CBS Sports projects Big Ten win totals
Michigan projected to be 3rd in the BIG 10 East.
Maryland
Over/under: 6 wins
CBS Pick: 3 wins
Rutgers
Over/under: 4 wins
CBS Pick: 4 wins
Michigan State
Over/under: 4.5 wins
CBS Pick: 5 wins
Nebraska
Over/under: 6 wins
CBS Pick: 6 wins
Indiana
Over/under: 7.5 wins
CBS Pick: 6 wins
Minnesota
Over/under: 7 wins
CBS Pick: 7 wins
Northwestern
Over/under: 6.5 wins
CBS Pick: 7 wins
Iowa
Over/under: 8.5 wins
CBS Pick: 8 wins
Michigan
Over/under: 7.5 wins
CBS Pick: 8 wins
Wisconsin
Over/under: 9.5 wins
CBS Pick: 10
Penn State
Over/under: 9 wins
CBS Pick: 10 wins
Ohio State
Over/under: 11 wins
CBS Pick: 12 wins
Very interesting, early riser!
Unfortunately, no specific game predictions in the article.
8 seems reasonable.
Loss - osu Wisconsin
toss up - msu PSU Washington Indiana
the rest we should win barring any major issues.
split the toss ups and you have 8 wins.
If Michigan wins 8 games and falls to OSU again, Warde needs to move on and give the ol farewell handshake to Harbaugh.
My preference would be to avoid a coaching shake-up ... the outcome of that is not guaranteed.
10-1 with the only loss to OSU ... there's no question Harbaugh stays.
Losses to Wisconsin, Penn State, and Ohio State ... 9-3 ... warm seat but not hot seat.
Losses to the three just mentioned and Michigan State ... 8-4 ... seat is very warm.
Losses to those four, plus drop the Washington game ... 7-5 ... seat is hot.
Losses to those five, plus drop an odd B1G game (i.e. Indiana) ... 6-6 ... scalding hot.
Here's hoping for an reasonably optimistic season: 9-3 at worse, with a stretch to 10-2.
Why in year 7 is it acceptable to have a team that won't even contend for a division title....and you'd rather stick with that? Wow.
Brian Kelly went 4-8 at Notre Dame in year 7. He was 55-23 in his first 6 (.708). Notre Dame kept him around after that 4-8 season and they’ve won double digit games every year since, including two playoff appearances.
Harbaugh is 49-22 after his first 6 (.690). I don’t expect anything nearly as bad as 4-8 here, but there’s a difference between something being “acceptable” and choosing tearing down the program entirely. Michigan going 7-5 this year doesn’t have to be “acceptable,” but it also doesn’t necessarily mean you burn the program down and start from scratch either. Some things take time, programs go through rebuilds and have down years. It happens, and you don’t have to fire your head coach when that happens. You can see it through and you might even get the desired results everyone around here is begging for.
I'd rather burn it down and start again than accept mediocrity.
You don’t have to fire the head coach to not accept mediocrity. Harbaugh just got rid of the majority of his defensive staff and changed schemes. That’s not accepting mediocrity. That’s changing. Change does take time though. As I stated above, ND was 4-8 in Kelly’s 7th year. Stuck it out, and they’ve been very good since. Including two playoff appearances.
Dude, it's been 7 years. It does not take a decade to turn a football program into an upper tier one, ESPECIALLY one that has so much infrastructure built in.
If he was trying to turn CMU into a great program, sure, you can be OK with what you've seen so far.
Not this.
Yeah, except it kinda does. How long did it take Clemson? How long is it currently taking Texas? USC? Florida State? Miami? All teams with similar or better infrastructures than we have that haven’t been able to build that top level program.
It is INCREDIBLY difficult to build a top tier team in the modern CFB landscape where 4-5 teams get over half of the top 100 recruits every single year. That’s why nobody else has been able to do it. You make a bad move or two, have some bad luck, some injuries/transfers don’t go your way and it’s just that much harder.
Once again, Notre Dame could have said the same thing. Kelly is going 8-5/9-4 most of the time and then he goes 4-8. They had the perfect opportunity to say it’s not working and move on. They didn’t, and they’ve won 10+ every year since and have been to the CFP twice.
