Non-Conference + Indiana, 2010 v. 2009

It is pretty crazy that we have the exact same amount of pass/rush attempts.. Really tough to tell if we will be that much better until we start playing better teams in conference.

Intersting stats, but I don't agree with your implication that because our stats in non-conference games plus Indiana was similar in '09 and '10 that the rest of the season will be.  I don't think our main problem in 2009 was increased competition, but the lack of production from our offense. 

Points per game in non-conference + IU '09: 42.6

Points per game in conference - IU '09: 20.1

Whether that is the result of better defenses from the opposition or some other problem, I don't really think that this offense will face the same issue.  With Denard at the helm, this is arguably the best offense in college football.  You couldn't say the same thing last year.  I don't deny that there are going to be some tight games and I won't argue that we'll get more than 8 wins, but I truly believe that the offense will keep us in any game this year.

We didn't start last year 5-0.

Good point.  Forcier definitely lost a lot of steam after the MSU and Iowa games.

The other caveat is that our schedule was probably tougher this year.  UConn, UMass and Indiana have much better passing offenses than their 2009 counterparts.  Notre Dame is worse (with a new coach and without Tate and Clausen), but they still throw the ball a lot.  There's some hope that we will be able to limit Penn State, Illiinois and Purdue's passing offenses.  SOME hope. 

1.  The competition we've faced this year is better than what we faced last year.  Last year, we faced an average MAC team (WMU), 6-6 ND, a horrible MAC team (EMU), a horrible I-AA team (DSU) and a 4-8 IU team.  All of these games were at home.

This year, we've faced a 3-2 Big East team (UConn), 2-3 ND team (which I think will finish better than 6-6, but we'll see) on the road, a good I-AA team (UMass), a bad MAC team (BGSU), and 3-1 IU (I think they'll finish a couple games better than last year, but again, we'll see) on the road. 

2.  Last year we were seriously derailed by offensive injuries.  I don't know why people keep downplaying this.  We played the whole conference schedule without our best offensive lineman, played about half of it without our best tailback, another half without our #2 tailback, and the last seven games with a gimpy QB who couldn't throw deep or with velocity.  These seriously affected our performance last year. 

3.  With Denard at QB, and with the OL and WRs a year older, we're simply better this year.  Last year's offense was never ranked anywhere near the national leaders. 

In short, relax - our O is legit and will win us some games. 

The difference between the two teams is that this year's team has an identity - a dynamic offensive unit that can hurt your running or throwing the ball.  Last year, it was all Tate magic and broken plays with a bad defense.  At least this year, every team on the schedule knows that they'll have to score 25-30 points to keep up, and that will cause them to press, to go for it on 4th down, and make the mistakes that can let the defense off the hook.

I haven't looked but I think one of the biggest differences between the 2 years is I'm yelling "HOLD ONTO THE DAMN BALL!!!" at the tv a lot less this year.

the rest of the way that will mean a 8-4 record. UM does not even have to play average ball the rest of the way to achieve a satisfactory record.

I think an "efficiency" metric (points or yards per possession) is likely a better measure of comparison. I think our defense looks worse, statistically, because of all the quick scoring by our offense. I'd bet our defense's performance isn't so terrible (relative to last season) when the number of possessions are accounted for.

I think an "efficiency" metric (points or yards per possession) is likely a better measure of comparison. I think our defense looks worse, statistically, because of all the quick scoring by our offense. 

I'm with you on this, but I think we'ld still see some sobering numbers.  The next 7 games are going to be tense, but with our offense we can at least expect some entertainment.  I wouldn't be surprised to see our numbers decline somewhat on offense, and improve somewhat on defense over the next couple of games, just because of the type of teams we're playing.  

I'd be happy with 3 wins over the next 7 games.  4 wins or a Win over OSU would be fantastic.

We had 0 road wins last year

We have 2 road wins this year

Since the 2010 schedule is so similar to the 2009 schedule, I figured I'd compare where we are now to where we were a year ago.

Seriously?  You think the 2010 schedule (so far) is similar to the 2009 schedule to this point?

Although a little sobering at least this year we have a solid back-up (or two) if the starter goes down.  I think that alone gives us an edge compared to this same point last year.

 . . . throw them out the window. We are better this year-- period. The D sucks, but the O more than makes up for it.