Two men mentioned in this mailbag [Bryan Fuller]

January Mailbag Has Answers About Football Matters Comment Count

Alex.Drain January 16th, 2023 at 12:40 PM

It's mailbag time again everyone! I solicited questions on the MGoBoard and on twitter last week and selected my favorite questions, trying to cover as many different topics as possible while also picking the most interesting ones. It was evident that the mind of the Michigan fanbase is still fully on football, as about 80% of the questions I received dealt with that subject. The mailbag is heavy on them as a result, but I made sure to pick one basketball and hockey question to include. I also noticed that it is apparently not Silly Season yet, as I got far few satirical questions than in June- don't worry, I still picked a couple anyway. 

 

How much stronger can we expect the BIG West to be in 2023, versus its abysmal 2022? Will the conference experience a positive bump as a result of coaching changes and the portal, and how significant will it be? (-Bohannon)

I also got a version of this question from @MGoBronxBlue on Twitter, so it seems like there is some interest in hearing about the B1G West and its new coaches. Let me start by saying I was a fan of the changes in the B1G West. Ryan Walters is a top young football coach and when you're a program like Purdue, what do you have to lose taking a swing on him? I also am a fan of them keeping the Air Raid going on offense. I liked Matt Rhule to Nebraska, though his lack of a single ranked win at Baylor is making me hold off from coronating Rhule yet. And Luke Fickell to Wisconsin is fascinating mostly for what it implicates for the program, a departure from three decades of the Barry Alvarez lineage, especially by moving to a pass-heavy offense. Fickell didn't do well his first time in the B1G but it was one season where the NCAA sabotaged him. It's hard to criticize what he did at Cincy, so I like that hire. 

However, if we step out and take the bird's eye view, I'm not sure how much the needle has been changed on the B1G West in 2023, which is also functionally the last year it will exist before expansion blows things up. All three of those new coaches are going to be in Year Zero situations, which are easier to navigate in modern CFB with the transfer portal, but still not easy. Purdue is losing its veteran QB, star WR, and star TE, Wisconsin is doing a wholesale change in personnel on offense and bringing in a new defensive coordinator, and Nebraska will be turning over a huge amount of the roster, like every offseason. Then you consider Northwestern is digging out of a Chicxulub Crater sized hole and to me the true contenders for the division are Iowa, Minnesota, and Illinois. I haven't yet gone through the West's offseason changes (coming next week) to see exactly the movement that's been going on there, but at least with Iowa, we have first-hand experience about some of those changes.  

I expect all three of those teams to field good defenses, even with Illinois losing Walters, and it just comes down to which teams have a pulse on offense. So... same ole B1G West? The Twitter question here asked about whether the new coaches can meaningfully raise the ceiling of the programs, and I don't really think so. The reality of the B1G West is these programs are pretty disadvantaged in terms of fundamentals. Only Illinois has a claim to really being on fertile recruiting ground, and yet the Chicago area doesn't produce the amount of players that they do in basketball. Nebraska was a juggernaut in an era where they had much easier access to players form Oklahoma and Texas playing in the Big 8/XII. If forced to recruit the plains, they're in trouble. I just don't think any of these teams can ever be true CFP contenders and in some ways, I think we ought to talk more about the fundamentals as reasons for the B1G West's lack of competitiveness with the East as opposed to coaching incompetence. They've had some bad and funny coaches but also are you ever competing for a national title at IOWA even with a better offense? Very good chance the answer is "no" because elite talent isn't coming to Iowa City. 

[AFTER THE JUMP: More questions]

 

[Bill Rapai]

What are your expectations for the second half of UM’s hockey season?  Will Naurato’s teams continue the second half surges we have come to expect from Mel’s teams? Are PSU and OSU for real or will they fade in the second half? Why does Naurato still have the interim tag? (-BlueNE)

I got three hockey questions and I'm consolidating them into one answer for today. User "drjaws" sent one in about making the tournament and I got one from Hoover Street Rag on Twitter about Naurato's interim tag so let's tackle them step by step. My expectation for the second half of the season is that the team plays better and makes the tournament. They probably need to only tread water in the B1G in the second half, so long as they take care of Wisconsin at home, since they are currently #8 in PWR and the B1G is very good. After playing OSU this weekend, 10 of Michigan's final 12 games in the regular season are against teams in the top 18 of the formula. Holding your own is probably enough to get you in, and that's my expectation (so far, so good). That is, provided that the team plays better. They're a young team and I want to see them play better in the second half of the season, playing a more consistent 60 minutes start to finish, and having more consistent weekends where they play well both nights. 

