1OSUNUT and OSU fans- I have a serious question for you (no flame actually serious)

[FLex500]

From Ohio state fans in general and in your posts I see a lot of sentiment like this when it comes to michigan...

"Maybe Michigan is worse then we thought - and Indiana is still just Indiana."

you have endless quotes like this about how michigan hasn't played anybody, their not good and they are not "what we thought they were". Listening to 97.1 the fan in columbus everyday they go on and on about how they don't believe michigan is what we think they are.

This is what we think UM is though...

UM is a 3-9 team in 2008 projected to go anywhere from 3-9 to at best 7-5 this year from the "experts". They have a defensive lacking talent, a mediocre offensive line, inexperience at WR and a freshman qb.Sure, sure their are a few, a very small minority of rogue fans calling for a 12-0 or 10-2 season. BUT literally 99.999% of fans are/were thinking 5-7 to 8-4. Most like me thinking 6-6 or so.

The question is...

What did you OSU fans think michigan was? And if it is the same as us and we are all thinking the same you really don't think UM is a 5-7 to 8-4 team?

[NorCal Buckeye]

From Ohio state fans in general and in your posts I see a lot of sentiment like this when it comes to michigan...

"Maybe Michigan is worse then we thought - and Indiana is still just Indiana."

you have endless quotes like this about how michigan hasn't played anybody, their not good and they are not "what we thought they were". Listening to 97.1 the fan in columbus everyday they go on and on about how they don't believe michigan is what we think they are.

This is what we think UM is though...

UM is a 3-9 team in 2008 projected to go anywhere from 3-9 to at best 7-5 this year from the "experts". They have a defensive lacking talent, a mediocre offensive line, inexperience at WR and a freshman qb.Sure, sure their are a few, a very small minority of rogue fans calling for a 12-0 or 10-2 season. BUT literally 99.999% of fans are/were thinking 5-7 to 8-4. Most like me thinking 6-6 or so.

The question is...

What did you OSU fans think michigan was? And if it is the same as us and we are all thinking the same you really don't think UM is a 5-7 to 8-4 team?

Before the emergence of Forcier, I projected M as being 6-6 at best. I thought there was a real danger of another 3-9 disaster if the QB problem wasn't fixed.

I'm not buying into all of the excuses about this team. They should not have lost to MSU. This is a 10-2 team with proper coaching and proper motivation. From what I have seen so far, the problem is with the defense fundamentals, i.e. sure tackling. It isn't the schemes. They just don't lock up and throw down like they should. Who do you blame for that? The kids are highly rated, recruited blue chip prospects that you people were buzzing about when you were getting them. English, Schafer, and now Robinson are all highly rated defensive coaches with good credentials. What is the disconnect here?

Nobody is going to tell me WI, IA, and certainly not MSU has better football players than you. They don't. Yet MSU already stole a win from you, and most of you Blue people are ready to roll over like dogs and give it up to inferior WI and IA teams too. I just can't believe all the "white flag" posts I see on this board. Excuses, excuses, and more excuses. And what do you think all of this "next year" and "when we get our players" baloney does for your current team? It tells them nobody believes! Nobody has faith in them!
They can't get it done! God, we wish you weren't even here so we could get some real football players! Some support these kids have from you people.

I got a hot tip for you. Address the concern and frustration where it should go. Where the buck really stops, the head coach's office. He is the man responsible for what is happening on the field. Don't cover his ass by blaming the kids. They deserve better from you, the fans. Enough said.:confused:

[Rockie]

Before the emergence of Forcier, I projected M as being 6-6 at best. I thought there was a real danger of another 3-9 disaster if the QB problem wasn't fixed.

I'm not buying into all of the excuses about this team. They should not have lost to MSU. This is a 10-2 team with proper coaching and proper motivation. From what I have seen so far, the problem is with the defense fundamentals, i.e. sure tackling. It isn't the schemes. They just don't lock up and throw down like they should. Who do you blame for that? The kids are highly rated, recruited blue chip prospects that you people were buzzing about when you were getting them. English, Schafer, and now Robinson are all highly rated defensive coaches with good credentials. What is the disconnect here?