It’s not like Harbaugh is maintaining the status quo here. He’s adapting, he’s changing, he’s making moves. He’s recognized what hasn’t worked and is trying to find what does.
for the love of god, please don't bring up Dabo Swinney. Harbaugh is no where close to Clemson.
Swinney won an ACC title in his third year! Harbaugh has finished above third in the B10 East Division ONCE in 6 years....Dabo had 2 Ten win seasons and 2 11 wins seasons in his first 6 years
In Year 7, Swinney got to the NC game and finished 14-1 finishing #2 in the polls.
its laughable that people continue to bring up Swinney's progression at Clemson as a corollary for Harbaugh at Michigan.
that fell apart after OSU curb stomped Michigan the year after a simple beat down
When you bring in facts to blow away the lame ass arguments from the pro-harbaugh crowd, it just makes them sad and you should feel bad!
/s
The simplest fact is that Harbaugh has yet to bring in a top QB and that is the primary difference between the top few programs and the next tier. Pair that with poor QB coaching and lack of a strong running attack and he's lucky to have won as many as he did.
Having said that, I believe that he's made the right coaching changes. Hopefully, he's got the right guys in the QB room and some guys that can tote the rock to get us to the next level.
he's lucky to have won as many as he did.
...and that was on full display last season without OoC tomato can U to pad the record with.
"Full display" insofar as to those without the maize and blue blinders on.
Please explain how Clemson's run through the cream puff land of the ACC is anywhere near what is the schedule which Michigan plays in the B1G East?
You left out the spot, refs, academics, and online U.
None of the programs you just mentioned have had their coach for 7 years except USC...they've recently changed coaches because the previous coach obviously wasnt getting it done and they knew that. All except Clay Helton at USC who has more success than Harbaugh but is still on the hot seat.
You're forgetting to mention ND played in the BCS title game in Kelly"s 3rd yr.
"Change does take time though"
You mean like when Hoke was hired and turned the defense around from one of the worst in the country to top 15 in a year?
Or Harbaugh turning a team that would have a school record number of draft picks the next year around from 5-7 to 10-3?
Spare me this it takes time stuff. I see teams every year change coordinators and not miss a beat or make a huge turnaround. Either it works or it doesn't. Why are we some special case?
Why have Harbaugh's best and most complete teams been with the previous coach's recruits? He's had plenty of time to recruit and shape the program how he wants, it's not working.
You mean when RR hired a 4-3 DC and made him run a 3-3-5 defense and then Mattison came in with a simplified 4-3? That’s your example? Or when Harbaugh pulled in an experienced starter from the portal to give us a functional offense for his first season? None of which delivered the team success you’re clamoring for mind you.
We’re going to compare that to Michigan switching from a 4-2-5 to a 3-4 defense? Where half the defense has to learn a brand new position?
You don’t see ANYBODY make the night/day jump that you’re asking for here. So yes, it actually DOES take time.
Every program that has played in, not just won, a national championship game or college football playoff in the last 20 years has made it in the coach's first six seasons except Mack Brown, Mark Dantonio, and Dabo. And Mark D went 11-2 and won the Big Ten his 4th year and went 13-1 and finished #3 in his seventh year. Dabo went 11-2 and beat OSU in the Orange Bowl his 6th year. Hows that trajectory looking?
Brian Kelly got to the national title game in his third year.
And had three 8-5 seasons, a 9-4 season and a 10-3 season in his other years. Very Harbaugh-esque. Then went 4-8 and was retained.
In 2016, when Notre Dame went 4-8, they finished the season ranked 18th in SP+. They lost 7 of their 8 games by 8 points or less. This sounds like a competent team that couldn't win close games. Average margin of defeat: 6.25 points.
In 2020, when Michigan went 2-4, they finished the season ranked 33rd in SP+. They lost 3 out of 4 games by double digits. They didn't put out a quality product. Average margin of defeat: 17 points.
We aren’t comparing the two seasons though, especially considering one happened in a weird CoVid year. We’re comparing what programs should apparently be willing to accept in their 7th season.
