ESPN Top 25 for next year: We're ranked
http://espn.go.com/college-football/story/_/id/10305934/texas-longhorns…
MSU is 5, OSU is 13, Wisconsin is 14, ND is 19, Iowa is 21. And we're 24.
I know that the poll means nothing, etc., but I still found it interesting that people who are paid to write things about sports think we'll be in the top 25 to start the season next year.
January 18th, 2014 at 2:39 AM ^
January 18th, 2014 at 2:51 AM ^
At ND, at Sparty and at OSU is 3 probable L's right there (we almost always play horribly in South Bend). So we'd have to run the table on the rest.
January 18th, 2014 at 2:57 AM ^
January 18th, 2014 at 3:13 AM ^
January 18th, 2014 at 1:01 PM ^
So you're 100% convinced that next year we're going to do something three times that we have yet to do even once in the three previous seasons.
January 18th, 2014 at 2:04 PM ^
Baseless optimism! Embrace it!!
January 18th, 2014 at 3:15 PM ^
January 18th, 2014 at 3:07 AM ^
January 18th, 2014 at 4:48 AM ^
If we lost all three of those games and won every other one, there would still be a lot of people unhappy with Hoke and it's hard to blame them. You can't let your rivals run roughshod over you year in and year out.
January 18th, 2014 at 7:07 AM ^
I know what you're saying, but you really mean MSU and OSU. We've one fairly well against ND. A win in Columbus next year (and East Lansing - thanks, by the way, scheduling gods /s) would erase a lot of bad feelings.
January 18th, 2014 at 7:53 AM ^
This myth about our rivals owning us has to stop. Hoke is a very respectable 4-5 against them, despite inheriting a train wreck. He's had the upper hand on Notre Dame and played Ohio virtually even. Sparty is having their best run in a half century but that's been a home field series since Hoke.
January 18th, 2014 at 8:35 AM ^
January 18th, 2014 at 9:24 AM ^
Must have, because we went 11-2 Hoke's first year, so if not a train wreck then what is the right phrase to say what Hoke inherited? A mediocre B1G program??? Sort of where we are right now.....
January 18th, 2014 at 10:24 AM ^
yeah not a train wreck on the order of what Rich Rod inherited. What was coming up on the offensive line was a future 5 car pileup. If only Rich Rod recruied a line.
January 18th, 2014 at 2:12 PM ^
First the offensive line recruiting, while occurring, not actually signing many players.
The second part is the RichRod era washout from 2009/2010
1. Vlad "the Impaler" Emelien, 2. Anthony Lolota, 3. Adrian Witty, 4. Cullen Christian, 5. Demar Dorsey, 6. Carvin Johnson, 7. Davion Rogers, 8. "Big Play" Ray Vinopal, 9. Kenny Wilkins, 10. Je'Ron Stokes, 11. Will Hagerup (maybe), 12. Antonio Kinard, 13. Christian Pace, 14. Conelius Jones, 15. Jerald Robinson, 16. Terry Talbott, 17. Austin White, 18. DJ Williamson, 19. Isiah Bell, 20. Tate Forcier, 21. Justin "JT" Turner, 22. Stephen Hopkins
Two classes of a total of 49 players with 22 departures purely to attrition. This is not quite 45% of RichRod's last two classes. Train Wreck.
Compounding this is 3 OL (2 starters on offense and 1 on defense) from 2009 class and 1 OL who never contributed from 2010. Train Wreck.
Jeebus. Avert your eyes.
January 18th, 2014 at 4:34 PM ^
Great post.
And this two year void moving up the ranks of the classes reached it's apex in 2013. These would have been fourth and fifth year players. That's why we've been seeing the record of the team decline the first three years. Now we've bottomed out and should begin improving as these classes graduate.
January 18th, 2014 at 9:25 AM ^
The myth that it matters going forward needs to stop.
January 18th, 2014 at 2:18 PM ^
January 18th, 2014 at 2:38 PM ^
"Coach em' up" "Michigan fergodsakes" "ratings don't matter" "fire everybody"
"Auburn"
Rabble Rabble
/s
January 18th, 2014 at 10:14 AM ^
January 18th, 2014 at 11:09 AM ^
My comment was to put better perspective on past performance, not predict the future. But you're right, looking at recent performance on the road is probably better for relevance to this season.
We're 0-5 by my count, yet 4 of those 5 were pretty competitive. I know at the end of the day it's actually winning the games that matters, but with a reasonable amount of improvement we can bridge that gap and start winning some of those games on the road as well.
January 18th, 2014 at 11:14 AM ^
This is Michigan. 4-5 against our rivals is not respectable. Don't try to dumb down the standards because the team has had a bad streak. Excellence is excellence and nothing else.
January 18th, 2014 at 12:58 PM ^
January 18th, 2014 at 5:54 PM ^
If we give Denard the credit for the UTL1, we have to give him the credit for the loss the following year, don't we?
