Which CFB team is BACK! 2019 Edition
This year's "they're back" candidates are:
Texas:
The Hype: Big win over Oklahoma and a bowl game win vs an interested Georgia last season. Tom Herman year 3, his guys etc. 2 top 3 recruiting classes in a row.
Reality: 8 returning starters. The entire front 7 and both corners gone from a defense that ranked 67 in the country last year.
Nebraska:
The Hype: Scott Frost year 2, look at his UCF year 2...finished season 4-2 averaging 36 ppg, played OSU tight in Columbus.
Reality: They finished 4-2 after starting 0-6, have a HORRIBLE defense and a below average offensive line.
Would you give either of those teams a chance to win their conference? Anyone else need to be on the list?
Other interesting teams: USC, UCLA, Florida, Auburn?
Michigan has been back, but this year were taking it to another level hopefully. Praying for 12-0 and burning Ann Arbor to the ground after we beat OSU (figuratively).
I remember figuratively beating OSU in 2016.
(*Sobs gently into open palms*)
What's your measure of success? Because Texas has reached higher highs than Michigan has in the last few years.
After two years of Herman they have a Sugar Bowl win over an experienced Kirby Smart Georgia team that was just on the outside of the playoffs, while Michigan has a Citrus Bowl win over a Jim McElwain Florida team as its crowning achievement.
I wouldn’t put too much stock into beating a disinterested UGA team, even in the “Sugar Bowl.”
Unfortunately, if one doesn’t make the playoffs, there doesn’t seem to be much post-season incentive anymore.
However, Herman does have a nice set of back-to-back wins over Maryland....oh, wait....
You nailed it. That win over George was totally meaningless as Georgia team did not give two shits to be in that game. That meant about as much as the Lions beating the Packers 31-0 at Lambeau in Week 17 last year. Should we be jumping on the Lions as the favorite to win the NFC North this year?
GA realized they were getting embarrassed in the 4th quarter and their pride finally kicked in so they started kicking Texas' ass...
Another analogy is either of the two Michigan - Florida bowl games in the last 4 years. Both of which saw a hungry team beat a disinterested team into the ground.
Don’t you dare try to take away a lions shutout of the packers in lambeau (for their 4th straight, no less) away from me.
We do not know what the feelings of any team is...losers look for any excuse as to why they were defeated. Bottom line is Texas beat a Georgia team that was a few plays away from being in the playoff. That same Georgia team beat Florida by 19. And being that most ppl have picked the Packers to finish 3rd in the NFC North(one spot above the Lions), how is that even comparable to what the Lions did? Texas looked good toward the end of the year even going toe to toe with Oklahoma in Dallas.
This is such a tired and lazy MGoTake. These players have pride in their craft. The fact that they're not playing for a national championship (which is true of almost every regular season game played by all but ~10 teams in the country) doesn't magically make them OK getting embarrassed and beat up in a nationally televised football game.
An 11-2 Michigan that absolutely stomped the shit out of Florida is a much different team than a 10-3 Michigan. Everyone still counts Harbaugh's first 10-3 season as a legitimate 10 win season, despite the 10th win coming in the bowl game. Bowl games don't "not count" when you lose and "count" when you win.
It's not just an MGO Take though...it's a thing, because it's a thing. I've heard it repeated all offseason from national media guys. I also think that Michigan's win over Florida a couple years ago was meh because Florida was disinterested and they weren't very good. Fact is a bowl game isn't a good barometer of how good a team is/will be the following year.
Of course they're not okay with getting embarrassed on national television. Who would be? No one is accusing the team of that.
But I don't care who you are or what team you play for. When you're a team that has legitimate aspirations of getting a spot in the playoff, and you miss out on it (especially in the way that teams like Georgia or Michigan did last season), you're not going to take the bowl game you get selected for as seriously as you would a playoff semifinal. You're just not. The lone exception maybe being for the Rose Bowl. But even look at Alabama the year they lost to Auburn on the Kick Six. Alabama was #1 all year, lost to their rival in the worst way imaginable, got relegated to the Sugar Bowl, and proceeded to get run all over by Oklahoma. Those players did not care to be there. Or at the very least, they had less desire to be there than they did with being in a title game.
Partially the same reason why guys like Devin Bush, Rashan Gary, Christian McCaffery, and Leonard Fournette all skipped their bowl games before going pro. Because to them, those bowl games were not worth getting hurt for. If they were in the playoff, it would've been different.
Lastly, this take really isn't unique to MGoBlog. You'll find it everywhere in national media outlets.
Guys skipping games, or even seasons, to preserve themselves for the NFL makes sense. The idea that a returning starter like Shea wouldn't give his best effort in a fairly decent bowl game is total nonsense that's only a popular opinion when used as an excuse.
Regarding the MGoTake - that opinion didn't show up on here until Brian started banging the drum.
It seems like both the pundantree and the fans have begun to accept this "polls don't mean doodly" rationale of late, but I don't. I've been ripshit at how we looked against USC and UF. I accept that some players may choose to sit out, but you don't not do your job because you got passed over for the promotion or because a co-worker is out sick. You step up.
punditry*
Unless your misspelling was intentional, then ignore me.
