| Daily Blog • Tuesday, January 3rd |
|---|
 |
SUGAR BOWL |
|
|---|
MICHIGAN (10-2) VS VIRGINIA TECH (11-2) |
||||||
Rushing |
Passing |
Points |
TO’s |
ST |
A.O.R |
|
| MICHIGAN | 205 | 175 |
29 |
2.3 |
- |
100.9 |
| VIRGINIA TECH | 130 |
205 |
21 |
1.9 |
• |
95.7 |
| First meeting. UM makes its 2nd appearance in the Sugar Bowl with a previous 9-7 loss to Aub in 1983. They return to the BCS lineup for the 1st time since the ‘06 Rose Bowl and overall UM is 1-3 in the big bowls since the BCS was instituted in 1998. Hoke has been the HC in just 2 bowls in his career, going 1-1 losing the ‘07 International Bowl to Rutgers while at Ball St while beating Navy in LY’s Poinsettia Bowl with SDSt. The Wolves players will want to erase any lingering memories of LY’s 52-14 bowl thrashing by Miss St, the worst postssn perf in schl hist which proved to be Rich Rodriguez’s swan song. VT surprisingly received the at-large bid trumping Boise, K-St and Baylor to make their 4th trip to the Sugar Bowl (1-2) to face Mich, despite being dominated by Clemson 38-10 in the ACC Title game, the only team they lost to… twice! VT is the only team in the FBS to have 8 str 10 win ssns and has a chance to go for win #12 for the 1st time in schl history. Beamer is 8-10 in bowls. UM went 2-2 on the road TY outgaining foes by 49 ypg. VT went 6-1 with a 22 ypg edge. UM went 8-2 vs bowl tms outgaining them by 63 ypg. The Hokies faced 8 bowl caliber tms going 7-2 but being outscored 27-20 and outgained 404-342 (Clem 2x). Hokies fans travel well which is the reason they were able to nab the bid but they actually trailed UM in ticket sales here. Michigan is certainly excited to be in their 1st BCS bowl since 2006, but VT has not lost their final 2 gms of the season S/’03. | ||||||
PHIL’S FORECAST: VIRGINIA TECH 26 MICHIGAN 24 |
||||||