Nobody is going to tell me WI, IA, and certainly not MSU has better football players than you. They don't. Yet MSU already stole a win from you, and most of you Blue people are ready to roll over like dogs and give it up to inferior WI and IA teams too. I just can't believe all the "white flag" posts I see on this board. Excuses, excuses, and more excuses. And what do you think all of this "next year" and "when we get our players" baloney does for your current team? It tells them nobody believes! Nobody has faith in them!
They can't get it done! God, we wish you weren't even here so we could get some real football players! Some support these kids have from you people.

I got a hot tip for you. Address the concern and frustration where it should go. Where the buck really stops, the head coach's office. He is the man responsible for what is happening on the field. Don't cover his ass by blaming the kids. They deserve better from you, the fans. Enough said.:confused:
See this is where your not knowledgeable about Michigan because nine guys transfered on the d, out of 16 recruites, before RR got here. I'll give you hiring Shafer as a DC last year on RR as a negitive, but in all honesty, in the hiring of Robinson, than you would have to give RR an A for this one, because in all honesty, Robinson is probably the best DC since Mattison and he is at Florida right now. I'm not making excuses, I'm giving you facts and the fact of the matter is, this team never was a 10-2 team, it is an 8-4 team and a Outback Bowl team

[NorCal Buckeye]

See this is where your not knowledgeable about Michigan because nine guys transfered on the d, out of 16 recruites, before RR got here. I'll give you hiring Shafer as a DC last year on RR as a negitive, but in all honesty, in the hiring of Robinson, than you would have to give RR an A for this one, because in all honesty, Robinson is probably the best DC since Mattison and he is at Florida right now. I'm not making excuses, I'm giving you facts and the fact of the matter is, this team never was a 10-2 team, it is an 8-4 team and a Outback Bowl team

Thanks for the info, now finish my education...why did so many defensive players transfer out?:confused:

[The Michigan Man]

Before the emergence of Forcier, I projected M as being 6-6 at best. I thought there was a real danger of another 3-9 disaster if the QB problem wasn't fixed.

I'm not buying into all of the excuses about this team. They should not have lost to MSU. This is a 10-2 team with proper coaching and proper motivation. From what I have seen so far, the problem is with the defense fundamentals, i.e. sure tackling. It isn't the schemes. They just don't lock up and throw down like they should. Who do you blame for that? The kids are highly rated, recruited blue chip prospects that you people were buzzing about when you were getting them. English, Schafer, and now Robinson are all highly rated defensive coaches with good credentials. What is the disconnect here?

Nobody is going to tell me WI, IA, and certainly not MSU has better football players than you. They don't. Yet MSU already stole a win from you, and most of you Blue people are ready to roll over like dogs and give it up to inferior WI and IA teams too. I just can't believe all the "white flag" posts I see on this board. Excuses, excuses, and more excuses. And what do you think all of this "next year" and "when we get our players" baloney does for your current team? It tells them nobody believes! Nobody has faith in them!
They can't get it done! God, we wish you weren't even here so we could get some real football players! Some support these kids have from you people.

I got a hot tip for you. Address the concern and frustration where it should go. Where the buck really stops, the head coach's office. He is the man responsible for what is happening on the field. Don't cover his ass by blaming the kids. They deserve better from you, the fans. Enough said.:confused:

You've posted on this same topic over and over. Just because a player has a lot of stars at recruitment doesn't mean that player will be a great player, and furthermore, it doesn't mean that he will be a good fit for the system. Can you interchange Ryan Mallet and Tate Forcier and have the same results? Teams are built with players appropriate for the offense. That is why Michigan had such a God awful record last year - sure, all of the kids are talented, but most were recruited for a different system, and those that could be "salvaged" had no experience with the system.

You are just oversimplifying everything. Yeah, there are talented kids playing for Michigan, but the Jrs and Srs are all playing in a system that they just learned last year (offense) or this year (defense). That is totally different than a Jr or Sr who hung out for a few years and learned the system throroughly before they actually started.

