Michigan 10th in Bill C's First 2018 S&P+ Projections
Title says it. The rest of our schedule:
1. OSU
7. ND
8. PSU
11. MSU
12. Wisconsin
38. Northwestern
58. Indiana
60. Nebraska
74. SMU
80. Maryland
84. Rutgers
87. WMU
Huge drop from our 5 toughest opponents to Northwestern and then to the rest. The good news is that 2 of those top 5 games are at home, and 2 more are in fairly unintimidating road environments.
Bill calls out the fact that S&P is significantly higher on ND than the early human polls are. Winning that first one would go a long way for our team, IMO.
https://www.sbnation.com/college-football/2018/2/9/16994486/2018-colleg…
February 9th, 2018 at 8:48 AM ^
first game no blow out against us. at least we got to keep it close. a win is better
February 9th, 2018 at 8:51 AM ^
February 9th, 2018 at 8:54 AM ^
I think our game will look a little like their game with Georgia last year. Early so there will be some mistakes, two top defenses. I think their losses on offense end up costing them the game as I don't think they'll be able to stay on the field, and their D will eventually get tired. Shea's ability to extend plays will open up just a couple big plays on O and we will pull away late...my way too early game prediction.
February 9th, 2018 at 8:57 AM ^
February 9th, 2018 at 9:00 AM ^
Please oh please oh please oh please...
February 9th, 2018 at 9:02 AM ^
February 9th, 2018 at 9:03 AM ^
I mean, I hope...but those are two separate things to wish for and both are probably 50/50 at best? I hope he's cleared first. Then I hope he has a great spring, and a great fall, and is back to what he was before the injury. Then you can start talking about a "good" OL.
February 9th, 2018 at 10:10 AM ^
He's started all of 5 games in his career prior to his injury. Serviceable, no doubt, but awesome? I'm not sure he's been battle tested or healthy long enough to label him as awesome. I'm also hopeful he's healthy and not too rusty, and if so is our starting LT, however I'm not ready to annount him as an all-conference LT yet.
February 9th, 2018 at 11:04 AM ^
February 9th, 2018 at 1:15 PM ^
If looked at comparatively, he was awesome.
February 9th, 2018 at 10:04 AM ^
February 9th, 2018 at 9:55 AM ^
February 9th, 2018 at 10:07 AM ^
I like your stance, but unfortunately it hinges on a lot of "ifs". If Shea is eligible, if we are healthy, if our o-line and WRs improve, etc. Our defense will be fine, but the offense has to go in the positive direction on a lot of ifs that were not great last year. If it goes the other way and we lose a QB, a starting o-lineman, an important WR, etc. like we did last year I don't like our chances. But, early in the season hopefully means we're healthy.
February 9th, 2018 at 10:26 AM ^
But most of the ifs are pretty well over 50% probability. The confidence around Shea's eligibility is very high. The offense, especially the passing game, really can't get worse. We've had 3 catastrophic injuries on offense the last 2 seasons, the odds of another are low. Our best two WRs last year were freshman, they will certainly improve. Obviously nothing is certain in the offseason before you see it on the field, but we're dealing more with likelihoods than fantasies.
February 9th, 2018 at 10:31 AM ^
I kind of feel like it all hinges on our o-line and that still feels like a big if. When we played defenses with a pulse that could limit our running game we were completely inept at protecting the QB enough and/or having a good enough/saavy enough QB to deal with a lot of pressure. I still don't like seeing our o-line trying to pass protect against OSU, Wiscy, ND, etc. I agree Shea will deal with that better than Speight or Peters, but he's also been TO prone as well. It's hard to make a good assessment on how he'll be in our system.
February 9th, 2018 at 10:58 AM ^
February 9th, 2018 at 11:14 AM ^
No, B is closer. O'Korn had enough time to throw and had open receivers against OSU, the best pass rushing team we saw all season. The OL also blocked fairly well against PSU and MSU. The OL played poorly against Wisconsin.
February 9th, 2018 at 8:45 PM ^
Who said our offense was great?
February 9th, 2018 at 11:17 PM ^
February 9th, 2018 at 11:39 AM ^
I like your optimism!!
