THE GAME: Ohio State 42, Michigan 7 (Nov. 22)

['BusNative]

Originally Posted by TexasFootball

All I have to say is;

[censored] Michigan.

That's just my opinion.

GPA?

[osugrad21]

Dispatch

Bob Hunter commentary: Rumblings

Friday, August 1, 2008 2:56 AM
By Bob Hunter


THE COLUMBUS DISPATCH
ASSOCIATED PRESS
Every time Michigan has changed football coaches since 1938, the Wolverines have defeated Ohio State in the new coach's first season. In case you missed it, Rich Rodriguez, above, is in his first season as Michigan football coach.




In talking about banners that coaches have on display in the Ohio State football locker room, linebacker James Laurinaitis said one of them says that every time there has been a coaching change in the OSU-Michigan rivalry -- the latest being Michigan's hiring of Rich Rodriguez to replace Lloyd Carr -- the team that changed coaches has won. Whether reporters at the Big Ten media day misunderstood Laurinaitis or not, that has happened every time Michigan has changed coaches since Fritz Crisler took over from Harry Kipke in 1938. Crisler, Bennie Oosterbaan (1948), Bump Elliott (1959), Bo Schembechler (1969), Gary Moeller (1990) and Carr (1995) all defeated Ohio State in their first season.
Cont...

[BB73]

Originally Posted by MililaniBuckeye

Sorry, my friend, but Bo Schembechler fully knew and embraced the magnitude of The Rivalry, while DickRod thinks it's "just another game". Schembechler also knew how Woody coached, having spent years on the OSU staff and being mentored by Woody. Throw in the "revenge factor" and the fact The Game was played up in the Pig House, and you can see that there isn't much similarity other than the fact The Game this year will have an established, highly successful OSU coach going against a rookie UM coach.

It's not just Bo. And three times it happened in Columbus - '38, '48, and '90.

Every time Michigan has changed football coaches since 1938, the Wolverines have defeated Ohio State in the new coach's first season.

[DaddyBigBucks]

The fact that scUM has won every time they've changed coaches since leather helmet days is interesting, but nothing more.

Yes, a new coach can energize a program and this can have an effect; but does anyone seriously believe that there's anything more than that in play here? Does anyone believe that this little factor is enough to overcome the talent difference this year? Anyone?

Let's review:

In TSUN's favor:

• New coach energizing program
• S&C program has been elevated

Not in TSUN's favor:

• The offense does not have the player's to run his system
• No QBs with a college snap on the roster
• One OL from last season, and he was the human-turnstile

Their offense is going to be brutally bad, and not just early on. Their defense is OK, but won't be in the same galaxy as ours.

Talent difference: Huge
We have JT
Q.E.D.

[MililaniBuckeye]

Originally Posted by BB73

It's not just Bo. And three times it happened in Columbus - '38, '48, and '90.

True, but you have to look below the surface at those and the other such wins:

Crisler (1938) We had a 4-3-1 team that year while Michigan was 6-1-1
Bennie Oosterbaan (1948) He inherited a national championship team that had already beaten OSU the previous two seasons 58-6 (our worst home loss ever) and 21-0 (and they won the national title again in 1948) while we were 6-3 that year
Bump Elliott (1959) Ohio State was 3-5-1 while Michigan was 4-5...two really mediocre teams
Bo Schembechler (1969) Bo had major revenge factor, playing at home, major knowledge of Woody and OSU
Gary Moeller (1990) John Cooper
Carr (1995) John Cooper

So, out of those six wins by first-year Michigan coaches, only one (1969) was where Ohio State was a true powerhouse. Our 1995 team was also a solid team (still not at the 1969 team level) but we were hurt by the Cooper Factor.

Only the 1969 game had a national championship caliber Ohio State team playing. DickRod doesn't have the humliation factor working for him, and I will not put him in the same coaching circle as Bo Schembechler.

[HailToMichigan]

Originally Posted by DaddyBigBucks

Not in TSUN's favor:

• The offense does not have the player's to run his system
• No QBs with a college snap on the roster
• One OL from last season, and he was the human-turnstile

Technically not true. Cone and Sheridan both have.

