Michigan Football, the 2020 Abbreviated COVID Season

[Jeff Buchanan]

Back to M v. Auburn or Alabama in a post season bowl ....... is M's defense better than Auburn's? That question can be answered objectively by looking at PFF grades. It's premium content so ..... I found one non-pay walled article that lists the All SEC players by position. Auburn has dudes, not as many as Alabama on D but nonetheless. There's not an available all BT piece yet so, hard to compare.

I'd add that player grades yield solid info but there are so many dependent variables in a defensive unit's overall performance that individual grades are hard to hang your hat on in answering the question. I thought I'd look at SOS. Auburn (#2) and M (#3) are in the Top 5 most difficult schedules. M's total D (#8) by NCAA is ranked higher than Auburn's (#20). In ESPN's power rankings, M leads Auburn in all their categories. Hard to discriminate based on the fancy stats and I like them but only in an advisory role So, back to the eyeball test.

I watched the Auburn, Alabama Game on replay. I thought Alabama controlled the game, mistakes and penalties changed the narrative and the outcome. Auburn gave up a shit-ton of yardage to Bama (515/335/180). M gave up a shit-ton to osu (577/313/264). You could argue osu's D is > M's by some margin and Alabama's maybe by a larger margin; Alabama's D is > Auburn's, therefore M's > Auburn's. Dunno. The transitive law doesn't seem to work real well here. Hard question. I tried.

Anyway, because of the interplay of offensive, defensive and intangible variables, it's hard to predict outcomes of CFB games or say, which team or which unit within a team, in absolute terms, is better than the other. Injuries on Alabama's side complicate the assessment. M would open as a 9-13.5 dog against either I would think. Would I rather M play Alabama or Auburn based on the above? The numbers seem to say Auburn. I like Alabama though because it's sexier..... and no Tua and injuries. I'd give M a 35+% chance, as a starting point, to win on a neutral field in good weather against an Alabama team with some of it's key starters out on D. It wouldn't be close if Alabama was at full strength. And to be clear, the win percentage thing starts at one point and varies as a function of unpredictable events both before and during the game. All things considered, I like M's chances v. Alabama ....... but I have a serious motivational bias for such a prediction.

[AlabamAlum]

Yeah, the upside is better vs Bama. If you win, "YOU BEAT BAMA!" (even if it's a hobbled version, no one knows that, and all they hear is Saban and Bama). If you lose, it would be, "Well, sure, it was Bama, after all. Can't beat the cheat machine of the deep south!"

[Jeff Buchanan]

talent, you want the complainers to show you the evidence. I think that's a powerful defense of your position technically but I'd argue there are ways to bury the evidence and make proving impermissible benefits were received by an athlete nearly impossible as well. The black market argument pertains. But, yeah, we've reached an impasse. It is what it is in our own perceptions and I lean heavily toward the position that for fans, players and coaches, it's out of your control, move on, play ball.

[iam416]

To be clear, in the absence of evidence, I want to see factors that support CHEATING!!! on a player-by-player basis other than, "Oh, he signed with Ohio State!" That's the extent of the analysis from M fans. No actual evidence? Oh, he signed with OSU, so....

The #1 or #2 recruit in the 2021 class has verballed to Ohio State. He's from Columbus. He loves Ohio State. His family has no need for money. If you want me to believe that he was paid for his signature in view of those factors AND zero evidence then, yeah, LOL. I can make a similar argument for Chase Young (though he's not from Ohio). And a lot of other players. My challenge to the reductionist idiots is to really think about it. Do or don't. It doesn't matter to me.

[lineygoblue]

John Bacon wrote about this in his new book, which I read some excerpts from. The most popular way (according to him) to pay athletes nowadays is thru the reloadable Visa and Mastercards, which are easily purchased with cash and given to whomever you choose. Its totally untraceable when bought and reloaded with cash. Nobody knows who buys the card, or who uses it. So, its perfect for paying players. He claims to have seen players with multiple gift cards.

