Brian Fremeau projections for B1G
Link ($) http://insider.espn.go.com/college-football/story/_/id/10851637/project…
Projects M to go 8-4 (5-3) and third in the East. Projects an 8% chance of winning the B1G and a 4% chance of finishing with 1 or fewer losses.*
Calculations are based on his drive-based FEI. He notes that last year we went 3-and-out on 38% of our possessions (92nd nationally) and had an explosive drive on only 12% of our possessions (73rd nationally).
He projects OSU to win the East with a 30% chance of winning the B1G and a 31% chance of finishing with one or fewer losses. MSU is 26/17%. Over in the West, he likes Wisconsin (17/15%) and Iowa (13/16%). But the West percentages show just how unbalanced the divisions are.
*Presented without comment as to what this record would mean for Hoke, etc. Plenty of threads on that.
Well in that case, damn it all to hell.
Really though, I am not sure anyone of us have ever seen an offensive line that bad..so that component was unpredictable
There's a bunch of inexperienced players at interior which is a recipe for a bad OL. No Experience = bad OL.
What the hell does 5 year program ratings mean? What does 2009 have to do with anything going on with our team in 2014? By that standard, Alabama would have been dragged down in 2009 because of Mike Shula.
I am sick and tired of all this negativity. Even Hoke has become too negative --"we were not tough enough".
I was at UM when Bo was the coach. My first year there, we were shut out by Iowa. The following week we were playing Illinois, which back then was quite good. Bo was all positive during the week and almost guaranteed a victory -- something like Michigan will show up. Well, though the running game was nonexistence up to that point, we ran all over them. You go to believe in kids, before they start believing in themselves. 12-0 That will be the record.
Pray that there are not many fans who want Hoke to stay if he loses 4 or 5 games. Ok the toughest games are on the road, guess what good coaches do? win road games.
Win lol.
I don't think we have much margin for movement from that prediction. It'll be 7 and 5 or 8 and 4.
personal opinion: Any of those records with a win against OSU or MSU and Hoke lasts. He loses to OSU and MSU and gets that record and he's gone. I'm not entirely sure that that's not an overly fair thing. This is Michigan and 3 4 loss seasons in a row is a travesty for us let alone 6 out 7 years.
So you'll feel better about Hoke after 4 years if he beats MSU or OSU but loses to someone else? Who else on that schedule would you feel okay about losing to? Maybe at Northwestern, but any other than that looks a lot worse than losing at MSU or at OSU.
People are way overreating MSU. A couple of good years doesn't change everything. Look at Kansas under Mangino and WF under Grobe.
All of the points, sir.
"Overreating" you say?
you are actually naive in thinking MSU is lucky or this is chance they are good. Everything about their program shows me they are for real. How can you justify your statement with their record the last few years?
As another poster pointed out in an earlier thread: MSU has gone 11-2, 11-3, 7-6, 13-1 with 2 BIG Championship appearances, 1 BIG championship, and a rose bowl VICTORY (something we have failed to do in over 15+ years).
MSU may always have a Lil Bro (a term I hate) mentality but we are lil bro (again, hate it) when it comes to actual football the last few years.
Go Blue! beat the damn spartans and damn buckeyes please and thank you.
The best part is, their obsession with something a player who went 4-0 against them said 7 years ago only makes them look even more like the inferior ones.
Michigan's 40 year run of no losing seasons/problems was going to end eventually. And these annoying little idiots were going to show their ugly faces once it happened. Just like I'm sure they did in the 50s/60s when Michigan wasn't winning and state was.
The best programs come back. Michigan has and will again. Who the hell knows how long it'll take.
The fact that the Big10 has been terrible the last few years. And the fact they were 7-6 in 2012. People just conveniently foget that. They also forget that they played weak Big10 schedules those years, often missing top teams. That is luck not skill.
Yeah, I considered that last year, too. In fact, I'd been considering it since about 2010. Then they went to Indy and beat Ohio State, then to Pasadena and beat Stanford. Both may have been hard-fought games, but the wins were not flukes. Yes, their offense looked like a joke early in the season and cost them a win in South Bend (the officiating didn't help, either). But they got better every week and proved by the end that they belonged, the opposite of what Michigan did. Yes, it was just one season. I'm just saying the popular refrain for a few years has been, "Yeah, but they missed Ohio State at their best, didn't play anyone elite." They finally got their chance this year and made good on it. I hate that fan base and especially that dick of a coach as much as anyone else, but the minimizing of their accomplishments, especially given what a joke Michigan has been lately, is laughable.
