In part. 7 yards per completion is a concern no matter what kind of defense your opponent is playing, even moreso when there’s a talent gap like there is between us and NW. 
 

Cade (and the play caller) are going to need to find a way to move the ball vertically up the field no matter how the opponent is playing you. Especially if we run into a wall in the running game and we HAVE to throw it. Dinking and dunking it down the field isn’t going to work without a running game. You basically turn into the Northwestern offense. 

You are correct, I have been overreacting. 

I love to hear it. I’m glad you had a great time with your son.

Furthermore, I’m an asshole. I pride myself on stoicism and I’ve debased myself. 

I think you can both enjoy each game and win during the game while at the same time during the week analyze what it means going forward and being worried. This is especially true in games against clearly overmatched teams where winning is the expectation and how you do it is the most important part

Honestly there isnt a point this team could run too much for me. Unless we start getting stopped consistently give me all the 4,5,6 yard runs youve got and move the chains. 

Things have been better for me this year because I've been less obsessed with outcome. Michigan is my team, we get 12 games, and each one is fun and an opportunity to cheer on the boys. I know this is a take on the old "one game at a time" spiel, but it's been working for me. It also helps that we are seeing growth in some of the players and some pretty good coaching.

Almost nobody makes it all the way through without a loss or two, and obviously we all want to get the OSU monster slain, but even the most optimistic of us know that they've routinely just had way more playmaking talent than Michigan. Sooner or later we'll get 'em, but I'm not going to let that talent gap ruin my enjoyment of the entire season.

Jim Harbaugh doesn't think he's ready for prime time, so I'm inclined to agree with him.

You have 1% of the information that Harbaugh does, and most likely 1% of the knowledge of what it takes to play QB at this level. I mean, sure, perhaps Harbaugh is making a mistake by playing McNamara instead of JJ, but the performance of the team so far this year makes that argument a tough sell.

To think that Harbaugh is playing Cade for any other reason than to give us the best chance to win is absurd. 

I mean we don't really know if he's ready or not for primetime. Its certainly no guarantee he is the answer. But its also not clear that he isn't ready and Michigan would lose those games with him in.

And that's why the coaches get paid millions of dollars to make the decision and comments on the internet that they're wrong despite being 7-0 is dumb.

What tips the scales for me being pro JJ in this instance is that we don't trust the passing game with Cade as the QB.

McNamara has thrown the ball 93 times over the past 3 games, including 28 times against Wisconsin and 38 times against Nebraska, especially in the second half when the game got close.  Over that same span UM ran the ball with Haskins and Corum...110 times combined.  And the numbers are even closer during the competitive parts of the game.  There have been, in fact, more games since the 2nd half of Rutgers and in fact UM looks pretty comfortable with McNamara throwing the ball.  

This also assumes, yet again, that the coaches want their starting QB to run the ball a bunch.  I have now 3-4 years of them decidedly not wanting to do so with any consistency, and there's a good chance the same would apply to McCarthy if he took the helm.  

Yeah I keep in mind that the Cade critics have already moved the goalposts several times.  In September it was "ok but this isn't going to beat Wisconsin/MSU/PSU/OSU" to somehow now just "this isn't going to beat OSU."  

Well, by then you're 11-0, and probably nothing is going to beat OSU.  But limiting mistakes and controlling the ball does give a team a small shot to put pressure on OSU's offense to score, which Oregon did. 

I think the zone reads work with McCarthy because it's a change-of-pace and typically are deployed sparingly and often toward the end of competitive contests.  Like, UM was up I think 20 when he ran in this game.  He did have one good run against Nebraska but he was very much responsible for losing 7 yards on UM's game-winning drive that made that FG a tough 40-yarder instead of the 30-ish one it would have been.

You aren't going to run either QB 20+ times a game.  Maybe McCarthy gives you 3-4 more FDs on the ground but he could just as easily miss the easy passes that McNamara hits that also get you first downs.  And the "struggles" in the redzone are a bit overrated; UM converted 4 of their 7 redzone possessions in this game into TDs and another with a FG.  Both McCarthy and McNamara were responsible for a non-scoring RZ possession.  And at least with McNamara he got the ball out there to Sainristil and they probably would have at least gotten a FG if there wasn't the fumble.  And on the season UM has converted 91% of their RZ possessions into points, 61% into TDs.  Those are both pretty good numbers.

But once again that is why I framed the QB debate as being around OSU in terms of the driving force. Because if your primary focus is can Michigan beat OSU at the end of the year the question isn't whether we have proof that JJ would do a better job running the offense against NW last weekend, it is whether the offense under Cade is good enough to beat OSU. And I think for most people the answer to that question is no. So the potential upside of JJ and the possibilities that means for beating OSU makes the risk worth it given what we have seen so far. Its not an obvious yes it will result better, but its a possibility. 

I don't remotely understand this logic here.  We have very little evidence on McCarthy either way, but assuming ignorance means hidden success is a HUGE mental leap there, relying on biases I could just as easily apply to McNamara.  I SAW McNamara throw for 2 TDs against one of the best defenses in the country in Madison.  I SAW McNamara lead this team back multiple times while losing against Nebraska, again on the road.  Those are actual data points, real ones we shouldn't dismiss with a wave of a hand and the fantasy that the unproven guy behind him who completes 63% of his passes against backups will be even better than the guy who...completes 63% of his passes against starting defenses.  There's no realistic cost-benefit analysis being applied here; it's simply "I want McCarthy to be QB so YOLO" which is a fine mantra but doesn't pass the sniff test.

Again, this entire argument is premised on a strawman argument that JJ McCarthy is the better option and has some intangible value to an offense that hasn't actually manifested.  There's no evidence of this and actually a decent chunk of evidence showing he's not as good a passer and his rushing, while a plus, doesn't come close to compensating for these deficiencies.  The "time" to make a switch was in the offseason or during the early parts of the year when McCarthy would have outplayed McNamara for the spot.  The fact he didn't at this point doesn't mean he's being held back; it's likely evidence he's just not as good as McNamara right now and people may just need to accept that.