First, a quick shoutout to @EJ Holland. I really appreciate your work ethic and effort and your ability to tell it how it is rather than how we want it to be. I’d much rather read your honest appraisal or prediction rather than a glowing Kool-Aid-based review. You are a great asset to our board.
PERSPECTIVE
Years ago, my Trial Advocacy professor, Tom Mauet, asked the class whether the opening or closing statement in a jury trial is more important. Nearly all of us answered the closing statement because it was the last word before jury deliberations. The professor told us that the opening statement, by far, is more important in a jury trial. People intuitively do not like uncertainty and are prone to take a side quickly. Once they do, they unconsciously give evidence that supports the chosen side more weight and become immediately skeptical of evidence that contradicts their chosen side.
This principle applies to other areas as well. Remember back to when you last read an article that criticizes a President with whom you vehemently disagreed. It was easy to agree with that article. But an article that praises the same President or criticizes a President with whom you agreed—your mind likely asked who wrote the article, what is their angle, etc. “Your eyes can only see and your ears can only hear what your mindset is looking for.”
The principle also applies to Michigan football. Some Michigan fans—including some of my favorite board members—believe Jim Harbaugh is not the right coach to make Michigan football a championship contender. He’s been here six years, never beaten OSU, is 3-3 vs less talented MSU teams and the team just had a culture problem created fully under his watch. If you share this viewpoint, know that you will unconsciously view every bit of news regarding Michigan football in a more negative light and will naturally be more skeptical with any positive news. This principle doesn’t mean your initial viewpoint is wrong, but it will make it hard to avoid being a Debbie downer and a pessimist regarding Michigan football until the change you feel is necessary occurs or results change significantly enough to change your mindset.
This principle impacts all of us, even our mods, in some way. Last year the mods told us (and were told themselves) that we had great team leadership and a strong culture and work ethic. The results showed otherwise. As a result, every bit of positive news the mods hear now will pass through that filter. If they hear positive news, is it just Kool-Aid or real? Now we see a much stronger need to wait to accept positive news until we “see it on the field,” even from the mods. (And there’s nothing wrong with that.) Those who gave the mods the wrong info last year will be more cautious in passing information this year too, meaning many are likely to hold back on the positive and accentuate the negative, whether they realize it or not.
But if we (including our mods) hear negative news, we are now more likely to believe it because of the recent performances. Remember the Spring practice comments “the defense needs a lot of work.” I didn’t hear anyone saying “I need to see it on the field” in response to negative forecast about Michigan. I’m not arguing the forecast is wrong; I argue that we take for granted things that fit our mindset and are skeptical about things that challenge our mindset. How would you respond to the statement “OSU will have trouble on the road this year because they have an inexperienced QB?” Would you believe it or say to yourself you’ll “believe it when you see it on the field?”
Ultimately, we will see what happens on the field. But based on recent performance, especially last year’s, most of us see the negatives well but ignore the positives because we were burned recently, especially last year. There are many more factors pushing our mindset to be pessimistic, and we are more likely to underestimate the coming year than we have in prior years.
I think there is a good case that we are more likely to exceed expectations, especially because today’s expectations are so low.
CULTURE PROBLEM
How the team has handled adversity recently and the lack of effort and trust among players shows we’ve had a culture problem. Culture problems must result from issues in some combination with two things: coaches and players.
Many blame Harbaugh for the culture problem. I do too, as he is the coach and is ultimately responsible for the team’s culture. That he’s ultimately responsible doesn’t shed light on whether he can fix it and if he can, how quickly.
I remember reading Bo’s story about LB and Captain, Andy Cannavino. Though it took Bo three games to learn of the culture problem, he fixed it in five minutes. Unfortunately, I’m confident our current culture problem is deeper and will take longer to correct. But the changes Harbaugh made on the coaching team indicates he recognizes it and is addressing it. If and how quickly it will work will play out on the field.
