All this negative Lindsay talk got me thinking about how expectations can be so far off in the months leading up to a season. How quickly we forget how quickly a team can turn things around. I remember in my stalking days before I signed up here, everyone thought that a mid-level ranked defensive squad in 2011 would've been a great accomplishment given the horrible results of 2010. However, Mattison came in and turned it into a consensus top 20 defensive unit. I also remember defensive players commenting in pre-season 2011 (Just as Kalis did recently re: last year's Oline) that in the previous year they were extremely disorganized and nobody knew what they were doing or what play was coming and how Mattison made things make sense for them and organized the defense into a cohesive unit. I for one think Nuss is going to do the same thing as Mattison in 2011 and turn next year's squad into a top 30 offense. I also think a reason for that success is because you had key leadership in Mike Martin and RVB - I think if Devin can assume this leadership role next year we can really turn things around - after what we know now about the OSU game I think he can be that catalyst.
Defense 2010 to 2011 - why not Offense 2013 to 2014?
Will Denard be back...and can he block?
/s (just in case)
Mr. Smith ... and he can block!
In all seriousness, I'm choosing to be optimistic in the off-season. Perpetual pessimism has been killing me, so I'm all in with the optimism. Blind optimism.
No offensive line. End of story really.
Theres a lot of talent there. Mike Martin was on some of those lousy D's. Just has to be properly utilized.
I'm getting goddamn tired of all this negativity. The team had a WINNING RECORD last year. We nearly beat OSU. There is plenty to b confident about.
We also nearly lost to Northwestern and Akron. That has nothing to do with this year.
A winning record by one game. That's not good in college football.
Drinking bleach is better than drinking poison. Wouldn't you say? Why should we expect or be happy about either?
blaming recruiting losses on negative message board posts are people who insinuate that because Hoke's record is better than Rich Rod's it must be good. If that is how you really feel then you deserve a lifetime of 7-6 records.
Were you like during the RR years?
Willing to say 75% of us would've acted differently if we knew the bullshit people were putting him through behind the scenes.
I know I would've.
The "It's impossible for the Oline to be better" crowd seems to have forgotten how much the D improved from RR's last year to BH's first year.
Caveats do apply: Oline is evidently more challenging to master, requires a longer apprenticeship, if you will. Seth or The Mathlete's analysis (I've forgotten who did it) shows that some Oline players reach the desired performance level in year 3, while others do in year 4.
Maybe I'm just too optimistic but, I believe huge strides can be made between your first and second year of playing time. With a more focused gameplan. Especially when you have extra incentive of embarrassment and the people outside expecting the worst of you. We will find out what kind of fight they have. Unless they are just completely without talent. I don't believe they're talentless. Therefore, if they are healthy and have a consistent line group without constant shuffling. We should hopefully see a better performance.
Definitely a big jump between year 1 of playing and year 2 IMO. This is where the Magnuson injury is really hurting and seems to be minimized by many. That was probably our best OL of the "young dudes" along with Glasgow last year, and he was in the midst of a position change, needing to gain about 20 lbs to handle the tackle rather than guard, and getting the reps. He is missing all that practice and weight training, and yet people are expecting a plug and play Magnuson at the most important position in the OL. That injury is a serious bugger.
Also, Kalis really needs to take not 1 leap but about 3 leaps - I look at Jack "no star" Conklin over at MSU who was a freshman All American at tackle, and I look at Kalis and his 5 stars and I really wonder what the hell is going on. They are from the same class of 2012 and both started from the get go last year. Conklin gave up ZERO sacks per the OL coach; Kalis looked lost. Kalis needs to perform, not be first team All Big 10, but to live up to his billing and be adequate this year on the way to way more than adequate in the next 2.
Braden is an open question - no one has seen him and now "they" are talking if Lindsay came they might have moved Glasgow all the way out to tackle which doesnt make me feel great about Braden all the sudden. And Bosch - well it is just unfair to throw out true freshman on the OL... same with Mone.
Look at those mits.
