We have enough talent to win now

Submitted by Magnum P.I. on

So thorough was the coaching incompetence at Michigan the past two seasons that many among us have genuinely become convinced that we don't have good players on our team. On-field ineptitude chipped away at our psychology, making us feel that all things Michigan football were inept. Even in the past glorious days, there are Michigan fans claiming that we don't have good players and that we should temper our expectations for Harbaugh's first years. Maybe by 2017 we will have a competitive team.

No.

We have extremely talented players and can be competitive this next season. The table below shows the total points from the 247 Composite Team Rankings for the 2014, 2013, and 2012 recruiting classes. Players from these classes will be teams' primary contributors during the 2015 season. Total points take into consideration both quality and number of recruits in a class. The "Total" column in the table simply sums the total points from the 2014, 2013, and 2012 classes, resulting in total points over the three-year period. Further, since older players typically contribute more, another column, "Weighted total," gives more weight to 2012 (x2) and 2013 (x1.5) points to privilege talent more likely to contribute next year. Note that the top 50 teams in terms of three-year total points, plus Big Ten and future opponents are included in the table.   

Rank Team 2014 2013 2012 Total Weighted total Weighted Rank
1 Alabama 319.58 319.48 310.06 949.12 945.95 (1)
2 Ohio State 296.06 303.28 281.66 881.00 876.20 (2)
3 Florida 267.75 291.51 286.99 846.25 852.66 (3)
4 Florida State 286.77 262.45 287.72 836.94 837.26 (4)
5 LSU 298.80 281.04 247.10 826.94 809.71 (6)
6 Georgia 273.38 260.43 270.37 804.18 803.18 (7)
7 Michigan 233.54 289.17 275.89 798.60 812.72 (5)
8 Texas A&M 278.25 267.84 245.56 791.65 780.75 (12)
9 Notre Dame 260.44 284.77 244.29 789.50 784.12 (10)
10 Auburn 276.87 252.54 259.73 789.14 783.43 (11)
11 USC 260.54 256.45 268.36 785.35 787.96 (9)
12 Texas 240.71 234.55 295.80 771.06 789.42 (8)
13 Miami 255.80 250.44 264.52 770.76 773.67 (13)
14 UCLA 238.37 276.28 243.49 758.14 759.85 (14)
15 Oklahoma 248.55 241.44 251.20 741.19 742.07 (15)
16 Clemson 240.66 249.53 245.91 736.10 737.85 (16)
17 Tennessee 274.76 213.60 239.11 727.47 715.59 (17)
18 South Carolina 240.77 223.69 244.96 709.42 710.82 (19)
19 Oregon 232.45 227.75 247.31 707.51 712.46 (18)
20 Ole Miss 240.82 275.38 188.88 705.08 687.77 (21)
21 Stanford 250.06 174.47 272.45 696.98 704.44 (20)
22 Virginia Tech 216.97 223.04 226.63 666.64 669.86 (22)
23 Washington 197.58 234.46 220.97 653.01 660.81 (23)
24 Arkansas 215.62 215.94 217.58 649.14 649.79 (24)
25 Baylor 217.00 206.91 218.04 641.95 642.30 (26)
26 Mississippi State 200.03 212.85 223.78 636.66 644.58 (25)
27 Nebraska 197.83 220.73 210.48 629.04 633.26 (27)
28 Virginia 205.30 203.20 219.02 627.52 632.09 (28)
29 Oklahoma State 216.48 200.06 209.50 626.04 623.71 (29)
30 Michigan State 217.41 192.46 207.57 617.44 614.16 (30)
31 Arizona State 222.47 191.16 203.12 616.75 610.30 (31)
32 North Carolina 213.49 206.46 195.21 615.16 609.07 (32)
33 Penn State 222.38 195.04 189.32 606.74 595.72 (37)
34 Kentucky 225.45 194.59 184.53 604.57 590.93 (38)
35 West Virginia 196.38 200.76 202.70 599.84 601.95 (34)
36 TCU 188.06 194.42 214.45 596.93 605.73 (33)
37 Arizona 211.60 186.77 196.20 594.57 589.44 (39)
38 Missouri 195.14 188.17 209.81 593.12 598.01 (36)
39 Texas Tech 190.04 182.63 217.80 590.47 599.72 (35)
40 Vanderbilt 183.09 210.77 188.63 582.49 584.34 (40)
41 Maryland 184.35 190.61 201.23 576.19 581.82 (42)
42 Pittsburgh 184.56 195.38 196.06 576.00 579.83 (43)
43 California 173.56 191.00 206.62 571.18 582.20 (41)
44 Louisville 183.93 193.73 191.75 569.41 572.02 (45)
45 Rutgers 165.50 176.19 219.66 561.35 579.40 (44)
46 Wisconsin 204.85 191.25 157.60 553.70 537.95 (50)
47 Oregon State 164.97 186.45 192.40 543.82 552.96 (47)
48 South Florida 190.54 173.80 179.46 543.80 540.11 (49)
49 Utah 160.27 180.94 202.21 543.42 557.40 (46)
50 N.C. State 200.91 161.86 179.37 542.14 534.96 (52)
51 Iowa 172.60 169.95 197.80 540.35 548.75 (48)
52 Indiana 180.15 188.56 171.61 540.32 537.47 (51)
53 Northwestern 182.10 173.94 173.74 529.78 526.99 (53)
56 Purdue 157.42 159.12 184.62 501.16 510.23 (57)
60 Illinois 152.35 177.60 159.84 489.79 492.29 (61)
61 Minnesota 169.94 151.40 167.54 488.88 488.08 (62)
70 Brigham Young 160.55 153.42 142.95 456.92 451.05 (70)
76 UCF 165.79 136.69 111.10 413.58 395.35 (80)
85 Hawaii 108.61 138.94 121.92 369.47 373.91 (84)
108 UNLV 81.84 120.23 102.60 304.67 311.59 (103)
             

