Bill Connelly: Michigan’s season has gone pretty much as expected

Submitted by Blue and Joe on

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-…

MGoStrength

November 21st, 2017 at 2:59 PM ^

Another thing is our biggest strength is our defensive line and our biggest weakness is our o-line.  Most of Wiscy's 4-stars are at offensive line and LB.  The LBs overwhelmed our o-line's lack of experience.  Our d-line still dominated much of the game against their o-line.  But, our d-line has more experience than our o-line does.  Makes perfect sense.

MichiganMan14

November 21st, 2017 at 1:00 PM ^

Our expectations have dwindled from the historic standard in my opinion. It's just Okay to go 8-4 at Michigan now. It's okay to lose to all of your rivals and to lose games by multiple scores. If that makes me a bad fan or crazy to contest that then I will just have to wear that hat to church on Sundays. We should do better.

Tedbossman

November 21st, 2017 at 2:38 PM ^

We lost 11 players to the draft, all data showed it was going to be a step back this year, but you ignored it. No one is saying every year it is acceptable to go 8-4. If we go 8-4 next year, something went wrong. Going 8-4 this has no such implication. And you can think whatever you want, but the idea that our thoughts are holding the program back is so absurd I legitimately thought it was tongue in cheek.

llandson

November 21st, 2017 at 12:19 PM ^

It's ironic that the people choosing to be optimistic by saying this season went more or less as expected are the same people writing off this coming Saturday's game as a loss. Connelly even says it in his piece. I happen to believe this season has been ominous, even before Speight went down, and yet I'm not giving up on the upcoming OSU game. 

After what happened in 2013, I'm never sure what will happen. I am hoping against hope that Harbaugh finds a way to win this game, obliterate OSU's hope of a national championship, just like we used to do all the time in the 90's, and flip the script on this rivalry.

1VaBlue1

November 21st, 2017 at 12:49 PM ^

I think we all feel this way.  Unfortunately, neither Peters nor Speight will, most likely, not be allowed to play.  And while I have respect that JOK will give everything he has to win this game, I (and most people) don't think he has enough.

I hope to God that JOK proves me wrong.

taistreetsmyhero

November 21st, 2017 at 12:25 PM ^

expectations” if those expectations are for a relatively bad season?
2) What would the projected record be if we knew Florida would be a terrible team?
3) Beyond record, expectations were for growing pains with flashes of brilliance from young players that would suggest next year would be set up for a title shot like 2016. That is not at all how this season has gone.

NRK

November 21st, 2017 at 12:56 PM ^

I'll take a shot:

 

1) I realize this is likely a rhetorical question, but it means that you haven't done worse than you thought you were going to do in the context of the overall progress of the program? For example, "meeting expectations" at 8-4/9-3 is wholly different than not meeting expectations and going 3-9. 

 

2) Maybe a little higher, but not significantly?

 

3) At least there's been plenty of growing pains!  But more seriously - there have been flashes that make me feel good about the future: Black looked good in the very limited time we saw him. Peters has looked good for a young QB and I was impressed with his play at Wisconsin while he was healthy. The young CBs have been pretty impressive as well. Hudson has shown flashes.

 

Look - there's plenty to be critical about and I don't have any problem with complaining about the lack of development on the OL, or the playcalling, O'Korn/Peters as backup, etc., but that's not mutually exclusive from the fact that Michigan was likely going to have a down year this year and acknowledging that shouldn't be met with as much resistance as it seems to around here. (I do understand there's been a lot of that so I think some of it is pent up anger at being told "this is okay")

 

EDIT - as noted above, I think we're actually very much on the same page here.

