Mgopoll
Coach Beilein has a couple of years on Coach Hoke in regard to building a program with his players. Having said that which team do you think is more likely to win the next National Championship?
My answer: Basketball. The chaotic structure of the one and done NCAA tournament often prevents elite teams from winning it all. HOWEVA, it gives as much as it takes away - providing opportunity for hot teams to string together 3 good weekends of basketball and a national championship. Football requires a full season of perfection, and a little good fortune. I think Coach Hoke will have his team in position in short order, but I'm going with Beilein to get there first.
An interesting debate no doubt...What say you?
edit: Option 3: Hockey. Does Red beat them to the punch?
February 22nd, 2012 at 10:02 AM ^
I say Hockey...what that wasn't a choice? ;-)
February 22nd, 2012 at 10:20 AM ^
We had a tiny senior class this year and got a whole bunch of production out of our freshman. Next year, those freshman are sophomores, the upperclassmen have another offseason to improve as well, and we have an absolutely AWESOME recruiting class coming in.
Not only could next year be something special, but we're looking good for several years to come.
February 22nd, 2012 at 10:25 AM ^
Losing Hunwick will hurt though. While it may be insulting to call him a stop gap, he's sort of been just that with Hogan getting hurt and the guys we had coming in jumping to the OHL (insert fist shaking emoticon). We're going to miss his experience at that position.
However, I think we have a decent chance this season. We're just playing so well, since the return of Jonny M. Now, I think a lot of next year will depend on whether we can keep him. The Devils might feel it's the right time. You could say similar things about Moffie. If you keep those two, you're going to have a solid base, especially with Trouba coming in.
February 22nd, 2012 at 10:56 AM ^
Jon will almost certainly come back. If he was going to make the jump there is no way he would have endured a half-season suspension when he could have just gone to the OHL and kept playing. The Devil's are also aware of why he was suspended and will probably be cool with him taking at least another year to develop and mature, not to mention the fact they have a good track record of letting us keep our players for 4 years.
Hunwick will definitely be missed, but I don't expect Rutledge will be a liability by any means. He may not immediately put up the numbers Hunwick did, but I expect him to be solid, and I expect the defense to improve next year with the guys coming in. Next year will probably be a bit of a slow start while the freshman get used to the college game, but we tend to finish strong as it is, and with the talent we will have, we can do some serious damage next year.
February 22nd, 2012 at 10:50 AM ^
Funny, I read your post and thought you were talking about football until I realized what you were responding to.
February 22nd, 2012 at 10:07 AM ^
I think football actually.
Until our basketball team can beat top teams when we don't shoot well form 3, I don't think we can make a Final Four run. It is too difficult to jump shoot your way to a deep run, because it's hard to shoot the 3 consistently. LAtely Jordan Morgan has been a great inside presence but I'm not sure we can rely on him to win us games against Duke/Kentucky/UNC/etc.
Football, on the other hand, is set up nicely on odd-number years, when we play Notre Dame, Nebraska, and Ohio State at home. While 2013 might not go well (as far as winning a national championship) because we'll have a first-year starter at QB, this year's Alabama team showed that a good defense can take you to the top.
February 22nd, 2012 at 10:55 AM ^
You mean like when we beat Ohio on Saturday while shooting 23% from three? It's a huge misconception that this team lives and dies by the three. Yes, we shoot a lot of threes, but some of our biggest wins have been because of our defense, not our shooting.
February 22nd, 2012 at 11:14 AM ^
I was waiting for someone to bring up the OSU game.
We beat OSU not so much because our D was so good, but more because OSU played dumb offense. Had they worked more of an inside-out game, they would have beaten us.
Look at the scores from when we played ranked teams out of the conference. 73-61 against Memphis. 82-75 against Duke. When we play elite teams, they are going to score more than 60 on us. When they do, we'll need to score more than them to win (I know, John Madden comment). In order to do that, we'll need to shoot well from 3. We almost never score more than 60 points without shooting at least 30% from 3.
February 22nd, 2012 at 11:35 AM ^
First, I'd say the Memphis win was absolutely because of our defense. We held them .88 points per possession that game, it was just played at a much faster pace than most Big Ten games.
Also, 30% is a pretty low standard, I wouldn't consider that shooting "well" from 3. Most people consider 33% to be average. Even then, wins this year while shooting under 33% from 3 include Memphis, Wisconsin, MSU, and OSU (essentially our 4 biggest wins).
February 22nd, 2012 at 11:53 AM ^
You bring up good points, but what I'm saying is that against high-powered offenses, we'll need to score more. Michigan scores more by shooting from 3. Wisconsin rankes 256th in points per game, so I'm not surprised we kept them to 41 points.
