Sporting News: Minnesota football projected for pedestrian finish in 2026 Big Ten predictions

Donate To GopherHole

gopherbadgerman said:
I think Taylor is a better overall all around back than Mo. But our line is WAY worse and we have no WR's to take the pressure of the running game.
Click to expand...
Will see I like Nathan Roy and Greg Johnson better than what we had on the left side in those years, biggest difference is on the right side and obviously JMS was a once in ten years type of player for us. We had Eslinger obviously in the Mason year, but it took 15 years to get a guy who could enter the conversation with him at that spot with JMS
 

The Deliberate Stranger said:
Will see I like Nathan Roy and Greg Johnson better than what we had on the left side in those years, biggest difference is on the right side and obviously JMS was a once in ten years type of player for us. We had Eslinger obviously in the Mason year, but it took 15 years to get a guy who could enter the conversation with him at that spot with JMS
Click to expand...
So all that said, you think the line is better now?

The last couple years the line has been below average at best. I think that and WR's and some athletes on the back end of the defense if the gophers biggest issue...
 




gopherbadgerman said:
So all that said, you think the line is better now?

The last couple years the line has been below average at best. I think that and WR's and some athletes on the back end of the defense if the gophers biggest issue...
Click to expand...
I do, we have two NFL guys on the left side a fifth year center and a fifth year RG. I think Smith and Tracy are two proven returning receivers and I really liked what I saw out of Noah Jennings this and I think we have some young talent in that room we can let battle for back up reps because we have those three. On the back end we have some strong pieces in Nestor and Brown, Gousby a guy we can put at corner, safety, or nickel, but really the key defense is the dline, elite pass rushing can cover a lot of potential warts
 

The Deliberate Stranger said:
I do, we have two NFL guys on the left side a fifth year center and a fifth year RG. I think Smith and Tracy are two proven returning receivers and I really liked what I saw out of Noah Jennings this and I think we have some young talent in that room we can let battle for back up reps because we have those three. On the back end we have some strong pieces in Nestor and Brown, Gousby a guy we can put at corner, safety, or nickel, but really the key defense is the dline, elite pass rushing can cover a lot of potential warts
Click to expand...
Hope you are right! You are definitely higher on those groups than I am...but admittedly I am typically more pessimistic...
 

Some guy said:
I agree.
Washington’s best conference win last year was Illinois. Second best was maybe Rutgers? Also had a loss to Wisconsin
Penn state was 7-6 and now has Iowa states 8-4 roster
Michigan could be great or could be a shit show.
Indiana could be great or could come back down to being just good.
Iowa at home lost everything
Wisconsin maybe have an interim by the time they play.
Purdue isn’t free but isn’t good
UCLA at home in November and they weren’t a bowl team last year
Northwestern at home will be tough but a toss up probably (or if the defense shows up won’t be a toss up)

I see 3 probable losses (Indiana, Michigan, Penn state (but only because it’s on the road))
A few 40-60 games (Iowa, Washington)
And a bunch of 60-40 games (Purdue, northwestern, UCLA,
A free win (Wisconsin)

Makes those 3 probably losses 20% chance of victory and my expected conference wins this year is 5.2
I will guess 8-4 (5-4)
Anything less than 5-4 will disappoint me
A loss to a non conference team will disappoint me but not as much as a loss that makes them 4-5
Get to 6-3 and I can forgive a non conference loss and call it a success. But better not because 9-3 they could be in the playoff conversation late in the year.
Click to expand...
Eastern Illinois and Akron are sure wins. I assume Indiana is a pretty sure loss. 2-1

Miss. State, @Purdue, UCLA, Northwestern, @Wisconsin: Should win 4. 6-2

I think they can/should win at least one of @Washington, Michigan, Iowa and @PSU (really should beat Iowa). 7-5.

Given PJ's track record, they probably drop two from the easier batch and win two from the harder batch, but 7-5 seems very reasonable with a shot at 8-4.
 




gopherbadgerman said:
I think Taylor is a better overall all around back than Mo. But our line is WAY worse and we have no WR's to take the pressure of the running game.
Click to expand...

About our receivers - our completion rate wasn't bad but we didn't get a lot of yardage per reception (9.84 per catch; 17th in the league with only UCLA's 9.44 per catch being worse). Highest in the league was USC's 13.77 per catch.