February 9th, 2018 at 9:12 AM ^
February 9th, 2018 at 9:33 AM ^
Yeah, I just think they lose too much, both on the field and on the sidelines. The loss of McGlinchey, Nelson, and Adams (along with their OL coach) means we will probably be able to shut down the run. Then I don't trust either Wimbuch (below 7 ypa, sub 50% completion) or Book (below 7 ypa, 1:1 TD-INT ratio) to beat us in the air, especially with over 50% of their receiving yards from last year not returning (St. Brown and Smythe to the NFL, Stepherson off the team). I like Don Brown with 8 months to prepare against that offense.
I also think our defense will be significantly better than theirs. They return as many starters on D as we do, but they finished the year 27th in S&P (Indiana finished 26th for reference), while we finished 10th. They also lost their D coordinator and safeties coach. I expect our D to be top 3 next year and theirs to be around 15th.
I think we need 21 points to win and I think we get it.
February 9th, 2018 at 9:51 AM ^
Yeah, their offense this year really was based on a ground attack that they might not be able to reproduce to that degree with the changes up front and in the backfield. It's obviously a good team and they have talent, but I think the outfit we saw at the end of the year (playing well at times but also getting blown out by Stanford and Miami) is a bit closer to reality than the top-5 team people had them in the middle of the year.
Michigan's defense should be a reasonable approximation of what it was this year; top-10-ish depending on how good Solomon and co. are at replacing Hurst. The passing offense will have to be better simply because it can't be any worse, and the running game should be top-20/25.
I agree 21 points is a good number to shoot for. Only variable is what happens at QB. Patterson has upside that (maybe) Peters can't reach, but I also think people are reading a lot into the USC game and not the fact he looked pretty good on the road against Wisconsin. If he can keep turnovers down and play within a better passing offense, you can win an ugly Georgia-type game with him.
February 9th, 2018 at 10:03 AM ^
And the same ND that almost lost to Navy at home. I think we agree on ND.
I'm more bullish on our D than you are I guess. I think it's a 2016 unit with better LBs. We have the same DL depth with NFL stars on the starting line. We have faster LBs. We have the best CB duo in the conference. I think this is another top 3 unit in S&P.
As for our offense I see no reason that the running game would get worse (finished the regular season 10th in S&P, dipped to 14th after the bowl game) with everyone coming back. I think it remains around 15th and passing offense can only improve, like you said. I'm guessing passing O jumps into the 40s and the offense ends up around 35th in S&P. I agree that Peters showed potential last year, and I was very bullish on him at one point, but I also kept waiting to see the fire come out in him and it never did. After the bowl game, I think Shea is the man this team needs.
28-17 would be my prediction for the ND game today, assuming Shea is eligible and at least one of Calvin Anderson or Grant Newsome is starting on our line.
February 9th, 2018 at 5:04 PM ^
" I'm guessing passing O jumps into the 40s and the offense ends up around 35th in S&P."
So you think next year Michigan is going to have a better offense than in 2015 and 2016?
February 9th, 2018 at 6:09 PM ^
It was 38th in 2015, I think that's about right. Shea can be as good or better than Rudock, our receivers can be better than the 2015 core, and our RBs can be better than Smith was in 2015. The OL won't be worse. Nothing in the 30s would surprise me.
February 9th, 2018 at 10:13 AM ^
I like our defense as well, particularly considering they lose a number of starting o-lineman and don't have a great throwing QB. However, on the road with our offense, it could be a bit low scoring and be a difficult game. I think it all depends on our o-line. If we can get the running game going to open some holes and loosen up the defense for whoever our QB is I like our chances, but that's a major if.
February 9th, 2018 at 11:32 AM ^
Your right about their offense. They return a solid QB but are taking heavy losses at OL, RB, and WR not to mention losing a stellar TE and their OL coach. I go to at least one ND game a year (don't ask why) and their stadium atmosphere is leaps and bounds below what you see at a typical UM game.
On the other hand UM returns practically everybody. I say the matchup favors us. Especially for an early on game.
February 9th, 2018 at 11:36 AM ^
Haha one of my main points is that they don't have good QB play, but I agree, I think we should be favored there.
February 9th, 2018 at 1:18 PM ^
I really want to agree with you, but I have a bad feeling about that game. The wife and I have even cancelled plans to attend. I know we didn't play them last year, but I suspect the loss to Georgia last year in their opener will be a strong motivator for them this year.
February 9th, 2018 at 3:22 PM ^
I mean I think we have 5 pretty strong motivators from last year, plus Mone, Marshall, Winovich, Watson, Furbush, and JBB were all on the 2014 team that got smacked in South Bend. Don't know how many of those guys traveled to South Bend, just saying that we have plenty of motivating factors as well, and I think we have a peronnel advantage. Also ND's first game last year was actually Temple, UGA was 2nd, though I'm not sure that matters.