Based on recruiting rankings, Michigan has the seventh most talented roster in the nation, ahead of every Big Ten team and every 2015 opponent outside of Ohio State. Using the weighted total, Michigan has the fifth most talented roster in the nation, with a preponderance of talent in the upper classes.

Clearly, recruiting rankings aren't completely accurate predictors of college performance, but Michigan's superiority based on this metric is so vastly beyond every non-Ohio State opponent (Nebraska is next at 27th), that even if there is a margin for error, we should still rest assured that our players have the talent to compete in every game next year.

Now that we have a proven winner, leader, and developer-of-talent at the helm, we can feel good about our odds this next season. The talent is there. These kids came to Michigan with the expectation of being developed, being put in position to succeed, and being great. Get after it, Jim.   

Comments

ca_prophet

December 30th, 2014 at 4:59 PM ^

I would be more sanguine if - he hadn't missed his senior year with mono - had shown more ability to harness the rocket arm in his limited action last year - wasn't coming off ankle and brain injuries - wasn't about to get his fourth coaching staff in four years - had had known quality coaching in college Your typical successful junior QB comes into the year with two years apprenticeship in the system he'll be asked to run, with two years of spot duty running the team in that system, and the benefit of health and coaching stability which let him actually develop during those years. None of that is true for Morris, and it poses a huge obstacle to his success. If Harbaugh and Morris can together climb that mountain and get him to 3rd-best-B1G level, we have a shot. Do not underestimate that task, though.

SHub'68

December 30th, 2014 at 6:25 PM ^

I watched the old video of Harbs' coaching clinic and he has studied handling a left-handed quarterback and will know what to do with Morris.  First, though it might cost UM some overhead projectors, he will get Morris' head screwed on straight: "I WILL WIN!!!"  Heck, even the projectors will be OK if Falk comes back - he kept Bo from breaking those headsets, didn't he?  And Morris won't even have to learn to put his knuckle in Miller's asshole, because lefties don't take snaps that way...

No seriously, I do agree with you.

leu2500

December 30th, 2014 at 3:37 PM ^

for possibilities.

