Can Michigan Turn it Around Like Auburn Next Season?
I'll spare you my position by position optimism; I'm just curious if anyone else believes that Michigan can duplicate Auburn's success this season.
I'll only add this: The interior o-line will be better, as will Green and Smith. Also, If I were a betting man, I'd bet on Devin Gardner showing what a Michigan QB is made out of next season. He won't leave this university with the legacy of being the starting QB for a team that lost at least 5 games three seasons in a row. As for the defense, like the offensive line, I believe they go into even the offseason conditoning pissed off, and with a larger than average chip on their shoulders. To me this is the recipe of a major bounce back season; whether it's as big of a turn around as Auburn's remains to be seen.
January 8th, 2014 at 2:15 AM ^
Are we realling writing about the 2006 defense like they belong in some kind of legendary lore? Pretty sad that by far our best defense since 1997 and one some still wax poetic about was also one that in its last two games gave up an average of 468 yards and 37 points.
January 7th, 2014 at 10:12 PM ^
I am referencing a post Seth put on the front page where yes our defense has as much experience as that 2006 defense. That doesn't mean we have as many play makers but we'll see. This staff hangs its hat on defense and we'll see if it is going to be an elite top 5, top 10 unit in future seasons.
Brian has also said the defense should take a step forward next year (probably around top 20). If we want a good season next year this will have to happen and the offense will have to be competent (35-40).
If both these things happen, not saying they will, we can have a good season.
January 7th, 2014 at 11:28 PM ^
so after 3.5 recruiting classes, we still have few playmakers on D? how sad is that, given the recruiting abilities of hoke/mattison.
January 7th, 2014 at 7:46 PM ^
I mean, State finished last year 7-6, lost three NFL players, and played the first quarter of the season with an ongoing quarterback dual. Are we going to have a number 1 defense, no. But we do return most of the starters most of whom were pretty young last year. We were also in every game except for arguably the State game. If we see improvement out of the young returning staters, and somehow we can get something resembling a running game going, we could be pretty good next year.
January 7th, 2014 at 7:54 PM ^
January 7th, 2014 at 8:07 PM ^
Lots of teams finish poorly, and then do good the next year. In 2005 Michigan finished 7-5 sfter losing to Nebraska in the Alamo Bowl, and then the next year they were a couple of plays away from appearing in the National Championship Game.
Also, perhaps we quit, but it didn't appear that way againsh Ohio this year.
And I'm just stating why their is hope for next year. If you want to miserable and depressed about Michigan football for a whole year, well by all means go right ahead.
January 7th, 2014 at 8:20 PM ^
January 7th, 2014 at 8:33 PM ^
Yea, that whole silence is very interesting. I can see how Michigan CAN turn it around next year, and I'll buy into Brady Hoke for at least one more year, But if he wants to risk his dream job on this coaching staff, by all means its his call/
January 7th, 2014 at 8:31 PM ^
January 7th, 2014 at 8:34 PM ^
State had a very bad defense in year 3 of Narduzzi.
January 8th, 2014 at 11:48 AM ^
Bowl wins typically aren't that associated with anything in the offseason. Honestly, it's more about keeping your guys out of trouble and eligible for a month than it is about really putting the best gameplan out there that's indicative of your team the prior season.
People overvalue bowl games so much because they are the last game of the season so it's the last chance to see the teams for months. The problem is that it's 1 out of 13 games and more specifically for Michigan, we were playing with a backup quarterback coming off a bad season. Is that an excuse to quit? No, but I don't think it's all that important for determining how Michigan is going to look in 2014. If anything, the most important part of the Bdubs bowl was getting the guys reps in those practices.
I'm not saying I completely agree with the optimism some people are displaying for next season, but a loss compared with a win in the BDubs bowl is probably not the best comparison for telling why Michigan will or won't be good next year.
January 7th, 2014 at 7:46 PM ^
was one fluky tipped pass and a miracle KO return away from not really doing anything than being better than last year instead of 'OMG we almost won the championship better.'
So 9-3 is possible.
12-1, Big Ten Champs heading to the playoffs improved? Probably not.
January 7th, 2014 at 10:35 PM ^
Improving from 7 wins to 9 isnt the same as 3 to 9. That Auburn team last year was abysmal, this years team is better than any Hoke has ever fielded. So no, it can't happen.
January 7th, 2014 at 7:49 PM ^
average coaching staff.
January 7th, 2014 at 7:50 PM ^
January 7th, 2014 at 7:52 PM ^
January 8th, 2014 at 2:13 PM ^
I don't believe he'll refuse to make changes. I think he won't scapegoat them for team issues. Many are looking for a quick fix, there may or may not be one. I mean, he's a witch burn him!!!
January 7th, 2014 at 7:52 PM ^
January 7th, 2014 at 8:06 PM ^
isn't this season going to be the 4th season with Al Borges as OC? How is this "year 2" of his scheme? I understand Borges made some adjustments with Denard, but shouldn't most of his "bread and butter" plays already been established in the playbook?
January 7th, 2014 at 8:15 PM ^
Those really are Borges words, not verbatim, but I recall him mentioning in a presser that this is really the first year he's doing what he wants to do instead of being constrained by the players on his roster.