Memphis is 44th, Ohio State is 36th and MSU is 67th in points per game. The Memphis win was great, and we shot 30% from 3 in that game.
However, we split against OSU and MSU this season, and that's exactly what I'm talking about. You only get one opportunity in the tourney and I don't think we can rely on our D to keep teams like Duke, Kansas, Kentucky, Carolina, etc. to around 60 points a game. And even when we do, we usually only win by shooting about 30% from 3.
Look, I hope you're right, but to get past Northwestern last night, we shot 36.8% from 3. To score 70 against Illinois, we shot 43.8%. To score 62 against Nebraska, we shot 45.8% from 3. To score 68 against Indiana, we shot 40.9%. For 66 against Purdue, we shot 42.9%. For 71 against IU, we shot 41.7%.
In the last 10 games, the only times we scored 60 without shooting at least 30% form 3 was against MSU and Arkansas.
All I'm saying is, if we can rely on our D to hold our opponents to 60, we can be OK. But if we need to score more than 60 to win, we'll need the 3. I don't know if we can shoot that consistently enough to consistently score over 60.
February 22nd, 2012 at 1:23 PM ^
The bigger point is that 30% from 3-pt range isn't that good at all. W beat Memphis because our defense was great and their coach was an idiot. We shot 70% from 2-pt range in that game. That would be a more unsustainable point to argue than merely shooting 30% from 3. Anyway you can't say "we can't beat good teams without shooting awesome from 3." and then when provided with an extremely recent counterexample say that the example doesn't count.
February 22nd, 2012 at 2:13 PM ^
If what I said made it seem like his argument didn't count, that was not my intention.
What I'm trying to get at is this: When we win by shooting less than 30%, it's because we play really good defense and keep the other team to below 60 points. I don't think our defense will consistently be able to do that. To win a championship, you have to be able to play defense, but you also have to be able to win the high-scoring games when the other team has your defense figured out.
And while 30% isn't that good, it's a percentage that we've fallen below plenty of times. Usually when we do, we don't score 60 points. Sometimes we win, some times we lose. But I can tell you this, if we make an elite Eight run, we won't be able to keep those teams to below 60 points.
Let's say that the Elite Eight, Final Four, and championship games all require us to score over 60. That means that we need to shoot a high percentage of 3s for three games in a row. We might be able to do that, but it's iffy.
I also provided several examples where we had to shoot 40% or better to get into the 70-point range. No team can sustain that kind of shooting.
February 22nd, 2012 at 12:06 PM ^
I think it very hard to compare those out of conference games against Doke and Memphis to now. Our Defense is lightyears ahead of where it was at that time. The team has matured and taken to player defense better than many thought they would at the start o fthe season in Hawaii.
February 22nd, 2012 at 1:18 PM ^
I was using those teams more because they are the kinds of teams we'll see in the later rounds of the tourney. Teams that we are unfamiliar with (not B1G teams) and, at least with Duke, good offenses.
February 22nd, 2012 at 11:19 AM ^
has been pretty clutch lately too
February 22nd, 2012 at 10:08 AM ^
I'd choose Hoke, without hesitation, and not because I'm a football homer either.
I'd take a Big 10 football schedule over a Big 10 basketball schedule any day. That and the sheer fact that to get through the NCAA tourney you need an extremely heavy dose of luck to go with your skill.
I think the basketball team is talentwise the better and more mature of the two (if I'm going to compare apples to oranges), but the level of competition and the luck of the matchup that's prevelant in bball is just too much for me to justify saying Beilein's closer to a national championship.
February 22nd, 2012 at 10:15 AM ^
I'd take a Big 10 football schedule over a Big 10 basketball schedule any day.
Who presents a really really tough challenge on an annual basis in Big Ten football?
OSU
MSU
Wisky
Occasionally maybe PSU and Neb. The other teams can win, but aren't regularly DOMINANT.
Now in basketball?
OSU
MSU
Wisky
Indiana
Illinois
Purdue
Minnesota
The schedule required to get a good seeding that helps win the tourney is tougher in bball.
February 22nd, 2012 at 10:54 AM ^
You categorize MSU as "dominant" in football? The past couple years have been good for them, but they certainly aren't dominant.
February 22nd, 2012 at 11:30 AM ^
Wait, MSU is "regularly dominant" and PSU/Neb are just occasional flashes in the pan? Wha?
February 22nd, 2012 at 11:38 AM ^
But for the past few years and going forward, looks like it. PSU is now a one legged man in an ass kicking contest, and it's going to take Nebraska a few years to get used to Big play. MSU may not be dominant exactly, but they've had a very nice string of seasons and that's probably not going to end in the next year or two.
February 22nd, 2012 at 12:10 PM ^
Just to clarify, that is the Nebraska team that destroyed MSU this year, you are talking about right?
