Bill Connelly: Michigan’s season has gone pretty much as expected
Bill Connelly has a nice read about how Michigan's season has basically gone how it was expected to go. S&P+ projected Michigan to win, on average, about 8.9 games in 2017. That would drop to around 8.5 if Speight being out for the season was considered.
https://www.sbnation.com/college-football/2017/11/21/16683112/michigan-…
November 21st, 2017 at 12:38 PM ^
Utah finished 10-3 in 2015, and we almost beat them out of the gates. MSU 2015 was a playoff team - and we should have won that game but for a freak happenstance. We beat UW in 2016. 2016 Colorado played in the PAC 12 Championship Game, and we beat them. Didn't PSU win the B1G last year? So, I guess we actually beat both participants in the 2016 B1G Championship Game...
What other "tough teams" have we not looked good against?
November 21st, 2017 at 12:44 PM ^
There were no functional QBs and like 1 good OL and 2 disfunctional OL between the key 2013-2014 recruiting classes. We hit with Newsome in 2015 but then he gets hurt. Anyway, none of that matters after this year. The playing fleid balances out as the top 2014 and 2015 recruits from other teams graduate or go to the NFL.
If we are sitting here next year at 8-4 with a mess at QB and/or the offense in general, then this "Harbaugh" has been a disappointment view becomes correct in my view. I think we are a top 10 next year with a shot at the playoffs.
My views on 2016-2018 haven't changed since the Oregon State game from 2015. Last year was a disappointment based on some bad bounces and calls but this year was entirely predictable.
November 21st, 2017 at 12:55 PM ^
and next year speight and peters will both have experience and should be servicable at a minimum. who knows, with experience, QB could actually be a strength.
the D will obviously be top notch again. the skilled positions will also be better and deeper. it all rests on the OL again. LT will obviously be the biggest concern; a healthy newsome would be nice.
November 21st, 2017 at 11:58 AM ^
November 21st, 2017 at 11:59 AM ^
8-4 was a reasonable expectation, but it's not so much that we've lost those games, but rather how awful we looked in each of them.
5 turnovers to MSU, getting outclassed on every level by PSU, the whole team collapsing at Wisconsin the minute Peters went down, and a very probably de-pantsing and utter humiliation against OSU this weekend. It's showing next to no signs of improvement on the offensive side of the ball week to week. And when I say improvement, I mean showing improvement against teams with a pulse.
No one gives a shit about running over Minnesota.
November 21st, 2017 at 12:35 PM ^
Most of the time when you lose something looks really really bad. Because that's usually why you lose.
November 21st, 2017 at 12:39 PM ^
100% agree. Look at Michigans 8 wins, to an outsider they'd probably figure a couple nice wins in there. Nope, "best" win is @Purdue. MSU outcoached us, PSU flat out embarrassed us, and WIS beat us at our own manball game. In our wins we've just looked average at best. Still no legit passing game, players look like robots, the play calls (3rd and 8 toss sweep). From a spectator standpoint the best half of football Mich has played all year is either the 1st or 2nd half of Florida. Where they "look" the part. I havent seen a lot of improvement.
November 21st, 2017 at 1:16 PM ^
How can you not see an improving young team? Harbaugh has done a good job in his time at Michigan, but you can not expect a half a team of freshmen to produce more than they have without solid QB play. If you don't understand how much better they looked with Peters at QB I can't help you. They have a great d and with consistent QB play they would be looking at a magical year, you don't get magical years when you get to the 3rd guy at QB*. (*fuck you ohio State you don't count)
November 21st, 2017 at 1:48 PM ^
November 21st, 2017 at 6:54 PM ^
November 21st, 2017 at 11:59 AM ^
This may be true as a whole but a couple things:
1) There seem to be a lot of people on here claiming in hindsight that they had us at 8-4 or 9-3. BS. I saw so many 10-2 and 11-1 predictions with OSU and Florida as the potential losses. I didn't see many with MSU as a loss but whatever, it's one game.
2) This leads to my next point but what is our best win this year? Not a rhetorical question. I'm curious to see what the answer is.
3) That post yesterday about us being 1-18 as underdogs tells the story no matter what excuses people want to make. 1-18! That is by far the worst and any reading of it is fucking horrendous. There were people still trying to excuse that one. That is not "pretty much as expected." OSU and MSU have winning records as underdogs. What does that tell you? And not to depress anyone, but just think for a second how many years it would take to bring that record anywhere near .500
November 21st, 2017 at 12:10 PM ^
Re: #2
So far, it's either Purdue or Indiana. Considering Michigan went to OT against Indiana, I would say Purdue was Michigan's best overall performance relative to the competition played.