Look at who was actually on the field for us in the second half of those two games. Magnus did a great breakdown of this after South Carolina. It’s not about people not doing their job; it’s about not having remotely the same team you did all year long, what with injuries and players voluntarily sitting out.
Man, you're putting caveats on which big games are credible now? That's a joke. If that's the case then Harbaugh hasn't credibly won a bowl game and Michigan's biggest achievement of the past 4 years is now a regular season win over Penn State. Is that reason to say Michigan is back? Because it still looks less compelling than Texas' win over Oklahoma.
Disinterested has become the excuse for every losing bowl team. Try telling the recruits GA only won because your future teammates couldn’t be excited to be in a nationally televised football game. It’s funny (to me) how losing bowl teams are disinterested if they aren’t in the playoff, yet how may Rose Bowls were played with high intensity when there was zero chance of being the AP champ. It’s a bullshit excuse, period, GA wanted to win.
Just me, but its hard to put a bunch of stock in that Sugar Bowl game. If that game was a playoff semifinal, I think you would've seen a far better, far more prepared Georgia team. Texas may still have won, but the game would not have been as one-sided as it was.
Just like when you look at us in the Orange Bowl and the Peach Bowl. One year, you come off a blown lead to your rival and an incredibly controversial ending that, had it gone the other way, you're likely in the playoffs. Last year, you got de-pantsed on national TV and saw your playoff dreams get crushed into nothingness. Whatever comes next, you know your season is pretty much over.
Meanwhile, you look at the teams we played in those games. A 9-3 FSU, and a 9-3 UF. Both teams vastly improved as their respective seasons went on, they stomped their rival en route to that game, and since they weren't fighting for a playoff spot in rivalry week, they could have the "we're just happy to be here" mentality. Also have to account for Florida already having been humiliated by Michigan twice in the previous three seasons. You had a LOT of guys on that Gator team who were motivated with something to prove against Michigan.
I give those teams credit. They took care of business against Michigan, and in Florida's case, they humiliated Michigan. But Michigan had zero interest in playing in either of those games.
If UM has zero interest in playing, that is a coaching issue. What was FL or FSU playing for that FL wasn’t? Bowl games are the last chance to be on Tv for the season as a team. It matters on the recruiting trail and it matters as a player to have the pride of a win. It’s only when a team loses that it becomes a “meh” issue.
Pass the bowl please...
That's some good stuff you're smokin.
Nebraska or Florida. Both will finish top 20 this year.
I’m selling Texas, hard. They lost everyone on defense, have to play LSU in addition to Oklahoma (possibly twice), and traveling to WV, TCU, Iowa State, and Baylor who will all be decent. I see 8-4 for Texas this year, which they will be disappointed with (understandably) after Ehlinger declared them back. They’ll have a decent offense (OL is still shoddy), but a rough defense, which cause them to lose to a team or two that they have more talent than.
If you want to go to the way back machine, I’m going to declare Minnesota “back” as in back to being relevant. They return everyone, they have legit all-conference contenders at WR and RB, and they have a decent schedule (they get Nebraska, Penn State, and Wisconsin at home). They have to go to Fresno State, Iowa, and Northwestern, but they could win 2 of those. This is a team that can win 9 games and win the West.
It is very unlikely to happen but I hope Fleck stays at Minnesota for a long time. The possibility of the Brown Jug games being competitive again is fantastic. Also its just good for the Big Ten to have more competitive teams than OSU and Michigan every year.
Agreed. I think some wrote him off after a rough 2017 and then announcing that a true freshman walk-on would start last year, but he has built something in MPLS. If I’m correct about Wisconsin trending down, I think the West will basically be a Nebraska, Minnesota, Purdue fight for years to come, if the young coaches stay at those schools (Frost obviously will). Frost, Brohm, and Fleck are the best coaches in that division and all younger than Ferentz.
I understand why you think Wisconsin is trending down but I've thought the same thing for years and they keep finding ways to win 8 plus games every season. They have always been well-coached and having a great young QB can make a team more competitve than they should be.
My money is on them continuing to be a good but not great team (good enough to be in the conversation for B1G champs every year, not good enough to win it).
I haven’t really thought they were trending down until last year. I think Chryst is garbage, their skill players outside of Taylor are mediocre, and their QB situation is gruesome (Mertz WILL be good, but starting a true freshman almost never is good and the other option is Jack Coan, which, yikes). The OL will still be a solid unit, but they won’t be the road grading monstrosity they were last year. Pass pro will continue to be sketchy.
The defense took a step back with the injuries and losing Wilcox last year. We will see if they rebound this year, but I don’t think they’re returning to a top 15 unit anytime soon. They’ll be better on D if they just have a healthier year, but I don’t think they’ll be great there, especially in the secondary.
I think Wisconsin could win 8 or 9 games this year, but I think the 5 to 7 range is way more likely. Probably 6 or 7 because they’ll still be able to run the ball really well and this is the Big Ten.
Just wanted to say that I enjoy your takes/opinions/thoughts more than any other poster on the board.
‘Preciate it, stache
Did Pat Fitzgerald get lost on Lake Michigan and I missed the memo?