I think that should happen personally, because they went through a lot of weirdness in the first half, the RSV outbreak, losing Fantilli against MSU because of the Team Canada WJC camp, they just need a full roster. Whether or not they ever get Nazar back this year, getting a consistent roster together will help them in the second half. As for OSU and PSU, I came into last week thinking the Buckeyes are overrated, but they looked sharp against Michigan. I have been impressed by PSU, so wouldn't be surprised if they keep it up, though of course, if Michigan gets hotter in the second half, they've got the talent to outplay both of those teams by a considerable margin. What PSU has on Michigan and basically everyone in the league is experience, rolling a nearly complete team over from last year and I think that's what helped them out of the gate. That competitive advantage will decline some as Michigan's freshmen and the likes of Logan Cooley and Jimmy Snuggerud get even more experienced for Minnesota. 

Finally, on the topic of the Naurato interim tag, I can't say why Warde hasn't moved on it. I am not Warde Manuel and unfortunately the most honest answer may just be that Warde is content to move slowly on these things and also may be (somewhat?) incompetent. That said, if I'm following my own belief, I'd let the year play out and then make a decision. Michigan is an elite hockey program that is one of the two easiest jobs in the sport. There is no reason to tie yourself down to a coach after only 20 games (that includes no postseason games). I want to see Naurato coach a full season and A) if the team improves in the second half and B) they make the tournament, then I think I'm comfortable taking the tag off. Waiting until the end of the year to make him the permanent coach is actually very sensible. If only I could believe Warde is waiting out of a shared belief and not because he's been asleep for the past three months. 

 

What is an ideal non-conference schedule after B1G expansion and the 12-team playoff? (-91 Sideliner)

I thought this was a fun one. I have become this site's notorious proponent of an easy non-conference schedule because I have long argued that the four team playoff structure greatly disincentivizes playing tough opponents in the non-conference if you're Michigan. I think this belief was justified considering Michigan played bad teams in their three non-con games in both 2021 and 2022 and still got the #2 overall seed anyway. If Michigan had say, a road game against Oklahoma on the schedule in 2021 instead of a home game against 4-8 Washington, and they lose that game, would they still have made the playoff despite beating OSU? Would've been much tighter than it needed to be! 

But in a 12 team playoff world? Bring back the hard non-con! The BCS system was lowkey great because it incentivized hard non-conference games. You needed the hardest possible schedule to ensure you'd be top two. That gave us games like Ohio State playing Texas and USC in home-and-homes in the mid-2000s, back when those were true top five matchups. With a 12 team playoff, you suddenly have a real incentive to take risks in the non-conference again. A 10-2 Michigan team is likely making the 12 team playoff, so you can risk losing a non-conference game in exchange for the benefit of boosting your odds of getting that top four bye into the semifinals by ramping up your strength of schedule. So, in a 12 team playoff world, let's say there should be one marquee top ten game on there each year, one lower-level P5 team on there, and then one cupcake. Imagining if 2023 were a 12 team playoff year, I'd say a game against top ten Oregon, a game against Syracuse, and then we'll keep Bowling Green on the schedule.   

 

[David Wilcomes]

Now that you’re a grizzled FFFF veteran, what was the most fun team to scout last year? Which team deserved to be punished for crimes against football? Relatedly, which teams are you most excited to scout in 2023? Which scouting assignment gives you nightmares? (-VintageRandy)

This was a good one. The most fun team to scout one is an interesting question, because there are many more bad teams and units than good ones. I really thought Indiana's offense was fun to scout because they moved at such a crazy breakneck pace and did stuff that other teams didn't do, like their endless barrage of screen passes to the running backs. At least they kept me on my heels. The crimes against football one is pretty obvious but the list is not short, some combination of Hawaii's defense + Iowa's offense + Rutgers' offense + Nebraska's defense. There were some grim ones this year. 

