Over or under Michigan's offense in 2018

Submitted by Yessir on

Over/Under Offense

1. 75% - that Michigan will have a 1000yd rusher in 2018.  

2017 K. Higdon 929yds 11tds

2017 C. Evans 661 6 TDs

Over or under 75% or pretty much agree? 

2. 40% - that Michigan will have two 1000yd rushers in 2018.

Over or under 40%?

3. 50% - that Michigan will have a top 50 ranked offense in 2018.

We were ranked 100th-ish.  Depends on what you look at.

The 50th ranked team had 4982 total yards. Michigan had 4259 total yards.

Over or under 50% that Michigan's offense will be ranked 50th or above?

4. 35% - that Patterson starts 2018. 

Assuming Patterson is eligible and assuming Peters has a decent day at the Outback.

Over or under 35% Patterson starts in 2018.

EDIT:  5%  that M Onwenu plays defense next year. 

Hes talented enough, imo, to start on either side of the ball and we have so many interior lineman to play guard.  Might be more needed on defense side of the ball.  There was a video of him shortly after committing and he said he wanted to play D.  Chances are slim, but it could work.  M. Owenu didn't start after he was hurt.  I think he was healthy, but Ruiz started and never gave up the starting job the rest of the season, iirc. 

 

 

 

CHUKA

December 25th, 2017 at 5:50 PM ^

Currently I think Peters gets the nod, but it all depends on how quickly Patterson can grasp the system. Considering how complex people say Harbaugh’s system is, I’m not too confident he’ll be able to compete with someone who’s been in the system for 2+ years. If this was an offense like Urban’s it’d be a whole different story.

Wolfman

December 25th, 2017 at 10:00 PM ^

"Jake Rudock picked up Harbaugh's "super complex" offense in half a season + fall. Patterson will have ample time from winter to the start of the season. "

Jake wasn't close to having "a grasp" of that offense by the Utah game. And  he learned week to week, and it was actually interesting watch as more and more of the field was given to him by Harbaugh. By the Fl bowl game I'd say your statement would be correct so that's a fall campaign and an entire season. I've said many times one of the most incredible coaching jobs I've seen, but I was referring to the uniqueness, how the rest of the team - his skill players had to make the journey with him. At the start of the year we had a good TE and two good wrs and at season's end we had all-conference in all four spots probably with Jake coming in a second or honorable mention level. It'll take him awhile. 

With that said, I am not sure how much Shea's athleticism will allow him to do things they might not ask of Peters, closing the competition a bit in that manner. Remember too though that Harbaugh said no when he thought he had Wilton and only changed his mind after he realized Wilton was not coming back. So I'm thinking Shea has to take the job and he'll have to do it convincingly. 

Orlando

December 25th, 2017 at 5:56 PM ^

Peters has never thrown for over 150 yards in a game. In only two of his four starts he has completed over 50% of his passes. I think he only completed one deep pass in four games. This year, Patterson only threw for under 150 yards once in 7 starts. His completion percentage this year was 63% compared to Peters' 57%. In my opinion, Patterson is a much better QB.

DrMantisToboggan

December 25th, 2017 at 6:25 PM ^

Patterson was 3-3 this year when throwing for over 150 yards. Passing yards is a meaningless statistic without context. Peters never needed to throw for over 150ish to win, nor did we give him the chance to. Based on what I have seen from both, Patterson is not significantly better than Peters and Peters’ ceiling is higher.

OwenGoBlue

December 25th, 2017 at 8:05 PM ^

Shea got most of his stats against San Antonio and Tennessee-Martin. Also had 40ish attempts/game and the best WR in the SEC. I like Shea and think he has a ton of talent but let's not pretend he's arrived in some way Peters hasn't. Both guys have something to prove which should make it a great competition.

funkywolve

December 26th, 2017 at 10:23 AM ^

Recruiting rankings:

2013

Ole Miss:  #8 class, 88.52 ranking per player

Michigan:  #4 class, 90.95

 

2014

Ole Miss:  #15 class, 87.42

Michigan:  #20 class, 89.90

 

2015

Ole Miss:  #17 class, 88.65

Michigan:  #37 class, 87.81

 

2016

Ole Miss:  #5 class, 90.42

Michigan:  #8, 88.52

 

2017

Ole Miss:  #31 class, 86.06

Michigan:  #5 class, 91.20

 

Other then the 2017 class, it looks like Ole Miss and Michigan have been very similiar with their recruiting classes according to 247.

Occam's Razor

December 25th, 2017 at 8:02 PM ^

I really wonder what evidence posters like you have to make dumb claims like Peters’ ceiling being higher when analysts all agreed that Patterson had more potential coming out of high school on top f his superior career so far in college.

