Firing Harbaugh would be dumb. It would be dumb because doing so would be based on the belief that we can do better. The reality is if Harbaugh can't win at the highest level here, no one can. The landscape of college football continues to make it more and more difficult for a program like Michigan's to succeed, and it has nothing to do with the coach.
The NIL has made funneling money to players "above board" much easier. Does anyone really think the twenty or so OSU players that were given cars to use while at OSU will provide a return on investment for the dealership? Does anyone think that's actually the goal? It's widely accepted that Walter Nolen is looking for the biggest "NIL" payday. I don't think the rules were implemented to allow for providing a recruit bags of cash legally, but that's how it's working. Like it or not, the University of Michigan as an institution isn't going to work that way.
The one-time transfer rule for immediate eligibility has become free agency (interestingly as Nick Saban of all people said it would). Is the game against MSU even competitive if not for their transfers? I doubt it. Like it or not, the University of Michigan as an institution doesn't allow transfers for the most part. This isn't new news.
Add these two new realities to the continued realities of Michigan being located in a geographical void in terms of high school football talent, Michigan requiring high school GPA's in excess of the NCAA minimum to get in, and Michigan requiring its players to actually attend class, and you have an increasingly insurmountable advantage for almost everyone else.
Many of you will say this doesn't justify a loss to MSU. That's only because many of you don't think MSU is worthy of losing to. If you did, you wouldn't fail to begin every conversation about Saturday's game with the officials taking four points off the board in a game where we lost by four points. It's irrational to think any program can overcome all of the aforementioned built-in disadvantages in player acquisition while adding in some of the worst officiating anyone has ever seen. Players and coaches are going to make mistakes during a game because they're human. Those mistakes are part of the game. Officials, with the aid of replay, shouldn't be terrible at their jobs.
So, can we do better than Harbaugh? Years of Rich Rod and Hoke say no. 1970's Big Ten football ain't coming through that door. Heck, 1990's Big Ten football ain't. The landscape has changed. Teams are better and will continue to improve with the new rules. The new rules don't help Michigan by the way, because the institution that is the University of Michigan won't allow it. Maybe they should...I have no opinion since I am not alumni (Calvin College, er, University here). My suggestion is you either change your expectations or find a different team to cheer for.
I agree. Seems strange given that Michigan has consistently out-recruited everyone on that list save 4 or 5 programs over the last 5 years. Have they been as low as 17 even once under Harbaugh?
I agree that Brown should probably move on, but it isn't just coaching. When you're the deepest defender on the field, i.e. Metellus, you shouldn't be letting anyone behind you. That's not coaching at this level. That's a player messing up his assignment. The biggest difference between Michigan and OSU in these games recently is they don't make mistakes while we do.
i'm not sure why you're being negged, at least on the substance of your point. bottom line: having to score 60 points to be in a game is a failure on the defense. We're outmanned, no doubt about that. We're not that outmanned though.
Why have season tickets if you're only going to sell them to OSU fans? It seems like half the stadium is red every time we play them. Not much of a home game.
There's no benefit to playing a team with a pulse non-conference unless losing to a good team means as much to the committee as beating a bad team. Until that happens, we should play Eastern, Central, and Western Michigan every year, with the Eastern game being the week before OSU.
No doubt. I don't think it's a coincidence that our best all-around game of the year is the one where he was asked to do the least. I just don't see how we score enough points to have a chance against OSU with Shea as the QB
The fact that this nonsensical rambling is a net positive in votes should surprise me, but it doesn't. I am happy to see that someone has the guts to admit that winning is literally the only thing they care about. Domestic abusers? Who cares. Pedophiles? No problem. Hey, maybe Nassar can coach?
Couple things that jump out at me. First, you should find a hobby that involves anger management. You're ranting about a college football game that you have literally no involvement in. Find some perspective.
