A UM upset: Why not?
We are a 13-point underdog in Las Vegas (and should be 15 pt underdogs according to Sagarin ratings and considering home field).
Most pundits give us little or no chance of winning. But a host of teams that have overcome 2-3 times that much of a point spread. Consider:
1985 Oregon State (+36) tops Washington, 21-20
1985 UTEP (+36) over BYU, 23-16
1972 Missouri (+35) beat Notre Dame, 30-26
1974 Purdue (+34) at Notre Dame, 31-20
1992 Iowa State (+29) over Nebraska, 19-10
1969 San Jose State (+29) at Oregon, 36-34
1995 Northwestern (+28) over Notre Dame, 17-15
1942 Holy Cross (+28) beats Boston College, 55-12
I guess that these underdogs forgot to listen to the pundits.
By the way, didn’t OSU tie Iowa in regulation at home last week (while Ricki Stanzi was injured), while UM lost by only 2 points on the road (when Ricki Stanzi was healthy, Tate suffered a concussion and DRob had to come in for the last 2 series)? Subtract home field (3 points) from OSU’s result and they lost by 3 in regulation. Add home field to UM’s result and we won by 1.
I’m not saying that the other games don’t matter as well. I’m not denying that we are an underdog vs OSU. But this UM team has a lot to play for on Saturday. And to say that we’ve got no chance is a bit of a stretch.
Yet, the pundits incessantly pick the team apart--like vultures stripping a carcass. All they can think of asking is WHY the team has fallen apart.
But, to paraphrase RFK's quote of George Bernard Shaw:
You see things as they are and ask, ‘Why?
But I see things that could be and ask, ‘Why not?’".
November 17th, 2009 at 11:41 AM ^
agreed, especially regarding the iowa comparison. while the transitive property is bogus in terms of who is better, their game against iowa, their loss to purdue, their close one with usc (which looks less and less impressive)...all scream that UM can play with this team and absolutely can win...going to take 60 minutes and 22 guys giving BG type effort.
November 17th, 2009 at 11:43 AM ^
I hope your soul has a hardy dong punch protector.
November 17th, 2009 at 11:43 AM ^
Michigan's Big Ten stat rankings:
Scoring 23.9 ( 7th)
Scoring Defense 35.0 (11th)
Rushing Offense 125.9 ( 6th)
Rushing Defense 196.6 (11th)
Pass Offense 197.1 ypg ( 8th)
Pass Defense 247.7 ypg ( 9th)
Pass Efficiency 119.9 (9th)
Pass Defense Efficiency 147.4 (11th)
Sacks By 14 (8th)
Sacks Against 23 (t9th)
Total Offense 323.0 (10th)
Total Defense 444.3 (11th)
Turnover Margin -1.29 (11th)
Red Zone Offense 63.0 % (11th)
Red Zone Defense 96.6 % (11th)
Time of Possession 25.19 (11th)
Third Down Conversions 40.2 (7th)
Opp Third Down Conv. 41.5 (7th)
a
Punting 42.4 (1st)
Punt Returns 9.3 (5th)
Kickoff Returns 23.6 (4th)
Kickoff Coverage 40.4 (8th)
I've never seen "11th" so many goddamn times inmy entire life! What's shocking is that even the OFFENSE is so bad in numerous categories! 10th in Total Offense? Jeebus!
November 17th, 2009 at 11:51 AM ^
go and pull out the stats, didn't you. But look, 1st in punting, dammit! Says it right there. The great equalizer.
November 17th, 2009 at 11:55 AM ^
Those are some eye opening stats.
Michigan has lost three of its past four games in fairly large blow out fashion. PSU -25, Illinois -25 and Wisconsin -24. There's no reason to not expect more of the same this weekend. Fool me once, shame on you. Fool me three times......
Things can only get better, right?
November 17th, 2009 at 12:11 PM ^
I am glad the game will be played on the field and not on paper.
November 17th, 2009 at 12:20 PM ^
i think its pretty safe to say we've got this one in the bag.
November 17th, 2009 at 1:25 PM ^
Never doubt the Space Emperor (of space) and his bombastic ability
November 17th, 2009 at 1:00 PM ^
Ohio State can and will say all the right things this week regarding this games importance, and the stats are telling. However, Ohio State does not have to win this game for any reason. Sure, to continue their ownership of Michigan, but they have the "we were already in the Rose Bowl" card ready to play at a moments notice, as such, this loss would be forgiven by OSU faithful and would not have a shred of effect on their national perception if they go win the Rose Bowl. Michigan, on the other hand, is a desperate team, and that stat cannot really be measured. As hard as the Buckeyes will try to convince everybody that this is the most important game of the season and so forth, it is not, and they cannot make it that way no matter how hard they try. Does this result in a Michigan win? Probably not, but I don't think you can measure Michigan's chance to win this game by statistics without looking at the current posture and their "desperate need to win level."
