Michigan 13 point dog to Bama

Submitted by StephenRKass on February 15th, 2012 at 5:38 PM

Michigan is currently a 13 point underdog to Alabama in the JerryWorld game. (Link:  http://www.detroitnews.com/article/20120215/SPORTS0201/202150407/1131/Michigan-now-13-point-underdog-against-Alabama.)

Personally, even though I'm not much for bets, I'd take Michigan at those odds. Of course, I'm a shameless homer who only roots for Michigan, but I can't see them beating us that soundly.

I also believe that Michigan has an advantage in facing them at the beginning of the season. Denard should have a lot more opportunity to surprise their defense. Even though Alabama has many great incoming freshmen, it always takes a while for newcomers to make solid contributions. We'll see. Of course, it'll be interested to hear RDT's take on the game and the odds.

Comments

nickb

February 16th, 2012 at 6:31 PM ^

of Alabama caliber. In two or three years we would be much more competitive. I don't know if this is a money grab for Brandon or felt he wanted some national exposure. Either way, the team will be exposed badly and it may take several games to get over it.

This by any measure is not a good game to schedule for a program starting to get back on its feet.

gobluednicks

February 15th, 2012 at 6:59 PM ^

the logic seems fine to me.  did you happen to watch the sugar bowl when molk was out?

combined with the fact that alabama consistently has one of the best d's in the country and i'd agree that we don't have too much of a chance.  we couldn't even get things going against va tech.  

you calling someone a clown for their opinion shows your intelligence and maturity.

plus, you said lol which, like omg!

ish

February 15th, 2012 at 5:43 PM ^

13 seems like too much.  i bet the line moves to about 10.  i wonder whether the casinos consider this a defacto home game for the tide because they're so much closer.

befuggled

February 15th, 2012 at 6:43 PM ^

Borges was at Auburn from 2004 until 2007. Only the 2005 Alabama team (10-2) was really any good, and in the other years Alabama was a marginal bowl team. In Saban's first year they went over .500 only thanks to an Independence Bowl win (finishing 7-6).

Edit: Forgot to mention that they vacated all the 2005 wins, too.

MgoBadFish

February 15th, 2012 at 5:54 PM ^

I can see this game going so many ways. They could beat us by 20 if we try to run power all game. We could win by 20 if we get a little creative (play to our strengths). It obviously could be close too. Get Denard and Fitz in space and I like our chances. Their offense doesnt scare anyone,  ours does. Their defense scares just about everyone and ours is... improving.

Seattle Maize

February 15th, 2012 at 9:25 PM ^

He was running what is best for the long term future of this program.  Michigan does not and should not revolve around Denard or any single player.  Unless Denard can back teams up with his arm then he will struggle against every really good defense.  

acnumber1

February 15th, 2012 at 5:49 PM ^

I was going to type:

 

"I see a very close win OR we get run over...so I guess 13 falls somewhere in the middle."

 

But then I realized that such comments add nothing to this thread and I don't know anything more than pretty much anyone else on this Ides of February.

So, never mind. 

 

Edit:  I typed and entered before I saw the above Redondo post...this is not a response to that.

Michael Scarn

February 15th, 2012 at 5:52 PM ^

I'm thinking we lose by 10 or so but it's not as close as the score indicates.  With Richardson and Maze gone, it's not like they're an explosive offense who will hang a bunch on us, but I also see them essentially shutting us down.  

jka347

February 15th, 2012 at 6:02 PM ^

At first I was giving us no shot at all and would agree with the line, but after seeing just how many players Bama is losing I'm a bit more optimistic.

robbyt003

February 15th, 2012 at 6:03 PM ^

If Denard doesn't turn the ball over once, we win...  If he throws those prayers in the air, we lose.  Not having a Hemingway type receiver will hurt this year

BlueinTC

February 15th, 2012 at 6:15 PM ^

a good ball and limit the turnovers, I think we have a chance, not a good one, but a chance.  This holds true for most games...if Denard's arm is a threat they can't stack the box on us, which opens up room for Denard and Fitz.

I'm sure Big Al is scheming from now until then, as well.

RollDamnTide

February 15th, 2012 at 6:16 PM ^

I see this game being a very close affair, sort of like Cary Grant and Deborah Kerr in an "Affair to Remember". Distant at first, but by the end, you won't be able to fit a nickle between them. 

