Woot.
That's great and all, but I don't think I'm going to make a pre-season pick for Michigan to beat Ohio State. Unfortunately, OSU just has a crap-ton of talent. If they stumble early and it looks like Ryan Day is overmatched, maybe I'll believe it.
I agree. I also don't understand how Vegas and other sports writers are so brash in their predictions for this team. They have offensive talent, but there are so many questions and holes throughout the line-up. We have a brand new OC, we lost a ton of NFL talent from last year including most of our key defensive players, we have no depth on the D-line and questionable personnel being keyed in as starters in that group, and our running backs are Tru Wilson and a host of unproven guys. I kind of want the media to shut up and let the team prove itself game by game. After how we finished last season, we do not deserve any hype.
It's Michigan for gosh sake's. This isn't the 1st time prognosticators have picked Michigan to win it all, let alone beat OSU. It's what people do in July when there is nothing else to do.
I think this is the first time in 16+ years that Vegas has spent the offseason favoring us in every game. We won't win them all, and our 21st century tradition of finishing overrated is painfully common knowledge, but this positivity is a measurable bump up from that baseline.
Two things can be true here. We can admit the team doesn't seem Top 5, just "solid." And also acknowledge the real difference behind the rosier predictions is how the Big Ten race is as uncertain as it's been in ... 16 years. No front runner; perhaps no team looks to have more than, say, a 30-40% shot.
#opportunity
I have a friend, a former English professor at the U of Alabama--guy born and raised in NYC, who cannot resist ever saying "the University of Michigan" without saying "the perennially overrated University of Michigan Wolverines." I don't usually get quite as down as some M fans because to me nine-ten win seasons at a school that plays somewhat by the rules are gonna go, most years, with the territory. But
is it wrong that my immediate reaction would be to say to him better to be perennially overrated than perpetually undereducated? or does that escalate things too quickly?
He went to an Ivy League school. In education, as you may know, then you go and look for a job. He has four books and--I admire him--was happy to teach a lot of kids who were the first of their family to go to college. Anyway, though I might have the same reaction as you sometimes, the subject of the conversation was whether our teams tend to be overrated, right? And the fact that some people immediately go there kinda speaks for itself.
I don't follow some of your comments as they are not clear, but mine was less an indictment on your friend rather the academic quality of Alabama, but take that how you wish. Either way was not taking shots at him or his work (which does sound quite noble).
I think in the past taking shots at Alabama's education level, especially in light of recruits who pick them for "school", over us, have always been fair game.
As an aside, I am also a 3rd generation Michigan Alumnus where my immediate family (and family though marriage) are all also Alumni. So not sure what your point is on that though.
There are plenty of first generation college students at elite schools such as UCLA and Berkeley. Going from an Ivy to a skool like Alabama must have been disapointing to his advisor. That sort of placement doens't look good on a CV. Hopefully he already had tenure.
Why so rude
Double post.
Early in my Michigan fandom there was this in 1976:
And I was all excited for the season and the Michigan championship.
Then came a 16-14 loss to Purdue on a missed last second field goal.
I temper my pre-season enthusiasm ever since.
Strange that you mentioned this, I had a couple of Michigan dreams the other night. One was I was babysitting Harbaughs Grandaughter or something and I missed the first game and Hrbaugh walked in the room and said "well we won". Lmao.
The other was I missed the entire season for some reason and I wanted to look it up online and I saw they lost to Purdue and another team I cant remember, lol Yea I know its pretty messed up, I did have a few Oberons before bed though that might explain it. Lmao
That first dream you stole from WD!
Nah, I really had this dream lol If someone else had the same dream it can only be concluded that its a sign. Were gunna beat Army!! lol
Only if Harbaugh was shirtless.
My first semester at Michigan in the fall of '81, Michigan was rated #1 and then they lost to WI in the first game of the season. I remember feeling crushed! And then we lost to OSU at home!
That loss to Purdue was not solely on the missed field goal. Earlier in the 4th quarter, Jim Smith was 5 yards behind the defense and let a perfectly thrown pass go right through his hands. That, and the 212 rushing yards by the Boiler’s Scott Dirking, is what beat us. I was there.
Interestingly, in 1964 they lost to Purdue as well, going for a two-point conversion that would have won the game. It was their only defeat of the season: they went on to beat MSU, OSU (both away), and Oregon State in the Rose Bowl, ending up ranked fourth nationally. The student newspaper dubbed Purdue 'the spoilermakers'.
Unproven guys at RB means nothing. I mean how much different could it be from the last 12 years?
That's the problem. It could be just like the last 12 years.