January 8th, 2014 at 12:18 AM ^
Denard constrained that offense to 11 wins. For borges to say anything remotely negative about the only thing standing between hoke and a very RR like record, shows what an arrogant ass he truly is.
January 7th, 2014 at 8:26 PM ^
January 7th, 2014 at 8:00 PM ^
Without looking it up, I'm 99% sure that no team in my lifetime has done what Auburn did this year. Go from a 9 loss season to playing for the national title. That just doesn't happen. So no, I don't see Michigan or any team do that any time soon. And Michigan's schedule sucks next year BIG TIME.
Also, Gardner was not responsible for us losing 5 games in 2012, especially when he only started a few games at the end of the season. He's not the one who threw 40 interceptions in South Bend.
January 7th, 2014 at 8:26 PM ^
Given that Auburn this year played at LSU and at Texas A&M, and also played Alabama, Georgia, Ole Miss, and Missouri, is Michigan's schedule next year really a murderer's row? I would say no. (It will of course be harder than this year's schedule.)
January 7th, 2014 at 8:47 PM ^
I guess not. But all three rivals on the road combined with the fact that Michigan hasn't won a noteworthy road game since...what, 2006? It's doesn't give me much confidence.
January 7th, 2014 at 8:01 PM ^
No. Though I think one thing to remember is that Malzahn was OC/QB coach for Auburn from 2009-2011, so when he returned as the HC there were players who were already familiar with his system. So that's an advantage. I think Malzahn's success is he is just that good, as well as a mastermind at offense.
I think Michigan has a difficult road slate next year, and I am not sold on Borges as a QB coach, so I have no idea what Devin will look like next season. I also am not a fan of Borges' playcalling and formations either, they are all over the map. Until Michigan has some clear offensive identity, I am not sold on it improving next season.
Overall, I think that Michigan still has some work to do to catch up to OSU and now, sadly, MSU. I think a reasonable experctation is 8-4, with 9-3 possible.
January 7th, 2014 at 9:56 PM ^
So are you saying we should bring RR back before all his players are out if we want to have success?
/s
January 7th, 2014 at 8:05 PM ^
If this year was really year 1 of the "Borges" offense (his words, not mine), then one could reasonably expect tangible improvement next year.
The big question is will that improvement be enough. Can we sustain another 7 or 8 win season [remember we play all of our rivals on the road]?
The reasonable expectation is 8-4, with 9-3 a realistic possibility.
January 7th, 2014 at 8:10 PM ^
Besides coaches doing bad jobs, there's a reason teams change up at least some of their coaches after crappy seasons: new voices and optimism. System changes, mentality shifts, motivation to play for new coaches, etc. If you're a player, you see a lot of guys getting one year older. While you're not losing much, given that the ONLY changes are one year of age and the addition of some freshmen (granted, one is Peppers), would you be really optimistic as a player that the team will go from whatever the hell that was in 2013 to a serious contender?
January 7th, 2014 at 8:09 PM ^
January 7th, 2014 at 8:17 PM ^
Yes, the interior OL will almost certainly be better but will they be better enough to get the TFL numbers out of the triple digits? No one knows at this point but losing two NFL tackles and keeping everyone else and the coaches doesn't look promising.
And I hate when people say things like "theyll be pissed off" or "theyll be hungry". Weren't we same mass of people saying that everyone is pissed off and hungry after they finished 8-5 last year? Were they not pissed enough last off-season? Did they cease to be hungry and that's why we couldn't run block?
They can be hungry and pissed till next August if they want, but it doesn't make them any better at football
January 7th, 2014 at 8:15 PM ^
I'd like to think that if I keep listening to Bruce Springsteen's new album, streaming for free on the CBS website, by the 135th listen, I'll have High Hopes for Michigan Team 135. http://www.cbs.com/shows/the_good_wife/springsteen/
Having seen a photo of the seven early enrollees from Michigan's 2014 Recruiting Class on campus*, better to give those young men a dash of optimism with their Polar Vortex chills than to welcome them with the old Mel Brooks song from the film The Twelve Chairs -- Hope For The Best (Expect The Worst)..http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=l_TKXPPjhRk
*Sorry, not technically savvy, so I can't embed that photo of the seven early enrollees that was posted on the Michigan Recruiting Twitter page. LInk to that page: http://twitter.com/go_blue_lou
January 7th, 2014 at 8:16 PM ^
January 7th, 2014 at 8:26 PM ^
You cannot blame the MSU game on the D and you absolutely cannot pin the Nebraska game on the D. Nebraska was a team that was giving up 5 f'ing yards per carry against Wyoming and South Dakota State. You know what the running backs managed to gain against that same unit at home? 1.2 ypc. The defense held Nebraska to 10 points through 3.5 quarters. That should've been enough to win by 20 against that sad sack defense.
In the MSU game, the D held MSU to 16 points through 3. Certainly a respectable showing. Then the defense reached the "F*ck This" Line and let in two late TDs/
The defense has been disappointing at times but it is fraction of the ineptitude we're seeing on the opposite side of the ball
January 7th, 2014 at 8:38 PM ^
January 7th, 2014 at 9:46 PM ^
i don't know about you but my granny is an excellent blitzer.
