Gambling Land: Early line, Michigan -3 over UCONN

Submitted by formerlyanonymous on

The Golden Nugget has their first college football lines released. Here's a look at where Michigan stacks up early:

Date Favored Line Underdog Home
9/4 Michigan -3 UCONN Michigan
9/11 Notre Dame -7 Michigan Notre Dame
10/9 Michigan -3 Michigan St. Michigan
10/16 Iowa -3 Michigan Michigan
10/30 Penn State -10 Michigan Penn State
11/13 Michigan PICK Purdue Purdue
11/20 Wisconsin -4 Michigan Michigan
11/27 Ohio State -13.5 Michigan Ohio State

Looks like Michigan is considered equal to UCONN and Michigan State this year, slightly better than Purdue. I'd say that sounds fair based on recent history.

Discuss.

Blue-Chip

June 25th, 2010 at 1:27 PM ^

None of those jump out at me as being way off base.  Hopefully as the season goes on M will look better, but based on what we know now they seem pretty fair lines.

MGoChairman

June 25th, 2010 at 1:31 PM ^

I'm not sure if I agree with the -7 line on Notre Dame. Losing valuable members of their offense, along with the installation of a new coach, I'm not sure if the line should be that heavily tilted in their favor. 

koolaid

June 25th, 2010 at 4:20 PM ^

Brian Kelly is an excellent coach.  He is also VERY good at turning programs around.  I watched Brian Kelly coach when he was at DII GVSU and his teams would consistently put up 50+ pts and won lots of games.  Then he went to CMU and turned the program from an average MAC team to a good MAC team.  Then he went to Cinci and took a very average Cinci team (7-5 previous year) and turned them into a title contender.  With the recruits that ND has, they will be good.  @Blue-Chip is right--he does well even without tons of talent

WolvinLA2

June 25th, 2010 at 5:37 PM ^

I agree that Brian Kelly has had a lot of success where he's coached, but I think you're overstating things a bit.  Not with CMU or Cinci have we seen what he's really made of as a coach, simply because he wasn't there very long.  GVSU continued winning at the same pace after he left, and CMU actually had better seasons after he left.  Cincinnati was on their way to winning before he got there (Dantonio, love him or hate him, is actually the one who "turned around" that program, Kelly just continued it). 

And at both CMU and Cinci, BK never really had a quality win.  He did a pretty good job in his mediocre conference when there wasn't really another decent team in the league, and got smoked when he played a BCS team out of conference (the lone exception is Oregon State, who was 8-5 in a pretty weak conference). 

I see Brian Kelly this way - he's like a college student who went to WMU, took pretty easy classes and got all A's.  He then transferred to MSU, took pretty easy classes again, and got all A's.  Now he has transferred to UM and is majoring in ChemE.  Will he do well?  Some people will say "of course he will, he's always gotten A's before."  Other people will say, "yeah, but never in anything difficult."  Bottom line, he's in for a major challenge, and his past work isn't enough to say he'll definitely do well, or definitely fail.

Blue-Chip

June 25th, 2010 at 5:41 PM ^

I don't think I made my point very well.  I don't think Brian Kelly is a great coach.  From seeing him up close, he is arrogant and takes unnecessary chances.  This leads to backfires and giving opponents great opportunity.  However, when he's working with someone elses teams, he tends to stay within the realm of what his players are capable of.  With what's left at ND, that makes them dangerous this year.

jmblue

June 25th, 2010 at 6:10 PM ^

I understand what you're saying, but Kelly's record doesn't back this claim up.  His first year at a school tends to be his worst.  At CMU he went 4-7, 6-5 and 9-4.  At UC he went 10-3, 11-3 and 12-0.  It seems that he is, in fact, most dangerous when he has his own recruits in the system.

Blue-Chip

June 25th, 2010 at 6:19 PM ^

The record increases because he is also a strong recruiter, and the players get better.  I can't speak to Cincy, but I watched him out think himself in that last year at Central.  It was stylistically similar to Charlie calling for a deep pass when they needed a couple yards to run out the clock in the 09 Michigan game.  I just don't think he'll make that type of mistake in the early part of his tenure.

WolvinLA2

June 25th, 2010 at 6:29 PM ^

I don't really think that increase in wins is a reflection on him winning with his recruits, since at both places, the first class of "his" recruits were either sophomores or redshirt freshman during his last season, not exactly the guys leading the team. 

M-Wolverine

June 26th, 2010 at 12:58 PM ^

Couldn't the last paragraph be a description of Rich Rod too? Maybe the previous paragraph differentiates that with the "quality wins", but Kelly did beat West Virginia.  Unless you're saying Rich left the cupboard bare.  

Not saying Rich hasn't accomplished anything either...but I just find it funny when they're a sliding scale for people who have done similar things based on whether we like them or not.