November 21st, 2017 at 12:21 PM ^
don't have a good win this season. I think we have played well for stretches but we don't have a good win. The only thing irritating me about the local and national discussion regarding Michigan right now is the manner in which they are discussing the defeats. The wheels came off in the fourth quarter against Penn State. Aside from that, we have been very competitive every moment of the season. Even the Penn State game was a one score game at half-time. But if you listen to everybody in the media we have been getting beat the way OSU beat MSU and that simply isn't the case.
November 21st, 2017 at 12:50 PM ^
There is no conspiracy or anything like that though. The way the media and others talk is a reflection of the actual results and people around here would be wise to figure that out sooner rather than later. I live and die Michigan like everyone else in here but the fact is we're meeting expectations of an average at best football program. And no matter how many nerves that hits it's the truth.
We are probably the 5th best program in the Big Ten currently. There is no doubt that right now OSU, PSU, MSU, and Wisconsin are ahead of us. The achievements say they are. There is no way to argue otherwise unless you are trying to talk about branding, hype, academics, etc. And those are all off the field.
No conference title since 2004. Haven't had back to back seasons of 2 losses or less since 88-89. Have had 3 in a row since the 70s. Lost 14 out of the last 15 to OSU.
This week would be a great week to start changing all of that. In the meantime, we can't continue to live off a history that is 40 years removed. I like where we are headed with JH but let's try not get mad at people outside the program who are stating the obvious and irrefutable.
And before anyone says troll, no. I'm an alum. I just hate excuses as I come from a military family. Meeting high expectations starts with having them in the first place.
November 21st, 2017 at 12:57 PM ^
wasn't saying any of that. I know you're not a troll. I discuss things with you all the time. All I was saying is that I think that people are using hyperbole in discussing our losses this year. I'm not "living off" of history, or even addresssing history, at all. I was just making one statement about this season in response to your post about our wins this year.
November 21st, 2017 at 1:14 PM ^
Yeah. Sorry. That wasn't directed at you actually. It was just piggybacking off of what you said and expanding on it rather than in opposition to it.
November 21st, 2017 at 1:52 PM ^
get it, but I don't think you can say that we are the fifth best team/program in the conference. I think we are on much better footing than MSU. I think in time we will seperate ourselves from Wisconsin. Yes, Penn State beat us this year and won the conference last year, but there is no way to tell how much staying power they are going to have, particularly if they lose their OC.
This has been a rough season, but nothing more than that. I don't think there is any reason for us to dive into what this team has and hasn't done before Harbaugh got here. He had no control over that. What he did when he got here was take a group of players that had gone 5-7 the previous year and were predicted to win 7 games max and win 10 games with a grad-transfer QB (who wasn't sniffing the NFL until Harbaugh got ahold of him). Last year we were in the Top 5 in the nation almost the entire year and lost a heartbreaker to OSU and likely would have been in the CFP had we snuck out of there with a win.
This year, we lost a ton of talent (that we frankly did not know we had until Harhaugh got here) and are taking a step back. The only loss that is out of place this year is the State game, and they earned that one, but there were certainly some extenuating circumstances.
Harbaugh is being asked to answer for much more than he created right now. He did not create the stale program that he inherited. In fact, he revived it much sooner than anybody expected. That is the only reason we are even having this conversation right now. In fact, it seems non-sensical that people want to both cite both Michigan's consistent mediocrity in the modern era of college football as hard as they are but also hold Harbaugh to the fire for not winning big already. That is illogical criticism.
November 21st, 2017 at 2:45 PM ^
Yes, I most certainly can say we are the 5th best program. There is evidence to back it up. What there is not evidence of is to say the opposite as you did.
-You said we are on a much better footing than MSU. What does that even mean? They beat us and have been beating us with worse overall talent. That is a fact.
-You said in time we will separate ourselves from Wisconsin. That is future tense. Hope you're right but in the present and recent past, they have been better with more achievements. That is also a fact.
- PSU. You say there is no telling how much staying power they will have. Fact: They are recruiting right there with us and they have more achievements as of late than we do. Your view is based on a future hope. What I said is based on present and recent facts.
-OSU. We don't need to go there.
Everyone wants to turn this into a Harbaugh argument. I never said a word about him. I am talking about what the post is about: expectations. It's not about Harbaugh.
So it's not illogical at all. Illogical is maybe convincing yourself that we are more than what we are or have been for many years now. We are one of four good programs mixed in with a great one in OSU.
November 21st, 2017 at 2:48 PM ^
We are better than MSU? The same MSU that won the Big Ten in 2010, 2013, and 2015? And made the playoff in 2015? And won 11 games 5 of the last 8 years? And beaten Michigan 8/10 times since Lloyd retierd?