RR is a great coach, but all he can do is prepare them and give them a good game plan, it is up to the players to make good decisions and execute. And whether you like it or not, the more of RR's recruits that are playing for him, the better this team is going to look. It isn't making excuses, it is the reality of the the drastic regime change that Michigan had in going from Carr to RR.

[Bossgobbler23]

You've posted on this same topic over and over. Just because a player has a lot of stars at recruitment doesn't mean that player will be a great player, and furthermore, it doesn't mean that he will be a good fit for the system. Can you interchange Ryan Mallet and Tate Forcier and have the same results? Teams are built with players appropriate for the offense. That is why Michigan had such a God awful record last year - sure, all of the kids are talented, but most were recruited for a different system, and those that could be "salvaged" had no experience with the system.

You are just oversimplifying everything. Yeah, there are talented kids playing for Michigan, but the Jrs and Srs are all playing in a system that they just learned last year (offense) or this year (defense). That is totally different than a Jr or Sr who hung out for a few years and learned the system throroughly before they actually started.

RR is a great coach, but all he can do is prepare them and give them a good game plan, it is up to the players to make good decisions and execute. And whether you like it or not, the more of RR's recruits that are playing for him, the better this team is going to look. It isn't making excuses, it is the reality of the the drastic regime change that Michigan had in going from Carr to RR.

You are right on the money MM. Just like the offense that took a year to learn, and is still being taught, the D is no different. We have a young team. Cal Buck is way off base thinking freshmen are going to come in and play like seniors. U-M is a very young team. We all saw what one year under the RR system can do. Give the guy a little time to take care of both sides of the ball. U-M will upset a giant this year. Next year it will not be considered an upset. If anyone's coach should take heat it's tOSU's. Though a good coach, he consistently does less with more. tOSU could be so much more if they ran a spread. With all that talent the Bucks have, Les Miles, Urban Meyer or Mack Brown would not only beat inexperienced ranked opponents at home, they'd win NC's.

[1OSUNUT]

Here is what I thought about Michigan in the preseason. I said it before the year started and got grilled by some of the morons on this site.


I thought Michigan would be a 5 or six win team. I based that on a freshman QB and a questionable defense. I was told to pound salt (and other things) because Robinson would fix the defense and Tate was the second coming.

I thought Tate would be a upgrade over last year because the QB play was so bad - and he has been. He is much better then I thought - but the tough teams are now coming up. I don't happen to like the fact Michigan is going with lighter / quicker offensive linemen. I thought that they would have problems against the bigger Big Ten teams - I was told that while Michigan would be firing off our fat asses would be tired. Michigan seemed to have trouble with the MSU linemen - and better ones are coming up on the schedule. Tate has played well - but he is going to still make some major mistakes like you saw this weekend.

The biggest reason why I thought Michigan would struggle is the defense. The last few years Michigan has had incredible trouble making tackles in space and putting pressure on the opponent just using the linemen. I know the new hire was supposed to fix this but I saw a lot of missed tackles on the BTN special on Michigan. The Wolverines played well in week one - but as we found out Western was not very good. Now the missed tackles and mistakes are showing up.

Overall I think Michigan has won a few games that many of us (me included) thought that thgey would lose. I think that they are going to be a 6 or 7 game winner this year - based on the first 5 games. They have had better players then all the teams that they have played so far - that will not be the case in upcoming weeks - and many of those will be on the road. The size of the upcoming teams and the crowds are going to be a problem for this young team. I would also be concerned about Tate taking hits. I'm not sure how durable he will be the second half of the season.

They are improved in some areas and the same or worse in others. Untill RR pays serious attention to the defense you will see teams go on long scoring drives that wears out the defense and keeps Tate on the sideline.