WolvinLA2

June 26th, 2010 at 8:11 PM ^

To reply to you and Tripp above, I think the two situations with RR and BK are different.  One, RR's WVU team often won bowl games, and against quality teams.  WVU won bowl games the last 3 years he was there against Georgia, GT, and Oklahoma (even though he didn't coach against OU, it was his team that got to, and won, that game).   WVU tied for a conference title before VT, BC and Miami left, too.

But the biggest difference is that RR has shown he can build, and maintain, a program.  Kelly really hasn't, unless you count GVSU.  BK has spent most of the last 6 years winning with players he didn't recruit, and hasn't shown he can win at a high level for more than 2 years at a time.  Take a look at their resumes, outside of the conference they last coached in, BK and RR don't have that similar of resumes.

MCalibur

June 25th, 2010 at 2:37 PM ^

Dude, don't sleep on ND. The rhetoric that Kelly won't have his guys in place is utter nonsense to me. Are we really to beleive that he wouldn't recruit Dane Crist, Michael Floyd, Kyle Rudolph, and a bunch of 4 and 5 star O-linemen? Those players fit Kelly's offense like a tailor made glove lined with memory foam.

Also, Crist is a first year starter but he's a RS-So and a 5 star recruit to boot. Remember how well Chad Henne did? Tell me why Crist won't be able to at least match that. Floyd is every bit the player that Braylon was in Henne's first year. Kelly's offense is known for making the QB reads very simple which is why so many different players can succeed (like last year and the year before). I ginned up a little something a few weeks back that might open your eyes as to how Crist can perform this year.

The only thing that might affect Crist is the fact that he's coming off of injury; but I'm not counting on that.

Finally, to hell with Notre Dame.

msoccer10

June 25th, 2010 at 2:58 PM ^

I agree that Crist, if healthy, could be good. I highly doubt he will be as good as Clausen though because Clausen had two years starting before last year, and Crist has considerably less experience.

But saying that Floyd is a good as Braylon is going a bit far. Braylon won the Biletnikoff award that year. Henne also had Mike Hart, who I believe was better than any running back ND has, and Jason Avant and Steve Breaston, who are better than any # 2 wr ND has. So Henne having a good year with little experience does not compare directly to Crist. Finally, U of M's defense was better that year than ND's defense will be this coming year.

We beat ND last year and lost less than they did. It will be close but I think a touchdown is too much for ND. I am predicting a straight up win for Michigan.

MCalibur

June 25th, 2010 at 3:33 PM ^

I think I need a room with Notre Dame. Thanks a lot! To pre-reiterate, to hell with Notre Dame.

Clausen would have been a lot better his Freshman year if he had anyone supporting him. ND's offense only had something like 3 starters returning that year.

As for Floyd, fire up the stake, I actually think he might be better than Braylon. Dude was unstoppable until he got injured. If he had been in for the whole game agaisnt us last year, I bet they win. Take a look at Braylon ('02-'03) versus Floyd ('08-'09). Braylon played in 26 games, Floyd in 18 so Edwards' Totals are higher but the per game numbers are virtually identical (edge Braylon). Those were Braylon's Sophomore and Junior years as opposed to Floyd's freshman and sophomore years. If you compare year to year, Floyd blows Braylon away. Plus, he rocks a mohawk.

Armando Allen is a useful player at RB. But, again we're talking spread here not pro-style. Crist doesn't need a Mike Hart per se.

I won't argue the Defensive point because I agree. They have some players back but, A) they're switching systems, again, B) they were terrible last year, and C) Kelly's team have been pretty tepid defensively.

I'm not saying that we will lose, only that the whole new system + new QB = crappy offense equation is hogwash in my book. I think the game is a shootout and hopefully our defense is able to slow them down enough for our O to get it done. The over/under on this game should be 80+, 'cause, you know, I'm a vegas line adjuster...not really.

Finally, to reiterate yet again, to hell with Notre Dame.

msoccer10

June 25th, 2010 at 3:42 PM ^

Yes, Floyd is good, but we'll have to just agree to disagree here.

Other than that, I think you are right and it will be close, hence, the -7 seems a bit much. But I am definetely not saying ND will be easy. I think their offense will get better as the year goes on too. I just hope they don't have it clicking yet.

jmblue

June 25th, 2010 at 5:46 PM ^

Remember how well Chad Henne did? Tell me why Crist won't be able to at least match that.

"At least match?"  Henne's 2004 season was outstanding.  You're acting like it was pedestrian.  Most first-year starters do not complete over 60% of their passes for 2,700 yards and 25 TDs.  Henne did NOT perform like an average first-year starter.

MCalibur

June 25th, 2010 at 10:14 PM ^

Dude, don't mistake my respect for Crist's potential with disrespect for Chad Henne's performance.

But it's important to note that Henne's freshman year was outstanding for a true freshman. The fact is that he had a lot of help that most first year starters don't have. Do you know what Matt Barkley's (USC) freshman stats were? EXACTLY like Chad Henne's.

Terrelle Pryor had a better rating than Henne did as a freshman  and also completed 60% of his passes. His yardage total was lower because Tressel only let Pryor throw 165 times. In fact, on a per attempt basis Barkley and Pryor threw for more yards than Henne did.