January 18th, 2014 at 1:12 PM ^
January 18th, 2014 at 1:32 PM ^
to anyone with realistically grounded expectations.
January 18th, 2014 at 2:33 PM ^
I pesronally tend to place more weight on the MSU & OSU games than ND, as they are conference games.
There, our record is 2-4 (wins again 7-6 MSU and 6-7 OSU), and I'm hoping that can change next season by beating a competetive MSU/OSU team on the road (realistically speaking, at least a split between the two games will be nice).
January 18th, 2014 at 2:07 PM ^
Since when does 4-5 against your rivals equal respectable at Michigan? That's not acceptable or respectable at all. If we play 9 games against our rivals, I think a respectable record would be around 6-3 or 7-2.
4-5 is lousy man.
January 18th, 2014 at 6:27 AM ^
this team has the potential but lacks a winning mentallity
I am hopeful with Nuss on board
January 18th, 2014 at 7:06 AM ^
ummm i dont know what Michigan team you been watching but we owned ND in south bend, ann arbor or any other place. The year before last we had 6 turnovers and they could barely beat Michigan.
January 18th, 2014 at 8:26 AM ^
people rationalize their best teams by how hard their schedule is. They play good teams on the road? Well then they aren't good! Louisville might go undefeated because they play all garbage? They must be top 5!
January 18th, 2014 at 9:30 AM ^
Who said anything about "best" teams? This is a pre-season ranking. It is basically a predicton of the final rankings of these teams, which is heavily influenced by schedule difficulty.
January 18th, 2014 at 9:44 AM ^
January 18th, 2014 at 10:22 AM ^
January 18th, 2014 at 10:03 AM ^
January 18th, 2014 at 12:40 PM ^
3 probable losses doesn't mean 3 losses. Even if we have a 60% chance of losing each game, the likelihood of losing all 3 is barely above 20%. I think going 2-1 (29% using same basic assumptions) is a real possibility.
Using my rose-colored glasses, I think of ND, MSU, OSU and UM, we should improve the most. We lose the least and return a great deal of our top playmakers. We should be favored against Notre Dame, MSU will be a tough but winnable game and we came one play away from beating OSU this year.
That road schedule is tough but I'm glad we have a 5th year senior at the helm. Although playing at MSU two years in a row is a b*tch, at least this team knows what it's like to play there because we just did it last season. Result wasn't pretty but it shouldn't be an intimidating venue.
January 18th, 2014 at 1:16 PM ^
That's news to me. Yes, we played horribly in 2012, but we've won two of the last four there--one of the losses was to a team that ended up in the national championship game and one was with a team that went 3-9.
January 18th, 2014 at 2:48 PM ^
January 18th, 2014 at 2:57 PM ^
U forgot that was when Borges was calling the plays
January 25th, 2014 at 1:09 AM ^
I could see us taking 2, especially if State comes into the game over confident, like I know they will
January 18th, 2014 at 2:42 AM ^
January 18th, 2014 at 3:00 AM ^
Thanks, I suppose. Low enough for minimal pressure, but ranked nonetheless.
January 18th, 2014 at 3:38 AM ^
January 18th, 2014 at 3:45 AM ^
We should beat ND with all they're losing. If we don't, Hoke is on his way out. When I look at the defensive roster, I get excited Clark, Beyer, Ryan, Morgan, Peppers.
January 18th, 2014 at 10:08 AM ^
I think all 3 of those tough road teams lose a lot. They will all be tough games becasue they are still quality teams on the road, but none are world beaters. We should be in every game and have a chance to win. But, not to be snarky, but Morgan or Beyer have never done anything that excites me. Unless being really consistent and not super athletic is exciting I don't get it. I am excited about Clark, Ryan, and Peppers. I'm also excited about the potential of Henry, Pipkins (if healthy), Ross, Gedeon, Wilson, Countess, and Stribling. But, if Beyer is still getting the majority of snaps over Wormley and Charlton is still not seeing the field much I will be not only disapointed, but woried about our pass rush and our ability to develop talent.
January 18th, 2014 at 12:42 PM ^
January 18th, 2014 at 1:21 PM ^
Good call, that was a pretty sweet play. But, more often than not he's more of the in the right place at the right time sort of guy to me. He's a solid player with experience, but I don't see him as exciting, a playmaker, or particularly talented. I think Gedeon is a more talented and bigger player, as will be Ferns (I still question Bolden). Do you disagree? I have no doubt Morgan is still our 1st team MIKE, but I expect when he graduates we will upgrade the position with the guys behind him.
January 18th, 2014 at 2:16 PM ^
January 18th, 2014 at 2:59 PM ^
sometimes knows where to be, but in the bowl game he looked awful when he got beat consistently on pass plays when he had no clue how to drop in coverage