Do you think UM would be undefeated against Clemson's schedule?
pointless speculation I suppose. Clemson is talented for sure but in looking at their schedule this year I concluded it was hard to tell how good:
GT
TAMU
@ Syracuse
Charlotte (the mighty 49ers)
@ UNC
FSU
@ Louisville
BC
Wofford
@NC State
Wake Forest
@ South Carolina
November 22nd, 2019 at 9:30 AM ^
Yes
No question about it
November 22nd, 2019 at 10:42 AM ^
Michigan was playing badly enough early on this season that they easily could have dropped games against Texas A&M in week 2 or UNC in Week 5.
In fact, retrospectively, I'd say that Texas A&M was likely a better team than Michigan in week 2.
November 22nd, 2019 at 12:13 PM ^
I agree. Most years, I'd totally agree. However, this year... some of those early games were pretty rough and they weren't against world beaters.
November 22nd, 2019 at 6:50 PM ^
First thought was that we likely would have lost to TAMU given the way we played early in the season. Think they beat UNC on week 5, though. Probably a 1 loss team at about #7 with that schedule.
November 22nd, 2019 at 12:11 PM ^
Yes, but we will never know
November 22nd, 2019 at 9:32 AM ^
The Michigan who played Army and Wisconsin could have dropped a road game somewhere. Or maybe the home game to TAMU.
Obviously I think Michigan today is better than all those teams.
Also, obviously, I think we would lose to Clemson, although I'd give us a puncher's chance at home...kind of like Nov. 30.
November 22nd, 2019 at 9:40 AM ^
Clemson wasn't all that sharp early in the season and somehow they survived. And they didn't change their offense or defense.
That said, I'm in agreement with you.
November 22nd, 2019 at 11:47 AM ^
Clemson is also better than us and 95% of the country.
November 22nd, 2019 at 12:15 PM ^
Clemson also wasn't starting a converted FB on the DL or breaking in a new offense. This is clearly an atypical year for Michigan under Harbaugh.
November 22nd, 2019 at 9:54 AM ^
A&M hasn't beaten a team with more than 4 wins all year. Early-season Michigan probably scuffs its way to a win over them at home (on the road would likely be a different matter). Still, A&M and UNC (at 45) are the only top 50 S&P teams on that schedule. Even with the early struggles, there just weren't many places to drop a game.
November 22nd, 2019 at 9:54 AM ^
Army and Wisconsin were also bad teams to play for Michigan. Army being a triple option, which is difficult to prepare for, and Wisconsin being a team that was able to take advantage of our lack of DTs at the time. May have had an easier time against TAMU than either of those teams.
November 22nd, 2019 at 9:59 AM ^
The defense wasn't really the issue in the Army game.
November 22nd, 2019 at 10:07 AM ^
Army's defense was though. You're still playing underweight players that are doing things different than most P5 teams would. Michigan shouldn't have had a problem, but it's still kind of "weird" and I could see doing better against a normal TAMU defense.
November 22nd, 2019 at 10:21 AM ^
Army's defense wasn't so 'weird' that it affected Michigan's performance. What affected the performance was an offense that didn't know what it was doing, or what it wanted to do. The Army game was a Michigan problem - it had nothing to do with Army. If Michigan would have thrown the ball, or used the running game they had last year (and have again, now), they win that game 45-10.
November 22nd, 2019 at 10:06 AM ^
As a Tallahassee resident I am so happy to see Jimby struggle! I hope he never unburies.
November 22nd, 2019 at 10:54 AM ^
Question about S&P+: where do people find 2019 S&P+ ratings now that Bill Connelly is at ESPN? There are no 2019 ratings on Football Outsiders or SBNation, and I can't seem to find them on ESPN's website either.
