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?

TheLastHarbaugh

January 10th, 2013 at 7:46 AM ^

Good god, could you possibly misconstrue my point any worse?

You realize Welker plays in the slot, right? Gallon plays on the outside. If  we ran a passing spread and Gallon played in the slot, like Welker does, that would be ideal.

My point wasn't Gallon can't play, just that he isn't ideal for this offense in his present role. 

There is a reason Welker plays in the slot. You should ask Tom Brady why that is.

EGD

January 10th, 2013 at 2:33 AM ^

I agree with your premise that it is unwise to "expect" a flawed football team to go 12-0, but I don't think the comparison with 2012 Alabama is persuasive.  This past season, the B1G was the worst I've ever seen it (though in fairness, the ACC and Big XII were also as bad as I've ever seen those leagues, and I'm not sure I bothered to watch a Big East game all season).  Not only do I think Alabama would have gone undefeated against a B1G schedule this season, but I doubt any B1G team would have seriously challenged them.  

I haven't seen any reason to expect that the B1G will return to historical levels of football competence in 2013.  Indeed, with Wisconsin losing its HC, the continued erosion of the talent bases at MSU and Penn St., and with Nebraska failing to keep pace in the recruiting wars, the distinct trend appears to be in the direction of a return to a Big 2 and Little 8 (or 10 or 12) scenario.  

It seems to me that this is what is driving the 12-0 predictions--the strength of Michigan's personnel relative to the schedule.  Put 2013 Michigan in the SEC, or in the 2009 Big Ten, and they probably  are an 8-4, 9-3 type of unit.  But in the 2013 B1G, with all their most difficult games at home, and a12-0 finish is realistic for Michigan.  Still unlikely, IMO, but realistic. 

TheLastHarbaugh

January 10th, 2013 at 10:27 AM ^

The Big Ten was the worst you've ever seen, and yet Michigan still lost 2 games in that worst ever Big Ten conference, nearly dropped a third to MSU, a forth to Northwestern, and avoided 2 of the better teams in Penn State and Wisconsin. 

Just like you're going down the schedule, pointing out all of the flaws of teams like Nebraska,  MSU, PSU, or OSU, and marking them off as Ws, they're going down their schedules, pointing out all of Michigan's flaws, and marking us off as a W.

Those flaws being (and I'm trying to look at things from their perspective, not my own)...

  • A Quarterback with a lot of talent, who can be inconsistent, and looks totally lost at times.
  • A complete and total lack of a running back or a running game, outside of Denard, who is no longer with the team.
  • A complete lack of wide receivers outside of Gallon, who is extremely undersized and playing out of position on the outside, rather than his natural position as a slot guy.
  • A TE, that while amazing, is used sparsely and is generally only in the game when Michigan plans on throwing the ball.
  • An offensive line that has one super-awesome-amazing-guy, one competent to good guy, and a bunch of heralded freshman/sophomores who haven't played.
  • A defense that lost a lot of key contributors in Kovacs, Demens, Roh, Floyd and Will. 
  • A cornerbacking corps that was absolutely torched by South Carolina, whose best player is coming off of an ACL tear.
  • A defensive line that is replacing 2 of 4 starters, with one solid guy in QWash, and no real proven pass rushers.

So while we do have a lot of undenaibly strong areas we also have a lot of question marks, about as many as any of the other top teams in the conference.

EGD

January 10th, 2013 at 10:31 AM ^

The fact is, realistically there are only two or three teams that could conceivably be favored against Michigan next season (barring disastrous injury/attrition issues). There won't be any games where UM is a decided underdog (like Alabama this year).  

When UM went 12-0 in 1997, we had to play at least seven ranked teams (CU, ND, State, Penn St., Ohio, Iowa, Wash St.), including #1 Penn St. on the road and 1- loss Washington State in the Rose Bowl.  Times have changed; to go 12-0 in 2013 requires no such feat of mastery.  