In fact, all four QB's (Threet, Cone, Sheridan, Feagin) have combined for a 100% pass completion percentage in about five years of experience

Anyway, I think you guys are underestimating our defense, but talking sense into you guys about Morgan Trent (he's not that bad) is harder than [censored]ing into the RR tornado. But the front four alone is good enough to boost the defense to at least better than "OK".

I think the offense will be OK from a scheme perspective. RR wasn't born a spread-offense guru, he figured a lot of this stuff out on his own. So I don't see why he can't continue to figure things out and adapt rather than being stuck with the identical plays he ran with Pat White.

Lastly, there's this. I don't think you can "get" the rivalry without having been a part of it somehow, even if just as a fan. Otherwise what's the use of bringing in people who've played in it? Tressel has never left Ohio to play or coach, so it comes a bit more natural. Bo was mentioned as a guy who "got it" and as a guy who'd "been there", clearly there's a link. RR obviously is an outsider. Does this mean Michigan and Ohio State are forever limited to hiring only coaches with ties to these two states?

[Buck68]

Originally Posted by Jaxbuck

scUM's only halfway done paying back for Coop. 6 years left on the bill.

it is amazing...but not surprising... how many times we see such payback expressions of satisfaction for the Tressel Team record of 6-1 v the ultimate 'them'. It's stupifying the number of folks who, loving 'dominate' as we do, settle for 'getting even' 50% below the Cooper even number, or even further below the series number...where tOSU would finally get to "zero". Zero being the number which aptly illustrates the utter relational stupidity of 'getting even' as a goal in the first place...let alone some form of 'attaboy'!

[Jaxbuck]

Originally Posted by HailToMichigan

[/indent]Anyway, I think you guys are underestimating our defense, but talking sense into you guys about Morgan Trent (he's not that bad) is harder than [censored]ing into the RR tornado. But the front four alone is good enough to boost the defense to at least better than "OK".

You can't convince anyone besides yourselves on Trent because all anyone has to do is go watch film of him getting routinely torched. He may be better than he was but he still sucks.

As far as the front 4 go, if they are so solid why did Wisconsin and OSU both rush over 50 times and avg 4+ ypc in those two games? That wasn't the spread, that was old fashioned straight ahead power running. Both teams advertised it was coming and your D couldn't stop it.

Its an above average defense at best. The question you guys better be concerned with is how they are going to do when the offense continually leaves them hanging out to dry.

[Jaxbuck]

Originally Posted by Buck68

it is amazing...but not surprising... how many times we see such payback expressions of satisfaction for the Tressel Team record of 6-1 v the ultimate 'them'. It's stupifying the number of folks who, loving 'dominate' as we do, settle for 'getting even' 50% below the Cooper even number, or even further below the series number...where tOSU would finally get to "zero". Zero being the number which aptly illustrates the utter relational stupidity of 'getting even' as a goal in the first place...let alone some form of 'attaboy'!

Ok I'll bite.

WTF?

[shetuck]

I realize that maybe it's not fair to pick nit-pick a few little statements out of a four/five paragraph post, but...

Originally Posted by HailToMichigan

...I think the offense will be OK from a scheme perspective...

Can somebody explain to me what this means?

Originally Posted by HailToMichigan

RR wasn't born a spread-offense guru, he figured a lot of this stuff out on his own. So I don't see why he can't continue to figure things out and adapt rather than being stuck with the identical plays he ran with Pat White.

He can do all the figuring and adapting he wants. But, the point is that if he doesn't have the *right* sort of players (sort of), he's not gonna be able to do much on the field come The Game.

To me that's like saying, "Hey, Rich, here's a bunch of basketball players," and thinking he'll be able to figure something out and adapt those player to fit his scheme. I realize that's a bit far-fetched, but (to me) that's kinda like what you guys are implying.