November 22nd, 2019 at 12:59 PM ^
You can get it from Football Outsiders but it is buried as a column in the "F Plus" rankings.
https://www.footballoutsiders.com/stats/fplus/2019
I have an RPA Bot that pulls this into a template each Thursday, pulls in the Bovada lines, and then proposes bets for the weekend based on differences :)
November 22nd, 2019 at 11:04 AM ^
After watching ND crush a ranked Navy team (who looks to be better than Army this year) last weekend, I think it's hard for Michigan to play the 'Army is hard to prepare for' card. They just stunk in that game and were fortunate to get the win. If they played today, it would be a completely different story.
November 22nd, 2019 at 11:54 AM ^
Bama has beaten 7 teams with 4 wins or less lol
November 22nd, 2019 at 9:32 AM ^
Yes. But I also think we would lose if Clemson was on our schedule.
November 22nd, 2019 at 6:02 PM ^
I have to disagree with you. Right now, neutral field, we'd take Clemson apart. And I'm not an optimist (OSU, I believe, is going to do bad things to us).
November 23rd, 2019 at 4:20 AM ^
Clemson would dismantle us. Our offense is getting better but it’s not dynamic enough to fool their D.
Clemson hasn’t played anyone but they’re still loaded with veterans who have played for titles since they arrived as FR.
November 22nd, 2019 at 9:32 AM ^
Yes, a down year would be 10-3 with that schedule
November 22nd, 2019 at 9:34 AM ^
Would Clemson be undefeated if they went through the B1G East? highly doubt it
November 22nd, 2019 at 10:01 AM ^
Not this year.
Here's the thing about Clemson: They were the best team in the country last year. And three years ago when they won the title.
Two years ago they were a good team that made the playoff because they had good talent and a manageable schedule. This year they might still wind up winning it all, but they benefitted extensively from playing no very good teams at any point early when they were still cobbling things together.
Weak schedules don't make dominant teams less dominant. But they can allow very good teams to look more dominant and sustain more excellence. This is the same thing that allowed FSU to be in the title hunt every year during their run of dominance in the ACC--they went YEARS without an ACC loss, because the conference was mediocre. They still played a couple of big games, but didn't have the risk of a road trip to Iowa or Auburn that could mess things up.
Let's remove Michigan from the equation, because we are naturally subjective about it: Would LSU, Auburn, or Georgia be in the playoff every year if they traded places with Clemson? Would Ohio State? Would Penn State make a playoff in the past four years with that schedule?
I think the answer to all of those questions is, "yes." Doesn't mean that Clemson hasn't been the best--they proved it on the field--but other teams would look really good with that schedule, too.
November 22nd, 2019 at 12:08 PM ^
SRKJ's argument will be one to circle back to if we beat OSU and appear to be firing on all cylinders.
Early season issues and working through kinks don't matter if you don't have much competition, but if you do they can ruin playoff chances.
November 22nd, 2019 at 10:11 AM ^
Easy schedule can win you a lot games which will improve your recruiting and a shot at the title.
November 22nd, 2019 at 10:44 AM ^
I think Ohio State would beat them but I'd take Clemson against anybody else in the conference.
November 22nd, 2019 at 9:35 AM ^
Absolutely. Who's the best team on that schedule? Wake Forest?
November 22nd, 2019 at 9:54 AM ^
All I know is that I watched Georgia Tech v. NC State last night and the Michigan team that played against Wisconsin would have beaten both of them 28-7.
November 22nd, 2019 at 12:17 PM ^
I like you ijohnb.
November 22nd, 2019 at 9:38 AM ^
Michigan would've been in the playoffs in 2016, 2018, and 2019 with Clemson's schedule.
They probably wouldn't have won it any of those years, but still.
November 22nd, 2019 at 9:47 AM ^
In 2016 Clemson beat FSU, which we lost to. And also beat OSU in the playoff.
November 22nd, 2019 at 9:59 AM ^
Shhhhh
November 22nd, 2019 at 10:01 AM ^
True, but I would counter that:
1) Losses in bowl games aren't all that informative anymore, not since people (eg Peppers) stopped playing, etc.
