Is the 2016 team better than the 2006 team? Do you expect a big drop off in 2017?
Obviously the Orange Bowl will give us more info. But before the season started, I felt uneasy about calling this "the year" and Brian's prediction of 12-0. I got on the hype train pretty quickly of course, but in hindsight I don't think this team was as talented top to bottom as the 2006 team. A Jim Harbaugh/Don Brown coached 2006 team would have walked away with the Big Ten Title and the National Championship.
This is not my attempt at a hot-take. I do think year's defense was better than the 2006 defense. But in 2006 we had NFL caliber impact players on offense AND defense. This year's offense was a bunch of question marks. A Borges recruit at QB with no track record? (and later, we found, no viable backup in O'Korn) A hodge-podge of mediocre runningbacks and an offensive line that grew up under Funk? Compare that to the Henne/Hart/Long/Manningham/Arrington supersquad of '06. Coming into this year, the only NFL caliber player on offense we had was Butt, and I think it's a testament to the offensive genius of Harbaugh that this team ended up scoring more points than any Michigan team of the modern era.
We were clearly hoping for a '97 repeat, where an insane defease carried a mediocre offense. That could have happened, but the team was done in largely due to bad luck vs. Iowa and OSU, but mostly due to the offense's inability to show up when the defense put it in position to win (plus the fact that Urban Meyer is no John Cooper). The defense lived up to the hype--giving up 13 points @ Iowa and 17 points @ OSU should win you those games 9 out of 10 times with a solid offense. I don't buy into the idea that the defense simply fell apart late. Michigan could have salted the games away with long 3rd and 4th quarter scoring drives, but that's not what we got.
For these reason, I don't think 2017 portends as big of a drop off as anyone imagines. There will be plenty of question marks on defense, but like 2015 OSU it's hard to assess the second string when they're only playing in gargabe time. The offense will have question marks too, but if Speight pulls off a Rudockian bowl game the only game on the 2017 schedule that truly scares me is the one at Camp Randall, which will likely be a night game. My prediction: 11-1 and we beat OSU, Raback it.
EDIT: My argument is that the 2006 team was overall more talented than the 2016 team is. The 2016 defense beats out the 2006 defense, but the 2006 offense had the big guns. You put Harbaugh and Brown at the helm in 2006 and Michigan goes 13-0. We beat OSU 53-23. Brown doesn't get fooled by OSU's 4 and 5 wide reciever spreads that obliterated our secondary.
December 6th, 2016 at 11:42 AM ^
I think the 2003 team was better than the 2006 team. I'd say 2016>2003>2006, though they're all pretty close. People forget that the 2006 team's best win ended up being against a ND team that finished 10-3, ranked in the teens. It was a very easy schedule that year. We have 3 better wins this year (Wisconsin, PSU, Colorado).
Also, I have no idea how you can think @ Wisconsin is a tougher game than OSU. I know there's the road/home factor, but that OSU team is going to be loaded up and down the roster. Clearly the most difficult game on next year's schedule.
December 6th, 2016 at 12:07 PM ^
Wisconsin finished 11-1 and 1 spot ahead of Michigan in the final rankings. And I'm not arguing about the end result. I think talent-wise the 2006 team was significantly better and would have been even more dominant than it was with a Harbaugh coached offense and a Don Brown defense. The 2003 defense was extremely good but not on the level of 2016.
December 6th, 2016 at 12:27 PM ^
Totally forgot that Wisconsin team. +1, sir. I agree 2006 had the most raw talent, but I think if you put them exactly as they were (coaches included) up against 2003 or 2016, they'd lose more often than win. But all three are very close. The 2003 offense was very good -- the best since I started seriously watching in 2002.
December 6th, 2016 at 2:26 PM ^
2003 achieved some things (beating Ohio State, prominently) that 2006 did not, but is there any real argument that they're actually better? That team lost three games. They were clearly outmatched in the Rose Bowl against USC, which contrasted with the 2006 team in that poor gameplanning and coaching wasn't as obvious an issue. They were sabotaged by horrible special teams and underperformed their talent level. And, unlike 2006, they lost a couple of road games that they absolutely should have won.
