Q&A with a Michigan fan
In Part II of our extensive team coverage of the game of the week that does not include the Huskers, we give a Michigan fan some air time.
Jeff hails from Princeton, NJ and is a die hard Wolverine fan. Here are his thoughts on the Big Game.
Michigan Fan: To me, Michigan-OSU is like Christmas Day, one day you look forward to more than almost any other!!! And this is the biggest in my lifetime.
FSU in 1999 is the only team to go wire to wire #1 in the AP Poll. Does that give you any encouragement heading into the Ohio State game?
Michigan Fan: No. That just means if it happened it would be unusual, not that it won't happen.
OSU is favored by a touchdown in the game, does that sound fair to you or do you think Michigan isn't getting its due?
Michigan Fan: I don't think it's unfair, OSU is at home so they should get 2-3 points there. If you look at common opponents OSU has won by larger margins than Michigan, so that would maybe add a few more points. But if it provides Michigan motivation, I'm all for an even bigger spread!!! My sense is that Michigan lines tend to be inflated, since there are so many Michigan fans out there. So this tells me that everything else being equal, OSU should be favored by 9-10 points, unless there is a similar inflation with OSU which might cancel out the Michigan inflation.
OSU has held an advantage in recent meetings, does that cause you any concerns or do the new assistants at Michigan render recent history irrelevant?
Michigan Fan: Any Michigan fan who is not concerned by the recent history is probably not that into Michigan football. To channel Dick Vitale, Jim Tressel can flat-out coach. He won 4 D-1AA championships and one 1-A championship. He's got as much talent or more than Cooper had, but the difference is Tressel can coach. Lloyd Carr is certainly no slouch, his record against Top 10 teams is very impressive and he has a national championship in his own right. And despite Carr's bad record against Tressel, most of the games have been close. I think Carr has earned the right to stay at Michigan as long as he wants, I wouldn't be calling for his job if Michigan loses.
I think the new coordinators are a big factor in the season's success, but one of many. I'll give Nebraska some credit here. That 5th loss last year was a big wake-up call. That might not have happened if Michigan won. It meant two new coordinators in Ron English (defense) and Mike DeBord (offense, who coordinated the 1997 team before leaving for a head coaching job). Michigan also had a new defensive coordinator in 1997 after a couple disappointing seasons and you remember what happened. That may also have been DeBord's first year as offensive coordinator. The team also dedicated itself to getting in top shape, and they have finished every game this year, after blowing so many last year and pulling several others out at the end. Another big factor is fewer key injuries than last year, which could be a result of the better conditioning. The only real big injury this year was to Manningham, but it benefitted the team in making Adrian Arrington a reliable target for Henne, particularly in the red zone.
I'm hoping Michigan can put that past history behind them so it doesn't affect their play. Michigan (aside from the Nov. 4 Ball State game) has basically gone in and taken care of business in every game, rarely being threatened. You can obviously say the same about Ohio State. Yes, the rest of the Big Ten is nothing great, but Michigan dominated Notre Dame and Wisconsin and OSU did the same to Texas.
What is your biggest concern match-up wise going into this game?
Michigan Fan: Easily the biggest concern for me is Michigan's second corner, Morgan Trent. Leon Hall is a shut down corner, although if he is matched up with Ted Ginn he may not be able to stay with him all day. So Anthony Gonzalez could have a big day against Trent. Hopefully if Gonzalez runs out of bounds on a pass play this year -- as he did on the big pass play last year -- the officials will not only notice it but will also call it. :) If Trent is a weak link, then OSU going to 3-4 WRs could present a problem when Michigan's safeties and backup corners are forced into the game. The good news is Michigan can rush four and get pressure on the QB, so they can drop extra men into coverage to make up for any deficiencies in the secondary.
The other major concern is being able to contain Troy Smith. Michigan could play excellent defense, but if Smith can scramble around and buy time he can kill us running as he did in 2004 or passing as he did last year. He doesn't turn the ball over, either. I think when Michigan has a shot at a sack they have to get him down.
I'm also concerned about Michigan's FG kicker. Garrett Rivas has very nice stats career-wise, but he has missed some key kicks in his life so he's not money.
What matchups favor Michigan?
Michigan Fan: I haven't seen enough of OSU to know how they compare. Michigan should have an advantage on both lines, based on what I have read. Michigan has a great front four and their OL has played well this year with a new zone blocking scheme. Drew Tate said Michigan's defense was better than any he has faced, including OSU. I think Penn State would agree, since Michigan knocked out their first and second string QBs.
I think everyone will say the key for Michigan is to establish the run with Mike Hart. They could not run on OSU at all last year (when Hart and Jake Long were banged up), and that is a major reason they blew the late lead. I also think Michigan needs to get some big pass plays early, like they did against Notre Dame. I think Henne is vulnerable to a lack of confidence if things don't go well. It would be nice to re-establish Manningham since he hasn't done much since he's gotten back.