2) We also beat OSU. I mean, not technically. But on a neutral field? With non OSU ass-patting refs?
November 22nd, 2019 at 10:25 AM ^
So you're asserting that Peppers just decided not to play? Which means you believe he was not injured - that he just decided, at the last possible minute, to not play.
Okay, whatever... We'll have to disagree. I'll also point out that Jake Butt was lost relatively early in that game, as well.
November 22nd, 2019 at 9:40 AM ^
I think many teams would be undefeated with Clemson's schedule.
November 22nd, 2019 at 11:44 AM ^
Do the math. Even if a team was 90% to win every game they likely don’t go undefeated.
November 22nd, 2019 at 9:40 AM ^
Harbaugh, with Michigan would have 5 losses TOTAL up to this point if we had Clemson's schedule over the last 5 years.
November 22nd, 2019 at 9:50 AM ^
Yes and a big part of that is not having to play OSU every season.
November 22nd, 2019 at 9:41 AM ^
Yes. Literally every team on that schedule is some level of not good.
Meanwhile, we've had to play 4 ranked teams thus far, 3 of which were in the top 10 when we played them. We lost big to one, close to another, beat one close, and absolutely demolished #8 ranked Notre Dame.
Clemson would have the same record as us, or one more loss, if they had to play our schedule.
November 22nd, 2019 at 12:21 PM ^
Clemson had an ultra soft schedule, but this
Clemson would have the same record as us, or one more loss, if they had to play our schedule.
is abject homerism. Clemson beats every team we beat, almost definitely doesn't lose to PSU, and probably beats Wisconsin. Clemson is a good team with a shit schedule. They're not frauds like PSU.
November 22nd, 2019 at 1:25 PM ^
There certainly is plenty of "abject homerism" around these parts. However, that does not mean you have a good understanding of how athletic contests play out nor is there any solid basis for your conclusions here. There are many benefits to a good team playing a weak schedule which allows for the building of many advantages over equally good teams that must face significant competition week after week. For starters, between the emotional and physical wear and tear plus the opportunity to expand your playbook and develop depth...these components are invaluable...and trot out a gaudy record to light up high level recruits.
November 22nd, 2019 at 9:42 AM ^
I'd rather have their game day weather. Last 2 home games: monsoon and damn cold. However, the results made me very happy and well worth handling Mother Nature.
November 22nd, 2019 at 9:43 AM ^
So Wofford was their version of Notre Dame (mid-season OOC cupcake)?
November 22nd, 2019 at 10:23 AM ^
SC has a state law that forces Clemson/SC to play two games a year against a university in SC. So they play each other plus whichever SC school they can get a date on. Add in that Clemson doesn't want to play Coastal Carolina and help their program grow as a FBS G5, and that means playing Wofford/Citadel/Furman/Presbyterian/SC State.
November 22nd, 2019 at 10:57 AM ^
State laws are sometimes....weird.
November 22nd, 2019 at 11:49 AM ^
Brother, there's no place weirder than South Carolina.
It's funny, because Clemson is so far and away the dominant football team in state historically, but politically, it's not a big power in state government. South Carolina and College of Charleston produce all the lawyers, and most of the old money is in lower SC while Clemson is upstate. A lot of politically connected people attended those private religious colleges in FCS, which is why the state basically forced Clemson to keep playing SC even after SC left the ACC in a huff in the late 60s while ALSO forcing SC and Clemson to basically subsidize the athletic programs of these small private religious colleges.
Contrast that with Louisiana which basically set its entire university system to make sure there was no other in state football rival for LSU, or Alabama where the entire Alabama system tried to kill off UAB football because "we don't want them to become another Memphis or Southern Miss (it's hard remembering Southern Miss used to be good)."
November 22nd, 2019 at 3:43 PM ^
Can we have the Michigan state government kill off MSU football?