Steele: Michigan among rising teams for '13
It's ESPN Insider, but I'm going to include the Michigan section here. Steele's a bit full of himself and everyone on every board hates every announcer (excl. Gus Johnson) / writer (excl. Grantland) / sideline reporter (excl. that blonde on ESPN) ever, but Steele was fairly accurate re. Michigan in 2012. With most putting us squarely in the Top 10, he saw the tough schedule and road games and saw a drop from 11-2.
Well he sees that reversing in 2013. Nothing particularly revelatory for this board, but confirms many thoughts presented here on next year's prospects. Other teams noted are TCU, Oklahoma State, Virginia Tech, and USC.
Also, for those who HATEARGHHATEHIM Jay Bilas, he just said Michigan is the best offensive team in the country, and can win the national championship.
After a Sugar Bowl win over Virginia Tech capped off an 11-2 2011 season, expectations were high coming into this season for the Wolverines, who were ranked in the preseason AP top 10. I rated them lower than most as their schedule was very difficult, with games against Alabama, Notre Dame, Nebraska and Ohio State all coming on the road. Michigan would end up losing all four of those games (those teams combined for a 46-4 record), as well as its bowl game against South Carolina. However, while the Wolverines will have to replace record-setting quarterback Denard Robinson, I think Michigan fans will be in for a much better season in 2013. It starts with the schedule, as the Crimson Tide fall off and are replaced by Central Michigan, while Notre Dame, Nebraska and Ohio State all travel to the Big House, where Brady Hoke is a perfect 14-0 in his first two seasons as head coach. Keep in mind the Wolverines lost to the Irish and Buckeyes by a combined 12 points thanks to costly turnovers, and were trailing the Cornhuskers by a single point before Robinson's injury, which could have been a blessing in disguise, as it got backup quarterback Devin Gardner a couple of starts under his belt. Look for the offense to make major strides with a legitimate passing attack, and the defense will continue to be stout for coordinator Greg Mattison. Hoke will also welcome in one of the best recruiting classes in the country. I fully expect Michigan to top its win total from 2012.
January 12th, 2013 at 9:53 AM ^
Link?
January 12th, 2013 at 10:12 AM ^
Yeah I hit save before I'd completed the post. Included now
January 12th, 2013 at 4:14 PM ^
Thanks.
January 12th, 2013 at 10:20 AM ^
The article is dated the 10th, with Lewan's announcement coming on the 9th. Would be interesting to know if Steele saw that and decided not to revise his post, or simply didn't have time to get that information in.
January 12th, 2013 at 11:02 AM ^
January 12th, 2013 at 10:03 AM ^
If the O line can gel with new additions on the inside with no experience and offseason growth by Devin and the emergence of a consistent RB squad, the O should be decent to pretty good.
The D should be stout.
Phil is quite right. Michigan SHOULD have a pretty good year next year of all the pieces fall together.
Can't wait for September!
January 12th, 2013 at 1:16 PM ^
The new linemen should have some experience. Not trying to split hairs, just Miller was a backup Center in 6 games last year, and the coaches run some pretty intense scrimmages, as close to game conditions as they can. Lewan had some positive buzz about the 4 freshmen, too.
http://www.mlive.com/wolverines/index.ssf/2012/12/kyle_kalis_erik_magnu…
January 12th, 2013 at 10:09 AM ^
January 12th, 2013 at 10:16 AM ^
I fully expect Michigan to top its win total from 2012
I would hope so. Michigan's 2013 schedule is not as tough as 2012's, but there are some question-mark games:
- Notre Dame at home
- Penn State in Happy Valley
- MSU up in East Lansing
- Nebraska at home
- Northwestern in Evanston
- Ohio State at home
(I'm assuming CMU, Akron, CT, Minnesota and Indiana are pretty solid W's)
I've got Northwestern on that list because I have a sense those squirrely bastards are going to continue to be sneaky-good.
January 12th, 2013 at 10:33 AM ^
I have no idea what to expect out of PSU. They lose that amazing senior class that was quite talented and also held them together. They might be starting a true freshmen QB and I don't think there's enough talent around him to hide that. Plus they also lost their DC.
