Michigan -6.5 vs. Utah

Submitted by turd ferguson on

... 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
 

MGoBoard
Football
Utah
betting lines

unWavering

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.

Joined: 01/13/2011

MGoPoints: 22437

aiglick

September 14th, 2014 at 11:24 PM ^

I would say Utah is one of the better teams we will face this year according to conventional wisdom which is admittedly wrong many times. I do think based on the info we have at this moment, 5-7 in a good conference last year but missing some players and bringing many people back, they will be a solid team this year. If we continue some of the positive trends, improving OL and running backs, against this team I will be very happy and positive about those two position groups. Just my opinion though and Utah may not be that good. I do think they are way better than Appalachian State and Miami of Ohio.

Joined: 11/27/2010

MGoPoints: 21521

Sam1863

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.

Joined: 04/27/2014

MGoPoints: 28860

GoBLUinTX

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.

Joined: 12/02/2013

MGoPoints: 5895

grumbler

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.

Joined: 08/17/2011

MGoPoints: 14112

turd ferguson

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.

Joined: 12/09/2009

MGoPoints: 26493

turd ferguson

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.

Joined: 12/09/2009

MGoPoints: 26493

BlueHills

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.

Joined: 10/31/2010

MGoPoints: 7468

SalvatoreQuattro

September 15th, 2014 at 9:38 AM ^

to Utah's best team.Neither team is what they were in 2008. I expect a nail biter.

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.

Joined: 11/30/2010

MGoPoints: 78723

alum96

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!

Joined: 04/28/2012

MGoPoints: 82508

aiglick

September 14th, 2014 at 11:28 PM ^

If anybody is watching the Bears they are playing the 49ers at their place and are being competitive and winning! even with all their injuries because of a young rookie corner and taking advantage of their big wide receivers. Please, please, please let's follow that template against MSU in East Lansing. Edit: unfortunately I think MSU will have a pass rush unlike the 49ers. Edit 2: not overlooking Utah it will be a tough game. Just didn't want to start a new thread for this.

Joined: 11/27/2010

MGoPoints: 21521

Lucky Socks

September 15th, 2014 at 9:10 AM ^

Won a Sugar Bowl, then went 8-5 the following year with losses against Bama (Nat Champ), ND (Nat runner-up), and OSU (undefeated). Other losses @Iowa with a questionable no flag at the buzzer and heartbreaker bowl loss to South Carolina. Last year was really bad, but his entire tenure hasn't been as bad as our memories tell us.

Joined: 01/18/2012

MGoPoints: 2745

reshp1

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."

Joined: 10/31/2011

MGoPoints: 34177

Lucky Socks

September 15th, 2014 at 11:06 AM ^

You're right. And that game is almost more forgivable, although no prepared backup QB isn't good either.

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.

Joined: 01/18/2012

MGoPoints: 2745

cheesheadwolverine

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.

Joined: 10/25/2008

MGoPoints: 7515

uminks

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.

Joined: 11/10/2009

MGoPoints: 32040

UMForLife

September 15th, 2014 at 12:07 AM ^

If we win big, there will be a bunch of comments about UT being a bad team. If we lose, M is bad and fire everyone. Sad to see the state of our team and fans. Go Blue!

Joined: 11/04/2013

MGoPoints: 63393

TheTeam16

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.

Joined: 09/07/2012

MGoPoints: 1137