Vegas win totals: Michigan 9
Las Vegas bookmakers officially set the bar for win totals for each team, and surprisingly only 2 teams will have 10 or more wins.. Those being Alabama (10.5) and Ohio St (10).
They have Michigan pegged in at 9.
Other notable B1G teams:
Wisconsin (9.5)
Penn St. (9.5)
Michigan St. (6.5)
Honestly surprised at the predictions for PSU and Wisconsin.
That's not been my experience at all. I've found you can parlay just about anything if you're willing to put the two bets together.
EDIT: I just checked with the offshore site I've used in the past and they absolutely take prop bet parlay's.
http://topbet.eu/sportsbook/football/ncaa-futures
Those rat-bastards take parlay's on prop bets!
FWIW I've never had a problem getting paid by them. And the other sites you mention wont take US CC's for payment - you have to send them a check.
Very good idea.
I know we are all optimists, but this year's team is not more talented than last year's team, unless you think there are 3 All-American players on this roster right now that weren't there last season. There is talent, and the staff is solid, but 9 wins after losing over a dozen starters is pretty encouraging.
Talking about raw talent, not overall ability. This team is more talented overall than last year, but the talent is skewed very young.
I think there'll be somewhat of a drop off this year, but next year all that young talent should be hitting its stride, and we should start destroying people.
I mean, fine. We can argue semantics, but right now, this team is less talented playing football in 2017 than the 2016 team. I know people like to forget the past, but they just had a school-record number of players drafted from that team. 2016 was an all-time team at this school derailed by a mediocre offensive line and some bad luck. The idea that a bunch of freshmen and sophomores are going to recreate that in a year or two seems optimistic to me.
Well, in a year those sophomores will be juniors, and those freshmen will be sophomores.
2016 seems like an all-timer, to me, when it comes to the D-line. And, especially, the depth of the D-line. In all other respects, it was an amazing defense, but not necessarily an all-timer. Jourdan Lewis is Jourdan Lewis, but we are supposed to have the next Jourdan Lewis next year, backed up by a faster Jourdan Lewis. The other corner spot seems like it will be just as good based on the highly touted lanky corners we have there (or David Long). We won't see another Peppers for a while, but maybe we can replace his production by the bunch of athletes we have in the VIPER/linebackers spots (Hudson, Bush, maybe Uche, Gil, etc. All of whom will be juniors next year). Safety is a concern because both Hill and Thomas are underrated guys.
The D-line will not be as good even if just because of depth. I don't think I will see a 2-deep D-line as good at Michigan for a long time.
Of course, it all depends on actual production as opposed to projection. But the projection is the reason optimism seems warranted.
The current defensive backs are all fine, but the rumblings coming out of insiders are that they are underwhelming a bit, and Don Brown is a bit bothered by their lack of progression. And regardless, expecting guys to actually become All-Americans is way harder than "he's like this guy, but better". That's a Fred Jackson special.
I get that young guys grow up and get better, but it also feels like selective measurement of expected improvements by players. The offensive line was full of top-rated guys and never got above "fine". De'Veon Smith was a decently-regarded recruit who never got above "fine". I'm not slagging these guys, but I'm also not ready to buy into this narrative that all the guys we know nothing about have a good chance at being as good as guys we saw absolutely dominate teams for a year.
Michigan should be good in 2017 and, in theory, very good in 2018. But assuming this because they are young and HARBAUGH, to me, feels like a recipe for disappointment for some on the board.
I think the (very fair) impression is that Michigan can win a big game on the road when people see it and we all know OSU's record against UM over the past fifteen years. In that vein 9 wins seems generous.
OSU, PSU, (arguably) Florida and Wisconsin (especially at home) all have equal talent in terms of on-field production. I think Harbaugh is a better coach than the lot save Meyer, where they are equals. So there, 4 teams that Michigan should be considered even or even a slight underdog to.
Can't. Better talent....Maybe osu. Better coaching....nobody and that's nobody in the country. Who is more wanted at the nfl level and is proven..............nobody!!!!!!.
take the over on michigan.
maize colored glasses and all, sure, but this is an easy bet - no way is harbs/co getting less than 10, including a dominant win over osu.