I liked that 2003 team but 3 losses with that roster is a crime. 2006 at least won the games that it was supposed to win handily.
December 6th, 2016 at 11:34 AM ^
I think next year you can pencil in 22ish starters who don't appear to be much of a drop off from this year. The bigger concern appears to be depth. We are going to be mighty thin at most position groups. If we stay healthy though we should still have a goot shot at a B10 championship and the playoffs catching MSU and OSU at home.
December 6th, 2016 at 11:34 AM ^
Offensive line was mediocre. Bama would beat us 8 out of 10 times this year because of that.
Defense is tough to judge...talent wise better than 06, but hard to judge them in late game scenarios against good teams because of the time already spent on the field.
We were 4 points away and a couple shitty calls away from an unefeated season, so Brian's prediction was right on - (minus of course taking in to account the football gods hating us and the universe generally shitting on all things UM - something I am shocked Brian chose to ignore).
That said, I expect us to be very, very good next year. Better offense, and defense won't be as dominant talent wise, but 2nd year of D Brown's schem suggests the young guys will do well and get better as the year progresses.
THe 06 team got screwed on that shitty OSU field, hence the shootout, so our biggest asset, the defense, was neutralized.
This team got screwed by the refs and its own self destruction.....but mostly, we need a dominant (not average to good) O-line to do what Harbaugh wants to do....Saban style grinding teams down.
I think we lose 1-2 games next year, but win the B1G and go to the playoff, with a team that isn't quite as good as this year's, but finally we get a few breaks.
December 6th, 2016 at 1:52 PM ^
The field in Pasadena was fine. The 06 defense didn't get jobbed by the field; they got torched by the two best opponents they faced.
December 6th, 2016 at 11:35 AM ^
December 6th, 2016 at 11:38 AM ^
There will be plenty of question marks on defense, but like 2015 OSU it's hard to assess the second string when they're only playing in gargabe time.
I would be careful about assuming that 2016 OSU is a predictor of 2017 Michigan. We've got two classes of players (the 2014 and '15 recruiting classes) that are small and not particularly highly-regarded by our standards. Those will be our junior and senior classes next year. OSU was not in this same situation. They replaced a lot but had a lot coming back, too. They had four years of Meyer recruits in the pipeline.
December 6th, 2016 at 11:55 AM ^
We are far from putting the damaging effects of the final two Hoke years fully behind us.
In order to be in the chase for the Big Ten CC and the playoff next year, the large 2016 and 2017 classes are going to have to backfill for the small and/or relatively low ranked 2014 nd 2015 classes.
Not impossible if things work out. But also no sure thing.
Young guys will have to step up fast at several position groups. The good news is that 2016 class guys (Onwenu, Long, Lavert Hill, etc, etc.) probably have the raw talent to do this.
December 6th, 2016 at 12:28 PM ^
It is middle of the pack, Big Ten, at best. Brian Cole was its best player. Four of the top 5 are unlikely to get much, if any playing time (b/c they left the program; are injured; or are buried on the depth chart) -- which is not good for the 3rd year.
http://michigan.247sports.com/season/2015-football/commits
If we're successful in 2017, it will be because the top ranked 2016 and 2017 classes achieve at a very high level. It's possible, but you typically don't want to count on that so much.
December 6th, 2016 at 12:46 PM ^
Which Harbaugh put together between Dec and Feb. It was trying to scratch out whatever could be gained from such a short timeline. Not blaming anyone, it was sort of miraculous that he found that many guys in a short time.
I don't have doubts on recruiting going forward. Guys are going to be put on steep learning curves but that's ultimately good in my opinion.
December 6th, 2016 at 2:50 PM ^
several decommittments as the Hoke regime fell apart. Michigan had to wait for Harbaugh's NFL season to end.
But most of the 2016 class did see the field this year. Will be similar for the 2017 class.
