Two missed calls ... yes, missed calls ... hurt Michigan, but are not why it lost
Roy Roundtree reaches for the Denard Robinson's pass in the end zone, but comes up short on the last play of the game while covered by B.J. Lowery.
Melanie Maxwell | AnnArbor.com
IOWA CITY, Iowa — Let's just get it out of the way, shall we?
Michigan receiver Junior Hemingway made a catch in the back of the end zone to set up a potentially game-tying two-point conversion attempt with less than 10 seconds left against Iowa.
The Wolverines never got that chance, though, as the officials — one of whom initially indicated touchdown, another incomplete pass — ruled Hemingway landed out of bounds. They reviewed the play in the booth, but did not overturn the call, despite replays indicating Hemingway indeed was in-bounds.
The video wasn't conclusive enough to overturn the call — the play was so close, the initial ruling would have stood upon replay whether the call was incomplete pass or touchdown — so the verdict is unsurprising. But, there's not much doubt where Hemingway landed.
"I caught that 1 no If ands or buts about it!!!!" he tweeted minutes after the game.
Even Iowa cornerback Micah Hyde, who was defending Hemingway on the play, seemingly agreed.
"I thought he made a good play, but the review says otherwise," Hyde said.
Despite the missed call, Michigan still had two shots at the end zone from Iowa's 3-yard line. And, after an incomplete pass, it lined up for a conclusive fourth-down play.
This time, quarterback Denard Robinson went to Roy Roundtree, who already caught a game-winning touchdown pass this year against Notre Dame. This time, he dropped the ball on a quick slant, but was interfered with in the end zone. Right?
Officials didn't see it that way, though, and the Hawkeyes rushed the field with their hands raised as Michigan's Big Ten title hopes dropped in a 24-16 loss Saturday in Iowa City.
This game, though, was lost long before two missed calls. Michigan coach Brady Hoke didn't make excuses after the game, opening his postgame news conference simply: "That's why you have to play 60 minutes of football."
The Wolverines (7-2, 3-2) didn't.
Yet, it will be those dramatic final moments that will sting the most.
Hoke fell short of criticizing the officiating, but left little to the imagination.
When asked multiple times whether Hemingway was in-bounds, Hoke would only say, "I don't have a great seat, but I know one (official) in the back thought he did, and the other guy thought he didn’t."
Hoke was asked if he was surprised that pass interference wasn't called on the last play, on which replays show a defender with his arm draped around Roundtree.
Hoke responded, "Were you?"
"Well, yeah, I was," the reporter said.
Hoke just nodded his head.
Those two calls stalled an otherwise efficient final drive from a set of plays Michigan calls "NASCAR." It went 79 yards in 14 plays and just more than 2 minutes, and it gave the Wolverines four shots at the end zone from Iowa's 3-yard line.
But it was the moments that led up to that final drive that necessitated it in the first place — and, judging from how poorly Michigan played, it was lucky to be even in that position.
The Wolverines opened the first half by allowing their third first-drive touchdown in as many weeks, then closed it with consecutive Robinson turnovers. An interception stalled a drive at the goal line and a fumble turned into three Iowa points.
There were missed tackles and missed assignments. The freshmen linebackers played like freshmen linebackers.
Michigan fell behind 24-9 in the fourth quarter on a 13-yard run by Iowa's Marcus Coker, and failed to slow the tailback for much of the day — despite knowing it was coming. Coker rushed 32 times last week for 252 yards.
Against the Wolverines, he had 29 carries for 132 yards, chunks of which came on more edge containment issues by Michigan. Coker was a known commodity, and edge containment was a known bugaboo. Yet, the Wolverines were helpless.
On offense, Michigan was punchless for much of the game. It finished with 323 yards, which outgains only Tennessee Tech among Iowa opponents this year.
That sounds bad. It's worse when listing those other offenses: Iowa State, Louisiana-Monroe, Minnesota, Indiana, Northwestern, Penn State and Pitt all outgained the Wolverines. That's not optimal.
The talk over the next few days will be about those final, gut-wrenching plays, calls and noncalls. There's no doubt Michigan came up on the short end there, and will have this team asking "What if?"
But there's no doubt it put itself in that situation.
That's the biggest "What if?" of all.
Kyle Meinke covers Michigan football for AnnArbor.com. He can be reached at 734-623-2588, by email at kylemeinke@annarbor.com and followed on Twitter @kmeinke.
Comments
Joseph Brando
Mon, Nov 7, 2011 : 3:21 a.m.
You can blame the high winds.... You can blame unnecessary roughness.... You can blame the referees...... but the bottom-line is UM has an unbelievably-fast tailback running their offense when it needs a QB managing the game, making timely decisions, whose timing and touch of the ball is of a legit qb. Please don't get lost in the video game numbers and results that we put up against Western, Eastern, Purdue, and etc, as it is not inline with our expectations of winning a championship.
mt
Mon, Nov 7, 2011 : 12:56 a.m.
Right Steve. It also means the replay ref did not see evidence that the ball was not trapped. Otherwise he would have overturned it. If the call had gone the other way, you can bet the Iowa fans would have felt like they got jobbed. As they celebrated when stuffed the two point conversion.
OTOH
Mon, Nov 7, 2011 : 1:19 a.m.
Doesn't matter Kyle, your logic is faulty and your headline is silly. You suggest that it is wrong to whine and then you whine. The replay ref reviewed the call and saw the same thing everyone else did. The receiver did not maintain possession of the ball to make it a completion. The ball was trapped. Whether or not an Iowa fan "would have felt like they got jobbed" is insignificant.
OTOH
Mon, Nov 7, 2011 : 1:19 a.m.
Doesn't matter Kyle, your logic is faulty and your headline is silly. You suggest that it is wrong to whine and then you whine. The replay ref reviewed the call and saw the same thing everyone else did. The receiver did not maintain possession of the ball to make it a completion. The ball was trapped. Whether or not an Iowa fan "would have felt like they got jobbed" is insignificant.
OTOH
Mon, Nov 7, 2011 : 1:17 a.m.
Doesn't matter Kyle, your logic is faulty and your headline is silly. You suggest that it is wrong to whine and then you whine. The replay ref reviewed the call and saw the same thing everyone else did. The receiver did not maintain possession of the ball to make it a completion. The ball was trapped. Whether or not an Iowa fan "would have felt like they got jobbed" is insignificant.
OTOH
Sun, Nov 6, 2011 : 5:53 p.m.
Kyle, you're headline suggests a mature synopsis of the game, "Two missed calls ... yes, missed calls ... hurt Michigan, but are not why it lost" Instead we get half of your analysis whining about the calls. You do a disservice to Michigan fans everywhere because they will now take your comments to work and live up to the perception that Michigan fans are poor losers. The end zone in-completion was clearly too close to call and thus couldn't be overturned. The play was rewound several times and the officials made the right call. Michigan played poorly against a non ranked opponent. Do us a favor and address Michigan's problems without the obligatory whine.
Matt Cooper
Sun, Nov 6, 2011 : 6:02 p.m.
Too close to call? Hmmm. If the receiver catches the ball and his knee is down before his body goes out of bounds, it's a good catch. Doesn't matter where the ball is when the knee touches the ground provided he has posession, which he did. He could be holding the ball in one hand in the air over the plane of the back of the end zone and it's still a good catch provided he has posession and his knee comes down in bounds, which it did.. Only thing that they need to look at is did the receiver make the catch and maintain posession, which he clearly did, and did his knee come down inbounds before any other part of his body touched ground out of bounds, which again is clearly what happened. To me it's a good catch, and one of the deciding factors. Blown call, plain and simple. Secondly, I find it very, very funny how you whine about Michigan fans whining. That kinda makes you as bad as anybody else here. Just sayin'.
lindor
Sun, Nov 6, 2011 : 5:16 p.m.
I agree with @raddesc above. Perhaps I'm too optimistic in thinking that we've got a good team and we could have won at MSU and Iowa. MSU was more physical than we were but they didn't blow us out. Iowa was straight up average. When teams are equal, or close to equal, certain things make a difference, penalties, execution, turnovers, etc... BUT, what makes the biggest difference, play-calling and coaching. We are severely lacking on that end - offensively. The last two years all of our complaining related to how bad our defense was. And it was awful, no one doubts that. We have a lot of the same players back and several true freshman starting on defense but we're performing far better. What's the difference? Greg Mattison. He hasn't coached any of these players to be All-Americans over night, he has taught them and he is utilizing their strengths and skills, and he makes rest decisions on match ups and formations, something Greg Robinson never did. Now flip this to offense. We have the same squad back as well, what's the difference, coaching. We've clearly taken a step back. Borges has no idea how to use Denard or any of the other players he inherited while Mattison is doing just that (with what we all though was a weaker cast than our offense). You can't run a pro-style offense when your QB is 5'10 and not one of your WR's is over 6'2 (Stonum 6'2, Hemmingway 6'1, and the others that play are 6' or shorter). You also can't run a successful offense when you are rotating in a QB that 90% puts you in a negative yardage situations. Give me a break. Let's call it like it is. Poor coaching and play calling on the offensive end. Very easy to criticize but the proof is in the pudding. I never imagine our offense looking this bad. Never.
bluefan_687
Sun, Nov 6, 2011 : 9 p.m.
Can't the offensive coaches just ask the players which plays seemed to work last year? They could at least incorporate some of the principles that made things work better. I'm sure that the players can remember, it is pretty much the same guys.
WolverineWhisperer
Sun, Nov 6, 2011 : 5:06 p.m.
Yes, the officiating was bad, which is becoming the standard since the MSU game with all the failures to impose penalties for vicious attempts to inflict injuries by the Dantonio thugs. But this is not the reason we lost on Saturday. The reason is the failure of the Hoke regime to admit that Denard has zero talent as a quarterback. I honestly can't remember a performance by any Div. 1 quarterback which included more complete misses of open receivers. And not near misses -- huge misses. Denard is a nice guy, a great runner, but it is time to admit, at nearly the end of 2 full seasons of observation, that he has no talent whatsoever as a passer. He doesn't see receivers who get open, when he does complete a pass it is almost always attributable to the acrobatics of a receiver, and his long throws are laughable. I think even Navarre was a better passer. Are we going to have to suffer through another year of this delusion of Denard as quarterback? He has shown absolutely no improvement from last year, which guarantees he's hit his peak and that we will see no further improvement next year. You can't win in the Big 10 without a quarterback who is at least a moderately competent passer, and we don't have one. Gerry DiNardo of the Big Ten Network, who has a pretty good football resume (All-American 1974, head coach at Vanderbilt, LSU, and Indiana), put it politely last night when he said that Michigan has a flawed offense which is going to cause troubles to the team's fortunes for the rest of the season. He's putting diplomatically what the handwriting on the wall is spelling out loud and clear to the rest of us, and especially to Hoke et al.: Get Denard out of the QB role, start grooming Devon or whoever else we have with some throwing talent, and incidentally, start looking for a MUCH better offensive coordinator (play calling has been atrocious).
