Too early prediction for next year

Submitted by massblue on December 29th, 2013 at 6:24 PM

Here is the schedule and predictions

Sept. 6 at Notre Dame  (L) Their QB is back
Sept. 13 MIAMI (Ohio)   (W)
Sept. 20 UTAH  (W)
Sept. 27 MINNESOTA* (W)
Oct. 4 at Rutgers*  (Toss Up) Hoke has not shown it can win on the road
Oct. 11 PENN STATE*  (Toss Up) Assuming O'Brien is back
Oct. 18 Bye
Oct. 25 at Michigan State* (L)
Nov. 1 INDIANA* (HC) (W)
Nov. 8 at Northwestern*  (W) Lose QB and key players
Nov. 15 Bye
Nov. 22 MARYLAND* (W) 
Nov. 29 at Ohio State* (L)
Dec. 6 Big Ten Championship Game

7 W

3  L

2 Toss Ups


With some good breaks we could be 9-3 and with some bad breaks we could be 7-5 again



December 29th, 2013 at 8:30 PM ^

But that streak goes back, as you noted, for 12 years.  Trying to divine some greater theme for this coaching staff from past performance doesn't make any sense.  UM is 1-2 under Hoke against OSU, with close games on both sides.  Congrats on OSU's run of semi-dominance since '99.  They've also only won once in the past 5 tries.

Regardless, OSU is a really good team.  This shouldn't surprise anyone.  But I don't see OSU running away from UM nearly as much as others seem to.


December 29th, 2013 at 6:47 PM ^

Jeez, this is way too early but I'll play along:


Sept. 6 at Notre Dame (toss up)

Sept. 13 MIAMI (Ohio) (W)

Sept. 20 UTAH (toss up)

Sept. 27 MINNESOTA* (toss up)

Oct. 4 at Rutgers* (W)

Oct. 11 PENN STATE* (Toss Up) Assuming O'Brien is back

Oct. 18 Bye

Oct. 25 at Michigan State* (toss up)

Nov. 1 INDIANA* (HC) (W)

Nov. 8 at Northwestern* (W)

Nov. 15 Bye

Nov. 22 MARYLAND* (W)

Nov. 29 at Ohio State* (L)

Dec. 6 Big Ten Championship Game

With the 6 wins I have on there I'm only really confident in App State, Miami, Indiana and Maryland. That's just sad. I foresee us being a better team overall but I can't guarantee many victories after watching this season and the team and coaches deficiencies.


December 29th, 2013 at 7:13 PM ^

Yes I think Michigan has a better chance against MSU next year than Ohio. I'm not exactly sure why but it really doesn't matter because there are so many moving parts between now and next season: transfers, players graduating or going pro, coaching changes, injuries, etc.

I think our ceiling is 10-2 if things go incredibly well. Our floor is 6-6 if things go bad. In all honesty none of us have any clue about what next year will bring because of the things I mentioned: mainly transfers, coaching changes, players leaving early for the draft.


December 29th, 2013 at 7:19 PM ^

Their offense lacks playmakers and that won't change next year. Truthfully, the key to beating MSU next year is UM getting much, much, better  on the respective lines. I really believe that an UM victory has more to do with Michigan getting better than whatever MSU returns.

I know that's stating the obvious, but I cannot emphasize enough the importance of this offseason. Player and team development must be improved dramatically if this team is to do anything in 2014. 


December 29th, 2013 at 8:32 PM ^

Um, many players on that defense ARE going away.  After this year, even.  Doesn't mean they'll crater, but UM's offense was once one of the mightiest in the lands before a bunch of those players left.  MSU will be good next year, but unless they pull of something elite teams like Alabama haven't been able to do yet, losing over half your defensive starters is not a recipe for maintaing FEI rankings.


December 29th, 2013 at 8:19 PM ^

You're saying seriously, this is the year that MSU's defense drops off enough that Michigan has a fighting chance? Like I said, I have been hearing this for the past 5 years now. 2014 hasn't happened yet but for the past 4 years Michigan State's defense has been as good or better than they were the year before.