Harbaugh does not have a signature win yet. I think literally everyone here thought that at this point they would have one. The best win in the Harbaugh era is probably the beatdown of Florida in the bowl game after 2015. I think Michigan obviously has to stay the course at this point but it's unsettling that they don't have a signature win yet and are looking at an absolutely brutal 2018 schedule.
November 21st, 2017 at 3:17 PM ^
we are better than MSU. Harbaugh has nothing to do with what has happened against Michigan State "since Lloyd left." You are listening to people who hate Michigan a little too much, and people who would badly like this fan base to lose faith in Harbaugh and have him leave. Don't listen to them man. The sky is not failling.
November 21st, 2017 at 3:22 PM ^
There is nothing to suggest Michigan is better than MSU right now, and their program has vastly outperformed Michigan over the last decade. By any metric you can think of, they are better. I really, really hate to admit it, but it's the truth. I think Michigan has no chocie but to keep pushing forward with Harbaugh, but the fact of the matter is that MSU will be ranked above Michigan in the 2018 preseason polls unless Michigan beats OSU. Literally all objective analysts out there would say the are better. The only possible way you can say Michigan is better is if you are living in the past and looking through Maize colored glasses. I don't get why so many people here still can't understand this basic fact. Everyone here hardly gave MSU a second thought this year despite Dantonio's record against us and look what happened?
November 21st, 2017 at 3:36 PM ^
is not better, man. Sorry. It sounds like you want them to be pretty badly. They lucked into a couple of wins this year against better teams than them. They got us is a rain storm in O'Korn's first start. They got Penn State the week after a devastating emotional loss to OSU and after a three hour rain delay. State sucks. No, not all "objective analysts" would say they are better. They suck. They lost to OSU 48-3 in a game where OSU literally could have scored 100 points. They had to bail LJ Scott out of jail so they wouldn't lose to Indiana at home. Notre Dame blew them out. They were in a one score game with Maryland last week in the fourth quarter. They just came off a 3-9 season, something that not even Brady Hoke managed to acheive. They suck. Stop listening to Mike Valenti. We will kick their ass next year and people are going to feel silly for saying things like this.
November 21st, 2017 at 3:45 PM ^
Michigan has been blaming losses to MSU on the weather since 2010. It's just as easy to say MSU's losses in 2016 were close (which they were) as it is to say their wins in 2017 were close. Michigan went to fucking overtime vs. Indiana and lost at home to MSU after a mother fucking buy week. Lewerke looks just as good a quarterback as anyone on Michigan's roster.
And just get the fuck out of here with your shit talk about how I "want" MSU to be good. Don't even fucking go there. You. Are. Delusional. You and everyone else around here have been insisting MSU will be a 1 year wonder since 2010. The fact is they are good and they are here to stay.
November 21st, 2017 at 3:47 PM ^
suck man. Sorry.
You don't have to swear so much.
November 21st, 2017 at 4:09 PM ^
I'm sure you were saying the same thing in 2010.
When Dantonio leaves it's a different story. But Brian and others like you have been telling me MSU sucks literally every year since 2010. And every year except 2016 and arguably 2012 they have not just met expectations, they have actually exceeded them. They have won the Big Ten 3 times, won the Rose Bowl, have 3 division titles, and have beaten OSU on the road twice this decade. Just look at their damn record as an underdog compared to Michigan's.
November 21st, 2017 at 4:39 PM ^
MSU doesn't suck. But I wouldn't want to trade places with them.
November 21st, 2017 at 4:48 PM ^
Seriously though ljohnb, back up what you're saying with some kind of objective fact. Anything. Saying they suck is basically throwing up the white flag and surrendiering. Even say it's just your opinion, but you have to come up with something better than you have so far because it just doesn't make sense.
November 21st, 2017 at 9:22 PM ^
November 21st, 2017 at 4:57 PM ^
November 21st, 2017 at 5:41 PM ^
That's because we are better than MSU.
November 21st, 2017 at 7:23 PM ^
November 21st, 2017 at 5:58 PM ^
“Haven't had back to back seasons of 2 losses or less since 88-89. Have had 3 in a row since the 70s."
November 21st, 2017 at 1:05 PM ^
I have a bet with my colleague (MSU alumni) each year on UM and MSU football records in regular season. Closest total correct gets lunch paid for by the other guy.
I said 9-3 for UM, and considered 8-4 as a potential due to young team. I had OSU, PSU, Wisc as losses in 9-3, figure to get to 4 we'd have to find a way to lose a game I felt UM should win, which... well, happened. I went with 9-3 because in the event UM had a better season and won a game it helpd further separate me from him to win the lunch.