Matt Cooper
Sun, Nov 6, 2011 : 5:37 p.m.
Really? I'm wondering what QB you are watching, because the stats don't back up your claim. D-Rob's passing stats the last 2 seasons according to ESPN: SEASON CMP ATT YDS CMP% YPA LNG TD INT SACK RAT 2011 93 179 1519 52.0 8.49 77 13 12 7 133.8 2010 182 291 2570 62.5 8.83 75 18 11 7 149.6
Bludogg97
Sun, Nov 6, 2011 : 5:19 p.m.
agree W.W. except its Not the play caller,its the player in this senario , like you said above,its D-Rob's lack of throwing talent,not the play called ..
Matt Cooper
Sun, Nov 6, 2011 : 4:53 p.m.
For all you Henny Penny's that wanna claim that M sucks and isn't that good of a football team, please...calm down. Going into this game the M defense was #6 in the nation in scoring defense, which is a far cry from where it was a year ago (giving up 15 points per game now vs. giving up nearly 35 PPG at the same time last year. Dramatic improvement I'd say). Secondly, teams sometime just have a bad game. Anyone whose ever played organized sports knows you don't win them all. Michigan fans are so spoiled that if they don't win every game by 13 TD's GOOD GOD THAT M TEAM SUCKS!!!! Get over it! This is a good team, greatly improved over any M team we've seen in at least the last 4 seasons. Finally, any coach will tell you that you want the players to decide the game, not the officials, regardless of the situation. It doesn't matter one iota if M was playing to get the tie or if they were up 5 TD's. The fact is that blown calls decided this game on 2 of the last 3 plays. They make the correct call on the TD catch, M runs a 2 pt. conversion. Tie it or lose, but the players would be deciding the game. Same with the interference. Call it what you will, but the defender was draped all over the receiver well before the ball got there. They make the proper call, M get one last shot at the TD and the 2 pointer. I can live with a loss if the players lose it. Not if the officials blow calls and take it away from them. M deserved better, from themselves and the officials.
Small Business Owner
Sun, Nov 6, 2011 : 4:46 p.m.
Let's call it like it is. Blown calls happen. There's no excuse for dropped balls, missed passes for definite touchdowns, and missed tackles. I love Denard just like every other fan, but we (Hoke) needs to realize this guy's only good against sub-par competition, and he's never been able to pass in big games. Teams have figured out how to defend him, and he hasn't been able to counter it. His mechanics are still off, even when he's set in the pocket, he still misses open receivers. It's time to give Devon a shot. We need a true quarterback who knows how to run, not an amazing running back who can throw. I know there will be haters out there, but let's start thinking about the future Michigan football, and not worry hurting Denard's feelings. Great guy, but even he has to realize he's a big part of what's keeping Michigan from being a top-ten team.
Matt Cooper
Sun, Nov 6, 2011 : 6:08 p.m.
Devon Gardneer is not that good of QB. As the Detroit Red Wings announcers always say 'the best goalie is the one riding the bench'. Much the same could be said for M's QB. And what, 4 incompletions yesterday were the result of receivers flat out taking their eyes off the ball and dropping the pass. This is not D-Rob's fault. He puts the ball on the numbers, the receivers have to make the catch. They make those catches and we've an entirely different game. And you don't switch QB's just because you lose a game (nor to appease fans who think they know what they're talking about).
Bludogg97
Sun, Nov 6, 2011 : 5:04 p.m.
agree Small B.O. see my post above.. I don't see D-Rob as the starter next yr. Why not try using him as an all purpose playmaker type.get him the ball every time you can. Sure his feelings may be hurt,but its not Michigans responsibility to keep him happy,or further his career,its about the TEAM. and as long as your making that change,put Thomas Rawls in there also..He is the future running back at Michigan IMHO..
lindor
Sun, Nov 6, 2011 : 4:33 p.m.
Let's forget about the poor call negating the TD and the pass interference at the end of the game. If we have to bring it down to the wire each week and score just to tie a game, it is not worth complaining about. Here's what I do not like. We went into Iowa and opened flat against a mediocre team. We looked terrible & I have to blame a lot of this on coach. Most people the team is not that good, but I don't buy that. This is nothing against Hoke either but I think our losses this year are blatant results of poor coaching. First, positives. Our defense has kept us in every game this year and is playing better each week. If we had this same defense last year we would have been far better. If we had LAST year's offense, we'd be far better. Negatives - loss to MSU. Why are we rotating QBs & ruining any momentum/rhythm we have. Then, on 4th & an inch with no one lined up between center and right tackle, are we not running. Or, why are we passing when Denard has been getting lit up all game on a play that "we've had great success with at SDSU?" Move forward to yesterday. Denard did not play poorly. A few bad throws, a few drops. Why are we bringing in Devin. Every play he came in for was negative. A fumble, couple sacks. Nonsense. Why are we making Denard a pocket passer and completely taking away use of his natural gifts? Why are we choosing to drop back & throw instead of running our version of spread when a mediocre Minnesota ate Iowa up running their own spread last week? Can't the coaches follow a winning game plan? Then, 4 downs from the 3. Not ONE PLAY GIVES DENARD THE CHANCE TO MAKE A PLAY WITH HIS FEET. That play calling is criminal. We've shackled Denard for what? And I know the common response - Denard has done nothing in big games against good defense. Well, at least he had a chance last year. Last but not least, hey Brady, get in the game before the last drive. What is a head coach doing without a headset on for the ENTIRE game?
oldguy
Sun, Nov 6, 2011 : 3:55 p.m.
It`s clear to me the game officials had a plane to catch and did what they had to do to avoid overtime. That was A CATCH period !!
knotch
Sun, Nov 6, 2011 : 3:48 p.m.
If I have learned one thing from all the years of playing and coaching. Never allow the game to be decided by the officals. Big Blue got jobed. for sure. Pass interfearnce waved off. TD waived off, no call on the last play of the game. Trust me, Blue got themselves into it, and they had to get themselves out....relying on the officials for the game will most likely go agianst you. INT in the red zone. fumble that lead to 3pts. subtract those 3pts, were looking at a score for the win not just a tie. I'm at a loss with this offensive coordinator. Dae'narr had several chances to just take off for at least 15 + yds.....Iowa was a need game. the rest of the way aint a cake walk.....
Bludogg97
Sun, Nov 6, 2011 : 3:35 p.m.
Two blown calls yes! But that is not the reason Michigan lost @ Iowa. I'm just a Blue fan headquartered from my couch in front of a big screen,The reason i believe Michigan lost here and at EL,is the ineffectiveness of the passing game,if you can't have a good passing game,you can't set up the run.So the team loads up the box,and forces Mi to pass,and they box in D-Rob. Someone else here at AA.com suggested that D-Rob be an all purpose player like Percy Harvins,kick returns,slot reciever,running back at times,makes total sense to me,don't take him out of the game at all,and get him the ball whenever possible,just not passing the ball,can you imagine D-Rob catching a pass as a slot reciever,if he gets behind the first stage of the D backfield,the possibilities are unlimited,because there aren't many d-backs that could catch him in the open field.Same goes for bubble screens,or like LSU used last night several times,a jailhouse screen,with blockers ahead of D-rob,can you say Dangerous ! Northweastern used they're backup QB,to catch several screens and passes,because Persa got injured in the 1st half,so they used 2 backup QB's effectively to beat Nebraska handly..If Fitz Toussant has injured his shoulder again,which I hope is not serious,but there is no better time than now,to roll out Thomas Rawls,give him as much pratice time with the no.1 O-line as possible,and they could use him on 1st &2nd downs,nothing complicated,no pass blocking assignments at first until he gets the swing of things..Brady has done a great job with the players he inherited,but he did start 5 freshmen in Iowa,so give another freshmen a chance,and I think we will be pleasantly surprized with his talents,I mean if you think about it ? Who will be the no.1 tailback at Michigan next yr ?? I really admire V.Smith,with his toughness,and determination,but lets face it ,the only reason he is in the B1G is because of the prior coach,he would be a better fit in the Big East,or ACC. Devin G. is 6'4 22
Bludogg97
Sun, Nov 6, 2011 : 4:57 p.m.
@ Lindor disagree with you on Al Borgis, you need to review his resume again, its not Al's fault that D-Rob has 50% completion ratio,and throws interceptions, or fumbles. and I'm not saying to take the ball away from D-Rob at all,he;s a play maker,so get him the ball,anyway you can,but limit him passing the ball is all. This about the team,not one player,its not Al Borgis or Michigan's responsibility,to further D-Rob's career,or a chance at NFL.its about TEAM TEAM TEAM...
lindor
Sun, Nov 6, 2011 : 4:45 p.m.
All those freshman are on the defensive end of the ball and our defense is not the problem. Our offense has taken a huge step back since last year. Borges has no idea what he is doing and it seems very clear. Forget the missed penalties, it is play calling. It's like playing for the last shot in a basketball game down a point. Do I give the ball to Kobe even though he's been shut down all night and his jumper has been off or do have Gasol take 15 foot jumper? Pretty sure I put the ball in Kobe's hands every time and give him a chance to make a play. You always give your best player a chance to make play.
Bludogg97
Sun, Nov 6, 2011 : 3:48 p.m.
ran out of Characters above, Devin is 6'4" 225lbs,and he can see over the linemen,D-rob has had so many passes batted down I've lost count, 2 at Iowa. Devin G. is a proto-tyical Pro-set QB, yes he has looked shakey at times,but that comes with experience,and tons of reps.. D-rob as all purpose playmaker,Devin G. as QB, a fullback,and Thomas Rawls in the backfield ,and pound the ball,then all of sudden D-Rob is open,and big yds to follow. just a fans idea..
Chip
Sun, Nov 6, 2011 : 3:26 p.m.