EGD

January 10th, 2013 at 1:45 PM ^

Right, and that's why we see so many more teams going 11-1, 10-2 these days.  When the schedule hands you 9 or 10 wins, you don't have to exceed expectations by that much to reach 12-0--especially if the games in which you are not favored aren't against an Alabama or other dreamkiller.

I guess, after seeing so many 11- and 12-win seasons out of flawed B1G teams in recent years, I just don't see any reason why UM can't do it in 2013.  If and when the league gets back to having four or five real good teams, then I think it will again require a truly complete team to run the table.

STW P. Brabbs

January 10th, 2013 at 9:40 AM ^

Quit dismissing Gallon as that guy who's 5'6". He looks like an All-B1G receiver based on what he did this year. Have you missed all the jump balls he's come down with in the past couple of years? Gallon is a huge matchup problem, because he's too strong for waterbug DBs (and has the aforementioned rocket boots), and is too quick for big, physical corners. Do we need another guy with the ability to stretch the field vertically so the safeties aren't always rolling over to Gallon? Sure. But he looks like a legit number one receiver to me. Oh, and he also blocks like a son of a bitch.

TheLastHarbaugh

January 10th, 2013 at 10:25 AM ^

When have I dismissed him?

I've said he's good, ridiculously talented, but playing out of position and doesn't have the ideal size to play on the outside. How many times must I repeat myself?

As far as being an All Big Ten receiver, that's not saying much these days. BIIIIIGGGG TEEENNNNN BURRRRRN! OH!

Sorry, couldn't resist. 

 

STW P. Brabbs

January 10th, 2013 at 6:50 PM ^

Again, in what sense is he playing out of position?  Would he be more dangerous as a slot?  Maybe, though maybe that would limit his big-play potential somewhat.  Regardless, he was extremely effective as a wideout this year.  So whether he'd be marginally better at slot or not, it doesn't really matter, because he's a great player where he is.  Doesn't matter how tall he is.

CR7

January 9th, 2013 at 10:27 PM ^

in my NCAA '13 dynasty, my O-line of Lewan/Bryant/Miller/Kails/Schofield is dominant. Just sayin'. 'Run left' is the main mantra. A calling card, if you will.

MosherJordan

January 9th, 2013 at 10:29 PM ^

Ask me again after we know if Green is going Blue and we know if Toussaint is going to be back, and if Miller puts on the weight he needs, and if Kalis looks good in Spring ball, and Bryant isn't carrying a lot of bad weight in August...

Lewan back could be huge, but only if Kalis, Bryant and Miller are real upgrades at guard and center, and a RB treat actually emerges. Otherwise, all Lewan returning is going to do is allow Gardner a little more time to run around before he is sacked. No run game = Death, and Lewan and Schofield can't block everybody.

I was 8-4 before, and I'm 8-4 until I see some evidence that we can produce more than 2ypc on the ground without Denard.

MosherJordan

January 10th, 2013 at 12:42 AM ^

Sans Denard, our run game was non-existent. We need much more than "can't be worse". We need leaps and bounds better. That means big time improvements at center and guard. Do Miller, Kalis, Bryant, Braden (freeing Schofield to move back to guard) have the potential to be big improvements? Absolutely. But it's way to soon to tell. What we do know is we have a more favorable schedule but the loss of Denard's production on the ground. We could be good, but if we can't do a lot better than 2ypc, we're done for.

the Glove

January 10th, 2013 at 8:52 AM ^

You're delusional. Is Taylor going to play safety? Is he going to play cornerback if Blake's knee isn't 100 percent? Is he going to be the pass rusher that they were missing all year? The deep threat at wide receiver? or the consistent every down running back that they haven't had for a full season in the last 5 years? There are just way too many questions to think this team can go undefeated.

swan flu

January 9th, 2013 at 11:02 PM ^

Between Chris Bryant, Kyle Kalis, and Ben Braden, 2 need to be the mountainous donkey riders that they are hyped up to be. If this happens, I don't care if Drake Johnson is our running back we will be in position to win every game we play. I know the coaches are high on Bryant and Braden, hope Bryant is healthy enough to play in spring ball

champswest

January 9th, 2013 at 10:59 PM ^

I thought 9-3 and I still think 9-3 (I picked 8-4 last year). At this point in time, who the hell knows. Let's see how the recruiting class ends up and how we look in the spring game. Alabama has been a power house for the last 2 years and they couldn't go 12-0. On the other hand, Ohio and ND had good, but not great teams and they both went 12-0, it takes a little bit of luck (but, you cannot predict luck). Having said that, I am glad as hell that Lewan came back and we will be a better team because of it.