What is the justification on staying if he goes 9-3 losing to MSU, OSU, and ND? Is it he won 9 games? He has 1 win vs. MSU and 1 win vs. a train wreck OSU team. I understand if he stays I'm just curious about the rationale of keeping him from other fans if he beats a bunch of lousy teams and loses all 3 "big/rival" games. Just a thought...
Got lucky on the final drive against MSU and OSU missed a wide open guy at the end of that game. Probably should've lost the first UTL against ND also. I would like to see us win one of those rivalry games without drama where we were clearly the better team.
So he has us losing to ND, MSU, OSU and one more big ten team. If this comes to fruition will hoke and family get a 5th year
April 28th, 2014 at 10:03 PM ^
but the most disturbing thing about last year's team is how close we were to 4-8 if we had lost close games to Akron, UConn, and Northwestern. If we lose 4 games but they are close losses, and we look like the far superior team in our wins that will be significant progress, more than enough to see what this staff can do with a veteran team in 2015.
He shouldn't have OL issues when he's throwing dump off passes and nothing longer than 15 yards. Even the announcers were waiting for them to let Morris loose with the arm.
April 28th, 2014 at 10:47 PM ^
What the hell are you talking about? From my seats against Ohio I saw a tough SOB come back on a god damned broken foot. That's the kind of Michigan "toughness" Hoke and the old guys talk about. It's sure as he'll not insecurity.
/smh
Hoke should've been made to lead another program before getting to Michigan. Like a program a tier under Michigan. For instance, a Stanford (If they did not have fantastic coaching already), a UCLA etc. He is not ready for the big time and if he fails here he may never get the opportunity to lead a "blue blood" again.
So who would be coaching the team now?
New Carr with less Miles.
Thanks, I was really nostalgic for 2007...
I'd be fine with 8-4 and some upward trending. Again, I lived through LOTS of 3 and 4-loss teams at UM. It isn't an elite program right now, but with a handful of seniors and lots of young talent, 8-4/9-3 would be welcome.
April 28th, 2014 at 10:04 PM ^
Serious question for the Hoke need to get fired if he doesn't win X games folks....
What make you think the team should more than X games and what is Hoke doing to prevent that from happening?
I'm trying to understand if people think he's doing something specifically wrong or if it's just that the team isn't the Michigan team of our hope and dreams and we just want to try something else.
April 28th, 2014 at 10:22 PM ^
April 28th, 2014 at 10:37 PM ^
I'll try and give a serious answer. For me the jury is still very much out on Hoke's coaching ability relative to his fellow coaches in the B1G and nationally. I think a recent survey had him around 40th in the country and 8th or so in the B1G. Call me an elitist but that just doesnt sound good enough to me to produce the type of results I grew to know and love for about 35 plust years or so.
In my mind 8-4 buys him one more year but anything less and he should be let go and replaced with somebody with a bit stronger coaching chops. And we might even have to teach the new guy the words to the Victors.
April 28th, 2014 at 11:46 PM ^
I'm not picking on you but can you please flesh out your complaints a little more instead of just not good enough? For example, back during the great Borges debate, the case for firing him was that he A) didn't adapt his system to his personnel, B) didn't adapt plays to the defense, and C) lacked a coherent system.
In the interest of fairness, I'll answer my own question.
Given our talent level based on recruiting ratings (good, although 2010 and 2011 still loom) offset against our inexperience on offense (bad), IMO, puts our expectations on par with State (worse recruiting but better maturity, both program and player), and one notch behind Ohio and ND. That gives us two likely losses and a toss up, especially given they're all on the road.. Inexperience, in particular tends to rear it's ugly head at inopportune times and it wouldn't be that difficult for a bad showing to drop one game that we should win. That puts us at a 10-2 to a 8-4 team. Obviously great coaching can steal a game or two, and bad coaching can cost us the same. But, there are many many other factors at play. If I were to pick a do or die number right now, I think 7-5 would be as high as I would go and that's pushing it. That's not to say we could go 8-4 or even 9-3 and I would automatically support Hoke. It would totally depend on how we looked in the wins and losses though.
As far as things Hoke is doing to keeping the team from playing to their potential, the biggest thing is being hands off and not a X's and O's guy, especially on offense. He has to rely on his coordinators to be great. This works for Mattison, didn't work so much for Borges. His inability to recognize bad play calling and intervene probably cost us a game (Penn State) or two. Whether that will be necessary with Nuss remains to be seen.