MichiganMan14

November 21st, 2017 at 12:23 PM ^

Michigan has a chance to win 10 games this season still. But to say that it's just Okay to lose to your rival when they kicked off their best players before the season started? A game in which we had two weeks to prepare for? One that we threw 36 times in terrible conditions with an ill-prepared backup qb? That was not okay and that loss was self inflicted. Articles like this indirectly cover up losses like that as if they were legitimate or excusable. That loss was neither. The Wisconsin game revealed a team that appeared mentally incapable of overcoming the Peter's injury. There was no fire once he left. Losing is not the issue. It's the manner in which these games are lost...the manner in which players are rotated and the subsequent results. Losing 3 games is not the end all be all. Michigan should only have 2 losses if that and the Wisconsin game was there for the taking. When you look at the offensive numbers on this season they are staggering. 82 nationally I'm total points. 104 in sacks allowed. 102 in negative tackles for loss. 109 in passing yards. 104 in first downs. These numbers are abysmal. We have to be honest here. Articles telling us that we are to expect those numbers and production from this grossly paid staff are simply not going to persuade those who look beneath the surface. These numbers should not exist at Michigan.

buddha

November 21st, 2017 at 1:37 PM ^

This.

8-3 is not the end all be all. I am fine with the record, for the most part. The loss to MSU was brutal to watch and remains inexcusable, IMO.

The killer for me is our performance though. Our offense is just plain bad. It's Hoke-ian level at this point, and their terrible performances are starting to mitigate the strength of our team, which is our defense.

Youth aside, there is no reason for us to be so bad on the offensive side of the ball. Every college football team replaces players year-over-year; every college football team has to manage injuries throughout the year; and, every college football team encounters forms of adversity. That's the sport.

Yes, our team is young. There is no getting around that. Smarter people than me can probably evaluate the youth / talent vs. experience paradigm. I'm not suggesting youth isn't an excuse; however, is youth an excuse to be 100+ in nearly every major offensive category?! That seems excessive, particularly given both the recruiting and the payroll of our staff.

Are their bright spots? Yes, absolutely. Individual players have looked good over the season. But those spots are extinguished by the "team's play" (not just one person but an entire unit), atrocious line play, the consistent mental errors, a "complicated" playbook that apparently takes "a few years to fully understand," and a coaching tree that just seems strange.

I hope and trust Harbaugh will turn it around next year. But - coupled with our brutal road schedule and the inevitable "monkey on [our] back" that we'll have - I just don't know...

NRK

November 21st, 2017 at 12:40 PM ^

I think you're seeing a lot of that due to the fact that there are people - both on MGoBlog and elsewhere - that are shouting that Harbaugh will never meet expectations based on this season, or in some rare cases, that UM should move on.

taistreetsmyhero

November 21st, 2017 at 12:46 PM ^

It doesn’t take a lot of nuance to say that this season was bad (even in the context of a young rebuilding team), but it is understandable given terrible injury luck and Florida’s shitty season causing us to miss out at a chance at a quality win. And one individual season is relatively meaningless in the grand scheme of the program’s trajectory.

Yet it seems that people either call the season “unacceptable” and think we’re doomed, or they insist on blowing sunshine up everyone’s ass and refuse to call a spade a spade.

NRK

November 21st, 2017 at 12:56 PM ^

Absolutely fair - and this is basically where I sit: it does seem like there's a middle ground. I am extremely disappointed in how the coaching staff has dealt with this situation and I think we should be critical of that - even if we exepcted a down year. To your point - this isn't binary - we can acknowledge a down year and still say "things need to improve."

I think I've +1'ed you on a few other threads where I felt you've done a good job of saying something similar, so maybe I was reading your comments here a little too much inf the "unacceptable and doomed" camp - but I don't get the impression that's where you sit.

taistreetsmyhero

November 21st, 2017 at 1:18 PM ^

I grew up in Ann Arbor, started watching Michigan football when I was 5, and have been obsessed ever since. I started college at UofM during Rich Rod’s first year. I love Michigan football as much as anybody, but if you blame me for being an eternal pessimist, then so be it. Can’t satisfy everyone.

NittanyFan

November 21st, 2017 at 12:28 PM ^

Assuming a OSU win over U-M ..... Michigan 2017 will basically be a near-doppleganger of Penn State's 2006 season. 

An 8-4 regular season.  All the losses to teams that finished the year in the Top 15.  Only 1 win over a team that finished at or above .500 (that being a 7-6 Purdue team).

No regular season games against those "ranked 15th to 35th" type of teams to truly gauge the team.

