Clarence Beeks

January 8th, 2019 at 12:20 AM ^

Those Alabama odds are absurd. This is the end for them, book it. They should have been blown out last year, too, but Georgia blew it by taking their foot off of the gas. The Buster/Tyson example was perfect.

Clarence Beeks

January 8th, 2019 at 1:33 AM ^

Bookmark this and come back to it. We’ll see whose comment was absurd. It is precisely because of what you said that it’s over. They will never be more talented than they are right now yet they got stomped. This was a team everyone was saying was the greatest college football team ever and they got stomped. It’s ok, all things come to an end.

maize-blue

January 8th, 2019 at 8:48 AM ^

Over the past decade Alabama's longest gap between not winning a National Championship is two seasons. If they get to 3 seasons of not winning it all then we can start legitimately looking at their coming back to Earth. Their 2019 recruiting class was so disgustingly good I have a hard time believing they're going to have a falloff anytime soon.

mgogogadget

January 8th, 2019 at 9:35 AM ^

Right, because that's the narrative we've all been berated with around here... I'm all for the offense improving next year, and it must for Michigan to win the B1G. I feel like I'm in the minority thinking that it will. Michigan averaged 10 more points per game this year than they did with a very young offense in 2017. I'd be surprised if they don't average 40ppg next year without this "air raid" offense that everybody assumes is necessary. Not quite willing to climb out to the ledge with you, yet.

M Ascending

January 8th, 2019 at 8:10 AM ^

Yes.  There is a reason.  It is Michigan's general popularity among the betting public.  These odds are not designed to rank the teams in order of actual win expectations, but to foreshadow how they believe the public will bet, in order to balance the books.  Michigan always gets rated too highly in these types of betting pools, because the oddsmakers don't want a flood of early money coming in on M at 25-1, say, and then having to try to compensate to keep the books balanced.

If I were a betting man, and I am when I go to Vegas, I would put my money on Texas as a good value bet and place a total flyer in Tennessee at 300-1.  That said, it will probably be Clemson again, beating the Fighting Frosts in the CFP final. /s

A Lot of Milk

January 8th, 2019 at 1:08 AM ^

I feel like this is the rough equivalent of guessing how Putin is going to die. Sure I get that "struck by an asteroid" could be the fourth most likely cause of death, but I feel like "cardiovascular disease" or "accident" are just miles out front of the other possibilities.

In this example, I think it's clear that cardiovascular disease and accident represent bama and Clemson, respectively 

Nervous Bird

January 8th, 2019 at 1:11 AM ^

The bookmakers know that the OSU game was an anomaly, and the bowl game was a fluke (4 starters out, 3 more hurt during the game). They see the returning talent, and the top ten recruiting class and they rightly expect Michigan to go into The Game as a CFP contender. It's happened in 2 of the last 3 years, and they expect Michigan to be a consistent winner and contender under Jim Harbaugh. Only irrational fans think this team is a long way from National Title contention.

footballguy

January 8th, 2019 at 1:27 AM ^

The OSU game was less anomalous than you think, and the dudes that weren't on D against Florida won't be there next year. We are adding Dax though which is good news. 

And "contending for the CFP" and "contending for a title" are not the same thing. 

I fully expect us to contend for the CFP. But I don't think they can compete with Bama or Clemson, especially when all the skill guys on display today are coming back next year.

 

Nervous Bird

January 8th, 2019 at 1:49 AM ^

The OSU game was less of an anomaly that I think? How so? Do you remember how competitive the 2017 game was with a bad Michigan team who started John O'Korn? Do you remember how well that gameplan was put together? Do you remember how the 2016 defense held the OSU offense to one scoring drive over 25 yards (FG)? You don't think Michigan will go into 2019 with more team speed, and a lesson learned - scheme wise? Do you think Haskins leaving makes that offense better? Do you think that Justin Fields, in his first year in the offense, will be as polished as Haskins (who was in his 3rd year in the offense)? 

Yes, the 4 players who were out of the bowl game will not be there next season. However, just as the defense had to learn to play without Ben Gedeon, Chris Wormley, Taco Charlton, and Jourdan Lewis, after 2016, they have an entire offseason to find out how to best utilize the returning players. At the beginning of 2017 we all thought the defense would be far behind the offense because of the 9 new starters. And then... Other than the PSU game, the defense carried the team all year. Since we won't have Bush's sideline to sideline speed and field awareness, then we'll probably look a bit like 2016 where we blitzed more, shot more gaps. Don Brown will have them play with more discipline because Bush won't be there to clean up in the run game. The defense couldn't fundamentally change in one month before a bowl game. But, the offseason adjustments will be made. How do I know? We've seen Don Brown do it before.

 

WorldwideTJRob

January 8th, 2019 at 6:04 AM ^

I love your enthusiasm, but one could say the gap is widening by the simple fact that the margin of victory has increased every year since 2016. We were supposed to be the more talented team this season, with our best chance at victory in years and the game was over shortly into the 2nd half. Now some factors are working in our favor, they break in a new QB possibly learning a new system. We finally have a returning QB and we will play them at home where we haven't lost in a while.