Folks, Forget about all this "blame the officials" routine. And forget about all this "rich rod era" versus "Brady Hoke era" squabble, and the spread versus the drop back. The reality of the situation is that we just DON'T have the talent right now to compete with teams other than cupcakes or bottom-feeders. And by talent I mean a combination of (ability, strength, and size). The losses to MSU and Iowa make ABUNDANTLY clear that we are undersized, weak, and unable to perform at certain levels. It PAINS me to come to this conclusion, as I'm sure it does many of you. But let's face it: MSU and IOWA just POWERED through us--- they were just stronger, faster, BETTER. We're not there yet. We should ASPIRE to that and so much more. Sure-- even in those two losses, we were "in the game until the end", but any observer can see that those two teams just whipped us around like ragdolls. They beat us up, to be sure. We've been living an illusion for these first 9 weeks or so. We beat all these bad teams, got lucky with ND, thought that but for a few mistakes here or there, we could have beaten MSU. But it was an illusion. The saddest part of this is that it makes unlikely AT BEST that we'll win another game this season. If we do, it's because we'll get lucky--- not because we're better, stronger, or faster. The coaches can only do so much. That said, I think we CAN see some progress. And, at least as of now, we can say that coaching isn't a CENTRAL issue if an issue at all (but for some useful push back on whether they're striking the right balance.) We just need better talent. And it's unfortunate that we play such a soft schedule early in the season to give us such false hope-- it makes this part of the year that much more frustrating. The LSU v. Alabama game last night reinforced this reality. Wow-- now THAT'S football.
Chip
Sun, Nov 6, 2011 : 10:05 p.m.
nattiejames, I'll concede a bit: Iowa didn't power through us like MSU did. But I seem to recall, on a number of occasions, watching McNutt (or whatever his name is) slice through easily, with our defenders unable to stop him. In fact, it often took half the defense to stop him and he just chalked up extra yards. Meanwhile, our schedule this season is about as good as it gets-- we couldn't have drawn it up any more convenient for us, unless we played MSU at home and toward the end of the season. Our only road win was Northwestern and, having been at the game myself, I can confirm that at least half of the spectators were Michigan fans-- it might as well have been a home game. I suppose that gives us SOME hope against NEB and OSU, but I can already envision those linebackers tossing us around like playtoys. And while we should be 'as good as we are going to be by that time', so too is NEB and OSU. I agree that the ship is being righted, however slow--- but to cast blame on the officials and all this other garbage misses the true issue (which I recognize YOU'RE not doing, but as it regards some of the other comments...)
heartbreakM
Sun, Nov 6, 2011 : 7:53 p.m.
Hey soft schedules allow us to fool everybody and get rich at the same time. Just look at the entire big ten! Rich and soft.
nattiejames
Sun, Nov 6, 2011 : 3:47 p.m.
Chip, I agree with much of what you say, but I would respectfully disagree that Iowa "powered through us." This was not a lopsided loss. Michigan out gained Iowa. Michigan also had more first downs. Michigan also did a respectable job on defense in tackles for loss while preventing third down conversions. I reiterate what I said earlier, in games where teams are basically even, turnover margin is huge. And just so we are clear, does anyone feel that our two turnovers were caused by an Iowa power defense that jarred the ball loose on punishing hits or intercepted passes on wildly athletic secondary plays? I don't think so. Looked to me as if Michigan's turnovers were more in the category of "unforced errors." I am not posing as a Michigan apologist: but we lost the game to a decent and desperate team on their home field. We made too many mistakes to win a game against a non-patsy. But I don't think Iowa "powered through us." Need more evidence? Where did Iowa get most of its yards? Up the middle? Nope. Out on the edges? Yup. That's not power football. Seems to me like the Big Ten this season is becoming an "any given Saturday" kind of conference (Minnesota beats Iowa, Northwestern beats Nebraska, State beats Wisconsin, etc.). And Michigan is decent enough to win any game left on its schedule. They are also limited enough to lose any of those games if they do not play efficient football and limit penalties and turnovers. Hang in their Chip! We will get bigger, stronger, faster in a year or two. Until then, we'll be one of those middle of the pack teams that will play teams close and rise up and bite one from time to time. Don't give up the ship! The nature of our losses look a lot different than losses the the last 2-3 years. Again, that's going to be the look of things for the rest of this season and probably much of next season, too.
Watcher
Sun, Nov 6, 2011 : 3:21 p.m.
A football game is not a court of law. Fortunately the game is over when it's over. There is no appeal. But it would be helpful to know why the officials ruled as they did. If their ruling was that Hemingway was out of bounds when he caught the ball, they clearly erred. His knee hit the ground first and hit it in the end zone. The fact that the nose of the football hit the ground after the catch is relevant only if Hemingway did not maintain control of the ball. He sure seemed to have a firm grasp on the ball. The rule says: "ARTICLE 7. a. Any forward pass is incomplete if the ball is out of bounds by rule or if it touches the ground when not firmly controlled by a player." An interpretation of that rule states: "XIV. Eligible A80 is airborne when he receives a legal forward pass. He grasps the ball firmly in his hands, and as he is returning toward the ground, the nose of the football touches the ground before any part of his body. A80 retains his firm control of the ball and it does not move during this action. A80's knees then touch the ground and he maintains control of the ball. RULING: Completed pass."
mt
Sun, Nov 6, 2011 : 4:43 p.m.
So if he did not have firm control when the ball hits the ground it means it is incomplete. Thanks for clearing that up for everyone. Everyone in Iowa City can now sleep well knowing that they won fair and square. I heard the whole town was up all night Saturday. At least they can sleep tonight.
ss
Sun, Nov 6, 2011 : 3:01 p.m.
If DR wants to go to NFL - his coaches OUGHT to help him. CLEARLY not as a QB !!!
Rufus
Sun, Nov 6, 2011 : 2:49 p.m.
Michigan runs the spread- they win by two touchdowns. Trying to turn Denard into Tom Brady is like trying to make a Penguin fly; what a waste of a great athlete. Michigan scored 28 points last year with no defense and Denard out much of the game against a much superior Iowa defense. Unless they go back to the spread for the last 3 games I believe we'll lose the remaining three games. Watching Denard afraid to run is painful to watch. Waste. Waste. Waste.
Matt Patercsak
Sun, Nov 6, 2011 : 11:25 p.m.
they are changing the culture at michigan. they are being mindful of the future. we are going to play FOOTBALL at Michigan. not basketball on grass. growing pains happen. greatness will return.
mt
Sun, Nov 6, 2011 : 4:33 p.m.
If they ran the spread the D would have been exhausted by halftime and the Wolvies would have lost by two touchdowns. You might want to check out your DVR's of the games from the last 3 years to see how it played out. The D is better because they are not tired in the second half. Why???? Do you remember how games were close, and then........better yet, go back to the spread, it is really cool to watch.
Matt Patercsak
Sun, Nov 6, 2011 : 2:31 p.m.
we got away from an effective power run game and didnt use it properly to set up the right kind of pass plays. our D wasnt bad. I was impressed on 3rd downs
Matt Patercsak
Sun, Nov 6, 2011 : 7:47 p.m.
for sure, Im a big fan of Rawls! (thus my picture)
Bludogg97
Sun, Nov 6, 2011 : 4:03 p.m.
agree Matt, But Fitz T. hurt his shoulder again and was out the whole 2nd half.. set up the pass with the run or vice versa,I'd like to see Thomas Rawls get a chance with ones ! and Brady was already quoted in saying they think Devin is a better passer.( the windy day at msu)
Chad Williams
Sun, Nov 6, 2011 : 2:30 p.m.
Excuses excuses. Every team gets a call made against them or doesnt get one at all. How bout the wide open roundtree the last drive. He had a td but overthrown. Then you get to the 3 16 seconds left and instead of spiking the ball, you call timeout. They wanted to run 4 pass plays with and not so good passer. The smart thing was to spike the ball leaving you with 3 plays with a timeout and a run pass option. Borges is not ready for a solid team. Had trouble for three quarters against nd, msu and now iowa. This offense is not ready to compete. The defense is still soft and blows coverage but they play with more heart and effort and hats off they played excellent in the last few drives. if they win more games this year its because therd wasnt a penn state or wisconsin to play not because of improvement in the coaching and players.
nattiejames
Sun, Nov 6, 2011 : 2:04 p.m.
Blown calls? Probably. Lost the turnover battle? Definitely. That's the story. Perspective: 1. Iowa does not suck - especially at home. They are well-coached, and everyone (including odds-makers) knew this was going to be a one-score game. 2. In one-score games, turnover margins (and yes, blown calls) figure prominently. 3. Iowa, like Michigan, is prideful and was guaranteed to respond to the Minnesota debacle with a focused home effort. They played relatively efficiently (a couple of dropped balls and a couple of penalties) and avoided the big mistake. 4. Michigan's defense, once again, held the team in the game, and the offense had a chance at the end. 5. Those people who think Borgess is a moron and that Denard should run wild have only to look as far as Gardner's ineffectiveness to perhaps see why unleashing Denard on the ground and exposing his small frame to violent hits is a foolish plan. 6. And while we're on the topic of Borgess, how would all of us sofa-coaches do in play calling with a thin offensive line and a segment of the game that featured your startting QB, starting tailback, and starting tight-end nursing injuries on the bench? 7. Most posters, pre-season, had listed Michigan a 7-5, 8-4, or 9-3 team. Congratulate yourselves: you were right. 8. Michigan will likely be less than a one-score underdog or favorite in its final three games. 9. It's hard to win on the road in the Big Ten and Michigan has two home games left on its schedule. 10. This team is a solid, not great, Big Ten team which will provide a foundation for great teams a couple of seasons down the road. On the way to those great seasons, fans will not need to suffer through bowl-less Decembers and Januaries. Keep cool, my babies (especially Lorraine)! Go Blue!
Chad Williams
Mon, Nov 7, 2011 : 2:34 a.m.
Agreed 100 percent, but I think in situations inside the 10 not only the play calling sucks but drobs decision making. 1st half int in the redzone attributes to the problem. Then call your last timeout with 16 seconds left. That would have kept the defense honest and a possible scramble. Right now the play calling is utra conservative or just a 45 yard bomb or some kinda mirage with 2 qbs. My 7th grade coach always said this acronym K.I.S.S.
vi4mi4
Sun, Nov 6, 2011 : 2 p.m.
