exmtroj

May 3rd, 2010 at 12:37 AM ^

Ok, I've been hearing a lot about how UConn OMG beat South Carolina in a bowl last year.  Not to take away from their accomplishment, and not  that we won or even went to a bowl, but what is so earth-shatteringly awesome about that?  South Carolina is a second-tier program in their conference and never contends for anything.  I kind of equate them to an SEC Sparty.

funkywolve

May 3rd, 2010 at 12:54 AM ^

but for a UConn program that has been slowly but steadily getting better it's a nice win.  It wasn't like USC snatched defeat from the jaws of victory or UConn won a nail bitter.  UConn demolished them. 

(I think partly too it's due to people's inflated image of the SEC.  USC hasn't done much in the spurrier era but hey, it's an SEC school.)

blue note

May 3rd, 2010 at 6:53 AM ^

I watched them play against WVU and ND last year. They are a well coached team -- they grind it out on the ground and play very conservative on D. Their o-line was honestly one of the biggest I have ever seen - I looked it up just now and they averaged like 320. They wore down ND's smallish front in the 4th quarter... ND kept scoring but you knew they couldn't stop uconn on offense.

The big problem for them last year was when they had to throw the ball their QB was very shaky. Checked out their depth chart and they lose their top 2 receivers, but the better RB is back. It's all on the front 7 in this one.

MCalibur

May 3rd, 2010 at 9:54 AM ^

That game was the battle of the bad (meh, at best) offenses. UConn put up 253 yards to South Carolina's 205 yards.

USC's defense was actually pretty good last year and held UConn to their season average in scoring (20 pts). The Game Cock's offense last year was ridiculously terrible...like, Michigan 2008 terrible.

I also don't want to suggest that UConn is going to be a push over or anything like that, but that is definately a team we should be able to beat.

artds

May 3rd, 2010 at 12:58 AM ^

(meant for exmtroj)

I hear you.

An 8-5 team that was 3-4 in conference play knocking off a 7-6 team that was 3-5 in conference play doesn't exactly sound like the upset of the century.

People must have just been comparing UConn's histoic mediocrity to South Carolina's SEC/Spurrier prestige and figured that the Huskies were done for.

Jedelman11

May 3rd, 2010 at 1:40 AM ^

I know, I know THE SEC ... but still ...

South Carolina played #1 Alabama, #2 Florida, Georgia, Clemson, Arkansas, & Tennessee

Uconn Played: North Carolina, Pitt, Cinci, Notre Dame (before freakbass!)

Now: UConn beat South Carolina, I get it, they're better...but its was just one game. Do you think Boise State was better than OU when they beat them? They sure were that day. How's about Utah over Bama?  Stanford over USC?

The fact of the matter is ANY team can beat ANYONE in ANY game these days. The sheer talent disparity is not as apparent as it was in 80s, 90s, and even early 2000s. Now, its all about coaching, preparation, execution, and taking your opponent seriously. Given the perceived "hot seat" RR and his staff are sitting on, I'm POSITIVE he isn't gonna overlook this game.

Michigan 38 UConn 24

victors2000

May 3rd, 2010 at 11:07 AM ^

"If Rich Rodriguez can't beat a program and a coach he used to handle while at West Virginia, what hope does he have of competing in the Big Ten?"

That statement really stuck out to me and kind of instills a 'must win' kind of scenario for coach.  UCONN is definitely improved from when he beat them while at WVU-me thinks- so it's a tad unfair, yet that is what is going to be thought if we do not defeat them. So, I'm lumping this game into the 'Gynormous' category; I think we can do it, I think we'll be favored, but if things don't go as planned it will look like we have not improved enough to have a good season in the Big Ten, and it will add another log to the fire that Coach Rod is not the coach for here. Don't want to type that, don't believe it, but, dammit, we gotta win that game.

the_white_tiger

May 3rd, 2010 at 4:01 PM ^

<blockquote>Do you think Boise State was better than OU when they beat them? They sure were that day.</blockquote>

I don't think BSU was better than OU that day, but they were very fortunate on that hook-and-ladder, and they had the guts and the brains to go for two. They deserved to win, but they were not better than Oklahoma.

los barcos

May 3rd, 2010 at 1:01 AM ^

3 of the 5 roundtable members selected the Michigan-UConn game as the opener they are most interested in seeing (free content)

 

cue jaimemac's ubiquitous "i told you so" posts

jrt336

May 3rd, 2010 at 7:10 AM ^

UConn lost their 5 games by a combined 15 points. I have to believe that the death of one of their players didn't help either. Let's not kid ourselves. UConn is going to be good.

artds

May 3rd, 2010 at 8:57 AM ^

If people are going to throw around the "5 games by a combined 15 points stat" as evidence that UConn's 5 losses could have gone either way, then I think it's only fair to discuss the fact that 4 of their wins (which is half of their total) were won by a one-score margin, and of those,  their victories over Notre Dame and South Florida were won by 3 points and 2 points, respectively.

Michigan had a few close ones too. Our losses to Iowa and Purdue were both by 2 points, plus there was the OT loss in East Lansing. All three games might have gone the other way, in which case we could have been looking at an 8-4 record (and possibly 9-4). But then again, our wins over Notre Dame and Indiana were both very close too.

oriental andrew

May 4th, 2010 at 3:54 PM ^

None of their losses was by more than 4 points.  Only 2 of their wins was by 4 or fewer points.  Let's call those the swing games.  If you'd say that it should average out, they probably should have won 3-4 of those 7 swing games.  Since 2 of those losses were at home, we can split the difference and say they should have won one and lost the other.  That would have made their record 9-3 to end the regular season.  Pretty good, even against a mediocre schedule. 

