Michigan -6.5 vs. Utah
... according to the lines that ESPN has posted so far (BETONLINE.ag, 5Dimes.eu, SportsBetting.ag).
Other Big Ten games:
Texas State +14.5/15 @ Illinois
Indiana +16.5 @ Missouri
Iowa +5/5.5 @ Pittsburgh
Maryland +1.5 @ Syracuse
EMU +45/45.5 @ MSU
Miami (FL) +7.5 @ Nebraska
UMass +28.5 @ Penn State
Bowling Green +21.5/22 @ Wisconsin
No line yet:
San Jose St. @ Minnesota
Western Illinois @ Northwestern
Southern Illinois @ Purdue
Rutgers @ Navy
Bye:
Ohio State
September 14th, 2014 at 10:49 PM ^
September 14th, 2014 at 10:54 PM ^
Sure. We could still win the other 8 games on the schedule. Not saying that is a likely combination of events, but hey, you asked.
This game is important only in that it will give us another barometer test going into league play. If it goes well, it bodes well for winning around 9 games. If Michigan loses... well, let's just say I'm going to stay off of this site for the rest of the season.
September 14th, 2014 at 11:06 PM ^
September 14th, 2014 at 11:24 PM ^
September 14th, 2014 at 10:49 PM ^
September 14th, 2014 at 11:12 PM ^
Just ban this guy already.
September 14th, 2014 at 11:34 PM ^
but but but ... I want to see what happens when he gets 2000 more downvotes. Does MGoBlog end? Is this like Lost? The next Y2K?
Don't end him now!
September 15th, 2014 at 12:08 AM ^
September 15th, 2014 at 9:11 AM ^
How could you neg yourself? Multiple accounts? I mean, if you're negative you can't vote...
September 14th, 2014 at 11:37 PM ^
The Gardner hate is especially amazing because he's probably the best QB Michigan has had since Henne. Forcier was maybe equal to Gardner at his best, but as a passer, think of who has played for UM since Henne's days.
September 15th, 2014 at 7:28 AM ^
Well, OK. But speaking as a Gardner fan who thinks that his performance in last year's OSU game was one of the gutsiest I've ever seen, I have to point this out:
Unless I'm forgetting someone, that list of post-Henne QBs's includes Threet, Sheridan, Forcier, DRob, and now Gardner. Except for Denard, who was one of the most exciting players to ever wear a Michigan uniform, that's not setting the bar real high.
September 15th, 2014 at 9:57 AM ^
also include Ryan Mallett with a shutout win over ND (38-0) a win the following week over PSU (14-9), and then later in the season another start and win over Minnesota (34-10). The book is not yet closed on Gardner, but Mallett did go on to a pretty fair career with Arkansas and a 3rd round draft pick. Though a small sample size, when Mallett started Michigan won.
September 15th, 2014 at 7:36 AM ^
That uneasy feeling you have, when seeing him post, is your subconscious that knows that Michigania just is a troll.
September 15th, 2014 at 1:28 AM ^
"A fanatic is one who can't change his mind and won't change the subject."
September 14th, 2014 at 11:15 PM ^
He looked like a QB against ND and OSU last year. Devin Gardner is like a box of chocolates.
September 15th, 2014 at 7:42 AM ^
September 14th, 2014 at 10:51 PM ^
September 14th, 2014 at 11:01 PM ^
that I point out they had Michigan +30 against Miami, and -3.5 at ND.
September 15th, 2014 at 7:40 AM ^
I suppose you could point that out, but in the absence of information about betting patterns, information about Vegas's attempts to manage the betting patterns isn't all that interesting.
Dunno why people treat the betting line as a prediction, and seem to feel that Vegas somehow fucked up when it made Michigan 3.6 point dogs at Notre Dame. If the line caused the betters to split evenly, it was a success. If it didn't, it was a failure. Comparisons to actual scores are meaningless. Clucko the Chicken has more interest in predicting scores than the Vegas oddsmakers.
September 15th, 2014 at 7:58 AM ^
I still don't really get this. It seems weirdly conservative for Vegas to try to get the money even on the two sides. Couldn't they exploit some irrational tendencies by gamblers to make it more likely that Vegas wins (e.g., by drawing money to a side that's unlikely to cover)? Sure, they'll lose occasionally, but with what they can know and pay, I'd imagine that they could do quite a bit better than 50% in the long run.
September 15th, 2014 at 9:17 AM ^
September 15th, 2014 at 9:38 AM ^
But over time they still should win out - or at worst go about even - if they're better than the betting public at picking games. I'm sure they are. Can Vegas really not sustain one bad day? I don't know how casinos manage money, but I'd imagine that they'd happily accept an occasional beating if they were right quite a bit more often than they were wrong.
September 15th, 2014 at 10:33 AM ^
September 14th, 2014 at 11:04 PM ^
It's hard to know what kind of team Utah really has until this weekend, as they've only played lesser opponents that they've beaten by very large margins. Defense may be unknown, but they know how to score.
Wittingham's the same coach who beat us in 2008 (and beat Alabama in the bowl game as well). The past couple of years his teams haven't done very well, but he had a run of much better seasons.
So they have very good coaching, play in a tougher conference, and should be well-prepared by their coaching staff. The question is whether they have the personnel.