December 6th, 2016 at 11:38 AM ^
I don't see us competing for a B1G/national title until 2019. Next year we lose pretty much all returning skill production except RB, 3 or 4 starting OL, and over half our defense including the entire secondary. Combine that with a schedule that includes opening with Florida in Texas, @Wisconsin and @PSU, I don't see us doing much better than a 10-2 regular season.
2018 I think will be the same as this year. A very talented team that could win it all, but the schedule is brutal again. @ND, MSU and OSU, home vs Wisconsin and Nebraska. I don't see us getting through that with 2 losses.
2019 should be the year then. The talent will be there, we should hopefully be at a point where we have the talent to reload at an pseudo-OSU/Bama level. We get all 3 rivals at home plus Iowa. We have to go to Wisconsin and PSU, but if we win at least one of those that's a good shot for a B1G/National title.
*Obviously caveats of me projecting 3 years in advance apply and nothing will actually work out like this.
December 6th, 2016 at 11:42 AM ^
Agree about 2017, but in 2018, we should be more talented than every opponent except OSU. I would expect us to be favored against all those other "tough" opponents you listed, and possibly even OSU if Barrett's replacement at QB doesn't pan out.
December 6th, 2016 at 1:09 PM ^
That they get better after Barrett leaves. Looking at their depth chart and possible incoming QB from down south somewhere (emory or emoritt.. Something like that). My in-laws are from Akron and they swear that there's a few guys behind barrett that have elite level arms and can run too. We'll see though
December 6th, 2016 at 4:11 PM ^
The backup QB is always the most popular guy on the team.
December 6th, 2016 at 11:44 AM ^
but some how they managed. i'm hoping we can surprise some people next year. we still have a lot of talent and the best coaches around. gonna need some surprises and guys stepping up quick. why not?
freakin hate the buckeyes.
GO BLUE!!!
December 6th, 2016 at 12:35 PM ^
recruiting classes of 3rd and 4th year players stepping in to fill the NFL vacancies.
On the flip - this is why Harbaugh has been burning redshirts - they have holes to fill and need experience.
December 6th, 2016 at 12:38 PM ^
Right, but they aren't/weren't recovering from a Hoke sized meteor cratering the program.
December 6th, 2016 at 1:14 PM ^
Not sure if the 2006 or 2016 team is better. I think the fall off we see next year will be more noticable in margin of victory than overall record. I don't think we'll be blowing teams out of the water but will still probably get 9 wins.
December 6th, 2016 at 11:39 AM ^
The drop off from 2016 to 2017
will be a lot smaller than, say,
the drop off from 2006 to 2007
December 6th, 2016 at 12:37 PM ^
Hard to predict 2017 because we are replacing so many starters.
I know the App State and Oregon losses really put a nasty mark on that 2007 team, but people forget that it was a pretty talented team that dealt with a lot of injuries during the year. That team had Mike Hart (Sr), Jake Long (Sr), Chad Henne (Sr), Mario Manningham (Jr), Adrian Arrington (Jr), Shawn Crable (Sr), Jamar Adams (Sr), Brandon Graham (So), and Morgan Trent (Jr).
The defense didn't have a lot of talent, but that offense was pretty good once it got healthy which we finally saw in the Citrus Bowl that year. The weird thing is that the FEI and S&P+ ratings were pretty good for the 2007 defense (#8 and #14 respectively) compared to the offense (#46 and #51 respectively). The overall F/+ ranking for the 2007 team was #14.
The huge dropoff was in 2008 after the offense cleared out for the NFL.
December 6th, 2016 at 4:33 PM ^
Without a deep look @ the numbers i can tell you, debord turned every talented offense he had to shit
December 6th, 2016 at 11:40 AM ^
2017 will be tough. 7 winnable games in Cincinnati, Air Force, Purdue, Indiana, Rutgers, Minnesota, and Maryland. 2 Rivalry games at home in MSU and OSU. 2 really tough road games in PSU and Wisconsin. And a big question mark in opening the year against Florida in Dallas. I think we could scrap our way to 9 wins. Probably won't win the divison though. 2018 should be a great year though.
