hell I dont know anymore. I am going to go in every game with zero expectations and hope to be pleasantly surprised.
Niko Porikos grew up in an NTDP billet home. Cool story.
hell I dont know anymore. I am going to go in every game with zero expectations and hope to be pleasantly surprised.
Perfect attitude. Totally agree.
which is a testament to how far U of M football has fallen
ive been searching, and i can not seem to find the date. anyone here know when they actually start fall practice? 51 days until the first game, so i assume we start around August 1st?
Losses to MSU and OSU, and a flip, slight lean win at ND. Rest should be wins with only at NW as any threat. So on paper I see 10-2, possibly 9-3 if ND is any good this year. However we always have that one derp game each year, so the range I see is 8-4 to 10-2, settling on 9-3 as most likely.
YES!!! This is Michigan FERGODSAKES!!! We should always expect 10 wins. WIth our tradition, status as an big-time program, and the recruiting classes we pull, we should always expect 10 wins at least 10 wins. I don't think it is unreasonable for us, as a fanbase, to expect anything less.
However, those expectations do not reflect the reality that is Michigan football at the moment. So while I expect 10 wins every year, I predict we finish the season 7-5 or 6-6 for a number of reasons.
1) the o-line will make little to no improvement. We just lost two NFL tackles from a line that was atrocious. Sure the younger guys will make some improvement with the experience they gained, but you simply do not replace a first and third round pick with guys who are underclassmen. Also, the lack of development the line showed throughout last year has me extremely concerned that the improvement that the young guys make will be minimal.
2) We lost our number 1 receiver and while Funchess will be a huge threat, there is no proven commodity besides him. Chesson was decent but not a world-beater last year. No one konws how Darboh will recover from his injury, and while Canteen has had a lot of hype this spring, we've seen some players receive equal hype and not do much come Saturday so I'm very skeptical.
3) Gardner, while great at times, was also a turn-over machine at points this past season. I'm not sure how much better he's going to get now that his favorite target as gone on to the NFL, especially as he'll be behind an o-line that I believe will be worse than last years
4) the RB's struggled mightly....albiet much of that might be due to the o-line problems but they certainly didn't show themselves to be anything than mediocre at best
The Defense: While this unit should be better I think most around these parts are overrating how good they'll be.
1) How will Ondre return from his acl injury? This is a big concern for me as the d-line was decent but not great. If Ondre returns 100% and lives up to his billing, then this unit should be good, but no one really knows how good he'll he returns. Clark and Ojeumduia are good, but if there is no push from the middle, I think teams will be able to plan around them.
2) linebackers- this unit I am the most optimistic about. We should have a real good LB corp.
3) DB's - We had our moments last year and on paper we're very talented. They played well in stretches last year but can they improve? I'm not exactly sold on Manning coaching them either. Seem's weird to me that a guy who played LB is now the DB coach, and the fact that this is his first year coaching the unit does not fill me with optimism. Mallory's Unit I feel will be very good though.
4) field position/time on field: clearly the offense is the weakest link of this team. I honestly don't feel that they will improve significantly/at all (I hope to God Nuss proves me wrong) and that our struggles offensively will place a massive burden on the defense. We might have a good to great defense, but if they are out there for 60-70% of the game, they'll get worn down and eventually break, it's only a matter of time.
Losses to ND, MSU, and Ohio obviously. However I think it's very realistic that we could potentially lose to Utah, Minnesota, NW, and PSU. So if we lose the 3 rivalry games and split those 4 toss-ups that's 7-5. and I could easily see us losing another one of those toss-ups, or falling to a team we should beat giving us the 6-6 record. I hope I'm wrong and that Hoke proves that he can develop our kids just as well as Dantonio can, I just don't see it at the moment.
For some reason I don't believe you when you say "I hope I'm wrong..."
not sure how to respond to that, but if you would like to refute any of the points I made, i'd be happy to engage you in a discussion.
It was just a joke and I actually would agree with the majority of your points. I think this is probably an 8-4 team with 9-3 more likely than 7-5.
but there is a big difference between what we as a fanbase should expect in regards to the product on the field versus what the current team and staff have lead us to expect. Are we right in expecting 10 plus wins every year regardless of the team and coach? yes!!! Have we been shown anything in the past 3 years to realistically expect anything above 8 wins? No!
You want, demand, and may feel entitled to, but stated clearly you don't expect. "Should expect" /= "expect."