True but that team had one of the most exceptional defenses in college football the past 3 decades, with a transformational player that erased half the field. And while it was a young team I read something like 35 players from that squad sniffed the NFL (offense and defense). So the offense was young but obviously had talent and the defense was the best in 25 years for UM.
People don't like to say it but the MSU 2013 team and the 1997 UM team have a lot of parallels - nothing exceptional on offense but a group that did the job with a "gamer" QB who improved as the year went by, ball control low risk offense, and an exceptional defense with shutdown play in the secondary. It is a winning formula - see Seattle Seahawks.
Those guys must have been really good if they could win with no left side of the line
Well, then you had a completely new defensive staff. Now, you still have the position coach of the worst part of the offense still employed, the strength coach of a team that was consistently bullied around still employed, and the rest of the offensive staff employed. Although I think the rest of the offensive staff has at least been decent, and Hecklinski has been phenomenal, that's still not a total reset
I think that simply too many coaches on the offensive staff cannot coach, or can no longer coach, at a D1 championship level and that we will simply see a modest improvement, at best.
but your entire premise is that the "rest of the offensive staff" makes 0 gains. I'm hoping that Nuss can make the entire staff a bit better.
i agree here with the fact that i completely expect that our D-line will hardly make any impact again this year for the third straight year..
Sick of seein the excuses made for them.. It is either hoke, mattison, or Wellman's fault.. if not all of them being terrible at what they have done for the D-line thus far.
Our offense will be light years better than last year's squad. How many light years is still TBD.
Our line will be one light-year different than last years. Better or worse, I cannot say.
Our fanbase is so jaded fter the process... this isn't how winners think. We need our crazy girl in a razorbacks hat to sing "Nothng's gonna stop us now."
I'm sure in Schembechler Hall they have a big tube that lights up when fan optimism is up.
This is not a complement.
The depression of where this program is has consumed me.
No coincidence I developed stress-induced mild psoriasis on my calves in November. Especially after reading 3&out for the first time as a bonus.
You're a Senior in high school. There has to be something better you could be doing.
today I think it's time to step away from the computer for a while.
that. Seriously, take a step back and look at the finer things in life. Nothing honorable exists in causing yourself pain for something as inane as football.
thats it guy, the players hoke brought in have failed to develop or achieve on the field due to the attitude of the fan base. wow youre a total genius
28 for 28. That is all.
However, the verdict is still out on Funk though. Plus, that terrible offense from last season is learning a new system with even younger guys. Last year's offensive line had two seniors and now we have no seniors on the line.
I guess I just want TomVH to hold me.
This year will serve as an interesting litmus test for Funk. He's rooted in inside zone blocking schemes, which is what Nuss is supposedly emphasizing. We should know a few games into the schedule whether he's incompetent or if many of the O-line struggles really could be tied to Borges and youth.
yes that is a thing that happened. excellent point. poignant.
like the seniors on the d-line did in 2011 and I'll believe
Guys you win in college football with upperclassmen. It is not basketball. It's a man sport. Other than one or two RBs, WRs you traditionally are going to want upperclassmen populating your team's starters. ALL our WRs and RBs are underclassmen save Funchess. ALL our OLs are underclassmen save Glasgow. A 22 year old just has a different physical strength than a 19 year old. It just is what it is.
Because 1 senior. And 3 upperclassmen (Glasgow, Funchess and Devin). That it scary. I have not done the research or seen anyone else do it but I would hazard a guess no BCS program has brought out an offense with 8 underclassmen in the past 20-30 years. The 2010 and 2011 classes devastate the 2014 offense.
Without bothering to look back at it I am sure the 2011 defense had way more experience than this offense will roll out. It just needed basic guidance and structure that the AD was too cheap to provide resources for back then.
This^. Everyone complains this is an excuse. But it is not. It is a reason. And only time will fix it. And when it does, it will be glorious.
Agree with you premise about the offense being so young but were Williams is going to be an upperclassmen and with Butt hurt, I'm guessing Williams is the starting TE to start the season. As crazy as it might sound, if Norfleet plays the slot he's going to be an upperclassmen too.
