Every Big Ten team's most dangerous game (Rutgers: Minnesota; Minnesota: wisconsin)

Donate To GopherHole
BleedGopher

BleedGopher

Well-known member
Joined
Nov 11, 2008
Messages
60,742
Reaction score
16,085
Points
113
per Hellman:

Rutgers: Minnesota, Oct. 19

Minnesota is going to be a favorite here, but it is a game where Rutgers has a lot at stake and will want to make a statement. It’s Homecoming weekend. It’s (possibly) a battle of former IMG Academy quarterbacks. Most interestingly, it is a game against a slew of coaches with strong ties to Rutgers. The fan base will be hungry to beat seven former staff members that now work at Minnesota, including head coach PJ Fleck. Rutgers will be an underdog, but it is a winnable game that could say a lot about the direction of the program if Chris Ash can beat Fleck and company. As far as an upset alert, keep an eye on Liberty and new coach Hugh Freeze.

Minnesota: Wisconsin, Nov. 30

The rivalry got a shot in the arm last year with the end of a long losing streak to the Badgers. With the game back at home this year, the pressure will be on PJ Fleck to make it two in a row. Playing this game so late in the year makes for great matchups. Both teams are loaded at running back, and Wisconsin will have had a full season to build the best game plan at quarterback.

https://247sports.com/LongFormArtic...tate-Nebraska-Michigan-132587362/#132587362_5

Go Gophers!!
 

I don't think any team can afford to overlook Minnesota.

But Minnesota is also a team who isn't good enough to overlook any team either...
 

Wait, Rutgers "most dangerous game" is against us?
 


I'm guessing they mean the most dangerous game....in terms of games that they expect Rutgers have a chance to win.
 


I am one of those guys that can always sport a chip on my shoulder. I'm assuming they don't count "unwinnable games" as "dangerous games" therefore they are indirectly saying Rutgers can point to their game with Minnesota as a winnable game. They likely would never declare Michigan or Ohio State or Penn State to be "dangerous" for Rutgers because the writers would expect everyone including Rutgers to assume those games are unwinnable.
 

And, the Gopher game is a "winnable" game for Rutgers.

Of course, that depends on your definition of "winnable." if it means having a mathematical chance to win, than any game is "winnable." But, if the word means a legitimate chance to win - then that suggests that the author does not see MN as favorably as some of the fans on this board.
 

short ornery norwegian said:
And, the Gopher game is a "winnable" game for Rutgers.

Of course, that depends on your definition of "winnable." if it means having a mathematical chance to win, than any game is "winnable." But, if the word means a legitimate chance to win - then that suggests that the author does not see MN as favorably as some of the fans on this board.
Click to expand...

That is how it works.

It says something when the other teams schedule you for homecoming or think "oh man I hope we can at least beat these guys".... we have a ways to go still.
 

Homecoming at Rutgers. That place is going to be off the hook!


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
 



Minnesota is going to be nearly a 3 TD favorite against Rutgers barring a miraculous resurrection of their program or a disastrous start for the Gophers.

I think Spoofin was saying earlier that if the Gophers lose to Fresno then we're in for a rough season, my take on it is that if the Gophers lose to this Rutgers team then this season has gone completely off the rails.

This Rutgers team is supposed to be god-awful, like way worse than Fresno, and I would not be surprised if they haven't won a game by the time we play them.
 
Last edited:

At least the author picked Wisconsin as Minnesota’s most dangerous game. He must be assuming it’s a game the Gophers should win.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
 

PitinoFan said:
At least the author picked Wisconsin as Minnesota’s most dangerous game. He must be assuming it’s a game the Gophers should win.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Click to expand...

The point made above was the difference between winnable games and non-winnable games. By saying MN is a "dangerous" game for Wisconsin - it is saying the Gophers COULD win. That is far from SHOULD win.
 

Schnauzer said:
The point made above was the difference between winnable games and non-winnable games. By saying MN is a "dangerous" game for Wisconsin - it is saying the Gophers COULD win. That is far from SHOULD win.
Click to expand...

It’s the other way around. The author is saying Wisconsin is Minnesota’s most dangerous game.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
 
Last edited:



PitinoFan said:
It’s the other way around. The author is saying Wisconsin is Minnesota’s dangerous game.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Click to expand...

You are correct. I incorrectly typed that. But the point I was (poorly) trying to make is Wisconsin is a game that is seen by the author as one that the Gophers COULD win, just as the Gopher game is one that the author feels Rutgers COULD win.
 

Schnauzer said:
You are correct. I incorrectly typed that. But the point I was (poorly) trying to make is Wisconsin is a game that is seen by the author as one that the Gophers COULD win, just as the Gopher game is one that the author feels Rutgers COULD win.
Click to expand...

OK. I see your point, even though I don’t really agree with him on the Rutgers game. If that’s not a win for our squad, they might as well blow up the program. A lack of respect for Minnesota football certainly factored into that. However, Wisconsin being a “winnable” game is a step in the right direction. I would have picked a different “dangerous game”.....a team below us who could give us trouble. Yeah, I know there aren’t many teams below us at this point.




Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
 

Maybe "dangerous" is a throwback to the spate of targeting penalties in 2016...
 

I would define "dangerous" as more of a trap game - a game that team A 'should' win - but one they could lose if they screw up. i.e., a game that could potentially tip the balance of a season if it goes the 'wrong' way. Hence, this is a "dangerous" game for State U. If they lose, they may not get a bowl bid.
 

Schnauzer said:
You are correct. I incorrectly typed that. But the point I was (poorly) trying to make is Wisconsin is a game that is seen by the author as one that the Gophers COULD win, just as the Gopher game is one that the author feels Rutgers COULD win.
Click to expand...

most Dangerous game = least winnable of the winnable games
So I'm assuming the author thinks Wisconsin is our hardest game? Or he thinks Penn St or Iowa is not a winnable game for us?
 

short ornery norwegian said:
I would define "dangerous" as more of a trap game - a game that team A 'should' win - but one they could lose if they screw up. i.e., a game that could potentially tip the balance of a season if it goes the 'wrong' way. Hence, this is a "dangerous" game for State U. If they lose, they may not get a bowl bid.
Click to expand...

Those are my thoughts as well. Rutgers is more of a “dangerous” game for Minnesota, and Minnesota for Wisconsin. The author has both matchups backwards, IMO. Having said that, I’ll be very disappointed if we don’t win both of those games.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
 

and, for fans of TCM, "The Most Dangerous Game" is a 1932 movie about a rich guy who hunts humans for sport on his own island.

Interestingly, it was produced by the same people who made "King Kong," shooting on many of the same sets and using many of the same actors.
 

short ornery norwegian said:
and, for fans of TCM, "The Most Dangerous Game" is a 1932 movie about a rich guy who hunts humans for sport on his own island.

Interestingly, it was produced by the same people who made "King Kong," shooting on many of the same sets and using many of the same actors.
Click to expand...

Some of the best, or worst, actors in American history - Ice-T, Rutger Hauer, Gary Busey - were part of the non-Academy Award winning remake Surviving The Game.
 

You must log in or register to reply here.



Top Bottom