Year/Record/Rivals Avg

Mike Shula:

2003/4-9/3.06

2004/6-6/2.9

2005/10-2/3.03

2006/6-6/3.61

Saban:

2007/7-6/3.28

2008/12-2/3.72

 

Cranky Dave

December 30th, 2014 at 3:51 PM ^

while there isn't a perfect correlation between recruiting rankings and success just looking at the 4 playoff teams you see 3 in the top 5 recruiting with Oregon down at 19. And looking at how well both Michigan a d Florida have recruited vs the results these 2 programs will likely be compared closely over the next couple of seasons. as the master of the obvious I can say unequivocally we've got the better coach to bring the wins inline with recruiting rankings. I'm usually pessimistic but believe that if a decent QB emerges this fall a 9-3 season is very likely.

g_reaper3

December 30th, 2014 at 3:57 PM ^

Is the weighted column correct?  For Alabama for example, the weighted total is less than the regular total.  It also doesnt seem to be the incremental amount.  I am confused.

 

Magnum P.I.

December 30th, 2014 at 4:41 PM ^

Sorry, I didn't explain the final step, but I just divided the weighted total by 1.5 to get a comparable figure to the unweighted total. So the actual formula was:

(2014_total+(2013_total*1.5)+(2012_total*2))/1.5

Probably shouldn't directly compare a team's total and weighted total to each other, just their relative ranks. That Alabama's weighted total is  less than its unweighted total just indicates that they had a more talented class in 2014 than in 2012.

NowTameInThe603

December 30th, 2014 at 4:02 PM ^

If the O-line can finally play up to their expectations out of high school this team will be good not great. The defense should be GREAT.

I have way more faith in next year than I had this year. Morris or Speight will probably give us as much as Devin but obviously not in the same way(mobility). 

O and we have a pretty damn good coach who wears a headset.

GO BLUE! 

Khrothgat

January 3rd, 2015 at 12:37 AM ^

I had almost reached the end of the thread without seeing anyone mention the improvement in the offensive line (or, really, how good the defense will be).  As has been noted, Morris was beaten up pretty badly at the Minnesota game, but it was behind an offensive line that was signficantly worse than the line was to become by the Ohio State game.  Nuss' consistency payed off in that regard.  I expect this improvement to solidy into a pretty decent line some time next year.  That would help any quarterback.

We would have had a winning record this year with only a not-terrible offense, and I think the same logic holds for next year.  Our defense could make the jump to elite at any time, and, at any rate, it's already good enough to keep us in the game.  We're not asking for Ohio State's offense (something, I fear, we will never have), all we're asking for is an offense that scores some points turns the ball over less.  I think we'll get that next year.  8-4 is a reasonable expectation. 

funkywolve

December 30th, 2014 at 5:59 PM ^

I've said in a few threads over the last week or so, but the amount of talent Hoke recruited based upon the high school rankings is head and shoulders above anyone else in the Big Ten except OSU.

Yeah, QB is a question mark but Harbaugh has done fine with QB's at just about every stop.  He turned Alex Smith into a viable NFL QB - not Brady/Manning but Smith is a serviceable NFL QB who was just about in the 'bust' catagory before Harbaugh went to the Niners.  In Harbaugh's first year at Stanford he beat USC when Stanford was a 41 point dog and had to start a 3rd string QB.  Whoever starts at QB I'm not expecting them to set the world on fire but I'd like think they will look like a legit Big Ten QB. 

For all of Hoke's faults, he somehow was able to get the players up for the OSU game.  In the last two years they went toe to toe with OSU.  2 years ago it was for 60 minutes and this past year it was for about 53 minutes. 

One thing that gives me pause in thinking he might blast off in his first year is the OOC schedule next year.  IMO, it's not that easy.  First game on the road against what might be a Top 25ish team in Utah.  Home against what can be a fiesty Oregon St team (although they too will be acclimating to a new coach).  UNLV should be a win but BYU isn't going to be a walk in the park.  2-2 isn't out of the realm of possibility heading into Big Ten play.

alum96

December 30th, 2014 at 5:59 PM ^

Need a good QB to emerge.  Simple as that.  Look no further to OSU, a very capable team that was on fire at time (MSU, Wiscy) that couldnt get out of its own way offensively vs VA Tech.  Unless we have one of those epic LSU type defenses from 5-6 years ago where the bad QB overcomes it for every game but v Bama (and we dont) you still need a decent QB. 