The team I'm most excited to scout in 2023 is probably either Bowling Green or UNLV, simply because I know nothing about them? They aren't good. In fact, they're pretty bad. But at least they're bad teams I don't know much about and haven't seen before? Of teams on the schedule in B1G play, I'd probably go with Minnesota for a similar reason, I haven't done them yet so at least that's different. Maybe Nebraska with a new coach. As for the nightmares, probably the Rutgers offense since they were in the crimes against football category, but maybe a new OC and a more experienced Wimsatt changes that. At least Iowa is off the schedule. 

 

Let's say the Peach Bowl, Fiesta Bowl, and National Title games were each played 10 times, to get a more accurate portrait of each team, how do you think it plays out? (-ImRightYouKnow)

We got several about bowl games, so that's what these next two questions will be about. I love this question in particular because it shows how much of sports is the spur of the moment, the fact that a given game is only played once. Here's my answer: I think that Michigan wins the Fiesta Bowl seven times out of ten if it's played over? They lost by five and gave the opposition fourteen points directly off turnovers and had the fumble on the goal line which was another ~six point swing. I believed Michigan to be a considerable favorite coming in and am mostly sticking to that with how it played out. If it were a ten game series, I might jack that up to eight because I think Michigan would have been much better set up to make adjustments for games 2-10. If we assume that these games are played out in isolation with no connection to the preceding outcomes, then I'd stick with seven times. Across the full season, Michigan was definitely the better team and TCU needed a lot of ultra high-leverage plays going in their favor to win and repeating that game ten times would bear that out. 

As for the Peach Bowl, I think Georgia wins six or seven times? Ohio State was in that position because CJ Stroud played the game of his life. Is scrambling and dodging pressure a new feature of his game or was it a one-off? Good luck figuring that out, NFL teams in the top ten of this draft! If Stroud is suddenly now that sort of QB, then OSU might actually win five or six of the ten. But if we assume that was a one-off performance for Stroud because the previous 20+ games of his college career say it was, then I think Georgia wins more times than not. Also, similarly to the Fiesta Bowl answer, if the games are a ten game series, Georgia would be in better position to adjust because they'd not have played man coverage as much in a rematch. Oh and the national title game? Georgia wins nine or ten times out of ten. They were so much better in the trenches that I don't think it matters all that much. 

 

[Patrick Barron]

Why is Michigan historically bad in bowl games? (-thelomasbrowns)

I talked to older Michigan football fans last night about this one for the Bo answer, because I am far from a Michigan Football historian and was not alive in the 1970s (surprise!). What I heard was two things, that Bo considered winning the B1G and beating OSU to be paramount and didn't care as much about bowls, and also that Bo mostly played in Rose Bowls. 10 of the 17 bowl games that Bo coached Michigan in were Rose Bowls, and he went 2-8 in those games, while going 3-4 in other bowls. Furthermore, Michigan played USC or UCLA in six of the Rose Bowls, opponents playing a de facto home game, while Michigan was traveling out there. Winning on the road in CFB is hard, let alone against very good teams. From that angle, it make more sense. 

As for the Carr and Harbaugh era? Carr lost four bowl games near the tail end of his tenure and part of that in my mind is the fact the B1G was not great in that era relative to the rest of college football. Ohio State lost by multiple scores both times they played in the BCS title game in the mid-2000s, PSU and Illinois got hammered by USC in their Rose Bowl appearances, so it's not really surprising to me that Michigan didn't beat USC in their Rose Bowl cracks, or Texas in 2004 (though there's a strong case they should've won that one). The teams they played were generally better than them. 

And Harbaugh? The Fiesta Bowl we can gripe about, but the rosters of Georgia and Alabama in the 2019-20 Citrus and 2021 Orange were way, way better than Michigan's. Michigan also had limited motivation in the bowl games following the 2016-18 regular seasons coming off devastating losses in The Game in all three. Bowl games in the modern CFB (outside of the playoff) are really all about which team actually cares about the game and wants to win. When you're told your season rests on beating Ohio State and then you don't beat Ohio State, it makes you far less interested in getting up for an Outback Bowl against South Carolina in rainy/muddy Tampa, Florida. Especially when you had OSU on the ropes and didn't pull it off. At least that's always been my theory. 