..Questions: 1.can a player use the football against the field to keep his balance and it still be a "live" play?? if not, D-Nards fumble was not a fumble.. 2. doesn't the clock stop automatically after a penalty on the defense? if so, why was it restarted on M's last drive with 24 secs left? ..In the road games Brady and staff have been clearly out- prepared and outcoached..M's early game offensive and defensive strategies are passive ad lackluster..the backup qb is not ready for primetime play.. the 360 while getting sacked, whirly bird, intentional grounding was ridiculous..grounds alone to sit the bench.. .who convinced D-Nard he should throw instead of pass? his throwing motion is high school at best..he see target, tilts his head fires ball, then tries to relocate his target ,huh??.. come on D-Nard, you don't have to be Tom Brady..you are always the fastest player on the field..Use your FEET!!.. this one definitely goes in hokes shoulda coulda category..3 str8 to IA??.. ..get it together Hoke, Go Blue! v
truebluefan
Sun, Nov 6, 2011 : 1:47 p.m.
Yes, the defense has improved over last year. But whatever gains we made in the defense, we've effectively lost in the offense. This is the thing I was worried about this season. The slow tempo huddle offense is killing us. We need to go back to 100% shotgun and no huddle.
Larry Weisenthal
Mon, Nov 7, 2011 : 6:55 a.m.
One of the things which made the Rodriguez defenses so bad was the lack of rest from the up tempo offense. One of the reasons the defense is so much better this year is that they are not on the field as much.
RWBill
Sun, Nov 6, 2011 : 6:11 p.m.
LOL, absolutely not. You want to put the defense back on the field every 2 minutes like RR did? One of the reasons they are giving up fewer points and getting 3 and outs is because they are finally getting some rest between possessions. RR's stubbornness and unwillingness to adjust to game conditions was a major contributor to the defense's second half collapses last year.
Tru2Blu76
Sun, Nov 6, 2011 : 6:22 a.m.
The dust settled hours ago. Right now, I'm reviewing: 1. Every single rating group (including BCS) was wrong about Michigan and so where Michigan fans. Most if not all of us thought Michigan was a least "rank-able" while Iowa was not. 2. Everyone loves Brady Hoke and we all believed his abilities as a coach - despite his meager record. Today: 9 games played: mediocre record. So Michigan met its downfall at the hands of an unranked team. Questionable performances and questionable coaching paints an entirely different picture of this team. Coach Hoke has been saying 2 different things: We compete for the Big 10 championship every year. We are not ready to compete in the Big 10. Now we know why he speaks so contradictorily. Just my view: I was thinking that Michigan had a solid chance to beat Iowa & Illinois. I no longer believe they'll beat Illinois because they lost to Iowa. Win against Nebraska AND TSIO? -- I think NOT! I think there's a reasonable chance the Wolverines will end 7-5 and we will look back and say: Post MSU collapse! (again!). Remember: Michigan got a better bowl game than they deserved last year - and they were horribly embarrassed on national TV. Lets PRAY they don't get "that lucky" this year because the odds say we're seeing 2010 all over again. The best thing we can say at this point is: at least this team and its new coaches started where the last coaches left off. It took 3 years to get them to even this mediocre level, so there's been no fall-back. Just modest improvement in defense during the first 9 games. NO improvement by the erratic offense at all. NINE games - that tells the whole story of the 2011 Wolverines.
heartbreakM
Sun, Nov 6, 2011 : 7:49 p.m.
7718: hoke is saying the correct things. He is not saying stupid things like "we are too young, even Lombardi couldn't coach these guys". You are hearing correctible things from hoke and not excuses. Remember former coach's comment that um is not good because of the last 2-3 februaries? That is throwing your players under the bus and saying that they are no good regardless. Hoke simply does not do that. He sets the bar high and challenges these guys to raise their level of play. But why am I wasting my time with this discussion?
7718
Sun, Nov 6, 2011 : 4:37 p.m.
Heartbreak: I hear Hoke's post game comments...We didn't block, we gave up too many yards, we didn't pass very well, etc. Etc. That's not embarrassing the players? Double standards.
DonAZ
Sun, Nov 6, 2011 : 1:55 p.m.
The issue is not so much the loss itself ... the issue is the manner in which they lost the game. I've long maintained that we can count this season a success, even with losses, if we see improvement in the fundamentals of the game. On defense we are definitely seeing those improvements in fundamentals. By most accounting the turnaround in defense is striking. They're not yet a dominant shut-down defense, but they are not the defense of last year, that's for sure. Some of the fundamentals on offense are encouraging. Some are not. And for me that's where the disappointment in the loss yesterday comes from. They could have won yesterday's game even without last minute heroics. Better execution of some of the offensive players earlier would have put them in a better position. Some blame can fall on Borges ... that's fine. But does anyone honestly think Borges is coaching Robinson to throw passes straight at large defensive linemen? Does anyone think Borges is coaching Robinson to hold the ball unprotected while he's being sacked?
heartbreakM
Sun, Nov 6, 2011 : 1:45 p.m.
First of all truBlu, I think you are being a bit harsh. Some team has to win and some team has to lose. Michigan didn't play well, that's for sure. But still had a chance to tie it up at the end. Rest of the season has to be played so we will see. One thing we have seen is that Michigan is not a good road team and we have Nebraska and OSU at home. It could be that we are not quite as good, but think about Nebraska--they lost at home to previously unvictorious Nebraska. Does that mean that their coach stinks and that they are mediocre? (Possibly), but hardly any team goes undefeated and Iowa at home is undefeated. @7718: nobody here is blaming former coach anymore. He dug his own grave by being a horrible coach on and off the field, and not knowing anything about Michigan (at least publicly) as has been expressed ad nauseum. What did you want? To continue a relationship with a coach who was 6-18 B10 over 3 years? A coach who continued to place blame on the players and not himself? Look at Hoke's comments and he never embarrasses the players. He is perhaps not the best coach in the world, but he is handling the job much better than former coach. But show me any coach who is undefeated and perfect every year. Doesn't exist. It's the demeanor and other intangibles that I like with him much better (as well as much better defensive performance)
7718
Sun, Nov 6, 2011 : 12:49 p.m.
But remember, Hoke is a Michigan Man despite the fact he left the program to better himself somewhere else. Brandon and the alumni will give Hoke a free pass for the next several years because somehow they will spin it and say it was Rodriguez's fault. Hoke won't win any championships here, supposedly he has a great recruiting class...we'll see how he coaches them.
Tim
Sun, Nov 6, 2011 : 4:38 a.m.
THREE blown calls (not two) determined the outcome of this game. The obvious interference on the final play was mirrored by the obvious interference on Iowa's interception in the red zone during the first half. Add the mind-boggling "play stands as miscalled" and you have three blown calls that directly impacted the scoreboard. The game was reminiscent of the 2005 Alamo Bowl between Michigan and Nebraska. The Sun Belt officials were revealed to be neither athletic enough nor skilled enough to keep up with the plays. For this Big10 crew, even super slo mo didn't help; today's replay official must have been a philosophy major at Iowa: "inasmuch as I am not 100% certain that I exist, I surely haven't enough evidence here to declare a touchdown a touchdown." Given the talent disparity, Ferentz needed all of that help from the officials -- but he plainly outcoached the Michigan staff. Hoke et al have been adept at making adjustments through much of this season, so they may be able to learn from this loss and start competing as a middle-of-the-pack Big10 team. The ranking was silliness; UM is still a couple of years away from respectability. For now, UM must struggle to climb out of the Big10's cellar and Hoke has lots of work to do -- starting with dropping the folksy nonsense and picking up the headset permanently. Time to get serious, get tough, and get some quality Big10 wins...
heartbreakM
Sun, Nov 6, 2011 : 7:44 p.m.
I have played sports though never at college level or high school even but that is beside the point. If a team constantly beats you, and the outcome probably would not change if you played again, then I think the talent level comment can stand. Yes, it is true that upsets happen all the time, but look at what Iowa has done to um despite changes in coaches, philosophies and personnel. It is not like northwestern beating Nebraska where one team lost once and the other lost a bunch of times. And even there, I don't really think nebraska is that talented based on actual results and who they have played. Even if they beat us in a few weeks
mt
Sun, Nov 6, 2011 : 4:22 p.m.
Tim, Glad you could find a fourth call that hurt the Wolvies. I just noticed that the fans in Iowa found a 4th crucial call against them. I guess it was called even. Now if they find a 5th call, I am pretty sure they plan on asking the Big 10 to add points to their score. It would only be fair.
Tim
Sun, Nov 6, 2011 : 2:40 p.m.
Thanks for commenting mt. I definitely agree that we could find many blown calls throughout that game, and some of those calls ill affected Iowa. That's precisely my point when I compare the crew to the hapless Alamo Bowl crew from 2005. The three specific examples I cited are qualitatively different, however, from all of the other mistakes in the game. You mentioned holding; take another look at Iowa's touchdown run -- the runner was untouched, but there WAS a clean tackle on the play (HOLDING!). Still, holding is missed quite often and one mustn't whine about such things; the three big blows are in an entirely different category. If you can find three blown calls in or near the endzone that hurt Iowa, get back to me. Thanks, too, to HeartbreakM. When I mention talent disparity, I am not suggesting that Michigan's talent is good, and I am definitely not suggesting that Michigan's talent exceeded Iowa's talent over the prior two years (good lord, no). But Iowa is rebuilding this year, and yesterday Michigan fielded more talent. Iowa's wins this year have resulted from weak competition and good Iowa coaching. Do you seriously think that this Iowa team could compete with a bowlbound team from the SEC or Big12? Your last sentence reveals that you have either never played organized sports or never understood what what happening around you: the more talented team doesn't always win (see, for example, Michigan's win over ND).
heartbreakM
Sun, Nov 6, 2011 : 1:53 p.m.
"talent disparity": This is the problem with Michigan fans, IMO. We always think we have better talent than the opponent. Iowa just beat us, and not just once but three times in a row. Is it conceivable that we are drinking the kool-aid just a bit too much and thinking we are better than we are? Iowa is undefeated at home and plays pretty tough. They have one of the best receivers in the game and a great tough running back, as well as continually one of the best line plays anywhere. We lost, for a variety of reasons. But let's not say that we have better talent. If that were the case, we would have won.
mt
Sun, Nov 6, 2011 : 11:58 a.m.
I bet Iowa could find 3 missed calls that hurt them. Some calls are right, (he did not complete the process) some are iffy. (PI) An Iowa fan can look at the video and show you several holding calls on the last drive that were not called. If UM had won, and Iowa fans complained, you would call them whiners. Rightfully.
aarox
Sun, Nov 6, 2011 : 3:23 a.m.
@bluefan, if you are worried about homer officials, its not really an issue. I speak from experience. In any case, we got 37 breaks against MSU (see above) so we are probably out of chits at this point.
aarox
Sun, Nov 6, 2011 : 4 a.m.
