How does Lewan coming back change your expectations for next year?

Submitted by WolverineFanatic6 on
Title says it all. I was thinking 10-2 prior to the announcement. Now I'm thinking 12-0 may be a realistic achievement. Sure we will need a few lucky breaks but the schedule sets up nice, the defense will be better and now we won't have to worry about Devins blind side. What are your thoughts fellow mgobloggers?

bdneely4

January 9th, 2013 at 9:48 PM ^

Lewan is worth 12 wins alone
The rest of our studly team is worth 1 win
Coaching staff is worth 1 win

Yep, you guessed it, National Champs!

I am not excited and delirious at all that Lewan is staying.

#maizeandblueglasses

turtleboy

January 9th, 2013 at 9:49 PM ^

Directly affects it, honestly. Our defense looks to be just fine, and might improve next year, but our offense is a question mark with the passing and run game incosistancies from 2012, and losing Denards rushing yards. Taylor should be an anchor next year for the offense and provide major stability for young Kalis who'll probably line up next to him. Devin should have the safest pocket in the B1G next year, and our running backs i'm sure are pretty happy to hear he's coming back too.

Gobgoblue

January 9th, 2013 at 9:52 PM ^

11-1.   We start out with a W, somehow lose to ND because of our young defense and RB (assuming Green here), then run the table with an exciting Gameday presentation WIN over Ohio.

EDIT: Wait, the ND game is UTL.... hmmm. @PSU or @Iowa?

Zone Left

January 9th, 2013 at 9:55 PM ^

Tackle was probably the strongest line position going into the season, now it's up there with the top units in the country. We still have major questions on the interior line that this doesn't address. Miller, Kalis, and one of the others need to be ready and really good to beat Notre Dame. We also need Funchess and one of the receivers to become quality starters to approach an undefeated level of play on offense.

On defense, we need to get pressure with four rushers, Countess needs to come back really strong, and all of the rising sophomore starters need to pan out to approach an elite defense.

To beat OSU and maybe Notre Dame, we'll need to be excellent on offense and defense. I think we're a 9-10 win team, losing one or both of those games and allowing for a loss to Nebraska or some other yet to be seen upset. That said, this is probably Hoke's best team yet, with a serious run in 2014 possible.

Perkis-Size Me

January 9th, 2013 at 9:55 PM ^

I think we've got a solid shot at 10-2 next year and the Capital One Bowl at least. I think we'll lose to Northwestern (Fitzgerald is on the verge of a major breakthrough with his team, and that option will continue to give the defense fits), and 1 other loss will come somewhere against MSU, OSU and ND.



I feel much better now knowing that Gardner's blindside is safe.

Nolongerusingaccount

January 9th, 2013 at 9:58 PM ^

What I think will really make or break the offensive line now is how much of a road grader Kyle Kalis/Chris Bryant/Braden/Magnuson can be in their first year of play.  You can't say anything but good things about our previous linemen as people -- solid citizens, worked hard and gave everything they got.  However, if we can conjure up two interior lineman that have a meaner streak geared towards a power running game, MIchigan can really have something going.  I really believe it can be the difference between 8-5 and 11-2.  That's how subpar the line looked to me at least in terms of power run blocking.  If the cards line up right, I really think next year can be special.  

Mich1993

January 9th, 2013 at 10:03 PM ^

Huge change!  My expectation for next year was hoping to win at least our half of the Big Ten next year with an expectation we should win at least our half in 2014.  Taylor Lewan (and the awesome leadership he demonstrates) bumps me to thinking we are likley to win at least our half of the Big Ten.

I see the biggest risks to next year as O-line, big step up for Devin Gardner, need healthy Blake Countess and need Jarrod Wilson or Marvin Robinson to be solid at safety.  If those four happen we could be excellent in 2013 instead of just pretty good. 

Lewan returning dramatically raises both the floor on possible O-line performance and raises the possibility the O-line could be pretty darn good next year from zero to 50-50 or so.  Still risk with 3 new O-line starters, but it looks a whole lot better.

 

BILG

January 9th, 2013 at 10:08 PM ^

11-1 instead of 9-3.  With the right bounces we could run the table.  Kalis is young but will be a monster.  Kalis + Lewan = Monster Mash

the Glove

January 10th, 2013 at 9:06 AM ^

You do realize they just lost the the vast majority of there total offense, right? So where do you expect the yards and points to come from? From Fitz who's leg just got snapped in half like a twig and wasn't able to produce anything this last season? or the extremely shallow wide receiver corpse? I think you should probably lower your expectations a little. We should get excited in a couple years when the depth is actually there.

goblue16

January 9th, 2013 at 10:09 PM ^

It definitly improves depth on the offensive line. The defense should be solid next season. With all the recruits and the returning players im actually very optimistic for next season. We return everything on special teams plus Gardner returns. Honestly our only issues next season are secondary, running backs, and offensive line

switch26

January 9th, 2013 at 10:13 PM ^

i don't see us winning more than 9.. unless we have big time playmakers show up on offense..  We can't pass it to gallon every play, and our offense is generally way too predictable..

