Fo what its worth
Pynchon on Columbus from pg. 66 of his new book
"If the US was a person, and it sat down... columbus, ohio would instantly be plunged into darkness.
OSU has become the Trystero to our Oedipa Maas.
By far the worse game by a group of safeties that I've seen in a while. Adams played poorly, also. (IMO) What a terrible angle he took on the Pittman TD run.
Englemon was shown being yelled at by Carr on the sideline after Michigan was forced to call a T.O. I believe he was not where he was suppose to be on the field, giving Ginn 1-on-1 coverage outside, no help.
I wish I hadn't read this, actually. You did a great job Brian, but...
...I mean, now I just feel sick again. Fuck, this one hurt.
Intentional or not, I do find it mildly amusing that no highlights are linked. Sigh.
Any comments about the turf, Brian? The word 'turf' was peppered in the UFR, but, after replay, did it really seem like it hurt either:
A) the pass rush (woodley seemed just a hair late on 6 hits on Smith...no penetration from Branch/Taylor)
B) the coverage (WRs know where they're going, DBs have to react)?
...and did it really seem like M was hurt more by the turf than OSU?
How many points in the quant. analysis could be attributed to the turf?
Well, there is one advantage to playing LSU over OSU: Jamarcus Russel is only "really good" as opposed to "Black Christ".
Incidentally, the Dayton Daily News reports that the turf will be replaced with artificial stuff for next year.
Obviously the right call, and we all look forward to this never being an issue again.
Also, I am still amazed that Wells out ran B. Harrison on the big TD. i think it was Harrison, but the UFR says I'm wrong. anyway,
I think they should have played a 4-1-6 (where 1 = Dave Harris) vs. the 4-5 wide. Why put any other LBs on the field vs 5 wide?
Also, part II: what was up with the position of the CBs at the snap wrt the LOS? It's seemed to me that they were 5-8 yrds off the LOS...very Herrman-esque, no? Was this consistently the case during your reveiw?
I guess I need to ask Santa for a TiVo
This is a general question to readers here: I DVR'd the game because I was at my boss' wedding and was only able to see the first three quarters. I've been very hesitant to play the recording and watch the fourth quarter. What do you all think? Should I waste my time watching it or just delete it now to free up four hours of HD space on my DVR? Don't worry I'll keep "Fields of Glory: Michigan Stadium" on the DVR to replay over and over :)
Dan
Yeah, the DBS were WAY off the LOS, hence the -21 (negative TWENTY-ONE!) coverage grade.
I think the big, enduring story from this game will be this: English shit down his leg this game. He played a Herrmann-esque Charmin-soft zone, played the wrong safety (and is also the figgin' COACH of those shitty, undisciplined safties btw!!) and I agree, should've been using a 4-1-6, since we don't own any pass-covering LBs other than maybe Harris. I thought Burgess could cover okay, but I think he was clearly still hobbled by the ankle injury suffered in the...wait for it...Ball State game! GOD, I HATE BALL STATE!! j/k, but damn if that game didn't blatantly expose our lack of DB-depth and ding up a very valuable LB!
And thank God the Black Christ is out of eligibility. Michigan's record the next 3-4 years against non-Troy OSU will define Carr's legacy against the Bucks. Did Carr hold his own in The Game, except for the anomaly that is #10, or does Tressel really "own" our beloved coach. I think the former, and I hope history proves it so.
I've been very hesitant to play the recording and watch the fourth quarter. What do you all think? Should I waste my time watching it or just delete it now to free up four hours of HD space on my DVR?
Why should you get off so easy. Watch it and suffer like the rest of your brothers.
"Watch it and suffer like the rest of your brothers."
I vote for dispersing the pain as well. Further, you need to see the Crable play.
Caup: I agree with you. I was just a little shocked when Brian didn't mention much, if at all, about the lack of press coverage. not even a " well, what can he do when he starts out 8 yards from the receiver."
I was really expecting more criticism of the scheme, rather than the players (I know, I know, except for the safties....I'm now banging my head on my desk in frustration).