Bowl Game will mean a lot.  PSU 2006 played a 20th-ish-ranked Tennessee team in the Outback Bowl;  Got the win, and the season felt good.  OK, we weren't Top 10-ish, but a fairly quality victory to end the year.  Michigan can feel the same way, even w/ a loss Saturday.

NittanyFan

November 21st, 2017 at 12:56 PM ^

Win that game and the season is an absolute success, IMO, yes.

But U-M is an underdog on Saturday for a reason - Ohio State's a borderline elite-team in 2017 while U-M isn't.  

Sometimes you need to re-build instead of re-load, and will have a season where you're the 23rd (give or take) best team in the country.  Yes, that shouldn't be acceptable for Michigan in the LONG-term, but I don't see it as unacceptable from the lens of where U-M was in November 2014 or August 2017.

One outsiders opinion, take it FWIW.

Trader Jack

November 21st, 2017 at 1:01 PM ^

For one, that's a Penn State fan. He doesn't represent the Michigan program or the fan base. For two, nobody is saying "we are supposed to just lay down." With how close you are to the program, you of all people should be able to see how bright the future is. The next two seasons should feature the best two teams Harbaugh has had at Michigan. All of this inexperienced talent will be experienced talent and the result should be a couple of special years. I doubt that, at that point, you'll be calling for some "serious fire" in the program.

Dylan

November 21st, 2017 at 12:31 PM ^

I just want to know how many years it takes to get Michigan to the maybe lose two games a year max level.  Five? I just thought we'd get to that OSU / BAMA "always reload, never rebuild" level eventually under this regime.

WalterMitty

November 21st, 2017 at 12:43 PM ^

I think the biggest thing contributing to the Harbaugh is overrated and awful narrative, is the fact that Speight didn't look good before he went down. I truly think he would have pulled it together and let us become a functioning offense, but because he didn't look good, we don't get the benefit of "Well, they lost their starting QB", of course they are going to struggle.

1VaBlue1

November 21st, 2017 at 12:55 PM ^

I subscribe to this view.  Speight had to do everything those first few games - call the play in the huddle (with a second option to check to), read the defense, make the line calls (or at least check that they're good), make sure the WRs and RBs saw a blitzer, and read again for an audible.  I'm sure his WRs missed a lot of routes, also - one yard, two yards there, is all it takes.

blueblueblue

November 21st, 2017 at 1:02 PM ^

The problem here is expectations. There is nothing saying Michigan will get to that level. In fact, looking at it from the cold glare of probability, its just not that likely. If it happens, great. If not, we will be right about where you expect us to be. 

uncleFred

November 21st, 2017 at 3:12 PM ^

In football usually that is longer than 3 seasons. Had Harbaugh's first season not been such a massive turn around, I think folks would be more patient. The "always reload" level requires continuity. You see that this year on the defense. Part of that is Don Brown's style of defense, but a much larger part is the continuity of recruiting and retention that stretches all the way back to the beginning of Hoke and Mattison.

This is the first season since 2010 that the offense had the same offensive approach for three consecutive years. The three years prior to Harbaugh's arrival the offense changed every season. For various reasons, some outside the control of the coaching staff, the retention on the offensive side of the ball hasn't been particularly good.

Depsite the home/away schedule next season, barring critical injuries, I would expect a better record in 2018, and a much better record in 2019. Harbaugh's teams are going to win a lot of games going forward, but given where the holes in the offense are at this point, you're probably looking at at least two more years before we can expect the offense to "just reload". 

MGoStrength

November 21st, 2017 at 12:34 PM ^

I agree with his macro level perspective and that the season is pretty much going as expected (minus losing to MSU).  However, there are obvious glaring issues such as pass protection, the QB question (Speight or Peters), and the fact that the WRs need to take a big step forward before we're going to beat any quality team next year.  I will give the offensive playcallig the benefit of the doubt considered they were hampered by multiple QBs and lots of youth, but that will have to improve a lot too.  At ND, Wiscy, at MSU, PSU, and at OSU are all games on next year's schedule that we'lll need to develop more to win.

buddha

November 21st, 2017 at 12:36 PM ^

I guess I'll tune in around ~July to see what he predicts for next year. Yes, our team is getting better but all of our major rivals are also getting better AND they are on the road (which we have yet to prove we can win a road game against a Top 25 team).

