Yes. There were fullback dives that were going for 35 yards.
Here is a coaching tip: put nine in the box to help stop that.
Harbaugh
- Thread starter newwavedave1
- Start date
Yes. There were fullback dives that were going for 35 yards.
Here is a coaching tip: put nine in the box to help stop that.
It almost pisses me off that there is a spot in my small left toe that actually hopes we can shock CFB and upset them. It is going to make me waste my saturday...
Said differently, Harbaugh can't afford a respectable score against RU (or at least wouldn't want to take the chance).
Yeah, but this year he has an actual qb. Last year we were doomed when he pulled the starter.
Positioning for the playoffs.
In case you don’t watch football other than Rutgers, a committee chooses 4 teams that will play in the playoff; and they’ve proven in the past that they have an SEC/ACC bias.
Therefore, it’s not just about winning, it’s about HOW you win.
They had a walk-on fullback take a dive for 15 yards for a TD in the 2nd half...
Smith, Ty Isaac, Peppers, Higdon, and Evans were all RBs and all had easy success. So yes, one of Higdon, Isaac, or Evans was considered 3rd string and one 4th string. It’s not Michigan’s fault that their 3rd and 4th stringers were head and shoulders better than RU.
no it was pay back for last year. psu instead of talking a knee tried to score another td with under 10 seconds left
But is there that big of a difference between beating a 1-8 team by 80 instead of 50 in the committee’s eyes?
Not saying they should let up. We’ve made our bed and if it takes a 80 point loss to reinforce the fact that a change needs to be made, then have at it. Good for Michigan that they’re able blow out one of their “peers” like that. They’re doing something right.
Hard to believe, as all 3 of them were taking snaps from the 1st quarter until the final whistle. But hey, whatever gets you through the night.
I disagree they have an ACC bias. I will agree they tend to love Clemson and will love Florida State if they get their program turned around.
I expect tonight's top 10 will be:
- Alabama
- Clemson
- Notre Dame
- Georgia
- Michigan
- Oklahoma
- LSU
- West Virginia
- Ohio State
- Washington State
Michigan needs to win out and needs someone other than Alabama to lose once more. Oklahoma / WVU will be setup in case all else fails.
well what was your reading of the depth chart since there were no other running backs on the travel roster? Should they have handed off to TEs? Move some DTs to the backfield and let them plow forward?
You seem to be fixated on Michigan having actual decent players that far down the depth chart at RB as if they had other players they chose not to play. You only get like a 70 man travel roster for road games so all the redshirting freshmen have to stay home.
Does it make you feel better to pretend Harbaugh had the starters in late and was running gadget plays to run up the score?
Sorry, I was meaning for the PSU game. You absolutely try and score as many points on the #14 team in the country, one that Ohio State struggles mightily with.
I agree with most of you in the sense that, no, running the score up big on Rutgers won’t mean much in the long run.
Boston College and UVA have no business being ranked over the likes of Michigan State and Wisconsin (heck, maybe even Purdue) but they were.
UVA proved on Friday night that Frank Beamer still doesn’t have an actual eye for football talent.
That’s what happens when top-flight athletes want to come play football for the program. The team has this thing called “depth”.
Michigan’s starting RB got hurt their very first series of the game.
Michigan had 11 different players run the ball. SIX OF THEM averaged 6+ yards per carry. TWO of them averaged 13.9 and 24.7 yards per carry respectively.
Aside from having Don Brown or Greg Mattison suit up and play RB, I’m not sure what they could have done differently. Knee, Knee, Knee, Punt? First down punt?
We were discussing the playoff committee. LAst week nobody had Michigan State, Wisconsin, nor Purdue ranked. The Coaches Poll had Virginia #22 and Boston College #25, the AP had Viginia #23 and Boston College #24. The playoff committee had Boston College #22 and Virginia #25.
This week Michigan State is #24 in the AP and unranked (#26) in the Coaches. Virginia has dropped from both rankings with Boston College being #17 in the AP and #14 in the Coaches. Michigan State will likely be about #25 when the playoff rankings are released and they will elevate BC to the top 15. This is done to "strengthen the perception of Clemson". If BC upsets Clemson, it will make it so the ACC is unlikely to get a team in without eliminating the conference. They'd rather take BC over UCF because BC is in the club.
