is noticeably different against teams that are supposed to be good). I see tons and tons of blown games in the 4th quarter (7-5 in 2005, losses by a total of something like 25 points, many other games that were just horrible in earlier years down the stretch). Sure it's easy to look at the end result and say, "Wow, they're doing a pretty good job." The thing is, the talent level there is usually so much better than a lot of the Big 10 except OSU that they can get away with this. It's as soon as the talent level is close or there is a mobile QB in a spread offense that Carr just goes to [censored]. He refuses to adapt, and there is no way he is going to this late in his career. If you actually watch the games, all his faults are apparent.

[/ QUOTE ]

you are arguing about things that produce results. I'm skipping all that and going straight to the results themselves (it's not exactly a small sample size). Michigan has done very well under Carr.

[Semtex]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
Did you REALLY think, BEFORE the Florida game, that Ohio State had no defense? They had given up 12, 7 (this was Texas who averaged 36), 7, 6, 17, 7, 7, 3, 0 (Minnesota averaged 29), 10, and 10 in their first 11 games. Yes, they then gave up 39 to Michigan, who averaged 29 on the year, but prior to the Florida game I think the logical assumption would have been to think that *that* was the fluke, particularly considering that Ohio State still won the game... and that Michigan's offense was helped by three turnovers... Ohio State's defense finished the year, INCLUDING the Florida stats, #15 in rush defense, #10 in pass efficiency allowed, #12 in total defense, and #5 in scoring defense. I think Florida was the best team in the country, but I'm pretty sure that the margin of the title game was NOT indicitave of the actual talent gap between them and OSU, who I think was probably the second best team in the country.

[/ QUOTE ]
Yes I REALLY thought that before the game. After the tOSU MICH game me and all my friends here were saying wow these teams can't play defense, and this was confirmed in each of their next games. Maybe it was a fluke, I don't think so though.

[/ QUOTE ]

After watching the UT-USC Championship game, I thought "Boy these teams can't play defense". Then I realized that I'm not retarded.

[/ QUOTE ]
too bad you are. i'm not even getting into this. two completely different situations.

[iggymcfly]

[ QUOTE ]
After the tOSU MICH game me and all my friends who obviously hadn't watched OSU and Michigan play dominant defense all season and were working with an extremely small sample size were saying wow these teams can't play defense, and this was confirmed in each of their next games. Maybe it was a fluke, I don't think so though.

[/ QUOTE ]

FYP.

[MyTurn2Raise]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
How is it that a sub-forum allegedly populated by drawing from a pool by winning poker players is still full of results-oriented garbage?

People are reacting to last year's NC game like they've never seen a lopsided game before. OSU losing was not a sign of anything greater than specific failings by Tressel and his players. It's rather incredible that you've managed to convince yourself that "everybody" knew that OSU was going to lose badly because they couldn't play defense and the Big Ten was terrible, that would be why Florida was a double digit favorite, right?

Trying to dig up any quotes from you about the NC game was unsuccessful, but I did manage to find a thread where you strenuously argued that USC 05>Texas 05.

[/ QUOTE ]

I just think the Big 10 has been pretty weak the last couple of years in Comparison to the SEC and I'm a big Michigan fan. We just can't compete with some of the SEC/Pac-10 schools. I hope the tOSU-UF game was a fluke, but it looked like domination to me. I guess we could blame it on many things, but I'm still skeptacle of the Big 10 right now.

[/ QUOTE ]

I definitely agree that the Big10 has slipped behind the Pac10 and SEC the last few years. However, I think the differences are exaggerated. The big 6 conferences are very close to each other in strenght. Every computer ranking over the past 6-7 years demonstrates that point over and over. What is odd is the Pac-10/SEC seem to be leading two consecutive years. That is rare.

[MyTurn2Raise]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
This is so stupid. You can have a good team that underachieves.

[/ QUOTE ]

who's most responsible for the team being good in the first place? do you think this aspect of being a coach is valuable?

[ QUOTE ]
I watch all the Michigan games. I see the monotonous, overly conservative playcalling (seriously, there are indicators via motion and personnel on the field that tip the exact play Michigan is going to run with near absolute certainty). I see teams that aren't even scouted for (App State and just about any opponent the coaches don't respect, the offense is noticeably different against teams that are supposed to be good). I see tons and tons of blown games in the 4th quarter (7-5 in 2005, losses by a total of something like 25 points, many other games that were just horrible in earlier years down the stretch). Sure it's easy to look at the end result and say, "Wow, they're doing a pretty good job." The thing is, the talent level there is usually so much better than a lot of the Big 10 except OSU that they can get away with this. It's as soon as the talent level is close or there is a mobile QB in a spread offense that Carr just goes to [censored]. He refuses to adapt, and there is no way he is going to this late in his career. If you actually watch the games, all his faults are apparent.

[/ QUOTE ]

you are arguing about things that produce results. I'm skipping all that and going straight to the results themselves (it's not exactly a small sample size). Michigan has done very well under Carr.

[/ QUOTE ]

I'm saying Carr is slightly better than Moeller and worse than Bo

I think one cannot just look at results. It's about furthering the program.

I mean, Ron Zook won one SEC East title in 3 years and had 3 bowls at Florida. That was a HUGE dropoff for the program.

Like it or not, Michigan's evaluation system is wins v Ohio State and Big11Ten championships. Carr has underperformed the Bo regime with respect to those two factors.

I think people forget that is wasn't the big 2 and little 8 when Bo left. For the previous decade, it was the big 1! Iowa and Illinois had been right up there with Ohio State. Ohio State was slightly better, but the difference was small compared to the gap between Michigan and everyone else.

[Semtex]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
After the tOSU MICH game me and all my friends who obviously hadn't watched OSU and Michigan play dominant defense all season and were working with an extremely small sample size were saying wow these teams can't play defense, and this was confirmed in each of their next games. Maybe it was a fluke, I don't think so though.

[/ QUOTE ]

FYP.

[/ QUOTE ]
The point is the same. Don't talk about sample sizes. You could watch 10000 games against the teams Michigan played that season (if I remember correctly Ball State ran up 30 on them and almost beat them at the end of the season) and still feel they had dominant D. It still wouldn't help you gauge what they could do against a real offense. I'm convinced tOSU was way overrated and they still ran up 40+ on them.

[teamdonkey]

MT2R,

that's more about tOSU getting good than it is Michigan getting bad. Bo did better as a coach than Carr has, but there's a lot more parity now and maintaining a program at an elite level for any period of time is even harder. If Michigan fires every coach that doesn't do as well as Bo did, they're gonna go through a hell of a lot of coaches.

IMO Michigan fans need to take a hard look at programs like Nebraska and Alabama, and realize being a storied program with great tradition doesn't gaurantee your team will keep cranking out great seasons. Or ask the Chargers how replacing a winning coach because you don't like (fill in the blank) about him works out.

[lastchance]

Turner - Marty != Miles - Carr.