Does a Winning Out Make Jim Harbaugh’s Third Season an Improvement?

Submitted by OaklandInPlay on
Alright, we’ve all seen the tie-breaker scenarios and it’s unlikely that we’re going to Indy. However, if we win out and OSU beats sparty, we would win a share of the Big Ten East. Would this season be an improvement over years 1 and 2?

mgobleu

November 5th, 2017 at 1:13 PM ^

Injured, then overwhelmed, then rs freshman qb throwing at freshman wr's might have just a smidge to do with that ranking as well. I'm disappointed in it too, but way too many variables to just go and dump pep right away.

ScooterTooter

November 5th, 2017 at 1:24 PM ^

Our defense is far younger than our offense, but has performed incredibly well.

Also, our offense didn't look good when we had upperclassmen throwing the ball. 

However, the rushing offense has looked very good lately. We will have to see if it plays out against better teams. 

jmblue

November 5th, 2017 at 1:38 PM ^

But that's comparing apples and oranges.  Defense is generally quicker to pick up than offense.  I think you can also get away with having a guy screw up on a given defensive play more easily than you can on offense, where one guy messing up often kills the play dead.  And if that one guy is your QB, you're in trouble.

ScooterTooter

November 5th, 2017 at 2:01 PM ^

Okay, but the defense is younger than the offense. It's not the same level of youth. And the QB that started the season was a returning upperclassman starter and the offense still looked mediocre/bad. 

Honestly, I'm just worried that the team is going to keep sputtering along on offense and there will always be an excuse as to why that continues. Next year it will be because the offensive line is young (again). How do you replace Mason Cole??? The line only has two JRs!! Grant Newsome is coming off injury!!

jmblue

November 5th, 2017 at 2:23 PM ^

If you look at that list, three are tailbacks and in fact, that's been one of the strongest positions on the team.  But there are 10 other offensive positions.  Cole and Bredeson have been OK, but there are three other OL spots, and that's where more of the trouble has been (at least in pass protection).  Often, it only takes one OL to miss his assignment to blow up a play.

The most reasonable criticism has been regarding Speight, who was not the same player this year as last, though he also had to adapt to a lot of new faces around him.  

 

Squash34

November 5th, 2017 at 4:43 PM ^

So you expected an offense starting a new center, guard, and tackle and replacing their man back, all American TE, and 2 pro wr, to not struggle at the beginning of the year? Sure, the backs had experience but not all that much. The most important unit is the line, which takes time to gel and get on the same page. Especially when you have 3 new starters, 2 of which are sophomores. Moreover, all the pass catchers outside of Perry were young guys getting their first game action. Expecting this team to be on the same page offensively to start the year is unreasonable.

JTrain

November 5th, 2017 at 2:34 PM ^

I’m quite sure it has nothing to do with our 3 new starters on the Oline, us switching Qb’s three times and a slew of new WR’s and TE’s. Right?
You’re right. Pep sucks. He is dumb. Fire him.

blueblueblue

November 5th, 2017 at 1:43 PM ^

I think so. My guess is that the improved performance of the RBs lately is more about the improvement of the OL than RB coaching. Even if I am wrong, it's tough to understand how we could not have a coach dedicated to a position of such importance who has not actually played the position. I know that opens up a whole new argument about the relevance of prior playing expience, but even if prior playing experience is not necessary, I think it helps a lot with recruiting.   

Squash34

November 5th, 2017 at 4:53 PM ^

Harbaugh is having a lot of the grad assistant coaches and having them switch positions from year to year, (some cross over to the other side of the ball) the idea is to develop them into better coaches by having them have a better understanding of what other positions do. Are you against this too? Because these guys are now coaching positions they never played.

SpikeFan2016

November 5th, 2017 at 12:30 PM ^

Improvement relative to expectations/youth, yes. 

 

Improvement on a raw scale relative to 2016, definitely not. 2016 saw us blow out way more opponents (against a harder schedule) and our losses were nailbiters on the road. 2017 would include a home loss to a rival that's younger than we are and an absolute blowout on the road. 

 

If we win out and then win the bowl game against a Top 10 team, then yeah on both fronts. 

DrMantisToboggan

November 5th, 2017 at 12:30 PM ^

Obiously. Achieving at least the same record as last season (not to mention a win against OSU and on the road against top ten Wisconsin) with all the talent we lost would be spectacular. Would make us popular playoff picks for next season.

OaklandInPlay

November 5th, 2017 at 12:42 PM ^

Jim Harbaugh is the right coach for this program but the offense has taken a huge step back and we haven’t scored over 40 since last years Maryland game. Yes, we lost a ton of starters but returned many key players on offense. Losing 3 games by a combined 5 points and being one fourth down stop away from going and most likely winning the big ten title game, to laying a goose egg in one of the biggest games under the lights in recent program history and getting blown out by Penn State. It all depends on the bowl game result.

jsquigg

November 5th, 2017 at 1:43 PM ^

We have had youth at positions that have a strong performance correlation as well as injuries and even in spite of that there has been significant improvement from the beginning of the season to now.  Depending on what ails the passing game, Pep may be gone, but the receivers are almost all freshman with the standout Black hurt.  If Peters can flash his talent the fanbase will be singing quite the tune at the end of the year and it will sound quite different than it did post-MSU.