Its a cliche but next year will be dictated by QB play.  And its a tougher schedule than most assume due to the OOC.  But most other positions the talent is there to do well enough.  Mission 1 in 2015 is look coherent, get better as the year goes by and settle on a QB... and then run full steam ahead into 2016.

PurpleStuff

December 30th, 2014 at 6:57 PM ^

We need a QB, a WR (or 2), a RB, maybe another RB or a QB rushing threat, and at leat two fo the young linemen to emerge as ELITE talents.  And that is just to get back to 2011 when we were a tad short of our goals (beat State, win B1G, etc.).

People act like Brady Hoke screwed things up by not coaching well.  He didn't.  He was the same guy who went 11-2 in year one.  The team just got worse as talented guys left and highly touted but unproductive guys took their place.

alum96

December 30th, 2014 at 7:12 PM ^

Well we lack elite playmakers at the skill postion.  Funchess was the only one and he was checked out mentally.  We lack speed outside of Drake Johnson.  And he is hurt.  After being ignored by last year's staff for 70% of the year.  Hopefully he is ready to go in 8 months.  We were totally unable to stretch the field last year and I dont see a lot of guys who can do it unless Drake comes in as a RS FR and begins to.  And he has been down for 2 years with hamstrings. 

We dont have Ezekial or Jaylon type guys like OSU right now and that I put on Hoke and his recruiting philsophy of recruiting bigger guys rather than speed guys.  We are the type of program we dont have to pick and choose - we can go find 6'0 WRs that fly.

We have been used to a star WR for a few years now - but this  has to be a committee... you hope Darboh steps up to a #1, Canteen begins to fulfull some of the hype and someone becomes a legit #3. 

And yes I agree you with the OL.  Look at Jim;s offense this year in SF.  The OL regressed and the whole offense regressed with it.  Kap didnt regress that much from looking at his stats.  Cole should be taking a big step up in strength and just the experience and everyone else on the line now is a returning starter - you throw Magnuson in there as a competitor vs Braden for RT and you hope guys like Bosch, Kugler, and Dawson start pushing.  I think the OL is going to at least be average this year finally.  It is critical.

And I expect Jake Butt to have a monster year - relative to his position I believe he was the best talent on the 2014 offense and criminally underused because our 2014 QB had made a decision on who he would throw to pre-snap and Butt was never option #1.  He won't be with Jim.  I also thought Khalid Hill started showing some things right before he got hurt.

But again it goes back to the QB.  I dont want Malzone starting as a true FR.  The young QBs who have lit up college football the past half decade are not true FR but RS FR.  It's a sea change playing that position right out of HS.  So hopefully the whispering works for either Morris or Speight...  or both.  Having a good OL will help all involved in this process.

 

PurpleStuff

December 30th, 2014 at 7:14 PM ^

Just to be clear, I'm not all doom and gloom.  It's possible Isaac is the best RB on the roster and a big upgrade.  The o-line should be better across the board and it's possible getting Bosch back is a very big boost (he was a top-5 guy as a true freshman) and there could be talent lurking in the 2013 class ready to break out.  Canteen could emerge, IMO.  I agree on Butt, especially if he's healthy.  Peppers and Pipkins also suffered from injuries and getting them back could be a big boost.

I'm optimistic, just not confident.  If this team is going to get significantly better, it will be because of new guys, but there is potential that new guys could make a big difference.

Khrothgat

January 3rd, 2015 at 12:43 AM ^

Strength and conditioning can make quite a bit difference.  I realize that a lot of the skepticism toward Aaron Wellman stemed from an infatuation with Barwis, but we never saw the conditioning produce speed (something the coaches never seemed to care about *cough* playclock *cough*), stamina, endurence (why good teams win in the 4th quarter), resilience (injuries, injuries!), etc.  Now before anyone says that Barwis' guys were sometimes injury prone too,my point isn't to defend Barwis, but to question the state of s&c under Hoke.  This is something that could be corrrected relatively quickly.  I'm eagerly watching the s&c position.

wildbackdunesman

December 30th, 2014 at 9:26 PM ^

"People act like Brady Hoke screwed things up by not coaching well.  He didn't.  He was the same guy who went 11-2 in year one.  The team just got worse as talented guys left and highly touted but unproductive guys took their place."