I'd take the under all day long, too many tough road games and OSU is going to be better than last year going against a very young team, just not a recipe for success.
I think they are overrated and hate them with a passion, but look at their schedule before commenting. It's a joke. Hard to find 3 losses in there.
THE KNOWLEDGE say about their win total?
9 wins would be outstanding. I hope we get to 9.
Kind of a sad perspective on our season, don't you think? 9 wins? Jim got to 9 wins with Hoke's players and a harder schedule in his first year. I would say 9 wins would be a slight disappointment.
Hoke's players were pretty good; it's some of his recruiting misses that are haunting this team right now. And that 2015 schedule was probably about as hard as this one, if you flip MSU and PSU and consider Florida about equal to Utah.
Gonna have to disagree, Hoke's DL recruiting was good. Elsewhere was decidedly not. Plus, every player we sent to the NFL this year was one year worse (coaching, experience, whatever) in Jim's first year.
As for the schedule - that Utah team was ranked #3 in the nation with 16 first place votes at one point that year. While we had the ability to win that game, that Utah team was better than this Florida team, and it was in Utah, at night, during the week. That Utah team had some of the best players in Utah football history at their respective positions. Our Florida game in Dallas against a freshman QB and a young defense will be decidedly less tough. At home in 2015 we got a good BYU, a top 25 Northwestern, a Michigan State team that won the conference and made the playoffs and an OSU team that was probably the best team in the country. Other than Utah, we had to go to Penn State, as well as annoying games in Indiana and in Minnesota at night, right after their coach had to leave the team. It was quite impressive that we came away from both games with wins.
I have spent way too much time on this response, but my point is that if Jim got to 9 regular season wins with that rag tag bunch a stiff schedule, 9 wins this season would be a disappointment with a slightly better schedule and more talent.
Hoke's defensive line recruiting was the best, but he also snagged Lewis, Butt, Darboh, Chesson, Hill, Clark, Peppers, etc. He was a good recruiter across the board; it trailed off, but there's no reason to crap on everything he did just because it ended badly.
Utah finished 10-3 that year; same record as Florida the past couple of seasons. They did get to #3 in the country, but they also lost to 8-6 USC by 18, to 8-5 UCLA, and 7-6 Arizona. They beat two teams that finished ranked that year - Michigan and Oregon. They were fine, but we have no idea about this Florida team's ceiling. They are predicted to win 8 games, which is an improvement over 2016 when Florida was predicted to win 7.5. And last year's team won 10 games, so who knows about this season.
As for the rest of the schedule, like I said, swap PSU and MSU and you have a fringe playoff team there, OSU is still OSU, NW finished barely in the top-25 and is worse than the Wisconsin team Michigan will play this year. Michigan plays Air Force and Cincy with a new coach, which is reasonably similar to BYU and Oregon St from 2015. The division schedule is identical home/road splits, and the cross-division games are about equal.
I guess my point is that the 2015 team was more talented than anyone gives it credit and this year's team has to play basically the same schedule, maybe a smidge harder since I think 2017 PSU is better than 2017 MSU and 2017 Wisconsin should be better than 2015 Minnesota, with more question marks at key positions.
Was mostly just crapping on recruiting, which was objectively bad. He got the players he wanted, sure. But his evaluation was poor and he went after the wrong players most of the time. It's easy to count the players that made it to the NFL (especially the ones that did after coaching from Jim's staff), but it would be almost impossible for a Michigan coach to be here for 4 years and not send a bunch of guys to the NFL. An orangutan could sell Michigan to a bunch of kids who would make it to the league no matter which scholarship offer they chose.
Hoke was an abismal evaluator of talent across the offensive side of the ball. He struck gold with Butt, Darboh, Funchess, and Chesson. DeVeon Smith was fine, but was the backup back to Derrick Green (a five star that was a three star to anyone that watched his filmed, alas Hoke only looked at Rivals). Hoke's misses on the offensive line will probably haunt us for another season, maybe 2. His QB recruiting was horrible as well (Morris, Bellomy, etc...Harbaugh is trying to get everything he can out of Speight). His Wide Receivers not named Darboh and Chesson (who did not do much before Jim got here, cause and effect unknown) basically amounted to nothing. As with everything, the exception proves the rule. Hoke sent some exceptions to the NFL, but the rule with his recruiting is a big part of the reason that he's no longer at Michigan.
