247 Article says bet on Michigan... kind of
Disclaimer: I am linking this because the author is a guy I work with who writes part time for 247, but also because he makes Michigan a centerpiece of the article.
Using statistical analysis he says that Michigan should win with Jake starting and should lose with Shane starting.... This probably isn't groundbreaking for many people around here, but its an interesting read.
http://247sports.com/Article/College-Football-Betting-Vegas-Lines-Alaba…
September 2nd, 2015 at 12:17 PM ^
September 2nd, 2015 at 12:17 PM ^
My only problem is that the author apparently still thinks the QB situation is undecided.
September 2nd, 2015 at 12:20 PM ^
I know what you mean, but he's from Texas and only reads as much mgo-info as I can stuff down his throat... While I think everyone assumes Rudock starts, its still not announced or known for sure, and this is a pretty objective piece form an outsider.
September 2nd, 2015 at 1:55 PM ^
I thought I was the only one...
September 2nd, 2015 at 12:26 PM ^
I really find it hard to believe that they would have started Shane anyway. I really want to believe in him, but the proof is in the puddin. Its a no brainer starting Jake. He has the experience, hes smart and I believe he has ice in his veins. Watch his interviews for cring out loud. Almost cocky but good... Some call that Confidence. I believe Harbaugh saw that this off season. Heck I believe he saw that on tape from Iowa. Jake is going to get this team to rally behind him. Then Watch out. He had impressive numbers at Iowa where the talent level is ehh. Shane has zero confidence in himself and it was evident amongst the student body during the open practice. Im sure its apparent during practice as well.
September 2nd, 2015 at 12:27 PM ^
September 2nd, 2015 at 12:27 PM ^
Confused and I'm sure it's me.
But "initial model" calls for a loss by 3.5 points. Inserting Rudock at QB flips that to a 1.1 point win, while inserting Morris has a loss, but by only 1.0 points. What's the 3.5 point intial loss based on?
September 2nd, 2015 at 12:28 PM ^
September 2nd, 2015 at 12:30 PM ^
That tripped me up too - and I'll ask the author when he gets back from lunch - but I'm pretty sure the initial model didn't consider the QB position. If thats true then the more interesting takeaway would be that Shane still improves our chances, but there can't possibly be real football stats to support that.
September 2nd, 2015 at 12:36 PM ^
It would have to assume a worse QB simulation than Morris, which is difficult to believe based on his available stats.
September 2nd, 2015 at 2:43 PM ^
September 2nd, 2015 at 12:37 PM ^
11 Players > 10 Players
September 2nd, 2015 at 5:31 PM ^
See 2014 Michigan Special teams for empirical evidence of this stat.
September 2nd, 2015 at 12:42 PM ^
But I wouldn't be surprised one bit to see Harbaugh try out Morris to see how he does, depending on the situation. This is more likely if Rudock struggles at all tomorrow night. In a game like Utah, who has a good pass rush, on the road, I'd have to think the more experienced QB wil be the best choice. Either way, the OL will need to bring their best game tomorrow - both in pass protection and run blocking. Go Blue!
September 2nd, 2015 at 12:48 PM ^
The projections seem to isolate the historical contribution to the team after 'simulating' a 3.5pt loss ....
So that Shane Morris of 2014 would take away from the computation and Jake Rudock of 2014 Iowa would make things better.
But both of these assumptions are based on last year ...which I understand is the point of the article; how do you predict the unknown when it comes to QB.
But all I can gleen from the write up is that MICHIGAN is better off with 2014 Iowa Rudock at the helm than it would be with 2014 Morris. And as someone who subjected myself to the horror that was the BWW Bowl vs Kansas State ...I don't want the 2014 Bowl game or regular season Morris, to be honest.
That said ...no way 2014 Morris hasn't improved with Harbaugh.
September 2nd, 2015 at 12:51 PM ^
I was just over at TeamRankings, since they are slowly updating their projections one more time as we slide into the season, and they've got this as a low-confidence lean to Utah, although their estimate of probability of a win for Utah is at 64.8%, but then it is essentially giving you an estimate of how more recent teams may have fared as there is no current season data yet. Their spread analysis is pointing to Michigan as a better than 50% shot to cover, but the "Money Line Value Pick" just reads "Lay Off".
September 2nd, 2015 at 1:08 PM ^
see what he says. My guess is that this kind of stuff is pretty darn wonky this early in the year. High variance, but I would take M and the points in this one.
September 2nd, 2015 at 1:39 PM ^
Harbaugh
September 2nd, 2015 at 1:40 PM ^
......IMO both options and their winning potential are tied to the 800lb Gorilla which is the running game. If we can run consistently, especially when the box is stacked with 7 or 8, than either QB can be successful but Rudock is the smart choice as a game manager; however, if the running game struggles we may need Shane's vertical passing to stretch the D.
September 2nd, 2015 at 1:49 PM ^
Considering the line is only 5.5 I have already placed a wager or two. Homerism's aside I do not see a 6 point loss in this game and of course I am rooting for the outright win. It also seems to the gamblers amongst us MGo bloggers that regardless of who starts we have a good bet! Yayyy money haha!
September 3rd, 2015 at 12:16 AM ^
Sent from MGoBlog HD for iPhone & iPad
September 2nd, 2015 at 3:21 PM ^
Butt will be a finalist for the Mackey Award for best TE in the country.
September 2nd, 2015 at 3:33 PM ^
According to his linkedin profile, the author graduated with a 3.61 GPA in Journalism from UT-Austin and an MS in Business Analytics from the same. Welp, I'm sold!
https://www.linkedin.com/pub/christian-corona/79/a77/736
September 8th, 2015 at 2:34 PM ^
So this model predicted Baylor v. SMU pretty accurately, but ther rest were pretty far off...
Michigan v. Utah
Prediction: Michigan by 1.1
Actual: Utah by 7
Arizona St. v. Texas A&M
Prediction: ASU by 3.8
Actual: TAMU by 21
Baylor v. SMU
Prediction: Baylor by 35.4
Actual: Baylor by 35
Notre Dame v. Texas
Prediction: ND by 16.7
Actual: ND by 35
Alabam v. Wisconsin
Prediction: Bama by 10.53
Actual: Bama by 18