There's been talk of a possible rematch of these teams in the national championship game (though history would suggest that's unlikely, that late season losses are usually a death sentence to national title hopes). Do you think a rematch would be fair or would another team (like USC) deserve to face the winner?
Michigan Fan: As much as I would hate to see a re-match -- particularly a re-match of conference foes -- I don't see how you can say another team is more deserving than the OSU-Michigan loser, unless it is a big blow out. If they play a close game I think Michigan-OSU should still be 1-2 in the polls regardless of what happens the rest of the season. Can USC or Florida make a claim to having a better season than Michigan or Ohio State -- particuarly if you compare their losses? And how could any sane voter even think about dropping Michigan behind Notre Dame?
I do think Michigan may have more of an argument against a rematch if they win at OSU than if OSU wins in a close contest, given home field advantage. To me, if you beat the other guy at their place then you are clearly the better team and there's no need for a game under different conditions to prove it.
The biggest downside of a rematch would be the teams splitting the games, as happened in 1996 with FSU and Florida. It would take some of the luster off this weekend's game, but also would move college football into the realm of all other sports in making the regular season less meaningful.
Changing gears here, if Nebraska and Michigan ended up facing each other in a bowl this year, what would your prediction be of the outcome?
Michigan Fan: Michigan in a rout, but if there are Sun Belt officials, Nebraska would have a chance of keeping it close. :) I do think Nebraska has a good shot of pulling out a BCS bid given that there are usually upsets in conference championship games, and I think they would be competitive with Texas (as they already were) or Oklahoma. However, no offense intended, I personally would be very disappointed to see Michigan play a team ranked in the low teens or 20s after the season they had. They should play a Top 10 team for sure, preferably the #2 team :)
Finally, who would have won Nebraska or Michigan after the 1997 season if they'd gotten to play one another on a neutral field?
Michigan Fan: Do you really think I would say Nebraska?
Related: Interview with an Ohio State fan | Buckeye Blog | Michigan Blog
11/17/2006
Great stuff, Jeff. Thanks so much for participating with BRN.
Loyal readers - I can say that Jeff is to Michigan what Steve and I are to the Huskers. Only, he’s smarter. Seriously, I quit participating in pools and having side bets about sports with Jeff because he would constantly school me.
When we could stay clear of whole ‘97 split-title controversy discussion, the three of us (Jeff, Steve and I) had some legendary Saturdays watching football together during our simple, consequence-free bachelor days.
12/14/2006
Loyd Carr is a great coach, but really doesn’t have a true National Title. The split title controversy really isn’t a controversy. It gets old hearing Colorado won a National title when they beat ND. I think that was 87? Colorado had a tie and a loss. Georgia Tech was the Champion that year. Nobody beat them. Michigan in 97 with Griese would not have a chance against the Nebraska team. That Nebraska team was the best college team I have ever seen play. Michigan barely beat their opponents. They were not dominant in any way. Nebraska totally dominated every team that year except Missouri at Missouri. If your were to look at the stats for that team, you would see just how dominant they were. Their offensive line as a unit deserved the Heisman as college footballs best player. Give it to their best lineman and let them share it. USC in 03 was the runner-up to LSU who was the champion that year. LSU was undefeated and won the BCS championship bowl. USC had a loss. You have to be out of your mind to vote for USC over LSU. So as you can see, the AP poll is an unreliable gauge for ranking college football teams. Whoever wins the coaches poll and the BCS Championship are the true champions. To place your trust in the Associated Press is a big mistake as it is way too subjective. It is just amazing how easy we call some teams National Champions just because we want to. We have more champions than we have years. That makes no sense. How come we don’t give Utah part of the National title when they completely dominated their bowl game and went undefeated when they had Alex Smith at QB? We called BYU national champions in 1980 because they didn’t lose a game. If that happened now, BYU wouldn’t have a chance. We really need a 8 team playoff incorporated into the bowls for us to quit giving multiple titles in a single year. What if Boise State beats Oklahoma? Would you call them National Champions? Nobody beat them. They beat Oregon state who beat USC. Why don’t they belong? If Florida beats OSU, then Boise State might be the only undefeated team in the country. Oh, and the Sooners had a win taken away from them by the replay officials in Oregon the first week of the year. They really only have one loss this year and that was to Texas. Those officials were reprimanded by the way because they really screwed up. If you are willing to call Michigan Champions in 97, then maybe you should also call BSU champions in 06 if they beat Oklahoma. I will say that Colorado, Mich, and USC, were all extremely good teams those years the AP voted for them, just not the best team in the land.