Second, your list of "better" options is littered with problems. Venables has done nothing but be a defensive coordinator. Stoops, while a favorite of mine, was awful when he left Oklahoma. Rhule? Really? What are his qualifications other than being young and maybe not terrible. And Urban Meyer. Great coach. No question about it. Win at all cost? Never going to (and shouldn't) happen at Michigan.
Maybe you're right about academics. I don't think you are, but maybe. I do know this though: There's a reason a guy like Urban Meyer was willing to take over OSU after the tire fire he left at Florida, as opposed to a Notre Dame. I'm guessing that reason had something to do with how much easier it would be to get players into 1 school versus the other. When winning is literally the only thing that matters, certain allowances are made.
Michigan fans are insufferable. If you really think comparing college football in the 70's and 80's, when Michigan played maybe 1 or 2 teams a year that were capable of beating them, to now makes sense, then I can't help you.
We consistently run into Ohio State which has better players from the top of their roster to the bottom. That's with Harbaugh recruiting at a historically high level for Michigan. At some point, you may want to ask yourself why that is.
Actually coming up with a gameplan is what the coaches are responsible for. Executing that gameplan is what the players are for. I saw lots of dumb penalties and dropped balls. Those are on the players. If a player can't get mentally prepared for a game like this, maybe they should think about giving back their scholarship.
You already know the answer to that. Let me see..."Don Brown sucks and Michigan could do way better. Huh? No, I can't name one, but This is Michigan." (Takes swig of Natty Lite).
What else...oh yeah, "Harbaugh sucks too. We should totally back up the money truck and hire [insert flavor of the week]. He would totally come. This is Michigan." (Opens new Natty Lite).
Here's a secret that isn't actually a secret: winning consistently at Michigan is really hard. Want to know why? The state of Michigan has never produced a solid quantity of quality high school football players. The Midwest, outside of Ohio, doesn't produce a solid quantity of quality high school football players anymore. And Michigan doesn't accept the same types of players that litter the rosters of OSU, Alabama, and Clemson. And they never will. Sorry Braylon. Simply put: if Harbaugh can't win here, I'm not sure anyone can.
Coaching was fine; certainly good enough to win. I'm not one of those people who think it's the coach's job to "get the team ready to play." These are semi-professional athletes, hoping to be fully-professional in the near future. If they can't get themselves ready to play for a huge night game then coaching is the least of the problems.
They came out ready to go on both sides of the ball. The combination of poor officiating and dropped balls were the problems. Sometimes, it is actually the players who lost the game.
"The Nico PI was a horrible call but..." But what? That's a huge play that was taken away due to one of the worst offensive pass interference calls I've seen. It was made even worse given the obvious push off by the receiver on PSU's first TD. In big games against good teams, those kinds of things matter.
I've watched the entire first half now, and other than the weird 58 yard field goal try, coaching has nothing to do with this. Shea throws a pick. Each of our receivers has dropped at least 1 ball. DPJ has dropped 3. Ambry Thomas getting burned. Offsides and false start penalties. This isn't a coaching problem at this point. It's refs and players. Nice thing is... we're still in it.
A & M has lost to the only good teams they've played. In other words, we may not know their floor, but we certainly know their ceiling. It seems that only SEC teams get credit for losing. Once again...bias. Clemson's schedule is Charmin-soft. We won't have any idea how good they are until the playoff, assuming they get in.
I've watched them all play. I saw Clemson almost lose to UNC. I've watched the other three blow out bad teams. Who cares how great they look against overmatched football teams? Did Michigan suddenly become dominant because it blew out Rutgers? Did it go from great, to bad, to good during the course of the Illinois game? A team is only as good as the teams they beat. That's why strength of schedule should be the primary component the committee looks at. Anything else is simple bias.
