|
|
| Author |
Message |
| 25 new of 199 responses total. |
senna
|
|
response 116 of 199:
| 
Nov 2 03:28 UTC 2001 |
So, here's a primer to the "casual," that is, sane, fan of UM or MSU or any
other type of contest in this state.
MICHIGAN vs MICHIGAN STATE. November 3, 2001, 3:30 pm EST
Breakdown: Michigan is 6-1, 4-0 in the Big Ten, ranked 4th in the BCS poll
used to determine the teams that play for the national championship. Michigan
State is 4-2, 2-2 in the Big Ten, unranked in any major poll. Michigan has
an outside chance at going to the Rose Bowl national title game and can win
the conference even with one more conference loss. Michigan State has an
extremely slim, outside shot at the conference title, and is more likely
shooting for a solid goal of playing in a New Year's day bowl game.
Currrent trends: Michigan has followed its loss to Washington in the second
game of the season with a run of good and occasionally really good play. With
solid wins over Illinois and Purdue, the only other Big Ten teams with less
than two losses, Michigan has established itself as the class of the field,
even pulling out a win in a hostile environment against Iowa when playing
flat. Michigan State started strong, slumped with a crushing defeat to
Northwestern and a bewildering collapse against Minnesota, and hit stride last
week against Wisconsin. Nobody's quite sure which team will appear to play
Michigan this weekend, but you can be assured that most of the best players
from the defensive backfield will be on the sidelines with injuries
regardless.
Players to watch: Offense overshadows defense here. Michigan has been riding
Marquise Walker all season long, and Ann Arbor locals have begun talking him
up for the Heisman Trophy, which he won't win. He is spectacular, and
contributes huge plays in every game, though. BJ Askew can play at least
three positions for Michigan, but he has settled in at tailback, where he can
run effectively and catch passes on screens and safety valves. If he gets
going on the ground early, Michigan will have a very easy time on offense.
Michigan State is *loaded* with skill position talent. TJ Duckett has
struggled early in the season (well, sort of; reports of his struggles are
overrated--MSU has been able to run the offense through different directions),
but he had a big game against Wisconsin last week, and he will be relied upon
to run over and through Michigan defensive linemen that have been stingy
against the run thus far this year. Herb Haygood and Charlie Rogers provide
a tremendous double-threat at receiver that Michigan won't be able to match
up with properly, and at least one of them should have a big game. Rogers,
incidently, will draw NFL paychecks in a couple of yers, so he's worth
watching.
Key: Nothing original here. Turnovers and special teams will have a huge
effect on the game. If MSU wants to win, they will have to get the ball deep
in Michigan territory and convert for at least a couple of scores. Their
ravaged secondary is going to get burned by Walker's superior physical talent
at least once or twice, but how they play second and third receivers Ronald
Bellamy and Calvin Bell will decide how efficiently Michigan can march down
the field. Don't forget, this game will end under the lights, and if MSU is
close or leading late, Spartan Stadium is going to become *very* hostile.
|
lk
|
|
response 117 of 199:
|
Nov 3 00:02 UTC 2001 |
That's a good analysis. And this game will be the real test for the
Michigan rushing defense, ranked #1 in the country.
My analysis is a bit shorter (even if biased): M 34, MSU 17.
(:
[Note: I'm not even hedging my bet; this is the same prediction i posted
in M-Net's sports cf earlier this week.]
|
lynne
|
|
response 118 of 199:
|
Nov 3 18:07 UTC 2001 |
Mmmm...I think it'll be closer than that. Say UM 24, MSU 17.
Two and a half hours to kickoff!
|
gelinas
|
|
response 119 of 199:
|
Nov 3 23:35 UTC 2001 |
It's 24-20 with four minutes left. And the home team has the ball. This has
been a hard-fought game.
|
jep
|
|
response 120 of 199:
|
Nov 4 00:35 UTC 2001 |
Michigan State won, 26-24!
|
krj
|
|
response 121 of 199:
|
Nov 4 01:58 UTC 2001 |
<krj does the happy Spartan dance>
I want to thank senna for his pre-game analysis in resp:116.
I thought seriously about working in the garden, because it was such a
beautiful afternoon, but senna convinced me it would be a game
worth watching. I was invited to the home of a couple of other
MSU alumni and we had a great time. This was one of the most exciting
football games I've had a personal interest in.
I don't know enough to do any serious analysis, but these seem
like two badly flawed teams. Michigan coach Lloyd Carr looked
*really* unhappy, especially since those two late stupid penalties
(one for a face mask, one for 12 men on the field!!!) kept Michigan
from putting the game away after MSU had fumbled on a snap (argh again!)
and allowed Michigan to take the lead.
<krj does more happy Spartan dance>
|
senna
|
|
response 122 of 199:
|
Nov 4 05:52 UTC 2001 |
Michigan was certainly flawed today, a depressingly regular pattern in Spartan
Stadium. MSU usually does a good job of keeping Michigan off its game when
MSU is at home-and those guys were flying for the entire second half.
Michigan played like a sack of wet napkins all second-half long, but MSU
deserves credit for the out-of-mind quality of play, particularly in the
secondary. Not for the interceptions so much as for the elmination of easy
options play in and out. I'm not sure why Michigan didn't try to attack the
secondary too much, but I guess we never really got any drives going to do
it.
Controversy abounds in the existence of the last second (ESPN analyst Rod
Gilmore suggests that there's some home cooking involved with the second left,
but I can't really comment on the accuracy of that until I see a
second-by-second replay. I thought it should have run off, but I wasn't
watching the clock when the ball was spiked, so I couldn't say for sure.