 

Should Warde just be fired, or fired from a cannon? (-The Mad Hatter)

I just want to say that I shared this in MGoSlack and BiSB responded with "is 'trebuchet' off the table?" so I think we're going with that answer. Mr. The Mad Hatter, you can comment below if that is an option.  

 

What is up with Mike Hart's recruiting? He seems like a very good developer of talent, both corum and edwards have become more complete players under his watch, but those were jaybaugh recruits. A lot of the fliers being brought in don't seem to have much upside, and idk if Cabana will be a 3 down back. (-CJW3) 

I wanted to get one recruiting question in here, and I thought this was a good one. Hart is definitely one of the most disappointing, if not the most disappointing, recruiters on staff right now. Various recruiting insiders have been starting to complain about Hart's recruiting, so I think that people around the program are a bit frustrated. I'm not a recruiting insider, so I don't know why it's the case, but it's very curious considering that RBs should be clamoring to play for Michigan. Not to mention the fact that during Jay Harbaugh's time coaching RBs, he recruited extremely well, reeling in Zach Charbonnet, Blake Corum, and Donovan Edwards as high 4* to 5* level prospects. So it does seem to be a Hart-specific thing, at least if you adjust for the slowness on NIL that is affecting the whole staff.

Cabana was a nice get and a guy I like a lot. The issue this cycle was taking Benjamin Hall as early as they did. Not that Hall can't grow into a good player, but there was no reason to settle that early (they took him in the spring!!). One theory I've had is that Hart hasn't been able to adjust to the fact he's not at Indiana and can actually chase top tier talent now. I also think he's someone that trusts his own development ability and believes if he can just find a ball of clay who looks good on tape to fit the mold, he can make that guy into a star, talent be damned. The problem with the thinking, of course, is that we've now seen what happens when Hart takes a guy with tons of raw talent and then coaches him up: the player becomes a superstar, Heisman caliber player. 2024 will be a big cycle to see if Hart can turn it around.  

 

[Bryan Fuller]

I got a number of versions of this question, especially being tied to Corum returning and fears that Michigan will over-rely on running yet again. If Jim Harbaugh is still the head coach, I expect they will want to run the football as much as possible because that is Harbaugh's DNA. I also think that Harbaugh believes strongly in limiting turnovers (especially interceptions), and part of the desire to run it as much as they have the last two years has been the fact they've had a first time starter at QB each of the last two seasons. 2023 will be the first season that Michigan has a returning starter at QB who is set to play out a whole year without fear of competition since 2019. If Harbaugh has faith in JJ and JJ makes continued strides, I do expect Michigan to throw it more, because Harbaugh will trust him more to limit turnovers. Will it be as much as we want? Probably not. Will there still be plenty of grumbling about it? Likely. But I do think it will be more than 2021 or 2022 and that may well benefit them by getting JJ enough reps to avoid potential pick sixes in a future CFP game. 

 

I got two basketball questions, a very good one about PG recruiting that unfortunately I can't answer because I don't cover basketball recruiting enough to have that in my domain. I will send it along to Matt D and other smarter basketball people than me, though. As for this one, I think it's a pretty fair question to ask when Michigan is now 10-7 overall and 50th in KenPom, which is the epitome of mediocrity. For me the obvious answer is two elements, 1) when they figure out the PG dilemma that the recruiting question was getting at, and 2) when Michigan can get players to stick around for multiple years to mature. 

Michigan has turned over a lot of its roster in consecutive offseasons and when you look at this current team, you see the youth and inexperience. Last week against Iowa they melted down in crunch time (with a nice assist by the referees late). Look at the players who played the highest minutes in that one: Tarris Reed Jr. (freshman), Hunter Dickinson (junior), Kobe Bufkin (sophomore), Jett Howard (freshman), and Dug McDaniel (freshman). So three freshmen and one player in Bufkin who averaged less than 11 minutes per game last year. Terrance Williams II is another junior starter, but he is also in his first year starting. The starting lineup against Northwestern yesterday had 4/5 players who were first-year starters and two of the three players with significant roles off the bench were either freshmen (Reed) or are seeing the floor for the first time in their NCAA career (Tschetter). They are a very young team and we saw the ups-and-downs of that last week against Iowa and NU. The biggest thing for Michigan is getting these guys to stick around and grow. Maybe Hunter comes back for year #4, maybe Juwan can lock Jett in the basement where NBA scouts can't get to him, both would be useful because the more players they can roll over to next year, the better. [For reference, the former is vastly more likely than the latter]. 