If there's one area on offense where you can afford to be inexperienced, its at RB. You see that happen all over the country where true freshmen or RS freshmen come in and contribute significantly at that position.
Let's put it this way: I'd MUCH rather be breaking in new RBs than breaking in a new OL, or a new QB.
You want the media to “shut up”? What would you propose they do instead of putting out content?
Not "shut up" in a literal sense, but be objective and honest in the analysis. All we've had is hype for the last 15 years with nothing to show for it. The articles that should be coming out this pre-season should be critical of the program, of Harbaugh, and the pressure should be turning up on the program. I'm sick of these puff pieces and hype machines.
Vegas isn't in the business of "puff pieces and hype machines". Their lines are as objective as it gets. That's not to say we'll win every game, but they have absolutely no reason to be emotional/subjective when setting lines.
True - but they're also in the business of cashing in on suckers.
Then why don't they set the Michigan line at 10.5 wins every year if they're just cashing in on suckers?
Did you miss the part where I said, "True?" They set lines based on many variables that aren't necessarily absolute. They also set lines based on trying to entice people to take the bet and the lines can also move based on betting activity. I'm just saying that Vegas isn't gospel nor is it always a great indicator of a teams success for the season. They are in the business of making money, and setting the line at 10.5 wins is how they are going to try to make money on Michigan. I'm not saying we are toilet water, but I'm not going to jump on the hype train that is being driven by the writers or drink the kool-aid. This team needs to put up or shut-up.
Oh I 100% agree that they're in the business of making money. But there's a reason they're using 10.5 wins to make the money and not 9.5 or 8.5. It's because most people think Michigan is going to be very good this year. 10.5 is also exactly in line with what FPI is projecting (granted that number also includes a bit of conference championship odds in it as well, but still)
Lines arent created to "take advantage of suckers". If there was ever a true advantage on one side of a line (to the point of it existing solely to take advantage of suckers) the sharps would eat it alive.
This is such a weird argument to me. Are you suggesting he's not being objective and honest because he has a higher opinion of the team than you do? This may be the first instance of a fan insinuating that there is a media conspiracy to promote their own team. The bias is clearly coming from you, considering many other outlets who are not hardcore fans of the team are also picking Michigan, i.e. Phil Steele, the Big Ten media poll. I don't see why it's worth getting mad that someone picked them to win the conference, especially when he says it's his first time doing so.
I just think hes tired of getting hyped up for the season by the media and fans and then we fail to beat OSU / win a championship. 2-16 will do that. Can you imagine if we beat them 16 out of 18 and they were getting all hypd up abput beating them, they would just laugh at us.
No, you missed my point. I am not specifically calling out Baum, nor am I saying that if you don't agree with me then you're not being honest. What I'm saying is that we objectively crapped the bed last year. We lost a ton of talent. We've had a bunch of turnover with our coaching staff. Yet, there has been more of the same from the writers and many of the fans - hyping up Michigan and giving a free pass to Harbaugh and the team, glossing over our issues while pointing out everyone else's flaws. As a blog, it seems that many of us have been elated to hear about Vegas, Phil Steele, Baum, and all of the off-season fluff about Gattis and his offense. This isn't validation. I'm saying that as a fan base, we need to cool it on the articles and we should be holding this team and program accountable. We need to prove it on the field.
I am hopeful about Gattis and the team. I want all of the success for them in the world. But damn it, I was 8 when we won in '97. For pretty much my entire life we've sucked and have done NOTHING. I'm sick of losing to OSU, I'm sick of not winning a god damn thing, I'm sick of seeing shit teams and rivals crap on us, I'm sick of reading hype, I'm sick of believing in the hype, and I'm sick of getting my heart ripped out of my chest once again when we under perform and fail. Sick of it. People can write what they want. It's their job to make picks, etc. I'm just saying we need to be wiser and more critical of what gets pumped out there for clicks. I am demanding more from the team. Sick of the bull shit.
People follow sports for the enjoyment. I don't find it surprising that fans look to positive linings about the team, rather than constantly dwelling on how the team has failed their personal expectations. You don't get a medal for being the most "real" or "objective" by only talking about the negatives, that's just as biased in the other direction. If you don't want to see the hype, don't click on the articles, that's your own personal prerogative. The team doesn't owe you anything, and I'm not sure how preventing fans from talking about these picks will help their performance.
You are 100% correct that it feels sort of, well, odd for Vegas and the media to annoint Michigan as a favorite (if not the favorite) to win the B1G. That's because we have been scarred by false starts and false promises for more than a decade. We have seen all the MSU games dating back to the RR years. We have watched OSU frankly dominate this side of the 21st century. We know the bowl game record, for whoever cares about it.
