> Relax .. it's Michigan State. They're built for the long haul against the physical Big Ten. Just like we will look worse against smaller, quicker teams to start the season.. teams who are plenty physical for THEIR conference, because any Big Ten team is concerned primarily with being big enough to survive the Big Ten season. Ever since Koutivides, Schweigert, etc. have left, this defense has done best when, regardless of how good our team is, they're more of a traditional running team who is going to try to pass off of play action. Watch Purdue. Tiller post 03, Hope, Hazell... it doesn't matter. When that extra potential receiver who COULD threaten deep areas turns into a fullback, a second TE, etc. we play better defense (Wisconsin's OL is a different story). This would explain why very bad Purdue teams have done okay against MSU, oh... since the beginning of time, or so it seems.
Now, if you're one of these people who.. when Hazell, Shoop, Hudson and company are doing bad.. is nowhere to be found.. and who is not like, "yeah, Virginia Tech is sticking it to us over and over and over again and HERE I AM talking about it," and yet you couldn't wait to jump out from behind a bush and flash everyone the first time the team didn't look worse than a Fred Akers team... if you're one of these fans that reminds me of a Kobe/Lebron fan who is nowhere to be found when either of those two is clearly having a moment that Michael Jordan would never have, but can't wait to jump out at you when Kobe or Lebron's best moments happen... lean in and pay attention...
I'm not saying today means we're doomed, still doomed or that it is a complete fluke. A very good team took their foot off of the gas the same way we did up 3 v. Marshall and tied v. BGSU, and then re-accelerated on defense on that last drive. We could very well still be doomed. Enough evidence has been submitted for the burden of proof to take a couple actual VICTORIES. Win next week AND against Illinois, and then you can START to talk to me about how the bleeding has stopped.
Actually, check that.. it's more like a geyser of blood. Wins against those two schools to go to a whopping 3-6 would mean you could reclassify the geyser of blood as more of a moderately bleeding wound where the nurse is at least beginning to secure the proper things needs to start the process of ending the bleeding and bandaging the wound.
> IF Blough can look good and either beat Minnesota or not be the reason we lose, and if he then looks the same as he has so far v. Wisconsin... you could begin to make a case that, after cementing that and showing it's not a fluke, he's the best we've had since Orton.
> Proof that I don't just want to be negative and see nothing I like.. I liked the fact that as the game went on, we just handed Jones the mother freaking ball and stopped thinking we're Oregon. I used to love Oregon's offense and hoped we could run it.. I listened to reason from those who pointed out we don't have the Nike stable. Give the freaking ball to Jones on hand offs you see, and then.. when you aren't handing off to him, pass the freaking thing. Real easy. You hand it to him on handoffs where you just let a fast talented back run with it OR.. (lean in).. pass it! If all of your reads are covered and there's a big fat invitation to run after you've made the defense cover the pass, and that opportunity is better than any of your receiving options... take it and run with it. It's not hard.
> Danny Anthrop is slow compared to the kid I saw in years past, and for good reason. I feel for the kid. That said, put him in positions where he can use his smarts like he did before the third TD. That position is NOT returning kicks. It's not on speed options where the route he runs is basically trying to put him in space and have him win matchups like he's Vinny Sutherland. You try to spring a kid with his brains in positions where if the defense makes a mistake rolling coverage to an area and he can exploit the open space, he takes it and goes.
> I'm not sure if I'm not a fan of Knox... or not a fan of the Knox I'm only seeing cause he's hurt. But what happened to that other kid. If Knox continues to cough it up and not look that great when he's not coughing it up, they better get Green or someone ready to make sure we don't ruin Jones working him way too hard.
> The defense doesn't appear to be able to keep their head up and concentrate on two things at once. I'm not operating under the premise that we have coaches that can fix this. I'm just saying that in years past, this could be an issue that could be addressed... where maybe you see Jacques Reeves unable to spot a QB keeper, come off covering the receiver and then go to the QB and make a tackle.. and then as Reeves ages, he can be responsible for making that choice.
I wish I was just seeing the easy thing where, "hey, these players get to the right position and make a play, but they're just getting bowled over by better players" but I'm not seeing players just getting off of one assignment and into position to make a play or getting around and through blocks only to be run over by Ron Dayne. I'm seeing guys who just allow gashes.
> Another thing I like, since I only want to be negative if I don't think we won the Rose Bowl today... I liked that we were in press coverage a lot more. Maybe if I have time again I'll see us giving up the world underneath, and believe me.. we did a few times, but it just appeared to be a lot less.
> If this team plays a good game next week where there isn't a bunch of garbage that puts us behind only to make for a comeback that never should have been because we shouldn't have been down that much to begin with the team is good enough to beat Minnesota 28-21. A couple gimmes and donkey like decisions and that could easily be coming back to get to 31-28 before it appears that we "fell just short."
