UCONN Opener

Submitted by jamiemac on January 2nd, 2010 at 5:05 PM

So, what does everyone think of the UConn opener now?

I seem to recall a lot of angst that UConn was a boring choice and that we were promised a team from a BCS league and that Uconn barely qualifies as such.

I wonder if those minds have changed?

Anyway, the 2010 Huskies will have 4 of 5 guys back in this huge OL, frazier at QB, Toddman at TB and three guys who caught more than 20 passes this season. They will also have 8 starters on D coming back and only have 4 seniors all day in their current 2-deep on defense.

This, by any standards, is a legit team to be opening the season with.



January 2nd, 2010 at 5:09 PM ^

I will be more willing to speculate on our ability after the spring game. Right now, UConn looks good, but who knows what will happen in September

Moe Greene

January 2nd, 2010 at 5:13 PM ^

not a creampuff here - though the way they are DISmantling the gamecox makes me wonder how on earth they only went 3-4 in the Big East....

I would not panic though - we can at least RUN the ball and PASS the ball, which Corch Spurrier's team hasn't been able to do.

If we can only get rid of Third and Terror on the Defensive side of the ball .......


January 2nd, 2010 at 5:27 PM ^

about the opener with uconn. If we were in a bowl this year, with the extra practice and confidence, no worries, but now we are at a disadvantage. Hopefully no more drama or distractions (btw, wouldn't it be great for ncaa to release their findings now, with leach dominating the airwaves and meyer and msu etc).


January 2nd, 2010 at 5:28 PM ^

the worst possible situation. A team nobody respects that RIGHT NOW would beat Michigan by double digits. Michigan could play well, still lose, and all the issues plaguing this program would crop right back up again.

los barcos

January 2nd, 2010 at 5:36 PM ^

i think the main complaint with uconn was that it was a good program, but the overall quality and prestige was "meh". compared to OSU, who have played texas, usc, and now miama (fla), the uconn opponent is still meh.

also, they seem to be a good team next year, but the perception of an opening game loss to uconn wont be good for rr and his seat would go into notre dame flaming hot.


January 2nd, 2010 at 5:48 PM ^

Get real. This is a team with a losing record in the freaking Big East. They beat a bad team in an ugly bowl game. This is not cause for alarm/panic.

Every unit of our team should be more talented, more experienced, and deeper than last year. The team will be young and will make mistakes and struggle at times, but to act like they should be shitting their pants about playing an also-ran from a weak conference is absurd.


January 2nd, 2010 at 6:20 PM ^

And what has Michigan done the past two seasons to make you feel so confident? Was it the one Big Ten victory over Indiana? It may be the Big East, but this isn't your father's Michigan we're talking about either.

I'd like Jamiemac's opinion on this, but I think UConn would be a pretty big favorite over Michigan if the two teams lined up next week.


January 2nd, 2010 at 9:42 PM ^

The last two years Michigan has signed some of the top recruiting classes in the country. During that time, every player on the team has been exposed to one of the top strength and conditioning programs in the country. Scores of freshmen and sophomores have gotten to play long before they should have had to, gaining valuable experience. The team loses only three players on the entire defensive depth chart. The offense returns a boatload of passing, rushing, and receiving yards from guys who played very early in their careers.

Next year's team will be better at every single position group. UCONN is a sub .500 team in a crap conference. I think we'll be pleasantly surprised next September.

Clarence Beeks

January 2nd, 2010 at 7:12 PM ^

I completely disagree. This matchup, and the fact that they won today, is exactly the right situation. It would have been far worse had UConn lost today. This way it was a very early reminder that the team on week one of the schedule is very much for real.

Real Tackles Wear 77

January 2nd, 2010 at 5:49 PM ^

We would not be doing ourselves any good by playing the non-conf opponents that OSU has/will be playing, we are just not at that level right now. UCONN is going to be a very solid team next year, and will definately be in the mix for the Big East's BCS berth.
Keep in mind that of their 5 losses this year, ALL FIVE were by 4 points of less, including losing by only 2 to Cincinnati and 2 to UNC. Quite honestly, I wouldn't be shocked to see us go into next years opener as underdogs, though the home game factor will probably have the oddsmakers make us slight favorites.


January 2nd, 2010 at 5:58 PM ^

I believe Michigan would have finished above .500 in the Big East. The bowls so far show that the Big 10 was tougher this year than is/was credited. (The Big East is 4-2, but lost its marquee matchups, and had very favorable pairings at the bottom of the conference.)

