Free Press Predictions- Tell me they don't love them some Sparty Green now
First I would like to say hi to everyone out there. I have been following the website for about 2 years now. I found it while I was bored in college one day, and now I am a everyday visitor. My name is Stephen, I live just south of AA, and have been a die hard Michigan fan since I came out of the womb in 1985.
I thought my first blog should be about the predictions that I heard while listening to the radio yesterday, and that appear in the Free Press today. The prediction for Michigan, which was done by the always bias, Mark Snyder have Michigan going 5-7, with a loss this weekend to Western. So in the last week Mark Snyder has co-wrote one of the most insanely bias, witch-hunting pieces of "journalism" in recent memories, then blatantly ignored the fact that this season will be far better than last for Michigan for all of the obvious reasons (second season for Rich Rod, new QBs that can run the system, and a new DC that actually knows what is going on).
In the same paper, MSU was predicted to go 9-3, with a win over PSU, "being a game that could decide the Big Ten Champion." This is absolutely insane!!! The boys in East Lansing may not be being coached by John L anymore, but to think that they will beat PSU and possibly be going to the Rose Bowl (and at worst the Capital One Bowl) is down right stupid.
All the projections for Michigan this year have them at a minimum of 6 wins, with some as high as 8 or 9. While MSU may go 9-3, in no way is that going to be close enough to win a Big Ten Championship. I am not a conspiracy theorist (all the time), but you cannot tell me that the Free Press does not have an agenda here to smear the good name that is Michigan. We will talk to you more soon...Go Blue!
I thought my first blog should be about the predictions that I heard while listening to the radio yesterday, and that appear in the Free Press today. The prediction for Michigan, which was done by the always bias, Mark Snyder have Michigan going 5-7, with a loss this weekend to Western. So in the last week Mark Snyder has co-wrote one of the most insanely bias, witch-hunting pieces of "journalism" in recent memories, then blatantly ignored the fact that this season will be far better than last for Michigan for all of the obvious reasons (second season for Rich Rod, new QBs that can run the system, and a new DC that actually knows what is going on).
In the same paper, MSU was predicted to go 9-3, with a win over PSU, "being a game that could decide the Big Ten Champion." This is absolutely insane!!! The boys in East Lansing may not be being coached by John L anymore, but to think that they will beat PSU and possibly be going to the Rose Bowl (and at worst the Capital One Bowl) is down right stupid.
All the projections for Michigan this year have them at a minimum of 6 wins, with some as high as 8 or 9. While MSU may go 9-3, in no way is that going to be close enough to win a Big Ten Championship. I am not a conspiracy theorist (all the time), but you cannot tell me that the Free Press does not have an agenda here to smear the good name that is Michigan. We will talk to you more soon...Go Blue!
September 3rd, 2009 at 11:56 AM ^
If all projections have UM winning a minimum of 6, I'm not sure predicting "5 wins" is that big of a deal. And remember always - predictions are pretty useless.
September 3rd, 2009 at 6:23 PM ^
But that's the difference between a bowl game and a losing season. People who say 5-7 don't think we're really back yet, while those who say 6-6 or 7-5 do. It's only one win, but what a win.
September 3rd, 2009 at 12:05 PM ^
I think the Freep "investigation" showed bias, but not the 5-7 prediction. It is a glass-is-half-empty take for sure, but not unreasonable. I read his break down of each game. I think 5-7 is a reasonable, conservative estimate. I think we will win at least 7, but he is not crazy.
Neither is predicting 9 wins for MSU. Again, game by game, they have a schedule that works in their favor. It is not an unreasonable prediction.
I recall last year Herbstreit predicted we would go 6-6 and people (myself included, sadly) HOWLED in anger. He later revised and said he thought we would win 7 or 8. Well, horrible as it was, he was not biased by his scarlet glasses, he was more correct than nearly all of us.
I hope the dour projections for us look absurd at season's end but they are not the basis for judging people's attitudes toward us.
