I believe the committee would've still moved the seedings around to make sure Alabama and Georgia didn't have an immediate rematch. They would've probably just made Cincinnati #3 and Georgia #4 in the playoffs.
I've read and heard that many Michigan fans sell their OSU tickets to pretty much get back the money they paid for all the other tickets.
So many of our season ticket holders have figured out that they can basically go watch Michigan for free, as long as they sell their OSU tickets for a great price.
It seems that would be the main reason why there are usually so many OSU fans in the Big House for that game.
Michigan had to deal with some questionable refereeing. Though I believe Macdonald's poor understanding that he couldn't do mass substitutions against a very fast up tempo offense was the real reason Michigan lost that game.
The MSU running back just ran over Michigan's defense when they weren't really ready some of the snaps. The Michigan run defense isn't that terrible.
Well, there you go saying what many people say after Michigan wins against a quality opponent on the road.
"Michigan won against a bad or crappy team."
PSU was not a crappy team.
If Michigan would've lost today, many people would've been talking about how Harbaugh still can't win against a good team on the road in a tough environment.
It's joked about, but it's often true that many people change the narrative when Michigan wins these games.
Well, look how PSU is doing some creative things to move the ball against a tough Michigan defense. I'm so tired of Michigan's boring uncreative offense.
It just seems like most of Michigan's plays are just handoff run up the middle calls, nothing really creative. McNamara won't run and they don't trust him with tempo.
Well, a part me feels that Michigan just has to bracket Dotson throughout the game and they'll win. I remember Michigan recently getting beat because they didn't properly game plan around one great PSU wide receiver.
I know this is a different defensive coordinator, but I still don't trust that he'll commit to stopping Dotson.
Many defensive coordinators just don't want to concede into doing a lot of game planning to contain one wide receiver.
Though I've watched enough of the Detroit Lions and Calvin Johnson to learn that a defense can sometimes control a great WR with proper brackets.
Joel Klatt stated during the broadcast that the play got wrongfully "reofficiated" and some people were debating on here what that really means because many plays seem to get reofficiated by reviews.
Though that play went a little too far with reofficiating. The review officials totally disregarded the rules that state there must be indisputable video evidence to overturn a play or the call on the field.
They used too much of their opinions and judgments to decide that the MSU quarterback was down, even though they had no real indisputable video evidence to warrant that decision.
I mean, that's not how the review process is suppose to work and that's what Joel Klatt meant when he said the play got wrongfully reofficiated.
They completely disregarded the review rules and just used their opinions to "reofficiate" the play as being down.
Well, under normal circumstances MSU would've plummeted more after that loss to Purdue. Though since they recently defeated Michigan, that made it tough for voters to drop them down too far in the polls.
I mean, there would've been hard questions about where does Michigan belong if the voters had moved MSU much further down.
I want good things to happen for Michigan. Though I'm rather intrigued how so many people are acting like winning against OSU is the only real obstacle left for Michigan.
PSU just played OSU very tough in Columbus. When PSU lost some games and their QB got injured, that made many Michigan fans feel UM had a better chance to win at PSU.
Though PSU's quarterback is healthy again and they showed against OSU that they're still a decent talented team.
I'm not saying Michigan can't win at Happy Valley, but it just seems like many people on here are disregarding that game.
Well, this is how l felt too. I mean, Harbaugh never stopped MacDonald from doing that defensive substitution pattern.
I'm not so willing to give MacDonald a total pass because he's new to the college game like some people are doing.
McDonald's common sense should've eventully shown him that constant mass substitutions couldn't continue to work against MSU's up tempo offense. I mean, just like fans could notice after awhile.
Though he just seemed determined to keep doing it, which leads me to believe they didn't prepare in practice to do anything different against up tempo.
Nebraska has so much creativity on offense. Michigan just has nothing really creative. It was time to use some kind of deception play and they couldn't run one.
Well, a Shaun Nua appreciate thread does seem a little premature. Though I do feel the defensive line hasn't played as bad as some people on here are stating.
