Penn State 2008 (it rhymes!!!)

Masks? Check. Football Unis? Check. Joe Pa get-up? You betcha. Smart-phone nicely clipped to football pants? Um... check.

So, having poked around BSD for most of this off-season, I feel decently comfortable in placing the majority of Penn State fans' expectations for this upcoming season at: "high" on the big board. Why not? There's a lot to be confident about from a Nittany Lion perspective, there are also a few things that I don't see getting a lot of mention around the Blue and White corner of the world that one might go ahead and place on the "question mark" list. How does it all sort out? Well let's embark upon that mystery together dear reader!

One thing the media will harp on that is ridiculously off-base: Well, it will be next to impossible for anyone to top the pure buffoonery that was Kirk Herbstreit's prediction of greatness from Anthony Morelli to lead Penn State to the summit of the Big 10 mountain. I wish I had taped a few of those segments prior to last fall, but this will have to suffice: go ahead and scroll down to the "What a Difference a Year Makes" category and enjoy.

This year? I don't know. Much focus will undoubtedly be on JoePa, but I have a feeling we'll hear more about the way that the old coach is "opening back up the offense" for his new quarterback(s)... a return to 2005 no less. That statement in and of itself isn't off-base, but here's the rub. Penn State has shown a tendenancy to play several BIG games in a very close to the vest fashion, particularly on the road. Last year that was the Michigan game in Ann Arbor. We've been down this road, but suffice to say that Michigan couldn't possibly hope to stop an offense in the spread formation at the start of the year... surely, Penn State and staff were well aware of this... and instead of simply following a blueprint that had been clearly laid out two weeks in a row for them by App State and Oregon, they came into Michigan Stadium and threw rock...

Turns out we have a bigger rock

Oh sure, it's a bit self-serving to throw up that picture (sue me) but it does illustrate a point. Penn State was #10 in the nation that day and had a chance to really make a run at the rest of their schedule after this hurdle... suffice to say it was a big game for them against an ailing Michigan squad, and they packed it in. Penn State fans will tell you it's not the first time. If Penn State has success with this new offense, it won't mean much if they don't take it with them to Camp Randall and to the Shoe. Yes the offense is experienced at most spots, yes the defense looks to be another strength, but what has changed on the staff and in the recruiting game that makes this Penn State team different from so many that have come before it? That's a question I just don't see being asked or answered much thus far this year.

One thing the media will completely ignore that is integral to this team's success: This team's lack of a reliable and/or proven offensive weapon. Having a new QB isn't as huge of a hindrance to your offense if you have a go-to guy who can bail you out when needed, but when I look at this Penn State offense, I have a hard time picking out that guy. Is there talent? Sure. But what has it done thus far that makes you comfortable pointing as anyone being the "go-to" playmaker in '08?

Something else you won't read about coming into this season:
1. Over the last 8 years, Penn State is a .500 football team in the Big 10 conference.
2. Over the last 5 years, Penn State is a sub .500 football team in the Big 10 conference.
3. Last year's record against winning football teams was... you guessed it, .500.

So that begs a question or two if you ask me. Yes Penn State returns a lot of players, especially on the lines, but the key question is not just of experience, but of talent. Just how good is this team? Who has the chance to become the playmaker on this football team? Who is going to be a guy on offense who will give Penn State a deep threat? Oh, and just one more thing: yes Penn State is returning to a more "2005" offensive approach, but Michael Robinson isn't the guy handling the pigskin, will whomever assumes that role be able to manage an offense that doesn't seem to feature any kind of a safety blanket? At what point will PSU's inability to bring in offensive firepower become an issue that people outside of the PSU circle (aka the media) start to discuss?

Oh, and we'll hear plenty about Sean Lee's absence from the field, but perhaps a more intriguing question is how much his leadership will be missed as well.

Area that scares you as an opponent: D-line. This D-line will be the heart and soul of what figures to be another solid defense. They are talented and they are deep. If the front four play well it will make the loss of Sean Lee not nearly as big of a deal from an on-field standpoint. The offense has loads of experience (perhaps not the talent to match) in nearly every position with the exception of the backfield. If Daryll Clark and Steven Green step up into serviceable roles, there's going to be reason for some of the optimism circulating in Happy Valley. Michigan had a similar set-up in '04 and took two freshmen in Chad Henne and Mike Hart to the Rose Bowl... of course we also had a Braylon Edwards...

Area that makes you salivate as an opponent: JayPa. He's the Penn State Mike DeBord.