Jalen Smith was pretty good on this measure (15.0 yards per catch; tied for 11th in the league among qualifiers). His problem was that he had difficulty catching the ball early in the season and he kind of disappeared at points during the year. His yards per catch number was better than any of the three incoming transfer wide receivers' numbers were last season. I'm anxious to see whether he can be more consistent this year. If he can, he could be a star. Still, he did pretty well for a RS freshman who wasn't highly rated coming from HS.

Malachi Coleman averaged 16.6 yards per catch but he only caught 5 passes on the season. He transferred to Wisconsin so I hope he doesn't burn us this season. Kenric Lanier averaged a whopping 26.3 yards per catch but he only caught three passes on the season and transferred to Missouri.

Brockington had a career high in receptions (46) but had a career low in yards per catch (10.5). Tracy was decent with 37 receptions and a 12.3 average.
 

TwistingMyMelon said:
About our receivers - our completion rate wasn't bad but we didn't get a lot of yardage per reception (9.84 per catch; 17th in the league with only UCLA's 9.44 per catch being worse). Highest in the league was USC's 13.77 per catch.

Jalen Smith was pretty good on this measure (15.0 yards per catch; tied for 11th in the league among qualifiers). His problem was that he had difficulty catching the ball early in the season and he kind of disappeared at points during the year. His yards per catch number was better than any of the three incoming transfer wide receivers' numbers were last season. I'm anxious to see whether he can be more consistent this year. If he can, he could be a star. Still, he did pretty well for a RS freshman who wasn't highly rated coming from HS.

Malachi Coleman averaged 16.6 yards per catch but he only caught 5 passes on the season. He transferred to Wisconsin so I hope he doesn't burn us this season. Kenric Lanier averaged a whopping 26.3 yards per catch but he only caught three passes on the season and transferred to Missouri.

Brockington had a career high in receptions (46) but had a career low in yards per catch (10.5). Tracy was decent with 37 receptions and a 12.3 average.
Click to expand...
Yep. As you are saying, our WR’s were not very good. I’m hoping other people’s takes are better, but I really don’t think we have any difference makers. Smith seems like a solid #2 or good #3, not a #1. Same with Tracy.

Hopefully I’m way off but I’m just not enthralled with the group of receivers or our OL.
 

gopherbadgerman said:
Yep. As you are saying, our WR’s were not very good. I’m hoping other people’s takes are better, but I really don’t think we have any difference makers. Smith seems like a solid #2 or good #3, not a #1. Same with Tracy.

Hopefully I’m way off but I’m just not enthralled with the group of receivers or our OL.
Click to expand...

It's hard for me to say how the blame should be allocated for our relative lack of explosive passing plays. Was it the receivers who weren't getting open long and had to settle for low yardage catches? Was it the line that didn't give the QB and the receivers enough time? Was it the indoctrination of Fleck's hatred for turnovers that led the QB to be risk averse and settle for safer short-yardage plays? One good thing for sure: Lindsay had only 6 interceptions in 13 games and three of those came in one game against Iowa.
 

TwistingMyMelon said:
It's hard for me to say how the blame should be allocated for our relative lack of explosive passing plays. Was it the receivers who weren't getting open long and had to settle for low yardage catches? Was it the line that didn't give the QB and the receivers enough time? Was it the indoctrination of Fleck's hatred for turnovers that led the QB to be risk averse and settle for safer short-yardage plays? One good thing for sure: Lindsay had only 6 interceptions in 13 games and three of those came in one game against Iowa.
Click to expand...
You have to think the game plan was made knowing our o-line couldn't pass protect.
 





TwistingMyMelon said:
It's hard for me to say how the blame should be allocated for our relative lack of explosive passing plays. Was it the receivers who weren't getting open long and had to settle for low yardage catches? Was it the line that didn't give the QB and the receivers enough time? Was it the indoctrination of Fleck's hatred for turnovers that led the QB to be risk averse and settle for safer short-yardage plays? One good thing for sure: Lindsay had only 6 interceptions in 13 games and three of those came in one game against Iowa.
Click to expand...
I think it’s hard for me to knock the passing game at all even with lack of explosive plays. First year starter and inconsistent run game. 2300 yards 18 touchdowns and 6 interceptions. only 6 QBs in college football had 2000+, 15+, and 9 or less.
Drake Lindsey is one of them.
 