MSU will be tough as usual, but we'll soon start seeing the recruiting talent gap make it self apparent. But that may not be as evident until next year.
I just don't think we'll lose at NW. It's not really a road game, and what else do they have next year that they didn't have the last two years? A really talented RS Frosh or true sophomore DE I suppose. The last two years have been a bit fortunate o our part, but again, the talent gap should start to show soon. And basically, I just don't think they have the horses to hang as long as we don't self destruct.
Ohio. Yeah, that's a tough game.
January 12th, 2013 at 11:09 AM ^
January 12th, 2013 at 11:42 AM ^
January 12th, 2013 at 11:51 AM ^
If you looked at MSU 2 years ago and thought worthy was what made that defense work you where mistaken. The secondary and pass rush either from their line or through blitzes was made it work. Any time you can blitz and know your corners will lock down the offensives WR's you have a crazy advantage.
January 12th, 2013 at 12:13 PM ^
January 12th, 2013 at 12:50 PM ^
January 12th, 2013 at 1:11 PM ^
January 12th, 2013 at 1:51 PM ^
I think we said that last year. That "their whole offense left, and their best D player in Worthy. We'll beat them handily"Actually, a lot of people here feared MSU going into this season. For some reason they bought the MSU hype about Maxwell and were convinced, based on two seasons (2010 and 2011), that Dantonio would have them contending every year. I predicted before the year that MSU would be more like a 7-5/8-4 team and many here disagreed.
January 12th, 2013 at 2:52 PM ^
I saw 8-4 as their logical resting place. I really didn't think that 6-6 was going to be where they fell to. I wouldn't be heartbroken if it was farther next year. 0-12 would be OK, but 6-6 for a couple more years while they keep trying to stick it out with Dantonio and we beat them every year would be OK, too.
January 12th, 2013 at 4:36 PM ^
I think Dantonio is a pretty good coach overall and will lead them to bowls on an annual basis - but with Michigan returning to its usual level of prominence, MSU is very unlikely to do as well as it did in 2010 and '11. I think they'll generally win six to eight games a year. I think that will be true next year as well. Their passing game will improve but the loss of Bell will negate a lot of that improvement, and their D will be a shade weaker with some rebuilding up front.
January 12th, 2013 at 11:19 AM ^
January 12th, 2013 at 11:42 AM ^
January 12th, 2013 at 11:46 AM ^
I actually agree that ND is very beatable next year, however, in describing what ND is losing, you pretty much also described Michigan.
Losing our leading tackler (Demens)
Heart of the defense (Kovacs)
Guy who makes secondary calls, (Kovacs)
#1 rusher (Denard)
And we are certainly losing a chunk of our Oline, though I'm not sure how "key" they are.
Like I said I actually agree with you, it was just an interesting thing I noticed as I read through it.
EDIT: My apologies, seems as though Jake Ryan actually led the team in tackles. Sorry!
January 12th, 2013 at 12:00 PM ^
January 12th, 2013 at 1:23 PM ^
Not to my knowledge???
He was hurt in the Outback Bowl and that is why Bolden played so much, but I never saw him lose his job to Ross.
January 12th, 2013 at 11:28 AM ^
had they only turned the ball over 5, not 6, times!
January 12th, 2013 at 10:13 PM ^
January 12th, 2013 at 10:17 AM ^
not sure when the last time we had a streak like that was
January 12th, 2013 at 10:46 AM ^
Starting with the victory over Purdue in '69 up to the 10-10 tie with OSU in '73, we were 28-0 at home.
Starting with the victory over Purdue in '69 up to the 21-14 loss to OSU in '75, we were 38-0-3 at home.
Bo also went 17-0 at home from '76 up to the loss to MSU in '78.
January 12th, 2013 at 10:57 AM ^
And that's why BO is a legend.
January 12th, 2013 at 11:14 AM ^
It certainly was Bo's—and Michigan's—good fortune to start out at a time when the Big Ten was without a doubt the worst it's ever been in terms of overall strength. Once better coaches starting appearing at other conference schools (like Fry at Iowa) and we started playing ND, the long home victory streaks came to an end.