@ Don, I refereed soccer for many years and up to the college level. I have a fairly dense set of colleagues including official in other sports including football. Homers don't make it to this level. They are certainly more prevalent at lower levels, in the same way that you may find that the softball playing 'hotheads' are more prevalent at the lower amateur levels. I will add that getting to this level is difficult. It is the result thousands of hours of effort and commitment and requires support and judgement from more senior people that have a lot to lose if they pick the wrong people. And, even though you have the whistle, for the whistle to be effective, you need to have the respect of those involved. This boils down to integrity. There is no way to put a price on this. I complaints about Ed Hightower for example but he is not a homer. Some folks just don't like his general approach to the game. Further, television, instant replay, and the internet have put us all under a microscope and its pretty clear that there isn't any room for homers, even if it was a possibility in the first place. Anyway, some of this is subjective, but that's what I meant by my 'experience' for what its worth.
DonAZ
Sun, Nov 6, 2011 : 3:30 a.m.
Care to share what experience you're referring to?
bluefan_687
Sun, Nov 6, 2011 : 3:12 a.m.
Does anyone know the actual Big Ten officiating policy regarding home town and alumni status of officials? Is it possible that the officials actually are from Iowa or are alumni?
mt
Sun, Nov 6, 2011 : 4:12 p.m.
They were 2nd string players for the Hawks, bluefan. By the way, the shopping carts at Wal Mart are blowing around in the wind today. Get back to work.
Jim Nazium
Sun, Nov 6, 2011 : 3:10 a.m.
I hate to say it, but I am really losing my patience with the lack of progression on behalf of Denard. Kiddo, if you really want to play in the NFL and not just be a kick returner, you had better start learning some other positions. You have incredible talent but to play Quarterback in the NFL you need other skills and gifts that in my opinion you don't possess. If you stay at Quarterback at Michigan, I hope you prove me wrong and become an all-around talent at that position and lead us to a Big Ten Title and hopefully more. If you become the all around stud that I think you could be, meaning you start playing some running back, slot receiver, kick/punt returner, and maybe some dime package on D, you could be a first rounder for sure. Think Charles Woodson, and Desmond Howard, they won Heismans playing a larger role on the team. And just think about all the extra space you would have to work with, you could be busting out big plays much easier than trying to get past that crowed box as of recent. Either way, good luck and Go Blue!
DonAZ
Sun, Nov 6, 2011 : 3:28 a.m.
If Denard thinks he'll play in the NFL as QB, then he's just sadly mistaken. He'd make an interesting punt / kick returner in college. He'd get killed in the pros. I wonder what DB coverage skills he's got. Anyone know if he's ever played that role?
emueagles63
Sun, Nov 6, 2011 : 3:15 a.m.
Well said. Totally agree.
aarox
Sun, Nov 6, 2011 : 3:07 a.m.
@Don: yes, here is the link: <a href="http://www.teamrankings.com/college-football/ranking/strength-of-schedule-by-team" rel='nofollow'>http://www.teamrankings.com/college-football/ranking/strength-of-schedule-by-team</a>
heartbreakM
Sun, Nov 6, 2011 : 7:40 p.m.
Come on. Youngstown state is tough!!
RWBill
Sun, Nov 6, 2011 : 6:06 p.m.
thanks, please disregard my comment above ! This system doesn't appear too stable or accurate however. the Sagarin system has long been regarded as one of the best mechanical systems, is used by the BCS (doesn't mean much) and places MSU's and all the B1G strength of schedules down in the 40s and 50s, which is where I think it belongs. I don't see how anyone could look at MSU's schedule and believe it is the 4th toughest? How? It does not pass common sense.
Craig Lounsbury
Sun, Nov 6, 2011 : 12:49 p.m.
as a "data point" in my opinion it is useless if the data input allows for such wild overnight swings. On Friday MSU has the 4th toughest schedule then on Sunday after playing MN it drops 27 slots .
aarox
Sun, Nov 6, 2011 : 12:26 p.m.
Its a data point, nothing more. This ranking was not developed with an 'agenda' to prove anything. For this reason I'd give this more weight than an argument generated to try to make a point one way or another.
Craig Lounsbury
Sun, Nov 6, 2011 : 11:08 a.m.
so MSU dropped 27 spots after one game if i read the current link correctly. It seems like a system that allows such wild swings over one weekend is a bit overly sensitive about some data.
emueagles63
Sun, Nov 6, 2011 : 3:04 a.m.
Before many of you call yourselves a Michigan FOOTBALL fan, brush up on your knowledge of the rule book. Junior Hemingway did not SECURE that ball properly. Yes, he caught the ball , but the tip of the ball hit the ground. That's an incomplete pass and will always be. The replay showed that clear as day. Let's not seem ignorant by commenting on the officiating of a play that was the correct call. Let me guess, the Hail Mary by MSU vs. UW was a bad call too. We only like replay and refs when it's in our favor, but hate them when it's not.
mt
Sun, Nov 6, 2011 : 3:58 p.m.
So as soon as his knee hits the ground the play is over?? You would have to have on your trueblue glasses to think that is the rule. You must have complete control before the ball hits the ground. You cannot use the ground to gain control. Good call. Pass interference. Slow it down on your DVR, the defender was a step early. In real time it was a tough call. Game is played in real time, not trueblue time. You could slow down most plays in every game and find some judgement error by the refs. You might find a left tackle who grabbed the head gear of his opponent 37 times in one game and never got called. Better teams find a way to overcome the calls. Not sure the PI call changes anything. I think the Wolvies had pretty much proved they could not push in from the 2 yard line.
emueagles63
Sun, Nov 6, 2011 : 3:06 p.m.
Hey, I know you guys are angry and looking for someone to blame the game on other than the actual team, but looking at the video again and again, he never had conclusive control of the ball. Take a look at the video :46 - :48 second. You can even blow it up and slow it down second by second, similar to a replay booth. <a href="http://scores.espn.go.com/ncf/recap?gameId=313092294" rel='nofollow'>http://scores.espn.go.com/ncf/recap?gameId=313092294</a> At the point of his knee touching the ground, he doesn't not have conclusive control of the ball as he goes to the ground. With the ball actually hitting the ground at the end of the play further validate the referees call of an incomplete pass. Sorry guys. Great effort by Hemingway, but wasn't a catch. @johnnya2 Here's the rule book. <a href="http://www.ncaapublications.com/DownloadPublication.aspx?download=FR12.pdf" rel='nofollow'>http://www.ncaapublications.com/DownloadPublication.aspx?download=FR12.pdf</a> It's a free investment.
truebluefan
Sun, Nov 6, 2011 : 1:42 p.m.
motorcity - wrong. He had possession of the ball when he was down in the end zone. The play was over the moment Junior's knee hit the ground. Anything that happens after that point in time means nothing.
johnnya2
Sun, Nov 6, 2011 : 6:05 a.m.
You are ignorant of the rules. The ball CAN hit the ground as long as the player had control going to the ground (he clearly did) and the call does not move (it clearly did not). It has NOT always been the rule and will not always be. The fact that you think that way shows you do not know what you are talking about I would suggest you download a copy of the NCAA rule book. It will cost you $7.80. It will be an investment that will avoid you looking so foolish in the future.
bluefan_687
Sun, Nov 6, 2011 : 3:03 a.m.
Why do Michigan coaches continue to force Denard into pro style drop back pass plays when it has been proven over and over again that this is just not going to be effective. They seem intent on reducing the most talented open field runner in college football to one of the most mediocre passing quaterbacks. They need to face the reality that on his pocket passing skills alone, Denard would not start at most division 2 schools. This approach is not going to allow for wins against the better Big Ten teams. The only conclusion to make is that Rich Rodriguez really is a great coach, a genius in fact, with respect to using the spread offense with an athletic dual threat quarterback. True, his special teams and defensive coaching are lacking, but wouldn't it be great to have Rich Rod back as offensive coordinator to go with Greg Mattison on defense?
RWBill
Sun, Nov 6, 2011 : 6:02 p.m.
Regardless of this good discussion here, I agree that the last 4 plays at the goal line were mystifying. Not once did DR bootleg or roll to open up 1) a pass to the end zone 2) A DR run into the end zone or 3) a pitch to a running back. All 3 were drop back look around passes weren't they? Not our strength.
bluefan_687
Sun, Nov 6, 2011 : 5:19 p.m.
If things don't improve, Hoke/Borges will not be getting 10 years. On thing we learned from Rich Rod is that you get 3 years if you can't win any of the important Big 10 games, regardless of other success. The hallmark of good coaching is the ability to adapt. They are going to need to figure out that Denard is only effective when he is in motion and adapt the offense accordingly or get a new quarterback soon that can play in the offensive style they prefer. Denard actually seems to pass pretty well as long as he is moving. Must be the threat of the run or something else that works for him. I just read an analysis describing how pro teams are adopting some aspects of the spread. It is not dying, things are just evolving toward a hybrid approach, using the best features of both. The key is to make to offense work with the players you have, not forcing a scheme that is predetermined.
DonAZ
Sun, Nov 6, 2011 : 1:07 p.m.
Given a dominant offensive line, several Steve Slaton and Noel Devine-like running backs, a healthy Denard Robinson and weather conditions up in Michigan that allow that type of offense to operate ... then it might be an effective offense some of the time. But I could say the same for the type of offense Borges is trying to implement. Or any offense. Given all the right components it'll work. Why do you suppose the spread option is seeing declining use across the top-tier teams? Hardly anyone in the SEC does. Neither LSU or Alabama does. WVU still does to a point, but they're not doing so well (6-3 with losses to Syracuse and Louisville). Oklahoma State and Oregon are probably the two poster boys remaining. Urban Meyer on ESPN commented how increasingly defenses have caught up with the spread and the pendulum is swinging back. And he knows a thing or two about the spread. So if you're Hoke/Borges and you're trying to position Michigan for the next 10 years, do you begin that process now, or do you put everything on hold and hope to get a few more wins running playground ball with Denard Robinson the whole offense and every tackle of him a potential season ending thing?
bluefan_687
Sun, Nov 6, 2011 : 3:23 a.m.
Given more time, more experience for Denard (imagine him as an experienced senior in that offense) and a better offensive line, no team would be able to stop them.
DonAZ
Sun, Nov 6, 2011 : 3:15 a.m.
