Big Ten Preseason Thoughts

July 13th, 2008 Keith Godfrey

A few months back, following Spring practices I posted my pre-fall Big Ten predictions; I still feel rather confident about them but perhaps things will change before I ultimately make up my mind come mid-August. However, the other day I picked up The SportingNews’ College Football ‘08 preview. Disgusting.

I can’t decide if it’s the inaccuracies I have discovered so far or my general lack of agreement.  For a refresher my post-Spring predictions looked like this:

1. Ohio State 12-0 (8-0)
2. Wisconsin 10-2 (7-1)
3. Penn State 10-2 (6-2)
4. Illinois       10-2 (6-2)
5. Mich State   9-3  (5-3)
6. Purdue        7-5  (6-2)
7. Michigan    6-6   (4-4)
8. Iowa           6-6   (4-4)
9. N’Western   5-7  (3-5)
10. Minnesota  3-9   (1-7)
11. Indiana       2-10 (1-7)

Now, please give me a break on how the records play out … that was just a fun experiment without looking at each team’s schedules (i.e. pulling it out of thin air). The SportingNews sees the Big Ten shaping up like this (they call the top 8 teams bowl eligible and place each in a bowl):

1. Ohio State
2. Illinois
3. Wisconsin
4. Michigan
5. Purdue
6. Michigan State
7. Penn State
8. Northwestern
9. Iowa
10. Indiana
11. Minnesota

The clear differences are how we respectively feel about Illinois, Penn State, and Michigan. In all honesty I cannot figure out their Michigan prediction.

First thing I notice is they predict Michigan as a preseason 18th in the nation. Excuse me, did I miss something? No one outside of Vegas is believing that! Nevermind that Michigan is perpetually the most overrated team in the nation; no other Big Ten team is in the Top 15. Michigan fans you can certainly thank preseasons rags like this and others who boast you up based on your tradition of winning. It’s a great tradition - don’t get me wrong - but voting Michigan so high simply because they’re Michigan is simply foolish sometimes. Nevertheless this is their right so I continue on.

The mag seemingly starts to contradict itself at this point; unfortunately Michigan fans it flubs up all over you. For each conference they assign a team that is ascending and descending. Michigan earned the descending crown for the Big Ten with commentary that reads as such:

The Wolverines won’t be down for long, but expect a dip as the program transitions to Rich Rodriguez’s spread offense. Not only is a quarterback need, but Michigan’s offensive line and receiving corps are a work-in-progress as the offense adapts to a new scheme.

Now, consider last season when Ohio State had serious questions surrounding it’s offense and the prevailing thought was the defense would have to carry them. They started out the preseason at number 11 which many called lofty for a team with an unproven QB, who lost their top 2 receivers to the NFL, and their starting running back. Sound familiar.  I believe this number 11 slot was earned strictly on what was returning on the defensive side of the ball which was far more formidable than what Michigan has returning this season.

So excuse me if I seem mildly confused at this point. I flip to the write up on Michigan and all hell breaks loose. I can’t find one positive comment about the offense!At least Beanie Wells was a mostly proven commodity coming back and the Buckeyes had several returning lineman on offense. They can’t find a positive thing to say about Michigan’s offensive side of the ball.

The cause of much of the angst is the apparent absence of a capable quarterback to make Rodriguez’s spread offense hum … A lumbering drop back passer, Mallett wasn’t the fit for this attack. But is apparent number 1 Steven Threet? … While he is more athletic than Mallett, Threet is still cut from the traditional-quarterback mold.

The article goes on:

With Mario Manningham and Adrian Arrington both having left early to the NFL, there is no doubt that Greg Mathews is Michigan’s top veteran wide out. But how many passes will be thrown his way in this offense?

Running backs:

Mike Hart’s departure leaves a gaping hole at running back. The answer may be a tailback-by-committee.

The article also points out, which I have neglected to consider, that Michigan coaches were already teaching the zone blocking scheme so that does put the line a little bit ahead of the curve. However, this is a line returning one starter, Steve Schilling, who got decimated against Ohio State last year and needs to show considerable improvement.

Saying nothing positive about an offense leaves me at a complete loss. I don’t care how dominant a defense you have - if you can’t score you can’t win. The 2004 Penn State team only gave up an average of 15.27 points per game and finished 4-7.