I'm sure other years you've also done more "should expecting" than actual "expecting" as well.
why some people think the defense is going to be so good next year? I want it to be stellar, but I haven't seen any proof to lead me to that conclusion. The defense was medicore at best last season so they really need to make a leap along with the offense. I mean look at the defensive rankings from last year and tell me that reads as expecting excellent this year:
Scoring - 66th
Rushing yards per game - 29th
Passing yards per game - 66th
Red Zone - 94th
Pass Efficiency - 43rd
TOs Gained - 26th
First Downs per game - 45th
Sacks - 66th
TFL - 91st
Those numbers say we have quite a bit of work to do if the defense is going to need to carry this team.
it's really all about the defensive line. If they improve, the defense should be stellar. From analysis, the linebackers were excellent when not eating blocks. The secondary should be excellent as long as Gordon's replacement isn't a black hole.
We get healthy Jake Ryan, hopefully Pipkins, and add Peppers to an already deep secondary. We have the bodies to be much more aggressive this year than last, which typically pays off in the Big Ten.
about the LBs. They are very good. I'm still skeptical about the d-line with Pip's health being a big question mark. I do like Henry and think he has a lot of promise. Hopefully he tears it up this year.
I think Taylor and Countess are both overrated. I think they can get burnt too easily when playing press coverage so I don't know how aggressive those two really allow the secondary to be.
The reason I think the defense will be much improved is they return 3 top players from injury that either didn't play much last year (Pipkins) or were not 100% while they played last year (Ryan and Countess). The DL is still somewhat of a question mark but I am very confident that the back 7 will be among the best in the country. Also, UM returns something like 20 contributors from last years defense and, although some will say differently, players can actually get better as they get older and gain more experience.
However the defense was put in horrible situations by the offense last year. It's really hard to be statistically good when you're on the field for almost the entire game because the offense does nothing but go 3 and out. I think they are better than those numbers show, but not much better. I agree that they need to make a leap, but if our offense last year was just bad instead of atrocious, then those number improve
Not to mention the flip in field position. The entire MSU, Iowa, and Nebraska games our D was fighting short fields and still did well. Remember the entire game in EL where Sparty started, on average, their own 40 yard line and us our own 10 yard line. Yeah - that tends to wear a defense down and skew stats a little.
There's only so much the defense can do. If they get absolutely no help from the offense, it's bound to take a toll on them physically. Then throw in the resentment the defense feels towards to the offense for putting them in such shitty spots and you get Clark's comments post-bowl game. We have a good defense, not great, but definitely better then the number posted above
Eh, I think the TFL and sack numbers were so low because last years DL (especially DT's) was pretty bad. Maybe I'm just crazy but I think the DL will be much improved. If the NT/DT combo is actually as good as I think they will be, that should really help the DE's and LB's be able to get after the opposing QB more. Add to that my belief that the CB's are going to be very good this year, I think that will help the sack numbers as well.
The TFL and sacks were bad and we should have had more considering the number of opportunities we had. My point was more in regards to the rush/game and pass/game stats than those. Although in reference to your point, when the defense is on the field for 60+% of the game, they're gonna get tired, and the pass rush will suffer as a result. Not an excuse by any stretch as we absolutely should have been better in those aspects, but I was just pointing out that all of that stats initially posted aren't truly reflective of the competency of the defense.
Losses @ ND, MSU, and OSU. Win a mid-level bowl game. Team demonstrably better than in 2013, but fan base still very unhappy and "hot seat" stories about Hoke during offseason increase by several orders of magnitude.
. Team demonstrably better than in 2013, but fan base still very unhappy and "hot seat" stories about Hoke during offseason increase by several orders of magnitude.
Just why I can't stand a good portion of our "fans" at times.
If my depressing DD scenario plays out, the yammering about headsets is going to be painful to endure.
Narduzzi may only be available after this year and could potentially be the best coaching candidate Michigan has access to in years. He's just been that important for MSU. We'll see how it goes this year but if MSU crushes again this year and UM falters, he'd be a near no-brainer to pursue.
Would be very Bo/Woodyish too to pluck him from a close rival.
Narudzzi come's here. He's been filled with too much Michigan hate while coaching MSU. If his only options were the Michigan head coaching job or MSU d-coordinator for another year, he'd stay right where he's at
Money can only go so far. Take Hoke's comments about how he would have walked from San Diego to Ann Arbor to coach UofM. You think that if ohio offered him quadruple the money we did he would pick ohio over us? I certainly don't. He loves Michigan too much, and as much as I criticize him, I'm glad we have a coach that loves the University that much. I feel that Narduzzi is cut from that same mold. He's spent the last 6+ years being indoctrinated with so much hate for U of M that if his only options were the HC position at Michigan at a quadrulple salary or remaining the DC at staee, he'd choose state. Obviously that's just my opinion as I certainly don't know the man, it's just hard for me to see a guy who has grown to despise everything about Michigan football turning around and becoming the head coach of the very program he despises.
that Hoke is let go, Brandon is going to be roundly criticized for hiring a coach many opined from the outset as not qualified. In that scenario, I doubt that Brandon would hire a guy like Narduzzi with zero head coaching experience to replace Hoke.