I mean, if that was the case, then Michigan would've probably lost to Rutgers because the offense really didn't do a lot to win that game.
The Michigan defensive line played well enough against a very motivated and competitive Rutgers football team.
I know they allowed some QB runs up the middle, but Rutgers still didn't score many points.
The Michigan defensive line made some big stops during that game.
Well, some people really like stating what you posted, but it's just not true. They appeared in the Final Four twice, which means they won two Regional Championships.
So saying they didn't win anything... is over doing it.
I don't really have a problem with players getting paid for certain things, but these types of large payments do open up possible issues.
I mean, could a school tell a recruit that they'll workout a deal which will pay him or her huge payments for something if the recruit commits to their university?
I know some people feel the players should have opportunities to be rightfully paid. Though does this allow basically open bidding for players to come to certain universities?
Well, I've noticed many people posting about Brooks possibly being the starting PG. Howard let him play PG for moments in the tournament and that lineup was rather effective at times.
Though Howard didn't seem to like using that lineup for more than a few minutes, even when Smith was really struggling in games.
So there's not a lot of clear evidence to suggest that Howard likes the idea of Brooks being the starting PG.
Though it seems like Brooks would be good as the starting PG in potential lineups.
Well, most of the time in today's college basketball, it's about 3 point shooting that dictates whether or not an offense looks good or bad.
Michigan probably would've lost to LSU if they didn't have some tremendous 3 point shooting during that game.
Brooks and Brown were feeling it. They were shooting with confidence and in the zone.
Franz and Smith lost their long distance shooting confidence quite a few games ago. So they haven't been much help in that area for awhile.
Though for some reason Brooks' 3 point shooting dramatically fell off after that LSU game and that left Brown as the only confident 3 point shooter.
They were feeding the ball to Dickinson so much because many of them didn't feel confident about their shooting abilities.
They got away with poor 3 point shooting against FSU because the Seminoles played terrible in the paint defense.
Michigan struggled with FTs and Hunter missed some easy shots and UCLA did use good defensive tactics.
Though the root of the problem was Michigan no longer having decent 3 point shooting and that's the real reason why they only scored 49 points in that game.
Well, I disagree about Franz being fantastic against FSU. I mean, his 3 point shooting was very bad during that game and it continued to be that way against UCLA.
Many people on here are talking about who should come back and how they almost want the whole team to return.
Though if a lot of these guys came back, they would want their usual minutes, but that might make the in coming freshmen disgruntled.
High ranked McDonald's All American players don't come to sit on the bench for a long time during their freshman season.
I mean, there are pros and cons that come with recruiting the #1 basketball class. You're going to have to let some freshmen play a decent amount of minutes and possibly start.
It seems that many people in our fan base might not be ready to accept that notion.
The subject of Blue Bloods in college basketball can be so subjective and debatable. You stating UCLA isn't a Blue Blood just proves that point even further.
Some people feel that title should only be given to the main traditional Blood Blue schools, like Kentucky, Duke, North Carolina, Kansas and UCLA.
Though some people like myself feel the list can be much longer with schools such as Indiana, Arizona, Louisville, Syracuse, UCONN, Villanova and maybe some more.
Many people who follow college basketball around the country do consider MSU to be a popular Blue Blood, at least right now.
Though a lot of Michigan fans won't agree for obvious reasons.
I also believe Blue Blood status can come and go in college basketball. I mean, schools like Georgetown and even Maryland to a small degree were once considered Blood Blues.
Indiana's weak Blue Blood status will probably be removed if they don't eventually turn things around with their program.
Recent Comments
I know Michigan was trying to surprise Illinois with a run, but that 3rd down was an opportunity to work on the passing game.
JJ is getting banged up in this game.
I believe the committee would've still moved the seedings around to make sure Alabama and Georgia didn't have an immediate rematch. They would've probably just made Cincinnati #3 and Georgia #4 in the playoffs.
Well, this is one of the reasons why I was a little skeptical about Gattis making that statement about OSU being soft.
He might leave for a head coaching position and Michigan will be left to back up that bulletin board material for the 2022 game in Columbus.