December 29th, 2013 at 8:26 PM ^

We'll, we're about to see their D with just 1 of those 6 (and could be more) not playing. With Bullough ineligible (let's be honest, the "suspension" is a joke, he'd be playing even if he stabbed a baby in front of Dantonio) we'll get a tiny taste of their D next year. Subtract 5 or more other starters and it's a huge difference


December 29th, 2013 at 8:28 PM ^

Regardless, UM beating MSU depends much more on UM getting better than MSU getting worse. It doesn't matter if MSU's defense is worse if UM's offense continues to flounder.  UM will still lose.

It isn't likely that MSU's defense will be as experienced or dominant as they were this year. That does not mean they won't field a very good defense. They most likely will.  


December 29th, 2013 at 8:36 PM ^

Again, losing 6 starters is a big deal for any defense, especially when those players are at key positions like cornerback.  MSU's defense is predictaed on those DBs being able to survive on islands against WRs.  If the next guys up are even a bit worse, that throws off the whole defense and will create holes.  Nobody is saying MSU is going to look like UM's defense under GERG, but teams without dominant recruiting bases don't usually keep it going after semi-massive attrition.


December 29th, 2013 at 9:01 PM ^

Hate to give MSU props, but they lose 5 starters off that D, Allen, Bullough, Dennard, Lewis, and Reynolds.  Hoover was not a starter most of the year.  AS far as replacements?  You guys remember Ed Davis?  Yeah, their backup LB to Allen was an animal against us and OSU, had 4 sacks in those 2 games. 

MSU's defense, like all good defenses, is built on depth.  They go 2 and 3 deep every game and keep guys fresh, it's what I hope for our defense some day.  So while they lose some guys, they have experienced guys ready.  Their D line is going to be stacked and better than this year.  Davis steps into Allens spot at the WILL, Drummond is probably already better than Lewis and Williamson, who has already been a stud, joins him.  Waynes was probably the 2nd best corner in the B1G to Darqueze Dennard this year, he'll be an All American candidate next.

Bullough is the guy they'll miss the most, but we sure thought they would take a huge step back at MLB without Greg Jones too.  Overall they will take a step back on defense, but I still expect them to have the best D in the B1G.

MSU is not going anywhere, and their offense loses very little, even the 3 O linemen isn;t as bad since they rotate 8 O linemen every game.  I know, pisses me off, we can't find 5 good starters and here they are rotating 8 guys extensively.  We have to worry about Michigan getting better, not having MSU or OSU coming back to us. 

Hi Gang

December 30th, 2013 at 3:16 AM ^

Bullough, Dennard, Lewis, Reynolds, Jones and Hoover.  That's 6.

Ed Davis played OLB a lot this year.  And he was very good.  No major drop off, if at all.

Hoover was out much of the season.  Reynolds was not a starter until Kittredge was out for the season with an injury - and Kittredge is back.  Knox and Scarpinato were basically co-starters at DT, and their true DT starter (Kittredge) is back.  Again, no real drop off.  They had a field day with UofM's interior.

Lewis will be replaced by Williamson.  Williamson had a great game vs NW (Lewis was injured), and they tried to pick on him, but gave up after they realized we wasn't a drop off.

Dennard will be a major drop off.  But so will Gallon.

Yeah, Max will be a loss - won't deny that.

If you think MSU will have a major drop off in D next year - especially vs UofM - consider how well Lewan and Schofield did against two very good DE's in Rush and Calhoun.  Controlled them better than any OT combo MSU faced all year.  Now, consider Calhoun and Rush vs UofM next year.

Moving Magnuson to OT from OG - well, now there's a hole on the interior OL.  Who's gonna fill that?  And Magnuson (sorry if misspelled) in his first year at OT will likely not be like either of the OT's you're losing.  Who's the other OT?  Braden?  That's the real drop off when considering MSU's D vs UofM's O.




December 29th, 2013 at 11:27 PM ^

No, you're just trying to be different (not unusual for you). You're special, we get it. No one has your insights. You're a magic man. 

Malzahn has been a raging success everywhere he's went. Someone pointed out in a thread a few weeks ago that wherever he's gone has seen immediate improvement and wherever he's left has seen immediate regression. It goes far beyond "one season" at Auburn. Coaching doesn't always come down to being the HC who gets the official credit for the wins. 