Narduzzi's first head coaching job will either be at MSU or some lesser program to get his feet wet.
I preface this statement in that I know this a bad example, however Will Muschamp was hired as the HC as the Florida Gators without any head coaching experience. Obviously Muschamp has not done a great job at UF, but it's not like Texas' defense was stellar prior to his move to UF. Narduzzi has done an outstanding job at MSU and the fact he's done it with as little talent as they recruit (given star rankings, which obviously is not a great indicator) only makes it that much more impressive. I would have no qualms in hiring Narduzzi over another Hoke type candidate solely because one has HC experience and the other does not.
Oregon's HC, their former OC, is a better and more successful example of this.
and Brady doesn't get it done, there is an obvious answer although it would be an expensive answer. Just hire the former Big Ten coach now in the SEC who obviously knows how to build a team capable of running the ball. In one year alone he produced two 1,000 yard rushers and another that fell 4 yards short of that magic number. He did it repeatedly, won three titles in a row and was rewarded with three straight trips to the RB. The big difference is he would inherit a team made up of even better talent than he had in this conference. Of course with his buyout at roughly 6 million for the first three seasons, I'm not certain our AD would entertain this notion.
Personally though, I am always loyal to the man currently in the seat and hope Mr. Hoke gets it done this season. If you see the ypc go up by a significant margin you will also see the Ws go up and there should be no further discussion of whether he's the man for the job. Never, since I've been a fan, has the entire fan base been in agreement on whether or not we had the right man leading the team, and that's been a long time. Best case scenario is what I stated just above. He's a hard man to dislike but not a difficult coach to second guess.
I honestly don't believe Hoke would ever becoming the HC at ohio regardless of how much they were offering him. Although I do agree with you that they would never have even pursued him, which is pretty telling of where our program is unfortunately
I think we win 10 games, including beating MSU or ND. I'm excited about this upcoming year.
I think 2015 is the year to be excited about but 2014 has to be a year where the football team shows Beilein like improvement WITHIN the season. If it is not we have a major issue with our position coaches (outside of Manning who did well with the LBs and Hecklinski who has gotten some of our WRs to do very well).
2015 we break in a new starting QB. Usually not the best year to expect big things, but it's happened before (Connor Cook, Winston, Manziel, etc.).
Schedule will never be easier than in 2015. No Wisconsin. MSU/OSU at home. The easiest non conf games we will have in the next decade or two I assume as we should begin scheduling home and homes with top 15 BCS type teams. Aside from Devin and maybe Funchess entire offense returns. The OL will finally be loaded with upperclassmen. We'll have maybe 6 WRs to pick from. We'll have a 3 headed RB.
I am tired of the QB excuse. Shane will be in year 3 in the system. He only has 4 years. If we can only have great success in the 4th year of a QB in the system we have the wrong staff. That means only once every 3-4 years can you expect great things from a team. Shane will get playing time this year and will be in year 3 of college football... plenty of guys of that experience do fine. And he has a very easy schedule early when he starts in 2015 aside from a tricky game @Utah.
If Hoke cannot pull off a 11 win season in 2015 he doesnt belong here IMO. The schedule will never work out better for him combined with his players filling the roster and a lot of upperclassmen starting. 2016 has Wisconsin on schedule + MSU/OSU on road again - so if not 2015 then when?
However, Hoke is Brandon's guy, and Brandon will do everything in his power to make sure that Hoke get's every bite at the apple he can. I don't think it's too far-fetched that if we have disappointing season (8 wins or less) in 2014 and 2015, that Brandon let's Hoke have another shot in 2016 so that he'll have a starting QB with experience at the helm. And even then, if we disappoint again in 2016, Brandon just might give Hoke another shot in 2017 when the schedule become favorable again to see if he can finally get it done.
I certainly don't believe that this should happen should that scenario occur, but I also wouldn't be shocked if it did.
We do not have "much stronger" guys than MSU. Often we are throwing out 19 year olds versus their 22 year olds. Just because they have a winged helmet and have 4 stars next to their name does not make them "much stronger". 2-3 extra years in a weight program gives someone man strength versus "teen strength". That is like saying Mike Martin as a sophomore was much stronger than Mike Martin as a senior.
It is not basketball - it helps to be loaded with seniors and juniors, esp if you can redshirt them, in football. Of course they have to be talented but Wisconsin and MSu are showing the advantage of redshirting almost everyone and having a bunch of 4th/5th year players load your 2 deep. It helps close the gap with the more talented (on paper) teams such as OSU and UM.