This isn't the committee's bias, so I GUESS YOU WERE WRONG.
Notre Dame’s record, if they were in the Big Ten East without a hand-picked schedule of who and when they play, would be different.
I will bet you all the money in my wallet (over $1200, as I need to go to the bank today) that Michigan will be 4th tonight. Georgia had a nice win on Saturday but it wasn't enough to jump the Wolverines.
I combined these because my response is similar to both.
Notre Dame is having a season like we'd see in the Big East, where the schedule looked fairly stout before the season kicks off. The only preseason "good team" they've played is Michigan. Stanford (#13), Virginia Tech (#20), Florida State (#19), and USC (#15) were all highly thought of in the preseason and all will likely finish the season unranked. They may only have defeated one ranked team (Michigan) when the season ends the first weekend in December although Syracuse has a chance to finish ranked if they don't lose to both ND and BC.
Yeah, I'm going to bet money with a poster on a message board on the internet. LOL. I'm not that impressed with Georgia and believe they were a much better team last year and Michigan clearly has the pedigree to stay above Georgia. I don't trust this process. The selection committee is a political entity who is concerned with creating the right playoffs rather than the best playoffs. Alabama HAS to make the playoffs with 1 loss, which is why I believe Georgia gets elevated to #4 by the end of the season. Auburn, UMass, and Georgia Tech won't have the impact the committee needs. I mean, it isn't as if Michigan has defeated a team in the current top AP 20. Penn State is #20 in the Coaches but Michigan State is not ranked (the B1G East doesn't appear to be as strong now as it did two months ago). While both teams are 0-1 against top 10 teams, Georgia has a win over current #12 Kentucky (how on Earth do they drop 1 spot while losing a home game by 17 points to then #6). The committee ranked UK #9 and higher than Ohio State (#10) and Penn State (#14). I said here last week that Kentucky was much closer to PSU than OSU in my opinion. They have more than enough justification to have UGA jump UM without thinking about SEC! SEC! SEC!. I could be wrong, but I think Michigan remains at 5 while Georgia goes from 6 to 4. It isn't as if this committee is attempting to select the best teams.
Notre Dame is having a season like we'd see in the Big East, where the schedule looked fairly stout before the season kicks off. The only preseason "good team" they've played is Michigan. Stanford (#13), Virginia Tech (#20), Florida State (#19), and USC (#15) were all highly thought of in the preseason and all will likely finish the season unranked. They may only have defeated one ranked team (Michigan) when the season ends the first weekend in December although Syracuse has a chance to finish ranked if they don't lose to both ND and BC.
Yeah, I'm going to bet money with a poster on a message board on the internet. LOL. I'm not that impressed with Georgia and believe they were a much better team last year and Michigan clearly has the pedigree to stay above Georgia. I don't trust this process. The selection committee is a political entity who is concerned with creating the right playoffs rather than the best playoffs. Alabama HAS to make the playoffs with 1 loss, which is why I believe Georgia gets elevated to #4 by the end of the season. Auburn, UMass, and Georgia Tech won't have the impact the committee needs. I mean, it isn't as if Michigan has defeated a team in the current top AP 20. Penn State is #20 in the Coaches but Michigan State is not ranked (the B1G East doesn't appear to be as strong now as it did two months ago). While both teams are 0-1 against top 10 teams, Georgia has a win over current #12 Kentucky (how on Earth do they drop 1 spot while losing a home game by 17 points to then #6). The committee ranked UK #9 and higher than Ohio State (#10) and Penn State (#14). I said here last week that Kentucky was much closer to PSU than OSU in my opinion. They have more than enough justification to have UGA jump UM without thinking about SEC! SEC! SEC!. I could be wrong, but I think Michigan remains at 5 while Georgia goes from 6 to 4. It isn't as if this committee is attempting to select the best teams.
And scoring only 3-4 plays into those drives. Rutgers still ran hurry up on offense and were passing well into the 4th quarter despite being unable to get a first down. Michigan didn't beat us 78-0 because they wanted to run the score up, we just didn't stop simple running plays on defense and refused to eat clock on offense.
35-7. That last TD was their backups and they scored in 1 play on a run up the middle (which was the entire 2nd half of 2016 so we did better by actually forcing their starters to play 3 quarters and not getting ran over by backups more than once I guess). I was actually surprised he didn't try passing with his backup QB at all.