That's three 5-start, true freshman QBs, with solid teams around them performing at about the same level. It seems like Henne performed exactly like we should expect under those particular circumstances; the rarity we observed was the in the convergence of the circumstances not in the level of performance.

Henne's 25 TDs probably had a little to do with Bralyon F. Edwards which was a resource that Barkley and Pryor did not have. But Crist does and, oh yeah, Michael Floyd is at least as good as Braylon Edwards.

Crist has the advantage of being two years older in his first start so I ask my question again: why shouldn't we expect Dayne Crist to perform as well or better than Chad Henne?

MCalibur

June 26th, 2010 at 1:09 AM ^

Saying Floyd is not Edwards doesn't make it true, let's hear some explanation. 

Also, I'm not talking about ND's overall prospects, only the offense and specifically Dayne Crist. I've shown my reasoning through this thread. 

Time will tell.

joeyb

June 26th, 2010 at 11:26 AM ^

You do realize that Armando Allen is actually a pretty good running back, don't you? He had almost 700 yards last year and sat out 4 games. He averaged 4.9 YPC last year and he only dropped below 4 in one game where he only had 12 carries. Not to mention he is a decent receiver out of the backfield, which he will be more often this year. If anything I would expect A break out year from him as he seems to fit this system better than the last.

And the defense won't have any effect on how Crist plays. The only thing it might do is give Crist more opportunities to boost his numbers. It might affect the number of wins but number of wins is not how you define a player's performance; it's how you define a team's performance.

If you don't think there is a good chance that Crist has a good to great year this year, you are being ignorant.

MileHighWolverine

June 25th, 2010 at 1:34 PM ^

And we win the games we are favored to win (+ the other games not listed) we would go 7-5?  I can see that happening but man would I be bummed about that outcome.  I really, really, really am hoping for 8-4 this year.  That would restore my faith in the RichRod era.

bluewave720

June 25th, 2010 at 1:48 PM ^

recently, but a "pick 'em" vs. Purdue?  I would feel very comfortable putting a substantial amount of money on Michigan in that game.

 

Edit:  I realize the problem with using a term like "substantial."  For my wife, a substantial gambling loss is anything over 6 dollars.  For me, the word means the absolute highest amount I can lose while still hiding the losses from her.

michgoblue

June 25th, 2010 at 2:13 PM ^

We lost to Purdue last year.  At home.  With Brandon Graham.  And Donovan Warren.  This year we play a Purdue team that, while not much better, didn't lose any big names (not that they had any to lose).  At Purdue.  Without Brandon Graham.  And without Donovan Warren. 

If I were an impartial Vegas book maker, I would either have this game as a pick 'em or paybe even Purdue by a slim margain. 

bluewave720

June 25th, 2010 at 2:23 PM ^

I understand that when a line is set, it is in no way a prediction.  It's an arbitrary line that is drawn leaving approximately 50% of the gamblers on each side.  So I agree with your point on the "impartial Vegas book maker" kind of hedging on this one.

I personally think that when the Purdue game week is here, Michigan will be giving them points.  As such, if I could grab that line right now as a "pick 'em," I would without hesitation.

msoccer10

June 25th, 2010 at 2:52 PM ^

They have beaten us the last two years. But they needed trick plays and luck both times. I think their luck finally runs out in 2010. I see what the bookies are doing, but Michigan will win that game by two touchdowns.

blueblueblue

June 25th, 2010 at 4:31 PM ^

You might want to re-interpret "needed trick plays" to "could successfully perform trick plays." Dont fault a team that has the skill to implement a trick play or few (e.g., that team in Idaho). I dont think you would fault Michigan if they ran everything smooth enough the last couple years to do the same. Also, the meme that we lost such and such game due to luck is outright blind homerism. It just really sounds weak. 

sharkhunter

June 25th, 2010 at 2:15 PM ^

uggh, rewatched the M vs. Purdue on BTN last week.  Painful.  Up 14 at the half, Tate turns over ball in our red zone, onside kick, just tons of unimaginable mistakes.  To me, that was the most disappointing game last year.  An easy win that ended up embarassing us.  Hopefully a year of experience and togetherness corrects these blunders.  That said, we should win easily given our talent and Purdue is also testing a new QB. 

SEAL Fan

June 25th, 2010 at 5:09 PM ^

Purdue owned my life in 2009 and I well never bet against them again.  I took ND over Purdue by 7 last year and lost.  I bet Ohio State by 14 over Purdue last year and lost.  I bought tickets for Michigan against Purdue last year and lost.    Furthermore, I pray that Danny Hope loses every single game next year for the sorry sh*t he pulled after the Michigan game last year with Rodriguez.

 

Sorry for the Purdue rant.

BiSB

June 25th, 2010 at 1:41 PM ^

Michigan against ND, Penn State, and Purdue, but I'd take Wisconsin and Iowa over Michigan.

If I had any money.  Which I don't.