Good grief. Some of you clearly weren't here for the final years of Carr. Lots of people, including me, would say things like "anyone can win at Michigan" or "Michigan recruits itself." Well, Rich Rodriguez and Brady Hoke disagree. And while we're talking about how easy it is to win at university of [insert name here], let's consider the following: pre-Saban Alabama, post-Brown Texas, post-Carroll USC, post-Meyer Florida, current-Florida State. All of these schools have better recruiting bases and lower academic requirements than Michigan. Fact is...winning isn't easy at any salary.
On what basis are they not no. 7?Only a couple of teams in the top 10 have played a team with a pulse and won at this point. If we're basing rankings on performance to date, Penn State could arguably be top 5. Beating iowa at kinnick is no joke. Neither Bama, Clemson, nor Ohio State have played a good football team yet, and Clemson almost lost to UNC at home.
Notre Dame, Auburn, and LSU have been/are relevant occasionally.
Georgia and Oklahoma in their current forms are currently flashes in the pan. Let's see if they can sustain it. Georgia just lost to a bad SC team at home.
He's a football coach at a big-boy football school. He will always be overpaid. That being said, the market sets his rate, and name five coaches who have been more successful over the last 5 years who are currently coaching.
Recent Comments
Firing Harbaugh would be dumb. It would be dumb because doing so would be based on the belief that we can do better. The reality is if Harbaugh can't win at the highest level here, no one can. The landscape of college football continues to make it more and more difficult for a program like Michigan's to succeed, and it has nothing to do with the coach.
The NIL has made funneling money to players "above board" much easier. Does anyone really think the twenty or so OSU players that were given cars to use while at OSU will provide a return on investment for the dealership? Does anyone think that's actually the goal? It's widely accepted that Walter Nolen is looking for the biggest "NIL" payday. I don't think the rules were implemented to allow for providing a recruit bags of cash legally, but that's how it's working. Like it or not, the University of Michigan as an institution isn't going to work that way.
The one-time transfer rule for immediate eligibility has become free agency (interestingly as Nick Saban of all people said it would). Is the game against MSU even competitive if not for their transfers? I doubt it. Like it or not, the University of Michigan as an institution doesn't allow transfers for the most part. This isn't new news.
Add these two new realities to the continued realities of Michigan being located in a geographical void in terms of high school football talent, Michigan requiring high school GPA's in excess of the NCAA minimum to get in, and Michigan requiring its players to actually attend class, and you have an increasingly insurmountable advantage for almost everyone else.
Many of you will say this doesn't justify a loss to MSU. That's only because many of you don't think MSU is worthy of losing to. If you did, you wouldn't fail to begin every conversation about Saturday's game with the officials taking four points off the board in a game where we lost by four points. It's irrational to think any program can overcome all of the aforementioned built-in disadvantages in player acquisition while adding in some of the worst officiating anyone has ever seen. Players and coaches are going to make mistakes during a game because they're human. Those mistakes are part of the game. Officials, with the aid of replay, shouldn't be terrible at their jobs.
So, can we do better than Harbaugh? Years of Rich Rod and Hoke say no. 1970's Big Ten football ain't coming through that door. Heck, 1990's Big Ten football ain't. The landscape has changed. Teams are better and will continue to improve with the new rules. The new rules don't help Michigan by the way, because the institution that is the University of Michigan won't allow it. Maybe they should...I have no opinion since I am not alumni (Calvin College, er, University here). My suggestion is you either change your expectations or find a different team to cheer for.
I agree. Seems strange given that Michigan has consistently out-recruited everyone on that list save 4 or 5 programs over the last 5 years. Have they been as low as 17 even once under Harbaugh?
Just moved to Kansas. Flipping a coin between Kansas and K State.
I agree that Brown should probably move on, but it isn't just coaching. When you're the deepest defender on the field, i.e. Metellus, you shouldn't be letting anyone behind you. That's not coaching at this level. That's a player messing up his assignment. The biggest difference between Michigan and OSU in these games recently is they don't make mistakes while we do.
i'm not sure why you're being negged, at least on the substance of your point. bottom line: having to score 60 points to be in a game is a failure on the defense. We're outmanned, no doubt about that. We're not that outmanned though.