That said the gap between the 2 teams in strength/toughness should be smaller than it was last year as we had a lot of 2nd year plauyers running around out there versus their 4th/5th years. This year there will be a lot more 3rd year+ players out there. Then in 2015, there will be no more excuses as the 2010 class disaster is erased.
I am talking about the lines and LBs where strength/age really helps. If someone is "much stronger" as a CB, WR, QB etc I dont care.
But our interior OL was young and hence lacked the man strength and our DL last year in the middle also seemed overwhelmed some games. Black and Clark did fine but that is to my point - those were 2 of our older guys. Henry I really like and he flashed but there were some games he was just blown back on quite a few plays. The Henry of 2015 won't have that issue.
I am sure there are some exceptions out there - i.e. UCLA's OL was very young last year but by and large I'd take a bunch of high 3 stars who are RS JRs and RS SRs on the OL then a bunch of high 4s who are RS FR or RS SOs. OSU enjoyed the benefit of both - highly rated high star dudes and it was one of the best OLs in the country and MSU still smacked them around in the BT championship game at times - so again how anyone can show up and say we are stronger or were last year due to our starz is a bit far fetched to accept. We were onbliterated on the lines in that game and it wasnt just scheme.
If that continues the next 2 years we have another issue altogether.
I'd still like to know what Nussmeier was referring to when he said at the Women's Football Academy that he "...did have some changes he wanted to see out of the weight training and they have incorporated those changes (we didn’t get specifics on that)." (maizemama's diary)
It's possible that the changes Nuss was referring to were real minor, but then why would he mention them at all? I've wondered all along if our issues on offense, particularly the OL, were partially due to S&C stuff, and the fact that Nussmeier saw the need for some changes would support that.
Hard to get excited for this season. 7 wins. Rinse, repeat.
The 7, and near 4 wins (could have easily lost to Akron, NW, UCONN) were mostly due to the worst O line in the history of MIchigan football by two magnitudes. I mean, if the second worst ever was a 4 on the 10 scale, this was a 1.4.
When a unit is that horrible, there is a very large probability of vast improvement simply based on just how historically bad the unit Hoke presented last year was.
If this year's O line is even just one magnitude better than last year's Hoke's a goner. If it comes back to just average as is minimally expected, no chance this is a 7 win season. More likely 9, with 8 really the unlikely floor.
The OL stunk but the defense fell apart often too. I know Indiana scores on everyone but they were scoring at will for much of that game. And in 40 second drives. 47 pts? cmon. Against OSU in the 2nd half we literally had zero answers. It was a very good offense but not one that we should have zero ability to stop. Against Nebraska when we needed a stop they went down the field and scored. PSU had sort of a miracle late versus us, but it happened - that's on the defense.
The defense played well vs Minnesota and a broken down Northwestern and a long stretch vs Nebraska (before late implosion) but it had some bad stretches last year.
I am not laying it all on the defense but while the OL was a disaster the defense let us down way too many times last year as well. If the defense had done that in a year the OL was not so egregiously bad a lot more heat would have been on Greg M.
So I didn't neg you.
But if I did, I would have.
I think it's just incredibly unlikely that Michigan only wins 7 games this year. Yeah, I understand they won 7 last year, but you're talking about losing games on the road to teams like Rutgers. Or losing at home to Penn State. The defense will be too good. 5th year senior QB. WR good enough at least.
I think 10-2 is a very real possibility. I think 8-4 is the floor.
I'm going to make a conscious effort to enjoy victories a lot more than I have in the past, and I am going to try to not let losses bum me out as much.
With that being said, I have nothing new to add -- the keys are marked improvement on the o-line, Gardner's decision-making, and interior d-line play. I see 8-4.
Everyone is getting excited about Michigan football again as the season draws near, and with that excitement, unrealistic expectations.
Most national analysts/observers/hacks have us as a middle-of-the pack Big Ten team. There's absolutely no on-field evidence to suggest we're anything other than that.
Like all Michigan fans, I sure hope all of our "maybes" turn into "yesses," but that almost never happens.
Agreed. If the spring game has been played last Saturday rather than 2 months ago I think more reality would be out there. The farther away you get from an event the more you tend to remember the positives. Aside from Freddy Canteen the second most positive thing about the offense from the spring game was a lack of injuries. It was bad.
No problem. Anytime you are feeling positive about any subject just find me, I'll help. ;)
Without the two best OL playing much, its no wonder the offense looked bad. It was already behind the 8-ball and needed its best out there to have much of a chance. If Mags and Glasgow are healthy and play, I think the O would have looked better...how much better, I'm not sure.
I look forward to fall camp with Mags, Glasgow, Darboh and Peppers...
I see the defense improving quite a bit this season with a lot of upper class-men talent on the field. A good to great D alone should get us 8 wins.