Of course, OSU is going to lose a lot of players to the draft (and JT to the Japan league), but they are so freaking stacked at every position. By November next  year, they'll be a well-oiled machine. MSU isn't quite as young as we are, but they are close! They return the bulk of their offense and defense, and Mork simply knows how to beat us (and win big games).

ND may be the outlier. They admittedly lose a lot on both offense and defense. In fact, they pretty much lose their entire O-Line. But, it is the first game of the season on the road in a hostile environment. And - frankly - that's not a recipe for success given Michigan's recent performances (including performances with upper classmen-laden teams).

I think people - to a certain extent - make too much about the record. I am frankly agnostic about the record, unless we are in contention for the BCS, which we are not. Instead, I would like to see this team play one good game. Put the magic pieces together (somehow). I'd love to see a reasonably competent performance by our offensive line; receivers that don't drop balls; playcalling that doesn't leave the majority of this fanbase scratching it's head; etc. Although the record says we are 8-3, that's a virtue of playing in a league with many doormats. Rather, the eye ball test simply says - although we are improving - we just are not that good at whole areas of "football." This mitigates any success we have for entire chunks of games.

Blah...I'm sad now.

bronxblue

November 21st, 2017 at 12:37 PM ^

When we peer into the future, we can stomach some disappointments in the name of long-term success. When we’re living through those disappointments in the present tense, however, it feels like the sky is falling.

It's this quote that I just want to make into a macro so I can post it every time someone screams "ACCOUNTAB ILITY!!!111111!!!" after each game. The problem for Michigan is both OSU and MSU haven't been consistently down in recent memory, so it feels like Michigan is falling behind instead of climbing out of the ditch. And so, you'll have a year like this where the senior class is basically 3 multi-year starters and some average pieces. This year was always going to be 9-10 wins at the most; they have an outside chance at 10 wins and will probably wind up with 9. That's not the worst rebuild all things considered.

blueblueblue

November 21st, 2017 at 1:00 PM ^

This doesn't really work. The problem is that the quote assumes there will be long-term success. That's not a given. Asking people who are staring at at lack of progress from year to year to just assume that there will be long-term success is a fantasy.

I am not saying I do not think UM will have long-term success, just that it is legitimate, and quite rational, to not assume it will happen. It's pretty normal to make an assessment by looking back on past patterns. Harbaugh has had success in the past, which is what makes current patterns tolerable. But it doesn't mean that people should not be concerned with current event and just assume success will come. 

bronxblue

November 21st, 2017 at 1:15 PM ^

But you are measuring progress subjectively, which is fine but makes this an academic exercise. I think a team that lost so much being 8-3 is sure signs of growth. Last year I thought they showed immense grwoth despite the same record as the year before. Michigan was a couple of bad breaks from playing in the playoffs. To others, it's not. That's the larger point with that quote. You always have to take as an article of faith a bit that performance is predictable based on historical norms.

taistreetsmyhero

November 21st, 2017 at 1:36 PM ^

End results versus the road to those results.

Unless you’re an Alabama or OSU, seasons go in small cycles, and you only get so many shots at title runs.

The first major step of a coaching staff is to prove it can produce a team capable of getting a team to a shot at a title.

The next step is proving that the staff can recruit and rebuild to cycle back to that title run.

Finally, the last step is proving they can take advantage of those special opportunities and actually win meaningful games, division titles, conference championships, make the playoffs, win NCGs.

Harbaugh has done 1/3. There’s no reason to think he won’t manage the last 2, but we’re all impatiently using incomplete data to project into the unknowable future. And some of us are optimists, and others are eternal pessimists.

Wolvie3758

November 21st, 2017 at 12:45 PM ^

I hate that we are already talking about next year. Its going to be a long long off season...I hope we manage a semi decent bowl game against a team we can beat to end the season on a upbeat note...where we going?