Maybe OSU's defense was soft this season, but that might easily change, especially with their new defensive coordinator.
So I would've preferred that Gattis didn't make those opinions public.
I felt he should've been happy that the Michigan staff noticed a weakness with OSU and just left that knowledge in-house.
Why comment about the weakness and possibly give OSU more motivation to get better in that area?
Well, this does appear to have something to do with Venables leaving, because Keon Sabb recently stated that he was totally committed to Clemson.
Wow, I never realized that the start of Michigan's downfall in the rivalry might have had something to do with the field changes.
I know we've had a few real good teams since 2002, but not many.
It stands to reason that Michigan's traditional man ball style of play was better suited for a slow field.
I remember when OSU use to bring some talented teams to Michigan and be forced to play a slow black and blue slugfest game.
I've read and heard that many Michigan fans sell their OSU tickets to pretty much get back the money they paid for all the other tickets.
So many of our season ticket holders have figured out that they can basically go watch Michigan for free, as long as they sell their OSU tickets for a great price.
It seems that would be the main reason why there are usually so many OSU fans in the Big House for that game.
Michigan had to deal with some questionable refereeing. Though I believe Macdonald's poor understanding that he couldn't do mass substitutions against a very fast up tempo offense was the real reason Michigan lost that game.
The MSU running back just ran over Michigan's defense when they weren't really ready some of the snaps. The Michigan run defense isn't that terrible.
Well, there you go saying what many people say after Michigan wins against a quality opponent on the road.
"Michigan won against a bad or crappy team."
PSU was not a crappy team.
If Michigan would've lost today, many people would've been talking about how Harbaugh still can't win against a good team on the road in a tough environment.
It's joked about, but it's often true that many people change the narrative when Michigan wins these games.
Wow, All showed some good speed for a TE.
McNamara is Michigan's best quarterback right now, but he's still so inconsistent with his throwing abilities.
If he just makes a simple decent throw, Haskins gets that first down and that PSU scoring drive doesn't happen.
Michigan is constantly using a lot of bunched jumbo packages because Illinois had some success with those against PSU.
Though the Illinois QB was also a threat to keep the ball sometimes. I really believe a McNamara bootleg call would've worked on that 4th and 2 play.
Well, look how PSU is doing some creative things to move the ball against a tough Michigan defense. I'm so tired of Michigan's boring uncreative offense.
It just seems like most of Michigan's plays are just handoff run up the middle calls, nothing really creative. McNamara won't run and they don't trust him with tempo.
Well, a part me feels that Michigan just has to bracket Dotson throughout the game and they'll win. I remember Michigan recently getting beat because they didn't properly game plan around one great PSU wide receiver.
I know this is a different defensive coordinator, but I still don't trust that he'll commit to stopping Dotson.
Many defensive coordinators just don't want to concede into doing a lot of game planning to contain one wide receiver.
Though I've watched enough of the Detroit Lions and Calvin Johnson to learn that a defense can sometimes control a great WR with proper brackets.
Joel Klatt stated during the broadcast that the play got wrongfully "reofficiated" and some people were debating on here what that really means because many plays seem to get reofficiated by reviews.
Though that play went a little too far with reofficiating. The review officials totally disregarded the rules that state there must be indisputable video evidence to overturn a play or the call on the field.
They used too much of their opinions and judgments to decide that the MSU quarterback was down, even though they had no real indisputable video evidence to warrant that decision.
I mean, that's not how the review process is suppose to work and that's what Joel Klatt meant when he said the play got wrongfully reofficiated.
They completely disregarded the review rules and just used their opinions to "reofficiate" the play as being down.
Well, under normal circumstances MSU would've plummeted more after that loss to Purdue. Though since they recently defeated Michigan, that made it tough for voters to drop them down too far in the polls.
I mean, there would've been hard questions about where does Michigan belong if the voters had moved MSU much further down.
Well, OSU has recently had some seasons where they didn't look sharp until playing Michigan.
I mean, Michigan was actually favorited to beat them one season not too long ago.