QB: Improved
RB: Same
WR/TE: Step back
OL: Step back (Replacing 3 guys who were 3+ year starters is not easy)
DL: Step back (but this goes from Elite to just great so still the best unit on the team)
LB: Step back (Gedeon and Peppers gone will hurt)
DB: Step back (losing everybody is going to make for some growing pains, even if Clark gets a 6th year)
Kickers: Step back (Allen ended up having a really nice year doing all 3 kicking phases)
Returns: Step back
December 6th, 2016 at 12:22 PM ^
10-2 this year, 8-4 next year.
Ask me again after the spring game. By then, we will also know who all is coming back and what the freshman class looks like.
December 6th, 2016 at 12:31 PM ^
I think our O/U at the beginning of the year will be 9 wins.
7 wins against the teams I outlined. And then 2-3 against MSU, OSU, @PSU, @Wisconsin, and Florida(in Dallas).
December 6th, 2016 at 12:35 PM ^
- WR: Darboh was a true #1, but not at an Edwards or Manningham level. Chesson was utterly average, unfortunately -- will it be that hard to replace 31 rec, 469 yards and 2 TDs? Perry got in the dog house and didn't build on a good end to 2015.
So *if* we get DPJ, I feel good that Crawford (awesome blocker), Harris, McDoom, DPJ, Perry and Johnson can absolutely give us much production as the 2016 group.
- TE: Pretty similar to WR, except Butt was an All-American. That said, a healthy Bunting (a former 4-star recruit) along with extra years for Asiasi (whom I love), Wheatley, etc should have an awesome blocking group with good receiving skills. So no one player as good as Butt, but overall the group should be as good.
So overall, I think instead of 49-10 and 41-3 games, we'll have a lot more 49-28 and 41-21 games, i.e., wins but not by as much.
December 6th, 2016 at 1:08 PM ^
Replacing Darboh, Chesson, and Butt (all 3+ year starters) will be hard. That is why I think we take a step backwards. Perry is a slot WR and Darboh and Chesson are outside WR. McDoom looked great on end arounds, better than Chesson IMO but didn't really do much catchign the ball. Harris is a huge mystery still and now we are into freshman.
All in all I think we'll still struggle to run the ball effectively and rely too heavily on the passing game. We'll score in bunches against over matched teams because our play action will wreak havoc but if teams can stop our run and not bite on play action we will struggle.
Defensively we should still be top 25 (thank you Don Brown) but it will be a step back.
December 6th, 2016 at 1:09 PM ^
It just won't. I know we all thought he'd build on a very good junior year, but he didn't. He had a so-so year, at best. The numbers don't lie, and neither does the eye-test (he was covered, more often than not, and had some key drops, e.g., Iowa).
And as I said, we won't have any one player who can replace Darboh or Butt, but the large number of talented underclassmen coming up should be reasonably enough to replace them.
December 6th, 2016 at 1:26 PM ^
Fair enough. I still think in the aggregate we will take a step back with WR/TE. Hopefully I'm wrong.
December 6th, 2016 at 1:14 PM ^
Darboh will have a very productive NFL career, he's that solid. As far as a Freshman coming in and making an impact at WR his first year? Call me skeptical. That's a position that takes developing regardless of the star# of the recruit. DPJ's year is 2018
December 6th, 2016 at 11:41 AM ^
The 2016 defense is more legit than the 2006 defense, which got seriously exposed down the stretch. The DC is also superior to Ron English.
The 2016 offense scored way points more than the 2006 offense, so that side of the ball was better, too. The 2016 offense scored the most PPG of any Michigan team since the 1904 Fielding Yost team. I mean.. WOW!
And the offensive coaching of Harbaugh/Drevno/Fisch is superior to Carr/Debord.
So yeah, I say the 2016 team is HANDS DOWN better than the 2006 team.
The 2016 team got royally screwed out of the win in Columbus, the 2006 team did not.
This Michigan team should be 12-1 and in the playoff right now if not for those fucking refs.
December 6th, 2016 at 11:50 AM ^
Not sure if using the amount of points each offense scored is the best indicator of which team had the better offense. If Carr/Debord had been the coaches on the 2016, I'm guessing the amount of points scored would have been a lot less. Just like if Harbaugh had been the coach of the 2006, that team probably would have scored a lot more points.
