What does the 2016 football season look like for yall?

[Deeringfish]

I don't think Michigan does anything to make MSU less potent. MSU is potent because their staff is extremely good at both seeing talent and developing it. Grabbing four and five star players isn't what MSU does. Lately they have been getting those type players, but they don't need them to be successful as they have proven. MSU is always very good defensively . This should be a close game if we can run the ball on them . We can't be three and out and wear out our defense. I honestly can't say how we will be this season.I think our defense will be very good. I don't know the players well enough, but I think Hanks is as good as any defensive coach in football. I like our whole staff, but do we have the horses yet ? I am still going with us beating OSU on Oct 19,2019, as for this year I will leave that to you all who have followed this team and players for years. . Nice breakdown gocats.

In my memory (not the best gauge of history) MSU has not been as strong as it has been the past 5-10 years. This strength corresponds to UM's lackluster (by their standards) performance since the last part of the Lloyd Carr era.

I agree that MSU does a good job of developing talent especially under the current coach but it wasn't too long ago that the football team was out of control, creating some pretty disturbing havoc on campus.

My point is UM was losing some of the top local talent to MSU under Hoke and Rich Rod. When you lose one or two top recruiting battles each year over 5 years to a direct rival, that is going to cause a shift. I don't like Harbaugh but I think he will be winning more of those head to head battles with MSU, depleting their talent pool a little each year.

We have to take advantage of the coming lull 2018 etc. Push them down to pull NU up.
NU has moved from a bottom feeder to a competitive middle of the pack B1G team. With the current new facilities coming on line and Fitzes continued solid reputation NU has an opportunity to step up but it has to come at someone else expense.

 

[pawildcat]

In my memory (not the best gauge of history) MSU has not been as strong as it has been the past 5-10 years. This strength corresponds to UM's lackluster (by their standards) performance since the last part of the Lloyd Carr era.

I agree that MSU does a good job of developing talent especially under the current coach but it wasn't too long ago that the football team was out of control, creating some pretty disturbing havoc on campus.

My point is UM was losing some of the top local talent to MSU under Hoke and Rich Rod. When you lose one or two top recruiting battles each year over 5 years to a direct rival, that is going to cause a shift. I don't like Harbaugh but I think he will be winning more of those head to head battles with MSU, depleting their talent pool a little each year.

We have to take advantage of the coming lull 2018 etc. Push them down to pull NU up.
NU has moved from a bottom feeder to a competitive middle of the pack B1G team. With the current new facilities coming on line and Fitzes continued solid reputation NU has an opportunity to step up but it has to come at someone else expense.

From the late '40s through the mid '60s, Michigan State was a consistent powerhouse under "Biggie" Munn and Duffy Daugherty, regularly cracking the top 25 and even top 10. I remember watching their 1966 showdown with Notre Dame that ended in a 10-10 tie. From then on they've had sporadic success and have often been considered a team that didn't play up to its talent. The Dantonio era has certainly been the most successful one since the glory days. Rather than Michigan State, I'd rather see our growth come at the expense of a team such as Wisconsin, which is actually in our division. Their coaching situation hasn't been as stable as MSU's in recent years.

 

[Deeringfish]

From the late '40s through the mid '60s, Michigan State was a consistent powerhouse under "Biggie" Munn and Duffy Daugherty, regularly cracking the top 25 and even top 10. I remember watching their 1966 showdown with Notre Dame that ended in a 10-10 tie. From then on they've had sporadic success and have often been considered a team that didn't play up to its talent. The Dantonio era has certainly been the most successful one since the glory days. Rather than Michigan State, I'd rather see our growth come at the expense of a team such as Wisconsin, which is actually in our division. Their coaching situation hasn't been as stable as MSU's in recent years.

I agree and I'll say we need to displace Iowa and Nebraska as well while keeping the rest of our division at bay. At some point, early in the thread, it was pointed out that we are skipping UM and picking up MSU on the schedule and in the current climate I think we have a better chance of catching MSU than UM over the next few years. Regardless, to get to the place where people actually put us in the top four or five of the B1G consistently, we have to start being these guys more. It is not enough to win the "easy" games.

 

[pawildcat]

I agree and I'll say we need to displace Iowa and Nebraska as well while keeping the rest of our division at bay. At some point, early in the thread, it was pointed out that we are skipping UM and picking up MSU on the schedule and in the current climate I think we have a better chance of catching MSU than UM over the next few years. Regardless, to get to the place where people actually put us in the top four or five of the B1G consistently, we have to start being these guys more. It is not enough to win the "easy" games.

I would agree with you that it might be easier to creep up on Michigan State than Michigan in the long term, although Dantonio has been recruiting pretty well the last couple of years.

 

[RockyTopRowdy58]

Outside looking in... NU has to find a way to get more athletic, across the board.

Teams over the years have had success in the P5 without having top 10 classes. Mizzou won the SECE twice and had a lot of athleticism on the DL (several big time NFL guys) and at WR. Virginia Tech had a lot of success in the early 2000's. Their RB's and DB's stick out to me as a strong point. Georgia Tech has had some success in the ACC recently without star studded recruiting classes as well.

If NU can continue to recruit the right players for their program while simultaneously getting guys who are on par with the rest of the B1G athletically, you can creep up on Nebraska, Iowa, Michigan St.

 

[Deeringfish]

Outside looking in... NU has to find a way to get more athletic, across the board.

Teams over the years have had success in the P5 without having top 10 classes. Mizzou won the SECE twice and had a lot of athleticism on the DL (several big time NFL guys) and at WR. Virginia Tech had a lot of success in the early 2000's. Their RB's and DB's stick out to me as a strong point. Georgia Tech has had some success in the ACC recently without star studded recruiting classes as well.

If NU can continue to recruit the right players for their program while simultaneously getting guys who are on par with the rest of the B1G athletically, you can creep up on Nebraska, Iowa, Michigan St.

I think most of us would agree that the talent level has improved over the last few years. There seems to be a lot more competition at most positions and we have had some young guys beat out the older ones. It's not like we went for two stars to five stars but the offer lists have been more impressive. Getting to bowls consistently again will help as will the new facility. IMO