I'm not making excuses. Michigan lost, period. LOL at those who watched and took positive from ND's performance. BCS? GTFO.

killer_ewok;1277922 wrote:Agree about the switch. Not crazy about it but fortunately for ND and Kelly...it has worked out so far. And I could see ND dropping 3-4 games too in a worst case scenario.

I agree 3-4 is worse case. Though I think 3 is likely looking at the schedule.

If it were a regular B1G year, I'd say 5 losses for Michigan. But this year who know. Vball, what have seen from Nebraska to call them division champs? Hopefully you aren't basing it off them putting up 73 on Idaho State.

WebFire;1277932 wrote:I'm not making excuses. Michigan lost, period.

yup

WebFire;1277935 wrote:. Vball, what have seen from Nebraska to call them division champs? Hopefully you aren't basing it off them putting up 73 on Idaho State.

No, I'm not. There's not one thing I can point to except for their passing the eye test for me. I think in this below average B1G season, Big Red seems to be the most balanced team out there, both offensively and defensively.

bigkahuna;1277817 wrote:Talking heads on ESPN/CBS did nothing but call LSU/Alabama the game of the century. They nut jerked for 3 weeks in prep for that game.

If you're talking about our game tonight (Michigan/ND), you're right, nobody said that.

Hmm, I don't seem to remember the nonstop game of the century talk last year. Memory must be going.

USC and Oklahoma are the most likely losses I see but neither are sure L's like I thought in the preseason. Stanford will be a test and is losable but I like that matchup for ND. They could drop one or even two they shouldn't based on the last several years.

WebFire;1277932 wrote:I'm not making excuses. Michigan lost, period. LOL at those who watched and took positive from ND's performance. BCS? GTFO.

No, you just made sure that you discredited ND. You're entitled to your opinion obviously but when you're saying things like "Sparty is overrated" right after ND just beat your team...it comes across as sour grapes as that has nothing to do with the UM-ND game. I mean, you're saying you'd be worried if you're a Notre Dame fan but your team only managed 2 field goals against a team that you're telling others to be concerned about.

I'd say you should be worried as Michigan already has as many losses in 4 games as they had all of last season.

Also, the same could've been and probably was said about Michigan after their performance last year in their win over ND. Didn't look like a BCS team based on that yet that is where they ended up. Not saying ND is headed there but it's not that crazy to entertain the idea.

sleeper;1277822 wrote:http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2011_LSU_vs._Alabama_football_game

It says coined "A" game of the century. Not THE game of the century.

killer_ewok;1277907 wrote:Yep. And now it's Michigan fans reaching for excuses.

I've yet to see any Michigan fan make excuses, other than complaining about that terrible display from our QB. Which is obviously a valid point.

killer_ewok;1277948 wrote:No, you just made sure that you discredited ND. You're entitled to your opinion obviously but when you're saying things like "Sparty is overrated" right after ND just beat your team...it comes across as sour grapes as that has nothing to do with the UM-ND game.

Ummm. I said Sparty was overrated after the barely beat Eastern Michigan. Or did you miss that game? I was not as impressed with ND as I thought I would be, or as I was after watching them beat Sparty. I honestly thought both their lines would maul ours, but honestly, I thought ours played as well if not better. Outside of the turnovers (of which only 2 I can say were caused by ND defense), Michigan's offense actually had good success against the ND defense.

killer_ewok;1277948 wrote:I mean, you're saying you'd be worried if you're a Notre Dame fan but your team only managed 2 field goals against a team that you're telling others to be concerned about.

Turnovers. End of story. 6 TO games are uncommon. If Denard plays even an average Denard game, Michigan wins. Michigan had more first downs, more total yards, more rushing yards, and better TOP. So no, I'm not worried.

killer_ewok;1277948 wrote:I'd say you should be worried as Michigan already has as many losses in 4 games as they had all of last season.

Do you pay attention to football in the off season? Almost everyone, my self included, is not expecting a 11-2 season. The thought was that they could be a better team than last years (which so far is debatable) and still have a worse record. Many predicted a 2-2 start, with losses to Alabama and ND. I predicted we'd lose to ND, you can scroll to the first page and see for yourself.

killer_ewok;1277948 wrote:Also, the same could've been and probably was said about Michigan after their performance last year in their win over ND. Didn't look like a BCS team based on that yet that is where they ended up. Not saying ND is headed there but it's not that crazy to entertain the idea.

I'll give you that. But I guess that kind of favors what I'm saying. BCS talk right now I think is premature. They certainly could get better or the rest of the season. But to base BCS predictions on last night's game is a bit absurd. ND didn't really play all that well.

karen lotz;1277897 wrote:You were right, he didn't throw the ball up for grabs at all.

Yeah. Unfortunately I was mostly joking when I made this comment. I cringe and every time I see him get ready to throw one up. Even my wife says "ugh" when she sees him throw it deep.

GoChiefs;1277953 wrote:I've yet to see any Michigan fan make excuses, other than complaining about that terrible display from our QB. Which is obviously a valid point.