He's the best coach in that division and it isn't even close.
Disagree completely.
The sharp, cogent analysis I pay good money for on this blog.
Disagree. Giving Michigan a better chance at losing more games is not desirable. They already can't win a championship. Why do you want a harder schedule?
Firstly because more respect for the B1G is always good, especially when the playoff committee makes their final decision. The SEC bias becomes less of a thing when other conferences become more competitive. The days of a 2-loss SEC team making the playoff are less likely with teams like Minnesota getting better.
Secondly because Michigan still hasn't reached their full potential under Harbaugh. There has always been something holding them back (bad O-Line, mediocre/bad QB, unimaginative playcalling). A fully weaponized Michigan can consistently beat good teams, they just have to get there first. I think we are on the cusp of this becoming reality.
Also, personally I'm tired of Michigan only playing 2 or 3 competitive games a year and the others being snooze-fests by halftime. I fell asleep watching most of our games last year and I'm only 27.
“Can’t” that’s hilarious
Oh, sorry. They can. They just chose not to.
Are you serious?
Illinois. Oh wait, they never were anywhere to begin with.
Since the Illini suck and always have, the question in Champaign ought to be whether Lovie will continue to sport that biblical beard.
It's like he's actively trying not to appeal to recruits. He looks so ancient with that.
They will score a ton of points, and that defense wasn't very good last year anyway. I think Texas will make some noise. Oklahoma can't be as good as last year with all they lost, and Hurst isn't very accurate, so Texas is in a real good spot.
The defense was okay last year, actually. At 44th, they had the third best defense in the conference behind TCU and Iowa State. That will probably slip to the 60s or 70s this year.
Oklahoma will be about the same - offense might be slightly worse (I doubt it will be significantly worse, Hurts is a better passer than you give him credit for), and the defense will be better with Grinch at the helm. I think they will run away with the conference.
I actually don’t expect Texas back in the conference championship game. They’re a lot weaker than people think and they’re going to disappoint all the people buying the hype.
I’d take Texas followed by Florida. Florida’s hype is built off being a decent team in the sec East and beating a michigan team that’s roster looked like a week 4 nfl preseason team
Texas is the most obvious choice. let's get them on the schedule at home in a couple years.
We already do! September 2027.
Cool thanks for pointing that out!
Thanks for the info Mrs Houma!
Nebraska - Tissue soft schedule. They only get OSU from the East and get almost every major West player in Lincoln. I still think they have a few too many holes that don't have legit Big Ten level starters yet. Martinez and Frost's brain could still win them the division if no one runs away with it. Wisconsin has a brutal schedule and the other teams aren't all that impressive so 6-3 could win the division.
Texas - Big 12 is basically OU and Texas then not a lot left. Early LSU game could either propel them to the top 5 or they lose and still finish in the top 3 of the Big 12 anyways.
USC - Bad coach but a returning QB. Does the bad coach (and Drevno) submarine the returning QB? Yes, probably. They have 5 losable games to start the year. Fresno State went 11-2 last year, Stanford, BYU, Utah, Washington, and ND.
UCLA - Kelly seems uninterested in recruiting and they look DOA. DTR isn't going to save them on his own.
Auburn has Malzahn so either an incoming upset of Alabama and 11 wins or 8 wins and he gets fired. They had what was supposed to be a very good Stidham leading them last year and they stepped on rakes.
Maybe Oregon? Herbert returns and Cristobal has been recruiting relatively well. They play Auburn to start the year oddly enough.
I had completely forgotten about Oregon. They should be really good this year. Especially considering the ALL KNOWING STEPHEN A SMIFF put them in his top 10 list!
/s for the last sentence
I think Texas is back already. Making it to the Big 12 championship is enough to consider them "back" in my eyes.
Nebraska should be much improved this year. Maybe not good enough to win the B1G but they will be contenders in the west and should surprise a few people. The defense isn't there yet.
Texas Im buying, they looked really good in their game against Oklahoma and Georgia is not an easy team to beat at all, even if they mailed it in in the bowl game.
Nebraska? Sorry not this year, they were absolutely terrible last year, I do think Scott Frost will have them competitive sooner rather than later but not so sure he will ever get them to UCF levelof success. The BIG10 is alot tougher conference than the AAC, you have to recruit really well in order to have success in the conference. Has Nebraska recruited well?
Dont mean to digress but I know MSU had some success with less than stellar recruits, but if you think about it they were pretty lucky to win the conference 3 times. UM as well as PSU were down, very down, and you can maybe even throw in Nebraska as well as a team being down even though they are new to the conference. They also missed OSU a couple of times and got very lucky at least once when our kicker muffed that kick. Dont get me wrong, I think Dantonio is a good coach and has had some solid teams without 5 star recruiting, im just saying they were pretty fortunate to win 3 times.
I like Florida because Mullen+talent. The rest (Neb, Texas, USC, Oregon, Minn, etc.) not so much.
I'm gonna go with Florida. Returning qb and good talent on both sides of ball. But they have had o-line problems for awhile now.
TEXAS IS BACK FOLKS. - (probably) Chris Fowler (again).