> If you think that today would be reason for a reasonable person to give Hazell another year, you're off your rocker. However, if you think that 3 more wins and 4-8 would be enough to, for financial reasons, give him another year, I hope you think he can get to 7-5 next year. Anything else would be a massive failure in year 4.
Now, if you're one of these people who.. when Hazell, Shoop, Hudson and company are doing bad.. is nowhere to be found.. and who is not like, "yeah, Virginia Tech is sticking it to us over and over and over again and HERE I AM talking about it," and yet you couldn't wait to jump out from behind a bush and flash everyone the first time the team didn't look worse than a Fred Akers team... if you're one of these fans that reminds me of a Kobe/Lebron fan who is nowhere to be found when either of those two is clearly having a moment that Michael Jordan would never have, but can't wait to jump out at you when Kobe or Lebron's best moments happen... lean in and pay attention...
I'm not saying today means we're doomed, still doomed or that it is a complete fluke. A very good team took their foot off of the gas the same way we did up 3 v. Marshall and tied v. BGSU, and then re-accelerated on defense on that last drive. We could very well still be doomed. Enough evidence has been submitted for the burden of proof to take a couple actual VICTORIES. Win next week AND against Illinois, and then you can START to talk to me about how the bleeding has stopped.
Actually, check that.. it's more like a geyser of blood. Wins against those two schools to go to a whopping 3-6 would mean you could reclassify the geyser of blood as more of a moderately bleeding wound where the nurse is at least beginning to secure the proper things needs to start the process of ending the bleeding and bandaging the wound.
> IF Blough can look good and either beat Minnesota or not be the reason we lose, and if he then looks the same as he has so far v. Wisconsin... you could begin to make a case that, after cementing that and showing it's not a fluke, he's the best we've had since Orton.
> Proof that I don't just want to be negative and see nothing I like.. I liked the fact that as the game went on, we just handed Jones the mother freaking ball and stopped thinking we're Oregon. I used to love Oregon's offense and hoped we could run it.. I listened to reason from those who pointed out we don't have the Nike stable. Give the freaking ball to Jones on hand offs you see, and then.. when you aren't handing off to him, pass the freaking thing. Real easy. You hand it to him on handoffs where you just let a fast talented back run with it OR.. (lean in).. pass it! If all of your reads are covered and there's a big fat invitation to run after you've made the defense cover the pass, and that opportunity is better than any of your receiving options... take it and run with it. It's not hard.
> Danny Anthrop is slow compared to the kid I saw in years past, and for good reason. I feel for the kid. That said, put him in positions where he can use his smarts like he did before the third TD. That position is NOT returning kicks. It's not on speed options where the route he runs is basically trying to put him in space and have him win matchups like he's Vinny Sutherland. You try to spring a kid with his brains in positions where if the defense makes a mistake rolling coverage to an area and he can exploit the open space, he takes it and goes.
> I'm not sure if I'm not a fan of Knox... or not a fan of the Knox I'm only seeing cause he's hurt. But what happened to that other kid. If Knox continues to cough it up and not look that great when he's not coughing it up, they better get Green or someone ready to make sure we don't ruin Jones working him way too hard.
> The defense doesn't appear to be able to keep their head up and concentrate on two things at once. I'm not operating under the premise that we have coaches that can fix this. I'm just saying that in years past, this could be an issue that could be addressed... where maybe you see Jacques Reeves unable to spot a QB keeper, come off covering the receiver and then go to the QB and make a tackle.. and then as Reeves ages, he can be responsible for making that choice.
I wish I was just seeing the easy thing where, "hey, these players get to the right position and make a play, but they're just getting bowled over by better players" but I'm not seeing players just getting off of one assignment and into position to make a play or getting around and through blocks only to be run over by Ron Dayne. I'm seeing guys who just allow gashes.
> Another thing I like, since I only want to be negative if I don't think we won the Rose Bowl today... I liked that we were in press coverage a lot more. Maybe if I have time again I'll see us giving up the world underneath, and believe me.. we did a few times, but it just appeared to be a lot less.
> If this team plays a good game next week where there isn't a bunch of garbage that puts us behind only to make for a comeback that never should have been because we shouldn't have been down that much to begin with the team is good enough to beat Minnesota 28-21. A couple gimmes and donkey like decisions and that could easily be coming back to get to 31-28 before it appears that we "fell just short."
> If you think that today would be reason for a reasonable person to give Hazell another year, you're off your rocker. However, if you think that 3 more wins and 4-8 would be enough to, for financial reasons, give him another year, I hope you think he can get to 7-5 next year. Anything else would be a massive failure in year 4.