The way I see it is that college basketball is changing significantly. When Juwan was hired at Michigan, a popular team-building strategy still revolved around the one-and-dones, turning over your whole roster and starting lineup every offseason because you were loaded with 5*s. Kentucky did it and Duke was still doing it the year Juwan was hired. That 2018-19 season Duke had a team that included Zion Williamson (1st overall), RJ Barrett (3rd overall), and Cam Reddish (10th overall), all as freshmen. But what happened a year later? The G-League Ignite popped up. Year after that, Overtime Elite popped up. There are still good players in college basketball, but a number of top tier NBA Draft prospects that allowed that team-building strategy to be successful have the option to go other routes.

Juwan leaned in to trying the one-and-done route, getting burned a bit in 2020 (remember Josh Christopher and Isaiah Todd?) but then succeeded in 2021 by snatching a top three recruiting class via the rankings. Unfortunately it's variable and if the caliber of player is not as high as 5 or 10 years ago (the Scoot Hendersons are not coming through CBB), I think you might be better off trying to recruit multi-year players with less NBA upside, growing them, and building a team with stability like it's the 1970s all over again. Getting this roster some stability, not swapping out seven players in the offseason as has happened two straight summers, and focusing on growing a core of Kobe, Dug, and Tarris, even guys like Tschetter or Barnes, is the first step. Then you pair it with coaching staff shakeup (new assistants to coach defense better?) and targeted transfers and that's probably the best path to get back in national title contention, rather than chasing one-and-dones because the Moussa and Houstan experiment didn't bring Michigan as much as we'd hoped. And of course, fixing the transfer PG carousel is a big part. If Dug McDaniel can grow into being a quality B1G PG, that solves a lot of problems. Searching for a transfer PG or leaning on a freshman is not a sustainable path to being a perennial top four seed in the NCAAs. 

 

[Patrick Barron]

If you could match any football coach with the University of Michigan football program as it stands right now, who would you pick and why? Is it Harbaugh or is there someone out there who could do more with this team than him? If it’s not Harbaugh, what are the odds Michigan could hire the coach if Harbaugh leaves? (-UMVAFAN) 

This one is pretty easy to me. As it stands right now, Jim Harbaugh is the best football coach for the University of Michigan. There are two guys that I think are better than him for sure and their names are Nick Saban and Kirby Smart and neither are a fit for this program and more importantly, this university. To replicate their success, you have to export the whole Bama and Georgia football apparatus, the program and university culture, the money, the boosters, the transfer rules, the willingness to play big time pay-for-play. None of that fits Michigan and the university culture/ethos. So of that next tier of coaches, I think Harbaugh right now is probably the best coach and also is the only one I'm confident can thrive under the circumstances that Michigan imposes on its coaches. 

I don't want to get too into the Anson/Harbaugh messaging and the contract negotiation drama, but I do think there's some truth to what Anson has said about how it's not easy being Michigan's coach. The way the administration has, whoever's fault it is, been way too slow to get going on NIL, would chase many coaches away. A huge amount of CFB coaches aren't even going to go to a school that won't do pay-for-play. Then you add in the academic standards, transfer hoops to jump through, and you're really talking about comparable programs being Stanford and Northwestern types. Neither of them have coaches I'd even think about over Harbaugh. The Upper Midwest also isn't the most fertile football recruiting ground either. Point being, it's not easy to coach Michigan despite it being Michigan™, the fundamentals aren't as strong as you might think for the Winningest Program In History and we get in our own way a lot (thanks, bureaucracy). Considering all that, Jim Harbaugh is the best fit for this program, hands down, because he is both a terrific football coach who has won 25 of his last 28 games and also he loves Michigan wholeheartedly and will put up with a lot that Kirby and Saban never would. 