JakefromStateFarm

January 9th, 2013 at 11:03 PM ^

i think the interior lineman will have to play stronger than they did this year. we need a running back that is a game changer (green hopefully?). we need to see if gardner can play to the best of his abilities. we need funchess to step up and have a good season. im expecting kalis to step up and play great. i'm not sure about 12-0 but i sure smell the roses.

GoBluePhil

January 9th, 2013 at 11:10 PM ^

One, it sends a clearer message to Derrick Green that the offensive line will be pretty stout. Second it will help the redshirt freshman learn faster and hopefully they take on Lewan's attitude. Establishing a good running game will help control games and keep other offenses off the field. Great teams run the ball. Exciting teams throw it all over hell and win nothing. This is a huge step for offense.

Levito

January 9th, 2013 at 11:45 PM ^

One massive question mark became substantially smaller in the O-line. The O-line is everything, just ask Alabama.

We should have a better O-line than we did this season if any of our 2012 recruits are in the ballpark of their rankings given their size, and we should have a much more effective backfield as well. 

I never saw anything special in any of our 2012 running backs except Rawls in garbage time, they all seem to lack vision, patience and any kind of elusiveness. 2013 on the other hand brings some interesting possibilites. Norfleet is a bigger, meaner, faster version of V Smith, which puts him at Sproles potential.

I've been excited about Drake Johnson for a long time, and Hoke has been talking about him as well. Concerns about WR? Throw Johnson out there, 6' - 6-1 200 lbs and a record breaking hurdler in high school. Now we have a vertical threat to go with our massive possesion recievers and athletic tight ends.

I personally prefer Deveon Smith over Derrick Green based on the film I've seen, but having both can only improve our backfield by leaps and bounds.

Robinson was great but he wasn't going to beat you with his arm, which only made it tougher on the run game.

As stated by others, our defense should be better than it was in 2012, and our schedule is favorable.

ND and OSU are both in A2 - they are gimmies imo. ND should have been a win this season and they are losing talent/coming to the big house. OSU should have been a win also, they squeeked by a lot of mediocre teams and do not/will not have any kind of defense to worry about.

TL:DR Lewan is critical piece, given the rest of the picture. We aren't good enough to expect to run the table, but it isn't out of the question at all. 

Levito

January 10th, 2013 at 1:51 AM ^

Done deal. Mark it down.

I'm more concerned with Sparty in EL, and I think Michigan will drop the ball on the road against either NW or PSU.

I don't think U of M has the talent to go through the all the twists and turns to run the table, but it is possible to get all the breaks your way. 2011 proved that for us (sorta) and 2012 for ND until Bama just Bama'd them

As for ND and Ohio, we should have beaten both on the road, and comparatively we get stronger AND at home, AND they don't have (imo) the defense Sparty has. +Hoke gets us prepared for the rivalry games big time.

Fret no more about those two in 2013.

EGD

January 10th, 2013 at 2:59 AM ^

I'm not so sure our problems at WR can be solved by simply "throw[ing] Drake Johnson out there."  I mean, he does have a cool name, but that's only half the position.  He also needs to be able to make good post-snap reads, run crisp routes, get separation from DBs, catch the ball in traffic, etc.  Is there any evidence that he can do all that stuff?  Jerald Robinson couldn't do it and he played the position for 3+ seasons.

(Then again, Jerald Robinson isn't a very exciting name).