Competitive or not, ND went 4-8. Doesn’t matter HOW you win or lose. A win is a win, a loss is a loss. You really think anyone will give a shit if we go 4-8 this year but we lose some close games? Hell no, this board will be HOT and ready to burn down the Big House.
Go ahead and look at that ND schedule. What would you walk away impressed with? Double OT loss to a 5-7 Texas team? Home loss to 4-8 Duke? Scoring 3 points against a 7 win NC State? Get out of here with that “competitive” crap. We would be LIVID if Michigan went 4-8 with THAT schedule.
Kind of like Michigan losing to teams that went 2-5, 6-1 (Indiana, not bad), 4-3, and 4-5 last year? And having our crowning achievement last year beating a team that ended up 3-4?
I just don't get the excuses.
What excuses? I didn’t give any excuses. I said we’re not comparing the two seasons with each other. The entire premise to this conversation is based on what teams should be willing to accept in year 7. I’m not here to debate whether Harbaugh’s 6th season was better or worse than Kelly’s 7th season.
I pointed out that Harbaugh and Kelly had very similar first 6 seasons. Similar winning percentage, Kelly had more 8-5 type seasons, Harbaugh had more double digit win seasons. Kelly made a BCS title game but was average outside of that season. I pointed out that Kelly’s year 7 was a 4-8 shit show. I pointed out that ND kept Kelly despite this, and have had a lot of success since including two playoff appearances.
Then I get fed some crap about them being competitive and unlucky in losing some close games to bad teams in their 4-8 season as if that’s a feather in Kelly’s cap. I point out how livid we would be with those results (and as you pointed out, we ARE livid after last season), not defending them with bogus S&P rankings. You really think this blog would pound our chests over a top 20 S&P ranking after going 4-8 and losing to: @Texas (5-7), MSU (3-9), Duke (4-8), @NCSU (7-6), Stanford (10-3), Navy (9-5), VT (10-4), and USC (10-3)
I pointed out that ND gave Kelly the opportunity to turn it around after that season, and he did that. I’m not really seeing what excuses I gave.
The closest “excuse” I gave was mentioning that Harbaugh’s bad year came during CoVid. Which, yeah it was kinda an unprecedented year that saw spring practice get cancelled, the season cancelled and then started up at a later date, players opt out (I think we’d have been a LITTLE better with Collins and Ambry in the lineup), games get cancelled, etc. Which isn’t an excuse for how bad the season was, but it’s fair to point out the circumstances and that looking at the S&P rankings (which he brought up) is irrelevant in such a weird year where teams played different amounts of games and there weren’t any non-conference games to stabilize the metrics. If he’s going to sit there and say ND had a good S&P ranking and they lost a lot of close games (to bad teams) then I think it’s pretty fair to at least acknowledge the circumstances the 2020 season was played under.
"I pointed out that Harbaugh and Kelly had very similar first 6 seasons."
No they didn't.
They had very similar RECORDS.
Go ahead and look at that ND schedule.
SP+ is opponent adjusted, so I don't need to look at the schedule.
He went to the title game in Year 3. That gets you some slack.
Harbaugh's slack is because of his name, and the fact that Stanford had a generational talent at QB that led to some good years. This has led to hero worship from the AD, If his name was John Smith, he would not be coaching Michigan right now.
Kelly went to the title game that year with a team marginally better than Michigan's. That says less about Kelly and more about the national sports media's Domer fetish.
I would take a team any day that plays above it's talent and goes 12-0 in the regular season. It's incredibly difficult to do. That ND team went to Norman and beat #8 Oklahoma, that's a better road win by far than anything Harbaugh has here.
Would you be saying that if the refs hadn't screwed Michigan against the Buckeyes in 2016? Related question: do you think the 2012 Notre Dame team was better than the 2016 Michigan team?
You know what didn't screw Michigan? When they had Samuel trapped on 3rd and forever in a freaking corner and let him go for 12 yards.
Or when Speight threw two INTs.
It's ALWAYS SOMETHING- except Michigan. Michigan's never at fault for losing.
To be fair, there was 3 or 4 separate holds that could have been called on that Samuel run. That play actually makes me more angry than the spot. The spot is at least close and whatever was called on the field was going to stick, but they missed a lot of calls that game that went against Michigan.