Jacob Hester = Aaron Shea
Perhaps English's decision to have the CBs play off the receivers was a reaction to the turf. There's a lot more quick footwork required of a defender when he's doing that dance with the receiver at the line after the snap when they line up in each others' faces. Anyone else see the defensive linemen, several times, simply slip on to their faces right at the snap because they couldn't get their footing? There was a play that comes to mind early in the game when Biggs was unblocked but fell over right at the snap, got up with the play still on, and fell right over again.
If our CBs were asked to do a lot of fancy footwork OSU might've put up 80.
I don't blame English for this at all. I blame OSU for having a great offense and mother nature for putting that offense in the best possible environment.
I'll address the turf tomorrow. I think it affected our offense more than the defense, actually.
As for the press cover: I did mean to mention it. One of the things about the five-wide package is that three of the WRs are off the LOS and hard to get a jam on. We still have a different philosophy than OSU, who jam frequently and to good effect. We've been a read-and-jump defense all year and I didn't really expect anything different, especially with our safeties often rolling up.
gnrgoblue,
Well, OSU pressed with their DBs. What, did they have better cleats? And there is absolutely NO justification for leaving only 2 DBs out to the left when they move THREE receivers over to the left side. NONE. OSU simplyhad two of them run off our DBs with deep routes, and the 3rd guy did a little curl route for an automatic 7-8 yards. Time and time again. It was like last year ALL OVER AGAIN. It was maddening. I couldn't believe my eyes. But it WAS coaching, make no mistake about it.
Hey, I still love English, but that was just stoopid! Now the safety play on the other hand was just poor execution.
Brian -
I know this is off subject, but after looking thinking about the squad next year, do you think that our offense will be able to make up for how bad the defense apears they will be? I mean, the defensive secondary doesn't look like they will get better any time soon and the LBs look weak as well. Also, I haven't heard much from Germany or Slocum (is he even still on the team?) But, I don't see any other Big 10 (11) team being better than UM. Any thoughts on next year's squad?
@masked avenger - my fault on the lack of clips. A combination of work overload, classwork overload, and, sure, I'll admit it, lack of motivation on my part.
"Did Carr hold his own in The Game, except for the anomaly that is #10, or does Tressel really "own" our beloved coach. I think the former, and I hope history proves it so."
How is Smith anomalous? Because one has to wade back 11 months into the foggy depths NCAA history to find a similar yet superior talent at his position? Because he was recruited from another football power's backyard? His best friend went to Purdue? His best friend's father and high school coach steers talent to Penn State? Because he will win the first ever Heisman at tOSU?
I think his argument is that Carr was doing great in the series against OSU until Smith arrived and made him look bad. It's plausible; Carr is 6-3 in the series when not facing Smith.
Does any one else wonder why our emerging pass rush specialist Jamison saw so little of the field?
Concerning the Crable hit: correct call by the officials, but I wish the rule book treated helmet-to-helmets as it does facemasks. The incidental helmet contact completely bailed O-State out of 4th and 15. A more appropriate 5 yard penalty would have been less momentum-shifting. And less game-deciding.
Very disappointing defensive performance. No doubt Mundy has been a liability out at free safety.
Things for next year:
The word on DT Slocum is very positive. No move to offense is what I hear.
Does Trent still run track? If so, he should stop and focus on football. He needs to get stronger also.
D-back recruiting has gone beyond a critical need and into a whole new undefined area more closely resembling desperation. Ronald Johnson is a must. And more will be necessary as well.
Sears was still only a RS-Frosh, so I won't give up on him just yet. The buzz around him has been very positive since he got to M.
Buzz on WILL LB Mouton is also very positive. Buzz on LB Patilla is also good.
I think S Stevie Brown's PT will be very signifcant next year. He has the speed and showed good fundamental tackling skills in his time out there this season.
In keeping with my current obsession on drawing up lineups:
DE Jamison/Patterson
DT Taylor/Slocum
DT Will Johnson/Walton
DE Germany/B.Graham
WILL C.Graham/Mouton
MIKE Thompson/Mixon???...need help here
SAM Crable/Patilla??