Again, guy recruited 11 players that were drafted this year. School record, and it spanned across both sides of the ball. And he'll have a couple more guys drafted this year from his stock.
He was a fine talent evaluator in my opinion. Smith played like a 4* back. Green flamed out, but lots of people thought he was a really good running back. Maybe he was a 4* instead of a 5*, but his 247 composite was 27th. Lots of people, not just Hoke, thought he was the real deal. Hoke didn't plan his QB recruiting properly and deserves blame for that, but Morris was a top-ranked kid with all the physical tools you wanted. Bellomy was a late flier he took after the transition. 2012 he should have taken a QB, but then in 2013 he took Morris and 2014 it was Speight, who has turned out halfway-decent. Funchess was a draft pick and a starter in the NFL, Darboh and Chesson are good. Bunting should be a solid offensive TE in the mold of Butt. Drake Harris was an elite WR who couldn't stay healthy; that happens. He recruited something like 10 4*+ offensive linemen, and Mason Cole should be a solid pro at the bare minimum. He did what was expected of a UM coach on the recruiting trail, but sometimes you have a bad run, you don't develop guys properly, etc.
And I looked back at the draft history of Michigan - even during the heart of the Carr years they rarely had more than 4-5 guys drafted in a class. Hoke had his issues developing players and it wasn't elite recruiting across the board, but I reject the argument he was bad at recruiting.
I'd add Bunting to the mix, and if Speight plays reasonably well he'd likely get drafted late as well. So that's 8, which considering a couple of higher-rated guys got hurt (Fox) or into legal trouble nobody could have predicted (LTT), that's not crazy. And Hoke also did have to recruit to offset the issues RR left behind, mostly along the offensive and defensive lines.
Again, I'm not making excuses for Hoke, but of all the real complaints you can have about him, negging him for recruiting feels low on the totem pole.
It did and I acknowledged that. It certainly also produced a handful that were decidedly average or worse at their position in the conference. Both can be true - that 10 wins last year was an underperformance and 9 wins this year would be as well. I was making no claims as to which would be underperforming my a greater degree.
We're so impressive they give us a bye in the first round of the CFP. Sort of like Clemson last year.
You win the internet for today.
Er .. yes 15!
Wisconsin's hardest game other than ours is their game at BYU. I would put money on them getting to 10 wins.
Penn State I would take the under on. They will lose to us and OSU and inevitably drop one more (Pitt or Iowa or both).
I like OSU for 10 wins, losing to Oklahoma and us.
As for us, I have stated my season prediction already, but I am certainly taking the over on 9. Vegas generally knows what they are doing, but betting on Harbaugh to go 1-3 against Florida, Penn State, Wisconsin and OSU seems unwise. 9.5 or 10 seems like a smarter line for us, although I would still take the over there.
Honestly, I would take the under on MSU right now. Consider last year, who they lost, and who they are rumored to lose...do you see 7 wins on that schedule? Guaranteed losses are Michigan, OSU, PSU. They should beat BG, Western and Rutgers. Do you think they have the team to go 4-2 against Iowa, Notre Dame, @ Minnesota, Indiana, @ Northwestern, Maryland? They lost to 2 of those teams last year, should have lost to ND. I see 4 or 5 wins this year for little brother.
I'm in no way an MSU fan, but the sky maybe isn't falling quite as quickly as some are making it out to be. They get ND, Iowa, and PSU at home, the latter coming off a 3-week stretch of UM, OSU, and then MSU. ND still went 4-8 last year, and while that was an aberration and bad luck it isn't like they are a proven commodity.
I think MSU flirts with 6 wins, and if they get lucky they win 7.
If you are asking me if they'll win 9+ games next year, then absolutely no for MSU. But it was still a team that lost by 3 to IU, 4 to Illinois, and 1 to OSU. They were close in games against BYU, Maryland, and NW, with the final scores making the margin look a bit wider than it should have been. They were a mediocre team with bad luck; they finished with a second-order win total of 5 games (2 better than they finished with), and had S&P performance more representative of a 5-6 win team than 3-9. They were not "good", but their S&P profile is closer to NW and IU than, say, Arizona, another 3-9 team.