Absolutely not. I am grateful Rodriguez is gone ... his "offensive genius" is way over rated. See my post above re: the Wisconsin, Ohio State and Mississippi State games last year. That supposedly "potent" offense was shut down pretty hard by those three teams.
aarox
Sun, Nov 6, 2011 : 2:49 a.m.
Jeff Blue - things changes, and the facts today don't support your assertion that "neither OSU or MSU have a particularly tough schedule." Below are the rankings current as of this week. OSU is #21 in strength of schedule, MSU is #4. UM is 46. 1 Missouri (3-4) 40.9 1 41 2 2 Oklahoma St (8-0) 36.4 2 81 8 3 Arizona (1-6) 36.2 1 28 11 4 Michigan St (5-2) 35.8 4 84 14 5 Baylor (3-3) 35.7 4 70 15 6 USC (7-2) 35.5 2 85 16 7 Arizona St (5-2) 34.6 1 59 1 8 Tennessee (2-5) 34.4 3 83 5 9 Mississippi (1-6) 34.3 8 71 10 10 Texas (5-2) 34.2 8 108 20 11 Texas A&M (5-3) 34.2 1 70 6 12 Florida (4-4) 33.8 3 97 17 13 Washington (5-2) 33.5 11 70 13 14 Arkansas (6-1) 33.2 1 96 4 15 Stanford (8-0) 33.1 4 78 44 16 Kansas (1-6) 33.1 10 76 18 17 Wisconsin (5-2) 33.0 16 85 24 18 Auburn (6-3) 32.9 1 90 9 19 LSU (7-0) 32.7 1 20 12 20 Georgia (5-2) 32.7 5 38 19 21 Ohio State (5-3) 32.3 16 103 25
heartbreakM
Sun, Nov 6, 2011 : 7:39 p.m.
Crazy numbers. Top ranked schedules in conference are Minnesota Indiana and purdue. And none of the big ten teams have even played a top 10 team nor will they now. Tell me how we can claim As a conference that any team is any good. If you don't play and beat the best, what leg do you have to stand on? At least the ADs are happy
RWBill
Sun, Nov 6, 2011 : 5:53 p.m.
do you just make stuff up? MSU has a #50 strength of schedule, not #4. Here Don. <a href="http://www.usatoday.com/sports/sagarin/fbt11.htm" rel='nofollow'>http://www.usatoday.com/sports/sagarin/fbt11.htm</a>
DonAZ
Sun, Nov 6, 2011 : 2:57 a.m.
Got a link to that "strength of schedule" list? Just curious about how it might calculate things.
Jaxon5
Sun, Nov 6, 2011 : 2:43 a.m.
Michigan is not a top 25 team. They are mediocre at best. Not a quality win in the bunch except dare I say Northwestern. And if that's the only quality win, it's not saying much.
heartbreakM
Sun, Nov 6, 2011 : 2:01 p.m.
I find it ridiculous that any Big Ten team is ranked in the top 25. Nebraska a top 10 team just lost to mighty Northwestern??? At home??? Who did they beat? MSU, though it has "impressive" wins over UM, Wis, OSU has played nobody meaningful outside of conference except for ND and got waxed. I don't buy it that beating the other B10 teams proves you are a good team, when the B10 teams have not proven they can play with or beat anybody out of conference worth a darn. (And UCLA just beat AZ State yesterday diminishing the importance of that win by Illinois). If any B10 team were to play this year in the ACC, SEC, B12 or maybe even Pac 12, those teams would be lucky to be upper division, based on results on the field (and opinion of course)
azwolverine
Sun, Nov 6, 2011 : 3:10 a.m.
Yeah, they are. None of the top 25 are great except top 5. No, Michigan doesn't have any huge qulaity wins, but at least they are beating teams they should beat now and remaining competitive with everyone. THAT is a huge improvement over the past three years...gotta start somewhere.
DonAZ
Sun, Nov 6, 2011 : 2:39 a.m.
For those who think last year's offense was so "dynamic" ... some stats: vs. Wisconsin (L) Points - 28 Yards - 442 Passing - 19 for 30 / 274 / 9.1 per Rushing - 168 / 4.7 per 3rd down - 50% Turnovers - 2 vs. Ohio State (L) Points - 7 Yards - 351 Passing - 16 for 33 / 169 / 5.1 per Rushing - 182 / 4.4 per 3rd down - 33% Turnovers - 3 vs. Mississippi State (L) Points - 14 Yards - 342 Passing - 27 for 41 / 254 / 6.2 per Rushing - 88 / 3.5 per 3rd down - 53% Turnovers - 2
semperveritas
Sun, Nov 6, 2011 : 6:20 p.m.
two simple questions: 1. was denard the bigten's offensive player of the year in 2010? 2. will he be this year? if not---then a 3rd question---what has happened in the interim. ?
eagleman
Sun, Nov 6, 2011 : 4:47 p.m.
Rufus, they scored 28 pts after they were down 3 tds and with a QB who can actually throw(Forcier). Robinson started that game and did little. It was Forcier and his ability to throw accurately that lead the three second half tds. But again those drives occurred after were down 21, the same thing happened in the Wisconsin and Penn State games.
Rufus
Sun, Nov 6, 2011 : 2:53 p.m.
They scored 28 points agaisnt iowa last year with Denard out much of the game, no defense and were playing against a superior Iowa defense last year. How many points did they score this year? not 28, denard was healthy, and this iowa defense isn't very good.
7718
Sun, Nov 6, 2011 : 12:43 p.m.
DR's first year as a starter. Michigan now has it's almighty coaching staff in place and they are going backwards, it would be nice if they could figure out how to maximize the player's talents here. However, they will get a free pass for 2-3 more years.
jeff blue
Sun, Nov 6, 2011 : 2:04 a.m.
Please check my math --- this is so weird. If OSU and MSU win out, they meet in the Big Ten champs game. Is this possible? Niether OSU or MSU has a really tough schedule: They have both played Nebraska and Wisconsin They have played each other. Somebody please check on this!!!
RWBill
Sun, Nov 6, 2011 : 5:45 p.m.
Do you look at the standings at all? Penn State is undefeated and Ohio has 2 losses, how do you figure Ohio will magically jump PSU and play Sparty? Please check the division alignment!! wow.
bobd
Sun, Nov 6, 2011 : 2:04 a.m.
Please don't write silliness. The play was obviously not a completion by the rules. He didn't coplete the process of the catch! He landed on the tip of the ball out of bounds, and the rule is you have to have control throughout the process of the catch period! Learn the rules before you write about a subject.
bluefan_687
Sun, Nov 6, 2011 : 9:52 p.m.
To clarify, the ball touching the ground does not necessarily dictate that possession is lost for that moment. He never "lost" possession through the process of the catch and still had possession at the end.
bluefan_687
Sun, Nov 6, 2011 : 9:43 p.m.
The rule about completing the process of the catch comes into play when the player does not have possession after it is all done. There are times when the player seems to make a catch and then a moment later seems to lose possession. This rule does not apply here, he still had possession at the end.
shoot2scre
Sun, Nov 6, 2011 : 1:48 a.m.
Not trying to be a downer... but the reply pretty clearly showed the ball touching the ground. When I saw the reply I knew immediately that it wasn't going to be a Touchdown and there is really no reason to get mad about that play. I don't even think you can call it a "blown call". They reviewed it. The call was upheld. End of the day, they didn't lose because of that. If the NardDog had any touch, he might have thrown a better pass and the catch could have been made easily. They had 2 more downs on the doorstep and didn't get it done. It's a massive cop-out to blame this on the officials.
Terry Star21
Mon, Nov 7, 2011 : 3 a.m.
Knee was down first in end zone - please pay attention when watching replays.
RWBill
Sun, Nov 6, 2011 : 5:43 p.m.
The ball can touch the ground, that is not an issue. The issue is whether it caused the ball to "bounce" or otherwise come out of the receiver's possession. No replay showed that. There was possession inbounds, the ball hitting the ground but no loss of possession. That was a catch, and inbounds, a TD.
Bludogg97
Sun, Nov 6, 2011 : 4:17 p.m.
try using replay, not reply
bigtenknight
Sun, Nov 6, 2011 : 12:50 a.m.
While we're talking about missed calls, let's not forget about probably one of the biggest one's that U of M fans aren't talking about...Martin's illegal movement in the neutral zone forcing the illegal snap by Iowa's center, which would have given Iowa the first down with about 2:30 to play...funny how 'good reporting' misses a critical detail here and there. Heisman Denard, again, costs you the game. Dismal QB numbers, 2 turnovers...need I say more?
Terry Star21
Mon, Nov 7, 2011 : 2:59 a.m.
Sorry - but you missed it...replays clearly showed without doubt - iowa moved first.
RWBill
Sun, Nov 6, 2011 : 5:41 p.m.
The center clearly bobbed his head. What were you watching? Take off the blinders, the center can't bob and juke to draw the defense offside. What is his last name, again?
Johnny2x2x
Sun, Nov 6, 2011 : 1:27 a.m.
Good point, not to mention the missed offensive holding, the missed push off, and the missed obvious pick play all that should have been called on Michigan the last drive.
Johnny2x2x
Sun, Nov 6, 2011 : 12:45 a.m.
IOWA!!! The better team won today, period! Quit all the whining.
Terry Star21
Mon, Nov 7, 2011 : 2:57 a.m.
Did you when the better 'iowa referee's won today, I'm a little confused ?
RWBill
Sun, Nov 6, 2011 : 5:39 p.m.
This is undeniable, however it is the right and obligation of fans to voice their opinions. Mistakes killed Michigan. Blown calls favoring the home team severely affected the outcome, but that is not unusual. Michigan is still in search of an identity for its offense and Ohio has a much better D than IA, so standby for more tears if nothing is figured out.
raddesc
Sun, Nov 6, 2011 : 12:38 a.m.
Thank you Al Borges! Thank you for handcuffing one of the most dynamic players in the country with your boring, unimaginative play-calling. If this is the future offense of the Michigan Wolverines, I am deeply worried we are taking a step backwards to te stone age. The only plays you dialed up today that worked were from the spread. You, integrating your system and not having Denard be Denard (is he allowed to leave the pocket?), is just flat-out ridiculous! Again, thanks for making one of the fastest players in college football look and play like Nick Sheridan today.
truebluefan
Mon, Nov 7, 2011 : 11:52 a.m.
Up tempo, no huddle spread should be the ONLY offense employed the rest of this season. That is the ONLY way we'll get to 9+ wins. Mark my words.
Freight Train
Sun, Nov 6, 2011 : 1:23 p.m.