[BB73]

Originally Posted by MililaniBuckeye

True, but you have to look below the surface at those and the other such wins:

Crisler (1938) We had a 4-3-1 team that year while Michigan was 6-1-1
Bennie Oosterbaan (1948) He inherited a national championship team that had already beaten OSU the previous two seasons 58-6 (our worst home loss ever) and 21-0 (and they won the national title again in 1948) while we were 6-3 that year
Bump Elliott (1959) Ohio State was 3-5-1 while Michigan was 4-5...two really mediocre teams
Bo Schembechler (1969) Bo had major revenge factor, playing at home, major knowledge of Woody and OSU
Gary Moeller (1990) John Cooper
Carr (1995) John Cooper

So, out of those six wins by first-year Michigan coaches, only one (1969) was where Ohio State was a true powerhouse. Our 1995 team was also a solid team (still not at the 1969 team level) but we were hurt by the Cooper Factor.

Only the 1969 game had a national championship caliber Ohio State team playing. DickRod doesn't have the humliation factor working for him, and I will not put him in the same coaching circle as Bo Schembechler.

I would qualify 3 of those losses as painfully unexpected. There's no debate about 1969. And 1938 was after the first 4-game win streak in the series for tOSU and was played in Columbus. And in 1995, regardless of the Cooper factor, tOSU was 11-0 and ranked #2 when they headed to AA to play an 8-3 #18 ranked TSUN team.

I'm not predicting a loss. I'm just advocating that The Game not be considered a fait accompli, and pointing out strong historical factors as to why it shouldn't be considered an easy win.

[MililaniBuckeye]

Originally Posted by BB73

I would qualify 3 of those losses as painfully unexpected. There's no debate about 1969. And 1938 was after the first 4-game win streak in the series for tOSU and was played in Columbus. And in 1995, regardless of the Cooper factor, tOSU was 11-0 and ranked #2 when they headed to AA to play an 8-3 #18 ranked TSUN team.

I'm not predicting a loss. I'm just advocating that The Game not be considered a fait accompli, and pointing out strong historical factors as to why it shouldn't be considered an easy win.

I see your points, but I also like to mention there's more than simple "historical factors". I wouldn't consider the 1938 loss "painfully unexpected", as Michigan simply had the better team that year regardless of the previous four games and the venue it which it was played. Was it a fairly big win for Michigan to get off a four-game skid? Yep. Was it a surprise upset? I wouldn't think so. The 1995 game was definitely "painful", but under Cooper not only was it not "unexpected" but almost "expected".

My whole point is that there are times where historical factors should indeed be considered, and times where they flat out don't apply...I think the latter in this case.

Hey, I hear we're playing USC this season...someone needs to start a thread on that game soon.

[HailToMichigan]

Originally Posted by shetuck

Can somebody explain to me what this means?

Based on what you said I think you figured it out. Just that I think the notion that we'll be operating at some kind of disadvantage this year because "the personnel don't fit the scheme" is overblown. RR isn't locked in to running Pat White's plays. He didn't rise through the coaching ranks by being that stubborn. Michigan's major problem is the offensive line, followed by the inexperience of the quarterback. The playbook isn't the thing.

[jwinslow]

The question is, do you have confidence in Threet executing the scheme?

Sure, there are some who think RR can't coach anything other than spread-option plays. But there are others spouting that response who do not believe he can scheme his way around the weaknesses at QB & OL.

Thus those folks think he doesn't have the players to run his offense, whether that's WVU 2.0 or Sean Payton's passing spread. They don't believe Threet can run an effective passing spread, nor Feagin a running spread.

I'll take a wait and see approach, but my skepticism lies with the OL. Much is made of the numerous talented RBs (with limited carries), but if they cannot control the clock and LOS, life will be hard on Threet.

[Buck68]

Originally Posted by Jaxbuck

Ok I'll bite.

WTF?

hope it didn't hurt too much. You'll have a tough time convincing me you cannot add 6-1-0 to 2-11-1 and grasp that the total is less than .500 or 'even'. And 'revenge' is 'getting even' which puts the total at zero, or even. And to even mention that a true Buckeye might not like to "dominate"...good googlie mooglie...! Actually, i hope you completely fail to convince me you do not grasp any of this.