Jerry Palm: Rose Bowl for Michigan

Submitted by Soulfire21 on August 2nd, 2012 at 12:53 PM

Jerry Palm released his 2012-2013 bowl projections that include Michigan (Big Ten Champ) facing Oregon (Pac-12 # 2, USC gets picked for the MNCG).

Obligatory statement about the utter ridiculousness of predicting bowl games before a single game of the season has been played?  Check.

The reason I bring this up (as opposed to other prognosticators) is that last year around this time, he had Michigan in a BCS bowl (the Fiesta) and most people were taken aback at his "silly" (but not so silly looking back on it) faith in Michigan.

And it's not just that he correctly predicted Michigan into a BCS bowl, he also predicted Michigan's losses to MSU and Iowa.

At the very least, it's nice to see us in the conversation for high-profile bowls, championships, etc.  You know, how it should be.

Comments

denardogasm

August 2nd, 2012 at 1:13 PM ^

Ehh.. This guy must not have been paying attention last year when the picks were based entirely on interesting matchups and excitement factor, AKA Money.  There's not a chance in hell Louisville makes it to the Sugar Bowl to play Bama.  And there's probably no chance Boise gets to a BCS game.  If they didn't get to one last year they won't this year.  I think they take a big step back without Moore.

bluewave720

August 2nd, 2012 at 7:38 PM ^

You both make me feel like a real jerk for not planning ahead like that.
Strong work.

Also, agree with the OP.  Preseason predictions are stupid, but things seem very normal when we are predicted to be awesome.  If it makes anybody feel better, I am having the same feelings that I had before the '03 season.  Heisman finalist, victories in all four of our rivalry games (I'm including you Minnesota because I love that jug so GD much) and a Big Ten title.  I'm down.

Tuebor

August 2nd, 2012 at 1:37 PM ^

Not too ridiculous considering we are a favorite to win the B1G along with Wisconsin and MSU.  Perhaps this reflects his thoughts on how those games will play out.

turtleboy

August 2nd, 2012 at 1:51 PM ^

USC is by no means a lock. Last year they let 4 teams tag them for a combined 167 pts, and the 2 biggest regulation scores weren't against Stanford or Oregon. They have a great qb, but their defense is very suspect, and their play on both sides of the ball is very incosistent. They very much remind me of our Team 131. F.I. the beat Arizona at home, but it was 48-41 in regulation, similar to our Illinois game. Then they lost at ASU 43-22, and ASU had a losing record, barely squeezing out 2 scores against the good Illinois defense the week before. DeAnthony Thomas is gonna light them up this year when they play Oregon.

Darth Wolverine

August 2nd, 2012 at 2:26 PM ^

They're not a lock, but obviously the sure favorite to get there. Oregon is their toughest opponent, but they now have to play the extra game (PAC 12 title game), so that gives them one more chance to lose.

And oh my, I don't want anymore of Oregon. They smacked us twice and I've had enough with that. The 2003 game wasn't as close as the score indicates. M had some late scoring that made the game seem more competitive. I won't even talk about details of the 2007 game in which they absolutely dismantled M.

readyourguard

August 2nd, 2012 at 2:07 PM ^

As Coach Moeller used to say, "if anyone says anything nice about you (the football team), turn around and punch them in the mouth. They're only trying to set you up"

So here's my ePunch to the mouth for the writer.

graybeaver

August 2nd, 2012 at 2:32 PM ^

I predicted 10 wins for last season. My reasoning was that if RR and Greg Robinson could get 7 wins then Hoke and Mattison should be able to get three more out of them. The schedule was easier as well. RR might have been innovative when developing his spread offense, but he had no clue how to game plan. He was running the same plays regardless of the defense he was facing. I'm a bit of a PITT fan and remember how bad he was out coached when they lost to PITT with a national title shot on the line. PITT was horrible that year and WVU's offense couldn't do anything. That offense will put up 500 yards and 50 points on the school for the blind, but won't do shit against a stout D. I'd take Borges running the offense anyday over RR. Notice how Borges made half time adjustments and game planned for different defenses. His only terrible game plan was Iowa. The MSU game wasn't great, but it was ugly playing in a trash tornado.

BlockM

August 2nd, 2012 at 2:59 PM ^

Sorry, but guessing correctly on last year does not make me trust him more this year. In fact, that means he was just pulling things out of his ass last year. I can't think of many rational people that were predicting 11-2 for us before last season.