 

Our D, will prob not be able to stop NW again..  We will lose to OSU, and could lose the ND, or a few other games..  ND returns most of their line.. Gardner should be in trouble most of that game.. specially if we have no running game

FreddieMercuryHayes

January 9th, 2013 at 10:22 PM ^

We were in winnable positions in every game except Alabama last year. Geez man, it's not like we got our ass kicked the entire year. Look what the offense did against a legitimate top 10 SEC defense in the bowl. Combined with an easier schedule, we should be much better.

Swazi

January 9th, 2013 at 10:15 PM ^

Better protection for Devin is always nice. Gives Magnuson one more year to bulk up and learn, then come out and kick ass as a RS Soph.

I expect the line to look like this:

Lewan/Kalis/Miller/Bryant/Schofield

I like a lot that both our tackles are 5th year seniors, and the rest of the line is relatively young, but should be able to hold their own.

TheLastHarbaugh

January 9th, 2013 at 10:24 PM ^

12-0, are you insane? 9-3 is realistc.

12-0 exists in some sort of fantastical land devoid of realism, or something.

Here is realistic:

On offense, we have a quarterback, two offensive linemen, one 5'6'' wideout, and an up and coming tight end. We have a bunch of really young guys trying to fill in on the interior of our O-Line with not really much knowledge of whether they will be better or worse than the fairly maligned guys who just left. Our wide receivers outside of Jeremy Gallon are complete unknowns. The running backs that we have are not very good, so much so, that we are praying to be rescued by a guy who hasn't even committed yet, let alone stepped on campus.

Our offense is a few good pieces and a whole lotta these: ?

All of this is of course assuming no one of significance gets injured, and we all know how that worked out this past season.

I could go on about the defense, but the point is, 12-0 teams generally don't have this many question marks coming into the season. I know the Big Ten isn't very good, but it's not like we've been shredding through it the past few years.

canzior

January 9th, 2013 at 11:31 PM ^

I agree ND will not duplicate luck, but teams get lucky bounces every year. As an obvious skeptic did you expect 11-2 last season? 9-3 is decent, however there just aren't enough teams more talented on the schedule to warrant 3 losses. Everyone seems to be mixing the idea of beating obviously bad teams, and winning MAYBE 3 challenging games. That's more than enough reason to see 12-0 as a real possibility. ND loses key defensive players, returns a shaky qb, and possibly loses a coach. Ohio is legitimately a toss up, and Nebraska at home favors Michigan. Sparty will have no offensive weapons or offensive line. I understand managing expectations, but Michigan might not be a dog in any games next season

TheLastHarbaugh

January 9th, 2013 at 11:43 PM ^

The 11-2 team overperformed and this year's team underperformed. I think 9-3 is a pretty good baseline.

People are already marking MSU in EL as a guaranteed W, which is completely and totally ridiculous, even if they have lost a lot of talent.

Nebraska, Ohio State, and Notre Dame can all state that they are better than we are, and it would be hard to argue against them.

Penn State has a good team, and would have been a tough game this year. I don't know what their team will look like next year, but we're going to have to go to Happy Valley which is a tough place to play.

All I'm saying is, if you're going down Michigan schedule and marking all of these games as easy Ws, you're not being very reasonable.

We have 5 very losable games on our schedule.

WolverineFanatic6

January 10th, 2013 at 1:45 AM ^

I don't think anyone thinks 12-0 would be easy by any stretch of the word. I certainly don't. However I think next years team is the most well rounded we have had under hoke. Look at Hokes record at home, look at his record when scoring 20+ points. considering both of those excellent achievements have taken place with teams that have lacked consistency and depth I'd say our chances at minimum double digit wins is probable, almost certain.



A couple breaks here and there and 12-0 is something not too far fetched. I believe the incoming starters at offensive line are going to have their growing pains but I believe the talent they possess is vast. I see a RB emerging early and giving us a huge boost in that area.



I also believe our receivers are much better then people are thinking they will be. People keep talking about gallon being our only threat. We have a freshman all American tight end coming back with a year experience. we have several young wide outs that are tall, fast, and physical. We have a quarterback that with an off season of work should be much more accurate next season.



Our defense has linebackers for days. Our defensive line will be young with exception of qwash who is a straight beast . We have depth and skill in the secondary. We have a kicker and a punter. We are Michigan fergodsakes!!!



We have a really great chance at bcs success again this coming year.

Ron Utah

January 10th, 2013 at 11:46 AM ^

NW will be a tough game next year as well, and it's not like they were an easy out this year.