Random factor that you think will come into play this season: A joke of an out-of-conference schedule sets up PSU for a run of @Purdue, @Wisconsin, Michigan, and @OSU. Let's just imagine that PSU runs out to 6-0... that leaves three HUGE games:
- @ Wisconsin (a team Penn State DRILLED last year)
- Michigan (a game most Penn State fans are oddly overlooking...)
- @ Ohio State (a team that has somewhat owned Penn State in Columbus)

That's quite a stretch in the heart of the season, and two out of three on the road no less. If anything, I doubt the ability of the coaching staff to put together three straight solid gameplans, especially with having to travel to Columbus. Penn State has every opportunity to field a very solid football team, but I think this stretch (and really the overall stretch of 4 road games in 5 weeks) will cost them a truly great season.

Overall record: 9-3

Final Big 10 standing: 5-3, pick two from the following: Michigan, Purdue, and Wisconsin. Chalk another up to the Buckeyes.

Bowl destination: New Year's Day somewhere.

I object

Opinions are funny things, and naturally you'll always hear that someone else's opinion is just as valid as yours or mine... this of course is not true. I have no problem with a dissenting opinion or point of view. What I do have a problem with is when said argument is devoid of any sort of attempt at presenting the information used to draw out the conclusions that were reached. I am more than happy to engage in a discussion and even reconsider my stance, just present your points of view in a way that has some sort of logical backing behind them. Absolute statements made without such backing fall into a different category. That said, the following deserves a few words presented in a calm fashion...:

From Nittany White Out:
Michigan will be beaten and beaten badly this season. For years Michigan has been beating on its fellow Big Ten rivals mostly due to Lloyd Carr’s impeccable coaching. This is not to say Rich Rod can’t coach. But he simply doesn’t have the players to run his offense. Sure he’ll modify it this year to fit his players, but if history repeats itself, his first year will be dismal. And to the delight of all Big Ten teams, Michigan will struggle. Michigan will be last season’s Notre Dame.

Can you honestly tell me with confidence that they can even win all their non-conference games? With Utah, and Notre Dame (away), the odds are in favor of a 2-2 start before they even start their conference gauntlet. Then there are revenge games away at Penn State, at Purdue, a vastly improved Michigan State, Illinois, at Minnesota and at Ohio State. If you look at their schedule, only 3 games can be considered a sure win, Miami (OH), Toledo and Northwestern.

The 2008 season will be sweet music to all Big Ten fans not sporting Maize and Blue.

Now then, everyone is certainly entitled to their opinion on this year's Wolverines... what I take issue with here is the ridiculous litany of "points" that are thrown out here sans defense, logic, or any identifiable level of reason. All this "breakdown" does is trot out a number of phrases, talking points, and whimsical notions that have been echoed around rival message boards ever since Rodriguez was announced as the new HC. Let's take them in order shall we?

1. For years Michigan has been beating on its fellow Big Ten rivals mostly due to Lloyd Carr’s impeccable coaching. This is missing the forest for a single tree. I said in the comments section over there that I'm was as big of a Lloyd Carr supporter as you could find during his tenure in Ann Arbor. He deserves a LOT of credit, but the main reason why Michigan has been winning football games has been his impeccable coaching? The man was a solid football coach and even greater person, he will go down as one of the greats who have roamed the sidelines in the Big House. But to claim that Michigan has been beating on its fellow Big Ten rivals mostly due to Lloyd Carr's coaching? Certainly his ability as a head coach was a large factor in Michigan's Big 10 success... but uh, there are a few other points to take into account here as well. For one, I think Carr's management of his talent had a much larger effect than his gameplanning or x's and o's prowess did.

I highly doubt anyone would argue that Carr-lead Michigan teams' success had nothing to do with his recruiting, which coincidentally brought in more talent than other teams in the conference could dream of having (save for that one down Columbus way of course), it probably had nothing to do with the fact that Michigan was a better football team across the field than nearly everyone else they lined up with, and I'm sure it had nothing to do with the fact that there has been a long-running tradition of a top level program, which affords it the ability to recruit, gather quality staffs (even if Malone, DeBord, or Andy Moeller were members...), and build from a very strong base. Michigan has not only been fortunate to have a run of great coaches, but we also have been spoiled rotten with the level of football player that we bring in year in and year out... more on that in a bit. To say we won only because of Lloyd Carr's coaching ability is quite simply wrong.

2. But he simply doesn’t have the players to run his offense. Sure he’ll modify it this year to fit his players, but if history repeats itself, his first year will be dismal. Sigh... I nailed this in the preview on "things people will beat to death and be way off base about" and here's example 1A. Sure he'll modify it to fit his players... and if you'd care to tell me how the caliber of player he had at West Virginia, Tulane, and Glenville State compares to that which he is now working with in Ann Arbor, I will happily sit here and listen. Michigan beat a number of teams over the years by running HB traps to the left and occasionally find one of a long line of great receivers deep (oversimplifying a bit for the sake of brevity)... the offense doesn't have to be amazingly complex or mind bendingly difficult to succeed, in fact if you'd like a beautiful example, I direct your attention to last years contest between #10 Penn State and the lowly unranked Wolverines... final score? 14-9 Michigan. Not exactly an offensive firework show was it... and a true freshman qb at the helm no less.

