Wolves vs 'Dawgs Thread

[Mdot21]

styles make fights. Georgia was dialed in and out for blood and boy did they start fast. Bennett hit some big deep balls early and they also scored a TD off a trick play RB pass early, and before Michigan knew it they were down 17-0. That's not a game that Michigan is going to comeback from and win as constructed- they are just not built for that with McNamara.

I think next year they should be a much better passing team if JJ is given the reigns and they'll also get their best WR Ronnie Bell back from injury, and Roman Wilson and Andrel Anthony are two very talented young receivers that should continue to develop.

[betarhoalphadelta]

Wait, you're criticizing watching a game that guarantees a result and then talking about it?  That's an entire industry, boss.

Yes, with a different outcome, the narrative/discussion about it would be different.  No shit.  I guess no talking heads should have jobs.  I guess this board shouldn't exist.

After a game is played, SHHHH!  Don't discuss it.

Georgia's win was an unexpected blowout.  The "narrative" as you deride it tries to explain the unexpected outcome.  What's wrong with that? 

Again, as usual, you're missing the point. 

Michigan lost. You can analyze what happened on the football field, i.e. they went down early and aren't built for a pass-first comeback offense, and Georgia's offensive scheme was designed to neutralize their biggest advantage of D, the pass rush. It ended up not being close. Of course, teams who are -3 in the turnover margin USUALLY have trouble keeping it close. 

Instead, you try to psychoanalyze a bunch of 20 year olds and treat it as a question of motivation, or emotional readiness for the game. How do you know? Do you REALLY think those players weren't mentally dialed in for the game? This isn't the case of a team that underachieved their goals and was in a "lesser" bowl. This was the damn college football playoff. You think Michigan lost because they weren't mentally present?

[Mdot21]

Again, as usual, you're missing the point.

Michigan lost. You can analyze what happened on the football field, i.e. they went down early and aren't built for a pass-first comeback offense, and Georgia's offensive scheme was designed to neutralize their biggest advantage of D, the pass rush. It ended up not being close. Of course, teams who are -3 in the turnover margin USUALLY have trouble keeping it close.

Instead, you try to psychoanalyze a bunch of 20 year olds and treat it as a question of motivation, or emotional readiness for the game. How do you know? Do you REALLY think those players weren't mentally dialed in for the game? This isn't the case of a team that underachieved their goals and was in a "lesser" bowl. This was the damn college football playoff. You think Michigan lost because they weren't mentally present?

I think Michigan wasn't as hungry as Georgia. That was clear to me from the get go. Michigan had been punching teams in the face all year. They ran into a team that just punched them in the face from the word go and didn't stop, and Michigan players had no idea how to respond. I think Cade was pressing a lot and he was pretty awful. The OL played like crap in pass pro, they looked like they'd never seen a blitz or stunt before in their lives. I think after Michigan was down 17-0 in a blink, frustration and panic set in and they just had no answers. They are not the kind of team that can overcome deficits because their passing game with McNamara is pretty vanilla and mediocre. They get some deep shots off play-action when they run the ball effectively, but when you're down 17-0 and only attempt 16 rushes all game- play-action isn't there. When McNamara absolutely has to throw- he can't. And Georgia knew that. They got up 17-0 and then just pinned their ears back on the rush/blitz.

[um1963]

I mean it looked pretty obvious to me last night that UM was still doing victory laps from last month while Georgia was on a mission.  Add insult to injury that Georgia is bigger, stronger, faster, more handsome, has better looking girlfriends and their mothers love them more we end up with last night's result.  It doesn't take a genius to see that UM ran into a buzz saw. The truth is that nobody was beating Georgia last night.

It was a great season none the less, looking forward to doing it again in 15-20 years.

[betarhoalphadelta]

I think Michigan wasn't as hungry as Georgia. That was clear to me from the get go. Michigan had been punching teams in the face all year. They ran into a team that just punched them in the face from the word go and didn't stop, and Michigan players had no idea how to respond. I think Cade was pressing a lot and he was pretty awful. The OL played like crap in pass pro, they looked like they'd never seen a blitz or stunt before in their lives. I think after Michigan was down 17-0 in a blink, frustration and panic set in and they just had no answers. They are not the kind of team that can overcome deficits because their passing game with McNamara is pretty vanilla and mediocre. They get some deep shots off play-action when they run the ball effectively, but when you're down 17-0 and only attempt 16 rushes all game- play-action isn't there. When McNamara absolutely has to throw- he can't. And Georgia knew that. They got up 17-0 and then just pinned their ears back on the rush/blitz.

I'm with you on everything except the bolded part.

I don't think it had anything to do with "hunger". Aidan Hutchinson didn't play in that game due to a lack of hunger.

Everything else is true. Michigan got punched in the mouth, went down 17 points in the blink of an eye, and doesn't have an answer for that. The analysis pregame was all about this being power vs power, and whether Michigan was going to be able to assert their will on the ground. They weren't, and they don't have the sort of pass offense an Alabama or Ohio State has, which was shown to be the way to attack Georgia. Then -3 in TO margin, and you've got the recipe for a blowout.

But a lack of "hunger" is an unnecessary explanation and narrative building.

[bayareabadger]

when did I say their secondary had no speed? I said I thought their secondary is not that good. And I still think that after watching this game.

