Graham Couch

Lansing State Journal

This is a recurring weekly column analyzing the analysis of MSU football by other writers and pundits.

EAST LANSING – “The simple truth is (Mark) Dantonio hasn’t lost his seemingly bulletproof program. But he has lost a season to all the variables that make college football less than precision science.”

Those are the well-crafted words of the Detroit News’ Lynn Henning in his column from Michigan State’s 54-40 home loss to Northwestern Saturday. It’s a good starting point for the second installment of this weekly column, analyzing the analysis of MSU football.

Several themes emerged in the opinions written about MSU over the weekend, the most prevailing being that the Spartans simply lack the veteran talent this year to compete. That much has become evident. But Henning raised the question about the future of the program. So let’s examine it.

One season does not define a program. Not when so much has been accomplished so recently. But what’s next? Because two lost seasons starts to look like a trend downward.

The Spartans are likely to be fine at quarterback long-term. Redshirt freshman Brian Lewerke showed enough with his arm and accuracy Saturday — even as the game became too fast for him — for me to believe that, with 10 months of growth, he’ll be at least a solid option by Labor Day weekend 2017. Lewerke might not even win the job over true freshman Messiah deWeaver, but he creates a baseline of competency and potential the Spartans and their fans should feel good about.

There is plenty of competing young talent at receiver and proven talent in the backfield, enough to think the Spartans will be strong at those two positions. That brings us to the offensive line. Here is where I think the immediate future — and the trajectory — of the program will be determined.

I wrote last week that MSU’s 2013 recruiting class, which featured only offensive tackle Dennis Finley, is a big part of the problem for the Spartans. Some of these players — those that redshirted in 2013 — will be around next season, Finley included, creating a fairly ho-hum senior class. MLive’s Kyle Austin did a nice job this week of delving further into the issues with the 2013 group, including “the curious decision” to bring in only one offensive lineman in that recruiting class. It’s been made worse by the situation with Finley, who was pegged to be the heir apparent to Jack Conklin at left tackle before breaking his leg last season. He’s been slow to get back into form.

“That's led to a current offensive line two-deep that has four freshmen or sophomores, a key factor in that group’s struggles,” Austin wrote. “And that’s made life difficult for the offense.”

It could next season, too. If 2017 is your concern at this point, this is the unit to watch closely. If the O-line starts to develop and looks functional by season’s end, I think you can rest easy that MSU’s tough season was just that — a season. Elsewhere, MSU should be OK. That includes on defense, where I believe what you’re seeing is more the result of a poorly timed collision of injuries, underwhelming veterans and youth seeking direction than it is a long-term talent problem.

Another narrative — one that Detroit Free Press colleague Drew Sharp is sticking to — is the idea that Dantonio should be focused entirely on the future beyond 2016. As I stated last week, I don’t agree with that. That’s not how college football works. But he made an interesting suggestion this week in his column, saying “Dantonio should have a serious discussion with his coaching mentor, Nick Saban.”

Sharp writes that Saban hired offensive coordinator Lane Kiffin three years ago, even though he might not have loved Kiffin’s personality, because he knew he had to adapt to changing times offensively. Sharp doesn’t directly say, “think about replacing your offensive coordinators, Mark,” but he implies it.

This feeds into fans' clamoring to have someone other than Dave Warner calling plays. Two years ago, it should be noted, Warner managed the most prolific offense MSU has ever seen — in points, yards, touchdowns, rushing yards and first downs. That was a better offensive group. But the point is, he’s been successful in his three seasons as MSU’s co-coordinator and play caller. Keep in mind, he wasn’t calling the plays in 2012.

That doesn’t mean he’s having a good season. I believe overly conservative play calling in a couple of critical instances against Indiana and BYU turned out to be costly. MSU’s offense hasn’t looked balanced or fully functional since the Notre Dame game. That, of course, was the last time MSU’s offensive line won up front, which goes back to the biggest issue facing the program.

I would, though, be curious to hear what Saban would tell Dantonio if that conversation happened. It’s possible he needs a new voice on offense, or another voice somewhere. Sometimes it’s good to step out of your comfort zone. Saban did with Kiffin. But remember, this is Dantonio’s offensive philosophy — a pro-style, balanced, time-of-possession approach. That’s not changing no matter who is calling plays. If you want something other than that, you want someone other than Dantonio. And that sort of thinking is ridiculous.

Contact Graham Couch at gcouch@lsj.com. Follow him on Twitter @Graham_Couch.