 
Isn't part of coaching - "coaching players up?"
 
The amount of 4 and 5 star players on the roster improved each year under him and each year we got worse.  He got 4 years to develop talent and it just wasn't happening enough to retain him.  
 
I like Hoke as a person, but he had this team (as measured by on field performance) headed in the wrong direction.

PurpleStuff

December 30th, 2014 at 9:50 PM ^

Yes, Hoke deserved to go in my opinion.  But using recruiting stars as a direct proxy for talent is just way off base.  Jake Ryan, whether he got "coached up" was incredibly successful under coach Hoke.  So was Patrick Omameh.  Desmond Morgan has been very good.  Gallon blossomed under Hoke when he had done little before that.  Fitz busted out with a 1,000 yard season.

Coaching didn't stop Lewan, Denard, Schofield, Countess, or other highly rated recruits who were also good players from excelling.  A lot of those guys only played for Hoke at UM.

The problem is he didn't bring in enough players who were as good as those guys, not that he couldn't get good players to play well.  Harbaugh brought in Andrew Luck in his first class at Stanford.  Hoke didn't sign a QB.  Harbaugh brought in Martin and DeCastro, future NFL players who were all-conference as RS freshmen.  Hoke saw Lewan, Schofield, and Omameh (and BWC) head to the league while guys that he recruited struggled to crack the lineup and/or block the opposition. 

College football is about building a program.  Jim Harbaugh didn't make the shitty teams at Stanford he walked into good.  He got the most he could out of them, but that was only 4 or 5 wins.  The team he built at Stanford was a juggernaut though.  Sort of the opposite of the guy he's replacing.  I think we'll be patient even if there are initial struggles, but I hope I'm not wrong.  The payoff should be fantastic.

 

PurpleStuff

December 30th, 2014 at 11:59 PM ^

Yes, the odds that a random 4-star guy makes the NFL are higher than they are for random 3-star.  Yes, higher recruiting rankings generally correlates with more wins.

Saying, Derrick Green (or whoever) has 5-stars so he'll be better than 3-star guys Harbaugh "coached up" at Stanford is just not the case.  USC has had plenty of 5-star guys who sucked or who never cracked the depth charge.  Toby Gerhart was the leading rusher in CA high school history.  Big programs and recruiting services whiffed on him because he was a big white RB. 

The theory that our roster is set up for success is based on a theory that guys we've seen play are as good as their star ranking.  If we had the high school expectations of Pipkins, Kalis, etc. lining up this past year, we would have been good this past year too.  That didn't happen.

Maybe injuries kept Pipkins from being that guy.  Maybe Isaac is that guy at RB.  Maybe Peppers back healthy makes a difference and potentially helps on offense.  Maybe Morris is a bit of a late bloomer.

Not saying this stuff can't happen.  But assuming it will after what we've seen from the Hoke classes so far seems like a recipe for disappointment.  I hope I'm wrong, but I'm not dialing up my own expectations until we see success on the field or we get to see the team Harbaugh is building.

 

Magnum P.I.

December 31st, 2014 at 9:16 AM ^

Yes, you're supporting my point. This is an "in aggregate" analysis. Over the three-year period, we've had two 5-stars, ten other top-100 players, and 31 other 4-stars, for a total of 43 "bluechip" recruits. Over that same period Utah, for example, has had five bluechip recruits, all lower-level 4-stars. Minnesota has had one.

Based on a CBS Sports analysis, there's a 27% probability that a 5-star will turn into an All-American; a 16% chance for a top-100 player; a 6.4% chance for a 4-star; a 1.8% chance for a 3-star; and a 0.8% chance for a 2-star. 

So, on the aggregate, we should get five (5) All-Americans out of our haul. Utah, by comparison should get one (1). Minnesota should get one (1). On the aggregate, we should have much more talent than Utah and Minnesota, for example.

wildbackdunesman

December 30th, 2014 at 11:46 PM ^

I see a lot of flaws in your argument.

#1 Most of the guys you mentioned as having been coached up by Hoke, were already starters or seeing significant playing time BEFORE Hoke got there - Denard, Lewan, Omameh, and Schofield.