NoMoPincherBug

January 9th, 2013 at 11:46 PM ^

#77 is the #1 jerseys for OL at Michigan.  Jansen, Long and Taylor have created a lasting legacy for that number.  It should only be given out to special talent after Taylor graduates.

denardogasm

January 9th, 2013 at 11:50 PM ^

Please let's not start this again. The #1 jersey has been way more trouble than its worth and now we just have the problem of no one being good enough. Just give it out like any other number with the expectation that the player is going to work his ass off to live up to the legacy of the number. That's what should happen with all the legacy numbers. The #1 scholarship by Braylon was one of the worst things to happen to jerseys since the conception of the Nike Ducks.

Indiana Blue

January 10th, 2013 at 9:09 AM ^

9 - 3 with a win v. ohio.  So who did we lose to ?   A win v. ohio gets us to 11 -1 in my mind (and we will not lose to nd) ... I could see a stumble on the road somewhere - but Hoke keeps his perfect record in Michigan Stadium.

Go Blue!

 

Don

January 10th, 2013 at 1:20 AM ^

Too many unproven players at key positions to go higher.

Predicting 12-0 is what a reliable precentage of fans of top-20 teams do each year. It's as predictable as the changing of the seasons.

Sione's Flow

January 10th, 2013 at 1:30 AM ^

I think 10 wins is attainable, bowl practices probably helped alot of the younger guys especially those RS O-linemen.  I think given Devin's passing ability, he should be able to keep defenses from putting 8 in the box, which should help our RB's regardless of who they are.  Defensive line should improve marginally, Linebackers will be awesome as they have been for the past two seasons.  Secondary could be a weakpoint, but if Countess returns and Taylor improves upon 2012 it could be solid going into BIG play.  WR is the one spot where I think we really need someone to step up.  Teams are going to realize that Gallon and Dileo are solid and will probably focus on stopping them.  If we can get Chesson or Darboh going in the pass game it may keep UM from relying on a 5'7" and 5'10" WR for most of the season.  And Funchess has got to get more touches.

uminks

January 10th, 2013 at 2:26 AM ^

tough games: ND, @MSU, NE, @NU, OSU.  I'm thinking 3 to 5 wins!

moderate games: @PSU, @IA, MN. We should win these games

Easy wins: CMU, Akron, @CONN, IU,  need I say more!

 

I think Lewan picks us up 2 more of the tough games. As long as we beat sparty and NE we should win the legends! I could see us going 10-2, 11-1 and possibly 12-0. I think going undefeated is more realistic this season due to an easier schedule and home games against ND, NE and OSU.

Previously I was thinking more in the 9-3 to 10-2 season record. Now with Lewan I'll go 11-1 since it is difficult running the table to go undefeated! We are a few years away from being a totally dominate team.

Logan88

January 10th, 2013 at 8:46 AM ^

You have MN (Minnesota) in the moderate category. I'm curious as to why you think they will present any challenge at all. UM stomped them in Minneapolis this season in Devin's first career start and I expect will have little trouble pounding them in Ann Abor in 2013. I actually think the UConn game will be more competitive than the Minnesota game---although UM should beat the Huskies as well. Other than that I agree with your assessent as far as easy games, moderate games and tough games.

swan flu

January 10th, 2013 at 9:58 AM ^

Perhaps because Jerry kill is a decent coach and if a few plays had broke different (fake field goal that had us beat til the throw was atrocious, DG yakity sax TD) the Minnesota game could have been a much bigger struggle than it was. Personally I'd move PSU to the middle category (they're going to suck, but that will be a hyped up game for them) and I'd keep everything else the same. Sparty and ND could present a tough game simply because they are rivalry games that are usually tough games.

mackbru

January 10th, 2013 at 9:36 AM ^

Next fall's MSU team will be down a peg or two from the 2012 version. Ditto ND, which we get under the lights. Nebraska -- a team Michigan thrashed in 2011 and would have beaten in 2012, barring injury-fest -- performs poorly on the road. And NW seems to perform most poorly when much is expected of it. I think it's reasonable expect M to win 3 out of 4. Overall, I see 10-2. Worst case: 9-3. Rose Bowl berth depending on the OSU outcome. Normalcy, restored.