February 9th, 2018 at 9:03 AM ^
Good lord, Big Ten East
The Big Ten’s projected averages are hurt by three teams projected 80th or worse, plus the fact that only five conference teams are projected in the top 35.
All five of those teams, however, are projected in the top 12. And four of them are in the Big Ten East. Your projected top team, Ohio State, leads the way, but Trace McSorley and recent recruiting have Penn State predicted to remain at a top-10 level, and Michigan’s 2017 youth movement will be expected to pay off next fall. Oh yeah, and Michigan State returns more of last year’s production than any team in the country.
The East has four of the top 12 teams in the country. Not even the SEC West (four in the top 16) can match that.
February 9th, 2018 at 9:04 AM ^
February 9th, 2018 at 10:45 AM ^
You're being as ridiculous as the people you're intending to mock. Probably 70% of the board have valid, reasonable criticisms of the team/offense/Harbaugh to date and are able to put them into perspective. The other 30% is made up the "unacceptables" and the "apologists" of which you apparently fall into the latter. The people complaining about the complainers have become worse than the complainers themselves.
February 9th, 2018 at 12:12 PM ^
February 9th, 2018 at 11:15 AM ^
February 9th, 2018 at 1:20 PM ^
Please God, we wouldn't survive a 3-9 season. We aren't msu. We can't take that severe of a dong punch. Msu can because their dongs are smaller.
February 9th, 2018 at 9:06 AM ^
February 9th, 2018 at 9:14 AM ^
February 9th, 2018 at 9:21 AM ^
early in the season instead of a bunch of cupcakes before B1G play. They're usually pretty good, and even when they're not, they hate us and play us hard (like a smarter, less rapey MSU, without all the Axe body spray).
If ND hands us our asses it's going to be a loing season and we can adjust our expectations accordingly.
February 9th, 2018 at 10:15 AM ^
Rich Rod's team would beg to differ with your stance.
February 9th, 2018 at 12:07 PM ^
or what you're talking about.
February 9th, 2018 at 8:43 PM ^
You seem to be making the assertion that ND early in the season will be a good benchmark and that if we win that will give you confidence we will have a good season. But, Rich Rod beat them in '09 and '10 only to lose 7 and 6 games later that season respectively.
February 9th, 2018 at 9:28 AM ^
These seem confusing. Last years prediction he had us 10 with "returning production" as 13th. This year we are 10 again with returning production of 14th. How do we move down in that ranking?
BTW here is 2017's prediction. I get that this isn't gonna be perfect, but it was really not all that good as a predictor:
https://www.sbnation.com/college-football/2017/2/3/14496224/2017-colleg…
February 9th, 2018 at 9:33 AM ^
It's "Returning Production", not "Returning Incompetence"
February 9th, 2018 at 9:44 AM ^
I think we moved down because Wilton Speight was supposed to be good in 2017
February 9th, 2018 at 9:44 AM ^
Idk man, that was pretty close. The two big misses were us and FSU, both teams that had devastating QB injuries early in the year, which the model can't predict for. We are at worst 10-2 with Speight, probably 11-1. FSU is probably 11-1 with Francois. Other than that he had the following teams with their finish and preseason projection in parentheses...
OSU - 1 (2)
Alabama - 2 (1)
Oklahoma - 9 (5)
Clemson - 8 (6)
PSU - 4 (8)
Auburn - 10 (9)
Wisconsin - 6 (11)
Washington - 5 (13)
Louisville - 16 (14)
He was pretty accurate with his preseason projected top 15 with the few big exceptions, Florida being the one without a major injury to point to as causation, though they did have the credit card scandal that got key players suspended.
February 9th, 2018 at 10:13 AM ^
"We are at worst 10-2 with Speight, probably 11-1. FSU is probably 11-1 with Francois."
Woulda coulda shoulda. Speight looked like crap from the beginning of the season.
February 9th, 2018 at 10:26 AM ^
Did you watch Speight in the beginning of last season? We probably pull out MSU, maybe Wiscy or S. Carolina, but there was no way we were beating PSU and I doubt OSU either. I'd say 10-2 at best, but guess 9-3. Our offensive line could not pass block and our WRs were not great, nor was Speight.