CB Trent/Harrison or somebody else
CB R.Johnson hopefully/Sears
FS Englemon/S.Brown
SS Adams
NICKEL Sears or Harrison or a new guy
That is a solid defensive lineup but only if a stud CB or two comes to M and becomes good quickly.
That combined with a very explosive offense and a favorable schedule (only Illinois, Wisky, Northwestern and Sparty on the road) and it should be another BCS season.
For the last several years, Jim Herrmann was thoroughly vilified as the chief architect of a defense that was routinely torched in big games. We gave up huge, embarrassing numbers to Syracuse, and few people seemed to be saying, "well, it was Donovan McNabb, whaddaya gonna do?"
Texas? How many of Herrmann's critics said, "well, it was Vince Young, whaddaya gonna do?"
Ohio State in '04 and '05? "well, it was Troy Smith, whaddaya gonna do?" did not pass the lips of too many people that I know and heard.
Nope, it was all "god-damned soft zones" and "secondary playing way off the LOS" and "inadequate or non-existent defensive adjustments." and especially "Herrmann's a complete idiot."
So now, after a defensive performance in the most critical game in the last 10 seasons that saw us yield over 500 yards of total offense, huge touchdowns on the ground and in the air, big play after big play, and as Brian and UMCAUP have pointed out, using an alarmingly similar defensive approach to the bad ol' days, all we hear from most fans (aside from this blog) is "well, it was Troy Smith, whaddaya gonna do?"
Here's the reality: we crapped the bed as badly down in Columbus as in any game under Jim Herrmann, and Ron English (and Carr) has to take the same kind of responsibility as Herrmann did. No, not abuse, but nobody should be getting a free ride on this one.
OSU thoroughly outcoached us; credit Tressel and his staff for recognizing what our defensive weaknesses are, and for ruthlessly exploiting them from start to finish, in a way that we were obviously unprepared for. Even a casual observer could have seen in the first 5 minutes of the game that our defensive scheme employing the standard arrangement of linemen, LBs, and secondary was going to be lit up by the OSU attack, and the fact that we never went to something like a 4-1-6 was inevitably going to put guys like Graham into totally untenable coverage situations. Whatever adjustments that did happen didn't take effect until after halftime, and by then it was a bit too late. That's a mighty slow reaction time.
You can't ever convince me that a team is legitimately the second-best team in the country with a defensive bed-wetting like this. Pete Carroll will not let that happen to USC. OSU may still win, but it won't be with 500+ and big play after big play.
And, if the bowl game does pit LSU against us, it will be interesting to see if Les Miles is smart enough to pass the test. I guarantee that Michigan will bring NOTHING to the Rose Bowl that LSU or whoever hasn't already seen before on tape, because our coaching staff seems to believe that coming up with something new and unexpected is unmanly.
Lloyd Carr is a fine coach and a wonderful man, but it needs to be said that Michigan will never beat a team with equal or superior talent because of something we do that's new in strategy or tactics. It will be because we play hard and make fewer mistakes an
Consdiering the strength we have at DE compared to LB, any chance Graham shifts back? Or Patterson, I seem to remember people saying he might end up at MLB in college
"I think his argument is that Carr was doing great in the series against OSU until Smith arrived and made him look bad. It's plausible; Carr is 6-3 in the series when not facing Smith."
He was doing even better before Tressel arrived (or before Cooper left, as the case may be). I'm not saying Tressel owns Carr -- I don't buy the concept as a predictor.
2004, I guess, is the year this whole debate turns on: Who gets credit (or blame) for a 37-point explosion by the sophomore-led, 98th-ranked (!) offense in the country. Purdue (comparable defensively to UM) had smothered Smith the week before.
Anyway, I really just wanted to note that Tressel deserves credit for Smith, not an asterisk next to his record against UM.
I think we match up pretty well against LSU IF we bring our A game ( OSU one - not the Ball State). Their Offense, I guess, is a faster Wisconsin in every facet. Our D-Line must be told to bring Jamarcus down - he is tough to bring down.