Off the top of my head the only team I can think that might have had that many underclassmen start would be USC a couple years ago. I think going into Barkley's senior they returned all 11 starters on offense.
We don't know much about how 2014's offense will actually perform as we haven't seen it yet, but I sort of see the potential for a parallel if things go better than perhaps most of us expect. With the defense in 2010 and 2011, it seems as if we had the right people in the wrong places basically - a new staff implements a scheme that better suits the skills of those players and a 180-degree turnaround takes place. I don't know about the 180 this time around, but I could see a similar scenario here - right players out of place, new coach, new scheme, consistent scheme. The optimist in me says the result may not be quite as dramatic, but they have the potential to be better than we think right now. Fall camp might be telling in this case.
I've bought into the hype just about every season for the past seven years and have been highly disappointed except for 2011. With an offensive line that still has huge question marks, is still very young, and even regressed last season, I see little to be optimistic there. Not to mention that all of a sudden, we have uncertainty at the quarterback position. The lack of emergence of offensive receiving weapons not named Butt, Funchess, and Gallon has me scared for the passing game, and our inability to run the ball all have me bracing for the worst next season... If the spring game was any indicator, this season should be long and painful... Hoke mentioned that just about all of Nuss's offense was installed so no excuses as to inexperience in the system.
The 2010 defense lost basically just Jonas Mouton (a talented but erratic player), Ezeh (a guy with major physical limitations for the position he was forced to play) and guys like Banks and Rogers who hadn't been touted recruits and didn't play much before their senior seasons (and walked through non-existent depth charts to earn starting roles). The 2013 offense is losing the 2-time offensive lineman of the year in the conference, another NFL bound OT, a record setting WR, and our leading rusher (a guy who, despite a lot of complaining about him, is still someone who put up a 1,000 yard season here).
The 2011 defense added a bunch of new contributors in Countess, Ryan, Morgan, and Heininger (who missed 2010 with injury) and saw a bunch of guys who played as underclassmen improve with experience (and possibly better coaching) in Roh, Gordon, Demens, Floyd, Kovacs, etc.
We need a lot of young guys to improve, but we also need to find some new contributors. And some of them have to replace really good players.
And even if the offense is better, is that really what matters? An elite staff (like we're told we have) should have things rocking and rolling by year 4. Not hoping for an extra year to get above the middle of the pack. Being better than 7-6 doesn't mean much to me. If we've got a quality RB, 2-3 stars on the o-line with solid depth across 5 spots, and a legit #2 receiver, we'll be fine (assuming Nuss > Borges as well). I'm not sure we have those things right now.
You are definitely in my personal "top five" favorite posters PurpleStuff. You and think quite a bit alike but you put things so much nicer and more eloquently than i generally do.
Now that I think of it, the more probable scenario is that we see a leap from the 2014 defense. There you have a bunch of guys who played as underclassmen, including a lot of backups. You lose more than you did in 2010 but no superstars are leaving (and a guy like Washington wasn't playing much anyway by the end of the year).
Finding two safeties may prove difficult and I'm not sure the pass rush has a high ceiling with this group, but there are a lot of guys who are probably going to get better and a lot of folks improving slightly can improve a defense quite a bit. Especially if guys like Peppers or Thomas can replicate what Countess and Ryan were able to add in 2011.
The defense needs to be very good in 2014. It brings back 5 seniors and 3 juniors. It brings back two 2 year starters at corner (who may or may not get beat out by younger dudes) but that's a massive luxury in CFB. The starting LBs as projected all are 2 year starters. It brings back 2 senior DEs - granted Beyer is half LB half DE but still tons of experience.
Aside from 1 safety spot and the DTs this is a very experienced defense and needs to perform as such. Showing blitzes early that tell the QB "hey here is where we are going to blitz" and such should stop. Almost no defense in CFB starts all upperclassmen so I don't want to hear ANY excuses this year for the defense about youth or inexperience. There are young guys on it who pop like Stribling, Lewis, Gedeon, Henry, Wormley, Charlton.