February 22nd, 2012 at 12:20 PM ^
Sounds like it. It's also the same Nebraska team that more resembled a down trodden Minnesota than a top tier B1G team against us.
I'm not trying to come to Sparty's aid, but flukes happen. Honestly tell me if they had played MSU again, do you think they would have won like that?
February 22nd, 2012 at 11:16 AM ^
This.
I'd feel more confident that my elite football team could win a national championship than an equally elite basketball team. Even if we get a playoff in football soon, I think I'd feel the same way as long as the playoff is limited to a small number of teams. Way too much luck involved with March Madness, as fun as it is to watch.
February 22nd, 2012 at 10:09 AM ^
Hoke in 3-5 yrs.
Like you said. The NCAA tourney is too crazy for me to put my money on Beilein, although I think he's gonna have a very good shot at it starting....now.
February 22nd, 2012 at 10:10 AM ^
But I base this on nothing.
February 22nd, 2012 at 10:14 AM ^
Football.
If you look at what Hoke is building and the type of players he's brining in (lots of size, emphasis on O-line and linebacker depth, shift in coaching philosophy to defense first, etc.), he's really following the model of teams like Bama and LSU, which has proven to be a successful model.
It seems like actually scoring points is viewed as a secondary aspect of the game to teams like Bama and LS. When you have size and toughness like those teams do, you don't need to rely on skill position players to win you games.
I love what coach beilein has done for the program, but his system is heavily reliant on the 3-pointer, and that can be hit or miss, which can cost you in games you're supposed to win, as well as in game you need to win.
February 22nd, 2012 at 10:14 AM ^
Hoke. The conference is stronger in bball than it is football. Much easier to get by the likes of Norhtwestern Minn. and Purdue etc. in football than in baketball.
February 22nd, 2012 at 10:15 AM ^
I hate to put it this way, but success in football is going to depend on which Urban Meyer landed in Columbus.
The worst-case scneario is that he is as good as he was when he won multiple national championships at Florida, and turns the talent to which he has access into a juggernaut. If this happens, the best we can hope for as Michigan fans is splitting with Ohio from year to year.
The best-case scenario is that Meyer rode Tim Tebow's coattails, and that he no longer has the patience nor the drive to put in the hours and work that it takes to win championships. In this scenario, he is the coach who made a mess out of his personal life, let it affect his performance, and quit on his team twice in less than a year.
My fondest hope, and a joker factor, is that the "newer, tougher NCAA" does a real investigation in Columbus and Ohio finally gets what they deserve for their blatant and utter disregard for NCAA rules.
Brady Hoke is a fine coach, but the "Urban Legend" version of Meyer does have two national championships under his belt. He could be our worst nightmare, especially if he puts to rest the idiotic notion that "the spread won't work in the Big Ten."
Either way, the game is on and the rivlary is officially back.
February 22nd, 2012 at 10:17 AM ^
I guarantee you Rural Cryer will not win a NC at Ohio. Get that negative attitude out of here mister!
February 22nd, 2012 at 10:14 AM ^
The job that Beilein is doing with essentially one post player and a limited bench is amazing. I can't imagine betting against Beilein when a deeper, more athletic roster arrives.
Of course, that same point can be made for Hoke and Co.
We are blessed fellas. Let the good times roll.
February 22nd, 2012 at 10:16 AM ^
The way recruiting has gone this year and last year, I can see football winning a national title sooner. This team is being built like Alabama and is going to be loaded with NFL prospects. Call me crazy, I think with a senior Devin Gardner we are playing for a national title, I think teams win it when you least expect it. If they don't that year, by Shanes Sophmore they will be serious contenders and his Junior year they should be an unstoppable force.
February 22nd, 2012 at 2:58 PM ^
But our football recruiting is NOT better than our basketball recruiting, at least in 2012. We got two 5*s in football, out of 20+ players. In basketball (once rivals re-ranks) we'll have 2 5*s out of 3, with the 3rd player being top-100.
We had a really good football class, but our basketball class is even better.
And everyone keeps on saying that the tourney is too hard to win. I think it's harder to go perfect in football than it is to go perfect in the tourney. And yes, I believe that you have to have an undefeated season (unless SEC) to go to the MNC game.
February 22nd, 2012 at 10:27 AM ^
I would think that football would be the obvious answer after an 11-2, BCS game winning season, but a football season is too difficult to navigate without an off-day. Everyone that is a Michigan critic likes to point out that even Bo never had a national championship (although it did not seem to stop him from becoming a legend, but that is a different post).