Their Defense is like Wisconsin with a better D-Line.
But one thing going for us is they are very much prone to mistakes and we are pretty good at protecting the ball. Intriguing matchup. We'd be favored by 3.5 or smth.
Well Paul, we'll just have to see what happens in future matchups before we decide if it's Tressel or Smith that's been the difference.
Did anyone get the impression that we were always a bit late in setting up the defense. It seems that we were a bit disorganized when OSU was lining up to snap the ball and then had to rush over to be in position just prior to the snap. This reminded me of the Hermann days when we were making small adjustment up until a millisecond prior to the snap of the ball.
*** Pete Carroll will not let that happen to USC ***
How did USC's defense look in their last bowl game?
don,
"You can't ever convince me that a team is legitimately the second-best team in the country with a defensive bed-wetting like this. Pete Carroll will not let that happen to USC. OSU may still win, but it won't be with 500+ and big play after big play."
Yeah, Carroll's defense sure looked stellar when Oregon State put 33 on the Trojans this year. Matt Moore went 21-32 against that defense. The OSU game may be different but please don't make it out like it's impossible to put up points against Carroll's defense.
And your point about English not taking all of the blame is b/c this was a one-game aberration from an otherwise pretty stellar defense. Strong showings vs. Notre Dame and others happened this year. That wasn't the case under Hermann and it's so obvious that I am not going to dig up the stats to show it.
You make some good points but those two I just cannot support.
A few thoughts:
1. I'm curious as to how you will explain the theory that loose turf hurt Michigan's O more than its D.
2. I don't think that OSU pressed much at all. Instead, I think that they typically played their corners play close to the line and then bail.
3. I thought that Jamison played quite a bit in the second half.
4. I would guess that Carr had a role in the soft coverages. Regardless, I think that the coverage was a coaching issue more than a player issue. With a spread field and little or no safety help, the theory was to keep all balls in front.
5. I think that the long delay before the game - a month of creampuffs for both teams - allowed the offenses to outscheme the defenses.
6. I agree that Michigan's defense spent a lot more time looking at the staff on the sidelines pre-snap. They were out of sync all day.
7. The notion that Carr doesn't bring new wrinkles may be a TV notion. In person, I thought that the offense, at least, usually had a beat on OSU's defense pre-snap based on new variations on old themes.
8. I didn't think Sears was bad at all. His guy caught a lot of passes because Sears seems to have been coached to stay off. I'm not saying that Sears showed much, just that he wasn't totally burnt as most people seem to think.
9. Safeties are by far the biggest problem on the team, and have been for years.
I'm gonna throw my 2 cents into the Tressel/Smith debate.
They both get credit. Tressel gets credit (especially this year) for an excellent game plan. Smith gets a lot of credit for executing Tressel's plan. That's really what it came down to. When you have top-level coaching combined with top-level talent (see: USC, OSU), that's an awfully difficult combination to beat.
Although, are we really having this conversation if we don't go sissy soft zone in 2005? I mean seriously, Smith as 2-1 and losing in dominating fashion (because we dominated for until about the 9 minute mark in that game) goes a long way towards dispelling the notion that he's some miraculous Michigan slayer and Tressel owns us. 2005 was a conspiracy of events and mistakes that can't happen against a team with the talent level of an OSU. Give them credit for capitalizing on said mistakes and events, but also recognize that it was a situation where Michigan had an equal hand in its own defeat.
Matt, we did not dominate the 2005 Game thru 3 quarters. OSU moved the ball well against us but we got some lucky breaks and turnovers, including a Ginn muffed punt at a crucial juncture.
Brian: I'm wondering why you don't include the Buckeyes' last possession. After all, given the timeout situation, it's possible that if Michigan had prevented OSU from gaining a first down, they would have had at least a punt return, and, possibly, a hail mary attempt to win the game. Instead, Ohio State just lined up and ground out the first down they needed. You can say that it was largely meaningless, but if that's the case then so was Michigan's last touchdown - or is the word I'm looking for "cosmetic"?
