Only an 11% chance UM will finish with a better record next season
That is according to Phil Steele's 2010 preview magazine.
In the last 8 seasons, teams who finished the season with 4 net close wins (UM currently has 4 wins by a TD or less and 0 losses by a TD or less) had a worse record the following season 78% of the time (28 out of 36 teams), 11% finished with the same record (4 of 36) and only 11% (4 of 36) finished with a better record the next season.
Pretty sobering stastic, isn't it?
(Cue the "So you're saying there's a chance ?!?!?" clips)
November 22nd, 2010 at 10:46 AM ^
this place is a joke at times.
November 22nd, 2010 at 5:19 PM ^
Here's how I see the coaching debate:
We basically have two options:
#1) Rich Rod is brought back...IF...he agrees to letting Brandon and Moeller appoint him a new defensive coordinator, and that defensive coordinator is allowed to hire two of his own defensive assistants (because RR has proven, twice, that he is incapable of putting together a competent defensive staff). The RR assistants lost will be Robinson, Braithwaite, and probably Tall (Gibson becomes full time special teams coach - something else we desperately need - and recruiting coordinator). The defensive staff could potentially look something like this...Mike Trgovac (for example) DC/DL coach, "Trgovac's hire" LB coach, "Trgovac's hire" DB coach.
or
#2) Jim Harbaugh is brought in as the new head coach.
Arguments:
#1) For keeping RR. His offense is great, his defense sucks. If Harbaugh comes in, he's going to have to revamp both the offense and the defense. If RR is kept, and a new defensive staff is brought in, only the defense needs to be revamped. Plus, RR is under contract for another year, and his buyout is pricey. And, of course, Harbaugh angered Lloyd and friends with his academics comments four years ago.
#2) For hiring Harbaugh (my choice). #1) RR's offense isn't that great. It's actually flat out SUCKED against good teams. We were down 24-0 to Wisc, 31-10 to PSU, 35-7 to Iowa, and 31-10 to MSU. Most of the points he's scored against good teams have been scored in garbage time (against prevent defenses). #2) Do we really want a coach who can't be trusted to hire his own defensive assistants? #3) Recruiting. The real reason people were excited about hiring RR was this - his offense at WVU was so great, with 2 and 3 stars, if he comes to Michigan, and starts racking up 4 and 5 star recruits, it's going to be unstoppable. Well, that has not happened. Rich Rod continues to recruit like he's at WVU. And it's sort of a catch-22 situation that might never end. He can't land talented recruits (especially defensively) until his team starts to go to BCS games, and he can't go to BCS games until he starts to land big time recruits. Jim Harbaugh, on the other hand, is one of the best recruiters in the entire nation and would really be able to jump start things here. #4) MICHIGAN MAN. RichRod simply doesn't portray Michigan values. If Bo was still alive, he'd be slapping the sh!t out of him after all of these excuse-filled press conferences. "We're too young, we've had too many injuries, Vince Lombardi couldn't win with this kind of talent, etc...etc...etc...". Rich Rod has yet to man up and accept any responsibility whatsoever. He just blames it all on his players!? How about..."I need to do a better job recruiting, I need to do a better job preparing young players and backups, I need to do a better job putting together effective schemes, It ultimately all comes back to me." That's exactly what Bo/Moeller/Lloyd would have said. Never in a million years would they have blamed the players publicly. Never in a million years should a coach blame his players like RR has done time and time again. #5) Jim Harbaugh's just a better coach, in every aspect. We can't think short-term here. We need to be thinking about 5-10 years down the line. Sure, RR might be a better coach for this team NEXT season. But we need to be thinking long term here. #6) Everything Harbaugh said about our academics was TRUE, and Lloyd hates everybody anyways - that's why he was asked to leave the athletic department (and I have a very reputable source that verifies that).