Still, hats off to the Huskies for waxing SCarolina, and it will make the game more interesting (i.e., Huskies bowl win will carry over to preseason hype, etc.).


January 2nd, 2010 at 6:43 PM ^

Syracuse and Louisville are "gimmes."

Of the remaining Big East teams, Michigan should be able to beat two. I think '09 Michigan beats S. Floria, and Rutgers. They have legitimate shots at Pitt, W. Virginia, and UConn. I think UC is the only Big East team that played at the level of a Wisconsin or better team in 2009.

The Big East teams have ridiculous non-conference schedules, filled with bottom dwellers from other BCS conferences and plenty of FCS teams. Plus consider:

*Pitt lost to N.C. State.

*Three of South Florida's wins were against Wofford, Charleston Southern, and W. Kentucky.

*Rutgers' only non-Big East BCS conference win was Maryland (and they played Howard and Texas Southern).


January 2nd, 2010 at 6:01 PM ^

Before we get all worked up over wanting to face Texas or USC right out of the gate, remember back when we did a home and home with Oregon? Nice quick punch to the jaw to welcome in Sept both years there.

I would have loved to play Tenn. All the joy of playing a big name, well known school, but all you have to do is figure out how to beat Lane Kiffin.

I'd have taken Pitt over UConn, but I'm fine with 2-4 years of this, then we go get Texas or FSU or someone. My vote is in about 3 years once RR has his system fully built, then we put WVU on the schedule.

NOLA Wolverine

January 2nd, 2010 at 6:16 PM ^

If you want to be big time, you have to play the Oregon's. I want to be big time, I want to see college game day at a Michigan game early in the season, prepping for a match up with a top team from the Pac 10, Big Twelve, or the SEC. Alabama goes and schedules big time openers. I'm tired of the Big Ten being discredited, the only way to change that is to compete in big games. How many people would rather play directional Michigan than a big time game for fear of a loss?


January 2nd, 2010 at 6:20 PM ^

is RR's third year. We need to start beating the teams we are supposed to beat and throw in the occasional upset. And by the teams I mean we are supposed to beat(UConn,Purdue, Illinois, Northwestern, Michigan State, ect.)


January 2nd, 2010 at 6:22 PM ^

...on the Husky Oline...4 of 5 starters are returning, and they are comparable in size to, possibly even a bit heavier than, Michigan's Oline.

I watched these guys in the Notre Dame game and a couple other contests. Everything I've seen indicates a disciplined, physical unit. Our DL is going to have its hands full with these guys.

Our LBs will need to make huge strides in the offseason if we plan on shutting down the UConn run game.


January 2nd, 2010 at 6:40 PM ^

I am very worried about this game. its the opener, everyone is going to be rusty. What defense are we going to have? If the defense doesnt get any better and the turnover over ratio doesnt get better its going to be a long year.


January 2nd, 2010 at 6:47 PM ^

I was impressed with how well coached and athletic this team was. The Huskies did not make many mistakes, and I think that we will probably be lucky to beat them. Having said that, we should be better next year, so it will be a fun way to start the year. While this is a tough team to start with, I really wish that the AD would have sucked it up and scheduled a home-and-home with a traditional power to christen the new Big House.

Huntington Wolverine

January 2nd, 2010 at 7:42 PM ^

It's easy to think that in hindsight with the season Michigan and Western both had. But remember that in the preseason Western was returning much of their o-line, QB, and their RB (sound familiar?) and was supposed to challenge for the MAC title.

I agree with the poster above, it's tough to predict anything about a game 8 months from now.


January 2nd, 2010 at 6:59 PM ^

I think UConn was scheduled with the assumption that the program would be much farther along and could just whip a middling Big East team in the tune up to ND. That is no longer the case. Make no mistake, UConn is a must win game. Failure to defeat a middling Big East team who has only been in D1 for a few years would be a huge setback, perhaps irremediable.

The good news is that UConn has the same type of running game showcased by OSU. Michigan was surprisingly successful against that type of running game. Fraser can't run and isn't accurate enough to beat LBs over the middle (of course, improvement at the LB position would be welcomed). Rodriguez was also very successful against Uconn, so a victory should occur.

While we can regret scheduling a "nothing to gain, everything to lose" game, keep in mind the assumptions made when the game was scheduled. We'll see what happens.


January 2nd, 2010 at 8:20 PM ^

but i still hate it for the same reasons i hated it when it was announced ...
it is too HARD
give me nd and 3 cupcakes ... i would rather watch a win over baby seal u than a loss any day ... yes when/if we become a nc contender again then schedule competition .. but untill then give me wins