[NorCal Buckeye]

You are right on the money MM. Just like the offense that took a year to learn, and is still being taught, the D is no different. We have a young team. Cal Buck is way off base thinking freshmen are going to come in and play like seniors. U-M is a very young team. We all saw what one year under the RR system can do. Give the guy a little time to take care of both sides of the ball. U-M will upset a giant this year. Next year it will not be considered an upset. If anyone's coach should take heat it's tOSU's. Though a good coach, he consistantly does less with more. tOSU could be so much more if they ran a spread. With all that talent the Bucks have, Les Miles, Urban Meyer or Mack Brown would not only beat inexperienced ranked opponents at home, they'd win NC's.

You guys need to have a copy of your team depth chart in hand before continuing to blow smoke about this young team nonsense. It's not true, period. You have a few freshmen playing, yes. But MOST of your starters are upperclassmen (i.e. juniors and seniors).:eek:

[Bossgobbler23]

Here is what I thought about Michigan in the preseason. I said it before the year started and got grilled by some of the morons on this site.


I thought Michigan would be a 5 or six win team. I based that on a freshman QB and a questionable defense. I was told to pound salt (and other things) because Robinson would fix the defense and Tate was the second coming.

I thought Tate would be a upgrade over last year because the QB play was so bad - and he has been. He is much better then I thought - but the tough teams are now coming up. I don't happen to like the fact Michigan is going with lighter / quicker offensive linemen. I thought that they would have problems against the bigger Big Ten teams - I was told that while Michigan would be firing off our fat asses would be tired. Michigan seemed to have trouble with the MSU linemen - and better ones are coming up on the schedule. Tate has played well - but he is going to still make some major mistakes like you saw this weekend.

The biggest reason why I thought Michigan would struggle is the defense. The last few years Michigan has had incredible trouble making tackles in space and putting pressure on the opponent just using the linemen. I know the new hire was supposed to fix this but I saw a lot of missed tackles on the BTN special on Michigan. The Wolverines played well in week one - but as we found out Western was not very good. Now the missed tackles and mistakes are showing up.

Overall I think Michigan has won a few games that many of us (me included) thought that thgey would lose. I think that they are going to be a 6 or 7 game winner this year - based on the first 5 games. They have had better players then all the teams that they have played so far - that will not be the case in upcoming weeks - and many of those will be on the road. The size of the upcoming teams and the crowds are going to be a problem for this young team. I would also be concerned about Tate taking hits. I'm not sure how durable he will be the second half of the season.

They are improved in some areas and the same or worse in others. Untill RR pays serious attention to the defense you will see teams go on long scoring drives that wears out the defense and keeps Tate on the sideline.

I don't agree with all you say but for the most part I do. I think 7-8 wins as predicted in pre-season. I am concerned about Tate taking hits, and I think he is too and will avoid them better. The poor kid was gasping for air at the end of the game. We do have some tough road games coming up but I like that our home games are against the toughest conference teams. Truth is the team is young and is making mistakes that reflect such. They WILL improve on D.

[NorCal Buckeye]

You've posted on this same topic over and over. Just because a player has a lot of stars at recruitment doesn't mean that player will be a great player, and furthermore, it doesn't mean that he will be a good fit for the system. Can you interchange Ryan Mallet and Tate Forcier and have the same results? Teams are built with players appropriate for the offense. That is why Michigan had such a God awful record last year - sure, all of the kids are talented, but most were recruited for a different system, and those that could be "salvaged" had no experience with the system.

You are just oversimplifying everything. Yeah, there are talented kids playing for Michigan, but the Jrs and Srs are all playing in a system that they just learned last year (offense) or this year (defense). That is totally different than a Jr or Sr who hung out for a few years and learned the system throroughly before they actually started.

RR is a great coach, but all he can do is prepare them and give them a good game plan, it is up to the players to make good decisions and execute. And whether you like it or not, the more of RR's recruits that are playing for him, the better this team is going to look. It isn't making excuses, it is the reality of the the drastic regime change that Michigan had in going from Carr to RR.

Certainly you speak in hyperbole, "RR is a great coach"? Mentioned in the same breath as Bear Bryant, (ahem) Woody Hayes, Tom Osborne, Bud Wilkinson, etc?