But suggesting that Michigan fans should be openly "critical of what gets pumped out there" in an effort to be "more demanding from the team" is just as odd. There is no correlation between the two. Talking about media predictions has no effect on the team's so-called accountability (whatever that even means--the games are played for our entertainment by college students), and you are not doing some public service by trying to tamper down expectations.
Again, personally I won't believe Michigan will win the B1G until I actually see it, but there's nothing wrong with other people believing it. And there's certainly nothing wrong with people discussing the possibility of it.
Have their own OT season.
But apply the same standards to OSU..they had an awful defense last year compared to the amount of talent they had. They lost an all-time great coach, a 1st round pick at QB, and they are replacing him with someone who has never taken a meaningful snap in college, and from what I've read/heard from some national folks, looked like he could be very underwhelming. So..looking at any other team who had similar questions...you would expect a regression.
For sure, I can be objective and apply that same standard to OSU. They have a ton of questions and uncertainty as well. However, they have a track record of excellence, are recruiting like gangbusters, and put their OC from last years team at the helm of the program... there may be a regression, but I have no reason to believe in Michigan. It's time for our program to prove it on the field, I'm not buying into it before they produce results. We have no excuses for playing at the level that we have for this long! MSU has more wins over OSU in the past 15 years. No excuses.
The thing that is sort of cool and sort of sucks about being a Michigan fan is that you have most of the regular season to see if the team is championship caliber or not, and then you have OSU to see how good you really are. It's like 11 pre-season games and then The Game. You lose theThe Game and your season was a waste.
In the 80's and 90's we owned them despite the fact that they had the crazy level of recruiting and local talent. This century has sucked. ...and its ~20% over. Mad Harbaugh didn't beat Meyer despite crooked refs. He needs to beat the backup coach.
They also lost three extremely fast receivers to the NFL. Bill Connelly actually found that returning receiving yards is a better predictor of changes in S&P+ production than returning passing yards, returning rushing yards, and returning offensive line starts. Regarding overall production, they're 121/130 in total yards returning from last year on offense.
Based on Connelly's calculations, OSU is 62nd in returning production overall and Michigan is 68th.
I will not expect regression from a program that's done nothing but fall upwards for almost 20 years.
Fields looked underwhelming after a month of spring football with a new team? I think a lot of players wouldn’t look that great after a transfer and learning a new system.
That's true, but i think measured against the "new team, new playbook" expectations for a former 5 star. Fact is, whether he turns out to be great or not, right now, there is nothing on him to suggest they won't fall off offensively going from a #7 NFL draft pick to a former 5 star who hasn't played meaningful snaps since high school.
Seems like we'd be better off playing OSU first game of the year than the last, at least this year.
Based on how we played at notre dame last year and how they annihilated Oregon State, I would say NO!!!
Mike Hart was a 3 star unknown running back from Upstate New York, Running back is not really a position of concern to me... Especially with this offensive scheme.
People are placing way too much stock in that Michigan-Ohio State game last year. If you take a look at the big picture from last year during the regular season Michigan undoubtedly had a better year than Ohio State. All the analytic sites, stats, big bettors agreed that when you took into account how both played Michigan was much more impressive than Ohio State. One game of information simply isn't more accurate than a full season worth of data. This is why Michigan was 3.5 point road favorites in the game last year. This actually equates to being valued to around 9 points better on a neutral field.
Put it this way if the two teams were to have played the following week in Ohio State last year the point spread on that game would have still have been close to pick'em. I would be shocked if it moved more than those 3 points that late in the year as there was just too much information out there showing the wolverines had played considerably better during the regular season. This is just like if Ohio State played Purdue the week after looking awful against them the number on that matchup would have likely only moved around 3 points or so as it as too late in the year and we had too much information how good these two teams were no matter what had happened in that one game. Even if osu ended had been favored against Michigan a week later they would have been by a field goal or less. This means at worst Michigan should win that game around 45 pct of time and though many would say not happening, 3 point dogs win around 45 pct of the time in cfb. We've see this a million times in sports where adjustments are made, things break differently, emotions change etc and the team who looked unbeatable the last time the two teams met looks totally different this time.
I know many are frustrated from past failures but fact is overall Michigan had the more impressive regular season than Ohio State last season.
In a theoretical sense maybe Michigan had a better regular season. In a literal sense OSU put it together for their biggest game and had the better season IMO.
OSU killed a top quality opponent and then won a bowl game to finish 13-1 and ranked 3rd in the AP. Michigan got killed and then shit the bed against Florida to finish 10-3 and ranked 15th in the AP. On no planet did Michigan have a better season than OSU. Some of these fans are delusional.