His game theory and decision making is generally good to great, with the exception of maybe clock management. As a motivator and program manager, he seems to be good to excellent, I never got any impression his teams ever quit on him or lost faith in him. The program has avoided scandal for the most part (Gibbons thing aside, not really in his control) and there have been few embarrassing things coming out of the Fort these days (like, say the Groben thing). Recruiting has been excellent.
The other open issue is if he and his staff can develop players. This year will be a big big year to prove that. His first two classes will be at the age where they should be showing flashes of greatness, if not just outright good. Still, I think people need to keep expectations in check for what will be RS SO and JR or younger.
IMO, whatever shortcomings Hoke has, compared to a marquee top name coach, it probably costs us less than one game a season, especially if going forward Nuss pans out. Given the uncertainty and potential for disaster coaching changes bring, I think it would be folly to fire him without some clear and tangible reasons, and not just some general feeling of "this is Michigan" that we're not living up to.
I actually agree with everything you wrote about Hoke. The key difference, IMO, is in how you interpret his "hands off" approach to gameplanning and in game playcalls. If I'm reading you right you view that as simply a function of his preferred management style where I view it as a result of his inability to intervine effectively. I think the core reason that Hoke is "hands off" is because he really doesnt have a good handle on the offense (like his predecessor with defense if you think about it) so he stays away. I would prefer a coach that has the ability to step in and correct problems if we can get one and not someone who is completely at the mercy of his coordinators.
At the end of the day Michigan coaches are evaluated on wins and losses. And a three year stretch (assuming we go 7-5) of 22-16 SUCKS. And lastly, if you think that overall support for the football team waned in some circles this year due to the crappy season we had - I cant even imagine what it's going to be like if we do it again. I think Brandon will have to can Hoke, if for no other reason than to show the masses he gives a damn about our record and is trying to fix things.
April 29th, 2014 at 12:04 PM ^
Most coaches are more focused on side of the ball at the expense of the other. Hoke does take it a little further than most, and that's a problem if he doesn't have a good OC. But, short of firing Hoke, we've already taken the biggest step possible to addres that problem, i.e. a new OC. In my mind, that gives him a reset of sorts on the offensive struggles, I'm at least going to see how that change affects things before I'm even going to think about firing him. Half the people here seem to already have made up their mind, short of a great season (10-2 or better) changing things. That's just delusional. In the 15 seasons since 1997, we've won 10 games or more in the regular season just 3 times (2002, 2006 and 2011) and one of them was under Hoke.
April 28th, 2014 at 10:51 PM ^
As a previous supporter of retaining/supporting Rodriguez until he could graduate a class of players he recruited, I am trying to support Hoke the same way. But history tells me why others think Hoke should win or get replaced.
Brandon has given Hoke many more tools to succeed than Martin gave to Rodriguez (good publicity, more money for coaches, better facilities). He is making the fans pay for it with higher-priced everything and an overall worse fan experience. Now that Michigan is transitioning into a win-at-all-costs program (assuming increased program revenue from the fans means increased spending on sports and only sports), the fans have to adapt to that same mentality: win at all costs. If we're not getting wins, find someone that can bring us wins.
If Hoke gets replaced next year after the expected outcome (8-4), there will be no doubt that Michigan is Notre Dame.
April 28th, 2014 at 10:16 PM ^
I look at our schedule, and I think an 8-4 regular season is a tad on the pessimistic side. As I have posted in other threads, I see:
7 likely wins (App St, Miami, Utah, Minnesota, Rutgers, Indiana, Maryland)
2 likely losses (MSU, OSU), and
4 toss-ups (ND, Penn St, Northwestern and the Bowl game).
Given that I feel listing NW as a toss-up, and both MSU and OSU as losses is pessimistic, I think 8-4 is a very modest expectation, and 9-3 is the most likely outcome. On the whole I think winning 10 games (including the Bowl) is more likely than winning only 7.
Now, we could continue to be cursed by the Angry, King James Version Old Testament, Wolverine-Hating God who has decided to smite us hip and thigh repeatedly in the last decade. However, I am expecting base-line competence to reassert itself this season. Call me nuts; many people have (just ask my wife).
April 28th, 2014 at 10:35 PM ^
I dont have insider so i dont know this guys game by game projections. Obviously the non conference loss is to Notre Dame. Two of the BIG losses are probably to Staee and Ohio, what about the third? Is it Northwestern? My opinion is they go 9-3 with losses to Notre Dame, Staee, and Ohio. Should Hoke stay if that occurs? I'm not sure. I would lean towards saying he would need to go because we can't keep losing to our rivals.