It should be top 3 in the Big 10 and top 20 nationally and give this offense some chance to develop. If not, then Mattison deserves heat as well. This should be on paper the best defense we've had in a long time (aside from 2011).
There are definitely a couple questions surrounding the defense heading into the fall but just about every team each year has a few question marks with each each side of the ball. With the amount of experience returning, this should be a very solid unit (assuming of course the question marks don't turn into huge liabilities).
I am quietly optimisitc that the defense in 2014 could be very good. I kind of sense the coaching staff may be aware of this as well and this my be why they have been stating a return to a more blitzing/aggressive style.
Hey we nearly beat OSU! Things are looking up!
The 2010 defense was terrible game in and game out. Last years O was pretty good for chunks of the year. I'm not sure what my point is I'm just hoping a lot of guys in both units can show some kind of improvement year to year and the coaches can put them in positions to take advantage. Defense needs to get some stops when it counts at the end of halfs and games, offense needs to block and be smart in the red zone, coaches need to not look like deers in headlights and figure out how to improve and get the most out of the players.
I wanted to weep when Funchess dropped three straight passes during the spring stretchy and drills a few weeks ago.
I seriously hate this board now. I come here if I want a huge dose of depression. Jabrill Peppers will save us all. He will block for the entire O-line and run out and play defense after. All is well folks.
who thinks all the states in our division are going to be worse than last year?
MSU loses 3 of their 4 best defensive guys and has no history of putting 2 real good years together. The offemse wasn't frightening. Garnder's B1G stats were better than Cook's.
OSU's o-line goes from best in the B1G to ?. The back 7 has some talent but not much experience. Neither the LBs nor the DBs as a group are better than Michigan's.
PSU? They wish they had Michigan's o line.
Maybe we need the river to deliver an inside straight, but I'm not feeling the others at the table are holding A-K.
I know more about MSU than OSU... and far less about PSU so I will only speak to MSU.
They did put back to back years together in 2010 and 2011. 2012 was the dropoff and 2013 was their big time year, so that is 3 out of 4 years. Dantonio and Beilien have done very similar things to their programs so anyone expecting a major dropoff from MSU is dreaming. They have coaching stability, a group that develops talent, and one of the best coordinators in the country. It is basically Wisconsin in our backyard right now.
Specific to their team - they brought back almost the entire offense and their QB goes from unknown quantity to guy who now has a year under his belt. Their OL might take a small step back but unlike us they rotated 8 guys in their OL last year to prepare for this year not due to #(@*#(@ on the OL. They only lose 1 starter on the skill positions. Their offense should be better.
Their defense will take a step back but you almost have to do from that defense. They have - again - a lot of guys ready to go as backups that rotated in with the starters last year. They will take a step back at one corner and MLB.... maybe a small step back at the tackles. They have young talent everywhere on that defense and its a testament to their coaching and identifying talent and redshirting almost everyone - they are to defense right now what Beilein is to guards and wings.
To top it off every major team they face is at home save for Penn State. I think they will be favored in every game this year except @Oregon. Now I do believe it won't be as good as last year's team for 1 reason - defense never takes a week off - offense has those 2- weeks a year it just looks plain stupid and like they have never met each other, so it depends which weeks that happens for MSU. So last year there were some games the offense completely sucked i.e. Purdue but that defense was so dominating it didnt matter. This year they will be more balanced, defense falls down some and offense is better.
As for OSU despite their record I did not find them to be "great" last year - they went head to head with a not great Northwestern team, and beat a not great (good) Wisconsin team at home. Other than that they didnt face anyone of value on their schedule until they faced MSU. Probably @UM was their 3rd toughest game of the year, and that is saying a lot considering it was not a good UM team. I am sure they will plug another great RB in for Hyde but lose quite a bit on the OL. Their defense line should be better - Bosa is scary, and they have so many 5 stars now on that DL with experience. I dont know enough about the secondary or LB to comment but Roby seemed overrated to me while Shazier was a beast.