December 6th, 2016 at 12:19 PM ^
There is no question that Carr/Debord would not have put up the points Harbaugh did with this year's team. My argument about the 2006 team being better is from a talent perspective.
Plus, a lot of our points this year came against overrated teams and puff balls. Michigan didn't play Rutgers and Maryland in 2006. Our blowouts against Colorado and PSU look impressive at first glance but I believe both teams are overrated and will lose their bowl games. Colorado is not a top 10 team and I honestly have no idea how PSU has gotten to where they are. If Franklin beats USC we will have to consider him a serious threat in the coming years. Franklin lost to Hoke's worst team though, so I don't see it happening. I think PSU's 2016 will be like Michigan's 2011.
December 6th, 2016 at 12:40 PM ^
Haha, what are you talking about? The blowouts against Colorado and Penn State only got more impressive as the year went on.
December 6th, 2016 at 2:13 PM ^
Yes, on the surface, Michigan's wins vs. those teams look impressive. But I do not believe Colorado is in the same stratosphere as the top 10 of college football, and I still think PSU's second half of the season is a mirage. They will come back down to earth against USC. If they don't, we as Michigan fans will have to concede that Penn State really is back, and James Franklin is just as big a threat to Urban Meyer as Jim Harbaugh.
December 6th, 2016 at 11:41 AM ^
12-0 this year. Hard to compare different teams. Defensively, I'll take this team all day. A little inexperience at QB and O Line not in the tradition of Michigan O Lines is where we "struggled." This team was really great all year (minus Iowa).
GO BLUE!!
December 6th, 2016 at 11:45 AM ^
The 2006 team had a lot of 2 score victories, 28-14 type games. The 2016 team destroyed fools. Average score around 44-11. There were only two wins that qualify as two-score victories or less, Wisconsin by 7 and MSU by 9, and the Wisconsin game should have been a 16 point victory, and we let MSU have a late score.
There maybe a dropoff next year. I'm not so sure about the size. The main concern is the trenches where games are won or lost. We lose a lot of depth on the defensive line and we lose a lot of starters on the offensive line. Can Newsome come back from that horrific injury? Can Dawson or Onwenu step in at guard and make us forget about Kalis? Can someone replace Magnuson's steady performance? Will JBB make the leap? Can a true freshman come in and be an impact player?
December 6th, 2016 at 11:48 AM ^
December 6th, 2016 at 12:51 PM ^
But from a sheer talent perspective on both sides of the bll, I think 2006 was better than 2016 AND 1997. I shudder to think what a 2006 Harbaugh/Brown team could have done to the college football world.
Also, I wouldn't call the B1G far superior to 2006. I think it will end up with 3 teams in the top 10, same as '06.
December 6th, 2016 at 11:51 AM ^
We had a dominate tackle in Jake Long. This season's DL and secondary are better than '06. Crable, Harris and Burgess are better LB than we have this season. Henne at QB was better. I'm not sure if OSU offense was so explosive or did our '06 defense had a poor game in '06. The defense had another poor game during the 2nd half of the Rose Bowl against USC. I'm thinking the '06 secondary was not that good.
Next season we will be a younger team that should improve through the season. We'll have tough road games at WI and PSU that could be losses and a tough pre-conference game against FL. And the game at home against OSU will be a tough one to win but may be the team will be much better at the end of the season. We could lose as many as 4 games or we may only lose 2 games and have an upset win at home against OSU. I'm not banking on '17 as being the year we probably do not make the playoffs but you never know with Harbaugh as coach, he could win the B1G and make the playoffs..
December 6th, 2016 at 11:47 AM ^
December 6th, 2016 at 12:47 PM ^
Michigan plays 6 road/neutral games next year. Playing Florida at neutral site, @PSU, and @Wisconsin is going to be a huge challenge. PSU and Wisconsin are both going to be preseason top 10-15 teams.
