Sporting News: Michigan Football Pre-Season Ranking

Submitted by Trauber19 on

http://www.sportingnews.com/college-football/article/2010-06-24/college-football-countdown-no-71-michigan-wolverines

 

I've subscribed to The Sporting News for a long, long time.  I became unhappy with it when they made it just like ESPN the Magazine, coming out once every two weeks, and even the same format.  I am starting to become disgusted with it, every time I read something David Curtis has written....I'm at the point where I think he is almost as worthless as Drew Sharp.  No way do we finish this poorly again.

snowcrash

June 24th, 2010 at 2:59 PM ^

Suppose the season goes like this:

UConn L 28-31

@ND L 24-27

UMass W 52-14

BG W 38-17

@Ind W 41-31

MSU W 31-24

Iowa L 17-24

@PSU L 10-20

Illinois W 34-17

@Purdue L 31-34

Wisc L 21-31

@OSU L 13-27

That's 3-5 in conference and 5-7 overall. I don't think any of those individual game scores are much of a reach, although we would be 1-4 in close games so we would have to be somewhat unlucky. That said, I think it's more likely that we will win at least 2 from among UConn, ND, MSU, and Purdue and at least 1 of the 4 games where we are likely to be an underdog. I think 7-5 is more likely, but 5-7 could happen.

SpreadGuru

June 24th, 2010 at 4:05 PM ^

the season goes like this:

UConn W 34-14

@ND W 41-24

UMass W 58-7

BG W 45-14

@Ind W 31-17

MSU W 28-27 (Pay back for 1990 you bitches)

Iowa W 20-14

@PSU L 24-27

Illinois W 45-14

@Purdue W 38-24

Wisc W 21-17

@OSU L 20-24

By my math, that makes us 10-2 and all of the magazines are dead fucking wrong.  Go Blue!

Bodogblog

June 24th, 2010 at 2:58 PM ^

QB underrated, both Tate and Denard will play better this year (and both will play)
 
DL ridiculously underrated.  ST overrated at this point, without having seen more
 
Opportunity is on the upside with the other groups


 

SpreadGuru

June 24th, 2010 at 4:02 PM ^

for all of the pre-season publications to come out and doubt UM.  Want to know why?  Because everybody else is doing it and if they're wrong, they will always be able to say, "Nobody else saw UM's rise again to prominence coming." 

Do you know the difference between all of the pre-season magazines doubting/bashing UM and the first one to predict a really good season?

The magazine with enough "hutzbuh" to predict UM success is a leader, while all the rest are just some guy out taking a walk.

GO BLUE!

dahblue

June 26th, 2010 at 1:24 PM ^

What's "hutzbuh"?  Sounds like a an old's sneeze...

"Want to know why" it's easy for pre-season publications to doubt UofM?  Because we went 3-9 and then 5-7...because our defense is extremely young and still depleted...because we just got hit with NCAA violations for the first time in the history of our storied program, etc.  

We are all hoping that Michigan proves all these publications wrong, but "chutzpah" is thinking that any legit publication would predict UofM success this season.  They have to base their predictions on past performance, current rosters and upcoming schedules...not hope.  Personally, I'm hoping for 8 wins...but no editor would let that stand as a publishable "prediction".

Bolton22

June 24th, 2010 at 5:56 PM ^

I personally love when people rip michigan.

Were going to have a 8 or 9 win season this year, 7 at the very least. We will get to a bowl, even if it isnt a spectacular one, and we will surprise everyone of these sportswriters that have us doing horribly this year, even though they know nothign about UM football and have spent zero time doing research on incoming recruits and watching Tate and Denard improve this spring.

BoBo24

June 25th, 2010 at 8:12 AM ^

This is just stupid. Every team hits a rough spot at some point, but this is just piling on. It will just make SN look all the more stupid when we end up ranked in the top 25 at the end of the year.