 

What's the most surprising thing that we don't know about each of the MGoBlog staff? (-Swayze Howell Sheen)

My real answers need to be censored for personal reasons but I actually have one about myself and one that is genuinely shocking about an MGo-adjacent figure. I learned recently that Craig Ross has never seen any of The Godfather films, something that flabbergasted me considering his age and knowledge of movies generally. I've had hour-long conversations with Craig about Hitchcock, film noir, and classic cinema yet somehow he's never seen THE GODFATHER? A man who was 24 years old in 1972 and watches movies didn't see THE GODFATHER????? Don't worry, I told him we will have to fix this in the coming months. 

As for my answer, I'll give my go-to fun fact about myself: I am from a family of four (me, one sibling, two parents) and am somehow the only right-handed person in the family. Make of that what you will.  

 

Rival Analysis: What is Ryan Day's reasoning for giving up play calling and is it a good decision? (-willirwin1778)

Two people asked about Ryan Day giving up play calling duties, which we got more info on recently when it was confirmed that Brian Hartline will be taking over as OC and thus play caller. I'm not exactly sure what is fueling this, but there are a few different threads. For one, it was unusual that a HC at a program like OSU was calling plays in the first place, so it could be a move to bring Day in alignment with most other head coaches. A conception in football these days is that when the HC is calling plays, they are less able to focus on other aspects of the game (in-game coaching, player management, decision making) and the last item mentioned in that parentheses, decision making, is probably the kicker. Day has been harangued for poor choices on 4th down situations, and Ohio State may want him to devote more attention to those situations and less to calling plays down-to-down. Brian also floated the idea in UV on Friday that it could be to give Hartline something to do so he doesn't leave to coach a MAC team, which seems plausible. 

Is it a good idea? Eh, I think it will have a marginal impact. You can argue that it's good for Michigan because OSU has had a hyper-successful offense since Day started calling plays and anything to disrupt that even a little bit will be a net positive for teams playing OSU. On the other hand, it's likely going to be the same scheme, so I would expect very little change in terms of the overall baseline. OSU fans will argue it could be a positive development for Ohio State if Day becomes a better in-game coach. Tough to know, but I don't think it will be a big deal in the long run. 

Comments

CaliforniaNobody

January 16th, 2023 at 1:04 PM ^

Good stuff Alex! Houstan and Diabate leaving to be back of the roster players in the NBA and destroying our team in the process will forever haunt me. Not a great record with elite recruits lately. 

mi93

January 16th, 2023 at 5:04 PM ^

I often think about the number of Beilein players that left early, almost all of whom probably should have stayed at least one more year (maybe except Poole).  As good as M basketball has been the last dozen years, just 'wow' for what could have been.

EDIT: I appreciate those were pre-NIL years and you get paid when you can.  I still think one more year would have done nearly all of those players a ton of good while lifting the program higher.

Wolverine15

January 16th, 2023 at 1:06 PM ^

You and Brian both seem in agreement on Hartline as playcaller but I'm in a different camp. It remains to be seen how much difference Hartline will make, but I think Day is an exceptionally poor playcaller. He doesn't seem to have a great feel for play sequencing, and he gets in pass-happy and run-happy moods that I think simplify things for defensive coordinators.

A couple examples of this are the first second half drive of the 2021 game (3 runs in a row) and the run heavy sequence of McGregor's half-suplex tackle and then the shotgun toss that got stretched out to the sideline around midfield. 

We'll see, I guess, as Hartline will be a first time playcaller as well. But I do think Day struggled.

M Dude in Portlandia

January 16th, 2023 at 2:15 PM ^

I have not seen anyone mention my biggest negative for those guys on Hartline moving up - recruiting. In most systems the Coordinators lessen their recruiting responsibilities when they move into those positions and that is what Hartline is bona fide great at.

It would not surprise me a bit to see Nacho Day finally recognize a problem and shoot himself in the foot trying to fix it.

4th phase

January 17th, 2023 at 1:54 PM ^

I agree, I think Day has a terrible feel for in game sequencing and for what the opposing coordinator is doing. He mostly relies on having the best players execute hard to defend concepts - great athletes on man beaters.