It's not about schemes. It's about wrapping up and throwing down on defense, tackling. What is so hard about that? Why can't your guys do it well? Or at all? Did RR teams have the same problem at Glenville, and WVU? Where's our RR historian?

This board is full of posts long before I got here asking the question, what is wrong with the defense? I say it is coaching. Not enough time and/or attention is being spent on defensive fundamentals. What else could it be?:eek:

[The Michigan Man]

Certainly you speak in hyperbole, "RR is a great coach"? Mentioned in the same breath as Bear Bryant, (ahem) Woody Hayes, Tom Osborne, Bud Wilkinson, etc?

It's not about schemes. It's about wrapping up and throwing down on defense, tackling. What is so hard about that? Why can't your guys do it well? Or at all? Did RR teams have the same problem at Glenville, and WVU? Where's our RR historian?

This board is full of posts long before I got here asking the question, what is wrong with the defense? I say it is coaching. Not enough time and/or attention is being spent on defensive fundamentals. What else could it be?:eek:

Wow, "defensive fundamentals"! Holy shit, I bet no one on the Michigan staff thought of that! Does anyone have Robinson's phone #, I think we've solved our problem, teach the defense FUNDAMENTALS! Thank God you're here...

[NorCal Buckeye]

Wow, "defensive fundamentals"! Holy shit, I bet no one on the Michigan staff thought of that! Does anyone have Robinson's phone #, I think we've solved our problem, teach the defense FUNDAMENTALS! Thank God you're here...

I'm glad you are coming to appreciate my insight! Now, if you will provide Coach Robinson's telephone number to me I will give him a call about it!:D

[FLex500]

Here is what I thought about Michigan in the preseason. I said it before the year started and got grilled by some of the morons on this site.


I thought Michigan would be a 5 or six win team. I based that on a freshman QB and a questionable defense. I was told to pound salt (and other things) because Robinson would fix the defense and Tate was the second coming.

I thought Tate would be a upgrade over last year because the QB play was so bad - and he has been. He is much better then I thought - but the tough teams are now coming up. I don't happen to like the fact Michigan is going with lighter / quicker offensive linemen. I thought that they would have problems against the bigger Big Ten teams - I was told that while Michigan would be firing off our fat asses would be tired. Michigan seemed to have trouble with the MSU linemen - and better ones are coming up on the schedule. Tate has played well - but he is going to still make some major mistakes like you saw this weekend.

The biggest reason why I thought Michigan would struggle is the defense. The last few years Michigan has had incredible trouble making tackles in space and putting pressure on the opponent just using the linemen. I know the new hire was supposed to fix this but I saw a lot of missed tackles on the BTN special on Michigan. The Wolverines played well in week one - but as we found out Western was not very good. Now the missed tackles and mistakes are showing up.

Overall I think Michigan has won a few games that many of us (me included) thought that thgey would lose. I think that they are going to be a 6 or 7 game winner this year - based on the first 5 games. They have had better players then all the teams that they have played so far - that will not be the case in upcoming weeks - and many of those will be on the road. The size of the upcoming teams and the crowds are going to be a problem for this young team. I would also be concerned about Tate taking hits. I'm not sure how durable he will be the second half of the season.

They are improved in some areas and the same or worse in others. Untill RR pays serious attention to the defense you will see teams go on long scoring drives that wears out the defense and keeps Tate on the sideline.
well that is a fair assessment. You also have to realize you get sh*t because you are an osu fan...obviously. But when I look at the gambling website that I frequent...way to much as well as talking to other UM fans in real life I think most expected a 5-7 to 7-5 team.

I know I'm the forum pessimist so sorry UM fans if I am being that way. BUT you just have to look at this team objectively. There WILL be trials and tribulations this year. Some will end with us on the good side...some not so much. This is not a team ready for a 10-2 season. This is a (after seeing 5 games) 6-6 to 8-4 team.