I'm sorry, but their offense will not be good. They lose a lot on the offensive line and they sucked donkey balls for most of the season last year. They didn't make it across mid-field until the 4th quarter against Purdue (yeah, that same Purdue that didn't win a B10 game and won 1 game all year). Their offense was just so shitty in the beginning of the season that when they got just a little better, everyone thought they were amazing. The facts are that they were towards the bottom of the nation in passing yards, weren't very good running the ball, and their points per game were awful. I am not buying that they will be improved simply because they bring back a QB who got better as the year went on, a group of WRs who were pathetic all year, and lost all of their upperclassmen on the line. They could still be a good team, but it won't be because of their offense.
WIth halfway decent coaching we will win 10 games in the regular season.
What if the O takes a 2011-like leap into the top 20 and the D stays right where it was last year? Then we'd have an interesting case of the D being the weak link which would be an anomaly.
We're not having a complete system change like we did then.
And we have no one to compare to Martin, RVB and Heininger on the OL.
Maybe if we had guys like Omameh, Barnum, and Huyge back I'd think...well, at least they're seniors. But these guys are still young. It's still different.
was favorable in 2011. Schedule is for shit this upcoming season.
Yep! Looking back at that 2011 schedule we beat a ton of .500 teams (7-6, 6-7) in the Big 10, an ok 8-5 ND team and the worst OSU team in 15 years. And stole the bowl game vs VA Tech. And that was a senior laden team with a pretty special QB who played better in 2011 than 2012 (even when healthy in 2012). 2015 is set up similar to 2011 for UM - favorable although OSU will obviously be better.
I admire your optimism, but I don't think we have anyone on this team (right now) that fills the caliber of leadership that we got collectively from Molk, Koger, RVB, Martin, etc.
JMFR is probably one, but I never hear anything Gardner as a leader in the locker room. Granted, I don't know squat about what goes on behind closed doors with this team. I can only go by what I see. But I just don't see where a lot of the leadership on this team comes from, from a player standpoint. I could guess maybe Countess or Funchess are, but just because someone is a good football player doesn't make them a good leader.
I mean, he was returning quicker than anybody could have possibly expected after tearing a ligament that gets regularly placed under tremendous strain in football. Frankly, I wouldn't have blamed him if he sat the entire season. That fact that we got him back at all was a small miracle. I agree with you regarding hopes for this season. Hopefully he returns in pre-injury form.
This argument is asinine and totally disrespectful to Mike Martin and Ryan Van Bergen. There is no MM or RVB equivalent on that offensive line, I am sorry. Maybe in a few years - but definitely not as sophomores or freshmen.
In my opinion, whenever you have a coaching regime change there is a certain "rah-rah" and "circle the wagons" element with the new staff.
I think there was a lot of that in the 2011 season. And Ryan Van Bergen and Mike Martin were essential pieces of that defense which wouldn’t have been as good without them.
Rich Rod’s tenure was dragging to an end and Hoke came in and re-energized the team and program. He took basically the same players and they won 11 games.
I think there is some similarity in the program in the way that RR’s defense wallowed and trended down and Hoke’s offense is wallowing and seemingly not trending up.
Another poster already stated this, but I think (and hope) that Nussmeir can change up and re-energize this offense the way Hoke and Mattison did the defense in 2011. Sometimes a new, fresh start can have a positive outcome.
RT Huyge, RS Sr. - 2 star (Scout)
RG Omameh, RS Jr. - 3 star
C Molk, Sr. - 4 star
LG Barnum, Jr. 3 Star
LT Lewan, RS So, 4-star
RT Ben Braden, RS So. 3-star (Scout)
RG Kyle Kalis, RS So. 5-star
C Jack Miller, RS Jr. 3-star or Patrick Kugler, RS Fr. 5-star
LG Kyle Bosch, So. 4-star
LT Erik Magnusson, So. 4-star
Talent-wise Michigan appears to be better positioned than 2011 on the OL.
Michigan's problem in 2011 was two-fold: low depth and low talent
Michigan's problem in 2014 remains to be two-fold: low experience and low depth