Some guy said:
I think it’s hard for me to knock the passing game at all even with lack of explosive plays. First year starter and inconsistent run game. 2300 yards 18 touchdowns and 6 interceptions. only 6 QBs in college football had 2000+, 15+, and 9 or less.
Drake Lindsey is one of them.
Click to expand...

I can't disagree with that and if we were still rushing at over 4 yards per carry like we used to do, we probably would all be just fine with our passing game.
 


Some guy said:
I agree.
Washington’s best conference win last year was Illinois. Second best was maybe Rutgers? Also had a loss to Wisconsin
Penn state was 7-6 and now has Iowa states 8-4 roster
Michigan could be great or could be a shit show.
Indiana could be great or could come back down to being just good.
Iowa at home lost everything
Wisconsin maybe have an interim by the time they play.
Purdue isn’t free but isn’t good
UCLA at home in November and they weren’t a bowl team last year
Northwestern at home will be tough but a toss up probably (or if the defense shows up won’t be a toss up)

I see 3 probable losses (Indiana, Michigan, Penn state (but only because it’s on the road))
A few 40-60 games (Iowa, Washington)
And a bunch of 60-40 games (Purdue, northwestern, UCLA,
A free win (Wisconsin)

Makes those 3 probably losses 20% chance of victory and my expected conference wins this year is 5.2
I will guess 8-4 (5-4)
Anything less than 5-4 will disappoint me
A loss to a non conference team will disappoint me but not as much as a loss that makes them 4-5
Get to 6-3 and I can forgive a non conference loss and call it a success. But better not because 9-3 they could be in the playoff conversation late in the year.
Click to expand...
And our best conference win was against.....Nebraska, second best, was Rutger's, so that means what, we'll be much better this year?

The pre-season predictions don't mean much. We'll line up and play the games. The two biggest challenges we have are Danny Collins and Greg Harbaugh. We're in year 3 of the Harbaugh experiment and have delivered the following:

Offensive Production in Conference
Total OffenseRushingPassing
202311811
202471310
2025171812
At what point do we admit the "new offense" isn't working? In fairness, we didn't know it was a new offense until last year, so.....

And Defensively Havoc was supposed to be for the other teams (at least so I thought) but it was more for us as we managed to rank 15th in total yards per game given up at just under 400 yards per game in conference after holding tOSU and Rutgers to their average outputs WHILE sporting a dline that led the conference in sacks and trailed only Indiana in TFL (both of us being 12+ ahead of tOSU at #3).

We'll see, but there's not a lot to say; things are getting better, particularly offensively. One final bit of statistical consideration:

Rushing Yds/Game in conf.
MN Rushing YDSOpponent Avg/GameIndex to AVG
Rutger's35230.315
tOSU6872.494
Purdue30192.316
Nebraska186183102
Iowa24130.718
MSU10417559
Oregon62114.454
Northwestern59139.3
42​
Wisconsin128124.9102
 
Last edited:

caliGopher said:
And our best conference win was against.....Nebraska, second best, was Rutger's, so that means what, we'll be much better this year?

The pre-season predictions don't mean much. We'll line up and play the games. The two biggest challenges we have are Danny Collins and Greg Harbaugh. We're in year 3 of the Harbaugh experiment and have delivered the following:

Offensive Production in Conference
Total OffenseRushingPassing
202311811
202471310
2025171812
At what point do we admit the "new offense" isn't working? In fairness, we didn't know it was a new offense until last year, so.....

And Defensively Havoc was supposed to be for the other teams (at least so I thought) but it was more for us as we managed to rank 15th in total yards per game given up at just under 400 yards per game in conference after holding tOSU and Rutgers to their average outputs WHILE sporting a dline that led the conference in sacks and trailed only Indiana in TFL (both of us being 12+ ahead of tOSU at #3).