[Wolvrin704]

You guys need to have a copy of your team depth chart in hand before continuing to blow smoke about this young team nonsense. It's not true, period. You have a few freshmen playing, yes. But MOST of your starters are upperclassmen (i.e. juniors and seniors).:eek:

Again, most of them are on the OL and defense. Most of the backups being rotated in are underclassmen and yet again the system is brand new or fairly new to all players. Not to mention that there is not a lot of experience on this team. Most of those who do have experience have most of it from last year and got very little while Carr was here. How much of our "veteran" upperclassmen OL had any starting experience prior to last year? Rome wasn't built in a day nor will the UM team.

I still think this team is a 7 - 9 win team just as I did in the preseason. No change in my mind on that as Tate has performed about as well as I thought along with the offense, and the defense actually just a bit worse than I thought as I said repeatedly that the DL and DB's were awfully thin and would be a problem. Nothing new there or unexpected.

[1OSUNUT]

Explain how the Ohio State freshman can come in and play so well ? Is the system and college game not new to them as well ? They were all playing high school ball last year - they had to learn a new system. I don't buy the reason Michigan is bad on defense is because they are learning - it does not hold water.

[Mich97c]

Explain how the Ohio State freshman can come in and play so well ? Is the system and college game not new to them as well ? They were all playing high school ball last year - they had to learn a new system. I don't by the reason Michigan is bad on defense is because they are learning - it does not hold water.

Probably because they're surrounded by experienced seniors and juniors so any mistakes are overshadowed. That and the coaches have had their system and practice regimes in place for years make the transition from high school to college much easier. It just takes time, we'll be okay.

[Swoosh]

You guys need to have a copy of your team depth chart in hand before continuing to blow smoke about this young team nonsense. It's not true, period. You have a few freshmen playing, yes. But MOST of your starters are upperclassmen (i.e. juniors and seniors).:eek:

Who were recruited for a differnet system:rolleyes:

[Swoosh]

Here is what I thought about Michigan in the preseason. I said it before the year started and got grilled by some of the morons on this site.


I thought Michigan would be a 5 or six win team. I based that on a freshman QB and a questionable defense. I was told to pound salt (and other things) because Robinson would fix the defense and Tate was the second coming.

I thought Tate would be a upgrade over last year because the QB play was so bad - and he has been. He is much better then I thought - but the tough teams are now coming up. I don't happen to like the fact Michigan is going with lighter / quicker offensive linemen. I thought that they would have problems against the bigger Big Ten teams - I was told that while Michigan would be firing off our fat asses would be tired. Michigan seemed to have trouble with the MSU linemen - and better ones are coming up on the schedule. Tate has played well - but he is going to still make some major mistakes like you saw this weekend.

The biggest reason why I thought Michigan would struggle is the defense. The last few years Michigan has had incredible trouble making tackles in space and putting pressure on the opponent just using the linemen. I know the new hire was supposed to fix this but I saw a lot of missed tackles on the BTN special on Michigan. The Wolverines played well in week one - but as we found out Western was not very good. Now the missed tackles and mistakes are showing up.

Overall I think Michigan has won a few games that many of us (me included) thought that thgey would lose. I think that they are going to be a 6 or 7 game winner this year - based on the first 5 games. They have had better players then all the teams that they have played so far - that will not be the case in upcoming weeks - and many of those will be on the road. The size of the upcoming teams and the crowds are going to be a problem for this young team. I would also be concerned about Tate taking hits. I'm not sure how durable he will be the second half of the season.

They are improved in some areas and the same or worse in others. Untill RR pays serious attention to the defense you will see teams go on long scoring drives that wears out the defense and keeps Tate on the sideline.

Go pound sand;)

[1OSUNUT]

I don't care what kind of system you run or what kind of system your trying to learn - you still have to tackle. Every defensive scheme has to be able to tackle - period. When the guy with the ball is in front of you - you hit him and wrap him up. Is it that hard to understand ? Missed tackles, bad angles, arm tackles and poor fundementals is all coaching. I find it funny because Ohio State has very few seniors on either side of the ball. They return almost the whole team on both sides next year - scary.

