A comment worth noting from formerly-coveted former UM recruit EWthan Johnson, regarding his decision to snub the Wolverines for the hallowed halls of the University of Notre Dame du Lac:
"'If you're killing on the football field but none of your football players are graduating, why do I want to go to that school?" said Johnson, who for the past two summers interned at the Portland law firm Stahancyk, Kent, Johnson & Hook. 'It's a school. You go 'cause you want to get an education first.'
At Michigan, he found out there was one other player in the business program.
'And he was the punter,' Johnson said, laughing. 'Is there anything else I can say about that?'"
Thanks to Tim for that completely off-topic post. Take it over to BGS next time, alrighty?
Anyhow, I am against two pre-season polls. The first one is a really "raw" assessment by the voters, who, in theory, are giving their own opinions on where teams should be ranked, whereas I think there would be a tendency for the voters to "fall into line" the second time around, and also be more influence by other polls, previews, etc, as pre-season hoopla ramps up.
I vote for sticking to one pre-season poll - it's kind of the same theory of going with your first guess when you're not sure of something. The second guess is almost always wrong.
I vote we go back in time and just do one poll.
The second poll ended up -
Looking a lot like the first, and,
Looking a lot like the AP.
I think the Blogpoll voters will do their best work in the coming weeks as the actual games unfold. Unlike the national polls, college bloggers are likely to pay more actual attention to the games being played.
Hopefully.
The only Notre Dame grad I know manages an Applebees.
Yeah, that. I knew a lot of people at Michigan who had 4.0 GPA but were denied admission to the business school. So kudos to the punter.
The only Notre Dame grad I know manages an Applebees.
A team of University of Michigan chefs taught Applebees how to make jalapeno poppers in 1897.
Holy crap, I can't wait for week three.
Tim McCarthy - Don't be that guy. No one likes a troll.
Thanks, Pat. Maybe you can also explain to Tim how ND guarantees athletes admission to its business school while Michigan doesn't.
Maybe that's "something else" Ethan Johnson could have said about that.
Timmy,
He's not just "the punter". He's Zoltan, and he's going to pin you deep in your end, assuming your defense can force a punt.
ben, that is the funniest thing i've read today. i'd like to thank tim for citing a specific reason to NOT respect the ND B school. at least when compared to UMs, the wharton, etc. ahhhhh, sweet irony...thy name is timmmmmmaaaaaaahh.
I'd also like to note that I spent a year living in Fort Wayne and working as an engineer at a place that employed about 1000 people, at least 500 of which were engineers. Fort Wayne is 85 miles from south bend. I didn't meet one person that went to Notre Dame. Plenty of Michigan, Purdue, OSU, and even Sparty grads. No Domers. I found that to be quite odd.
Does Notre Dame have an engineering school?
ND has an engineering school, but it's very small (about 800 students total across 8 majors). ND's b-school is big (about 2200 students) and most of them are undergrads (1552). Given an undergraduate enrollment of about 8400, that means that close to 20% of them are in the b-school. I'm guessing ND and Michigan have very different standards as far as admission to their respective undergrad biz programs, as Ross undergrad only has about 730 students.
let me rephrase one part (which I feel like some ND schlub would key on). rather than saying ND and UM have different admissions standards, it's more likely that the schools just have different philosophies in admissions. key indicator is student faculty ratio: 5.7 at Michigan, 16.8 at ND. i'm sure they're not that far apart in terms of quality of education (BW has UM #5 and ND #7), but UM does seem to be a little more exclusive.
So, is Ross Grad school possible to get in to or what?
Ross apparently recently allowed high school seniors to apply to Ross for guaranteed admission their sophomore years (although i assume they must maintain some sort of academic standards freshman year). of the 900+ that applied, Ross accepted 65. Couldn't tell you about ND.
I went to Ross back in 1980 and had to apply during my sophomore year to get into the BBA program. There were also some course prerequisites in Accounting and Economics which had to be completed. Obviously, I had to have a strong undergraduate academic record as well.
I have heard about the early application process at Ross, but don't know a lot of the details.
Notre Dame's Mendoza School of Business is different. After completing freshman year studies, an ND undergraduate can get into the school fairly readily. Its a whole different admission standard, and I'm sure its one that ND is outlining to their recruits (such as Sam Young).
For the record, things haven't changed much. There was only one football player in my BBA class of 1982. He played special teams--not a starter, FWIW.
Does anyone else skip all the blogpoll entries. I love reading Brian's take on most things, but who cares about this?
A poll done solely for fun and one that has no consequences or bearing on anything real is not particularly interesting to those not involved in the project.
If the OSU preview (which was excellent, btw) was still on top of the blog, it would generate more discussion in the comments section.
i, as a non-blogpoller like the blogpoll entries and appreciate them. you do know the impetus behind the blogpoll concept, right? it's not just the poll itself, it's the discussion around how everyone got to where they are. it's interesting because it's a transparent process (unlike SOME polls out there). we can try our darnedest to convince brian that he's a fool for ranking Iowa #2; or T Kyle King that Michigan really shouldn't be #1 in his preseason blogpoll. this is one of the few areas where we, the commenters, ARE involved.
and to your own point, the osu preview has no bearing on anything real and it's not exactly like any of us readers were involved in the process of putting it together.
+1 BRCE.. I say "damn" whenever I see "Blogpoll" as the title of a post. You just put it eloquently what I've been thinking.
Speaking of polls and predictions...
http://www.freep.com/apps/
pbcs.d...eme=COLLEGEFB07
Gee, big surprise there, eh, that Mr. Sharp is negative AGAIN about the Wolverines?
9-3? 10-2, maybe...but 9-3?
