I have felt for a while now that 2015 is the year.  All the pieces should be in place on offense and defense.  The only wild card is we need Morris or Speight to be really good.  I suppose that is an argument for burning Morris's red shirt and getting him some playing time this year.

that 2015 is the year it all comes together. My opinion is that the defense "arrives" next year (or even late this year) and that the offense is still one more year away. 2015 is the year the offensive line finally has experience from tackle to tackle, and there will be size, physicality, and experience at every skill position. If Morris is even just above average, look out. 

The 2015 schedule also lines up nicely, too. 

I think that's a very important point and matches the gut-level concerns that many of us have about so much inexperience on the interior.  These were already excellent teams that were successful in what they did.

The extension to the Michigan's situation is limited given the ongoing transition but I do like the comparison to Stanford in terms of OL personnel.  Alabama is a stretch - yeah, if Kalis and Braden are NFL 1st rounders, we'll do well, but what are the chances of them both being that good, realistically?

A decline in YPC would be really bad for Michigan but as you said, we're starting from a different base. 

Would be interesting to see how the departed talent from these schools compared.  We lost 3 veteran guys, but none are NFL-caliber talents.  I imagine Alabama lost some high level people from the previous year.

Anyway, excellent work as always.  Even though I think the comparison is limited, its interesting and encouraging nonetheless.

While those Stanford/Alabama comparisons are certainly promising, each of those teams had one tackle and one interior lineman as their returning studs.  I'd be interested to find a comparable team that had two returning, experienced tackes but a raw interior line and see how that affected things.

My gut feeling is that this would be good for pass protection (since pass rush often comes off the edges) but perhaps bad for the running game, due to a lack of push up front.  However, last year's OL wasn't that great at creating space inside, so there's the thought that these highly-touted young guys can't be that much worse.

One possible example is Texas A&M last year.  They had one tackle who was a top-5 draft pick, another tackle who is a likely first-round pick, and a relatively less touted interior line (the two guards were each in their first full season starting, and the center had started for a year and a half but wasn't a star).  They averaged 5.9 yards per carry, second in the country.  However, that number is bolstered by the fact that Johnny Autograph was their leading rusher at 7.0 ypc, and as we well know, it's easier for a QB to get a high ypc number.

Well, I don't know how this year will turn out but the line can't be any worse than last year.

"Kyle Kalis appears to have locked down his starting spot and comes in with the highest ever recruiting profile for a Michigan offensive lineman." I'm not so sure that Kalis had a higher profile than Steve Hutchison. He was listed by SuperPrep as a Top 3 OL nationally in 1995. That's higher than Scout (6) or Rivals (4) listed Kalis. But I get the general idea.....Kalis is good. http://www.fhsaa.org/news/2007/1204 The link shows the Top 50 football players in the first 100 years of HS Football in Florida. It's interesting (at least I think so) that three of them played college ball at Michigan. Anthony Carter, Stefan Humphries and Steve Hutchison.

The Stanford comparison seems most appropriate, but that's only if the inside of the line plays up to rankings a bit.  Alabama was in a weird transition that year, and I think Ingram's (relatively) mediocre season had more to do with his lack of game-breaking ability than troubles with the line.  If memory serves me right, Richardson showed quite a bit more ability than Ingram playing behind that line.  

I may be wrong, but from what I've gathered, pass blocking is a more difficult to pick up than run blocking. Given that, I am slightly confused on why everyone expects such minimal gains in the run blocking this year. As run blocking is easier to learn, it would seem as though youth and lack of experience would be less of a factor than size and talent. Therefore, I would think our problem may be with missed blitzes on the interior (which should be less of a problem with our tremendous bookends telling the young guys what to do), but it seems reasonable to think that our run blocking will be significantly better this year.

I love the rosy implications of this but surely there are less successful examples of similar lineups. There are also differences between these schools all running consistent or similar offenses as the prior two years.

Don't get me wrong - I have totally bought into the whole This Year has to be Better Because Last Year's Interior OL was a Step Back meme but I think it gets taken to a unrealistic stretch in both directions. As bad as it was, the OL didn't completely cost the Ohio or ND games, or even Nebraska and South Carolina. As for depth, UM had been trying (unsuccessfully) to transition out of what worked in 2010 and 2011 early last year, so the RS and freshmen and backups presumably have 2 years in the current system (by virtue of working with Bellomy and Gardner at QB with Borges at OC) and therefore aren't as inexperienced as they may look.

The interior line play will be better than last season, especially during the second half the season.

If the young guys can handle ND DLINE, I will be quite excited about this season.

The 1972 team had two or three RS sophomores who were talented but not experienced and that team went  10-1. If you remember LG Hoban replaced McKenzie, C Hart replaced Murdock, and RT Seymour replaced Brandstatter. Only the LT Coode and the RG Coyle were returning starters. I wonder if there are any other past Michigan team comparisons to this season?