I want good things to happen for Michigan. Though I'm rather intrigued how so many people are acting like winning against OSU is the only real obstacle left for Michigan.
PSU just played OSU very tough in Columbus. When PSU lost some games and their QB got injured, that made many Michigan fans feel UM had a better chance to win at PSU.
Though PSU's quarterback is healthy again and they showed against OSU that they're still a decent talented team.
I'm not saying Michigan can't win at Happy Valley, but it just seems like many people on here are disregarding that game.
I kinda stay away from college football sports talk the following week after Michigan gets defeated in a game.
Though I'm curious to know if other sports talk people were talking about the questionable refereeing and not just the guys mentioned in this thread.
Well, you're just posting a negative response after watching the way Michigan did some things against MSU.
Though if Michigan makes the playoffs, then that would mean they're playing a lot better and maybe capable of giving Georgia a competitive game.
Well, this is how l felt too. I mean, Harbaugh never stopped MacDonald from doing that defensive substitution pattern.
I'm not so willing to give MacDonald a total pass because he's new to the college game like some people are doing.
McDonald's common sense should've eventully shown him that constant mass substitutions couldn't continue to work against MSU's up tempo offense. I mean, just like fans could notice after awhile.
Though he just seemed determined to keep doing it, which leads me to believe they didn't prepare in practice to do anything different against up tempo.
Wow, that was a great stop by the Illinois defense.
The Illinois RB wasn't ready for the moment because he should've caught that first OT two point conversion to end the game.
Nebraska has so much creativity on offense. Michigan just has nothing really creative. It was time to use some kind of deception play and they couldn't run one.
A quarterback having the ability to run kept that drive going for Nebraska. It's one of the things that's holding back Michigan's offense.
The WR bailed Cade out with a tremendous catch.
Well, a Shaun Nua appreciate thread does seem a little premature. Though I do feel the defensive line hasn't played as bad as some people on here are stating.
I mean, if that was the case, then Michigan would've probably lost to Rutgers because the offense really didn't do a lot to win that game.
The Michigan defensive line played well enough against a very motivated and competitive Rutgers football team.
I know they allowed some QB runs up the middle, but Rutgers still didn't score many points.
The Michigan defensive line made some big stops during that game.
I started yelling at my TV when I saw the Lions switch to a three man rush. The 4 man rush was working so well.
Well, it's because Rutgers has been stopping the running game.
Well, some people really like stating what you posted, but it's just not true. They appeared in the Final Four twice, which means they won two Regional Championships.
So saying they didn't win anything... is over doing it.
I agree. The Michigan player stood over the WMU guy and really did too much talking.
I don't really follow Michigan hockey as I do with football.
How did Michigan hockey have all of these supposedly great players, but weren't a dominant team last season?
I don't really have a problem with players getting paid for certain things, but these types of large payments do open up possible issues.
I mean, could a school tell a recruit that they'll workout a deal which will pay him or her huge payments for something if the recruit commits to their university?
I know some people feel the players should have opportunities to be rightfully paid. Though does this allow basically open bidding for players to come to certain universities?
I really liked the Michigan Panthers and they were pretty good for awhile.
A few years ago there was some hype about Mantha becoming a huge superstar, but it just didn't happen at all.
I came to the conclusion long ago that he probably wasn't going to be one... at least not while playing for Detroit.
Hopefully this trade works out for Yzerman and the Red Wings.
UCLA probably felt disrespected when they were put in the "Play In" game and not a better position.
The desire to prove people wrong who didn't think you were good has often been a helpful motivation with players throughout the history of sports.
It's possible all the Pac 12 teams in this tournament were motivated by the disrespect their conference received this season.
Though I disagree with people who feel the Pac 12 was unfairly seeded by the committee.
I mean, sometimes teams just really outperform their seeding in NCAA basketball tournament.
Michigan couldn't get UCLA's Juzang to do stupid decisions like that charge he did to end regulation in this game.
Well, I've noticed many people posting about Brooks possibly being the starting PG. Howard let him play PG for moments in the tournament and that lineup was rather effective at times.