In 2021, I thought his best plays in that game were Henderson runs. Which, once he abandoned after that Josh Ross run stuff, the game started to unravel for him. In 2022, he similarly abandoned the run on short yardage after Trayanum was having success as a Haskins style battering ram.

matty blue

January 16th, 2023 at 1:08 PM ^

I am not Warde Manuel and unfortunately the most honest answer may just be that Warde is content to move slowly on these things and also may be (somewhat?) incompetent. 

hoo, boy, brace yourself.  the interim tag on naurato is a lead-pipe cinch to either be proof of manuel's incompetence, or proof of his excellence...in some cases both, in the same post.

unlike many here, i won't weigh in on either.  what i will do is remind everyone that lloyd carr was an interim for almost the entire 1995 season.  it's not a crazy notion, to, as you say, wait and see how the rest of the season goes.

as to the discussion of non-conference schedules, please let's not forget that most teams that think they have a shot at a playoff will want home-and-home series...michigan giving up home dates to let that happen is always going to be a struggle, unfortunately.

Goggles Paisano

January 16th, 2023 at 1:10 PM ^

I will make a confession:  I also have not seen the Godfather movies.  I saw Jaws in the Theater in 1976.  I'm not near as old as Craig, but it's still pretty lame that I have not yet seen these movies.    

kehnonymous

January 16th, 2023 at 1:16 PM ^

Is there any credence to thinking that Hart might be more naturally inclined to look for and click with RB recruits in his mold (moderate talent but with strong technique and intangibles) as opposed to the 4/5-star gazelles, because that's the template that was successful for him?

Not saying that's the case because I honestly don't know, but that's something I could easily believe.

jmblue

January 16th, 2023 at 1:17 PM ^

While I think there will be less of a disincentive to play difficult non-conference games in the 12-team era, I don't think there will actually be an incentive to do so.  For a Power 5 team, it's still mostly going to be a question of record, and a 12-0/13-0 team will always get a bye.

The other issue (which surprisingly has gotten little discussion) is about the length of the season.  As it stands, with a 12-game regular season, conference title game and then the CFP, teams will have to play 16 or 17 games to win the national title.  That will be a grind, and I think the NCAA needs to revisit this.  Teams will want to rest their stars where possible.  Playing a tough non-conference game in which your starters have to go the distance might not make a lot of long-term sense.

Padog

January 16th, 2023 at 1:39 PM ^

I agree that an undefeated team would be in line for a bye in a 12 team playoff, but wonder if that should be the basis for plans when creating a schedule. 

It is insanely difficult to go undefeated in College Football. If I were creating a schedule for a team like Michigan, I'd want to be trying to create the best 11-1 resume possible. 

Let's use next year as an example. If Michigan goes 11-1 with a loss to Ohio State at home, the playoff would not be a guarantee. But add a game, Oregon like Alex mentioned, and Michigan has a great win on top of beating teams like Penn State and Michigan State on the road. 

Going undefeated gets you a bye no matter what, the added difficulty of the schedule is to allow for a loss, even if that loss is against a team you didn't have to schedule. 

jmblue

January 16th, 2023 at 1:48 PM ^

The counterargument to that is that one-loss Power 5 teams often make the playoff.  So you can afford one slipup.  The problem with playing a marquee game in September is that if you lose, you've got to run the table the rest of the season.  OTOH, if you play a soft non-con slate, you can afford one stumble during the conference season (as we did in 2021).

Playing a marquee game is great if you win it.  If you lose it's all downside.

Kilgore Trout

January 16th, 2023 at 2:05 PM ^

I actually think that Michigan doesn't really need to think about schedule much when it comes to getting a bye. Since only conference champs can get the byes, the B1G champion will almost always be guaranteed a bye as long as they aren't some sort of weird 9-4 B1G west outfit, and even then they might still be better than the champ of the shells of the B12 and P10. 