He’s brought in assistant coaches in Bellamy, Hart and Morgan who experienced a strong culture and won or were regularly competing for championships. He’s brought in younger and hungry coaches, most of which are also better recruiters. It appears some of the coaches who left may have contributed to the culture by continuing to start underperforming favorites despite on-field performance.
When players have transferred, I’ve seen complaints on the board about the transfers. Are the transfers indicative of the culture or an improving culture? Remember that players contribute to the culture too. I’d argue that most (but not all) of the transfers will improve culture. Most transfers would have contributed little on the field. Regarding the two potentially contributing ZC’s who left, the RB room has talent and hard workers and the Center bailed before we knew the season was over—which indicates to me he wasn’t the kind of player to improve culture.
Will it be enough? Will find out. You don’t have to be a rocket scientist to have seen what Will Johnson told EJ recently—that our team looked disinterested and showed a lack of energy and passion. Had we played with the same talents and schemes as last year but with passion and energy and played all regular season games, what would our record likely have been? Let’s assume we would have lost @Wash and @OSU and won the other three non-conference games. If we played with passion, I think we would have beaten MSU and PSU (maybe McNamara’s injury puts the latter into question). This would have made our record 7-5 or 6-6 by itself. To me, barring injuries, this should be our floor this year.
DEFENSE
I loved Don Brown and wish him nothing but the best now at the school 15 minutes from my home. But he needed to go. His defenses stymied OSU in 2016 and to an extent in 2017. OSU adjusted and hired Ryan Day, and along with Indiana, figured out how to beat Brown’s defense. He couldn’t or wouldn’t adjust and the results became predictable. Our opponents could figure out exactly what our defense was doing before the play started—whether by stealing signs or by sending a TE in motion coupled with our predictability—and the results played out as one might expect.
We have a new defense. They’ll be a learning curve, and the defense in the Fall and as the season progresses will be much better than the Spring, when players were first learning it.
I think we’d all agree that in college football, offenses are ahead of defenses. Few think today’s best defenses can hold good offenses below 30 points. In 1997, one team scored 24 points against our defense (actually, one TD came off a punt return) with the next two highest teams scoring 16 points against us. Times have certainly changed.
To my untrained eye, it appears most offenses look over the defense as it sets up, have their offensive coaches determine the right play and signal it in from the sideline so that the QB has only a few reads to make and limited thinking to do. This might explain why many schools have success with QBs executing at a higher level earlier in their careers. They have less reading of the defense to do because the coaches take care of it for them. QBs have to successfully focus on only a few reads to thrive today.
Our new defensive philosophy appears designed to combat today’s high-powered offenses by preventing offensive coaches from knowing what the defense will do—the exact opposite of our prior defense that said here’s what we are doing, “deal with it,” which eventually became “have at it.” I don’t know of any college defense that operates as ours will now. Today’s offenses force defenses to react, which is why they have had the advantage. What will happen when college offenses and QBs who have to date made limited reads suddenly have to react on the fly? Even if we are still missing a few key players to fit the new defensive approach, confusing offensive coordinators and QBs will go a long way if our defense can cause it.
Here’s a link I found on the ideas behind the Raven’s defense that you might find interesting.
https://www.si.com/nfl/2018/10/17/ravens-titans-amoeba-defense
@thedude2403… expressed the concern that our new defense will still be in learning mode causing players to think and react a little slower. That is true. While our defense should react faster over the season—let’s be thankful the defense had Spring practice to start learning—the offenses will have to think on the fly too.
OSU
When I was in school (during CBs time), Michigan dominated OSU, often beating OSU teams with significantly more talent. Now we’ve had a longer dominance period the other way. Still, I am rather surprised with how our collective mindset has changed for so many to believe we have little to no chance to beat OSU this year. While of course OSU will be favored, this is our best chance in several years to beat OSU.
They will start a talented but inexperienced QB on the road against us. Against Don Brown’s defense, they knew exactly what was coming and how to attack us to consistently create mismatches. (Even when Haskins came in off the bench late in the game a few years ago, he shredded our defense immediately.) That’s gone now, and you can bet our defense will save some options for OSU. How will young OSU QBs react on the fly on the road?