And on the subject of Mark's comment: It's worth mentioning that Michigan benefited from some "luck" in this year's game as well, in the form of two totally unforced OSU turnovers - something they didn't do at all this season. One of those turnovers was directly responsible for a touchdown that was crucial to keeping the game close - and this is a recurring theme in the game's narrative: that Michigan was mostly trying to keep the game CLOSE, never really having an opportunity to WIN it.
You can scoff at the notion that OSU's unforced turnovers had that much effect on the game, but the fact is that - in this respect - it was an uncharacteristically poor performance by Ohio State's offense that was worth at least a touchdown. Lots of you have made exactly the same point about Michigan's defense.
Oh, huzzah. The Crable hit has become this year's version of the "Gonzalez stepped out of bounds" issue from last year.
Crable hit him as he was going out. The helmet-to-helmet may have been accidental or it may not have. I think realistically in order of probability, one would have to say: frustration, accident, gameplan to knock Smith off his game.
Either way, Smith was very clearly going out of bounds and Crable laid into him. It was a stupid decision, and a play that's going to get called every time.
And I swear to God, I don't know how you can possibly watch the Gonzalez catch during the 2005 game and not see Morgan Trent's left hip hit Gonzalez and force him out of bounds. Lloyd Carr must have some Jedi mind thing going on you.
The notion that Michigan was muddling along and could barely keep with OSU barring the help of turnovers and dropped passes is irritating. UM lost by 3 points. Henne overthrowing MM killed them. Crable's penalty killed them. Mundy's shitty angles killed them. Maybe most importantly, utterly wasting two timeouts in the second half killed them. Both teams made mental mistakes, it just so happens that OSU's fumbles are more readily apparent. In the end, OSU made more big plays, had the best player on the field, put their players in a position to succeed more often and deserved to win. But they weren't exactly playing the functional equivalent of a toddler that needs Daddy's help to walk from the coffee table to the couch.
And I agree with Tom. Refs are very touchy about hitting players as they approach the sideline and Crable should know better than to try and lay out Smith over there. It was a mental mistake, just like drifting before securing the shotgun snap of a wet ball, while anticipating the play, is a mental mistake.
Honestly, I pit this loss on lack of DB recruiting. I was at the game, and said to the people sitting around me: "If OSU goes 5 wide on us, we are screwed." The thought of Sears and Stewart seeing serious time on the field gives me hives. I got heartburn every time I saw him and Stewart step onto the field. I think this game goes differently if you change the backfield for Michigan. "Hall, Trent, Harrison, Sears, Stewart" doesn't quite have the ring that "Hall, King, Eugene, Trent, Harris" would have. This is not to excuse play calling, but our DB talent level was
Wow, I've got to disagree with Tom and MRG on the Crable hit. If that is Pittman and no Smith, 0% chance of a call. If that is Smith holding onto the ball instead of throwing it, maybe 2% chance of a call.
I'm not saying that it was a bad call, just a very tough one.
As for the Crable hit, I want to see a picture of where Smith's foot was when he threw. I watched the replay, and Crable took one step after Smith threw the ball. It is not like Smith threw it, Crable took 3-4 steps and laid into him a yard out of bounds. If you are sprinting at full speed, and someone suddenly yells "STOP" it would take you more then 1 step to slow down, especially on a field like that.
As for the Helmet to Helmet, I think that was as much the way Smith rotated after throwing, as it was Crable leading with his helmet. For a dude that is 6'6" that is kind of a hard thing to avoid in that situation.
matsut, it works both ways:
It's worth mentioning that OSU benefited from some "luck" in this year's game as well, in the form of two 50+ yard touchdown runs - something Michigan didn't allow at all this season. Two of those runs were directly responsible for a touchdown that was crucial to not keeping the game close - and this is a recurring theme in the game's narrative: that Michigan was mostly trying to keep the game CLOSE, never really having an opportunity to WIN it.
