**UPDATED… see below.**
Michigan did not lose to OSU because of a shoddy field.
There. I just had to get that out there. Sheesh. There is waaay too much talk on UM blogs and message boards blaming the November 18th loss on mediocre grass. (No, I’m not giving you any links to such.) If Woody and Bo could hear the fans complaining, they’d be ashamed of how wuss-ified college football had become.
At any rate, am I the only one that notices the inherent contradicton in that argument? If you argue that UM is about as good as OSU, but you also argue that UM isn’t OSU’s equal on a slippery field, isn’t that the same as admitting that UM isn’t as good as OSU? Think about that for a moment. “They’re just as good. Oh, they can’t beat them on a non-perfect field, but they might be able to beat them on a perfect one. So, they’re just as good.” WTH kind of logic is that?
Let us slap some logic on ya:
(1) No, the field wasn’t as perfect as field turf. Yes, the occasional player slipped. But it wasn’t as bad as what a lot of UM fans make it out to be. And it wasn’t as bad as a rainy field, or a muddy field, or a snowy field, etc. If you want to see terrible field conditions, watch the OSU/Penn State game, played during a heavy downpour. Interesting how you didn’t hear Penn State players or fans blaming their loss on the field conditions. Maybe that’s because…
(2) Surprise! OSU played on the same field. Saying the field conditions only gave the advantage to OSU is pure cognitive dissonance. One Michigan blogger, who I really respect, actually said that a slippery field hurt Mike Hart more than it hurt Antonio Pittman, because Hart makes a “lot of cuts.” Foolish me, I never noticed that Pittman only runs in a straight line! Someone else wrote, “But the field caused Manningham to trip and not catch that bomb from Henne.” But the field kept Ginn from catching the first-quarter bomb from Smith. Advantage: nobody.
One of these things is the REAL reason Michigan lost
Some have argued that the turf benefited the OSU offense more than the UM defense. But even if that was the case, remember that both teams had 12 offensive possessions. They both had equal chances to “benefit” from the field conditions. (Note: in actuality, UM had one more offensive possession than OSU, as OSU’s twelvth possession was a “run the clock out” possession at the end of the game.)
No matter what your loyalty, the field did not give one team the advantage over another. For a given play, it may cause a ball carrier to slip, for another, it may cause a defender to slip.
(3) This is the first time in history that a group of fans have complained that a slippery field actually raised the score in a game. Uhhh… whatever.
(4) The turf wasn’t the reason that, at any given time, two out of four or five OSU WRs were completely alone and not covered in the flat. It didn’t have anything to do with the UM secondary being out of position on Pittman’s and Wells’ 50+ yard runs, or the many missed tackles on OSU ball carriers. Ginn was covered as best he could be on the second quarter play action TD pass, and the turf didn’t help Smith put the ball in that 12″ wide window where only Ginn could catch it.
(5) Turf aside, the only reason Michigan even had a chance in that game were the three gift-wrapped turnovers from OSU, and a bogus pass-interference call that kept a UM touchdown drive alive. It was those four events that led to 17 UM points, and that kept OSU from scoring at least two touchdowns more than it did.
Know what? That’s such a good point, I think I’ll rephrase it in a more dramatic way:
Turf had nothing to do with it. I really do understand the need to find something – anything – to mitigate a disappointing loss. Heaven knows what we OSU fans went through during the Cooper era. But understand, the turf had absolutely no effect on the outcome of the game.
UPDATE: Jeff at BBC is being mean again. (If you’ve read our other posts that link to Jeff’s work, you know that’s our way of complimenting him.) He’s put together a video that shows a couple of Buckeye ball carriers — the ones who don’t make cuts — juking UM defenders out of their shoes… without slipping.
Thanks, Southern Cal. Thanks a lot. So much for your eight-Pete (or whatever “-Pete” you were on). Way to go and screw it all up.
Wa-hoo! Greg Oden, Ohio State’s twenty-three-and-a-half-foot-tall center & the country’s best recruit, will finally 