Red is Blue

November 5th, 2017 at 1:59 PM ^

Not scoring over 40 is not necessarily a good indicator that the offense has regressed. Minnesota/small sample caveats apply, but last night we scored 33 without being set up with great field position or being blessed with a big turnover margin in our favor. Racked up 400 yds of offense on less than 60 plays.

AA Forever

November 5th, 2017 at 7:46 PM ^

again.  No matter what it is or how we do in it.

Bottom line, Harbaugh screwed the pooch when he choked in yet another game against a team he should have beaten.   After that, the rest of the season was just excuses.

When Harbaugh stops doing that, then he can be considered to have brought about real improvement.  As long as you're crapping the bed in in one game a year, you will always be a second tier coach.

WolverineMac

November 5th, 2017 at 12:42 PM ^

OP, in my opinion the answer to your question is an obvious yes, however the real question would be feelings if we won all but, OSU.

To that my answer would still be a begrudging yes, if we also win a bowl. I can't stand losing to both main rivals and only beating Rutgers, but the youth, combined with being on our 3rd string quarterback to me would make any 10 win season a good one.

I hate saying that, but am excited to see the experience and growth these young guys are getting and they are getting better. If you look back before the spring game hype this would be in line with most and better than some predictions.

JBLPSYCHED

November 5th, 2017 at 1:32 PM ^

...that none of us wanted to see coming but in hindsight seems obvious. So much youth plus we couldn't rely on our experienced QB even before he got injured and then we couldn't rely on his backup either. What happens from here on out is crucial to how we do next season. We need to solidify Peters as our QB going forward and slowly but surely bring him along. I'm actually happy with the all but one dimensional offense we ran last night bc it didn't put additional pressure on Peters to perform. Of course the OL needs to continue to gel and someway somehow the pass protection must improve. We will be in trouble in Madison and against OSU if we can't pass protect better than last night. One dimensional won't win either of those games. But if we win three of our remaining four games (including a bowl game obviously) then I think this season should be considered a step in the right direction. Youth and inexperience all around plus the usual unforseen injuries and adversity mean that 10-3 (again) would no doubt be an impressive achievement. If on the other hand we only win 2/4 of our remaining games (hard to foresee doing worse than that) then it all depends on whether or not Peters and the OL look like they can carry us next season. By definition going 2-2 the rest of the way will raise questions about that.

jmblue

November 5th, 2017 at 12:59 PM ^

Each season should be evaluated on its own.  Fans shouldn't look for a grand narrative behind everything in a sport with so much turnover from year to year.   I don't care to compare it with the other two years.

If we lose out (7-5), that'd be pretty disappointing, with at least one bad loss (Maryland).  I'd want to see a strong bowl performance to take the sting out.

If we finish 8-4, I'd pretty much shrug my shoulders given the youth and QB situation.  I'd still want to see a bowl win though.

9-3 would be solid.  I'd take that.  That was my preseason expectation, assuming a healthy Speight.

10-2 would be excellent, beyond my expectations.  

 

WholeMilk

November 5th, 2017 at 3:03 PM ^

And I think that a case could be made that even if we didn't win out but still beat OSU (say a Wisconsin loss) then that's an improvement.  But winning out is undoubtedly an improvement that would show that we've grown throughout the season with the consistent play necessary to string together big wins. Not to mention, it always feels better to finish the season on a high note.

BlueMk1690

November 5th, 2017 at 12:48 PM ^

(1) What is "a winning out"? That's not a noun.

(2) The question is about how we would evaluate a hypothetical outcome that would be, if it happened, 3 weeks in the future. What exactly makes you think of asking the question at this point in time? There's no point to the question or the subsequent conversation.

But it does feed the idiocy here where after a couple easy wins over a couple bad opponents people build up these expectations again, which will then lead them to melt down when the results aren't going our way.

 

charblue.

November 5th, 2017 at 1:25 PM ^

consensus anywhere that Mchigan was a Top 10 team except hopeful feeling among this fan base that Harbaugh would surprise and somehow produce results that were similar to his past elsewhere even without accounting for the cirucumstances of in-season injuries that took away our starting qb in week four.

Regardless of the effectiveness of any quarterback entering the MSU game, most people didn't think that Harbaugh fumbled the decision after he was forced to replace him with O'Korn especially after his in-game performance at Purdue. That isn't even a fair assessment of this season, let alone a perspective worth debating.

People were anxious tp see O'Korn play until he disappointed with extreme prejudice in throwing three picks against the Spartans in which Michigan still had a chance to win in its final possession. That loss is still disappointing way more than getting blown out in Happy Valley, a game in which Peters involvement would have made no signifciant difference.

This season is the result of playing a young team without any senior assets on offense. So, let's see how the team performs the rest of the way before making other premature judgments.

 

 

SD Larry

November 5th, 2017 at 12:50 PM ^

with this young team with a qb who was 3rd on depth chart at beginning of season, absolutely.  Personally think this team is getting better each week since PSU and our running game is the best it has been in awhile.   Palpable improvement in run game and blocking.  Have to mprove pass pro though to win next 3 games.