Robinson's passes were horrible. He really does not have the skill to be a quarterback. Without playing quarterback, he can't gain big yards by picking a running lane. Robinson is as much of a detriment to the squad as he is a benefit.
johnnya2
Sun, Nov 6, 2011 : 4:51 a.m.
Yes, because Denard was an offensive force against Big Ten teams last year? Check his stats against Iowa last year. The lost that game by 10 and only got it that close due to garbage time points after entering the fourth quarter down by 21. Denard played HORRIBLY today. He missed wide open receivers and still tried to throw when receivers were blanketed. The interception was stupid and the fumble is inexcusable. If you think Denard did so great last season, why not check who actually scored the points as QB against Iowa last year. His first name starts with Bate.
raddesc
Sun, Nov 6, 2011 : 2:52 a.m.
Think about the offense that opened the season against Western Michigan to the one you watched today. What is different? Borges is simply phasing out the spread and attempting to make Denard a pocket passer. This is not who Denard Robinson is! This offense was built for speed and up-tempo....not drop back and misfire open receivers. Why did the offense struggle for 50 minutes and look good in the last 10 minutes? Because it was up-tempo. This was not the Clayborn, etc. Iowa defense UM played in the past....this was the defense that lost to Minnesota last week. And I am not sold on this "spread offense" doesn't work against elite defenses argument. First, Iowa is not an elite defense so you are contradicting yourself regarding this loss. Second, we never had the complementary defense with the spread offense. And finally, if you think this offense is going to get it done against our last three opponents, you are kidding yourself. Remember, Denard (just himself) makes Borges look good when it should really be the other way around.
DonAZ
Sun, Nov 6, 2011 : 2:05 a.m.
I'm simply suggesting you look at the *reality* of Robinson-as-the-offense that was used last year, and which you seem to wish was used again this year. It was not effective against good defenses. Robinson himself was not effective against good defenses last year; even average defenses this year have learned how to defend when Robinson is the ball carrier. I am personally convinced that last years "spread option" offense used again this year would have proved far LESS effective than last year, even with the added experience of the players. The same thing that plagues Michigan this year offensively -- no credible rushing thread other than Robinson -- would plague the spread option with Robinson. If you know it's Robinson with the run, you contain Robinson. It's really that simple. And it worked like a charm last year by teams like Iowa, Ohio State and Mississippi State. Iowa is an inconsistent team ... moreso this year than past years. The Minnesota game was in Minneapolis, and Iowa is not known as a great road team. A surprise win for Minnesota; not a completely shocking one. And Minnesota played Michigan State pretty tough in East Lansing, so I think Minnesota is an improving team as the season goes on. Some blame does fall on Borges' shoulders. But this notion that Robinson is some uber-dynamic superman of a football player is just nonsense. If it's just him it's easy to defend. If there are other credible threats THEN the Robinson threat becomes worrisome to a defense. THAT'S what Borges is *trying* to craft here -- other threats PLUS Robinson. So far it's a work in progress.
raddesc
Sun, Nov 6, 2011 : 1:44 a.m.
Let me get this straight, you want me to read a biased opinion about a coach who not longer coaches at UM? Who cares! Did this coaching staff--with their offense beat MSU? I do not live in the past so stop railing against a guy no longer on the sidelines. I will agree the defense has made strides but there is no excuse why this offense should be "stalled" against a porous Iowa squad. Are you and az suggesting that Minnesota has better offensive personnel then UM's? How about this one since we all want to compare and contrast....a coaching staff who literally could have taken this team to Indianapolis could now end up 7-5....Unacceptable!
DonAZ
Sun, Nov 6, 2011 : 12:56 a.m.
See azwolverine's comment above regarding the supposed "dynamic" nature of Denard Robinson against good defenses.
macjont
Sun, Nov 6, 2011 : 12:35 a.m.
Sure, the Big Ten officials blew their jobs on some of the last few plays. But when your team runs 75 plays the whole game, and screw up so many of them on their own, it is impossible to blame a loss on the officials. Too many plays by trying to fit round pegs into square holes. When Rich Rod did that, the Michigan faithful were all over him. Can't figure out why Brady's making the same mistake.
DonAZ
Sun, Nov 6, 2011 : 1:23 p.m.
@macjont - no, I'm not kidding. I'm aware of some of the grumbling in 2008 to which you refer. But if you look back to the overall response to a 3-9 record ... the VERY WORST in Michigan history ... you'll see any criticism was largely muted. Any *reasonable* person would conclude that. Rodriguez was afforded by most an opportunity to accomplish what he said he would do. That's why 2008 and the 3-9 record and the first missed bowl opportunity in 40 years went by mostly with an eye on 2009 and beyond. 2009 started well, but when Michigan collapsed against teams in the Big 10 ... THAT'S when some of the serious grumbling started. Still, *most* wanted to see the potential Rodriguez claimed was in place. 2010 was the same thing repeated -- started well, then collapsed -- with regression shown on defense and that supposedly potent offense showing an inability to move effectively against good teams ... Wisconsin, Ohio State and Mississippi State shut it down. And by then the cries against Rodriguez were loud indeed. It absolutely, positively and without question was NOT a case where the criticism when he stepped on campus pegged the meter and stayed there throughout his tenure. Absolutely not.
macjont
Sun, Nov 6, 2011 : 4:17 a.m.
DonAZ The criticism of Rodriguez didn't start until late in 2009? Your kidding, of course. It started before he set foot in Ann Arbor and never let up.
DonAZ
Sun, Nov 6, 2011 : 12:48 a.m.
The Michigan faithful were plenty tolerant of Rodriguez's 3-9 2008 team. The criticism of Rodriguez didn't start until late in 2009, and then in earnest in the second half of 2010. Keep in mind -- Hoke is the kind of man who won't publicly single out the players for blame. How much biting his tongue do you think he's doing right now? For instance, Robinson was simply awful today ... three freakin' passes batted down by defensive linemen ... all three of those passes thrown practically right at the lineman's head. And the fumble when he reached down with the ball to steady himself should earn him laps as punishment. Some blame goes to the coaches, for certain ... but not all. Denard Robinson is not an infallible saint ... he's a fast (but not quick) runner and is an only so-so passer. His decision-making skills are suspect. His receivers still drop too many catchable passes. And the running-back corp is simply average at best.
Craig Lounsbury
Sun, Nov 6, 2011 : 12:24 a.m.
"This game, though, was lost long before two missed calls...." that's one way to look at it. Another way is to realize that sometimes a game comes down to the last play or last couple plays. And if the officials blow a crucial call with seconds to go sometimes it comes down to that.
Lorain Steelmen
Sun, Nov 6, 2011 : 12:14 a.m.
I have had problems with big ten officiating ALL year, and not just in UM games. The catch WAS a touchdown, not even close, to being out of play. They took a first down away from UM earlier in the game, after signaling first down and moving the chains. Finally, they ignored the pass interference on the last play of the game, bringing back memories, of the 'never called' interference on Demond Howard by msu, in 1991. UM's biggest problem is Al Borges. He has the most exciting QB in college ball, but has absolutely NO idea how to use him. To NOT roll him out, and put pressure on the defense, is to take the kid out of the game. I always felt that Rodriguez would succeed or fail, by how his defenses performed. Conversely, I feel that Hoke will succeed or fail by how his offense performs. ......And so far, Hoke is failing. He has soem big decisions to make in the area of his assistants, and I doubt he's capable of taking charge. Iowa is just NOT that good. UM just never challenged them offensively, preferring instead to play Iowa's brand of ball. This is a game UM should have won. Now we have to wonder, if Hoke can win any the rest of the way. All three remaining opponents wil be tougher than Iowa. You got the feeling that Hoke did NOT have his team ready to play. The defense was listless in the first quarter, as Coker pushed through arm tackles. Reminecsent of the game at msu, when UM again looked flat. The team was NOT ready to play.... We are beginning to pick up a trend here, and it is NOT good.
DonAZ
Sun, Nov 6, 2011 : 12:54 a.m.
@heartbreakM - "but in some ways he has improved too--hanging in the pocket for example." Yes, credit where credit is due -- the 1st half TD where Robinson hung in the pocket for what seemed forever until a receiver opened up was a good example. If there was a clear running lane to the endzone I'm sure he would have taken that. But my guess (I'd have to see replay) is that the defense was spying against that very thing ... they were just hanging back against a run. Well, darn it ... rather than run into the teeth of that, wait for a receiver to open and hit him. And he did.
heartbreakM
Sun, Nov 6, 2011 : 12:44 a.m.
Oops--"not that I don't AGREE with you...." Someone above mentioned DR as "big ten offensive player of the year". Last year I criticized that choice because his team was 3-5 and his stats were largely obtained in pre-Big ten season and in late blowout games I think in some ways he has regressed as a passer, but in some ways he has improved too--hanging in the pocket for example. He is an exciting runner, but he can't do it consistently against the better D's, as shown last year and this. If he had better touch, his running lanes would open, but how many QBs can do both? Patrick White, Michael Vick (sometimes), Vince Young.
heartbreakM
Sun, Nov 6, 2011 : 12:28 a.m.
Lorain: I do sense some criticism of the coaching staff coming out of you. Similar type of criticism of our former coach used to draw quite a bit of ire from you. What gives? (Said with a smile). Not that I don't disagree with what you said, but just checking....
DonAZ
Sun, Nov 6, 2011 : 12:25 a.m.
I'm not ready to go as far as you. I think Borges *does* have a good offensive mind. I think the fundamental problem is Robinson is simply not a credible threat as a passer. Go ahead ... roll him out ... and half the defense will be tracking him. Borges' problem is he has one offensive thread -- Robinson running. That's it. And that game just doesn't fool anyone anymore.
tulsatom
Sun, Nov 6, 2011 : midnight
I agree that the refs made some bad calls. However, U-M started the game like they were just going through the motions and got behind before they knew what hit them. You can't do that on the road and expect to win against decent teams in conference play. On 4th down U-M would've been better off calling a play that allowed Denard to run it if there was an opening or pass if it was open. The play they called was a do-or-die pass, and they died. Oh well, I hope they play with more determination next week. At least Nebraska lost today.
DonAZ
Sun, Nov 6, 2011 : 12:15 a.m.
I hate to say it, but next week's game at Illinois is shaping up to be a pretty serious test of what kind of 'heart' Michigan has. If they show up and start flat and play some sloppy ball ... well, then I'm left to wonder about things.
chas
Sat, Nov 5, 2011 : 11:46 p.m.