September 3rd, 2009 at 12:06 PM ^
Yes, the "bias" Mark Snyder's prediction of 5 wins is extremely egregious. He's cheating us out of ONE win!
September 3rd, 2009 at 12:13 PM ^
I heard a guy on the radio say terrelle Pryor would win the Heisman. I don't care, I know he's wrong.
September 3rd, 2009 at 12:13 PM ^
Nine wins might be high, but they do have a favorable schedule this year. No OSU this year, and PSU/Iowa/UM at home.
September 3rd, 2009 at 12:53 PM ^
Fine. The Freep is hyping MSU. In other news: Water flows down hill!
September 3rd, 2009 at 12:54 PM ^
When you WERE in college? Uh, okay. So much for higher education.
Anyway, the predictions for MSU are not "completely insane." Veteran defense (Dantonio's strength) quarterbacks who are fairly enough seasoned (and pretty decent), and if they can adequately replace Ringer they stand an excellent chance of going 9-3. I think they need a lot to fall into place, and that isn't inconceivable. Not to mention their, er, already mentioned schedule (or lack thereof).
My feeling is they don't feel so confident at running back, thus "rushing" LOLZ Glenn Winston back in. Last season their receivers were prone to The Droppsies--can they hang onto the ball this year?
I'll peg them at 7-5 and losing to Michigan.
September 3rd, 2009 at 2:14 PM ^
the syntax and grammar of his post suggest to me that he is not a native english speaker. no need to be a jackass.
also, agree that the msu predictions are not completely insane, although i generally do take a more (biased) pessimistic view as to their prospects. 8-4 seems reasonable for MSU, with UM right there are just a tick behind this year (at, say, 7-5)
September 3rd, 2009 at 3:42 PM ^
Sorry about the mistakes, I wanted to review it so that I could proof it. When I went to click on it I saved it instead, and did not know how to get it back. I promise the next one will be better. Thanks for reading.
September 3rd, 2009 at 2:50 PM ^
MSU's receivers still had mad droppsies in the spring game, FWIW, partially explaining Dantonio's permascowl. Their schedule is soft enough to go 9-3, especially since they have a lot of big games at home. They will not, under any circumstances, lose to Michigan, but even I'm not crazy enough to think they'll beat Penn State, home or not.
September 3rd, 2009 at 3:36 PM ^
I finished college in 3 and 1/2 years...so I do believe in higher education, I was just bored in between classes, but hey thanks for doing the math and figuring out that I am 24 years old.
September 3rd, 2009 at 12:55 PM ^
and am an unabashed homer. God I hope I am wrong.
September 3rd, 2009 at 1:06 PM ^
Ridiculous. Propaganda. Bias.
September 3rd, 2009 at 1:22 PM ^
It's not really the number of wins, but actual predictions. He predicted we'd lose to Western simply because we lost the last 2 openers and Western has an experienced team.
Then they predicted MSU would beat Penn St and get an at-large BCS birth.
I guess it makes money to go out on a limb rather than be conservative in your predictions. No the numbers of wins aren't necessarily that far off, but the game by game predictions have some pretty obvious outliers.
September 3rd, 2009 at 5:53 PM ^
Go on a personal vendetta-driven crusade against Michigan, prop up Sparty, and VOILA! You have the entire state of Michigan reading. For years Sparties have thought he Detroit Market was nothing but UM lapdogs.
The Freep has Wolverine fans clicking for the next train wreck and Sparties clicking for the next train wreck on top of the next article predicting they are now the next best thing to Dippin' Dots.
September 3rd, 2009 at 7:33 PM ^
...but THIS Michigan fan hasn't visited the freep since Sunday. Unless they come up with a piece so compelling that I feel I have to read it, they won't get another click off of me as long as they continue their present course.
September 3rd, 2009 at 1:23 PM ^
vs. Montana State -w
vs. Central Michigan -w
at Notre Dame -w
at Wisconsin -tu
vs. Michigan -tu
at Illinois -tu
vs. Northwestern -w
vs. Iowa -tu
at Minnesota -w
vs. Western Michigan -w
at Purdue -w
vs. Penn State -tu
okay, so if they win less than half of their toss ups they're at 9 wins...NOT unreasonable.
critique fail.
