J.W. Wells Co.

Last week (in UV?) Brian mentioned the fact that 40 years of continued beatdowns and general success is why there are so many Walmart Wolverines.  Little Brother's fans are just jealous that people who attended neither school seem to be more willing to pick a much more successful program for their rooting interests.

So I thought I'd go further into the numbers.  It's pretty staggering.  Let's look at it in a thinly veiled hypothetical.

Suppose there are two schools, A and B.

A and B are both large, long established, public universities roughly 70 miles apart in the same state.

A and B have played each other in football 41 times since 1969.  During that period:

• A has won 30 games in that series, B has won 11 games.
• A's winning percentage over B is .732.
• A has outscored B 1100-659.  That's an average game of 29-16.
• A has shutout B five times, and has allowed only three points in two additional games.
• A has never failed to score at least a touchdown against B.
• A has won 1 national championship. B has won none.
• A has won 21 conference championships. B has won 3.
• A has appeared in 35 bowl games, including a streak of 33 straight, with 15 wins.
• B has appeared in 16 bowl games, with 5 wins.
• A has appeared in 16 Rose Bowls, 2 Orange Bowls, 1 Sugar Bowl, and 1 Fiesta Bowl.
• B has appeared in 1 Rose Bowl.
• A's players have won 2 Heisman trophies. B's have won none.
• A's winning percentage against all opponents is .756.
• B's winning percentage against all opponents is .509.

Since 1898, A and B have played each other in football 102 times.

• A has won 67 games in that series, B has won 30 games, with 5 ties.
• A's winning percentage over B is .681.
• The all-time series between the schools includes a score of 119-0 in favor of A.

National Statistics:

• A is the NCAA FBS leader in all-time football wins with 881, 33 wins better than second place.
• B has 621 all-time wins, good for 32nd place among all FBS schools.
• A is the NCAA FBS leader in all-time football winning percentage at .737, .005 (roughly 3 whole games) better than second place.
• B's all-time winning percentage is .592, also good for 32nd place among all FBS schools.

National Championships:

• A has earned 11 consensus national championsips.
• A has been selected as national champions in 5 additional years by various recognized selectors on the idiot fringe of college football opinion.
• A claims only its 11 consensus national championships.
• B has earned 3 consensus national championships.
• B has been selected as national champions in 3 additional years by various recognized selectors on the idiot fringe of college football opinon.
• B still claims a total of 6 national championships.

Conference Championships:

• A has won 41 conference championships.
• B has won 6 conference championships.

Which team's football program would YOU root for?

A is the University of Michigan.  B is Michigan State University.

Is it any wonder that there are so few Walmart Spartans?  Little Brother indeed.

Okay, so there's also that basketball thing.  A few years ago ESPN ranked the top all-time basketball programs.  Michigan was ranked 13.  Sparty was ranked 16.  Yes, MSU fans: basketball actually existed as a sport separate from the exploits of Magic Johnson and Tom Izzo.  U-M men's basketball actually owns a 91-74 record over MSU (84-71 adjusted for vacated games).

Hockey?  Let's not even bother to share the stats. MSU has a good hockey program historically, but U-M is far and away the most celebrated hockey program in history, with its record 9 national championships and current record streak of 20 straight years in the NCAA tournament.  There's acutally a guy in my hometown who claims that Sparty has won more championships and has had more tournament success than U-M.  So okay, let's go to the stats anyways since thinking about that guy has pissed me off:

• National Championships: U-M 9, Sparty 3.
• NCAA Frozen Fours: U-M 23, Sparty 9.
• NCAA Tournaments:  U-M 33, Sparty 23.
• CCHA Regular Season Championships: U-M 10, Sparty 7.
• CCHA Tournament Championships: U-M 9, Sparty 11.  WOO-HOO! GO SPARTY!

During the ND game on Saturday, ESPN used a graphic that showed ND had slipped to #3 in all-time wins, behind U-M and Texas.  I had not realized this happened at the end of last season.

Here are the current (up-to-date following 2009 Week 2) rankings for wins and winning percentage.  Comments/observations below.