Michigan really didn't play a game to win, though. Countless opportunities
to put the game away, including several in the last drive, were blown in
heartbreaking fashion. Worse, Michigan never broke--if a team is going to
drive to score, you hope that they leave some time left on the clock for a
desperation comeback, but there was obviously no chance for that.
The place wasn't as intense as some UM-MSU games have been at the beginning,
but it was rocking by the time Michigan scored to go ahead 24-20. It *was*
really hostile at night. A passenger jet flew directly over the stadium on
its approach to the airport during halftime, causing no small consternation
in the crowd, by the way.
We aim to please, Ken. Absolutely cracking game of football today, a perfect
example of.. escape through sports. :) Congratulations to MSUers, it was a
terrific game.
|
lynne
|
|
response 123 of 199:
|
Nov 4 18:59 UTC 2001 |
Dammit. I thought the Michigan defense was really spectacular most of the
game...it was *so* depressing to watch the friggin offense go three and out
or just give the ball away.
What a frustrating game to watch. I so miss Drew Henson.
|
senna
|
|
response 124 of 199:
|
Nov 5 00:09 UTC 2001 |
I don't, really. He's gone, and there's no much we can do about it. The team
that matters is what we have on the field, and it has already surpassed
espectations on offense. The second half was abysmal, yes, but it was far
more than the fault of missing one quarterback.
|
gelinas
|
|
response 125 of 199:
|
Nov 5 03:02 UTC 2001 |
I agree. Michigan *always* has someone who can step up to replace *any*
player. Navarre is working out. I don't like the interceptions he threw
yesterday, and there were some incomplete passes (if I recall correctly)
that could have been done better. But he's working out. We'll play on
New Year's Day, and we'll be the Big Ten champions, which is all I ever ask
of my football team.
|
senna
|
|
response 126 of 199:
|
Nov 5 03:44 UTC 2001 |
Three wins in the big ten are never guaranteed, so nobody count their chickens
yet.
|
gelinas
|
|
response 127 of 199:
|
Nov 5 03:58 UTC 2001 |
As we saw yesterday. ;/
|
goose
|
|
response 128 of 199:
|
Nov 5 14:13 UTC 2001 |
Okay, I see all this talk of Michigan has pretty much lost their chance at
the Rose Bowl due to this loss. Why is that, they still have the best Big
Ten record right?
|
lk
|
|
response 129 of 199:
|
Nov 5 14:34 UTC 2001 |
This year, which also happens to be the 100th anniversary of the first
Rose Bowl game (Michigan 49, Stanford 0), is the BCS national championship
game. Thus it will feature the #1 and #2 teams in the BCS poll rather than
the Big-10 vs. Pac-10 champions.
Historical note: after Michigan's one-sided victory, the Tournament of Roses
(which predates that game) went back to racing elephants (or some such) and
didn't play another football game for about 15 years. Thus while it is the
100th year, it is only the 87th(?) game.
|
bruin
|
|
response 130 of 199:
|
Nov 6 01:47 UTC 2001 |
BTW, wasn't the Rose Bowl played in an eastern U.S. city for one year
during World War II?
|
senna
|
|
response 131 of 199:
|
Nov 6 02:02 UTC 2001 |
Yep.
|
goose
|
|
response 132 of 199:
|
Nov 6 03:44 UTC 2001 |
RE#129 -- Man, that sucks. Why did they change it to the BCS crap?
|
gelinas
|
|
response 133 of 199:
|
Nov 6 04:23 UTC 2001 |
The money.
|
goose
|
|
response 134 of 199:
|
Nov 6 05:27 UTC 2001 |
Figures.
|
jep
|
|
response 135 of 199:
|
Nov 6 17:19 UTC 2001 |
I think the Big Ten and PAC-10 didn't want to be left out of the BCS,
and neither did the Rose Bowl.
Meanwhile, I hope for a split national champion every year. The BCS
championship is the official national championship. All of the coaches
in the USA Today/ESPN poll are required to vote the winner as the #1
team, but the AP poll is done by the media and it's possible they could
pick another team as #1. Unlikely, but possible. That's my dream
scenario every year.
|
gelinas
|
|
response 136 of 199:
|
Nov 11 06:06 UTC 2001 |
I forgot to set the VCR before leaving for Atlanta this morning; did anyone
tape the game? If so, can I borrow the tape?
|
senna
|
|
response 137 of 199:
|
Nov 11 16:32 UTC 2001 |
I'm afraid I have a blanket policy against taping Michigan games, but ones
broadcast on ESPN or ESPN2 are occasionally replayed late at night on those
stations--check into it. UM-Minnesota was probably shown last night, but you
never know.
|
mrcool
|
|
response 138 of 199:
|
Nov 11 18:08 UTC 2001 |
who won the game?
|
ea
|
|
response 139 of 199:
|
Nov 11 19:07 UTC 2001 |
Syracuse beat West Virginia yesterday, and Miami survived a scare from
BC, leaving SU and Miami as the only 2 teams that are undefeated in Big
East Conference play. Next week's matchup between the two has become a
huge game. A lot of people who were saying at the beginning of the
season that Syracuse didn't have a chance are changing their tune
somewhat. I think the general opinion on campus is that it will be a
close game, rather than a blowout, and it could go either way.
|
gelinas
|
|
response 140 of 199:
|
Nov 11 21:30 UTC 2001 |
Thanks for the pointer, Steve. I don't see it on tonight's schedule, so I
guess I missed it.
|