~~~
Turnovers are part of the game. They can happen by the other team influencing your performance and forcing mental mistakes. You can't dismiss them as flukes and anomalies. Credit Michigan for having that kind of effect on the OSU offense.
The db situation is a disaster. Along with recruiting some more promising prospects, we seriously need to consider converting some offensive guys to defense. Perhaps Carlos Brown and Doug Dutch can start practicing at corner. Perhaps Laterryal Savoy to safety. It reeks of desperation and may not work out but let's be serious, those guys aren't going to be playing much on offense next year. Dutch and Savoy are behind Manningham, Arrington and Mathews and possibly Hemingway and/or Clemons. We've got enough receiver depth to sacrifice them.
And Brown is clearly the 4th string back. With his talent, being buried that deep on the depth chart might make him a candidate to transfer. Maybe getting him some playing time on defense can help prevent that.
for all the Defense bashing, I do want to give credit to the offense....they put up alot of points in balanced attacks in big games...OSU, ND. we could run, we could throw when necessary, we limited TOs. Plus the ST were solid. let's be real...many of us are harping on 1/3rd of the teams performance in 1/12 of the games. and things would have been different if it weren't for a couple execution errors on the long TD runs. yea, it's maddening, and yea, the coaches need to coach the proper technique...but I think they have. for whatever reason, some(most? recall, Mundy was a 4.5* recruit out of PA) of our safties are 50yrd TD machines. stop those 2 plays and osu doesn't get 14pts...maybe 7-10 at best. then, no one's worrying about the D too much, as we most likely would have won.
anon - I agree with your general premise, although I think you're overstating (understating?) the percentages. However, when you can say, "it was a good call as the rule book is constructed," how much can you really blame the refs as opposed to the player? Just because that type of hit may not normally be called doesn't mean it shouldn't or never will be again.
matsut--
two things: the last tOSU drive was meaningless. They had 2 minutes and UM had not TOs. They could run out the clock or simply punt the ball into the endzone. the onside kick ended that game. if that makes the final TD cosmetic in your book, fine.
Also, this: "that Michigan was mostly trying to keep the game CLOSE, never really having an opportunity to WIN it." Michigan had the ball and a chance to tie in the 3rd q. and the ball and a chance to lead in the 4th. Without Crable's hit (a legit call but one that didn't actually impact the play), they get the ball again with a chance to lead. tOSU won this game straight up; they have the better team, but Michigan had opportunities to WIN, they just didn't take advantage. That's a reason they're not as good.
tOSU should take credit for a great year and a great win without having to rewrite the past.
Crable hit was a legit call but only for the reason it involved helmets and a QB. That WAS NOT a late hit and it WAS NOT out-of-bounds (if that was the basis of the call, I would be really pissed).
I find it amusing that OSU fans keep saying the game wasn't that close b/c of two OSU "unforced" turnovers. First, that's a mistake by OSU. Second, OSU trumpeted its defense all year because they caused so many TOs. Do they now say the OSU defense sucked and got lucky only b/c so many teams committed unforced errors against them? Of course not.
Bottom line, it was a 3 pt game in the 4th and Michigan had a chance to get a stop and get the ball back with plenty of time to go ahead. That makes it a close game. OSU deserved to win but it was a close game.
OT: Can I think that UCLA has a chance to beat USC this weekend? (I have been out of the loop for a couple weeks)
peter....nope
I believe in the UCLA Bruins ;)
Hey - USC lost against Oregon State 33-31, while UCLA beat them 25-7. Two weeks ago, UCLA handled Arizona State 24-12 on the road, while USC struggled to pull out a 28-21 victory at home against the Sun Devils. To me, it appears that UCLA has a stronger defense, they're on a roll, they're at home, and it's a rivalry game. USC has been overrated all season long, and, although I'm not going to get my hopes up too much, I definitely think there is a chance for an upset. Booty is young, and makes mistakes. UCLA's defense will keep them in the game, and if the offense can move the ball, it should be a tight game.
I don't exactly see how claiming the Crable call was correct but a symptom of creeping wussyism is exactly creating a myth. If you would like something crystal clear: it was the right call.