Secondly, Bacon claims that all players receive an NCAA-approved stipend for miscellaneous expenses throughout the year. There is no SET amount by the NCAA. Conferences can decide for themselves how much they want these stipends to be. In the Big Ten, the 'approved' amount is about $1200 per year. In the SEC, its nearly $2600. Again, these amounts are legal, and totally within the rules for both conferences, so I'm not accusing the SEC of cheating in this instance. What they're doing is fully within the rules. Bacon argues this is yet another advantage that the SEC holds over other conferences because the extra cash makes them more inviting.

I think allowing players to be paid needs to happen, especially when the players' likeness is being used to make money by both the school, and sponsors. I'm not sure what this will end up doing to swim teams, or tennis teams, but I think that if you pay athletes who are attending school on athletic scholarships, you're going to have trouble in court if you pay football player Johnny CannonArm more than you pay swim team member Suzy Splasher. That gets into all sorts of legal issues that lawyers will feast on for years. But in the end, it needs to happen.

[hack]

Paid players needs to happen, but it looks to me like an opportunity that needs to be well thought out if Michigan is to benefit. Corrupt people and institutions are always going to think more about how to be corrupt than the non-corrupt are about how to combat it.

[Hannibal]

There is no more potent a competitive advantage gained by cheating than paying the players. If payments are decriminalized, then whatever further edge the cheating cultures seek, it won't be as effective. The only other area to push is academic fraud, which requires some institutional participation.

[hack]

Any system is going to develop loopholes over time, but, for a while the playing field would theoretically be much more level. It would have to be for a while.

[Jeff Buchanan]

Here's more proof that osu doesn't cheat ........ talent, you're welcome!

This is a YouTube video of a BTN show where ufm breaks down M's defense against a couple of osu's pass plays. There are some takes on this at mgoboard. The good ones point out that on Michigan's defensive breakdowns on these big plays, it's less about scheme than it is about player discipline and execution of said scheme. Some questioned a 5 man blitz on 2nd and 19 and I could agree with that but, the majority of the plays ufm breaks down shows M players not in the right place, missing a switch in the doubles scheme, misreading who the primary and secondary reads are going to be, etc. It's bad. You have to ask, how does this happen in M's most important game of the season?

Bottom line is that M's defense played a spectacularly bad game against nothing special or tricky that osu did. I would also say that the video lends itself to making an argument that osu's film study and ability of the osu coaching staff to sniff out bad things that M's defense does as a unit and as individual players is superior to anything M does. Game preparation issues? That might be a stretch because were not seeing breakdowns of M's plays that worked against osu and there were some but this is both frustrating and revealing at the same time.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BmOTNDHUMro&app=desktop

[iam416]

[Jeff Buchanan]

Well, hope has been the manna of M fans since 1998 and that's not just about osu. It is more recently, though. The hope thing goes waaaay back.

I think your point on putting hope on correctable issues is bound to be more profitable in the short term than hope for institutional change is good one. I would hope that the Fort feels the same way.

That, however, does not completely eliminate the need for such institutional change to improve competitiveness across the entirety of the FBS.

[Jeff Buchanan]

This is where Michigan is ........

osu 3 consecutive BTCs

In 2019:

osu #1 overall.

osu #1 offense.

osu # 1 defense and who was M's DC last year that got them there.

Institutional excellence v. institutional mediocrity....... destined for BT and national also ran for the foreseeable future because of it.

[lineygoblue]

It is what it is.

At least nobody else is getting over on OSU either.

The national media would have you believe that Michigan is the only team that loses to OSU. Truth is, nobody has been beating OSU except for the occasional Purdue or NW fluke. Everybody has been losing to them, and that's not going to change either. Wisconsin got whacked by them twice this year.

Nobody is going to talk about that, because well, .. they're Wisconsin. Everybody loves Wisconsin. I mean .. dairy cows, and all that ...

[Tom W]

Well, does anybody, outside of their own little bubble, actually LIKE osu? Does anybody really want to see them run this conference like their own little dictatorship going forward?

For example, even though Wisconsin played well and was able to do a few things against them that Michigan couldn't in the first half at Indy, everybody KNEW that they would that they fold. And, of course, they did.

It was predictable. It was dull. It was boring.

Why would anybody keep watching this crap?

More importantly, though, is that it HAS to change and it will.

[Hannibal]

The conference loves OSU.

It won't change.