Our QB play against OSU (and against many teams recently) has been atrocious. While our QB room is young, there is reason to believe it will be significantly improved—and at least serviceable—but with plenty of opportunity for growth. While it means less than some may be taking it today, I’m not surprised JJ has come out swinging and am glad Cade needs to bring it if he wants the starting job.
Too many players on Michigan teams appeared to play for themselves rather than for something greater. These players folded when adversity hit. We’ll see more pride and heart this year than we’ve seen for some time, which sadly, doesn’t say much, but will make a huge difference.
This is our best chance to beat OSU in years. While they may be a recruiting machine, they are not invincible as the mindset of many on this board seems to imply.
Calling it now, Michigan 31—OSU 26.
OVERALL RECORD
If today you predict a 7-5 record after looking at the schedule—as do @ChrisBalas and Angelique, super-connected people who know much more than I do about Michigan football—you likely assume Michigan beats the teams where it should be favored (W. Michigan, N. Illinois, Rutgers, @Nebraska, Northwestern, @MSU, and @Maryland) and lose all the games against the better teams on our schedule (Washington, @Wisconsin, Indiana, @PSU and OSU), or win one of the latter but lose one of the former. If you base it on last year’s performance with a slight culture improvement, I get coming up with 7-5 (or less with no improvement). With all due respect, those who were burned last year with their overpredictions are some of the most likely to have the mindset bias discussed above (even if they don’t want it). A 7-5 record should be the floor. Had last season not occurred, I believe these 7-5 predictions would have been 9-3, with 7-5 being the floor.
Michigan’s 1997 12-0 season came after four straight 8-4 seasons. At the time, many were calling for Carr to be replaced. Who among us saw the 12-0 season coming? (Please do not mistake this as any implication we will repeat 1997 this year.)
Time will tell how we’ll do this year. Having lower expectations does bring one benefit—the pleasure of exceeding them becomes far greater.
I look forward to a new season and removing the stench from last year’s performance.
PERSPECTIVE
Years ago, my Trial Advocacy professor, Tom Mauet, asked the class whether the opening or closing statement in a jury trial is more important. Nearly all of us answered the closing statement because it was the last word before jury deliberations. The professor told us that the opening statement, by far, is more important in a jury trial. People intuitively do not like uncertainty and are prone to take a side quickly. Once they do, they unconsciously give evidence that supports the chosen side more weight and become immediately skeptical of evidence that contradicts their chosen side.
This principle applies to other areas as well. Remember back to when you last read an article that criticizes a President with whom you vehemently disagreed. It was easy to agree with that article. But an article that praises the same President or criticizes a President with whom you agreed—your mind likely asked who wrote the article, what is their angle, etc. “Your eyes can only see and your ears can only hear what your mindset is looking for.”
The principle also applies to Michigan football. Some Michigan fans—including some of my favorite board members—believe Jim Harbaugh is not the right coach to make Michigan football a championship contender. He’s been here six years, never beaten OSU, is 3-3 vs less talented MSU teams and the team just had a culture problem created fully under his watch. If you share this viewpoint, know that you will unconsciously view every bit of news regarding Michigan football in a more negative light and will naturally be more skeptical with any positive news. This principle doesn’t mean your initial viewpoint is wrong, but it will make it hard to avoid being a Debbie downer and a pessimist regarding Michigan football until the change you feel is necessary occurs or results change significantly enough to change your mindset.
This principle impacts all of us, even our mods, in some way. Last year the mods told us (and were told themselves) that we had great team leadership and a strong culture and work ethic. The results showed otherwise. As a result, every bit of positive news the mods hear now will pass through that filter. If they hear positive news, is it just Kool-Aid or real? Now we see a much stronger need to wait to accept positive news until we “see it on the field,” even from the mods. (And there’s nothing wrong with that.) Those who gave the mods the wrong info last year will be more cautious in passing information this year too, meaning many are likely to hold back on the positive and accentuate the negative, whether they realize it or not.
