ESPN Postulates 3 big changes coming for Wolverines

Submitted by poseidon7902 on September 21st, 2014 at 1:31 PM

http://insider.espn.go.com/blog/travis-haney/post/_/id/3557/big-changes…

I'm a believer that the more you see this stuff, the more likely it is to become real.  The court of media is very convincing (Just ask Winston) no matter if it is how it should be or not.  It's one thing to have blogs and sidebar sports sites saying Hoke has a hot seat.  When ESPN starts pushing the "It's a done deal" line things tend to sprial out of control.  

MOD EDIT - the entire article plus what was behind the Insider link was posted in here. Let's try to leave some value for the authors themselves, please. - LSA

Comments

Cold War

September 21st, 2014 at 1:46 PM ^

We were not dominated by Utah.

We outgained them and the reasons we lost, or at least the reasons the game wasn't far closer, were special teams and turnovers.

Utah and ND are both headed for really good seasons and I believe we'll look at these losses in a less harsh light over time, particularly if we can finish in good fashion.

I dumped the Dope

September 21st, 2014 at 5:44 PM ^

and old enough to still hold a grudge about Woodson winning the Heisman over Peyton Manning.  So there, lets get that out in the open, its easy peasy to come up with a nasty storyline here to satisfy your deep rooted hatred of Michigan.

Its an ESPN writer yes, but I don't think anyone with a shred of authority at ESPN really backs this.  Obviously a struggling coach/team is the easiest story to write outside of a fall camp "quarterback controversy"

J.Madrox

September 21st, 2014 at 2:23 PM ^

If you are going to take an arbitrary TD away from Utah lets do the same for Michigan. Utah can sit there and say if it wasn't for some lucky interception by a 300 lb defensive lineman they would have won 26 to 3.

If we take both "lucky" TD's away (even though I believe Michigan's was luckier, seeing as how Michigan's punt formation is just asking for a team to house one) Utah won 19 to 3. That still pretty much looks like domination to me.

The stats are never going to be outlandish against Michigan because their defense is really good. If you think 0 redzone trips and a total of 3 points from your offense in 2 games vs. teams with a pulse isn't being dominated good for you, for most of us here, that is domination.

Ryno2317

September 21st, 2014 at 2:02 PM ^

I agree. Here is the problem: we don't really do anything well and the coaching staff has shown no signs of being able to adjust. This is a huge problem and we are capable of losing to any team on the schedule. Any team and some of them will be blowouts. Hoke will not last the season.

Ryno2317

September 21st, 2014 at 2:02 PM ^

I agree. Here is the problem: we don't really do anything well and the coaching staff has shown no signs of being able to adjust. This is a huge problem and we are capable of losing to any team on the schedule. Any team and some of them will be blowouts. Hoke will not last the season.

Doc Brown

September 21st, 2014 at 2:02 PM ^

That sounds like the usual broken record refrain from Hoke supporters...

Every week, were not dominated by the opponent, but fell due to X, Y, Z, etc reasons. The excuses for not executing are getting old. Hoke is a nice guy, but it is time for this relationship to end. Michigan and its athletes deserve better. 

We were dominated. Everytime we broke the 50, we somehow fucked up the next couple of plays. We have yet to score an offensive TD against a power 5 conference team. Last night, the team absolutely quit when Gardner was pulled. 

ShruteBeetFarms

September 21st, 2014 at 2:01 PM ^

I didn't see anything special about them. They look like a mediocre Pac12 team to me.

The defense did it's job for the most part. Our offense had recievers open, but Gardner didn't hit them, and when he did the receivers had to do way more work than needed to catch it. And yes, our blocking sucks.

umumum

September 21st, 2014 at 2:09 PM ^

you said the exact same thing after the ND debacle.  I get it that you are all in on Hoke.  I suspect there will never come a moment that you will believe a changing of the guard is appropriate--or that Hoke is responsible for where we are at ( and no longer Rich Rod).

Cold War

September 21st, 2014 at 2:22 PM ^

I'm trying to be measured and may go too far the other way. But helmet to helmet this  team hasn't been dominated yet breakdowns or bonehead plays make scores more maddening or embarassing than they should be.

I see an o-line, rbs, and defense that show progess since last season.

Sports

September 21st, 2014 at 2:30 PM ^

You're correct in that all three of those things have verifiably improved. This is true. However, it has nothing to do with us getting dominated. We were just crushed by a team that will be lucky to reach a mid tier bowl, if not be postseason eligible in the first place. We were dominated in every sense of the word. Just because we would have been crushed even worse last year, it doesn't mean that we don't suck now. 

Doc Brown

September 21st, 2014 at 4:43 PM ^

Yards and time of posession are by far the most overrated offensive stat. What do you call our team failing to score an offensive TD in 8 quarters against power 5 conference teams (and one team that will finish as a mid-tier pac12 team). This team was dominated by Utah's vaunted defense...

Magnus

September 21st, 2014 at 4:38 PM ^

Under Rodriguez, there was both offensive futility (lots of yards, not enough scores) and defensive futility (obvious). That's not the case with Hoke. The offense is producing a fair amount of yardage (but not enough scores) and the defense is pretty stout. The Wolverines are #8 in total defense and #1 in the Big Ten.

MileHighWolverine

September 21st, 2014 at 6:04 PM ^

Bullshit. According to FEI we had one of the best offenses in the country and that was with mostly mid ranked underclassmen with only 2 full years in the system running the damn thing. Hoke has highly ranked upper classmen (except for OL which is still not THAT young) and we can't do shit on offense. 

We basically flipped flopped - took a team with great O and lousy D and now have a great D and record setting incompetence on O.

 

Yeoman

September 21st, 2014 at 9:06 PM ^

2010: #2 offense, #109 defense

2013: #42 offense, #37 defense

I wouldn't call that a flip-flop. 2010 might possibly have been the best offense and worst defense in school history, at the same time. 2013 was meh on both sides of the ball (with some pretty wide fluctuations around the meh on offense, to be sure).

Fremeau hasn't posted schedule-adjusted numbers for 2014 yet but the unadjusted numbers have Michigan's offense at #42 and the defense at #25.

atom evolootion

September 21st, 2014 at 2:48 PM ^

This should tell you how bad we look: 10-10 at halftime against the Miami-Ohio Redhawks, who are 0-19 in their last 19 tries. 10-10 and looking bad going into the half. I've seen people say Notre Dame is one of the best teams in college football because of what they did to Michigan, and that game got Gholson in Heisman talks. Now, Utah's going to be pretty good because of what they did to Michigan. Please... The talk is the way it is because of the name, Michigan. Neither Notre Dame nor Utah is a proven team, and our team is about on par with Rice and Fresno state. Our defense has kept the yardage statistics respectable. They break because they get too much run, because the offense can't sustain drives. That's why the statistics say we weren't dominated. Look at the turnovers and field position and long plays and yards per attempt, and you'll see how we were dominated.

Tagg

September 21st, 2014 at 5:03 PM ^

Utah is going to have a fight on their hands just to get to a bowl game. They will be lucky to win 4 more games all season playing in the PAC12 South and the teams they have from the North. 

Here is their remaining brutal schedule and my opnion of their win/loss:

Washington St.

@UCLA (L)

@ Oregon St. (W)

USC (L)

@ASU (L)

Oregon (L)

@Stanford (L)

Arizona (L)

@Colorado (W)

So far they've only beaten FCS Idaho St., an awful Fresno St. team and Michigan.