#7) And I'm making this seperate because it's so important - It's NOW OR NEVER FOR HARBAUGH. He's going to be getting some major offers this off-season (NFL, Georgia, etc.). He almost took the KANSAS job last season, for crying out loud. He IS going to be leaving Stanford after this season. And once he signs a major deal with a major program, he's no longer going to be interested in us. So...if RR ends up not working out (which is very likely) and Harbaugh is no longer interested...who in the he!! are we going to hire!? Miles/Ferentz/Schiano already turned us down. English!? DeBord!? Hoke!? Trgovac!? These are, honestly, going to be our best options if Harbaugh's not interested. In which case, we'll be COMPLETELY SCREWED.
November 22nd, 2010 at 10:46 AM ^
Because that's totally how statistics work.
November 22nd, 2010 at 1:06 PM ^
After a long night of drinking, I usually did some multi variate regression and analysis of variance*. It works better than pizza
*could explain why I didn't do well on the homeworks
November 22nd, 2010 at 3:00 PM ^
You can make stats say ANYTHING!!!!
November 22nd, 2010 at 10:46 AM ^
Not sobering at all. He's lumped together dozens of teams under completely different circumstances.
Slight correlation does not lead to causation.
November 22nd, 2010 at 10:50 AM ^
on what the record is of a team that has had their record increase progressively with a favorable ratio of Fr-Jr vs. Sr roster
November 22nd, 2010 at 11:41 AM ^
"Slight correlation does not lead to causation." That's exactly the same quote my Psychology professor uses. Do you happen to be my psychology professor?
November 22nd, 2010 at 12:02 PM ^
that any person with any background in statistics uses. I wonder if he is everyone I've ever talked to about statistics.
November 22nd, 2010 at 11:45 AM ^
Whew. Thank God for intro stats.
Good ol' Stats 350, the most useful class that I hated every moment of.
November 22nd, 2010 at 10:47 AM ^
Phil Steele also had Notre Dame in his preseason top 10.
November 22nd, 2010 at 10:54 AM ^
Lou Holtz has also picked ND to win the championship the past 3 years
November 22nd, 2010 at 11:06 AM ^
A couple years ago, I specifically remember Lou picking Florida to UPSET Notre Dame in the national championship game, an even better, more thought out pick considering Florida was a pre-season top 5.
November 22nd, 2010 at 10:47 AM ^
How many of those teams had 20 or so returning starters? And had half their defensive contributors 1st or 2nd year players?
November 22nd, 2010 at 10:55 AM ^
Never, under any circumstances, do that again. I feel like I'm reading Rivals or Red Cedar.
November 22nd, 2010 at 11:12 AM ^
you're getting laid like your signature suggests? Take it easy; I have seen people do that on here many times.
November 22nd, 2010 at 2:30 PM ^
Or how many of these teams are returning Dilithium?
November 22nd, 2010 at 10:47 AM ^
Cue the "face palm" embeds because this is a joke.
November 22nd, 2010 at 10:49 AM ^
| September 3 | Western Michigan | Win | 1-0 | |
| September 10 | Notre Dame | Toss-Up | 1-1/2-0 | |
| September 17 | Eastern Michigan | Win | 2-1/3-0 | |
| September 24 | San Diego State | Win | 3-1/4-0 | |
| October 1 | Minnesota | Win | 4-1/5-0 | |
| October 8 | @ Northwestern | Win | 5-1/6-0 | |
| October 15 | @ Michigan State | Toss-Up | 5-2/7-0 | |
| October 29 | Purdue | Win | 6-2/8-0 | |
| November 5 | @ Iowa | Toss-Up | 6-3/9-0 | |
| November 12 | @ Illinois | Win | 7-3/10-0 | |
| November 19 | Nebraska | Loss | 7-4/10-1 | |
| November 26 | Ohio State | Loss |
7-5/10-2 |
November 22nd, 2010 at 10:59 AM ^
N'Western and Illinois are toss-ups not auto-wins, but I respect you for at least acknowledging that UM won't beat Nebraska or OSU next season. That makes you more realistic than 90% of the people on this board.
Auto wins (no such thing, I know): WMU, EMU, SDSU, Minny and Purdue
Toss-ups: ND, NW, MSU, Iowa, Illinois
Auto losses (again, no such thing): Nebraska, OSU
Looks like 7-5 or 8-4 in the regular season in 2011 by my reckoning.
