Mr. Rager

November 21st, 2011 at 1:26 PM ^

Agreed.  Not taking Saturday for granted... but if we DO win, I would rather it be the Sugar than the Fiesta.

1)  It's New Orleans.  I've been dying to go for the last year or so, and this would be a "two birds, one stone" kinda thing.

2)  It's also not the Fiesta Bowl, which I am pretty sure is sponsored by the Reagents at Ohio State.

Wolverman

November 21st, 2011 at 12:27 PM ^

 Houston is extremely beatable , heck i'd take most of the big ten over houston in a bowl game. I'd rather face Houston than alabama or LSU... or Stanford.. or oregon....or Oklahoma state i think you get the point. Don't get me wrong i think we would stand a good chance of beating stanford , Oregon and Oklahoma if we played a good game , but i think we beat Houston even if we don;t bring our A game. I can't wait for Saturday GO BLUE

Tater

November 21st, 2011 at 1:34 PM ^

As the saying attributed to Mike Tyson but probably handed down from trainers to fighters since the 1920's goes: "everybody has a plan until they get punched in the mouth."  Houston hasn't really played anyone capable of "punching them in the mouth."  Their schedule has three decent teams and nine tomato cans.  

Michigan is much better than a decent team now, and is certainly capable of altering Houston's plans.  I would love seeing Michigan unmask a previously-undefeated Houston team in a BCS bowl.  It would be one of the most lopsided of all the BCS bowls.  

James Burrill Angell

November 21st, 2011 at 11:12 AM ^

First off, sorry about the more-or-less double post.

Second, to address Magnus, DID YOU SEE THEIR SCHEDULE!!!!!!!!

 

 

Sep 3 UCLA Won 38-34
Sep 10 @North Texas Won 48-23
Sep 17 @Louisiana Tech Won 35-34
Sep 24 Georgia State Won 56-0
Sep 29 @UTEP Won 49-42
Oct 8 East Carolina Won 56-3
Oct 22 Marshall Won 63-28
Oct 27 Rice Won 73-34
Nov 5 @UAB Won 56-13
Nov 10 @Tulane Won 73-17
Nov 19 SMU Won 37-7
Nov 25 @Tulsa 12:00 pm

So OKAY, they threw up some BIG offensive numbers but look at who they beat. The only team BCS Conference team they beat was a very very average UCLA team and they only beat them by 4.

WolvinLA2

November 21st, 2011 at 11:22 AM ^

First of all, they had UCLA at home and till barely won.  That's not a BCS bowl team. 

And sure they put up huge offensive numbers, but look at their points allowed against that murderer's row: They allowed 42 points to UTEP, 34 points to UCLA, Lousiana Tech and Rice, and 28 points to Marshall.  Rice and Marshall were blowouts, but UTEP, UCLA and Louisiana Tech were all close games. 

Point is, we should be able to put up 40+ on them.  Do I think we have hold them to under 40?  Yes I do.  UCLA, LTU and SMU all did.

wolverine1987

November 21st, 2011 at 4:53 PM ^

What matters more is the comnpetition and talent level you achieved that record against. The talent level in their conference isn't even near, not even close to, the talent level in the weakened, down year for the B1G. It's certainly not impossible that they could beat us, but we would be favored, and favored for a reason. 

Soulfire21

November 21st, 2011 at 10:59 AM ^

"A very beatable opponent"

I know they're Non-AQ, but they average more passing yards (447.5 ypg) than we do total offense (434.5 ypg).  They throw in an additional 170.8 rushing ypg to average a cool 618 yards per game.

Now, I know our secondary hasn't been torched since ND, but that's quite impressive.

Admittedly, of other potential matchups, I suppose I'd prefer this one ...

justingoblue

November 21st, 2011 at 11:10 AM ^

Houston opponents:

Average total defense: 83 (Tulsa, 408)
Average scoring defense: 85 (Utah State, 31)

Highest ranked total: SMU (49)
Highest ranked scoring: SMU/LTU (51)

Michigan opponents:

Average total defense: 47 (TCU, 353)
Average scoring defense: 42 (NC State, 23)

Highest ranked total: MSU (3)
Highest ranked scoring: MSU (5)

 

Soulfire21

November 21st, 2011 at 11:19 AM ^

I totally get this argument, but regardless of who you play if you're averaging 618 yards a game, your offense is doing something very, very right.

They aren't going to be a slouch.

I'm confident Michigan could beat them, but I'd rather, as others have said, not be the next BCS team to lose to a Non-AQ team, because you know Houston is going to give it their all (i.e. they aren't accustomed to the big time CFB stage).

Still, we should not be afraid to take on C-USA opponents, so we'll see.

NOLA Wolverine

November 21st, 2011 at 11:02 AM ^

Houston? I'd rather go to the Capitol One bowl than play Houston. That's just another lose/lose situation for a BCS conference team v. Non-BCS conference team BCS bowl. The Fiesta Bowl should pick us up and pit us against the winner of Bedlam. Now that would be a great draw. Does Stanford even travel? 