November 17th, 2009 at 11:47 AM ^
-It's at UM
-Tate played well last week
-Minor will play- Sr. year, even if injured he'll play
-OSU's loss to Purdue shows they are capable of laying eggs
Pray for Pryor turnovers. And our defense has to play to make up for past horrors... play with pride and passion.
We have a much much much better chance of an upset than we did last year. Hopefully OSU is expecting to win easy.
Go Blue!
November 17th, 2009 at 11:48 AM ^
"But this UM team has a lot to play for on Saturday."
This UM team has had a lot to play for for two years, and that has helped them exactly NONE of the time.
November 17th, 2009 at 11:56 AM ^
According to my new Delaware State outlook on Michigan sports we have won, and will continue to win, every game! All you have to do is record it that way on the internet and it is truth!
November 17th, 2009 at 11:50 AM ^
I like that, of the 8 extreme upsets listed, Notre Dame comprised 3.
November 17th, 2009 at 11:52 AM ^
The spread is probably more accurate than you think. You've managed to find a few big underdogs who won (indeed, you went all the way back to the 1940s) but there are probably many thousand 10+ underdogs who didn't win.
Being a 13 point dog is pretty tough to overcome.
November 17th, 2009 at 11:59 AM ^
If we have no turnovers the offense has long drives, and the defense becomes competent, and OSU makes some mistakes aka Pryor @ Purdue then anything is possible. Just want BG to get some nice alan branch like sacks in.........
.............remember '69
November 17th, 2009 at 12:22 PM ^
for us to win prior has to get flustered by BG and cough up a few bad turnovers.
November 17th, 2009 at 12:44 PM ^
BG will only be able to get pressure if the backfield can cover for more than 2 seconds
November 17th, 2009 at 12:01 PM ^
we have alot riding on this game we need it more than ostate
November 17th, 2009 at 12:13 PM ^
The underdog has won in this game 38% of the time over the past 70 years. There has been 9 times that an unranked undog beat the other ranked team and that's pretty good considering both teams were usually ranked. I believe it was in 93 unranked Michigan beat No. 5 Osu 28-0......... I strongly believe we can pull this off. I watch Osu every weekend just hoping they lose and they are not impressive at all, they are highly overrated, with the exception of Penn State. They almost lost to Navy until they intercepted the two point try, got beat by a poor USC team, should have lost to Wisconsin but their D and special teams saved the day with 3 touchdowns, got crushed by Purdue, almost lost to Iowa @ home against a Qb who was 19 and making his first start (throwing 3 ints).
They have played two very hard emotional games in the last two weeks, they're already going to the Rose Bowl so they have nothing really to gain except an outright Big Ten and we have nothing to lose. Our Pass defense is our biggest problem and I don't see Pryor passing on our D.
I think an upset isn't being realistic at all. Osu is more concerned about their new throw backs, not beating a lossing Michigan team.
November 17th, 2009 at 12:19 PM ^
Under Tressel, OSU always, ALWAYS plays their best game against Michigan REGARDLESS of the circumstances. OSU will BRING IT on Saturday. They will play hard and show no jitters...or mercy. I can't believe how shitty Michigan is this year.
Where's the whiskey, goddammit?
November 17th, 2009 at 12:48 PM ^
in your LIQUOR cabinet for the JAMESON's? That's where I KEEP mine.
November 17th, 2009 at 1:35 PM ^
Well PLAYED!
November 17th, 2009 at 12:15 PM ^
is if there are injuries to key OSU personnel. That is IT. If OSU is able to keep all of their starters on the field this will be a 20+ point blow-out. Sorry.
November 17th, 2009 at 12:19 PM ^
http://mgoblog.com/content/eleven-swans
The day after Bo died, on the eve of the #1 vs. #2 game, Brian pulled out this gem.
Michigan probably won't win on Saturday. However, go read and listen to that link and tell me with a straight face that you have given up on this season.
November 17th, 2009 at 12:28 PM ^
Wait, Ohio State thinks it will upset Michigan? The Buckeyes are kidding themselves.
November 17th, 2009 at 12:28 PM ^
OSU has nothing if this happens. Never hope a player gets hurt but in this scenario Michigan now becomes the favorite. Then again, maybe whoever OSUs second string QB is wins Big 10 player of the week.
I just want to see BG in a bowl game for his final appearance in the Maize and Blue!
November 17th, 2009 at 1:41 PM ^
There. I said it.