Which leads me to this … how can the SportingNews completely fawn over this defense? A defense that last year gave up on average 21.4 points per game, 156.8 yards rushing a game, and an average of nearly 5 yards per play?

A defense on which they say Morgan Trent is the best player?! Morgan Trent?! Someone help me. I can’t remember the last time I wasn’t stunned by how inept Morgan Trent appeared.

Their thoughts on Michigan, were they placed them nationally, and within the Big Ten, caused me the most consternation. Additional thoughts are this:

1. I think they’re a wee bit high on the Illini. They seem to think their defense is going to be some wrecking ball and while I believe that Vontae Davis is going to be stellar nobody can replace J Lehman. The Illini gave up 21.8 points per game last year and over 375 yards per game. On offense, Juice has to prove he can be consistent, Mendenhall must be replaced (Dufrene showed flashes of brilliance) and Arrelious Benn will need to have a formidable threat emerge at the other receiver position.
2. I think they’re a bit soft on Penn State. Something just reminds me of 2005 Penn State here; especially if Daryll Clark is as special as he looked in last season’s Alamo Bowl. The loss of Sean Lee does hurt, yes, but this is Linebacker U.
3. I don’t think they give enough credit to Bret Bielema and the Badgers. Quarterback questions may abound in Madison but Allen Evridge does have some experience and its not as if he doesn’t have a mammoth line and tremendous backs to rely on (hello, ala Todd Boeckman?).

Those are my thoughts. Overall, the magazine has been a good read and provided some good insight to the upcoming season. I just wish it would have been more consistent with their thoughts and where they ranked teams.

Posted in Big Ten, Illinois, Michigan, Ohio State, Penn St, Wisconsin | No Comments »

Something needs to change

February 9th, 2008 Keith Godfrey

First off, let me make a quick correction to my previous blog. During an NCAA dead period in recruiting a coach can call a recruit once a week. A recruit can call a coach as many times as he likes and the only face-to-face contact can take place on campus; a coach cannot go visit a recruit. Moving on …..

The other night the Indiana Hoosiers visited the Illinois Fighting Illini to partake in a quaint game of basketball. Perhaps during intermission the teams would forego the typical strategy session and arse chewing to share tea and crumpets and maybe by chance the ever so manly slap on the rear end out the door; the good ole atta boy slap.

C’mon people this is Big Ten basketball!

The crowds at Big Ten basketball games have long been ruthless to opposing teams. Heck, I know it was a staple of the Izzone during my years at Michigan State. The only time it crosses the line is when it becomes profane and in bad taste (or it’s at Crisler Arena, then its all profane and in bad taste). Home crowds create home court advantage.

Quick back story - Indiana basketball star Eric Gordon had orally committed to play for Bill Webber’s Illini squad before he reneged on that oral committment and went to play for Kelvin ‘Text’ Sampson. Needless to say Illini fans are p-i-s-s-e-d.

You see, Gordon is a stud and would have been the backbone of a very young Illini squad. Albeit Gordon is young himself I have to believe if the NBA hadn’t changed their clearance to enter the league that Gordon would be playing at a different level right now.

So I am sorry Indiana Hoosiers men’s basketball, Kelvin ‘Cheat’ Sampson, Eric ‘Renege’ Gordon, and all others associated with this hooey but I just cannot feel sorry for the kid because the Illini fans chanted ‘Liar, Liar’ at him. He brought that upon himself.

To sum it all up. I think something needs to be done about oral committments. In fact, I think those committments may need to be binding or at least carry some sort of penalty. The recent college football signing day saw three U of M signees renege on their original oral committments to other schools, two of which were Big Ten schools, to sign with the Wolverines (and yes Wolverine fans I know it happens with other schools too).

This whole orally committing to one school and then signing with a different school is growing into quite an epidemic. I believe the only appropriate way to handle that type of situation is to publicly reopen your recruitment much like Josh Jenkins of Parkersburg, WV did. Otherwise, once a recruit makes an oral committment the rule out to be hands off or pay a price. And just perhaps part of that price is facing the cold hard truth and being called a liar all night by the school you spurned.

Posted in Big Ten, Illinois, Indiana | 1 Comment »