But if we (including our mods) hear negative news, we are now more likely to believe it because of the recent performances. Remember the Spring practice comments “the defense needs a lot of work.” I didn’t hear anyone saying “I need to see it on the field” in response to negative forecast about Michigan. I’m not arguing the forecast is wrong; I argue that we take for granted things that fit our mindset and are skeptical about things that challenge our mindset. How would you respond to the statement “OSU will have trouble on the road this year because they have an inexperienced QB?” Would you believe it or say to yourself you’ll “believe it when you see it on the field?”
Ultimately, we will see what happens on the field. But based on recent performance, especially last year’s, most of us see the negatives well but ignore the positives because we were burned recently, especially last year. There are many more factors pushing our mindset to be pessimistic, and we are more likely to underestimate the coming year than we have in prior years.
I think there is a good case that we are more likely to exceed expectations, especially because today’s expectations are so low.
CULTURE PROBLEM
How the team has handled adversity recently and the lack of effort and trust among players shows we’ve had a culture problem. Culture problems must result from issues in some combination with two things: coaches and players.
Many blame Harbaugh for the culture problem. I do too, as he is the coach and is ultimately responsible for the team’s culture. That he’s ultimately responsible doesn’t shed light on whether he can fix it and if he can, how quickly.
I remember reading Bo’s story about LB and Captain, Andy Cannavino. Though it took Bo three games to learn of the culture problem, he fixed it in five minutes. Unfortunately, I’m confident our current culture problem is deeper and will take longer to correct. But the changes Harbaugh made on the coaching team indicates he recognizes it and is addressing it. If and how quickly it will work will play out on the field.
He’s brought in assistant coaches in Bellamy, Hart and Morgan who experienced a strong culture and won or were regularly competing for championships. He’s brought in younger and hungry coaches, most of which are also better recruiters. It appears some of the coaches who left may have contributed to the culture by continuing to start underperforming favorites despite on-field performance.
When players have transferred, I’ve seen complaints on the board about the transfers. Are the transfers indicative of the culture or an improving culture? Remember that players contribute to the culture too. I’d argue that most (but not all) of the transfers will improve culture. Most transfers would have contributed little on the field. Regarding the two potentially contributing ZC’s who left, the RB room has talent and hard workers and the Center bailed before we knew the season was over—which indicates to me he wasn’t the kind of player to improve culture.
Will it be enough? Will find out. You don’t have to be a rocket scientist to have seen what Will Johnson told EJ recently—that our team looked disinterested and showed a lack of energy and passion. Had we played with the same talents and schemes as last year but with passion and energy and played all regular season games, what would our record likely have been? Let’s assume we would have lost @Wash and @OSU and won the other three non-conference games. If we played with passion, I think we would have beaten MSU and PSU (maybe McNamara’s injury puts the latter into question). This would have made our record 7-5 or 6-6 by itself. To me, barring injuries, this should be our floor this year.
DEFENSE
I loved Don Brown and wish him nothing but the best now at the school 15 minutes from my home. But he needed to go. His defenses stymied OSU in 2016 and to an extent in 2017. OSU adjusted and hired Ryan Day, and along with Indiana, figured out how to beat Brown’s defense. He couldn’t or wouldn’t adjust and the results became predictable. Our opponents could figure out exactly what our defense was doing before the play started—whether by stealing signs or by sending a TE in motion coupled with our predictability—and the results played out as one might expect.
We have a new defense. They’ll be a learning curve, and the defense in the Fall and as the season progresses will be much better than the Spring, when players were first learning it.
I think we’d all agree that in college football, offenses are ahead of defenses. Few think today’s best defenses can hold good offenses below 30 points. In 1997, one team scored 24 points against our defense (actually, one TD came off a punt return) with the next two highest teams scoring 16 points against us. Times have certainly changed.
