Detroit News UM Season Preview
Several articles today in the paper regarding the team, including a game by game prediction for the season (Angelique has us going 10-2), and an article on JMFR.
http://www.detroitnews.com/article/20140826/SPORTS0201/308260003
Saturday cannot come soon enough! Go Blue!
August 26th, 2014 at 8:44 AM ^
Sent from MGoBlog HD for iPhone & iPad
August 26th, 2014 at 8:53 AM ^
program progress and development standpoint. This would mean that our road game performance probably doesn't improve. The 'domer game is critical to win. After that, we need to beat and shutup some other programs ... on the road.
August 26th, 2014 at 9:02 AM ^
Michigan struggle with bad football teams.
August 26th, 2014 at 9:37 AM ^
With the possible exception of Iowa 2011 (they finished 7-6), Hoke's UM teams won their first 10 games against bad teams by an average score of 41-9. Of course last year they had big problems with three sub-.500 teams in Akron, UConn, and Indiana. Recency effect.
August 26th, 2014 at 10:23 AM ^
of kind of beating teams we should beat does not erase the last 8 years of struggling to watch Michigan beat terrible teams like Purdue, Toledo, Appalachian State, etc. Or should I go on?
August 26th, 2014 at 10:51 AM ^
August 26th, 2014 at 11:46 AM ^
August 26th, 2014 at 12:43 PM ^
Canadian politics are fine. They're the political equivalent of a teddy bear tea party. All Canadian politics are simply a bunch of guys agreeing that the Mounties deserve to have new saddles. Unanimous vote.
That's not real politics...
August 26th, 2014 at 11:02 AM ^
go on. Look, I feel the same way about letting bad teams hang around. 2013 was a depressing season and included a lot of bad things. Let this season get started before you strike up the dirge.
August 26th, 2014 at 10:27 AM ^
I think relegating progress and development to only wins and losses is completely idiotic.
August 26th, 2014 at 12:24 PM ^
It's unreasonable to expect this Michigan team to win games on the road against ND, MSU, and OSU in a single season. Suggesting that should be the standard for success is just setting yourself up for disappointment and giving yourself a license to bitch (unjustifiably).
Taking 2 of 3 of that gauntlet would be a major win for us and if they take all 3, well then we're probably closing out out the regular season in Indianapolis and staring at a good shot at making the playoff.
August 26th, 2014 at 2:06 PM ^
...and put $10K on Michigan over 7.5 wins, and we won 8, would that be acceptable to you?
Sure, 8-9 wins may be unacceptable as a regular thing, but this year it depends on how we play and who we beat.
August 26th, 2014 at 3:48 PM ^
August 26th, 2014 at 8:54 AM ^
August 26th, 2014 at 8:55 AM ^
August 26th, 2014 at 9:10 AM ^
August 26th, 2014 at 12:28 PM ^
Making that prediction is as difficult as predicting the sun rising in the morning.
August 26th, 2014 at 8:58 AM ^
August 26th, 2014 at 10:25 AM ^
believing the OL can be consistent enough for 10+ wins for a few reasons.
1. Every one of the linemen, save Cole, lived through the 2013 travesty and are loath to repeat it.
2. Not all the ails of the OL was the fault of the five or six up front. Example, the first hard hit Gardner took last year was thanks to an ole block by Fitz (ND game).
3. I think people are jaded from last year and are giving far too much weight to last year's failure and not enough to the growth, experience, and confidence to this year's unit.
4. While it wasn't football, I have personally coached up professional team units from the very dregs of failure to the pinnacle of success from one "season" to the next. So I know that it can be done.
August 26th, 2014 at 11:32 AM ^
is that the 2012 oline was pretty bad too. Everyone seems to focus on the oline's performance in 2013, but heading into 2013 the mantra was the oline couldn't be any worse then it was in 2012. I'm in my mid 40's and the last two years might be two of the worst oline's I've seen UM put on the field.
August 26th, 2014 at 12:46 PM ^
August 26th, 2014 at 9:04 AM ^
No game on the schedule is deathly terrifying. We can win every game we play. We can also lose about six games we play in. If the offensive line can pick up a blitz and is 2011 worthy, 10-2 is definitely not out of the question. If they look like they did in the scrimmage, 6-6 is not out of the equation.
August 26th, 2014 at 9:14 AM ^
Still asinine that we have to go to East Lansing for a second straight year
August 26th, 2014 at 10:38 AM ^
All part of the "Wow Factor"!
August 26th, 2014 at 9:17 AM ^
August 26th, 2014 at 9:21 AM ^
The other Detroit paper had its preview, too. How did Michigan get stuck with Debbie Downer Super-Schnoz, while State gets total program-slurper Rexrode? And before you say, "Look at their performances of late," I read Rexrode back when he was with the LSJ when Sparty sucked, and he was the same. As for Snyder...Stretchgate.
August 26th, 2014 at 9:28 AM ^
10-2 seems to be under the assumption that we take care of business in every game that we are predicted to win. I certainly hope that happens, but odd things happen on game day. Penn State, Maryland, even Minnesota are potential losses if Michigan isn't locked in.
That being said, 10-2 sounds excellent.
August 26th, 2014 at 10:26 AM ^
August 26th, 2014 at 9:44 AM ^
Mark Snyder at the Freep today literally picked the exact same won/lost games as I did in the season predictions thread last week... All wins except losses to NW, MSU and OSU... Creepy and also creepy.
