ESPN review of UM vs. Connecticut game . . .

Submitted by ImSoBlue on July 8th, 2010 at 4:41 PM

The big east blogger is sitting in for Rittenberg for this article.  Does not discuss what Michigan brings whatsoever, only Connecticut.  Gives UM a 47.5% chance to win.

Last paragraph:

"But underestimate the Huskies at your own peril. This is a deep, veteran and fundamentally sound team that I think deserves to start the year in the Top 25. Given the Wolverines' struggles of late and the pressure they will be under to get off to a good start for the sake of Rodriguez's job, this could be a game that UConn just might steal on the road."…



July 8th, 2010 at 6:18 PM ^

But one thing he's right on is hyper-accurate predictions and stuff. .5%?  What, because 47 or 48% wasn't precise enough?  Heck, under 50% wouldn't have been close enough?  What quantifies the .5%? Depending on who starts at QB, does it go up to .8%, or down to .3%? Sigh.


July 8th, 2010 at 4:55 PM ^

The Big East guy was actually the one posting there.  Still, I mean I think it's a gross miscalculation if he's factoring in the whole "UConn is underrated, and hopefully Michigan isn't looking past them."  Because, I can't imagine RR looking past any team at this point.

EDIT: I didn't neg.

James Burrill Angell

July 8th, 2010 at 4:50 PM ^

Should be expected from a Big East blogger but he's not wrong about UConn's analysis. Pretty veteran team with some decent players. Certainly no pushover so we'll have to play well to take it.


July 8th, 2010 at 4:52 PM ^

The one thing I'm pretty convinced of for this game is that we will score a lot of points.  Their undersized DL will get pushed around by our OL and when we get a hat on their good LB's we'll run the ball like crazy and regardless of which QB starts, we should be able to throw the ball well against them. 

The question will be if we can stop them.  If we hold them to fewer than 30 points we win this game.  Maybe by 10. 


July 8th, 2010 at 4:58 PM ^

This. They do return 16 starters (8 on both sides). Their DLine is supposed to be good, but our Oline might be able to overpower them. Saying their secondary is questionable is a huge understatement. 3 of their 4 starters back there are sophomores. Our Dline really needs to play well. UConn supposedly has a really solid Oline and a good RB. They do lose their best WR though, who had 500 yards more than anyone else. Steele has 5 of their players on the 1st team all Big East. If our Oline and Dline play well though, we should win.


July 8th, 2010 at 4:59 PM ^

Putting Michigan at less than 50% odds to win when they are the favorite in Vegas is either ballsy or dumb.

As a Michigan fan, I will say - "dumb". 


July 8th, 2010 at 5:02 PM ^

He gives us a 47.5% chance to win, but says

this could be a game that UConn just might steal on the road

If UConn needs to "steal" the game, and it UM needs to "underestimate" UConn for this to happen, then HOW can he say that UConn has a better chance at winning than we do? Those statements only make sense if UM should win - if we have the better chance of winning. Only then does the other team 'steal' the game. 

I dont mind journalists being down on UM, but they at least shouldn't contradict themsleves in the process. 

NOLA Wolverine

July 8th, 2010 at 5:01 PM ^

Why would you expect him to bring anything about Michigan? If he didn't know a ton more about UCONN then he wouldn't be very good at his job. 47.5% shows his opinion of Michigan, basically giving them a coin toss chance in a game agaisnt a "top 25" team. That's a pretty bullish view on Michigan based on history.


July 8th, 2010 at 5:07 PM ^

It won't be easy to go and win this game on the road, especially against a team desperate to get off to a good start. But UConn is a veteran team that's ready for this kind of challenge, and it was simply a better team at the end of last season than the Wolverines were. If the game is close, expect Michigan to start doubting itself again. I give an ever-so-slight nod to UConn pulling a very mild upset.

The prose is slightly more pro-UConn on his BigEast blog, but that's not to say he's not raising a good point-- I'm a bit worried about what might happen if UConn jumps out to a lead or comes from behind.


July 8th, 2010 at 5:19 PM ^

With all due respect to UConn, I actually don't think this game will be as close as some believe.  A run-first spread offense with a good O-line and a QB with speed to burn against an undersized D-line and quality (for the Big East) linebackers?  Even if we're not moving the ball on the ground, I'll still take either one of our QBs and our receivers against that secondary. 

On defense, the lines sound like they will match up fairly evenly, but our defense will consistently have 8 men in the box.  If the new scheme truly does simplify the reads for Ezeh and Mouton, we should be fairly good against the run.  I'll admit our secondary is still a bit questionable, but UConn isn't sporting a fleet of ND-quality receivers. 

Combine that with it being at the Big House and the inspiration of seeing Brock Mealer lead the team out, I think we win this game by a comfortable margin.


July 8th, 2010 at 5:33 PM ^

"a game that UConn could steal."  Everybody in the country is putting UM on upset alert.  I think that is as dipshit as Morgantown, WV but how can it be stealing.  Let me put it another way...




Come to think of it, fuck this clown...UM 31, UConn 17


July 8th, 2010 at 6:05 PM ^

I think we'll run pretty good.

I think we'll pass ok.

I think our defense will be better than some games but not others.

I think we can score some points; more than some games but less than others.

I think we have a good chance to win but so does UConn.


July 8th, 2010 at 6:37 PM ^

The secondary is [UConn's] glaring weakness right now; UConn was the worst in the Big East in defending the pass a year ago, and its two best defensive backs graduated.

Chalk up a couple points in the Tate column as starting QB for this game.


July 8th, 2010 at 7:37 PM ^

I don't know, bad DB's or not, I don't think that will affect RR's decision on who starts the game.  Denard proved he could sling the ball around during the spring game, and he's such a dangerous runner that a handful of completions and we've set up the run game nicely.

Now, if we felt we needed to throw to win and they have a good secondary, that might be a reason to go with Tate.  But since they have a poor secondary, this will allow Denard to be dangerous on the ground and through the air.  That spells victory, friend.


July 8th, 2010 at 8:49 PM ^

Yes, Denard threw against the 2's on D during the spring game.  But he blew them up.  If UConn's DB's are that bad (and it sounds like they are) they might not be much better than our 2's.  Even if they're as good as our 1's, maybe Denard goes 8 for 14 instead of 11 for 14 like he did in the spring game, and that's still enough to move the ball consistently.

Unlike the spring game, UConn's D will have to do more than 1-hand touch Denard to get him down, which could be a tall order.