To my untrained eye, it appears most offenses look over the defense as it sets up, have their offensive coaches determine the right play and signal it in from the sideline so that the QB has only a few reads to make and limited thinking to do. This might explain why many schools have success with QBs executing at a higher level earlier in their careers. They have less reading of the defense to do because the coaches take care of it for them. QBs have to successfully focus on only a few reads to thrive today.
Our new defensive philosophy appears designed to combat today’s high-powered offenses by preventing offensive coaches from knowing what the defense will do—the exact opposite of our prior defense that said here’s what we are doing, “deal with it,” which eventually became “have at it.” I don’t know of any college defense that operates as ours will now. Today’s offenses force defenses to react, which is why they have had the advantage. What will happen when college offenses and QBs who have to date made limited reads suddenly have to react on the fly? Even if we are still missing a few key players to fit the new defensive approach, confusing offensive coordinators and QBs will go a long way if our defense can cause it.
Here’s a link I found on the ideas behind the Raven’s defense that you might find interesting.
https://www.si.com/nfl/2018/10/17/ravens-titans-amoeba-defense
@thedude2403… expressed the concern that our new defense will still be in learning mode causing players to think and react a little slower. That is true. While our defense should react faster over the season—let’s be thankful the defense had Spring practice to start learning—the offenses will have to think on the fly too.
OSU
When I was in school (during CBs time), Michigan dominated OSU, often beating OSU teams with significantly more talent. Now we’ve had a longer dominance period the other way. Still, I am rather surprised with how our collective mindset has changed for so many to believe we have little to no chance to beat OSU this year. While of course OSU will be favored, this is our best chance in several years to beat OSU.
They will start a talented but inexperienced QB on the road against us. Against Don Brown’s defense, they knew exactly what was coming and how to attack us to consistently create mismatches. (Even when Haskins came in off the bench late in the game a few years ago, he shredded our defense immediately.) That’s gone now, and you can bet our defense will save some options for OSU. How will young OSU QBs react on the fly on the road?
Our QB play against OSU (and against many teams recently) has been atrocious. While our QB room is young, there is reason to believe it will be significantly improved—and at least serviceable—but with plenty of opportunity for growth. While it means less than some may be taking it today, I’m not surprised JJ has come out swinging and am glad Cade needs to bring it if he wants the starting job.
Too many players on Michigan teams appeared to play for themselves rather than for something greater. These players folded when adversity hit. We’ll see more pride and heart this year than we’ve seen for some time, which sadly, doesn’t say much, but will make a huge difference.
This is our best chance to beat OSU in years. While they may be a recruiting machine, they are not invincible as the mindset of many on this board seems to imply.
Calling it now, Michigan 31—OSU 26.
OVERALL RECORD
If today you predict a 7-5 record after looking at the schedule—as do @ChrisBalas and Angelique, super-connected people who know much more than I do about Michigan football—you likely assume Michigan beats the teams where it should be favored (W. Michigan, N. Illinois, Rutgers, @Nebraska, Northwestern, @MSU, and @Maryland) and lose all the games against the better teams on our schedule (Washington, @Wisconsin, Indiana, @PSU and OSU), or win one of the latter but lose one of the former. If you base it on last year’s performance with a slight culture improvement, I get coming up with 7-5 (or less with no improvement). With all due respect, those who were burned last year with their overpredictions are some of the most likely to have the mindset bias discussed above (even if they don’t want it). A 7-5 record should be the floor. Had last season not occurred, I believe these 7-5 predictions would have been 9-3, with 7-5 being the floor.
Michigan’s 1997 12-0 season came after four straight 8-4 seasons. At the time, many were calling for Carr to be replaced. Who among us saw the 12-0 season coming? (Please do not mistake this as any implication we will repeat 1997 this year.)
Time will tell how we’ll do this year. Having lower expectations does bring one benefit—the pleasure of exceeding them becomes far greater.
I look forward to a new season and removing the stench from last year’s performance.