So that 5 losses by 15 points thing could be relevant from the "luck" perspective (did mathlete ever do UConn's luckiness?), where they would probably be on the slightly unlucky end of the spectrum when it comes to close wins/losses. 

bluebyyou

May 3rd, 2010 at 9:19 AM ^

I will be absolutely delighted if we kick UConn's butt, but for someone  to assume the game is automatically in the W column, they must  be smoking something.  When I think about our personnel losses on D, our secondary and our questions about our QB and a bunch of other tangibles that most of you know well, this game makes me very nervous.  

Can we beat UConn - absolutely, but I see this one as a struggle. 

Maize and Blue…

May 3rd, 2010 at 9:55 AM ^

We have a much better QB situations now than we did last year at this time. Tate has started 12 games with varied levels of success, but you really have to wonder how much the shoulder injury hindered him the last eight games. Denard will be allowed to run more than the QB draw which was his primary play last year. He looked much improved in the passing game at the spring game, but I'll remain leary until he does it against a real D. Overall, the play of the QBs should be much improved.

Our D didn't suffer a mass exodus of high draft picks. Replacing BG will be difficult, but it's not like DW and Stevie were lights out players who were high draft picks. The overall D will benefit from some continuity and the players should be able to react first instead of think and then react. The Dline should be strong again and LB and safety play can't get any worse (can it?). The secondary will be young, talented, and fast, but I'll wait and see how that translates on the field. I'm of the opinion that the D will surprise this year with part of the reason being a more successful O.

learmanj

May 3rd, 2010 at 10:07 AM ^

We'll still be starting so many freshmen and sophomores that I am not going to set my sights extremely high.  Can we win this game?  Yes, but we could lose it just as easily.  The one thing that gives me hope is that DRob will be able to cut up their D with his speed.  UCONN is not a fast team, if we can get them spread out and use his speed, we should be able to score enough points to cover our D.  I have a bad feeling that the D is going to look bad this game with so many new starters in the secondary.  Hopefully, I am wrong.

Huntington Wolverine

May 3rd, 2010 at 10:09 AM ^

"Remember, Connecticut defeated Notre Dame in South Bend late last season. The Huskies won't be intimidated by the Big House."

 

Because ND in South Bend was so intimidating at the end of last year after their fate was sealed and apparently an extra 27,000 fans on opening day of a new season doesn't make a difference, especially for a team used to playing in front of 40,000 total.

 

They'll be a good opening game but I think we earn a solid win that will build the resume.

Hannibal.

May 3rd, 2010 at 10:25 AM ^

Last year the Big East was terrible.  UConn's only really imporessive game was their bowl game.  ND was fully healthy against us, but they had some key injuries against UConn.  UConn has tons of experience, but it is MAC-level talent.  Well-coached, but MAC-level nonetheless. 

BrayBray1

May 3rd, 2010 at 10:30 AM ^

until the season starts, and we are kicking ass. Nothing would make me happier than seeing these media douchebags put there foot(s) in their mouths. I think we come out and FSU. (fuck shit up)

Hannibal.

May 3rd, 2010 at 10:37 AM ^

They have a nicely balanced offense.  I don't think that we can afford to do what you are describing.  Especially since we'll probably be real susceptible to the deep ball.  I suspect that this is going to be an agonizing game to watch.  UConn is going to move the ball between the 20s all day.

MCalibur

May 3rd, 2010 at 3:21 PM ^

Don't know where you're coming from on this point, Hannibal.

  • They had two RBs with over 230 carries last year.
  • Frazer is not a good passer: his completion percentage was in the mid-fifties and his TD-INT ratio is pretty terrible (almost 1:1).
  • They're losing their best WR.

Considering all that, I think you stack the box and make Frazer beat you. This game feels a lot like the Iowa game last year to me, except with a less good opponent.

Hannibal.

May 3rd, 2010 at 4:09 PM ^

I assume Endres will play instead of Frazer.  When I look at the stats for the two QBs, I don't understand how Frazer could be playing unless there's an injury. 

They averaged 171 yards rushing last year and 216 yards passing.  They look like they can beat teams throwing the ball.

MCalibur

May 3rd, 2010 at 4:42 PM ^

I'm with you on thinking Endres is better but someone pointed out to me on a different thread that he put his numbers up against weaker competition. I think that is a fair point. Even Still, he's more accurate than Frazer is so I agree with you.

Nonetheless, there Frazer is at the top of the 2-deep after spring practice and I think he's a captain, too. Plus I saw an interview with the OC talking Frazer up. So, I don't get it but, it looks like Frazer is the guy.

It might be because Endres jacked up his shoulder last year which ended his season. Not sure where he is on the rehab.

spam and beans

May 3rd, 2010 at 1:18 PM ^

This is a big game, and a tough game.  I think Michigan will win, but am nervous about it.  Some on this board have an "of coarse Mich will win this game" attitude.  And that is okay, fans can have that attitude.  I sure as hell hope the mich players don't have that attitude.  After Mich goes bowling and comes back with an impressive victory, then I'll strut my stuff, and become that arrogant Michigan fan again.  I have been humbled for too long.  I still hope I got it.