ALL-TIME WINS:

1.  MICHIGAN  -  874
2.  Texas  -  834
3.  Notre Dame  -  832
4.  Nebraska  -  819
5.  Ohio State  -  809
6.  Penn State  -  802
7.  Alabama  -  801
8.  Oklahoma  -  792
9.  Tennessee  -  777
10.  Southern Cal  -  768

ALL-TIME WINNING PERCENTAGE:

1.  MICHIGAN  -  .740  (874-295-36, 1205 GP)
2.  Notre Dame  -  .736  (832-285-42, 1159 GP)
3.  Texas  -  .718  (834-317-33, 1184 GP)
4.  Oklahoma  -  .716  (792-298-53, 1143 GP)
5.  Ohio State  -  .715  (809-307-53, 1169 GP)
6.  Alabama  -  .709  (801-316-43, 1160 GP)
7.  Southern Cal  -  .707  (768-303-54, 1125 GP)
8.  Nebraska  -  .702  (819-337-40, 1196 GP)
9.  Tennessee  -  .694  (777-328-53, 1158 GP)
10.  Penn State  -  .690  (802-349-42, 1193 GP)

Thoughts:

1.  In terms of wins, MICHIGAN's got a huge lead over Texas and Notre Dame, followed by another drop-off to schools that have pretty recently cracked 800 wins.

2.  In terms of percentage, MICHIGAN and Notre Dame have a tremendous lead.

3.  Around the 1200 GP point, a win raises MICHIGAN's percentage by about .0002 (1/5 of a point).  A loss drops MICHIGAN's percentage by about .0006 (just over 1/2 of a point); so 2008 was pretty tough on the all-time stats.

4.  MICHIGAN's substantial leads in each category I think can be attributed to MICHIGAN's two highly dominant eras as far as number of wins: Yost and Bo.  The other schools on those lists have had dominant stretches here and there, but generally only one truly dominant era each.

5.  Also, since 1970, MICHIGAN has generally avoided (thus far, fingers crossed) a multi-season dead era of a bad coach or a few bad coaching searches in a row, such as has occurred with every other team on those lists, save for Penn State (though one could argue the late 1990s and early 2000s had the same effect there).  4-5 lousy seasons in a row, or a full decade of mediocrity, really takes a toll on winning percentage.

6.  The top ten on each list are the same teams, in slightly different order.  So number of wins is generally analogous to winning percentage.  Duh.  BUT:

7.  Just outside of the top ten in percentage, a few precocious upstarts pop up.  Florida State sits at #11 with .670 and only 460 wins.  Miami (Fla.) is #14 with .634 and only 546 wins.  Other than those two notables, the list roughly holds true: more all-time wins roughly equals greater winning percentage.  Since the top ten traditional power schools racked up most of their wins and drove their percentages higher in an era with nowhere near the parity we have today or in the past 30 years, I think what Florida State and Miami did in the 1980s and 1990s was pretty darned impressive.

8.  Until the late 1990s, MICHIGAN and Notre Dame had each hung around the .745 mark for quite a while, then Notre Dame slipped off, and Michigan followed in 2005-2008.

QUESTIONS AND INVITATION FOR PREDICTIONS:

When will MICHIGAN get to 900 wins?

When will MICHIGAN get back to .745?

I'm watching the MGoBlue.com video feed now (with the radio audio piped in), and have several comments.

First of all, this is pretty good coverage, at least compared to the alternative.

I see that the Miami players are entering and leaving the rink from the south end, rather than the north. Until I moved away and quit going to games in 2006, both teams used the entrance at the north end. When did this change? Are there new visitor facilities at the south end now? I recall that the "concourse" area at the south end really was mostly useless loading-dock type space.

During radio commercial breaks, we hear what Al Randall and Jim Hunt are saying off the air with their mics on. Just before Jim Hunt's second-intermission interview with Miami's injured Justin Mercier, Jim said, "Justin, how's the leg? They told me not to ask you about it, but I won't say anything on the air." And Mercier then gave him the full scoop "off the air."

After the interview, Jim was talking to his producers, and he said something to the effect of, "How was that? Yeah, LOTS better than the first one. [Greg Pateryn in the first intermission] When you don't know these kids sometimes you have no idea what you're gonna get on the air."

In the third period, Michigan appeared to score a shorthanded goal which was waived off. Porno-mustache Langseth reviewed the video, and the MGoBlue camera focused from the press box right down onto the review monitor rinkside. The ruling was that the puck was directed in with a Michigan skate, and the goal was waived off. From the video I saw though, it clearly looked to me on the slow motion the ref was looking at that it was a Miami skate that kicked in the puck. What are the rules about defensive skates kicking pucks in? Or maybe I just didn't see it correctly.

Someone had better buy Bryan Hogan a HUGE steak tonight. He made some absolutely ridiculous saves in the second period.