Mike: the disorganization wasn't really disorganization. We were flipping our formations whenever a TE went in motion. So the safeties would switch, the linebackers, and the DTs.
Maize&Smeef: I don't think it'll be that bad. The DL should be good with Taylor, Johnson, and (maybe) Branch plus Jamison and Germany/Graham/whoever at DE. Someone will probably emerge at LB. Johnny Thompson? Corner is bothersome and safety iffy. But I don't think it'll implode. As good? No.
matsut: i didn't chart the last possession because with 2:20 left and no Michigan timeouts all they had to do was kneel down. 25 * 4 = 100 seconds. Add 30 seconds for resetting the ball = 130. Add ten seconds for slight delay in kneels == game over. Just because Tressel doesn't understand how the clock works doesn't mean I don't.
Hey - USC lost against Oregon State 33-31, while UCLA beat them 25-7. Two weeks ago, UCLA handled Arizona State 24-12 on the road, while USC struggled to pull out a 28-21 victory at home against the Sun Devils.
*********************************
Yeah but ND beat UCLA on a last second score while USC pummeled em............
the UCLA-USC rivalry is on par with the UM-MSU rivalry..ie, UCLA only has a chance because everyone qualifies the game as a rivalry game.
UCLA has a chance because...rivalry
USC has a chance because.... of every other reason imaginable
Am I crazy, or is there no such rule as "helmet to helmet" in college? I think that's a pro rule that is being used here incorrectly. I believe the call was late-hit on Crable. Live, it seemed to be severely aided by the crowd... hit occured, both went out of bounds, crowd moans and then the flag.
Either way, I don't believe there is such a thing as a helmet to helmet hitting foul in college, although there is a "leading with the helmet".
Could be wrong. Go blue.
Jeremy: That is exactly my point.
Brian: That's what I figured you'd say about the last possession, and you're right. Still, just thought I'd ask.
To those of you that didn't comprehend what I wrote, I never said the game wasn't close, or that the two unforced TOs somehow made that closeness illegitimate. I also never said that UM was "muddling along" - I was scared to death the whole second half that eventually you guys would get the stop that you really, REALLY needed and then break off another scary easy drive like you did at the start of the game/2nd half. The fact that you did have the ball once w/ a chance to tie and then again later w/ a chance to lead is why I said that the Wolverines were "MOSTLY" trying to keep it close; there were basically two instances where a better series on either side of the ball for you guys would have changed that narrative - and those series were the difference between the teams. Actually three - the fourth OSU touchdown, after we took the ball on our 20 with just 2:33 left in the first half, was a killer for you guys. No question you guys came out very strong in the 2nd half, though, which was impressive; that kind of thing would have been pretty much a coffin nail for almost anybody else. All that said, 14 points was still one hell of a hole to climb out of.
I hope that makes it clearer. You won't catch me saying it wasn't a near thing.
We all know what the refs do when somebody even lays a finger on the QB, it just get wrose when helmets are involved, and with guys like that asshole Musberger calling everyhit on the QB a late HtoH hit things are getting out of hand. Dang, did you guys remember the OSU-Texas game this year, somebody form the Bucks dline nailed McCoy, but the refs called it HtoH and thats how Texas got their first TD. It was a piss poor call, but thats how it is and Crable could have done something about it, running QB, close to sidelines possibility for a late or OOB hit, game on the line.
You also have to play smart once in a while. I am not condoning the officials but Crable could have done different.
anybody see the uncalled helmet-to-helmet (or leading-with-helmet, or whatever but whatever it was, it was much worse than anything crable did) shot late in the USC-UCLA game?
Not sure if you mentioned this or not, but in the second half we burned two TOs (one on offense, one on defense) on 1st and 10s. The offense one was immediately after a punt! Especially with the rule changes, you just can't potentially sacrifice an extra possession like that. Again, not that things would have changed....also, in the USC/UCLA game the hit that rocked the UCLA QB in the late stages was WAY more severe than the Crable hit. Nobody says anything.....
Commenting by HaloScan