Cool story - I know - but if you rationally were looking at the schedule I think that's where a lot of people came out.
November 21st, 2017 at 12:00 PM ^
was to excced expectations tho?
November 21st, 2017 at 12:00 PM ^
Great. Can we please beat a rival?
November 21st, 2017 at 1:18 PM ^
November 21st, 2017 at 12:07 PM ^
with losses to Penn State, Wisconsin and Ohio State. I didn't expect MSU, but if someone told me we would have JOK at QB vs an improved Sparty I would have said that was a toss up.
November 21st, 2017 at 1:33 PM ^
The biggest controllable problem is the offensive coaching. I have no idea what the exact problem is but the inability to craft some sort of consistent functional offense to minimize our obvious weaknesses is killing this team. It could be counterproductive long term but once Speight went down maybe a OSU style power spread would have been easier for our young WRs and less dangerous (passing) for the QB while hiding OL weaknesses? (do the blocking concepts at least translate back to our preferred O scheme?)
Outside of PSU this defense has played well enough for Michigan to win every game.
November 21st, 2017 at 12:09 PM ^
November 21st, 2017 at 12:26 PM ^
Honostly they don't have better o-line. Their offense is 106 in S&P (we are 69). Their only offense is Lewarke making plays. They are having every bit the struggles we are on offense. They have just figured out a way to get a few timely drives for touchdowns. Wisconsin and MSU seemed to go 3 and out all day but pull off 1 or 2 sustained TD drives. We seem to go 30 yards all day but can't get that long TD drive.
November 21st, 2017 at 12:28 PM ^
The grass is always greener on the other side. I think our OL is WAY worse than Michigans overall. We're bad a run blocking and just barely tolerable in pass pro. Michigan is at least good at one of those, even if they're a disaster at the other.
I guess we haven't gotten two QBs killed tho, so maybe MSU's OL is better.
November 21st, 2017 at 12:44 PM ^
Your last line... I want to downvote you, but dammit!!!
November 21st, 2017 at 12:12 PM ^
After reading the Larry Prout article and this one I feel completely energized and rejuvenated for the game this weekend. I cannot wait to be there in person to see the greatest game in all of the sport played in person. Go blue!
November 21st, 2017 at 12:16 PM ^
November 21st, 2017 at 12:33 PM ^
MM14, I think you've inadvertently hit on a problem—in terms of performance on the field, which is the only metric that matters, Michigan does NOT have a notable talent advantage over Wisconsin. Throw the recruiting rankings away, because they don't directly determine how players play.
November 21st, 2017 at 2:54 PM ^
How does one compare a 3-star talent that is an upperclassman to a 4-star talent that is an underclassman? One is probably slightly more talented, while the other has more experience and understands how to play the game within the system better which allows them to play faster with less thinking. This is an oversimplification and there are nuances. But, generally these seem to cancel each other out or favor the more experienced player, particularly if they are a 4th or 5th year player with lots of experience against a 1st or 2nd year player with very little playing experience. It also may be worth noting that Wiscy's 4-stars tend to be on the o-line and at LB.
It would be one thing to compare a 5-star to a 3-star (we only have three 5-stars and they are all underclassman and two are on defense). That discrepancy in talent might be enough to give the advantage back to the more talented player. But, Gary and Solomon are our two 5-stars on defense and most of Wiscy's 4-stars are on the o-line so that balances it out a little more. Our only offensive 5-star is DPJ. He seemed to have good results against his 3-star counterpart. But when you compare the rest of UM's 4-star/high 3-star underclassman (which is basically our offense) to Wiscy's low 4-star/generic 3-star with lots of experience which is what Wiscy's defense is mostly...well you see what happened.
November 21st, 2017 at 1:02 PM ^
November 21st, 2017 at 2:34 PM ^
They win with freshmen and sophomores surrounded by upperclassmen. They don't win championships with 4 returning starters (and that may even be generous) and a dozen juniors and seniors total contributing in any meaningful way.
November 21st, 2017 at 7:13 PM ^
November 21st, 2017 at 2:23 PM ^
Talent and experience are always different; last year Michigan had more talent and experience than Wisconsin, and were plainly better on the field because of it. This year, they have talent but one of the youngest teams in the country, and they played like it against an experience Wisconsin team. Recruiting rankings do matter - Michigan was in that game despite having a number of key injuries and inexperience because their young guys were talented enough to compensate for a time. But let's say next year Michigan beats Wisconsin with basically the same team, did their talent suddenly change? Probably not; if anything, the raw talent might take a step back because Hurst has turned into one of the best players in the country.
It's why I don't understand this debate about players in a vacuum. Young players get better; older players less so. Recruiting rankings matter when taken into conjunction with experience.