The fact that the conference is much more competitive now is a testament to how good 14-0 really is.
January 12th, 2013 at 11:19 AM ^
Well let's hope Coach Hoke can bring that record to 21-0 at the end of next season.
January 12th, 2013 at 11:24 AM ^
January 12th, 2013 at 11:28 AM ^
Believe it or not, in '74 and '75 there was lewd anti-Bo graffiti scrawled on the walls of the men's rooms in several downtown A2 bars, slamming him for his record against OSU and in bowl games. Funny how perspective changes over the years.
January 12th, 2013 at 11:45 AM ^
but the anit-Bo crowd stopped and held its collective breath in 1978 when Bo took a little weekend trip to Texas. Texas A/M offered to make Bo the highest paid Coach in College Football.
It would not surprise me if Bo did this (ala Izzo) to show those detractors that he was a sought after coach.
January 12th, 2013 at 12:28 PM ^
It was 1982, not 1978, and your supposition that Bo "did this" to show his worth isn't supported by what transpired:
"On January 15, 1982, Texas A&M offered Schembechler nearly $3 million for 10 years—the richest contract in the history of college athletics—to become the school's football coach and athletic director. Schembechler turned it down. "Frankly, I've come to the conclusion that there are things more important in this world than money," Schembechler said. "For that reason, I've decided to stay at Michigan."
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bo_Schembechler#Offer_from_Texas_A.26M
TA&M initiated the contact with Bo—he didn't seek them out in order to prove to his doubters how good he was.
January 12th, 2013 at 11:45 AM ^
January 12th, 2013 at 1:53 PM ^
We also had a winning streak at home from the final month of 2002 to the ND game (second home game of the year) in 2005. It reached about 16 or 17 games, IIRC.
January 14th, 2013 at 3:04 AM ^
RR is still mad Hoke ate his cake
January 12th, 2013 at 10:18 AM ^
/s
January 12th, 2013 at 11:24 AM ^
I think the opinion of Steele is someting pretty much everyone on this board agreed upon on January 2nd. There were/are some questions about the O-line, but overall I think next years line will be an improvement over this years. Devin's passing ability will help the running game, and JMFR is gonna be JMFR along with help from Morgan, Bolden, and Ross, who all were solid contributors last year. Plus as Steele pointed out the teams we lost too were 46-4 last season and Nebraska had three of those. Now three of those games could have easily went the other way, ND, Neb,and tsiO, so 8-4 could have been 11-1 had we caught some lucky breaks last year, like Nebraska seem to do week in and week out.
January 12th, 2013 at 11:25 AM ^
I rated them lower than most as their schedule was very difficult, with games against Alabama, Notre Dame, Nebraska and Ohio State all coming on the road.
And we'll be better in 2013 because our schedule will be easier? This is one of my pet peeves. Nobody who voices an opinion like this should ever get a vote in a poll. Ranking one team above another because their schedule gives them a better chance to go undefeated is a plague upon those polls. Combining that with a reluctance of many voters to change the order of teams from their initial ballot as long as their records remain the same makes me think any system that uses those polls is broken.
January 12th, 2013 at 11:47 AM ^
January 12th, 2013 at 6:53 PM ^
I think he meant rated lower meaning worse record because UMhad the most difficult schedule in the country. Because we had such a slim margin of loss in most games and UM is re-establishing depth, the early weakness in the schedule and having Neb., ND, and Ohio at home probably swings at least a win or two back to UM.
January 12th, 2013 at 11:36 AM ^
Maybe I am mistaken, but didn't Phil Steele predict that Michigan was going to play for/win the the BCS title this past season?
January 12th, 2013 at 11:46 AM ^
January 12th, 2013 at 11:49 AM ^
Okay, then I was mistaken. I know some highly-regarded member of the national media did. Carry on.
January 12th, 2013 at 2:56 PM ^
Was the dude from CBS, IIRC. He thought UM would lose to Alabama and play them in a rematch, which was patently ridiculous because we all knew there wasn't going to be a rematch this year.
January 12th, 2013 at 11:55 AM ^
to his success with predictions: Magic 8 Ball.
January 12th, 2013 at 12:32 PM ^
Outlook is hazy.