What an asshat.
Calling Sharp an asshat in an insult to asshats everywhere.
The problem is I agree with the 9-3, and that's very unpalatable company to have.
I don't know how you can predict 9-3. Explain that one, Don.
BRCE -
Never underestimate the ability of a Michigan team to lose games they shouldn't in bizarre and unpredictable ways. I'm not saying I agree we'll go 9-3, but any UM fan worth his salt would also have to admit it wouldn't be shocking either.
For example, in 2003 IMO we should have been undefeated going into the Rose Bowl (where we deservedly lost to USC), but we decide to try a "wacky" new punt formation that loses us 2 games. That and Navarre kept throwing to the redshirt freshman Tacopants at Oregon. Senior QB? Check. Senior TB? Check. Dominant WR? check. Record? 10-3.
Boccher fired? Check. New OC? Check. New DC? Check. All new players? Check. Different opponents? Check. Different year? Check.
Why 9-3? History, this season's team and opponents, and coaching. And a pessimism borne of a few too many heart-breaking, mind-boggling Michigan losses over the past 38 seasons.
From a historical standpoint, it's not as though losing three games in a season is unheard of: in 19 seasons starting with '69, we've got 3 or more losses, including bowls. That's 50%.
In 9 out of Carr's 12 seasons as HC, Michigan has lost 3 or more games, including bowl games. That's 75%. In 7 of those seasons, we lost 3 games during the regular season itself. That's 58%.
As far as "we're so much better than everyone else we play so how can we lose 3 games" goes, in the Carr era we've got 20 regular season losses to teams ranked 19th or worse, including 10 losses to teams not ranked at all. So losing to teams that the polls say are inferior to Michigan is not unknown at all.
As far as this year's team goes, I'm skeptical that a defense losing Hall, Harris, Woodley, and Branch is going to be nearly as good. And as good as the D was last year, the last two games were very reminiscent of the defenses in the late 90s and early 2000s that gave up lots of points, especially at crunch time, and sabotaged pretty potent offensive units. Sure, there's all kinds of happy talk about the replacements, but at this point none of them have truly proven on the field—yet—that they will be equally effective defensive successors. And while the offense seems to be loaded, the right side of the line is a work in progress, we've got a center who's never snapped a ball in game action, TE is a bit of a question mark, and we're pretty thin at RB. I bow down to MM, but what has Arrington proven yet? He's got far more notoriety for off-the-field stuff than game achievements.
So who are we going to lose to? Right now I'm picking Wisconsin, primarily because it's a night game on the road in front of 80000 drunken cheese-soaked knuckleheads screaming their lungs out on behalf of a pretty competitive team. I'm saying we're going to lose to OSU, in part because I think Tressel does a better job than Carr of developing strategies to aggressively take advantage of an opponent's weaknesses. I expect OSU to have a markedly better kicking game and special teams play than Michigan; ST have historically played a big role in M-OSU games. And I think we're going to lose one other game to either ND, OR, PSU, or MSU, not because I think those teams are better than us but because there's ample precedent for losing such a seemingly-can't miss contest.
From a coaching standpoint, I think we're unfortunately hobbled by a bit of arrogance, risk-aversion, a slowness to learn and adapt, and a seeming refusal to ever consider that sometimes strategic changes are necessary when facing teams with equal or superior talent. Carr is an innately cautious and deliberate guy; we rarely do anything particular to aggressively set the tempo offensively or defensively. Think of all the
I'm with Don. These days I go into the season expecting 9-3 and hope to be surprised rather than the reverse.
Don, I agree with much of what you said, except that Arrington is a question mark. He stepped up pretty big when Manningham was hurt last year, and I have no doubt he is the best second WR in the Big Ten, and one of the better second WRs in all of college football.
Other than that though, I can see your nervousness. I don't necessarily share all of it (despite being a Red Sox fan, a Michigan fan and a BU hockey fan, I'm an optimist at heart), but I can absolutely see where it comes from, and none of that would shock me.
I generally agree with Don, except about Arrington. Both in the games when MM was out and in the OSU game, he proved his talent on the field. Check out the post he ran against Penn State for a TD if it's still available on the UFR if you forget.
Our special teams terrifies me. I keep having visions of 2003.
Don hit it right on the head. Couldn't agree more. I don't think they will lose 3 but its entirely possible. I think coaching philosophy creates an artificial ceiling on the team every year.
Also, did anyone see Angelique C. (not even going to try spelling it) picked them to go unbeaten?
1) i don't mind the blogpoll, but there have been 75 posts on it in 2 weeks, which is a bit much, imo. i think the poll services the bloggers more than the rest of us, which is probably the intention.
2) look, are we a better team than anyone else on the schedule? yea. but, that's on paper. does that mean we should go undefeated? ummmm no. statistically, the odds of 12-0 are miniscule even if you put every individual game between a 90-99% chance of a win. i'd bet on 10-2 (7-1), big ten title (at least a share anyway), RB birth. +/- 1 W is not out of the question obviously.
in the past the def'n of success was simple: B10 title. it was simple then b/c a B10 title == RB birth == win over OSU back then. success was a neat package that included all 3 of these happenings. they came as a set. now, it's a little confusing, with 2 teams being off the schedule, ties, BCS berths/RB births w/o winning the B10. i've said this before, but 06 was litterally an 'on the fence' year. no B10 title, but still got the BCS game.
successfull year: Big ten title, or no title + BCS win
fence: BCS birth(loss), no title
pain: no BCS birth, no title.
I think the senior leadership on this team is vastly superior to the senior leadership on the 2003 team.
How come my password doesn't work? Can I get it reset before the season starts.
Commenting by HaloScan