Given our performances in the past two weeks, one a disaster against a good opponent, and one a disappointment against a lesser opponent, I wouldn't be surprised if we find ourselves in big trouble by halftime.
The oddsmakers are wrong this time. I have no confidence in our ability to stop a good offense, or do well against even an average defense, I think we lose by two touchdowns. At home.
I sure hope I am wrong.
September 15th, 2014 at 9:38 AM ^
Losing by two at home when UM nearly beat a superior OSU team seems like an overly pessimistic prediction. Could it happen? Sure. These past seven years have shown that anything can happen. But I consider unlikely that it will happen.
September 14th, 2014 at 11:13 PM ^
Will be interesting to see how Maryland does. I think they may pull a few upsets in the B1G during this down year.
September 14th, 2014 at 11:30 PM ^
Watching Maryland this weekend they definitely have that WTF quality to them where they could look horrid one week and if they figure it out for 2 weeks look really good for the next 2. Then reverting to mean.
But the Big 10 was not kind to Rutgers or Maryland in scheduling - they got all the "tough"* crossovers.
*my use of the word tough is relative to Big 10
Here is a 6 game stretch Maryland has: OSU, Iowa, @Wisconsin, @PSU, MSU, @Michigan
On the positive side they should be very buttered up by the time they land in AA. The conference might suck but we still hit each other hard!
September 14th, 2014 at 11:25 PM ^
Some Utes give Mattison high marks including for adaptation: http://www.blocku.com/2014/9/13/6146235/utah-football-opponent-preview-michigan-defense
Excerpt: "Michigan runs a press man coverage in the secondary, similar to what the Utes like to play. Utah's offense will have seen a variation of the UM defense in practice every day...."
September 14th, 2014 at 11:28 PM ^
September 14th, 2014 at 11:32 PM ^
September 14th, 2014 at 11:34 PM ^
September 15th, 2014 at 12:38 AM ^
September 15th, 2014 at 6:09 AM ^
September 15th, 2014 at 9:10 AM ^
September 15th, 2014 at 9:34 AM ^
I think the loss @ Iowa was more about a questionable "put Denard under center" for the entire game more than anything else.
September 15th, 2014 at 10:03 AM ^
The other 2012 loss was actually Nebraska, when Denard got injured and we put Bellomy in. Iowa under center was one of the two losses the year before.
I totally agree with the sentiment around here. One bad year last year has people really revising what was actually a great 2011 and a decent 2012 into "3 years of failure."
September 15th, 2014 at 10:27 AM ^
I hope Hoke can turn it around this year. I think he and his coaches can, especially given the weak state of the B1G. Also playing tough in East Lansing will be big thing! Even if we lose it better not be a blowout!
September 15th, 2014 at 11:06 AM ^
I find myself being more optimistic in my posts just to offset the negativity around here lately. And through 3 games - I think we look way better than last season in the trenches and on defense. And that's with a blowout loss to ND as opposed to a energizing home win last season.
Huge game this week, and 6.5 points sounds about right.
September 14th, 2014 at 11:29 PM ^
Bookies' job isn't to accurately predict, it is to make money. In actuallity this might be a three point spread on comparing the teams alone, but more casual Michigan fans bet than casual Utah fans.
September 14th, 2014 at 11:46 PM ^
You are correct, sir.
September 14th, 2014 at 11:54 PM ^
Utes may be a pretty good team. Defeating them will put us on the right track heading into B1G play. If we lose I will worry much about how the season will pan out.
September 15th, 2014 at 12:07 AM ^
September 15th, 2014 at 1:16 AM ^
September 15th, 2014 at 1:17 AM ^
September 15th, 2014 at 3:10 AM ^
Their D is not scary, Nate Orchard is really the only kid that is a possible major impact player for their D from what I have watched and heard.
If we DONT TURN THE GD BALL OVER, I think we win this game going away. If Funch is not back yet it may be a little bit more difficult just due to the relative inexperience at WR, but we should still win by more than a TD if we can run the ball effectively.
We need Raymon back, Dres Anderson is a beastly WR...kid slayed Stanford last year and I do not trust Countess in one on one coverage against him if we are playing the "Michigan Man Press D." I would be copiously more comfortable with Ray or Peppers, and have Countess in nickel or on their second option who is good, but a significant drop off from Dres. Playing Peppers on Dres scares me as well s bit, just due to the true frosh playing one on one with a experienced, dangerous, upperclass WR. Still take it over Countess though. I imagine we will be in nickel probably 80% of the game anyway.
Pass D has to show up big, and we need to limit the turnovers, pound the ball, and run the clock. If we can do those things I think we will have a great shot at a big win even without Funchess.
September 15th, 2014 at 6:00 AM ^
September 15th, 2014 at 6:48 AM ^
September 15th, 2014 at 8:49 AM ^
September 15th, 2014 at 11:04 AM ^
Michigan under Hoke
2011: 22 turnovers in 13 games
2012: 27 turnovers in 13 games
2013: 21 turnovers in 13 games
2014: 8 turnover in 3 games.
Average turnovers per game: 1.85
Total games under Hoke: 42
Games with at least 1 turnover: 37
Percentage of games with at least 1 turnover: 88%