#2 Of course some players will develop well regardless if the coach is below average at developing players.  A "D student" gets most questions correct (65%) - he is still poor at getting answers correct.

#3 Can you in good conscience tell me that the QBs as a whole were developed well under Hoke?  Denard, Gardner, Morris, and Bellomy?  What about the Oline as a whole?

#4 Statistics show that recruiting rankings are reasonable indicator of talent and success...5 stars are more likely to make the NFL than 4 stars, and 4 stars are more likely to make it than 3 stars and so on...of course many exceptions...teams that recruit at the top are much more likely to beat those in the middle are much more likely to beat those at the bottom - statistically.  Hoke recruited very well as the team regressed.  Why is this if not for the explanation that he and his  staff were not getting the most out of his players.

Hoke out recruited Dantonio.  Were all the rankings way off year after year - or is one of the two coaches better at getting the most out of the players?  If we could magically swap all of our recruits during the Hoke years with Dantonio's...Dantonio wouldn't be worse and in fact I'd probably bet that he would have a better record than he did with his own recruits.  While Hoke would probably fair worse off.

Khrothgat

January 3rd, 2015 at 12:50 AM ^

Remember at the beginning of 2011, when they tried to force Denard into power-I pocket passing?  The glorious moment in UTL was when they abandoned everything new they had been coaching and basically reverted a stripped-down version of RR's offense. 

It wasn't just that talented people left--though I'll grant you that that's what happened on the offensive line (thanks RR), but it was that as the talented people left, also the people left who had been coached by the coaching staff that brought up the offense of 2010. 

Mattison's defense was always solid, even if personell loss and offensive incompetence caused some regression.  It was on offense where the problems lied, and that wasn't merely come big apples leaving and the apples taking their place turning out to be smaller, that was a coaching staff unable to do what they wanted to with the people they had. 

 

SC Wolverine

December 30th, 2014 at 6:13 PM ^

You are certainly right about the QB position.  But give us a strong running game -- with an O-Line that is ready and Isaacs and Green toting the rock -- and our receivers will do just fine.  Canteen, Darboh, Harris & co are plenty talented, and we will have outstanding TE's under Harbaugh.  The OP is right.  We have plenty of talent for an immediate turn-around.  The big challenge is QB, but we have 3 highly ranked guys on the roster for Harbaugh to develop.  We should be competing for a B1G title this coming year.

umchicago

December 30th, 2014 at 6:23 PM ^

i would be absolutely shocked if morris, speight and malzone all flame out under harbaugh.  this will be one spring game that i have definite interest in; to see the improvement in these guys.

wahooverine

December 30th, 2014 at 6:44 PM ^

We should have a decent to very good o line.  We have a stable of beast running backs, full backs, tight ends and H back type guys.  The pieces are there for a good Harbaugh offense.  We have enough options at WR that 2 or 3 should emerge as solid enough.  Doesn't Harbaugh's offense rarely use more than 2 wrs?  Harbaugh is a QB whisperer.  He'll get Shane or Wilton ready to run te offense, even if there are training wheels on the passing game for a while.   We'll also have a great D which should help.

 

 

DCGrad

December 30th, 2014 at 6:55 PM ^

will be better and that will make the passing game better. Harbaugh will have sugar Shane and Wilton ready to play. I believe Shane starts week 1 but by the time we play The Game Wilton is the starter.

alum96

December 30th, 2014 at 6:58 PM ^

Just to add one more point and I dont want to stop the Kool Aid bandwagon but I believe Bama recruited fine (NOT AT THEIR CURRENT LEVEL BUT SIMILAR TO UM THE PAST 5 YEARS) during the Shula era and even with Saban they were like 7-6 in year 1.  So even the best of the best need some transition most of the time, especially when cleaning up a pile of shit from a mediocre coach.  Again if this was a year ago and Harbaugh had inherited Devin I'd probably sing a more upbeat tune as that position simply dictates so much in the sport.  Then again I think Funchess would have been benched for half the year in Braylon Edwards - Carr style if Harbaugh had been coach last year ;)

We kind of have 2 pronged issues in 2015 and 2016 - the passing game in 2015 with WRs/QB (lots of guys need to step up not named Jake Butt) and then in 2016 we lose a ton off our D - the entire LB corp, our best S and one of our starting DE.