Until the Big 10 explains why the pass to Hemingway was ruled incomplete and why no call was made on the obvious pass interference the outcome of this game is not legitimate only official. Kind of like giving Colorado an extra down and "winning" on the final play against Missouri years ago. Hoke and Michigan should not sit like quiet patsies while the conference says "tough". Sick of the incompetence I see in Big 10 officiating these days. They can't even spot a ball within 2 yards of the actual spot.
Steve
Sun, Nov 6, 2011 : 4:59 p.m.
@mtand and @momRN-I'm pretty sure the referee said the ruling on the field stands and not that the ruling was confirmed. This means there was not enough evidence to overturn the call. If it had been ruled a completed pass, the call would still have stood and Michigan would have been lining up for a two point conversion. Even the replay officials didn't think it was a clear cut incompletion. That being said, if Michigan hadn't made key mistakes earlier in the game, these plays wouldn't have mattered.
mt
Sun, Nov 6, 2011 : 11:38 a.m.
Ya JON, You are right about how the rule is applied. But he did not have control and the ground allowed him to gain control. Or as they would call it in the NFL, complete the process. The right call. The replay ref agrees with me. From what I hear, he knows the rules.
johnnya2
Sun, Nov 6, 2011 : 4:38 a.m.
Obviously Mt does NOT understand the rule. The ball is ALLOWEd to touch the ground if the receiver had possession BEFORE it hits the ground and he maintains possession without the ball moving. This was painfully obvious to any person with a brain. It was clearly a TD. It was CLEARLY PI on 4th down.
momRN
Sun, Nov 6, 2011 : 3:42 a.m.
@mt - finally somebody who actually understands the rules of football. pass WAS incomplete, replay confirmed. time for these whiny wolverines to move on and prepare for their season ending melt-down
mt
Sun, Nov 6, 2011 : 1:11 a.m.
Easy, the ball was clearly trapped against the ground. Did not have control of ball before he trapped the ball against the ground to gain control. Actually, pretty easy call. Had it been called complete, it would have rightly been overturned.
DonAZ
Sun, Nov 6, 2011 : 12:04 a.m.
Don't hold your breath waiting for that. Hoke's post-game press conference was a lesson in sucking it up and moving on. The players echoed the sentiment. I doubt very much Hoke will permit much dwelling on what could have been. Good for him.
Theo212
Sat, Nov 5, 2011 : 11:19 p.m.
Two words: horrible horrible horrible horrible horrible coaching. Why is DRob not rolling out on the 4th down play? Didn't they learn anything from that (equally horrible) botched 4th down play against msu? The tears are bitter; The tears, they sting. Come back now; Come back, King.
Larry Weisenthal
Mon, Nov 7, 2011 : 6:27 a.m.
You are the one that wants "crystal." Did you happen to catch the LSU-Alabama game. Two so so offenses, with monster defenses. I think that Rodriguez might well have done a better job with the offense with this particular group of players. But if you compare and contrast the job Hoke and Borges have done with Rodriquez offensive recruits with the job Rodriguez did with the Carr recruits, it is just night and day -- with advantage to Hoke and Borges. Then you get to real Michigan legacy football -- and to the part of the game which has to be great if you want "crystal." That would be the defense. That's Hoke's real strength and the degree of improvement is just stunning. They played a bad game Saturday, but the defense was good enough to give them a chance, right to the end. That was the hallmark of Schembechler teams -- didn't always in, but were virtually always in the game, right up to the end. I do have one prediction. Don't trash the "deuce" completely. There's a lot which is being held back -- notably passes to Robinson and maybe even the most outrageous flea flicker of the 21st century.
7718
Sun, Nov 6, 2011 : 12:38 p.m.
AZWolverine|. Denard Robinson compared to Nick Sheridan? Freshman and sophomores compared to juniors and seniors? Hoke better be 7-2 at this point, otherwise he'd be more of a failure than RR.
DonAZ
Sun, Nov 6, 2011 : 1:04 a.m.
By the way, LSU v Alabama is shaping up to be a fierce -- and wonderful -- defensive battle. Just the kind of game you'd call "boring". Funny thing ... these kind of defense-oriented teams tend win "Crystal" year after year after year. Both teams are running QB's under center with two backs. Watch and learn, dear Theo -- your King's precious "spread" is an offense drifting into obscurity, just like the Wishbone. LSU and Alabama are demonstrating the offenses of the next half dozen years.
DonAZ
Sun, Nov 6, 2011 : 12:51 a.m.
Bravo, azwolverine ... well said.
azwolverine
Sun, Nov 6, 2011 : 12:43 a.m.
At this point in RR's UM tenure, UM was 2-7. If 7-2 is not a turnaround, I don't know what is. We are competitive to the end now, not just until the end of games, but it appears competitive to the end of the season. We have something now called a DEFENSE. And no, semperveritas, 'WE' did not make DR ordinary. Hoke is trying to devise an offense that will keep DR from being ordinary in the B10 like he was last year. DR did NOTHING against OSU (nor did the spread), MSU, or Iowa (he was hurt when Forcier led three late, meaningless scores down 34-7) last season...opposing defenses had him figured out already. Miss. St said going into the bowl game that all they had to do was stop Robinson and they stopped Michigan. And that's EXACTLY what they did. No, 'WE' did not turn DR ordinary in the B10...but Hoke and Borges working on ways to keep opposing defenses from doing that is taking time. Fortunately, while they devise their plans, UM has still gone 7-2 and remained competitive in all 9 games...a far cry from the previous 3 year debacle.
DonAZ
Sun, Nov 6, 2011 : 12:21 a.m.
@semperveritas -- don't quite agree ... Robinson has had plenty of designed runs, plenty of run attempts when pass coverage leaves no receivers open ... and Denard hasn't been all that effective. That's because every team is keying on Robinson while he has the ball. He simply does not have the element of surprise like he did last year. Defenses have figured him out. Hence Borges trying his very best to create other credible threats to make the offense a bit less one-dimensional. The problem is -- and this is heresy, I know -- Denard is simply not that good a passing quarterback. He has years of bad or inadequate coaching to overcome.
semperveritas
Sun, Nov 6, 2011 : 12:08 a.m.
WE have taken the bigten's offensive player of the year and made him ordinary. the opposition hasn't done that. WE have.
tulsatom
Sun, Nov 6, 2011 : 12:07 a.m.
I agree that a play that gave Denard a run-pass option would've been nice on 4th down, but like others have said U-M would've probably given up 40 under your king and the last drive would've been to draw within 2 touchdowns. at least the defense isn't averaging giving up 35+ a game this year.
DonAZ
Sat, Nov 5, 2011 : 11:51 p.m.
"Why is DRob not rolling out on the 4th down play?" Because every defense Michigan faces has Denard Robinson figured out. Michigan running the same offense as last year would fail utterly. It did at the end of last season and it would through this year as well.
heartbreakM
Sat, Nov 5, 2011 : 11:43 p.m.
come back, King, so we can lose by more than 1 TD and it doesn't come down to the last play!! LOL
MRunner73
Sat, Nov 5, 2011 : 11:19 p.m.
All is not lost, NW just beat NE, in Lincoln. Spaty looked real flat, again. That was a close one, against, who? MN. The Legends Divisional race is totally wild. It gives Michigan hope to know they might control their destiny yet. Lots of what ifs in this IA for sure. Lots of good comment made. I would have us rather lose by two if we got the TD with seconds to go and then not converted the 2 point play because there would only be one shot. It would have still drwan a lot of fan criticism had THAT happened and Michigan lose 24-22. The point is, in the coming days, we can talk about Michigan's chances to win the Division IF they can redeem themselves and win at IL. That is where my focus is now at.
mt
Sun, Nov 6, 2011 : 1:22 a.m.
Control your own destiny? Iowa does. And MSU has to lose 2X out of 3 for UM to win the Legends. Needing others to lose is not really controlling your own destiny. It helps if you can beat someone with a winning record in October or November.
chas
Sat, Nov 5, 2011 : 11:09 p.m.
How can you describe a clear blown call on a potentially game tying score, a missed pass interference in the end zone on the final play and float a headline like this? We'll never know the legitimate outcome of this game as we were denied it by pathetic Big 10 officiating. Instead we will have to live with the official score and accept defeat? Tell it like it is. This all Iowa Alum Officiating Crew determined the outcome well out of bounds of what is acceptable.
Matt Cooper
Sun, Nov 6, 2011 : 4:56 p.m.
jim, as long as the receiver maintains posession, even if the ball does touch the ground, it's a good catch. The reason the called it incomplete is totally baffling to me as the receiver maintained possession through the end of the play. The only way they could have called a trap is if the ball his the ground BEFORE the receiver caught it, not after.
jimid34
Sun, Nov 6, 2011 : 12:31 p.m.
First, during the game, the ref said over the audio that the ruling on the field was an "Incomplete pass" not "out of bounds". The replay would need to show that he did not trap the ball as he landed on the ground. Unfortunately, the ball slid down a little as he fell to the ground and his hands were not completely under the ball. The big game changers were the 3 pass interference calls that the refs blew. The one where they threw the flag and then picked it up, the interception in the end zone at the end of the 1st half was a worse pass interference call then the one at the end of the game. The Iowa defender was holding the receivers arm down when the ball hit him and bounced in the air. Dave Brandon needs to make sure NONE of these refs ever sets foot in the Big House ever again. Truely pathetic.....
redceder1
Sun, Nov 6, 2011 : 6:22 a.m.
And that Iowa band! Could you believe the refs let them play so loud?
Theo's Brother
Sat, Nov 5, 2011 : 11:08 p.m.
Well said. Two plays hurt us: - The botched extra point - The redzone INT Those two things come through for us, Brendan Gibbons kicks a GW field goal. On the bright side, the defense is getting stops when needed. The offense is talented and will get it together. This will be a scary team on New Years' Day (Lord willing) and going into next. The future is bright! GO BLUE!
DonAZ
Sun, Nov 6, 2011 : 1:07 a.m.
Yeah, I'm not a fan of that "deuce" package. It doesn't seem to be fooling anyone.
Jojo B
Sun, Nov 6, 2011 : 12:57 a.m.
And I'll add another one of those crazy Al Borges dual-QB "trick" plays. It failed again to gain any significant yardage, it didn't fool anyone, and most importantly, it threw Robinson off-track for the drive.
DonAZ
Sun, Nov 6, 2011 : 12:07 a.m.
I'll add to that -- o Several catchable-but-dropped passes o Three (I think) Robinson passes batted at the line of scrimmage