Why have season tickets if you're only going to sell them to OSU fans? It seems like half the stadium is red every time we play them. Not much of a home game.
Looking at the amount of red in the stadium, I wouldn't call this a home game.
There's no benefit to playing a team with a pulse non-conference unless losing to a good team means as much to the committee as beating a bad team. Until that happens, we should play Eastern, Central, and Western Michigan every year, with the Eastern game being the week before OSU.
No doubt. I don't think it's a coincidence that our best all-around game of the year is the one where he was asked to do the least. I just don't see how we score enough points to have a chance against OSU with Shea as the QB
Officiating is the only profession where performance is irrelevant.
Make no mistake...if we win this game, it will absolutely not count as a "big game" for some on this site.
Did I miss something... where is ambry thomas? Too much vincent gray
The fact that this nonsensical rambling is a net positive in votes should surprise me, but it doesn't. I am happy to see that someone has the guts to admit that winning is literally the only thing they care about. Domestic abusers? Who cares. Pedophiles? No problem. Hey, maybe Nassar can coach?
Couple things that jump out at me. First, you should find a hobby that involves anger management. You're ranting about a college football game that you have literally no involvement in. Find some perspective.
Second, your list of "better" options is littered with problems. Venables has done nothing but be a defensive coordinator. Stoops, while a favorite of mine, was awful when he left Oklahoma. Rhule? Really? What are his qualifications other than being young and maybe not terrible. And Urban Meyer. Great coach. No question about it. Win at all cost? Never going to (and shouldn't) happen at Michigan.
Maybe you're right about academics. I don't think you are, but maybe. I do know this though: There's a reason a guy like Urban Meyer was willing to take over OSU after the tire fire he left at Florida, as opposed to a Notre Dame. I'm guessing that reason had something to do with how much easier it would be to get players into 1 school versus the other. When winning is literally the only thing that matters, certain allowances are made.
Dabo wouldn't win 9 games a year at Michigan. The ACC is trash and Michigan's player slush fund isn't up to Clemson's standards.
Michigan fans are insufferable. If you really think comparing college football in the 70's and 80's, when Michigan played maybe 1 or 2 teams a year that were capable of beating them, to now makes sense, then I can't help you.
We consistently run into Ohio State which has better players from the top of their roster to the bottom. That's with Harbaugh recruiting at a historically high level for Michigan. At some point, you may want to ask yourself why that is.
Actually coming up with a gameplan is what the coaches are responsible for. Executing that gameplan is what the players are for. I saw lots of dumb penalties and dropped balls. Those are on the players. If a player can't get mentally prepared for a game like this, maybe they should think about giving back their scholarship.
Yes. Because censoring the people you don't agree with always works. Suggestion: don't read it.
You already know the answer to that. Let me see..."Don Brown sucks and Michigan could do way better. Huh? No, I can't name one, but This is Michigan." (Takes swig of Natty Lite).
What else...oh yeah, "Harbaugh sucks too. We should totally back up the money truck and hire [insert flavor of the week]. He would totally come. This is Michigan." (Opens new Natty Lite).
Here's a secret that isn't actually a secret: winning consistently at Michigan is really hard. Want to know why? The state of Michigan has never produced a solid quantity of quality high school football players. The Midwest, outside of Ohio, doesn't produce a solid quantity of quality high school football players anymore. And Michigan doesn't accept the same types of players that litter the rosters of OSU, Alabama, and Clemson. And they never will. Sorry Braylon. Simply put: if Harbaugh can't win here, I'm not sure anyone can.
Coaching was fine; certainly good enough to win. I'm not one of those people who think it's the coach's job to "get the team ready to play." These are semi-professional athletes, hoping to be fully-professional in the near future. If they can't get themselves ready to play for a huge night game then coaching is the least of the problems.