Soulfire21

August 2nd, 2012 at 3:06 PM ^

I don't know if just because his thoughts last year differed from the majority of peoples' and he happened to be very close to correct means he was "pulling stuff out of his ass".  Could it be that he sees things others don't?  Or that they may overlook?

Honestly I tend to agree with you, I think a lot of what went in to last year's predictions for Michigan done by him were "Well, Michigan can't stay bad for so long can they?  Why not?"

Also, I wonder if he is influenced by the fact that some of the most stellar seasons schools have are in their first couple years with a new coach.

PurpleStuff

August 2nd, 2012 at 3:17 PM ^

Neither is people assuming a team is exactly the same as it was the year before (as people did with Michigan last year and seem to be doing with Alabama this year).  People who actually looked at the roster saw that the team was going to get substantially better as virtually no one departed, players returned from injury, and young contributors continued to grow/emerge.

This year is not much different.  The same "rationalists" are worried about the major losses we suffered on defense (2 starters from the Sugar Bowl, only one of whom was an NFL draft pick), while underestimating the dramatic improvement that will come from not having to learn a brand new offense, bringing back so many promising young players and first time starters who are only going to get better (Ryan/Gordon, Beyer/Clark, Morgan/Hawthorne, Countess, Avery, Gordon), and having the opportunity to incorporate many more potential contributors who are waiting in the wings (guys like Ash, Washington, Furman, M. Robinson, Rawls, Taylor, and the entire incoming freshman class).

This team is going to be really good.

BlockM

August 2nd, 2012 at 3:36 PM ^

I'm not an overly pessimistic person, I just don't think either one of our lines is elite, and our passing game is going to have to be a lot more consistent, which will be tough without a proven jump baller like Hemingway. We'll see, I don't think Rose Bowl is out of the question, I just don't think that this guy knows something we don't because he nailed it last year.

BigBlue02

August 3rd, 2012 at 1:01 PM ^

I've never understood the reasoning behind the jump ball argument. The main aspect in jump balls isn't height, it's timing. Last year, Hemmingway wasn't great at jump balls because he was taller than the cornerbacks, he got them because he had good timing. We have other receivers who have already proved they are completely capable of catching Denard's jump balls. Off the top of my head, Roundtree had a pretty big one in a certain night game last year. Our passing, even without Hemmingway, will be just fine in regards to Denard's passes.

redhousewolverine

August 2nd, 2012 at 6:46 PM ^

I haven't read it but are the two big east teams tcu and west Virginia? That wouldn't be too ridiculous in comparison to the acc as west Virginia went all English navy on the Spanish armada against Clemson who were the acc champs and beat vt twice. Don't really know tcu or wv situation but they generally are solid of not really good teams. It is a bit of a limb against the Big 12 as both oklahoma and okie st are pretty good. Then again okie st lost Weedon who was a pretty good qb.

Edit: scratch that. Louisville? Are they suppose to be good?

Tater

August 2nd, 2012 at 4:39 PM ^

I am still sticking to my opinion that there isn't anyone on the schedule Michigan can't beat, and that everyone except Bama has at least one "fatal flaw" for Michigan to exploit.  

As for Palm, he is eerily good at predicting who gets into the NCAA Baskeball Tournament and who doesn't.  He may turn out to be that good at football, too.

Tater

August 2nd, 2012 at 4:39 PM ^

I am still sticking to my opinion that there isn't anyone on the schedule Michigan can't beat, and that everyone except Bama has at least one "fatal flaw" for Michigan to exploit.  

As for Palm, he is eerily good at predicting who gets into the NCAA Baskeball Tournament and who doesn't.  He may turn out to be that good at football, too.

Soulfire21

August 3rd, 2012 at 8:29 AM ^

I was looking it over on ESPN yesterday and, while certainly a gauntlet, it's not like we can't do it.  Alabama, Ohio, Nebraska, and Notre Dame are all winnable games for us.  It's not out of the question we go 3-1 out of those 4.

I'd feel much more confident if we had more experience on our lines though, I hope they can gel together well throughout the season.

uminks

August 2nd, 2012 at 11:29 PM ^

Looking over the Legends, I don't see a dominate team. I think it will be close between Michigan, NE and MSU. Even the top teams in our division may lose 2 to 3 conference games. The prediction looks quite reasonable for Michigan to win the Legends and beat the Leader winner in the B1G championship game!

I wouldn't mind going 8-4, win the B1G conference and play in the Rosebowl. Of course I'm always rooting for the team to go undefeated!!!!