He's a very good coach. Its obvious to anyone whose bothered to look at the man's background. 



December 29th, 2013 at 6:48 PM ^

I'm thinking 9-3, one more win that I expected this year.  There are still question marks at o-line, safety, receiver, and on the d-line.  We have all the CBs back and add Peppers.  We have all the LBs back.  We lose Q-Wash and Black.  I think Pipkins injury is concerning.  And, the o-line situation still probably remains our biggest need.  


I'm predicting a loss at ND and two more in there somewhere.  But, unlike many others I think we can win both at MSU and OSU.  I think MSU takes a step back losing all those seniors on defense.  I think OSU takes a step back losing the offensive line, although they're still better than UM I think we can beat them in Columbus.  NW loses Colter and Mark, Indiana loses a lot on offense too.  I think they avenge PSU at home...finally!  But, somewhere along the line they will drop 3 games, but I think they have a very good chance in all the games.  I expect JMFR, Gardner, and Funchess to have big years.  I expect the 2012 class to step up with big improvements from Wilson, Wormley, Ross, Kalis, Braden, Mags, and Chesson. 


December 29th, 2013 at 7:15 PM ^

for fucking 5 years straight now. MSU has had one bad year in that span: 2012, in which they were still ranked #2 (!) in defensive FEI. If you think MSU's defense is going away because they lose a handful of seniors you are delusional.


December 29th, 2013 at 7:45 PM ^

No one thought they'd be good that year. But for 2010, 2011, 2012, 2013, and now 2014 (i.e. 5 years), Michigan fans have been talking smack about how we're going to run all over MSU, and yet we're 1-4 against them in that span with our single victory being a fluke home win that took a 4th and 10 miracle 20-yard pass to Dileo and a last second 45 yard field goal. Against a team with one of the worst offenses in the country in a game in which Michigan was a double digit favorite.

Face it, MSU's defense has been utterly dominant for 5 years straight now. When they had a problem on offense in 2012 and had a bad season, they fired their OC and went out and got another guy. They are now in the Rose Bowl. This is an example of a highly competent coaching staff. An example of a highly incompetent coaching staff is one that has severe offensive troubles that lead to a middling 8-5 season, does absolutely nothing to right the ship the next year, and promptly goes 7-6 and gets blown out by a crap Big 12 team.


December 29th, 2013 at 7:55 PM ^

Anyways, you have to count 2009 because it's on his record. It also is directly analogous to Hoke. In Dantonio third season MSU was similarly bad.  Unfortunately for us he only had to contend with the GERG defense. 

MSU's defense has not been "utterly dominant" for 5 years. It has only reach dominance the past two seasons. Before that it ranged from solid to very good.   You are correct in pointing out that MSU has made changes when it needed to. Dantonio is a superb coach and he got the coach(Bollman) who fit his style perfectly.(Tressellball)

I'm not disagreeing with your overall point about MSU having a superior staff right now. But considering where MSU was in year three(where UM is now) I would refrain from gushing too much about Dantonio. He did correct the ship, but there wee definitely questions after year three with Dantonio. It remains to be seen if Hoke will do the same. 


This is a big offseason for Michigan. The biggest in recent memory IMO. Unlike RR, Hoke does have the full support of the alums and AD. He has no excuses in 2014 for not having a breakout season.


December 29th, 2013 at 8:09 PM ^

Those are MSU's defensive FEI rankings in 2009, 2010, 2011, 2012, and 2013. That is a trend towards elite-ness. And say what you want, there are absolutely no "direct analogies" in college football. Dantonio had beaten his rival 3 years in a row after 2009. Hoke has been owned by MSU and OSU the past 3 years. We barely squeaked out two home wins against them in years in which those teams went 6-7 (!)

When Michigan goes 6-7 in 2014 I'm guessing you'll be whining that Hoke had a harder schedule than Dantonio in year 4 so it doesn't count. Then in 2015 you'll mumble something about 1st year starters at quarterback. We have been playing this game for 6 years; by now, we should know how it ends.


December 29th, 2013 at 8:20 PM ^

for three years. Hoke hasn't had the same benefit.Yes, there are analogies in college football. Dantonio has had more than twice as many years to develop his program. That makes a difference.You seem to think excellence comes easy. It doesn't. It takes awhile to develop(as seen at MSU).