That being said, I think basketball, and for one reason - the one and done rule. I have a feeling that the class we are getting next year will stay for at least two years. I just think McGary will stay beyond one year to develop his game against talent that won't discourage him on a nightly basis (on a rhetorical note, how many early draft candidates took years - if ever - to develop in the NBA because of the talent discrepancy?). As a result, in two years, it is possible to have a lineup of Morgan, THJ (although it might be asking a lot to get 4 years out of him), McGary, Robinson, Stauskas, Smotrycz, Brundidge and/or Burke. That is a solid line-up top-to-bottom that is not entirely 3-point reliant. That is just the type of experience line-up to beat the one-and-done laden teams that seem to make deep tournament runs only to lose when matched up against comparable teams with more experience.
February 22nd, 2012 at 10:28 AM ^
After the Northwestern game yesterday, they showed a stat saying this was Michigan's longest Big Ten winning streak since 2006. We are on a 4 game Big Ten winning streak. Winning six straight required for a national championship? A lot needs to go your way. Beilein has us in a great position to be in a favorable spot in the tournament, but winning it will always be a huge challenge. I think football comes first, but both are in a great position going forward.
February 22nd, 2012 at 3:00 PM ^
I think we're likely to win 4 more big ten games in a row, (3 if you don't include the tourney).
February 22nd, 2012 at 10:29 AM ^
Football, because Hoke poops magic. If Beilein pooped Magic it would be basketball but this is not the case. Football will be in 2016 or 2017.
February 22nd, 2012 at 10:32 AM ^
I'll go with Beilen, mainly because I think we could next year. We lose Novak and Douglass, which is huge mainly with the intangibles, but we have two potential 5 star talents coming in. The roster we have next year will Beilen's most talented at Michigan, and I defintely think it should be talented enough to make a run to the NC.
February 22nd, 2012 at 10:34 AM ^
After the 2012 and 2013 recruiting classes are up to college speed, and Morris is in his second year playing, and we have a favorable home schedule--that's our best shot. We'll have a dominant defense by then, the key to winning it all (as we saw in 1997), plus a dominant OL.
February 22nd, 2012 at 10:37 AM ^
Hoke and Meyer are quickly separating themselves from the rest of the Big Ten pack. I think the odds are better when Michigan is one of the two dominant programs in your conference. Belein certainly looks like he is making Michigan a major player in the Big Ten, but there are too many good basketball programs for a NC to seem more likely
February 22nd, 2012 at 10:58 AM ^
Div 1 football - 120 teams
Div 1 basketball > 300 teams
This isn't a totally scientific way of looking at it, but naturally more teams to compete with means that it is inherently harder to win the NC in basketball. Factor that in with a requirement of winning 5 games in a row at the end of the year, and I think Hoke has a much better chance at winning an NC than Beilein
February 22nd, 2012 at 11:01 AM ^
Very good point.
February 22nd, 2012 at 11:29 AM ^
February 22nd, 2012 at 11:25 AM ^
February 22nd, 2012 at 12:14 PM ^
Hockey then basketball then football.
But maybe it'll be all 3!
February 22nd, 2012 at 12:26 PM ^
There is so much more margin for error in basketball. I think the fact that the Big 10 is such a tough basketball conference is a little off base. That only matters to the extent that you need to get into the tournament, but its not like you have to win your conference, or even come particularly close to get in, and once you are in, all bets are off. Look at UCONN last year, they were .500 in conference play. Whereas in football a Big 10 team is almost always going to need to be undefeated to get a spot in the title game.
February 22nd, 2012 at 12:53 PM ^
In basketball. You don't win a National Championship by going undefeated in the conference.
I'd say football, because we seem to be recruiting at a base where we'll be up there year in and year out. The conference doesn't seem to be getting tougher, so I can see a lot of years where the game between Michigan and OSU (and then the wrench in the plan...the B10 title game) Could leave at least a 1 loss team looking for a spot in the game.
Basketball recruiting is getting to that level if can continue to come close to what we're doing next year, but with the early exits it's harder to have a talent base EVERY year that gives you a shot (If Burke leaves this year, what shot do we have next? If McGary goes after next year, do we really have a 2014 shot?). Very few programs can reload with NBA type players coming in to replace those guys who leave early. Your Kentucky, Duke types. So you're cutting out a lot of years of opportunity for a program like Michigan....maybe half as many shots, optimistically.
Now if you were going to ask me what's going to happen first, going to the National Championship game or going to the Final Four, I might bet on basketball. Because the Tourney style does let a lot of underdogs get there...but really, it's been awhile since a true Cinderella won it.
February 22nd, 2012 at 1:41 PM ^
I don't think we're national title contenders in basketball this year. The BCS national title is played in January next year & the Final Four is in April, therefore I'll say football.
February 22nd, 2012 at 4:57 PM ^
but I would bet that of all the Varsity Sports: Softball wins the next NC.