Umbig11 suggested Patterson was Harbaugh’s guy vs Peters who Pep favors. This will be interesting throughout the off season.

Occam's Razor

December 25th, 2017 at 8:25 PM ^

I know recruiting analysts aren't always correct, but they're better than joe schmo on the internet. 

Nothing in college or high school suggests that Peters has a higher ceiling than Patterson. 

Patterson picking up this offense will be crucial. 

uncleFred

December 26th, 2017 at 6:15 PM ^

"I know recruiting analysts aren't always correct, but they're better than joe schmo on the internet. "

Really. The advantage we have in assessing various reruiting analysts is that we can track their predictions over a number of years, giving all of us a common context to measure their accuracy. When it comes to the Joe Schmos among us, we don't have that shared context.

I know two people who, over the last fifteen years, have rather dramatically out performed the "professional analysts" who get paid for their opinions. The reason is pretty obvious, they are two of the smartest people I know who follow football obsessively, are utterly dispassionate in their analysis, and have no monetary interest in convincing people to follow their opinion.

wahooverine

December 26th, 2017 at 2:26 AM ^

“Appealing” to authorities is a perfectly valid thing to do when there is a recognized authority on a matter. In football there are professionals whose ratings and observations are used by college and NFL couching staffs for player evaluation.

Are you saying professional football scouts and analysts’ opinions are meaningless simply because you’re one of those dismiss all experts people?

You know, plumbers say never to flush paper towels down the toilet, but eh what do these so-called “experts” know, amirite?

Canaday_Leverett

December 25th, 2017 at 7:38 PM ^

Not only that, but Peters couldn’t beat out Speight or O’Korn until O’Korn was so bad it was a no-brainer. I don’t know what people have seen to think that he has Harbaugh’s full confidence. He managed games rather than win them. Remember the Minnesota game? Fine, but not a “this is my guy” kind of performance.

PapabearBlue

December 26th, 2017 at 10:58 AM ^

It's pretty common knowledge that peters didn't know the playbook as well as speight and JOK and as a result kind of mailed it in during the competition. Once he became the backup he took his role more seriously and in a few weeks surpassed JOK.

Also, speight was a pretty good QB last year and JOK wasn't nearly as bad at houston as he looked this last year. When all 3 QB's are struggling, and you have freshman receivers (something Brian has repeatedly claimed to be wary of), and a terrible line, it seems like it'd probably make sense to attribute at least some of every QB's struggles to the receivers and the line.

Better receivers, better line, and maybe Peters numbers look a little better. Stronger grasp of the playbook, definitely gonna see better numbers.

Shea wasn't some wizard at Ole Miss. He did "good" things, sometimes. But the general consensus has been to pump the fucking breaks. He might be good, he might just be a slightly better JOK. Patterson only has a slightly better rating than peters with more experienced receivers, a line that wasn't a revolving door.

Each of them has pro's and con's but there are a lot of asterisks next to each of those lists.

Caesar

December 26th, 2017 at 8:27 AM ^

Peters is talented and has been in the system far longer than Patterson. It's not even like Patterson comes from a similar system. 

If this was Rudock v. Patterson, where Patterson has a huge talent advantage, then sure. But Peters is motivated. For maybe the first time in his career, he sees the light. He's experienced. I just don't get how Patterson can win out. 

DrMantisToboggan

December 25th, 2017 at 4:29 PM ^

1. Over  - Higdon hits it easy, Evans gets close

2. 40% is about right, see #1.

3. Over (I go by S&P) - it will be as good or better than 2016 offense. Top 50 is safe bet.

4. I think 35% is about right. Peters is about 55-60%, the rest McCaffrey. Peters is over 50%, Patterson not under 30% based on skill. 

 

twotrueblue

December 25th, 2017 at 4:59 PM ^

Running back by committee does make this a harder question. I think under ideal conditions this year, Harbaugh would've kept Isaac and possibly Walker in the committee, but Higdon and Evans have separated themselves from the pack enough that they might be the sole backs next year.

newtopos

December 25th, 2017 at 5:47 PM ^

The teams you list fall between No. 81 (Nebraska) and No. 126 (Rutgers) in S&P+ (out of 130 teams).  Michigan was No. 74.  (Also worth noting: even after losing its three QBs to injuries, Maryland still had a better passing S&P+ rating than Michigan.)

Ohio State was No. 6; Penn State was No. 12.  Notre Dame (whom we play in 2018) was No. 24.

DrMantisToboggan

December 25th, 2017 at 6:21 PM ^

Right, I was using S&P numbers. 5th best offense with 3rd best defense (in a conference with 5 top 15 defenses) - makes sense that we were 4th best team in conference. I expect to have #1 D and #3 or 4 O in conference next year. D should move from 10th to solidly top 3 and O should move from 74th to top 40.