Though Howard didn't seem to like using that lineup for more than a few minutes, even when Smith was really struggling in games.
So there's not a lot of clear evidence to suggest that Howard likes the idea of Brooks being the starting PG.
Though it seems like Brooks would be good as the starting PG in potential lineups.
Well, most of the time in today's college basketball, it's about 3 point shooting that dictates whether or not an offense looks good or bad.
Michigan probably would've lost to LSU if they didn't have some tremendous 3 point shooting during that game.
Brooks and Brown were feeling it. They were shooting with confidence and in the zone.
Franz and Smith lost their long distance shooting confidence quite a few games ago. So they haven't been much help in that area for awhile.
Though for some reason Brooks' 3 point shooting dramatically fell off after that LSU game and that left Brown as the only confident 3 point shooter.
They were feeding the ball to Dickinson so much because many of them didn't feel confident about their shooting abilities.
They got away with poor 3 point shooting against FSU because the Seminoles played terrible in the paint defense.
Michigan struggled with FTs and Hunter missed some easy shots and UCLA did use good defensive tactics.
Though the root of the problem was Michigan no longer having decent 3 point shooting and that's the real reason why they only scored 49 points in that game.
Well, I disagree about Franz being fantastic against FSU. I mean, his 3 point shooting was very bad during that game and it continued to be that way against UCLA.
Many people on here are talking about who should come back and how they almost want the whole team to return.
Though if a lot of these guys came back, they would want their usual minutes, but that might make the in coming freshmen disgruntled.
High ranked McDonald's All American players don't come to sit on the bench for a long time during their freshman season.
I mean, there are pros and cons that come with recruiting the #1 basketball class. You're going to have to let some freshmen play a decent amount of minutes and possibly start.
It seems that many people in our fan base might not be ready to accept that notion.
Well, this is one of the reasons why I don't talk too overconfident about the outcome of some NCAA basketball tournament games.
I've watched kids choke, play tight, shoot cold and their team get upset for many years in this tournament.
In fact, that happened a lot with higher seeded teams this year.
You never know when certain guys will fall to the tournament pressure.
Though you're hoping it won't be pretty much your whole team falling apart and somebody will do enough to win the game.
UCLA is a decent team, but they benefited greatly from Alabama and Michigan flat out choking and falling apart against them.
Eli Brooks' 3 point shooting totally disappeared after that great performance against LSU.
Eli and Brown were the 3 point offense for this team because Smith's and Wagner's long distance shooting has been broken for a rather long time.
Though once Eli fell off, Michigan only had Brown and that further weakened their offense.
The team 3 point shooting was bad against FSU, but luckily they scored a lot of points in the paint.
Wow, rather disappointing that Michigan couldn't at least get a shot off right there.
I'm not trying to seem mean, but there's no reason to feel bad for the team that wins the hockey tournament.
I'm pretty sure that team will be happily celebrating their championship.
The hockey tournament has had COVID issues, but the winning team's achievement will be fully accepted and recognized, especially years from now.
The subject of Blue Bloods in college basketball can be so subjective and debatable. You stating UCLA isn't a Blue Blood just proves that point even further.
Some people feel that title should only be given to the main traditional Blood Blue schools, like Kentucky, Duke, North Carolina, Kansas and UCLA.
Though some people like myself feel the list can be much longer with schools such as Indiana, Arizona, Louisville, Syracuse, UCONN, Villanova and maybe some more.
Many people who follow college basketball around the country do consider MSU to be a popular Blue Blood, at least right now.
Though a lot of Michigan fans won't agree for obvious reasons.
I also believe Blue Blood status can come and go in college basketball. I mean, schools like Georgetown and even Maryland to a small degree were once considered Blood Blues.
Indiana's weak Blue Blood status will probably be removed if they don't eventually turn things around with their program.
…
I CAME HERE FOR THE BANG!!!
GO BLUE!!!
Mike Smith hasn't made smart decisions down the stretch of this game.
Michigan really needs for Mike Smith to provide some 3 point scoring right now.
The announcers did say that when Brown went to the bench. I thought he had three foul too.