No
They came out ready to go on both sides of the ball. The combination of poor officiating and dropped balls were the problems. Sometimes, it is actually the players who lost the game.
I'm assuming this is sarcasm. Otherwise, this site is free.
"The Nico PI was a horrible call but..." But what? That's a huge play that was taken away due to one of the worst offensive pass interference calls I've seen. It was made even worse given the obvious push off by the receiver on PSU's first TD. In big games against good teams, those kinds of things matter.
Purdue disagrees with you (from last year obviously).
I've watched the entire first half now, and other than the weird 58 yard field goal try, coaching has nothing to do with this. Shea throws a pick. Each of our receivers has dropped at least 1 ball. DPJ has dropped 3. Ambry Thomas getting burned. Offsides and false start penalties. This isn't a coaching problem at this point. It's refs and players. Nice thing is... we're still in it.
Why on earth would we try kicking a 58 yard field goal? Either go for it or punt the ball.
That's 3 drops for Peoples-Jones.
We certainly have the horses to win this game. The question, as always, is will we show up on the road.
If the fire helps the O hang onto the football then I'm all for it.
A & M has lost to the only good teams they've played. In other words, we may not know their floor, but we certainly know their ceiling. It seems that only SEC teams get credit for losing. Once again...bias. Clemson's schedule is Charmin-soft. We won't have any idea how good they are until the playoff, assuming they get in.
I've watched them all play. I saw Clemson almost lose to UNC. I've watched the other three blow out bad teams. Who cares how great they look against overmatched football teams? Did Michigan suddenly become dominant because it blew out Rutgers? Did it go from great, to bad, to good during the course of the Illinois game? A team is only as good as the teams they beat. That's why strength of schedule should be the primary component the committee looks at. Anything else is simple bias.
Good grief. Some of you clearly weren't here for the final years of Carr. Lots of people, including me, would say things like "anyone can win at Michigan" or "Michigan recruits itself." Well, Rich Rodriguez and Brady Hoke disagree. And while we're talking about how easy it is to win at university of [insert name here], let's consider the following: pre-Saban Alabama, post-Brown Texas, post-Carroll USC, post-Meyer Florida, current-Florida State. All of these schools have better recruiting bases and lower academic requirements than Michigan. Fact is...winning isn't easy at any salary.
Back to back games against top 10 teams, with 1 being a road game? Yes. 1-1 would be huge.
God doesn't care how many games Michigan wins. Just sayin.
And given the percentage of programs who lose more than 2 games every year, it is unreasonable to expect nothing less than 2 losses in a given season.
Based upon your recent posts, being conned by big pharma might do you some good.
Well he didn't leave voluntarily so...
One thing that always surprises/confuses me about this fan base: No wins are "big wins," while all losses are "big losses."
No it isn't. The main reason ticket prices are so high is because people such as yourself continue to buy them.
On what basis are they not no. 7?Only a couple of teams in the top 10 have played a team with a pulse and won at this point. If we're basing rankings on performance to date, Penn State could arguably be top 5. Beating iowa at kinnick is no joke. Neither Bama, Clemson, nor Ohio State have played a good football team yet, and Clemson almost lost to UNC at home.
That's likely true. You could always go hire Will Muschamp from SC. He's been terrifically mediocre but did just beat Georgia.
I'm sure they're being coached to fumble...
Clemson, Alabama and Ohio State, correct.
Notre Dame, Auburn, and LSU have been/are relevant occasionally.
Georgia and Oklahoma in their current forms are currently flashes in the pan. Let's see if they can sustain it. Georgia just lost to a bad SC team at home.
He's a football coach at a big-boy football school. He will always be overpaid. That being said, the market sets his rate, and name five coaches who have been more successful over the last 5 years who are currently coaching.
Time for everyone to freak out because Harbaugh doesn't criticize his players and coaches to the media.
I suggest they remind the players that fumbling less is better than fumbling more.
You are correct sir.
This was the game? Huh.