November 22nd, 2010 at 11:07 AM ^
i think Northwestern and Illinois will have new qbs. Not a guarantee Win but if I have to chalk up why i would even begin to think 7-5 next year can be improved, it will have to take place in those.
November 22nd, 2010 at 11:14 AM ^
November 22nd, 2010 at 11:22 AM ^
But I'll bet Leshoure takes off for the NFL after this season.
November 22nd, 2010 at 11:40 AM ^
Assuming there will be an NFL next season.
November 22nd, 2010 at 11:30 AM ^
Scheelhaase isn't their starter next year. that's all.
November 22nd, 2010 at 2:39 PM ^
Didn't Persa rupture his achilles? I thought that full recovery from a ruptured achilles takes a long time. I don't know if he will be back and at full speed, and his mobility is one of his strengths.
November 22nd, 2010 at 11:14 AM ^
Illinois won't have a new QB unless you think Scheelhaase is getting benched after this season. Dude's only a redshirt freshman. And probably a lot better than Juice Williams, too.
November 22nd, 2010 at 11:18 AM ^
November 22nd, 2010 at 11:20 AM ^
I'd rather see posts of kittens then a double-auto-starting embedded video. Boooo!!!
[edit] but its prompt removal is a-ok
November 22nd, 2010 at 11:51 AM ^
I know whining about negs on your own posts is verboten, but maybe complaining about negs someone else receives is more acceptable.
As of 11:50 am EDT, two people have negged msoccer10 for stating the indisputable FACTS that Persa and Scheelhaase will be returning next year. If there was ever proof that there are some on this board who are so unable to have an adult discussion that they will attack people for mentioning facts that they do not like, this is it.
November 22nd, 2010 at 11:19 AM ^
Scheelhaase is a RS frosh? Is he going pro, or Taylor Martinez, or something?
I think Illinois will be tough to beat next year, but Zook makes them difficult to predict.
EDIT: Late to the hate party.
November 22nd, 2010 at 11:32 AM ^
i don't think it's a lock he's the heir apparent. zook's on the pressure cooker and i think (and i could be wrong) Scheelhaase has shown a ceiling already. just my .02
November 22nd, 2010 at 12:13 PM ^
Scheelhaase has made huge strides over the course of the season. I'll be stunned if he isn't starting next year.
November 22nd, 2010 at 11:17 AM ^
I'd be willing to bet that this year teams goes 7-5 on that schedule. So with T-Wolf being on the field again and everyone getting older, I'm hoping for 9 or 10 wins but all that can change with injuries (Please God no)
November 22nd, 2010 at 11:43 AM ^
why do people think we cant beat nebraska or osu? nebraska lost to texas and A&M and if we would have played anything that resembles football in the first half vs wisconsin it would have been a toss up, the same wisconsin team who beat osu. there are always upsets, we will be better next year on both sides of he ball, and fresmen RBs can drastically help a team (dion lewis, michael dyer) so lets hope d. hart can do the same. no doubt in my mind we will be in every single game we play next year and the majority of the games the other team won't be close
November 22nd, 2010 at 11:54 AM ^
?????? Anyone whose takeaway from that Wisconsin game is that it should have been a toss-up has no credibility.
November 22nd, 2010 at 12:12 PM ^
He's got a point in a way. He's not saying Wisco should have been a tossup, he's saying it could have been a tossup. Which...I guess, but eh not really.
Regardless, I too am surprised at the lack of faith in this team to beat OSu or Nebraska next year. Will UM be favored? Probably not. But with so many returning starters on an offense that, though inconsistent, gashes up opposing teams, and a defense with one more experience (and a better DC/staff...please!), plus they're both at home...I'm inclined to believe those are toss up (maybe "leaning towards loss") games as well. And we're not accounting for intangibles and other unforseen circumstances that we won't know until we get there.
November 22nd, 2010 at 12:26 PM ^
we scored no points in the first half and 28 points in the second half, if we would have scored points in the first half we might have stopped them from putting up the last touchdown of the first half and the game would have been close. i don't think the numbers lie.