 

 

Yeah, Alabama had an American Film course, what of it?

StephenRKass

February 15th, 2012 at 6:34 PM ^

I will say, I expect Michigan to lose.

However, if Michigan should win, it would do incredible things. Among others,

  • It would cement Hoke's reputation and tenure as Michigan coach. To beat Ohio the first year, and the reigning national champion in your second, would be incredible.
  • It would greatly further Denard's career, and could open the door to a Heisman. If he should be able to run against Alabama's defense, and pass, that would open the eyes of voters around the country.
  • It would bode well for both Borges, and Mattison. They are great coordinators now. This would give them credibility beyond the Big 10. To have beaten Virginia Tech in the Sugar Bowl, and then Alabama, would mean they planned very well.
  • It would help with recruiting. Right now, many of the best players in the country look to Alabama, and Auburn, and USC, and Ohio. We are getting our share, but were helped tremendously by the strong classes in Michigan and Ohio with the 2012 signing day. If we beat Alabama, this would open the eyes of many potential recruits far beyond our regular geographic reach.

Honestly, this game is really set to benefit Michigan tremendously. If we lose, well, it's expected. If we win, it helps us in so many ways. This is a very high risk - reward game. Who gets the credit for scheduling Alabama? IIRC, it would be one David Brandon. If so, this is working out brilliantly for Michigan. We get a huge payday, great exposure, and if we win, rewards that far exceed the risk. I understand that Brandon can be blamed for many things. In this case, he should receive huge credit.

I'd love to see the odds stay this high, and even get worse, and then see Michigan pull the trap of doom on Alabama. This will be such a hard season, and game, to wait for. Argh.

DonAZ

February 15th, 2012 at 8:26 PM ^

I believe you meant it's a low risk-high reward game, since if we lose it's expected and if we win it's miraculous.

Depending how we play if we lose.  A spirited fight to the end with it relatively close ... it's a marginal plus for Michigan still.  If Michigan gets man-handled then it'll hurt.

San Diego Mick

February 16th, 2012 at 3:16 AM ^

What's up buddy, it's Mick from AA.com, I've been reading this blog more than anything else lately, best blog around with great participation and we're all supportive of Hoke, now anyways, some doubted a year ago, now not so much.

As for the spread on this game, it makes me chuckle a bit at how so many have a doom and gloom outlook for the Bama game. I think Hoke and staff proved last year how good they are. Now we are into year 2 with them and we will only get better. I bet if you asked most SEC fans what B1G program and school they respect and fear the most, it would be us Wolverines. We're the only program that has historically beat that conference, including bowl games.

Why do you think Hoke said this is Michigan for god sakes? Because it is Michigan for gods sakes! Notice how Roll Damn Tide shows us respect? I like that guy and he is welcome here in my eyes and as he stated, it will be close, U-M intimidates others, remember that. Plus I think and have been saying for a while now that we are entering a golden era in M football.

Go Blue!!!

GoBlue

February 16th, 2012 at 1:48 PM ^

If you want to call it high-risk, then I'd say that it has the potential to be an ugly loss, setting up a potential early seasion slide (including the game at Notre Dame,) coupled with a few other losses throughout the season which could turn next year's record into one which is much worse than this past season's.

If the down side is that we could end up at 12-1, that is not high-risk.

Also, in the quote I referenced a "nothing to lose, but everything to gain" situation was described which, if you accept that as reality, is decidely not high-risk.

crjorgensen

February 15th, 2012 at 6:37 PM ^

I think this line is a little high and will drop to 10 like some others have suggested come kickoff. I can't wait for this game and although Bama is clearly better then us but  since Bama lost so much on defense I am hoping this will hurt them in the beginning of the season. They clearly have a bunch of young talent on defense, but hopefully these guys have some nerves in the first game of the season. Denard is going to have to have the game of his life. He is going to have to have a game very similar to the OSU game this year or the ND game 2 years ago where he had 502 total yards for us to have a chance. Also, I am a little concerned with how Fitz will do against a defense as physical as Bama's and idk if our receivers will get separation against Bama's corners.

Although the Bama offense isn't that explosive, I am still worried how our D is going to go against their offense. Despite losing Richardson, they still have eddie lacy who is a very good back and dee hart is expected to be a key contributor in their offense. I am always worried about our secondary and even though Bama loses Maze Duron Carter is eligible this coming year and could have a big impact at receiver for Bama.