We'll see, but there's not a lot to say; things are getting better, particularly offensively. One final bit of statistical consideration:

Rushing Yds/Game in conf.
MN Rushing YDSOpponent Avg/GameIndex to AVG
Rutger's35230.315
tOSU6872.494
Purdue30192.330
Nebraska186183102
Iowa24130.718
MSU10417559
Oregon62114.454
Northwestern59139.3
42​
Wisconsin128124.9102
Click to expand...
I don’t think the team has to be much better to go 8-4 or 7-5(5-4).
So I guess I don’t see why my posts read like a claim that we would be much better.
 

caliGopher said:
And our best conference win was against.....Nebraska, second best, was Rutger's, so that means what, we'll be much better this year?

The pre-season predictions don't mean much. We'll line up and play the games. The two biggest challenges we have are Danny Collins and Greg Harbaugh. We're in year 3 of the Harbaugh experiment and have delivered the following:

Offensive Production in Conference
Total OffenseRushingPassing
202311811
202471310
2025171812
At what point do we admit the "new offense" isn't working? In fairness, we didn't know it was a new offense until last year, so.....

And Defensively Havoc was supposed to be for the other teams (at least so I thought) but it was more for us as we managed to rank 15th in total yards per game given up at just under 400 yards per game in conference after holding tOSU and Rutgers to their average outputs WHILE sporting a dline that led the conference in sacks and trailed only Indiana in TFL (both of us being 12+ ahead of tOSU at #3).

We'll see, but there's not a lot to say; things are getting better, particularly offensively. One final bit of statistical consideration:

Rushing Yds/Game in conf.
MN Rushing YDSOpponent Avg/GameIndex to AVG
Rutger's35230.315
tOSU6872.494
Purdue30192.330
Nebraska186183102
Iowa24130.718
MSU10417559
Oregon62114.454
Northwestern59139.3
42​
Wisconsin128124.9102
Click to expand...

I like your post but, looking at the stats (from Sports Reference and Big Ten Org), I get 12th in total offense for both 2023 and 2024. Of course, the earlier year is out of 14 teams.

The bottom chart is a good exhibit to illustrate our rushing futility for the most recent year (there is an obvious mathematical error for the Purdue game Index to Average rushing). I remember thinking after the Purdue game how dismal it was that we had only 262 yards and 4.2 yards per play of total offense against a Purdue team that was near the bottom of the league in total defense (17th in the league at 423.5 yards per game and 6.6 yards per play for the season).

Fleck has had only one truly good offensive team (2019) in his tenure here but the Harbaugh years have been the worst collectively. I guess that explains why he's still here instead of being hired away like some of our other assistants.
 

Some guy said:
I think it’s hard for me to knock the passing game at all even with lack of explosive plays. First year starter and inconsistent run game. 2300 yards 18 touchdowns and 6 interceptions. only 6 QBs in college football had 2000+, 15+, and 9 or less.
Drake Lindsey is one of them.
Click to expand...
Not knocking our passing game, just saying we dont have very good WR's
TwistingMyMelon said:
I like your post but, looking at the stats (from Sports Reference and Big Ten Org), I get 12th in total offense for both 2023 and 2024. Of course, the earlier year is out of 14 teams.

The bottom chart is a good exhibit to illustrate our rushing futility for the most recent year (there is an obvious mathematical error for the Purdue game Index to Average rushing). I remember thinking after the Purdue game how dismal it was that we had only 262 yards and 4.2 yards per play of total offense against a Purdue team that was near the bottom of the league in total defense (17th in the league at 423.5 yards per game and 6.6 yards per play for the season).

Fleck has had only one truly good offensive team (2019) in his tenure here but the Harbaugh years have been the worst collectively. I guess that explains why he's still here instead of being hired away like some of our other assistants.
Click to expand...
Agree. Anyone that thinks the Gopher offense has been anything but below average (at best) over the past few years is nuts IMO...
 

TwistingMyMelon said:
I like your post but, looking at the stats (from Sports Reference and Big Ten Org), I get 12th in total offense for both 2023 and 2024. Of course, the earlier year is out of 14 teams.

The bottom chart is a good exhibit to illustrate our rushing futility for the most recent year (there is an obvious mathematical error for the Purdue game Index to Average rushing). I remember thinking after the Purdue game how dismal it was that we had only 262 yards and 4.2 yards per play of total offense against a Purdue team that was near the bottom of the league in total defense (17th in the league at 423.5 yards per game and 6.6 yards per play for the season).