August 26th, 2014 at 9:56 AM ^
August 26th, 2014 at 10:11 AM ^
Needs more pointing.
August 26th, 2014 at 10:05 AM ^
August 26th, 2014 at 10:07 AM ^
I put my annual bet in on the season wins over. 7.5 is just too low. Vegas....they get me every year
August 26th, 2014 at 10:18 AM ^
“I just hated it,” Ryan said. “You run a route and then you’re done. You don’t get to hit anyone.” - on possibly being a WR
Even worse, wide receivers don't get the opportunity to use the offense to tackle the offense like in the 2012 Minnesota game, so there's that added perk as well. Here's to hoping we see some more of that this year, right? Actually, we very well might - I like the idea of having Ryan in the middle in a 4-3 Over personally.
Nice article, OP. Thanks for sharing that one.
August 26th, 2014 at 10:43 AM ^
I'd obviously like to see us win every game but 9-3 would mean that we were able to put teams away that we should and that would be growth in my book.
August 26th, 2014 at 10:51 AM ^
The only problem is 9-3 almost assuredly means losses against either (or both) Michigan State and Ohio State, in combination with one or two losses against teams Michigan should beat.
While I'm happy with 9 wins as a number separated from context, how this team probably gets to three losses is going to be frustrating as all hell, and probably not in a way that's indicative of progress.
August 26th, 2014 at 11:04 AM ^
Is there a real distinction, though?
Say we beat ND, MSU, and OSU but finish with 3 losses. Is that "progress"? I don't think many of us would think so; we'd be crying about how Hoke can't beat the teams he's supposed to beat ala Lloyd Carr.
Three losses are three losses. Either we're losing to the teams that we should beat, meaning we're not progressing towards being a true contender, or we are losing to our rivals, meaning we're not progressing towards being a true contender. That goes for the pessimists. For the other crowd, they'll see three losses as an improvement, because either we are finally taking care of business but aren't ready to beat the top teams, or we are capable of beating anyone on our day, and we just have to learn to focus and close out the little guys.
August 26th, 2014 at 12:09 PM ^
you see no difference? i would gladly take 9-3 this year with losses to Utah, PSU and NW.
August 26th, 2014 at 12:32 PM ^
If it means we're playing in Indianapolis on December 6th, then yes, have some.
August 26th, 2014 at 12:43 PM ^
Of course there is a difference for me as a fan. I'd like to beat ND, MSU, and OSU because beating those teams is fun. It feels good. The theoretical season in which we sweep our rivals is probably more enjoyable than the one in which we are swept.
But in the context of "progress", which is what we were talking about, I don't see any difference. How painful would it be to realize that we have a team that is capable of beating the best teams in our conference, but knowing that we shit the bed in other games? What kind of coach allows said bed-shitting? Do our players have the character necessary to win the conference? Etc.
If we have a team that can beat ND, MSU, and OSU, all on the road, then we have a team that can run the table. Three losses with that sort of team is pretty bad.
August 26th, 2014 at 2:44 PM ^
Michigan wouldn't have to "shit the bed" to lose to Utah or PSU. They could get egded by a key miscue, or a key injury, or a key bad call, and I'd gladly take those losses if they meant wins againstOSU and MSU. Michigan isn't so good that it can suffer key misfortunes and still dominate good teams.
August 26th, 2014 at 11:07 AM ^
I may be more concerned with who we beat this year than the total number of wins and losses. Losing to Sparty and Ohio again in the same season is almost unbearable.
While 9-3 technically constitutes progress, it will be a little hollow if we lose to our three biggest rivals.
August 26th, 2014 at 11:02 AM ^
This team is going 12-0 or 11-1 in the regular season. Have faith people.
August 26th, 2014 at 11:12 AM ^
To quote the first President Bush: "Trust, but verify."
August 26th, 2014 at 11:56 AM ^
August 26th, 2014 at 12:11 PM ^
hope and change.
August 26th, 2014 at 12:29 PM ^
Nitpicking, I know, but that phrase is based off of an old Russian prover and President Reagan co-opted and used frequently when talking to the Soviet Union during his summits to end the Cold War. Wasn't Bush #1.
I've also heard parents deploy it on their children with much success since then.
OK. End politics, back to football....
I agree that 9-3 is an improvement either way. I also think it's unlikely that if we do go 9-3, it will be a pure "we can't win the rivalry games" nor is it going to be a "we swept the rivals but can't win the should-win games." If we go 9-3, it'll more than likely be some sort of hybrid where we win 1 or 2 out of the rivalry games, and then lose focus or let another team out-scheme us along the way.
August 26th, 2014 at 11:07 AM ^
Hard year to predict. There is no one on the schedule who can't be beaten on a good day, including OSU and MSU, I don't see either of those programs being any better this year than they were last year, and we should be much better in all three phases of the game.
Go Blue!
August 26th, 2014 at 11:30 AM ^
8-4. Nothing under Hoke has shown me we can win in hostile road enviroments. Chalk up one more loss.
August 26th, 2014 at 12:08 PM ^
But due to OSU loss we could win in Columbus this year and finish 9-3. Our O-line should be improving and by the end of the season we could be one of the best 3 loss teams out there.
I'm expecting 1 loss to be to a team we should have beaten! If we play hard but lose close games to MSU and ND, or even OSU, I would not be too disappointed in a 9-3 or 8-4 record.
If we finish 8-4 or 7-5 again and get our doors blown off against the tough road teams, I will have less confidence in Hoke being our coach into future years.