November 17th, 2009 at 12:31 PM ^
Stanford (+41) @USC two years ago and Syracuse (+38) @Louisville the same season. These were the same season as the Horror and both were bigger upsets in terms of the line.
November 17th, 2009 at 12:38 PM ^
the horror was only +25
November 17th, 2009 at 12:44 PM ^
If Ezeh, Mouton, or Warren were suddenly to wake up and play psycho, I say we have a chance. It would be contagious.
And who knows, stranger things have happened. Why not?
GO BLUE.
November 17th, 2009 at 12:45 PM ^
Our defense is teh suxxor.
November 17th, 2009 at 12:47 PM ^
all I can do is hope that OSU turns the ball over about 8 times, and that we don't match them turnover-for-turnover. All objective signs point to a blowout as bad or worse than last year's. The only thing I'm concerned with at this point is whether there will be key defections among the verbal commits. If there are, and RR can't make it up with new commits on signing day, the roster/talent issues might become self-perpetuating.
November 17th, 2009 at 12:51 PM ^
God, how bad are we going to look after T.P. puts up 300 yards and 4 touchdowns against us. This may be the most embarassing statistic in the entire rivalry. I think we have a better chance if we drop our entire secondary into goal line defence no matter where OSU starts their drives. That way we can't get beat by the guy over our shoulders, can we?
I don't think there will be enough beer on Saturday to endure what is ahead.
November 17th, 2009 at 1:03 PM ^
go blue.
This can only end in tears...and by that I mean. Either they lose big like almost all of you are predicting or its (potentially) the biggest upset in the history of the rivalry and I'll be at work and have to watch it on my DVR. here's hoping I remember to record it.
November 17th, 2009 at 1:05 PM ^
If there's one ray of sunshine for Michigan in this game, it's got to be when the Wolverine offense takes the field. Why? Because OSU has the best rushing defense in the league and Michigan has the top rushing offense in the league.
The rubber meets the road in two key areas in this game:
1. Michigan's OL pass blocking vs. OSU's outstanding front four of Rose, Hayward, Worthington and Gibson. OSU wins this one in all likelihood.
2. Tate Forcier/Denard Robinson verus the 2nd best secondary in the Big 10 in passing yardage and INTs in the league (19 INTs in 11 games). I like Michigan's chances to gain yards.
Defensively, Michigan is going to have to play out of their minds for a full 60 minutes. They did a good job at UW last weekend and can probably replicate that again this week. Just probably not for 60 minutes.
Pryor is fragile mentally, and is not always accurate throwing the ball. I think Michigan gets to him a few times because he's not that quick of a runner as advertised.
The reason Ohio State has "owned" Michigan the last several years has more to do with sound defensive play by OSU than anything else. OSU doesn't play great defense on a national scale, but it's played good enough.
It will be an emotional and interesting game to watch because (IME) it's essentially Michigan's bowl game. Hopefully Michigan's young team can control the frustration and anger and channel it into a win Saturday.
November 17th, 2009 at 2:03 PM ^
I've already been predicting this all week. M gets the big victory 34-10. Hail to the victors!
November 17th, 2009 at 2:10 PM ^
How about 2001? I think that is the closest comparison to this game in recent memory. OSU was 6-5, unranked, and nobody really expected them to beat Michigan, who was ranked, 8-2, and IIRC just needed a win to clinch the Big Ten and a BCS berth. Instead, Tressel brought OSU in and won in his first try, 26-20.
It's not a perfect comparison, except in the relative ranks/records of both teams. That game gives me hope for every and all Michigan game, no matter how bleak it looks.
Sorry for bringing back the painful memories from that game. I probably cried afterwards.
November 17th, 2009 at 3:29 PM ^
"By the way, didn’t OSU tie Iowa in regulation at home last week (while Ricki Stanzi was injured), while UM lost by only 2 points on the road (when Ricki Stanzi was healthy..."
You say playing Iowa with a healthy 5-int/game Stanzi like it was a disadvantage. I think Donovan Warren would disagree
November 17th, 2009 at 4:04 PM ^
"Wish you were here."
Stanzi is a 4th year player (RS junior) who has 1.4 INTs per game, not 5. (also a 56% completion rate and a 130 QB rating). His replacement, James Vandenberg, is a RS Freshman, who had hardly played at all, had a 49% completion rate, with 2TD and 4INTs.
Also, if Stanzi were not the best QB at IA, then he would not be starting.
So, yes, clearly it was an advantage for OSU to play IA without Stanzi, just as it was a relative disadvantage for UM to play IA with him.
http://www.iowa.rivals.com/cviewplayer.asp?sport=1&Player=63635
November 17th, 2009 at 4:18 PM ^
Yeah, but they don't need a reason, trust me. UM will have to play completely out of their minds to have any chance.