Do I think the 2016 Michigan had more talent? Yes. Do I think they were a better team? No.
Did the refs screw Michigan out of a win against Iowa too? That team was talented, but couldnt put it all together when it mattered most.
You are absolutely right about the Iowa game; Michigan should have won that, and Harbaugh's record in close games is terrible for a coach of his (until recent) reputation. But that 2012 Notre Dame team was seriously overrated, and did NOT belong in the Championship game. A one-loss Alabama team destroyed them. ND beat an 8-5 Michigan team by a single touchdown. They nearly lost to Pittsburgh. Their signature win came against a 10-3 Oklahoma team that was pretty good but not great.
There are a lot of good reasons to argue why Harbaugh should get the boot, but acting like the 2016 Michigan team wouldn't have curb-stomped that 2012 ND squad is just revisionist history. Michigan really was very close to having an incredible year in 2016. It didn't happen, but it was close, and Michigan's subsequent descent into mediocrity doesn't change that.
Also, why in the hell am I getting negged for not showing Brian Kelly enough love?
If you want to get really technical, the only reason Alabama was in that title game was due to Ohio State's bowl ban. 2012 really should have been Notre Dame vs. Ohio State, and ND very well could have won that game.
And Michigan went 1-2 vs. ranked teams that year and they only played two ranked teams during the season. We can't say they would have "curb stomped" 2012 Notre Dame.
"Michigan was really close to having an incredible year in 2016. It didn't happen, but it was close." What a perfect statement for Harbaugh, and Michigan football in general over the past 20+ years.
How much slack does it REALLY give you four years later though? Especially considering if you exclude that season, he had a record of 47-30 (.610) in his other 6 seasons. He had 1 season with double digit wins outside of that year.
For as much as people on this blog harp on Harbaugh for his record, Kelly seems to get a lot of praise for his pedestrian start of his tenure.
Would we be okay with Harbaugh’s results the past few years if he made the playoff in 2016? I’d wager the board would still be calling for his head
Good hypothetical. I can't say for sure (of course) but I think I would have been okay up through 2019, as long as (another hypothetical) he canned Brown after that second OSU blowout. After 2020, though, I think I would feel the same way I do now. 2020 illustrated quite clearly for me the downward spiral of the Harbaugh regime, COVID or not.
Why wouldn’t making the playoff in 2016 (hypothetically) buy Brown some slack and keep him around not only through the second OSU blowout (which we kept him after that regardless), but after the 2020 season as well?
That’s kinda the issue I’m bringing to light here. We’re not looking at Michigan through the same scope that we’re looking at Notre Dame with. Kelly earned the right to go 4-8 in year 7 because he made a title game 4 years prior? And won 60% of his games outside of that season? That’s what im not understanding in these counter-arguments.
First Harbaugh was Dabo Swinney, now he's Brian Kelly (except Kelly went 12-1 his 3rd year, already pointed out), who is he gonna be when he goes 6-6 this year?
who is he gonna be when he goes 6-6 this year?
John L. Smith
Brian Kelly went 4-8 and ND gave him another chance. Kelly capitalized on the chance quickly going 10-3 with a win in the Citrus bowl.
Harbaugh is getting the same chance. If he doesn't capitalize on it, UM should move on.
Hoke and Rich Rod would like to know exactly when this philosophy started?
When your name is Harbaugh. That’s when.
$1000 Harbaugh doesn’t have the career at Michigan that Kelly did after his 4-8 season at ND. Any takers?
Horrible analogy. Kelly’s career at ND, after his 4-8 season, is clearly the exception and not the rule.
I'm not on the "he has to go" camp, but this Brian Kelly comparison is disingenuous. He at least had a BCS title game appearance he could point to.
I think Michigan views the situation in entirely different terms. Harbaugh is not just some guy who can't elevate the program. He is the program. After RichRod and Hoke and now the Anderson/Bo scandal, I'm sure Warde and most boosters would rather just stick with him. Since there is no reasonable expectation of beating OSU or winning the conference, it actually becomes easier to maintain the status quo. The only thing that will end this marriage is Harbaugh quitting.
And that's really fucking scary.
No man, including Harbaugh, should be THE PROGRAM.