It does not matter what is in place already at Ohio State - because the kids have to learn it just like the Michigan players. I think the Tressel mentality is defense and special teams - then offense. RR is all offense with very little attention to defense and special teams. Maybe that worked for him in the Big East - it won't work in the Big Ten. This conference always has and always will be predicated on defense. There is a lot of variables that you have to deal with when you play in our conference - weather being a major one. The one thing that plays well home or away, good weather or bad is defense. With a good one you will always be in the game - RR does not understand that.

[amazinblue]

Missed tackles, bad angles, arm tackles and poor fundementals is all coaching.

Nut,

So - according to you - nothing in the game has anything to do with execution - for instance, choosing the right angle for pursuit? Or, on the offensive side of the ball - deciding whether to run or throw?

I'll agree that coaching is important - but, execution is up to the players - period. Coaches can't go onto the field during the game and make the tackle for a player. And, your comments about RR "ignoring" defense - well, they are as ignorant as you are...

[Silver Bullet]

I have no idea who is in the pipeline for Um so maybe somebody can help me here....but I get the feeling that RR's master plan is to outscore everyone and is recruiting as such. I don't see much in the way of quality on the defensive side of the ball for Um. I'm impressed by Graham but he's not RR's guy. I've been saying this for a while and I'm not flaming here but Um's defense is god-awful. Until there is a commitment made to that side of the ball Um isn't going challenge OSU for the B10 much less anyone else for the MNC. That was my concern for Um going into the season and the only reason my prediction was off was because of the way Forcier has been carrying the team. Another conern I had was O-line play. I saw a lot of bad snaps during the Indiana game but I can't remember any of those issues against Sparty. Has the O-line been doing well and is that a concern for anyone else?

[Bossgobbler23]

I have no idea who is in the pipeline for Um so maybe somebody can help me here....but I get the feeling that RR's master plan is to outscore everyone and is recruiting as such. I don't see much in the way of quality on the defensive side of the ball for Um. I'm impressed by Graham but he's not RR's guy. I've been saying this for a while and I'm not flaming here but Um's defense is god-awful. Until there is a commitment made to that side of the ball Um isn't going challenge OSU for the B10 much less anyone else for the MNC. That was my concern for Um going into the season and the only reason my prediction was off was because of the way Forcier has been carrying the team. Another conern I had was O-line play. I saw a lot of bad snaps during the Indiana game but I can't remember any of those issues against Sparty. Has the O-line been doing well and is that a cocern for anyone else?

Our Center broke his foot. They moved a O lineman over to center for the Indiana game. That's why the snap issues that week.

[Swoosh]

I have no idea

You had me right there:D

[Wolvrin704]

I have no idea who is in the pipeline for Um so maybe somebody can help me here....but I get the feeling that RR's master plan is to outscore everyone and is recruiting as such. I don't see much in the way of quality on the defensive side of the ball for Um. I'm impressed by Graham but he's not RR's guy. I've been saying this for a while and I'm not flaming here but Um's defense is god-awful. Until there is a commitment made to that side of the ball Um isn't going challenge OSU for the B10 much less anyone else for the MNC. That was my concern for Um going into the season and the only reason my prediction was off was because of the way Forcier has been carrying the team. Another conern I had was O-line play. I saw a lot of bad snaps during the Indiana game but I can't remember any of those issues against Sparty. Has the O-line been doing well and is that a concern for anyone else?

The plan isn't long term to outscore anyone but to get his offense working he has to recruit his type of players, which is and has been the priority. What they need are lots of speedy WR's and RB's and as history has shown a couple of QB's especially considering the amount of depth we had last year. The OL being recruited will also change as we go for more athletic guys instead of just mass. But OL have been recruited the last 2 years.

The D is and will become a priority from this point I believe. But its going to take time to get the guys we need. Its not like we're loaded 2 or 3 guys deep on D, we're excessively thin there. The DL is not very experienced outside Graham and is thin on top of that. The LB's are both young and experienced but overall not as athletic or fast as we need. The DB's are a huge concern especially the safeties, but with very little pressure on the QB these guys are being exposed.