They lost some talent, but it also seemed pretty cancerous and lacking in leadership. With a couple more breaks, maybe they pull out 6-7 wins. My whole point was that people saying "hard under" for MSU are probably being a bit optimistic. I wouldn't touch that number because it feels exactly right.
First rule of MGoBlog: do not give credit to MSU or PSU
Second rule of MGoBlog: do not give credit to MSU or PSU
Third rule of MGoBlog: refer to first two rules
PSU won the conference last year and returns pretty much everybody?
MGoBlog: "They're crap. ARM PUNT lolololzzzz"
They accomplished more last year than any Michigan football team has in my 13-year-old nephew's lifetime. Are we allowed to arm punt? Or is it more noble when our QB chucks one 15 yards over Amara Darboh's head and we lose to poop-Iowa and nuke our CFP chances?
MSU never finished with less than 6 wins in any season in 9 years under Dantonio. They won 36 games in a 3-year span from '13-'15, won 2 conference titles, won the Rose, the Cotton, went to the playoff. And then out of nowhere, 2016 was an unmitigated shit show.
MGoBlog: "They will never top 3 wins ever again."
Of course they won't. Smooth sailing from here to eternity.
I'm not going to fight fellow Michigan fans for the honor of MSU and PSU, but this place is just stupid sometimes. And this seems like a good place to shut it down for the week. Enjoy your weekend everybody.
Well you may not see this but saying Penn State returns pretty much everybody is grossly inaccurate. They return McSorley, Barkley, Gesicki (who is more Funchess than Butt), and Cabinda. They lose their top receiver, their best 2 or 3 D Linemen, 2 starting LBs, and their best corners (one to a spring injury, out for the year).
Penn State's defense will struggle mightily against comptetent teams that don't turn the ball over, aka us, OSU...Iowa? Pitt? If Matt Canada's offense is still chugging along without Peterman and Conner, Pitt could put 50 on the Penn State defense this year.
Their offense will be good as long as McSorley has time and Barkley has lanes. That should get them at least 8 wins, but their OL will be extremely outmatched in their games against us and OSU. The other two games idk.
I expect Penn State to win 9 games this year. They're good, but they're not top 10. They have a lot of questions all over the field when you look past a couple all-conference players.
I really wasn't replying to you, though I can see that this is in response to your post. I was more commenting in general that, for some reason (49-10 I'm sure and probably underlying Sandusky feelings), this community is ridiculous when it comes to Penn State. I don't care if everybody here bets the under, but the feelings that 2016 Penn State was a fluke is nonsense and a relentless group opinion that makes me eyeroll every time they're brought up.
My only beef with you is saying I'm "grossly inaccurate" by saying Penn State returns pretty much everybody. Penn State returns 16 starters which is tops in the conference with NW and tied 9th most in the nation. Yes, they lost some guys. But saying they return "pretty much everybody" isn't a literal statement that they return 84 of 85 scholarship athletes or something. It's shorthand for they bring back a lot. And relatively speaking, they do. I understand you probably thought I was taking a shot at you. I wasn't. I think we're on the same page here. I know who they return. I know who Mike Gesicki is. Unlike seemingly 95% of MGoBlog, I kept an eye on Penn State football even after the Michigan game.
Notre Dame was 4-8 last year and yet ranked 26th overall (!!!!) in S&P+. They were the best 4-8 team ever, as ridiculous as that is to say. Brian Kelly is not incompetent and they have way more talent than MSU. The fact that MSU won that game last year was absurd - the last dying bit of luck from Dantonio's contract with the devil.
Penn State may have a tough stretch but I'll be damned if this Penn State team loses to Michigan State. McSorley should have a field day against a really bad defense.
You have to realize, it's not just that Michigan State is coming off a 3 win season, it's that they are coming off a 3-win season and losing all but one of their best players (assuming Scott is still on the team come fall). The well is now dry and EL and they weren't even good when it still had some water in it. They will have less talent this year than last. I think their schedule will allow them to get to 4 or 5 wins, I think 6 would be an outstanding accomplishment by Dantonio but I would put the odds of them getting to 6 wins at less than 5%.
that you are so high on Oklahoma in Columbus? Just curious.