That this team is good? And I do not mean 15-0, OSU streak dies type of good. I mean, what event, series of events, will convince you that come November, we're playing for "something"?
I've been reviewing articles, watching highlights, etc, and the consensus, outside of Ronnie Bell being hurt, was that game went about as well as things could go considering, 2020, defensive scheme overhauls, coaching changes, contract "extensions", current state of recruiting, etc. But, I think every statement about the game or this team ends with, "but", usually meaning, one game, one game against a MAC opponent (no matter how good of a MAC opponent), one game against a MAC opponent at home, means that nothing is finalized on the quality or future success of this team.
I also looked at others. Games we thought were toss ups, lean losses, or straight up defeats, and it seems some things are setting up better. Is Wisconsin or PSU on the road a guaranteed loss which I thought before? Washington to me was a toss up, pretty sure that goes lean win. Nebraska on the road was lean win early, maybe now a straight up win. Indiana was probably lean loss/toss up before, now I'm thinking lean win. Northwestern? Better be a win. Only one that made me think twice is MSU, but I have any rivalry game on the road as a toss up. BUT, this is all predicated on "is Michigan good?"
So, I started thinking, what is it that will convince me, a known skeptic and cynic, that this team has a chance to be "good"? Here's my potential items:
1.) A QB that can read. No, not words, but read a defense beyond the play they are given. Will we have consistent RPOs? Will we have the threat of a running QB at the mesh point on handoffs with the RB? This offense will be stuck in the Jurassic era if we do not utilize any of these modern concepts. The Shea years showed a hesitancy by the QB to do it, last year was an embarrassment where Milton flat out wasn't doing it (appeared to be directed to not to), and outside of McNamara some in Rutgers, nonexistent. Game 1 this year showed me none of it. Is this hiding it for later, what they finally did some in 2018 after the Army debacle? Seems odd to break out something later that requires repetition to perfect to save it for the most important moments, but I will defer until another game. You show me that consistently, I think we have a chance.
2.) A pass rush that is not designed. Hutchinson can do it, but outside of him, I'm concerned against a MAC o-line (though veteran laden), our pass rush required LBs and others to come at the QB. We NEED Hinton or Jeter or Mazi or someone to find something to get upfield and create pass pressure in 4 man rush situations. Only way you're beating the upper echelon teams or at least the teams you thought were better is to see a consistent pass rush in non-blitz situations
3.) Turnovers. This mildly piggy backs off of 2, but also, like Hoke's first year, comes down to flat out luck. It seemed the DB years did not equate to a lot of turnovers. Someone far smarter than me will have to explain this, maybe the lack of zones and straight up man coverages mitigated potential INT situations, but we just did not force a ton of turnovers. Maybe the zone concepts and if we get non-blitz pass rush will lead to QB confusion and picks. We have a few chances, 1 clearly dropped, another over some hands. If we start winning turnover margins, I think we have a chance to be "good"
4.) Finally, from a macro level, make it to November with 0-1 loss and you have me convinced. This would mean at least 1 road win of substance (MSU or Wisconsin) and beating the teams you should beat. You go into Indiana unblemished or only 1 loss, and 1-3 appear to be happening, you have me.
What say you?
I've been reviewing articles, watching highlights, etc, and the consensus, outside of Ronnie Bell being hurt, was that game went about as well as things could go considering, 2020, defensive scheme overhauls, coaching changes, contract "extensions", current state of recruiting, etc. But, I think every statement about the game or this team ends with, "but", usually meaning, one game, one game against a MAC opponent (no matter how good of a MAC opponent), one game against a MAC opponent at home, means that nothing is finalized on the quality or future success of this team.
I also looked at others. Games we thought were toss ups, lean losses, or straight up defeats, and it seems some things are setting up better. Is Wisconsin or PSU on the road a guaranteed loss which I thought before? Washington to me was a toss up, pretty sure that goes lean win. Nebraska on the road was lean win early, maybe now a straight up win. Indiana was probably lean loss/toss up before, now I'm thinking lean win. Northwestern? Better be a win. Only one that made me think twice is MSU, but I have any rivalry game on the road as a toss up. BUT, this is all predicated on "is Michigan good?"
So, I started thinking, what is it that will convince me, a known skeptic and cynic, that this team has a chance to be "good"? Here's my potential items:
1.) A QB that can read. No, not words, but read a defense beyond the play they are given. Will we have consistent RPOs? Will we have the threat of a running QB at the mesh point on handoffs with the RB? This offense will be stuck in the Jurassic era if we do not utilize any of these modern concepts. The Shea years showed a hesitancy by the QB to do it, last year was an embarrassment where Milton flat out wasn't doing it (appeared to be directed to not to), and outside of McNamara some in Rutgers, nonexistent. Game 1 this year showed me none of it. Is this hiding it for later, what they finally did some in 2018 after the Army debacle? Seems odd to break out something later that requires repetition to perfect to save it for the most important moments, but I will defer until another game. You show me that consistently, I think we have a chance.
2.) A pass rush that is not designed. Hutchinson can do it, but outside of him, I'm concerned against a MAC o-line (though veteran laden), our pass rush required LBs and others to come at the QB. We NEED Hinton or Jeter or Mazi or someone to find something to get upfield and create pass pressure in 4 man rush situations. Only way you're beating the upper echelon teams or at least the teams you thought were better is to see a consistent pass rush in non-blitz situations
3.) Turnovers. This mildly piggy backs off of 2, but also, like Hoke's first year, comes down to flat out luck. It seemed the DB years did not equate to a lot of turnovers. Someone far smarter than me will have to explain this, maybe the lack of zones and straight up man coverages mitigated potential INT situations, but we just did not force a ton of turnovers. Maybe the zone concepts and if we get non-blitz pass rush will lead to QB confusion and picks. We have a few chances, 1 clearly dropped, another over some hands. If we start winning turnover margins, I think we have a chance to be "good"
4.) Finally, from a macro level, make it to November with 0-1 loss and you have me convinced. This would mean at least 1 road win of substance (MSU or Wisconsin) and beating the teams you should beat. You go into Indiana unblemished or only 1 loss, and 1-3 appear to be happening, you have me.
What say you?