Fleck has had only one truly good offensive team (2019) in his tenure here but the Harbaugh years have been the worst collectively. I guess that explains why he's still here instead of being hired away like some of our other assistants.
Click to expand...
Yes, if you include the NC schedule. The data I showed is conference game stats only. I fixed the Purdue Index, which should have been 16 (15.6).
 

Some guy said:
I don’t think the team has to be much better to go 8-4 or 7-5(5-4).
So I guess I don’t see why my posts read like a claim that we would be much better.
Click to expand...
Except:

Washington > 2025 Rutgers, Michigan State, Nebraska
Michigan > 2025 Rutgers, Michigan State, Nebraska
Penn State > 2025 Rutgers, Michigan State, and Nebraska
UCLA > 2025 Michigan State and Purdue
Iowa > Minnesota
Indiana > Minnesota

Which leaves two toss up games from last year Purdue and Northwestern that are toss up games again this year

And Wisconsin, a game we should win again, but they were better than their record last year. While their offense struggled without a QB again (even though they outgained us), their defense was 7th in yards allowed per game in conference, against a conference schedule that included the 1,2,3,5,6,7,8,9,17 teams in the conference as opposed to being 17th ranked in defense in the conference against a schedule that included the 2, 3, 6, 10, 11, 14, 15, 16, and 18th place finishers in the conference. 8 of the top 9 teams and 1 of the bottom 9. We had 3 of the top 9 and 6 of the bottom 9. I'm not counting on their fortunes changing, but I won't be surprised if they finish near the top of the bottom in 2026 (right next to us).
 

caliGopher said:
Except:

Washington > 2025 Rutgers, Michigan State, Nebraska
Michigan > 2025 Rutgers, Michigan State, Nebraska
Penn State > 2025 Rutgers, Michigan State, and Nebraska
UCLA > 2025 Michigan State and Purdue
Iowa > Minnesota
Indiana > Minnesota

Which leaves two toss up games from last year Purdue and Northwestern that are toss up games again this year

And Wisconsin, a game we should win again, but they were better than their record last year. While their offense struggled without a QB again (even though they outgained us), their defense was 7th in yards allowed per game in conference, against a conference schedule that included the 1,2,3,5,6,7,8,9,17 teams in the conference as opposed to being 17th ranked in defense in the conference against a schedule that included the 2, 3, 6, 10, 11, 14, 15, 16, and 18th place finishers in the conference. 8 of the top 9 teams and 1 of the bottom 9. We had 3 of the top 9 and 6 of the bottom 9. I'm not counting on their fortunes changing, but I won't be surprised if they finish near the top of the bottom in 2026 (right next to us).
Click to expand...
If all the teams were the same as last year you could do an analysis closer to this.
Our schedule could end up much easier or much tougher than last year depending on how teams do.
 

You know Indiana is going to be really good. You want to think Washington, Penn State and Michigan are going be tough games. Mississippi State, Iowa and UCLA could be really good or not as good, no one knows. Most think Iowa is going to be really good and that the Gophers have zero chance against the Hawkeyes. We assume Purdue, Wisconsin and Northwestern are winnable games but here again, who knows. I think our schedule is tougher than last year but I also think our roster is much better. Many people think that losing Perich is hurting the Gopher defense. I'm not one of them. It allowed us to fill some other holes defensively and it should make us better. It's fun to give an opinon and make predictions. You just don't know but I would be shocked if the Gophers are not much better this season. Go Gophers!
 

Lifeleadership said:
You know Indiana is going to be really good. You want to think Washington, Penn State and Michigan are going be tough games. Mississippi State, Iowa and UCLA could be really good or not as good, no one knows. Most think Iowa is going to be really good and that the Gophers have zero chance against the Hawkeyes. We assume Purdue, Wisconsin and Northwestern are winnable games but here again, who knows. I think our schedule is tougher than last year but I also think our roster is much better. Many people think that losing Perich is hurting the Gopher defense. I'm not one of them. It allowed us to fill some other holes defensively and it should make us better. It's fun to give an opinon and make predictions. You just don't know but I would be shocked if the Gophers are not much better this season. Go Gophers!
Click to expand...
Our schedule this year gives us a lower floor but also a higher ceiling.