Darker Blue

November 21st, 2011 at 11:04 AM ^

I love Michigan fans that complain about some hypothetical bowl matchup. For the last 3 years we would have given our left arms to go to a bowl game, and now we're gonna complain about a possible BCS bowl? gimmeabreak

Marlin Jackson…

November 21st, 2011 at 11:07 AM ^

Let's keep focus on the game at hand.  Next weekend will be Ohio's superbowl, so to assume victory would be very foolish. 

We must do all we can to impact the outcome of the game with our intensity.  FOCUS!!

 

Gorgeous Borges

November 21st, 2011 at 11:29 AM ^

Wait, what? You think because Ohio State has a sour taste in their mouths? How about the team that hasn't beaten them since 2003? How about the seniors that have experienced a 3-9 season, constant November collapses, Stretchgate, two coaching changes, never beating Michigan State, never winning a bowl game (except Junior Hemingway)?

You know what struck me about tattoo-gate was that those players had so many Big 10 championship rings and pairs of gold pants that they'd be willing to sell them and trade them for money. Face it, they'd won so much crap that it didn't mean anything anymore and they just wanted to get some money for it. And just because they've got five losses now and Michigan's having a good season doesn't mean that they suddenly have more to gain from this game than Michigan does.

Gorgeous Borges

November 21st, 2011 at 11:13 AM ^

Houston has all offense and no defense. They really haven't played any quality opponents. I'd say we have a lot better shot at them than we would at anyone except maybe the Big East Champion.

I also don't really understand people who think that there's no glory in beating a non-AQ conference team in a BCS bowl. Boise State and TCU are legitimately good teams. If you win a BCS bowl, you win a BCS bowl and if you're in your first year of coaching, that's pretty special.

Six Zero

November 21st, 2011 at 11:14 AM ^

Jerry Palm's predictions are based, obviously, on Wisconsin defeating PSU this week and Sparty in the conference championship.  Works for me, obviously, but in the fallout of the first B1G Championship, I noticed something curious, and I'm not sure if this is speculation on Palm's part or actually documented procedure.

But you'll notice that Sparty is listed as the Big Ten #3.   I would have thought that the loser of the Conference Championship would be credited as the #2 or runner-up of the conference.  Palm, on the other hand, ranks the teams solely on record, and with Sparty losing to the Badgers in Indianapolis they would have three losses, dropping them behind UM, who defeats evil next Saturday to finish 10-2.

So is this official?  Would the conference runner-up stack as #3 with the resulting loss, or will the bowls recognize them as the #2?  It could very well be subjective, I suppose, and if so I'd think that a bowl committee would find UM and the fan base much more attractive than the Sparty horde.  Thoughts?

justingoblue

November 21st, 2011 at 11:17 AM ^

Conference finish order doesn't matter to the bowls at all. The only thing that really matters to the bowls is overall record. If a team wins six games and is less than two overall games behind another team in conference, a bowl can pick a team. It's not on straight finish order.

Erik_in_Dayton

November 21st, 2011 at 11:19 AM ^

The bowls don't have to choose the team that finished second.  They get first, second, third, etc. pick of whatever bowl-qualified team they want.  I think that a lot of people are putting Michigan in a BCS game b/c they think that a bowl would rather have Michigan than MSU b/c Michigan is a much bigger draw.  My guess is that that is correct, though I can see how MSU fans would be pissed if things go down that way.

A second thought about MSU:  It's two losses have been by 18 and 21 points.  That has to hurt its cause. 

Six Zero

November 21st, 2011 at 11:48 AM ^

With the title game out of reach, it almost seems like our bowl forecast is much friendlier by not playing in it at all.  Yes, obviously a B1G championship is the goal every year, but it seems like the loser is going to take a real step backward when it comes to bowl selection.

I'm not suggesting anything as ridiculous as throwing the chance to play for the title, but it  emphasizes how ridiculous the whole process has become.

WolvinLA2

November 21st, 2011 at 12:09 PM ^

I disagree.  For most Michigan fans, the bowls are Rose and everything else.  Sure, the Sugar Bowl is better than the Capital One Bowl, etc, but the chance to play for the Rose Bowl and a Big Ten title is way better than the Sugar Bowl. 

Sure, MSU might lose and end up in a bowl below us.  Big deal, they still know they beat us and they till get to play in the B1G Champ game.  I'm sure they'd take that and the Cap1 bowl over our Sugar Bowl, any day. 

Outside of the Rose Bowl which takes our league's champion, the bowl selections have always been chosen - the reason we got a better bowl than Iowa last year, for example. 

Coastal Elite

November 21st, 2011 at 11:36 AM ^

I'm going to laugh my ass off if/when MSU loses in the B1G championship game and gets stuck in a worse bowl than they made last year. I can already hear the Spartan partisans crowing about the lack of respect accorded to their program and spinning elaborate conspiracy theories about how Dave Brandon is in bed with Jim Delany, ESPN, and Allstate Auto Insurance.

gopoohgo

November 21st, 2011 at 11:39 AM ^

Why? They will have 3 losses, won't be in the Top14 of the BCS standings if they lose to Wisconsin in the B1G championship game.

They will be ranked lower.  Michigan has a bigger national following, with more alumni.  The Sugar Bowl is looking out for their own financial interests, not to placate Sparty