Playing the "IF" game is an excuse IMO. It's not like ND played a perfect game either.

Webbie, as hard as you're trying not to, you're sounding like a sore loser. You're making some salient points, but when you do so the morning after, along with a couple well placed sarcastic jabs, it just sounds like sour grapes. Sorry, but it just does.

killer_ewok;1277963 wrote:Playing the "IF" game is an excuse IMO. It's not like ND played a perfect game either.

Where did I say "IF"??? I brought up the fact that our QB played like shit. There isn't any if's about it. He had the worst game of his career. Where's the argument?

WebFire;1277958 wrote:Ummm. I said Sparty was overrated after the barely beat Eastern Michigan. Or did you miss that game? I was not as impressed with ND as I thought I would be, or as I was after watching them beat Sparty. I honestly thought both their lines would maul ours, but honestly, I thought ours played as well if not better. Outside of the turnovers (of which only 2 I can say were caused by ND defense), Michigan's offense actually had good success against the ND defense.



Turnovers. End of story. 6 TO games are uncommon. If Denard plays even an average Denard game, Michigan wins. Michigan had more first downs, more total yards, more rushing yards, and better TOP. So no, I'm not worried.



Do you pay attention to football in the off season? Almost everyone, my self included, is not expecting a 11-2 season. The thought was that they could be a better team than last years (which so far is debatable) and still have a worse record. Many predicted a 2-2 start, with losses to Alabama and ND. I predicted we'd lose to ND, you can scroll to the first page and see for yourself.



I'll give you that. But I guess that kind of favors what I'm saying. BCS talk right now I think is premature. They certainly could get better or the rest of the season. But to base BCS predictions on last night's game is a bit absurd. ND didn't really play all that well.

I saw that MSU struggled early but won 23-7 last night so I knew why you were saying it but what does that have to do with the ND-UM game? Nothing, really. For you to bring that up right after Notre Dame beat Michigan just comes across as sour grapes.

You're not going to get much sympathy from ND fans by playing the turnovers card after last season. Been there and it sucks. Good teams don't turn the ball over that many times. Michigan obviously has some trouble taking care of the football. You guys could be in for a rough season. I don't care about how Michigan had more this or that...they had 7 less points and that is what counts. Congrats on leading TOP and yards, ND will have to settle for the W. And of course ND's gameplan didn't force 'Nard into making any bad decisions. ::sarcasm:: It was obvious that they wanted to contain and keep him in the pocket and that is not his game. Kudos to Diaco and the defense. But just say that UM lost it rather than give ND ANY credit.

I wasn't saying that you were expecting another 11-2 but off to a 2-2 start should be worrisome to UM fans...especially since they lost to an unimpressive team like ND. 'Bama was considered a likely loss in the preseason but I think many considered ND-UM a toss-up and not a likely ND win like you are saying. 3-1 was probably what many were expecting with 2-2 a worst case scenario. JMO.

I didn't bring up the BCS first on this thread...rather, I addressed it and said it's not that crazy to entertain the idea. There's a lot of football left to be played and a lot of things can happen between now and then so we do agree that it is a bit premature at this point.

GoChiefs;1277969 wrote:Where did I say "IF"??? I brought up the fact that our QB played like shit. There isn't any if's about it. He had the worst game of his career. Where's the argument?

See webfire's posts. I never said that you said it. I said some Michigan fans. Sorry for making it plural as it's only webfire.

vball10set;1277965 wrote:Webbie, as hard as you're trying not to, you're sounding like a sore loser. You're making some salient points, but when you do so the morning after, along with a couple well placed sarcastic jabs, it just sounds like sour grapes. Sorry, but it just does.

+1 reps when I can.

killer_ewok;1277982 wrote:See webfire's posts. I never said that you said it. I said some Michigan fans. Sorry for making it plural as it's only webfire.

Gotcha. Yes, no sense in even doing the if game. We lost. If won't change that.
















But if our QB doesn't have 2 turnovers in the red zone, the score is probably in our favor.

GoChiefs;1277984 wrote:Gotcha. Yes, no sense in even doing the if game. We lost. If won't change that.
















But if our QB doesn't have 2 turnovers in the red zone, the score is probably in our favor.

Yeah....and if Golson doesn't throw a pick in the endzone when ND is in the redzone...ND probably wins by double digits.

killer_ewok;1277986 wrote:Yeah....and if Golson doesn't throw a pick in the endzone when ND is in the redzone...ND probably wins by double digits.

:thumbdown:

Got it. No discussion of games allowed on the OC. This place is ridiculous.

WebFire;1277993 wrote:Got it. No discussion of games allowed on the OC. This place is ridiculous.

That's what you took from there posts? :huh: Smh.

WebFire;1277993 wrote:Got it. No discussion of games allowed on the OC. This place is ridiculous.

You can discuss the game just don't be a little bitch about it. You lost stop sounding like a sore loser and making excuses

So michigan's in for a rough season and ND is a BCS contender. I think I'll go to the Rivals main board. I can get more logical discussion there.

I've done no such thing. Please show me where.