With all that said the Big 10 is a shit conference and we hopefully finally have legit position coaches everywhere in 2015.  I want to see a Beilein like year - it will probably start slow but I want to for once see a steamroller build AS THE YEAR goes by.  For so many years we just sort of stagnate around game 5 and nothing changes from there. 

PurpleStuff

December 30th, 2014 at 7:08 PM ^

They were on major probation and scholarship reductions twice after Gene Stallings retired.  They had 10-win seasons under DuBose (won the SEC in year 3 and lost to UM in Orange Bowl, went 3-8 a year later and got fired), Franchione (went 10-3 in year 2 and left for Texas A&M because of sanctions), and Shula (10-2 in year three and a top-10 finish, fired a year later after going 6-6).

Bama couldn't sustain success because of coaching turnover and very harsh sanctions.  But they were never far away from being good.  Saban rode the wave of big recruiting classes after the limitations were lifted and never looked back, but the myth that they were a down in the dumps program is dumb.

alum96

December 30th, 2014 at 7:14 PM ^

I will say this partly tongue in cheek and partly not - having Hoke was like a scholarship reduction.  Look at Penn State v Michigan the past few years - they are basically the same product.  One team was hit with serious sanctions...the other was hit with Hoke.

 

PurpleStuff

December 30th, 2014 at 7:41 PM ^

Still, a coach in-season is worth a game or two at most either way.  I think we should have one one or two more in 2011 and we almost certainly should have hit 7-5 this year, but we weren't any better than that.  Still, Hoke didn't get remarkably worse at coaching every year he was here.  This wasn't a good team last year, but significant improvement is possible (SEE 2006 and 2011).  I just don't know that we're in as advantageous a position as we were going into those seasons (two years where I was supremely confident going in that we would have an elite team).

Duval Wolverine

December 30th, 2014 at 7:53 PM ^

I am a die hard 49ers fan as well as a michigan fan, so I am very familiar with watching harbaugh-coached teams develop and play.  The thing that has stuck out to me the most about his first year with the 49ers, is he turned a 6-10 team into a 13-3 team the following year without making much changes to the roster.  Like this michigan team, the 49er team had talented players, but lacked passion, intensity, discpline, and a culture of winning.  Under harbarugh, Vernon Davis went from just a freak athlete at the TE position, to a complete TE who could block and catch very well.  Alex Smith was a broken quarterback before the arrival of Harbaurgh, and had multiple OC's in as many years.  He looked like a complete bust, and QB was the biggest question of concern going into the 2011 year.  Under Harbaurgh, Smith became a very capable QB in the NFL, and although he is not elite, he is a better option than a lot of current NFL QBs right now.  The defense under Harbaugh as been top 5 in the NFL every year in the past 4 years, and was even ranked 3rd in the NFL this year while missing two starters (Dorsey and A. Smith) on the DL, two LBS (Willis and Bowman) most of the year, and both starting corner backs (Brock and Culliver) for most of the year.  Harbaurgh has been able to accomplish all this immediately against good NFL competition, and now will be going up against B1G level college competition.  I have full confidence that Harbarugh can win right now with this team, and will  continue to recuit well for the future.  

Jeff09

December 30th, 2014 at 11:17 PM ^

I'm of the opinion that it's going to look kind of ugly in the early going against the tough OOC schedule, with a whole new playbook. But, most good staffs, ya know, actually develop their players to get better through the course of a year. I fully expect us to be gaining momentum by the middle of the B1G season, put a scare into osu (if not beat them), and set ourselves up very nicely for a big 2016 once everyone knows the new schemes.

wolverinebutt

December 31st, 2014 at 1:46 AM ^

I don't expect the same starting 5 at O line next year.  I think JH will open all positions and let the dog fighting begin.  I expect 1 or 2 changes in the O line.  We will have a new starting center next year for sure.  We need more toughness and some nastyness up front.    