I think 9 regular season wins is more realistic. If we get lucky, maybe more, but it is hard to predict because there is so much unknown about our players for next year.
December 6th, 2016 at 11:48 AM ^
December 6th, 2016 at 12:01 PM ^
If you're talking physical beating, then yes, most qbs will take a pounding over the course of a year. If you're talking about the picks against OSU, you must remember he took a major step up in as to talented defensive backfield. What was open vs. other less talented teams appeared open vs. OSU and that talent that could cover three steps where other opponents covered two, coupled with some excellent coaching was his first major test against an equally talented team. They were mixing up coverage, bouncing into zone a lot and giving man looks, etc. It's called a learning experience and I actually expect Speight to be much better next season, beginning with game one.
He'll get another major test as to talent in the bowl game. This is all good. He will be one of the better qbs most opposing Ds will face next year so there should be some good battles. Our rushing attack, I am predicting will improve and by no small margin. I like Mone, Hurst and Gary on the DL and feel Brown will have some players that have been acclimating and learning for a few years, same way with the OL, that coud very well have three experienced players. New playes to the starting units will surprise as will incoming freshmen, some of the highly touted variety and ready to contribute immediately. I'm not looking for a major drop off in terms of Ws and Ls. Year three will be better than many think.
December 6th, 2016 at 12:05 PM ^
I think people expecting no dropoff next year are insane. Doesn't mean we can't have a great season (record and overall team quality are not the same), but there are so many multi-year starters on the way out. Ten defensive starters gone (assuming Peppers leaves) is tough, no matter how good Don Brown is. The first unit DL will be strong again, but depth in the front seven will be lacking and the secondary is crazy young.
The one place I disagree is Speight. I don't think he's been "figured out", and I actually am pretty confident he'll be even better and more consistent next season (provided he wins the job). The infusion of fresh blood on the OL could turn out to be a positive as well, but that's pure speculation.
December 6th, 2016 at 12:41 PM ^
I'm worried about the OL. Dawson and Kugler will be 5th year guys who couldn't crack the starting line up in the previous 4 years (and we all know our OL troubles over those seasons). Newsome playing in 2017 will be a miracle IMO. Onewu is still probably 30+ pounds overweight and might be destined for DL.
So assuming Newsome is not ready for 2017 we have to find a solid line out of Cole, Bredenson, JBB, Dawson, and Kugler.
Behind those starting 5 (6 if you include Onewu) are true freshmen and 3 star recruits. A few injuries on the line in 2017 could decimate us.
December 6th, 2016 at 1:03 PM ^
Look, I'm worried too. But I also wonder if it's a blessing in disguise to move on from the 3 fifth-year guys. All had some good games, but overall they were uneven and still showed some of the deficiencies they had early in their careers.
Cole can serve as the veteran leader in the middle, making the line calls and hopefully settling more into what was still a new position for him this year. Bredeson got better with more snaps and should hopefully be a solid starter at LG. The other three spots will be a battle, just the way Harbaugh likes it. I agree the talent is lacking, and the older guys still around have not been pushing for time. Newsome is a medical wildcard and would a return would be a nice boost as well.
My bigger worry is losing our three biggest weapons in the passing game (as well as our best pass blocker at RB). My hope is that Bunting/Wheatley/Asiasi all prove to be weapons at TE and the young receivers blossom quickly, but there will be growing pains. DPJ wouldn't hurt here.
December 6th, 2016 at 1:48 PM ^
I would like to think that you're right, but we thought exactly the same thing after 2012 and the 2013 line was one of the worst units fielded in the history of the program.
We have better coaches now, yes, but we're talking about patching up the line with a combination of Hoke recruits that couldn't see the field in the past four years and true freshmen. I think cynicism is warranted. Also, Cole's performance this year was disappointing.
I worry less about the passing game weapons. Darboh was good but not elite, and Chesson was just a guy this year. Butt was terrific but never really changed any games. We know we have athletes coming up behind these guys, especially if we land DPJ. Couple that with a reasonable hope for improvement under center and we may be close to replacing the capability of the skill positions quicker than we'd expect.
If the line can block for them.