Wolfman

December 13th, 2017 at 6:58 PM ^

He is not the only one from Ole Miss leaving and their argument is well thought out and plural. There are a number of players that are going to tell the ncaa - through their attorneys or in person - but all will be represented, that Hugh and the Ole Miss staff were guilty of misrepresentation when recruiting the players. The legal experts giving their opinion feel it will be a compelling argument inasmuch as so many are making the same argument and Ole Miss is not armed with much to refute it. 

Joined: 07/23/2008

MGoPoints: 8259

gruden

December 13th, 2017 at 11:16 AM ^

Next season is certainly set up for sweet redemption.  M will not only have the opportunity to beat all of its main rivals, but do so on the road.  Beating all 3 in that scenario would make people forget a lot of losses.  We got the QBs, more experience, so now we're a lineman or two away from being a real possibility.

Joined: 04/29/2016

MGoPoints: 6063

HateSparty

December 13th, 2017 at 7:21 AM ^

This competition will give Michigan 3 good options when one wins it.  The defense will again be lights out.  Likely better than this past year.  The O-line.  ugh.  That cannot be the achilles heel again.  If so, Harbaugh has to make a change.  I am overly optimistic.  I am uncomfortable with that feeling.

Joined: 12/17/2014

MGoPoints: 27193

Frank Chuck

December 13th, 2017 at 5:57 AM ^

...Rich Rod and Brady Hoke since the iPhone was revealed in late 2006.

(I'm not saying Harbaugh is a guaranteed future Hall of Famer but he's certainly a helluva lot better than his predecessors.)

Also, your reasoning is lacking. What did or didn't happen in the past has little-to-no bearing on what will happen in the future.

Joined: 05/01/2015

MGoPoints: 15911

Red is Blue

December 13th, 2017 at 9:31 AM ^

"Michigan hasn't won a rmajor road game since before the iPhone was invented, so cross off Notre Dame, MSU, and OSU from the W-list."

 

The MSU game in 2016 apparently doesn't count as a "major road game" victory.  And yet, Michigan won't win the game next year in E. Lansing because they can't win "major road games" which implies that the 2018 game at MSU is now a "major road game" even though the 2016 game wasn't?  That seems inconsistent.

Joined: 05/13/2010

MGoPoints: 23901

Red is Blue

December 13th, 2017 at 1:40 PM ^

Think you missed my point.  It was not meant to comment on whether MSU 2016 was a major road win.

The post I referenced implied MSU 2016 wasn't a major road win (obviously it can't have been, since the commentary was we haven't had a "major road win").  I can accept that.  But, then why is MSU 2018 a presumptive loss because it would require a major road win?  Is MSU a major game or not?  

If it is record related as you imply, then what record does MSU have to have to make it a "major road win"?  And, how can we, in advance, know that MSU will chin that bar such that it becomes a presumptive loss, because winning would require a major road win?

 

Joined: 05/13/2010

MGoPoints: 23901

bo_lives

December 13th, 2017 at 4:14 PM ^

A team that beat Michigan at the Big House as well as a highly talented Penn State squad. I am assuming they're "back" after the 3-9 year, since ya know, that year is kind of an outlier and they've been pretty darn good since 2010. It would not be a major road win if Michigan walks in and beats a 2-4 MSU team that ends up 3-9. It would be a major road win if Michigan walks in and beats a ranked 5-1 or 6-0 MSU team that's on it's way to a top 20 finish.

Joined: 04/10/2011

MGoPoints: 7867

DT76

December 13th, 2017 at 4:55 AM ^

I’m not too concerned over who wins the starting qb job. Where I feel good is knowing there are good plan b and c guys should injuries crop up.

Joined: 07/19/2011

MGoPoints: 11117

DOBlue48

December 13th, 2017 at 9:11 AM ^

I would certainly agree with your premise Blu, but I also think that many on the board are overlooking how much a refined receiving corps and solid QB play will help the OL.

I certainly did not study how teams were defending us throughout the season, but it was pretty obvious in many cases that teams did not believe we could get the ball downfield, so the more aggressive they played at the line of scrimmage.  We still ran the ball pretty well despite this fact, which makes me feel pretty good about the run side of things for next year.  

Now insert a QB that threatens a team deep and talented recievers with another year perfecting their craft and defenses will have to soften unless they are just committed to losing to the long ball.  Now we can run the ball easier, and force defenses to play more assignment football rather than say "hey, everyone, lets run at the LOS at every snap."

Offense is a complete unit and if one aspect consistently struggles (QB), the other aspects of the unit are stressed....sometimes to failure.  

I predict a year from now we will be discussing what amazing improvement we saw in the OL.  The big boys will deserve much of the credit.  But give an assist to having skill players that truly threaten a defense all game long.

Joined: 10/21/2015

MGoPoints: 2156

Mr Miggle

December 13th, 2017 at 9:33 AM ^

some poor OL play and have a shot at the playoffs. Better QB play alone would have won at least one more game, probably two. Better WR play alone would have won at least one more.

Our OL play wasn't terrible. It was uneven. There were busts in pass blocking, but our QBs often had time to throw. I think our QB play made it look worse than it really was.

It's pretty much assured that our WRs will be better next season. Give us good QB play and our offense will be very good. Even if the OL plays at the same level as last season, (not that we should want that), we'll think they're improved.and will be giving Frey a lot of credit.

 

 

Joined: 10/07/2010

MGoPoints: 47770