You seem to think I'm making excuses for Hoke. I'm not. I'm just pointing out that if you are going to compare the two compare them at similar periods in their respective careers at their respective schools. Hoke has to do much, much, better in year four and if granted it, year five.


December 29th, 2013 at 8:54 PM ^

You're the guy who keeps cherry-picking the example of Dantonio's career at MSU as absolute proof that it takes more than 3 years to become elite.

Nevermind that fact that Saban won the MNC in his 3rd year. And Meyer won it in his 2nd year. And Tressel won it in his 2nd year. And Lloyd of all people won it in his 3rd year.

The point is, all these analogies are ridiculous. It's not the fact that Hoke had an awful year three that really bothers me. It's the fact that the same problems that plagued us are the problems that plauged us in the Iowa and MSU games in 2011. Other than the initial huge uptick in defense and the kicking game in 2011, what year-to-year improvements have we seen? And what intra-season improvements have we seen? Was the team that got blown out by KSU yesterday really any better than the team that almost lost to Akron in week 3?


December 29th, 2013 at 8:39 PM ^

Yes, Hoke has the full support of David Brandon, but I'd bet that there is far more discontent with Hoke among the alumni—especially at the wealthy donor level—than you're thinking.

You're right about the importance of the offseason, but what are Hoke & Co going to do with it? Instead of spending another week with with Wellman and the Navy Seals out in San Diego, maybe they should stay in the weight room.


December 29th, 2013 at 8:42 PM ^

Has there really been any issues with people thinking the players are slow and fat?  They are young and that makes it hard when you play against guys 2-3 years older who've been in a college weight system for years, but the S&C arguments always strike me as silly.  Taylor Lewan and Jeremy Gallon sure seemed strong enough out there.


December 29th, 2013 at 9:09 PM ^

My experience working in a college S&C program is limited compared to a guy like Wellman, but I have spent roughly 2 years working with various college sports teams including FCS football.  People vastly over-rate what the strength coach can do with any kid.  Most kids don't come into a college program with very much weight training experience.  Even more importantly, strength does not highly correlate to on field success in any sport, although it's probably more important at positions like offensive and defensive line.  And, third, the strength staff can only moderate improve speed, agility, and quickness.  There are all sorts of small improvements to general athleticism they can give an athlete.  But, motor control, the ability to read, react and anticipate plays is still far and above what makes a good athlete a good athlete.  This is also why combine workouts are not highly correlated to NFL success. A good 40 time, a good bench press, and a good vertical jump don't make you a good football player.  Being a good football player makes you a good football player.  S&C coaches can make you bigger, faster, and strong to a degree but they can't make you better football players.  Experience and being good at football make you a lot faster at reading and reacting to plays than improving your 40 time, your agility on drills, or your vertical jump does.


December 30th, 2013 at 1:39 AM ^

Defense has been dominant for 2 years now. Before that they were good but not near this level.  I don't fucking care how many times you and the other idiot try to shout it, it won't make it true. You guys really think MSU is going to be able tyo do what no other team in college football has been able to do and sustain a top 3 defense over a long period of time. Fuck Alabama couldn't do it but somehow MSU is the new standard.


December 29th, 2013 at 7:46 PM ^

Yep, lets keep carrying on like MSU and Michigan have the same expecations. Let's pretend that two Big Ten titles and two division titles are just flukes. Lets keep pretending that MSU has the same resources and prestige that Michigan has. Lets pretend like MSU having more 11 win seasons in the past four years than Michigan has in the last 15 years is no big deal because of that season they went 7-6 in between two of them. 

Its hilarious: The people who are trying to belittle MSU are actually making it obvious that they've lapped us. We're trying desperately to catch up to the little regional school while pretending we're a national program. 


December 29th, 2013 at 8:03 PM ^

MSU clearly is the better program right now. They have accomplished a lot in the past 4 seasons. I cannot diminish that.Nothing they have done is a fluke. They have won titles and games by playing Manball(an offense mocked on here) and tough defense. You know, like Bo used to.


MSU is a tougher program. Michigan is soft. It is UM who has to do the catching up, not MSU.