I did question their playmakers outside of the TE's. And I still kind of sort of do. One of their long passing TD's they had, CB Vincent Gray was step for step with the WR and then inexplicably literally just stopped running and let the WR get behind him and it was all she wrote. One of their long pass TD's was a RB on a LB in man coverage and the RB got behind the LB on a wheel route. Another of their TD's was set-up off a similar play where the RB got matched up in man on a LB outside on a go-route. That's bad coaching- shouldn't be having your LB's in man vs RB. That is just asking to get burned. Just some poor execution/coaching that Michigan hadn't shown most of the year.

Never said Stetson sucked either. Said he was a huge question mark. Which he was. And the kid just played the game of his life- so kudos to him.

"Georgia D = shades of a Don Brown D. PAPER TIGERS. Very similar style defense and very similar blitz heavy scheme with a god awful secondary to back it up. Works wonders against teams not equipped to handle it- can over-power them and get crazy stats on the stat sheets- but it's all a sieve."

"we are saying that -7.5 line is ridiculous, Georgia starts a HS QB and their D was, well...overrated."


Coming out of this, if I was prone to saying bombastic things, I'd be roasting the Michigan defense. HS QB, not many play makers outside a tight end, gave up 7.7 yards per play. Woof. And an offense with an edge at QB, receiver, OL and WR, as someone told us, got smothered (4 YPP, three big plays before half) by a sieve. Quite a game. 

[MrNubbz]

I think Michigan wasn't as hungry prepared as Georgia. 

FIFY

[OrangeAfroMan]

Instead, you try to psychoanalyze a bunch of 20 year olds and treat it as a question of motivation, or emotional readiness for the game. How do you know? Do you REALLY think those players weren't mentally dialed in for the game? This isn't the case of a team that underachieved their goals and was in a "lesser" bowl. This was the damn college football playoff. You think Michigan lost because they weren't mentally present?

First of all, yes, I'm suggesting that my idea MAY be true.  I'm guessing.  I'm saying it's a possibility.  How dare I!!!
Secondly, I wouldn't word it as "Michigan lost because they weren't mentally present."  I'm not sure how you got that from my suggestion.

A more precise description would be Michigan lost because it wasn't as good as Georgia, but Michigan MAY HAVE BEEN blown out because they were satisfied with their season.  They already achieved all of the realistic goals of a team that wasn't ranked in the preseason. 

Despite what some here would suggest, teams get "up" for certain games.  I'll never understand how that idea is so challenged on this board.  But anyway....
Of course UM got up for OSU.  They're always up for that game.  And HOLY SHIT, they won it!
Okay, great, UM won the division, but the job isn't done.  When they made their season goals, I'll bet you a dollar their ultimate goal was to win the B1G, for 2 reasons.
1 - they weren't ranked in the preseason, so playoff/NC might seem silly back at the end of July
2 - winning the B1G is the best goal they can have that's directly under their control

It's REALLY hard to get a team "up" for 3 games in a row.  

Again, I'm not saying UM lost because of this, but perhaps they got blown out because of it.  It's a silly, unfalsifiable claim.  But what else are online forums for??

[Gigem]

Dang, it’s just so simple. Georgia was just much better coached and they were more talented. You can spin being down by 17 early all you want but the truth is Michigan simply could not move the ball no matter the down/distance, quarter, or field position and when they did it usually got stopped by a TO. 

I get it, sometimes the better team doesn’t win ( see A&M/Alabama 2021) but yesterday was not the case. Just be happy your one loss team got into the CFP and had the opportunity, there’s been plenty of one loss teams that never got the chance through the years. 

[Mdot21]

I'm with you on everything except the bolded part.

Nubbz corrected me. Hunger was the wrong word. Prepared is a better word. Michigan was not prepared for that- they got punched in the face early and were down 17-0 in a blink. They ain't build to comeback from that with McNamara at QB or with that offensive system. 

Watching the Ohio State game now- they got down by a lot early- but with that QB those WR's and that system with a play-caller like Day- even with all those guys sitting- they can scream right back into games. That's the only way you're winning anything in todays game. Ohio State just didn't have the defense this year to match that offense. Doubt that will be the same two years in a row. Very jealous of how they play offense. I think if Michigan wants any shot of actually winning a playoff game- they have to move to McCarthy and completely re-tool the offensive philosophy and become a pass first team. 

[SuperMario]

FIFY

You could argue it was both. Neither hungry nor prepared. UM1963 said it best when he said they were still doing victory laps and Georgia was on a mission. Michigan winning anything else was just gravy and Georgia was clearly pissed about their loss to Bama and out to prove how good they are. Honestly, it was always a bad matchup for Michigan, but showing up less hungry made it a buzz saw. Personally, I don’t know how anyone could watch the game vs the buckeyes and the game be Georgia and not see the difference in energy among the same 20 years olds in both games. 

[MrNubbz]

Well you have a point both Georgia/tOSU played much better after getting throttled

[FearlessF]

I blame the space cadet, HArbaugh

[Cincydawg]

I think folks put too much emphasis on emotions and not enough on turnovers and some fortunate breaks.  A pass a foot or an inch the other way can change a game.  And yes, there are times when a team is not focused and loses or plays poorly, I think that is rare in major bowl games.  I've seen it most often after a Big Win.

And yes, it can play into game prep at times, the emotional/mental aspect.  Evenly matched teams won't overcome 3-0 TO deficit very often.