NCBlue22

January 16th, 2023 at 4:32 PM ^

I think incentivizing non-con will happen if the committee stops just ranking teams mostly based on how many losses they have.  Right now you can only lose once and with expansion you can likely only lose twice.  They would need to put in a 9-3 team with a good non-con loss over a 10-2 team with a weaker schedule.  I’m not sure, in general, that would happen - therefore why schedule harder and risk an extra loss.

massblue

January 16th, 2023 at 1:26 PM ^

On Warde:  As some may remember, I worked with Warde at UConn.  I have stayed in touch with him since then, but we are not close friends.  Regarding the coaches that have left for various reasons, I would add that Warde did not like to get into a bidding war with other schools while at UConn.  His reasoning was it would not be financially sustainable if every coach at UConn was at the top of the range in terms of salary. Given the resources available here, that way of thinking may not be as sound, but that was his approach. He was relatively generous with his coaches but did not want to get into a bidding war.  Regarding the lack of support for Jim after the OSU game, I can say with no uncertainty (I saw him after the game) that he was very angry and let the BIG commish know about it. He was very supportive of Jim.  Regarding NIL, Warde is conservative and is reluctant to get the school involved with anything the athletic dept does not have full control of.  There was no NIL back then, but he faced a somewhat similar issue with BB coaches at UConn. To help my institution, I talked to him after the NIL was approved to see how UM would handle it. He said it then that he was going to move very carefully and thought the schools would soon lose control and it would become a bidding war. Finally, regarding his competence. I am obviously biased, but talking to other AD, I see a lot of respect for him, and he is viewed as highly competent. He will land a high-level job the moment he decides to leave UM.

BoFan

January 16th, 2023 at 3:26 PM ^

Regarding the lack of support for Jim after the OSU game, I can say with no uncertainty (I saw him after the game) that he was very angry and let the BIG commish know about it. 
 

What specifically was “the lack of support” referenced here?

It sounds like Warde has a philosophy and subconscious bias against bidding wars. I know people like that.  They always want a deal.  Or they like their reputation of being frugal. And it sounds like his first offer to Jim was more about him getting a deal than about paying for value. Unfortunately, NIL and competitive football programs are now set up for bidding wars. With a program and athletic department like at Michigan, being frugal and avoiding bidding wars is not a successful strategy, and if he is going to maintain this philosophy and approach he might need to go elsewhere. 

Two analogies would be:

In California, houses are often sold in bidding wars.  We once missed buying a house by $3k below the highest bidder. In hindsight, we would have rather paid $10K or even more for that house. Even worse, if we avoided all bidding wars we would never had bought a house  

I worked at a company that was built on acquisitions.  Many acquisitions are bidding wars.  If we avoided all bidding wars the company would never grow.  We did have to pay a market price and make sure the cash flow would work in the end. But avoiding all bidding wars from the outset would have only assured our failure.  
 

 

matty blue

January 16th, 2023 at 3:49 PM ^

What specifically was “the lack of support” referenced here?

just to answer your question, it's an article of faith among the 'fire warde' crowd that the manuel didn't have an adequately angry and (perhaps more importantly, if you listen to some posters) PUBLIC response to the officiating screw job we received in columbus in the 2016 game.

Wendyk5

January 16th, 2023 at 4:20 PM ^

He seems like a guy who doesn't want to do any business in public, which is a management style that can work well. We're so used to information being made public because of social media and FOIA (and reality television voyeurism) that when we don't get every tidbit of information in a timely fashion, it may feel like nothing is being done. Regarding NIL, I agree with him, but I'm old school and it bums me out that numbers in the millions of dollars are thrown around when it comes to 17 and 18 year old's who haven't even stepped foot on campus yet. And I also think that a couple of players getting 7 figures could really undermine the locker room. Team game until you're playing in the NFL, then it's kind of a faux team game. 

Blue Vet

January 16th, 2023 at 1:41 PM ^

"As for my answer, I'll give my go-to fun fact about myself: I am from a family of four (me, one sibling, two parents) and am somehow the only right-handed person in the family. Make of that what you will."

It sounds sinister.

pescadero

January 16th, 2023 at 2:21 PM ^

"The way the administration has, whoever's fault it is, been way too slow to get going on NIL, would chase many coaches away. "
 

Are we just ignoring that the administration can't run, direct, or give money to NIL collectives?