September 3rd, 2009 at 2:42 PM ^
vs. Illinois - tu
at Notre Dame - w
vs. Penn State - tu
I agree that 9-3 is not out of the question with that soft schedule, but I think these three predictions are off.
a slight favorite against Notre Dame maybe, but not enough to classify that one w instead of tu. Personally I the ND wins that one.
vs. Illinois I guess I could see it being close enough to be a toss up, but I have to believe that is expected to be a win for the Illini, considering they are a much more experienced team.
and absolutely no freaking way is it a tossup with Penn State.
September 3rd, 2009 at 5:01 PM ^
I think you may be giving Sparty a little too much love. While I agree that 9-3 is possible for MSU, I think that is their ceiling for 2009 and I believe their floor is probably 5-7. I think they will either be 7-5 or 8-4.
@ ND is not a W, but a TU at best
Illinois is a likely L
NWestern is a TU
@ Minnesota is a TU
I think they actually MIGHT lose to either CMU or WMU.
September 4th, 2009 at 10:41 AM ^
They could be no better than Michigan and get 8 or 9 wins. The only >95% lock for them to lose is Penn State.
September 4th, 2009 at 11:01 AM ^
My game predictions do not bear this out:
I see a solid 7-8 win season for them, unless anyone can find 150-200 percentage points to pepper into this chart.
| Odds of Win | Opponent |
|---|---|
| 97% | Montana State |
| 70% | Central Michigan |
| 60% | Notre Dame |
| 65% | Wisconsin |
| 60% | Michigan |
| 45% | Illinois |
| 60% | Northwestern |
| 30% | Iowa |
| 80% | Minnesota |
| 80% | Western Michigan |
| 90% | Purdue |
| 5% | Penn State |
| = 7.42 wins |
September 4th, 2009 at 11:49 AM ^
I just KNOW I am going to regret this (talking S on this M site). S record will be determined if they have their usual case of imploding or not. Last year they didn't implode completely. Their usual Modus Operandi is to win a few games in a row then get hooked by a rival and commence with a free fall.
I think too much assumption is going on with a 9-win season for S. Two years in a row without said implosion? I think they will feel the pain this year and revive their usual ways.
September 4th, 2009 at 5:29 PM ^
Wishful thinking.
September 4th, 2009 at 2:33 PM ^
OSU and re-calculate your win total. I will assume it is 6-6 like most predictions.
September 4th, 2009 at 5:33 PM ^
I think your NU percentage is a bit low, though. Like MSU, NU lost a productive QB/RB. MSU has much more receiving talent returning, better players to replace the graduating seniors, and a better defense.
September 3rd, 2009 at 3:46 PM ^
Yeah, Cousins threw some passes last year but, nobody really spent anytime watching film of him. It's much different having to be the MAN than the backup. Ringer was the O and they have no RBs with any experience plus they lost the right side of their line.
Baker was a nice pickup but, his last two years of HS he couldn't make it through more then 6 games. How will he survive the Big 10 schedule?
Finally, if the secondary plays the way it did in the spring game (750 passing yards and 8 TDs) I don't see how they win 9 games. They do have a favorable schedule so anything is possible. I do find it interesting that they chose PSU as one of the teams that doesn't rotate off of their schedule though.
September 4th, 2009 at 2:02 AM ^
Those predictions don't surprise me at all. I do not, however, think that there is any way that MSU is going to be contending for the Big Ten Championship.
September 4th, 2009 at 2:49 PM ^
new QB's (freshman) & D Co-ordinator (3rd in three years)are most likely the same reasons observers are predicting 6-6. To them, two new starting safeties and no depth at any defensive positions (and not much depth on offense) on the worst U-M defense ever are good reasons to doubt any more than 6 wins. I do agree that doubling last year's win total would be "far better". Regarding Coach Rod's past second years, past performance never guarantees today's results. That probably goes double in football.
Comments