November 22nd, 2010 at 12:41 PM ^
Do you recognize the fact that we were UTTERLY INCAPABLE OF STOPPING THEM, even when they stopped passing the ball in the second half? Unless you think we should have scored on every possession, that game was never going to be anything resembling a toss-up.
November 22nd, 2010 at 12:15 PM ^
First you show one of the dumbest statistics that could apply to this team. That is like saying "A team from the WAC has 10% chance of beating a team from the Big Ten" When trying to prove Boise State's chances of beating Penn State, which would probably be around 90%. This team is not the average 7-5 team. I would predict that a lot of those teams were from lower-level conferences and got crushed in out of confrence play or we're lower-level BCS conference teams having their peak year(due to experience). Also I doubt that they had the talent returning that our Wolverines do. Now regarding your belief that Michigan has no chance to defeat Nebraska or Ohio St. next year, that is absurd. With the added experience and talent to this team next season it is ridiculous to think that our team has no chance. Also making prediction about having no chnace in next years games when the season is not over and guranteeing a loss this week (I don't believe we'll win, but I always hope) is disrespectful to boys in Maize and Blue who work harder for this university than you ever will.
November 22nd, 2010 at 11:02 AM ^
Why do we think Notre Dame is always a toss-up? We overrate them as much as the rest of the media. Notre Dame is terrible, and Brian Kelly has been terrifically underwhelming in his first year. Yes, we've had close games with them the past two years, but that's because we're not particularly good either. If we legitimately believe that this team (especially the defense) is going to improve over this offseason, there's no reason to think that next year's Notre Dame game - at home, in year 4 of the RR era - should be a toss up.
In conclusion, Notre Dame sucks. SUCKS.
November 22nd, 2010 at 11:06 AM ^
Yes, ND does SUCK, but consider that UM won that game by 4 points on a last minute drive with ND losing the TO margin at -3 and playing most of the first half without their starting QB. The plain fact is that UM was fortunate to win at ND this year.
I think there is enough evidence to believe that ND should be able to challenge UM next season...thus it goes in the "toss-up" category.
November 22nd, 2010 at 11:14 AM ^
Every season Notre Dame is given the benefit of the doubt and assumed to be a competent football program...solely because it's Notre Dame. (They were a fringe preseason top-25 team this year, for reasons that are totally beyond me.) They don't deserve it.
If we aren't confident that we can beat Notre Dame next year, at home, we aren't confident at the prospects of this team. If Notre Dame is a toss-up, then the liklihood of us besting this year's record is a lot less likely than everyone here assumes. Michigan State and Illinois on the road are much much tougher games than Notre Dame is at home.
Really, I just can't stand Notre Dame.
November 22nd, 2010 at 11:57 AM ^
More proof that some (not all) people on this board are insane homers incapable of a rationale discussion. Everything Logan88 said above is indisputably correct, yet he is getting negged. Unless and until we have a game against Notre Dame that is not decided by a last minute come from behind drive, in which many breaks go our way, that game has to be considered a toss-up.
We are still a team that eked by Notre Dame, Illinois, Indiana and UMass. Where in the hell do people get off saying that any game against a team like Notre Dame is a sure win?
November 22nd, 2010 at 12:03 PM ^
Fuzzy articulated my thoughts better than I. So, instead, I'll steal Dale Carnegie's:
"When dealing with people, remember you are not dealing with creatures of logic, but with creatures of emotion, creatures bristling with prejudice, and motivated by pride and vanity"
November 22nd, 2010 at 11:15 AM ^
This is poster child material for delusional Rich Rod supporters -- in their minds Michigan will only get exponentially better while all other teams will stagnate or get worse.
November 22nd, 2010 at 11:24 AM ^
The team has gotten better each year under Rodriguez. At the current rate, we will be 9-3 next year. Also, if people were just saying "Hey, we're Michigan, we'll win just because we are awesome!" you might have a point. But people are looking at who returns next year and assuming a natural progression for freshman and sophomores and are realistic in assuming that next year should be much better.
Very few teams return as much next year as we do. So we should improve as much or more than just about everyone we have faced.