QB will be interesting.  Right now I'm guessing Spreight.  Shane has a shot, but this is his last shot. Bellomy will never see another snap during a game(I hope).  Malzone - I don't think he will ever start for us.  We will go from Spreight or Shane to JH's first QB recruit.   

We get 8 wins next year.  Things get better after that.     

joeyb

December 31st, 2014 at 1:49 AM ^

I've been saying this for a while: whoever comes in is going to look like a god. They're taking a team with lots of young and raw talent and (assuming they can coach) are going to be able to win a lot of games in year 1. I said this around the time that everyone knew that Hoke was getting fired. So, I agree with your diary 100%.

As for the people who are concerned about QB play next season, keep in mind that we don't need a gunslinger, we just need a game manager. On top of that, I would say improved QB play is the one thing that should almost be a guarantee each year for the next few years. Andrew Luck didn't develop in a vacuum and I'm also reminded of this article that I read in Harbaugh's first year at SF.

http://grantland.com/features/quarterbacking-made-simple/

The way that Harbaugh does things makes things easier for QBs. While I'm not ready to call us a national championship contender in year one, I see no reason that we couldn't have 10-11 wins.

UMgradMSUdad

December 31st, 2014 at 8:54 AM ^

A year or two ago, almost everyone around here agreed that 2015 was the year Hoke should really come into his own with the talent he was bringing in and the holes that were in the lineup.  Harbaugh absolutely has the talent to work with to be successful.

uncleFred

December 31st, 2014 at 3:45 PM ^

A great deal will come down to how different the offense and defense will be compared to 2014. Clearly the offense scheme will again be brand new. That, probably means, new terminology alterations in how various plays are blocked, alterations in audibles, etc. How long will it take the coaches to teach this to the offense so that it is internalized and the players can just act or react and not have th think about it? The added experience will certainly help, but that is mitigated by how much new they must learn.  

The impact of another new offesne on the QBs is more profound. Once again none of the QB's have any experience with the offense they will be required to run. I have no doubt each of them will improve fundmentals under Harbaugh, but how quickly can they learn the new offense? The secondary effect of this is that it will be very very difficult to prepare both the starting QB, whomever that turns out to be, and a back up who can step in if required by injury. In 2011, the vast majority of pratice snaps had to go to Denard to get him ready and even in games were there was room on the score board he stayed in because he needed the in game snaps. Devin didn't see the ball much. The team will be a similar situation in 2015, who ever starts will play a lot of whatever garbage time is available. So there won't be a ready backup for a lot of the season. 

If Mattison is retained and it may be possible to avoid significant changes in terminology. The defense will be new but if the players don't have to climb a communication learning curve they should be able to get up to playing speed more quickly than if everything is brand new. 

There is plenty of talent on this team. If the oline can continue to progress from their performance at the end of last season there will be hole to run through and time to pass. unfortunately, given a new offense, they are unlikely to be up to playing speed at the beginning of the season and the first couple of games lack cup cakes for opponents. 

Expecting 10+ wins means that the team climbs the learning curve very very quickly, or you expect to run the table in conference play. Realistically that probably requires a pretty good dose of luck, both in terms of the roll of the ball and staying injury free. 

Eight regular wins with an improving team whose play, intensity, and cohesion improves through the season would be a very good start and a reasonable expectation. Bad luck with injuries, calls, and the roll of the ball could easily knock that down to six. If the team gels early and has some good luck 10+ is certainly possible, but expecting that is asking for disappointment. 

Then there is the Harbaugh "factor". In a very real way the guy is already a legend. In a very real way he embodies the culture of winning that Michigan enjoyed for most of its history. The perception is that the job of head coach at MIchigan is made for Jim Harbaugh. That he is fulfilling his legacy. You take a bunch of talented athletes who desperately want to win and an immensely talented coaching legend who can and will make them believe that together anything is possible, and anything becomes possible. Great coaches create teams that find ways to win games they aren't "supposed" to win. That's pretty much who Harbaugh is. 

It is unreasonable to "expect" a Big Ten championship or a shot at the playoffs in 2015, but under the circumstances it's not impossible. 

So I'll take eight wins with solid progress to set things up for 2016, hope for 10+, and believe like all the rest of us that we have a shot at it all.