AP Poll: Michigan 18, coaches: 17
1 |
Alabama (56)
Record: 3-0
|
PV Rank
1
Points
1,496 |
|
2 |
Oregon (4)
Record: 3-0
|
2
1,418
|
|
3 |
Record: 3-0
|
3
1,340
|
|
4 |
Record: 4-0
|
4
1,320
|
|
5 |
Record: 3-0
|
5
1,270
|
|
6 |
Record: 4-0
|
6
1,167
|
|
7 |
Record: 4-0
|
7
1,088
|
|
8 |
Record: 3-0
|
8
1,049
|
|
9 |
Record: 2-1
|
9
1,029
|
|
10 |
Record: 3-1
|
10
1,011
|
|
11 |
Record: 3-0
|
11
849
|
|
12 |
Record: 2-1
|
12
828
|
|
13 |
Record: 3-0
|
13
798
|
|
14 |
Record: 3-0
|
14
689
|
|
15 |
Record: 3-0
|
16
687
|
|
16 |
Record: 3-0
|
17
559
|
|
17 |
Record: 4-0
|
18
477
|
|
18 |
Record: 4-0
|
15
450
|
|
19 |
Record: 3-0
|
20
441
|
|
20 |
Record: 2-1
|
19
414
|
|
21 |
Record: 3-0
|
21
342
|
|
22 |
Record: 3-1
|
22
256
|
|
23 |
Record: 3-1
|
24
130
|
|
24 |
Record: 4-0
|
25
127
|
|
25 |
Record: 3-0
|
27
110
|
September 22nd, 2013 at 5:13 PM ^
top 6 Big Ten team right now.
September 22nd, 2013 at 5:21 PM ^
Blueinlansing.....the slappies are out in force.
According to them we did not see what we saw. The game was played thru their eyes only.
If you dont agree with them then you should change your user name. Thats what they say when dissenting opinions are offered.
Pathetic.
September 22nd, 2013 at 5:30 PM ^
the potential this team has despite the last two weeks. Clean up the mistakes and this a top 20 team and a very young one at that.
But right now, Michigan is not playing like a top 20 team and if they continued playing like this they would probably lose 6 Big Ten games. That will not happen.
September 22nd, 2013 at 5:56 PM ^
September 22nd, 2013 at 5:35 PM ^
i agree with you Blue...
I still believe in these players but my faith in the coaches is slipping fast.
All i know is that we have looked poor the last 2 weeks after a great win over ND. Too me thats on the coaches.
I hope we turn it around in the conference but i have doubts. Ohio and Nebraska and even State have much better teams than were Akron and UConn and we barely got out alive from both.
Deven has to get his mojo back and soon. The OL has to mature and soon. The defense needs pressure and soon.
September 22nd, 2013 at 5:52 PM ^
I'm glad the team is 4-0, but I don't see why we don't put Bryant and Green in on short yardage situations. I think Glasgow at center and Bryant at guard may be a better option. Miller is just getting knocked back on to many plays. I know the team is young, but we're through the first 1/3 of the season and the O-line seems to be regressing.
September 22nd, 2013 at 6:00 PM ^
For most of the last twenty years, being "Michigan" means averaging 3.5 losses a year. This really isn't anything too surprising to me. I am just going to enjoy the fact that Michigan is still undefeated and hope that they play "up" to better competition as the year goes on.
Would you rather have them playing "great football" at 3-1 or 2-2 due to a tougher schedule or 4-0 and "unacceptable?"
September 22nd, 2013 at 6:03 PM ^
September 22nd, 2013 at 7:52 PM ^
"For most of the last twenty years, being "Michigan" means averaging 3.5 losses a year."
As opposed to Alabama's 3.9? LSU's 3.7? Oregon's 3.6? Oklahoma's 3.6? USC's 3.5?
If we could really average 3.5--and we've done a bit better than that if the RR years are removed, which wouldn't be fair because I haven't removed any seasons from the other schools--we'd be a truly elite program. It's a lofty goal, if maintained over multiple decades.
September 22nd, 2013 at 6:37 PM ^
you are bitching about....people bitching??
September 22nd, 2013 at 6:41 PM ^
with Tater. I will take the 4-0. But that does not mean its a great 4-0.
We all make fun of Ohio's schedule (and rightly so) but the fact is that they are just destroying the teams they are supposed to destroy.
We are not in their class as far as teams go right now.
September 22nd, 2013 at 7:23 PM ^
September 22nd, 2013 at 7:54 PM ^
Towson was number 3 last week and I doubt they'll have dropped when this week's come out.
September 22nd, 2013 at 8:27 PM ^
September 22nd, 2013 at 6:44 PM ^
to M-Wolverine you can only make comments based on what he(or she) determines is politically correct based on your user name.
Damn you are shallow.
September 23rd, 2013 at 12:42 PM ^
but if you honestly think we are "good" at any of those things....i think its YOU that needs to do some explaining.
The simple fact is....if you are impressed by any of those areas i mentioned....carry on.
You are in an extreme minority and the very definition of a slappie.
Particularly when you refuse to back any of it up. Other than parts of ND, our defense has been good. Not great, but good. O-line and RBs need some work, but we knew that going into the season. Is kicking kicking, or just punting? Because our kicking has been mostly better than good. Record setting kicker, most kickoffs into the endzone. The punting has been shakey, but our potential All-American punter is sitting this one out, so not shocking. And if anything I've had more problems with the defensive playcalling than the offensive. And we've been ok there.
I just think it's funny that you are pretty much the opposite of your username. But I don't think you're trying to be ironic. No one is asking for everyone to agree. Just asking to not be stupid about it.
September 23rd, 2013 at 1:34 PM ^
M-Wolverine, anything you say.
Cause obviously if someone does not agree with YOUR assessment of the team they must be stupid, right?
And screw you with the "user-name" crap. How does a user-name have anything to do with what i am allowed to say??
Why does it bother you that not everyone will agree with you? Not everyone will agree with me either, but i dont tell them they cannot do that based on some pathetic "user-name" criteria.
Get over yourself.
September 22nd, 2013 at 6:54 PM ^
September 22nd, 2013 at 7:01 PM ^
...when the Big 10 schedule starts. This could be a brutal year unless we're one of those teams that plays to the level of the competition.
September 23rd, 2013 at 12:09 AM ^
during the bye week.
September 23rd, 2013 at 8:11 AM ^
We really should be at best 3-1 or even 2-2. We were outplayed by Akron and should have lost but we did outplay UConn.