Win or lose games in 60-40 to 40-60 games against Washington, Michigan state, northwestern, Purdue, Iowa, MS State, UCLA

2 of Penn state, Indiana, and Michigan are 7-5 or 8-4 teams instead of national contender and all of a sudden you could finish anywhere from 2-10 to 11-1

Last years gophers team vs this schedule would’ve gone 5-7 against this years schedule assuming they lost to everyone they didn’t play.
So if you assume losses to Washington, MS State, UCLA, Penn State, Michigan, Indiana
I don’t think they’d have gone 0-6 vs that group though.
(Assume they beat the teams they beat+ two cupcakes and lose the teams they lose to)
 

caliGopher said:
Except:

Washington > 2025 Rutgers, Michigan State, Nebraska
Michigan > 2025 Rutgers, Michigan State, Nebraska
Penn State > 2025 Rutgers, Michigan State, and Nebraska
UCLA > 2025 Michigan State and Purdue
Iowa > Minnesota
Indiana > Minnesota

Which leaves two toss up games from last year Purdue and Northwestern that are toss up games again this year

And Wisconsin, a game we should win again, but they were better than their record last year. While their offense struggled without a QB again (even though they outgained us), their defense was 7th in yards allowed per game in conference, against a conference schedule that included the 1,2,3,5,6,7,8,9,17 teams in the conference as opposed to being 17th ranked in defense in the conference against a schedule that included the 2, 3, 6, 10, 11, 14, 15, 16, and 18th place finishers in the conference. 8 of the top 9 teams and 1 of the bottom 9. We had 3 of the top 9 and 6 of the bottom 9. I'm not counting on their fortunes changing, but I won't be surprised if they finish near the top of the bottom in 2026 (right next to us).
Click to expand...

I am more concerned about Wisconsin than I have been for a couple of years. Their new QB was very productive at Old Dominion and was a true dual threat.

A number of sports writers have been pretty high on UCLA. A lot of that seems to be due to their new coach but new coaches who lead a team to a big first year turnaround are not that common despite a recent very high profile one in the Big Ten. To rise to the middle of the pack, UCLA will need a significant turnaround: they were 17th in the league in scoring offense and dead last in scoring defense last season.

Iowa lost a lot of good players and have uncertainty at the QB position. They don't have down years often but those aren't completely unknown to them.
 

TwistingMyMelon said:
I am more concerned about Wisconsin than I have been for a couple of years. Their new QB was very productive at Old Dominion and was a true dual threat.

A number of sports writers have been pretty high on UCLA. A lot of that seems to be due to their new coach but new coaches who lead a team to a big first year turnaround are not that common despite a recent very high profile one in the Big Ten. To rise to the middle of the pack, UCLA will need a significant turnaround: they were 17th in the league in scoring offense and dead last in scoring defense last season.

Iowa lost a lot of good players and have uncertainty at the QB position. They don't have down years often but those aren't completely unknown to them.
Click to expand...
Iowa is gonna line up with their OL and RB group and run the shit out of the ball. Their defense might be a little down this year, but they are gonna be a handful.
 

TwistingMyMelon said:
I am more concerned about Wisconsin than I have been for a couple of years. Their new QB was very productive at Old Dominion and was a true dual threat.

A number of sports writers have been pretty high on UCLA. A lot of that seems to be due to their new coach but new coaches who lead a team to a big first year turnaround are not that common despite a recent very high profile one in the Big Ten. To rise to the middle of the pack, UCLA will need a significant turnaround: they were 17th in the league in scoring offense and dead last in scoring defense last season.

Iowa lost a lot of good players and have uncertainty at the QB position. They don't have down years often but those aren't completely unknown to them.
Click to expand...
Is uncertainty at QB something new for Iowa?
 

Assuming bowl results remained the same (big assumption) if we flipped the outcome of the Iowa game the last five years. Iowa would have won 8,7,11,7, and 9 games the last five years. Minnesota 9,9,5 (the year we actually won),10, and 10. Just trying to illustrate that the two programs are not far apart outside of head to head results, turn that part around and I think we can say we’ve reached a pretty similar level as them as a program, at least what that program is over the second half of Ferentz’s tenure.
 

You must log in or register to reply here.



Top Bottom