I'm a Michigan's fan. I'm not bitter over the loss to USC. They simply out played Michigan. BUT Michigan is a great team this year in my opinion far better than USC can anyone tell me how USC beat Michigan. I know Michigan can't defend four good WR but they did so well against OSU. and John David Booty is just an average OB compared to Matt Leinhart.
2007-01-04 13:25:07 · 16 answers · asked by Question 2 in Sports ➔ Football (American)
USC plays a wide-open, flexible and opportunistic style of football which triumphed over Lloyd Carr's rigidity. Michigan has better players with greater skills, but the coaching staff did not make the necessary adjustments to deploy them effectively. The old cliche rings true: In the Pac-10, coaches play to win; in the Big Ten, coaches play not to lose. The "trench" attitude did not serve Michigan's fans and athletes well. If I had been Henne, I would have been in the face of the offensive co-ordinator demanding that he make changes, tighten the o-line, give me two more seconds----just two more---to get my passes off, rather than being sacked so painfully, so many times. The receivers were in place and often wide open. Flexibility is crucial. Coaches marks: Carroll, A. Carr, D. End of story.
2007-01-06 07:29:39 · answer #1 · answered by ragged 3 · 0⤊ 0⤋
Wow, still delusional, huh? Sorry, but they're not far better than USC, or even better than USC. The Trojans exposed them as a mediocre team in a really bad conference (go past OSU and Wisconsin and see how badly the other eight teams in the conference really suck).
How did they beat them? It's called a game plan, something that's obviously a foreign concept to Lloyd Carr. Pete Carroll saw the problems in the loss to UCLA and corrected them - he rolled Booty out of the pocket, got much better blocking from his O-line, and let his receivers rip the crap out of the porous Michigan secondary.
On the other side of the ball, the USC front seven might as well have been in the Michigan huddle. They completely shut Mike Hart down, mainly because the fat asses that comprise the Michigan offensive line couldn't get a push to save their souls. Take away the run and make a bum like Chad Henne try to beat you, and since Michigan wasn't pass blocking either, the Trojans were simply pinning their ears back and coming.
I don't know where you got the concept that Michigan did so well against OSU, because Troy Smith once again ate the Michigan defense for lunch. OSU just didn't play defense as well as USC did, and the Buckeyes should have beaten them by 20. Booty may not be Leinart, but the Michigan defense made him look better than Matt, and he ripped the **** out of them. Duane Jarrett was toying with them all afternoon, and they couldn't have covered him had they tried.
Michigan played a very soft schedule (especially given that their big win over Notre Dame looked worse and worse every time the Irish got the crap kicked out of them, or pulled games out of their asses that they should have lost) and it finally caught up with them. USC beat them with speed and talent, foreign concepts in Ann Arbor.
Next time Michigan gets an invite to Pasadena, they need to do the college football world a favor and decline (though it was entertaining to see them get ripped a new anal orifice).
2007-01-04 21:39:49 · answer #2 · answered by TheOnlyBeldin 7 · 0⤊ 1⤋
Considering both teams were hungry after ending the regular season with a loss, USC just seemed more put together. I think the fact that Michigan had more games off between the regular season and the bowl game probably didn't help, but I think it didn't cost the game. USC just came prepared and fought hard. Michigan, well, didn't really show up.
2007-01-04 21:38:26 · answer #3 · answered by Amber C 3 · 0⤊ 0⤋
Sorry to burst your bubble but Michigan was the most overhyped team of the entire season. The only reason they rose so highly in the rankings is that they were the first to slaughter ND. As we found out later in the season, ND wasn't good at all, which made Michigan's victory over them seem less impressive. Their biggest claim to fame was that they played Ohio State so closely but even that score was padded with an insignificant TD late in the game. Illinois played Ohio State pretty closely too. 17-10 if i remember correctly.
I'm an LSU fan and I was chomping at the bit for the Tigers to get a crack at the Wolverines, but USC lost their last game and got the Rose Bowl bid.
Big Blue just started to believe their press clippings a little too much. They are a top 10 team but not top 3 sorry.
2007-01-04 22:16:34 · answer #4 · answered by Jukeboxster 4 · 0⤊ 1⤋
Im a fellow fan and the thing is michigan has been conistant by playing above average ball with thier only great game at the shoe. So when USC showed up with thier A game and Michigan with thier B, the Rose bowl happened. With all the main players coming back, we should be #1 next year.
2007-01-04 21:28:52 · answer #5 · answered by Ryan A 3 · 2⤊ 0⤋
USC is one of those talented teams that has players who are lead by a great coach and have been prepared mentally and physically. Michigan players (Some of them) were upset over the fact that they were beat out by Florida. I mean we lost to Ohio State by 3 points and we just came' unglued. I guess USC showed up to play and the better team won.
Go Michigan (2008 National Champions?)
2007-01-04 21:35:31 · answer #6 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 1⤋
Ok Michigan is a great football team. They just had an off day but USC diserved it! I know im a Notre Dame fan but if Michigan had another shot at USC im shure they would win.
2007-01-04 22:45:49 · answer #7 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 0⤋
What happened to Michigan is they got so caught up in being snubbed for the BCS game that they didn't care about the Rose Bowl. It really didn't matter at that point if they won or lost. winning gets them nothing other than a #3 ranking. Michigan was the second best team in the country all year. It sucks that they lost.
2007-01-04 22:37:06 · answer #8 · answered by ur3minutesrup 2 · 0⤊ 1⤋
Im a Nebraska fan and i was really pleased with the fact that we beat you in the alamo bowl a year ago........GO BIG RED. But really USC has more veteran recievers and linemen and compared to michigans younger wideouts and linemen. Michigan will be in the national title game next year prolly.
2007-01-04 21:30:34 · answer #9 · answered by Mac_Daddy_Z 2 · 0⤊ 1⤋
Outplayed and outcoached. Plain and simple.
USC fixed the protection schemes and when that happens, Booty and his receivers just play throw and catch. And it looked like USC's defense was the only one to show up.
Where was Leon Hall and LaMarr Woodley?
2007-01-04 21:43:31 · answer #10 · answered by Kevin H 3 · 0⤊ 0⤋