Michigan Game Preview

BigRedBuster said:
View attachment 22320
Click to expand...

Surprising. Michigan and Nebraska are ranked close in most power polls. Toss in a home game and Michigan w/o their HC, I would think we would be favored.

Also, looks like you got this from ESPN. Funny that right next to that line is a graphic that shows us as having a 70% chance of winning.

www.espn.com

Michigan vs. Nebraska (Sep 20, 2025) Live Score - ESPN

Live coverage of the Michigan Wolverines vs. Nebraska Cornhuskers NCAAF game on ESPN, including live score, highlights and updated stats.
www.espn.com www.espn.com
 
Gonna be an interesting one. I really like the stuff these guys put out, to the point where I read it even when they aren't going to play Nebraska soon (and I do not like Michigan). The focus of this piece is how Michigan has been trying to stay in heavier personnel against 2-TE sets, and how that has burned them with Edge players being in coverage when the TEs flex out and similar problems. On the surface, that bodes well for us - Lindenmeyer, Haarberg, and Nelson give us arguably better players to do that with than Oklahoma has. But I'm kinda worried we'll gameplan a significant chunk on that matchup and then have Michigan play it differently after essentially a bye week against CMU - but that's something for the coaches to worry about.

https://mgoblog.com/content/neck-sharpies-what-asking-too-much
 
Husker_In_WI said:
Gonna be an interesting one. I really like the stuff these guys put out, to the point where I read it even when they aren't going to play Nebraska soon (and I do not like Michigan). The focus of this piece is how Michigan has been trying to stay in heavier personnel against 2-TE sets, and how that has burned them with Edge players being in coverage when the TEs flex out and similar problems. On the surface, that bodes well for us - Lindenmeyer, Haarberg, and Nelson give us arguably better players to do that with than Oklahoma has. But I'm kinda worried we'll gameplan a significant chunk on that matchup and then have Michigan play it differently after essentially a bye week against CMU - but that's something for the coaches to worry about.

https://mgoblog.com/content/neck-sharpies-what-asking-too-much
Click to expand...
I'm not concerned about them overly game planning around the Tight Ends. That may be the case if we didn't have good options at RB and WR. But, we do. So, your main game plan is the RB and WR with some TE mixed in with the matchups you discussed.
 
BigRedBuster said:
I'm not concerned about them overly game planning around the Tight Ends. That may be the case if we didn't have good options at RB and WR. But, we do. So, your main game plan is the RB and WR with some TE mixed in with the matchups you discussed.
Click to expand...

I'm not overly worried either, but I think Michigan matches up pretty well against our run game and you're always looking for advantageous matchups. The split zones or whatever they were with Haarberg/Nelson slicing across to take on the edge were terrific against Akron. Michigan's edges are not going to take those blocks as passively, and the DL won't be as easy to move. If we can use that personnel while mixing in looks that make their edge players cover, I feel really good.

If Michigan can play with lighter personnel when we're in 12 and still stop the run, I feel less good because the matchups when we spread out are worse. I like our receivers, and Raiola is playing incredibly well - but they're good enough on the back end that I think we need to scheme up some favorable matchups to consistently move the ball.
 
Husker_In_WI said:
I'm not overly worried either, but I think Michigan matches up pretty well against our run game and you're always looking for advantageous matchups. The split zones or whatever they were with Haarberg/Nelson slicing across to take on the edge were terrific against Akron. Michigan's edges are not going to take those blocks as passively, and the DL won't be as easy to move. If we can use that personnel while mixing in looks that make their edge players cover, I feel really good.

If Michigan can play with lighter personnel when we're in 12 and still stop the run, I feel less good because the matchups when we spread out are worse. I like our receivers, and Raiola is playing incredibly well - but they're good enough on the back end that I think we need to scheme up some favorable matchups to consistently move the ball.
Click to expand...
My thoughts are, Cincinnati and, to a lessor extent, Akron played with their safeties deep trying to prevent the big pass plays. I'm guessing Michigan will not think they need to do that. So, their safeties will be closer to the line to help in the run game. That should leave them playing more man coverage. Sooooo......this will be the game where we find out really how good our WRs are. Can they make michigan pay for that decision? If so, then our run game should get better as the game goes on as Michigan adjusts to stop our WRs. That should also open up some options for the TEs.
 
Cornfed said:
This is arguably (we'll see) the toughest game on our schedule until penn st. How cool would it be to come into happy valley undefeated? Sorry, caught me daydreaming again. I know every Big10 game will be a challenge but please oh please let this be the season that nebraska football is...nebraska football again.
Click to expand...
At this point with what I've seen I think USC is going to be more challenging, but much remains to be seen.
 
presidentjlh said:
At this point with what I've seen I think USC is going to be more challenging, but much remains to be seen.
Click to expand...
More challenging for our defense for sure. Not sure what Michigan can realistically put together in the passing game without a lot more work. Riley has another offense cranking.

Our offense will get a true test of our capacity against Michigan. If we can open up the passing game and threaten them deep, we may see how dynamic this offense can be. If Michigan can man us up and play the run, could be a long ugly day for both offenses.
 
Husker_In_WI said:
I like Michael Rose-Ivey's response to looking ahead:



We're fans, we can look ahead however far we want. There's another thread where people are debating the QB situation in 2028. If the team looks ahead that's a problem, but Rhule seems prepared to aggressively combat that.
Click to expand...

I get it but players are just like us.

They look ahead, they loaf in practice, they fake being sick to sit out a little bit and so on.

And the coaches are the same way.

I remember being on a staff and one of the coaches was talking about going to the lake or boating, something like that. It was a Wednesday or Thursday and we played a good team that Friday but a super crappy team the next Friday.

Our head coach goes "Perfect timing, right after this game head out to the lake with your family and have fun, we don't need to d!(k around with film and all that stuff for Crappy High coming up"

And sure enough, we won like 70-7 vs Crappy High
 
Watching Butler in any of his pressers, including today, he doesn’t seem overly confident with our DL still.
Could be I’m reading him wrong too. Maybe he’s just fed up about the questions regarding the aforementioned position and gives nervous answers and body language?

Holgorsen gives me this dude vibes tho and I like that so…

IMG_7164.gif
 
Corn Train said:
Watching Butler in any of his pressers, including today, he doesn’t seem overly confident with our DL still.
Could be I’m reading him wrong too. Maybe he’s just fed up about the questions regarding the aforementioned position and gives nervous answers and body language?

Holgorsen gives me this dude vibes tho and I like that so…

View attachment 22330
Click to expand...
I did not see it but I am sure he knows there is no magic fix. So he is probably kind of worried...maybe?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top