Rodriguez has been around the block, he'll put something in place that will enable this team to play to its strengths. Why everyone is so convinced that because Michigan won't run the "Pat White Steve Slayton" offense next year that they are in huge trouble is beyond me, Rodriguez ran an effective offense with Sean King winging the ball all over the place, and he ran one that whipped the life out of opponents by throwing less than 20 times a game, he's clearly able to adjust to his personnel, but hey, that's inconvienant to this flawed argument. We're all well aware of his first year record at West Virginia and Glenville State, etc, etc, but to try to compare his first year at WVA with what he's working with here is a bit of a stretch if you were to ask me. What his success in these different systems does tell me is that he WILL get his play-makers the football, and believe me when I say that we will have more than one or two players who will be capable of making plays.

The second part of this is the notion that because the offense likely may struggle at times, Michigan is doomed. This might be the case if the defense were going to be of the 2000 vintage... but that simply will not be the case. The Maize and Blue won't have to score 35 points a game to win. Of course it'd probably help to actually, you know, look at the team you're talking about to realize points like that.

3. Michigan will be last seasons Notre Dame. Based upon what? Michigan lost a number of top offensive skill players like ND did two years ago? That's where any and all comparisons stop beween these two teams. The coaching staffs couldn't be more different in terms of both track record and ability, the recruiting classes compared over the past four years are vastly different, the schedules for the upcoming year are different, and the makeup of this year's Michigan squad compared to last year's notre dame edition is also vastly different. Quick name last year's starting running back for ND... does he even crack our top 5 heading into this season? How about their top receiver.... and on, and on, and on.

4. Can you honestly tell me with confidence that they can even win all their non-conference games? With Utah, and Notre Dame (away), the odds are in favor of a 2-2 start before they even start their conference gauntlet. 2-2 would be something close to a worst case scenario to start the season as I look at the teams we're facing... but hey, "the odds favor it"... which means precisely nothing. Nothing in the way of matchups, breakdowns, or other places where any of these teams might give Michigan problems. Utah will be a tough test, as will ND as the first road game, are theses sure wins? No. Are they sure losses? No.

5. Then there are revenge games away at Penn State, at Purdue, a vastly improved Michigan State, Illinois, at Minnesota and at Ohio State. Ah yes, the "revenge game"... this is as true a barometer of an upcoming season as any. I love the argument that teams will be excited to beat Michigan this season... really?? That's different from every other season how exactly? It's really helped Penn State out a bunch since '96 hasn't it, every time our two teams have lined up since then hasn't been a "revenge game" for the Nittany Lions? Next of course is the "vastly improved MSU" (in what way are they vastly improved?)... which just so happens to have to travel to Michigan Stadium where, vastly improved or not, they haven't won since 1990... which is a vast expanse of time.

I've longed learned the hard lesson of trying to determine "sure wins" and you know what, the same holds for "sure losses". For anyone to try to claim that Michigan will be doomed to a 9th place conference finish and a record that one must reach back to 1967 to find another in the same ball park (4-6) with nothing more substantial than talking head sound bites and message board banter is just a bit laughable... add to the fact that it is June, and it's even more laughable. Call me old fashioned, but examining trends and matchups certainly carries more weight than trying to judge a team's "revenge factor" against its opponent.

So in short, we're in trouble because:
1. Rodriguez can't possibly run "his" offense (nevermind that this "argument" completely ignores 2/3rds of the game of football and fails to present any sort of actual attempt at defending these kinds of predictions, it sounds good and everyone else is saying it too!).
2. Other teams will want to beat Michigan really bad... which is news to exactly no one.

How very illuminating...

Michigan may very well struggle this season, nobody knows how we'll look come the end of August, which makes absolute statements about the upcoming season altogether misguided. Particularly when such absolute statements don't do anything like the following: "I think a lack of an experienced quarterback combined with the installation of a new system will really hinder Michigan's offensive efforts this year, this could spell trouble in a number of matchups, including...blah, blah, blah and so on."

I am not stating that Michigan will be great or even good, I don't KNOW what they will be, but to deny that there's a chance that they will be anything other than downright terrible (and the Nittany Whiteout prediction is the bottom of downright terrible) is pretty bold at this point in the year. To attribute said terrible-ness (English is a generative language after all) all to a struggle on offense is just a bit too much for my taste.