karen lotz;1278597 wrote:@NBCSportsPR
Notre Dame-Michigan did 4.0 overnight on NBC last night, besting all college games yesterday & up 54% vs last yrs ND-USC primetime gm on NBC

I liked Kyle McCarthy's tweet:
@KMcCarthy28: “@NBCSportsPR: ND-Michigan did 4.0 overnight on NBC last night, besting all college games” 4-0. top 10. Irrelevant? Where r you @reillyrick?

sleeper;1278013 wrote:Good for Notre Dame. I'm rooting for them to go undefeated this year just so I can watch them get blown out in a BCS bowl game against Alabama. Early spread is Alabama +71.

You know by saying "Alabama +71" you're saying that Notre Dame would be favored by 71 points, right?

I thought Michigan's defense was outstanding. Mattison called an excellent game. Golson is obviously not to the level where he can carry the load. Hopefully the bye weeks helps. I'd probably say that Michigan deserved to win Saturday, which wasn't the case the last three years. I too would say that there are more positives to say about Michigan than Notre Dame after that game. However, we all know what a talented team looks like without a competent quarterback: 2010 Notre Dame.

I do think that you can expect Golson to get better and better and I'm thinking that by November's easy slate (Pitt, @ BC, Wake) he'll be flinging the rock around pretty well. He looks jittery out there; not very shocking. Rees is a cool cucumber of a quarterback, if he has an ounce of athleticism he'd be tremendous.

I think people on here are guilty of acting like each team is some buried artifact and each week we uncovered a little bit more of the identity of what it is. That is pretty asinine. Each week it's a different team; week 4 Michigan/Notre Dame won't resemble week 13 UM/ND. Michigan could play lights-out defense and win the Big Ten. They could also fall flatly on their faces. We just don't know. This lackluster running game by Notre Dame isn't something that necessarily will remain. They ran for ~300 yards week one, when their injured OL gets back maybe Golic is benched and shit starts clicking. We just don't know.

I expected a 8-4 season at best. Now, I'm going to be disappointed with anything less than 9-3, and am expecting 10-2.

sjmvsfscs08;1278741 wrote:You know by saying "Alabama +71" you're saying that Notre Dame would be favored by 71 points, right?

It would start that way to get a few ND suckers and drift back the opposite direction to Alabama - 71 pretty quickly.

sleeper;1278757 wrote:It would start that way to get a few ND suckers and drift back the opposite direction to Alabama - 71 pretty quickly.

Good save. You covered the fact that you completely fucked up pretty well.

sherm03;1278758 wrote:Good save. You covered the fact that you completely fucked up pretty well.

Just another,"I'm always right/I meant to do that" post by sleeper. He doesn't disappoint.

sleeper;1278757 wrote:It would start that way to get a few ND suckers and drift back the opposite direction to Alabama - 71 pretty quickly.

If they wanted to get ND suckers in, wouldn't they make it ND +71? All of the suckers would throw in.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9gY7qQC4abI

The title of that video sucks. Even if it is a ND only highlight video, are the turnovers the only highlights? If so, that's not good.

Ask the good people at mgoblog, its on their YouTube account.

karen lotz;1279049 wrote:Ask the good people at mgoblog, its on their YouTube account.

Ahhh, how cute you read Michigan sites.

WebFire;1279175 wrote:Ahhh, how cute you read Michigan sites.

ummm no. Unless twitter is a Michigan site now?

Adam Kramer ‏@KegsnEggs
Your Michigan-Notre Dame recap in one tweet and a fabulous 1-minute video. http://bit.ly/NMFlvo

It is cute that your butthurt still lingers, though.

Butthurt huh? I am actually looking forward to the rest of the season. I know my team will be fine after turning it over 6 times and only losing by 7 to a supposed top 10 team.

karen lotz;1279199 wrote:It is cute that your butthurt still lingers, though.

And I didn't really think you'd be such an asshole after WINNING.

sjmvsfscs08;1278841 wrote:If they wanted to get ND suckers in, wouldn't they make it ND +71? All of the suckers would throw in.

I don't know. Ask Vegas. They make the most money off Notre Dame games; fact.

WebFire;1279204 wrote:Butthurt huh? I am actually looking forward to the rest of the season. I know my team will be fine after turning it over 6 times and only losing by 7 to a supposed top 10 team.

Congrats? I'm sure they will be fine. They've played the two best defensive fronts they will face this year. Denard can't play much worse, can he?

karen lotz;1279216 wrote:Congrats? I'm sure they will be fine. They've played the two best defensive fronts they will face this year. Denard can't play much worse, can he?

I sure as hell hope not.

...at least not until 11/24 (sorry, Webbie, couldn't resist)

vball10set;1279246 wrote:...at least not until 11/24 (sorry, Webbie, couldn't resist)

Well, we just never know with Denard. It's sounds stupid but I can't wait until the DR era is over. Next year might be rough at QB, but hopefully after that we are back to more traditional UM QBs.

WebFire;1279251 wrote:It's sounds stupid but I can't wait until the DR era is over.

The dude can't throw a ball to save his life, hell no it doesn't sound stupid. I'm right there with you. I've been on that train for a little while though. So sick of just seeing him throw the fucking ball up in the air and pray someone comes down with it.

GoChiefs;1279327 wrote:The dude can't throw a ball to save his life, hell no it doesn't sound stupid. I'm right there with you. I've been on that train for a little while though. So sick of just seeing him throw the fucking ball up in the air and pray someone comes down with it.

I was on the Devin Gardner train last year. I love DG at WR, but maybe we switched the wrong guy to WR.

WebFire;1279353 wrote:I was on the Devin Gardner train last year. I love DG at WR, but maybe we switched the wrong guy to WR.

Who's behind Gardner on the QB depth chart?

vball10set;1279357 wrote:Who's behind Gardner on the QB depth chart?

Actually, with Gardner's switch to WR, Russell Bellomy is #2. Kid has potential, and I'm sure will be in the mix next year to start. He is only a sophomore and obviously lacks game experience, so it's hard to gauge how he would perform. Some so he can be a starter, others question it.

I'm still 100% for Denard.

I think there was one interception that was squarely on Denard, and that was the one where he was rolling out to the right and he threw right to Teo. One pick was a hail Mary, one pick was on Gardner (who does not run very good routes at all) and one was a tipped football.