January 8th, 2014 at 11:54 AM ^
The defense held PSU's offense to under 400 yards including OT periods. They scored a touchdown and forced four turnovers. Two of the four touchdowns scored by PSU in regulation came on drives from inside the Michigan 20 yard line.
It wasn't the defense that lost us that game, it was the coach's inability put the game away (choosing to constantly run Toussaint, clock mismanagement....)
January 8th, 2014 at 1:06 PM ^
But when you give your defense a 10 point lead in the 4th quarter and the other team ties it, your defense is part of the reason why you lose. When you give them 50 seconds and a 7 point lead to win the game and they give up a touchdown in 23 seconds, your defense is part of the reason why you lost. When you give your kicker 3 attempts to win with a field goal and he misses all 3, your special teams are part of why you lose.
Acting like Borges' conservative playcalling were the only reason for losing that game is, frankly, asinine. It was part of it, a big chunk of it for sure, but nowhere near the only thing. That loss was a team effort.
January 7th, 2014 at 8:17 PM ^
fact. Yes, of coruse. And, Michigan itself did it in the last decade. Michigan has plenty of talent at every position to succeed. Gardner is one of the best qbs in the country. This team's defense will be better. The only question is about the Oline, creating a consistent pass rush and stopping big plays defensively. The talent level is there to compete with anyone.
January 7th, 2014 at 8:38 PM ^
MSU went 7-6 last year with 4 close losses (3 against top 20 teams) and 2 close wins (over top 25 teams).
This year we had two blowout losses. 0 wins over top 25 teams and only 2 wins against teams with a WINNING record. Three miracle wins came aganist teams with a combined 13-24 record.
I hope you're right, but MSU is definitely not confirmation.
January 7th, 2014 at 9:16 PM ^
MSU: 7-6
5 close losses (rank of teams receiving votes: 3, 17, 24, 25)
1 big loss (rank of teams receiving votes: 4)
4 close wins (rank of teams receiving votes: 33, 34)
3 big wins (rank of teams receiving votes:____)
Michigan: 7-6
4 close losses (rank of teams receiving votes: 12, 26, 31, 34)
2 big losses (rank of teams receiving votes: 3, 34)
3 close wins (rank of teams receiving votes: ____)
4 big wins (rank of teams receiving votes: 21)
-------
Looks pretty similar. Each of Michigan's losses came to a team that received votes, same can't be said for MSU. MSU did have two wins against teams that ended up receiving votes, Michigan only 1, but Michigan's was in the top 25.
January 7th, 2014 at 10:05 PM ^
That close wins against 2012 Wisconsin, TCU, Boise, and Indiana are similar to three close wins against 2013 Northwestern, Akron, and UCONN.
Of course, they aren't close. Only the close win against IU in 2012 is comparable to our three close wins. Our best Big Ten win was against Minnesota. Theirs was against the Big Ten champion.
January 8th, 2014 at 11:55 AM ^
TCU and Boise were not good teams in 2012. Maybe they both have "name" value, but they were not good teams. Wisconsin was "good", but most would have considered their season a failure as well if they had not been gifted a trip to Indy.
January 7th, 2014 at 8:19 PM ^
Did I miss something or did a certain OC get fired?
If not, than NO
January 7th, 2014 at 8:24 PM ^
So it's unreasonable to say we'll be 10-2 next year? I'd say it's much more realistic than those who say we'll go 4-8 and lose to App State. I go to every game believing we'll win from the highs of 2006 to the lows of 2008. I can't comprehend how someone can travel to a game as a fan and think we have no shot.
January 7th, 2014 at 8:23 PM ^
If so, yes. I think that with a coach who can strategize during the game rather than simply just develop a plan and run into a wall when it doesn't work, then yes, we could see major improvement.
If we continue to have a headcoach who has never called a game at the college level, then no.
January 7th, 2014 at 8:22 PM ^
I'm looking forward to having a senior starter at QB. By and large, offenses with senior QBs do quite well - note that the '92 '97, '99 and '03 offenses all had them.
Senior QBs have been a very rare sight for Michigan football over the last decade - 2007 and 2012 are the only years we've had one, and both times our QB missed time with injuries.
January 8th, 2014 at 2:24 AM ^
I see you reference Michigan examples from a generation ago instead of modern-day examples of college football contemporaries.
January 7th, 2014 at 8:26 PM ^
Could they? Sure.
Will they? No.
Will they get better? Yes.
Could they win the B1G? Sure.
These types of questions are usually not worth thinking about. After this season, and considering the odds of any team making a title game, it's probably not gonna happen. I'd just be happy to see more consistent play on both lines, or a new OC.
January 7th, 2014 at 8:31 PM ^
I'm also not willing to concede any game on the schedule yet. There are games I don't think Michigan will win, but there isn't any single game where I think Michigan doesn't at least have a decent chance. Things need to improve, I think they will, but I don't think Michigan will be a one loss team going into bowl season.