That said, IF the O-line can get their act together, I think double-digit regular season wins is very attainable.  Gallon, Funchess, and Dileo are reliable targets, and I expect some of our sophomores to step-up.

Hayes and Rawls will probably take big steps forward (they need to) and Darboh and Chesson will be better.  If we get good blocking and decent RB play, and a sophomore WR steps up, the sky is the limit.

That's a lot of "IFs".  9-3 or 10-2 seem most likely; 11-1 possible; 12-0 and 8-4 seem like outliers to me.

snarling wolverine

January 9th, 2013 at 10:53 PM ^

I could go on about the defense, but the point is, 12-0 teams generally don't have this many question marks coming into the season.

Actually, they often do. ND had a new QB this season. Ohio had a new coach and rebuilding defense and was coming off a 6-7 season. Our 1997 team had four new starters on the OL. Pretty much every team in the country has question marks. National championship teams happen to have guys who step up at the right time.

TheLastHarbaugh

January 9th, 2013 at 11:18 PM ^

OK, but the key words are "generally" and "this."

Also, there is a huge difference between 4 new O-Line starters, and 3 new O-Line starters, an entire receiving corps minus a 5'6'' guy, the entire running back corps, nearly the entire secondary, and half the D-Line.

My main point though is that it is insane to expect 12-0. This year's Alabama team did not go 12-0. Last year's Bama team did not go 12-0. The 2009 Florida squad, which if I recall correctly some group attempted to track the best football teams of the past 20 years and rated them number 1 overall, did not go 12-0.

Expecting 12-0 is generally dumb. Hoping for 12-0 is fine, but everyone does that every single season, so it's kind of moot.

TheLastHarbaugh

January 10th, 2013 at 12:58 AM ^

That doesn't change the fact that he's still not ideal for this offense, as talented as he may be. 

Jumping is one thing, but using your body to shield the defender from the ball on slants and out routes is something a 5'8'' player just can't do as effectively as a bigger receiver. Smaller body, shorter arms, smaller target.

Even if he can out jump people, a 5'8'' guy basically has to out jump a 6'2'' guy by 8 or 9 inches just to break even with height and arm length taken into account.

the Glove

January 10th, 2013 at 8:59 AM ^

TheLastHoke I'm completely with you man, I don't know what the hell everybody's thinking. Has everybody forgot that injuries happen during the course of the season. So it Gallon goes down, where is the depth at receiver? There is no way that they are going 12-0. Maybe if they're lucky the following year and they answer a lot of questions next season, but until then I haven't drank the Kool Aid.

BraveWolverine730

January 10th, 2013 at 9:33 AM ^

Jeremy Gallon had 829 yards receiving last year. Your "we only have a 5-8 receiver so we're going to be terrible" argument would be more valid if said receiver hadn't already proved he can be a productive college football player. We're going to have Gallon starting on one side and probably the winner of Chesson/Darboh on the other side. Add in Dileo in the slot and a potential breakout year from Funchess and we have a potentially very productive passing attack.



I actually agree with you about the seeming overly optimistic statements many here are making (winning 10 games is really, really hard even when we were uber talented 8-4 or 9-3 is still more likely), but you're undercutting your argument by dismissing Jeremy Gallon as merely a "5-8 receiver"

TheLastHarbaugh

January 10th, 2013 at 11:15 AM ^

I'm not saying that we're going to be terrible. I just stated that our wide receiving is corps has two knowns (Gallon and Dileo), and a bunch of unknowns. Both of our knowns are undersized, and Gallon is not playing his ideal position. So based on that, it's probably not safe to assume that it will be a group capable of playing 12-0 football.

Is there anything wrong with that?

Gallon is good, but there's no denying that he's not in an ideal spot.

Let me put it to you this way, seeing as there is so much confusion with regard to this matter.....

There is a concept that's been around forever, but I think Bill Simmons coined a phrase for it.

The "Table Test."

In other words, what do you bring to the table (good attributes), and what do you take off the table (bad attributes)?

A perfect example of this for football would be Adrian Peterson in 2008. He ran for 1700 yards and 10 TDs, but he fumbled a ridiculous 9 times. So while you acknowledge the good (1700 yards, 10 TDs), you can't ignore the bad (9 fumbles).

I'm not denying that Gallon brings a lot to the table, but a lot of you are simply glossing over the things that Gallon takes off the table, and not only that, but you're basically admonishing me for even bringing those things up.

I'm not being debbie downer. I'm being, "Hey, we're probably not going to go 12-0" guy.

TheLastHarbaugh

January 10th, 2013 at 12:37 AM ^

My point was that the receivers that are known quantities (Gallon and Dileo) are extremely undersized, and the rest are question marks.

If we are going to be a pro-style passing offense, having tiny receivers isn't ideal, and the receivers we have that fit the mold, are complete unknowns. That's not to say that they can't be good, but probably not 12-0 good.