Welp.

As a Michigan homer, I see a team playing better teams, healthier teams, and teams playing at home.  I see Lawrence Taylor taking John Wangler out of the game which Michigan had all but won.  I see a phantom touchdown, a punt fielded with a knee on the ground, and a game where the announcers were openly appalled at the officiating.  I see an o-line playing with their 7th and 9th best offensive linemen on a two-day notice.  I see Don Rogers separating Steve Smith's shoulder.  Steve Everitt, All-American cannot play to counter Steve Emtman, All-American.  I see Michigan short multiple defensive backs due to injury and cannot stop the passing attack in multiple games (common problem for many teams.)  I remember a game where every time the official reached for the flag in their back pocket, they somehow never pulled the flag out of their back pocket.

The other teams played well and deserve the accolades.  Some had injuries too. Heisman runner-up, Ricky Bell was knocked out of the Rose Bowl with a concussion but was replaced by a (Heisman winner) freshman named Charles White (122 yds, 1 TD).  (I had the honor of seeing that one in person.)

The poor record is more bad luck than institutional.  If Michigan wins 6 of those games, they are .500 which you might expect in a series of even matchups.

I have seen every one of these games starting with the '76 Orange Bowl against Oklahoma. 

The fundamental underlying reason for Michigan's bowl failures is this: We regularly beat up on an overmatched Big Ten, which makes us over-confident in our approach and our abilities heading into the bowl game. 

When we meet teams with better talent - which happens often because we tend to be overrated by beating up on the Big Ten - we don't have any kind of game plan in place that can give us an edge.  We just think we can do what we did all season that worked great in the Big Ten.  When it doesn't, we are caught flatfooted with no well-rep'd Plan B ready to go.

The most disappointing thing is that there have been very few cases where our talent level was so far behind that we couldn't have made adjustments necessary to win.  In 29 bowl losses, only 8 were by more than 10 points.  So basically, we were in a position where we could have realistically won about three quarters of those 29 bowl losses. 

If I had time, I could go through each and every one of those games and point out where that could have happened.  But here are two that are illustrative:

1-1-07  Rose Bowl  #3 Michigan (11-1) vs #8 USC (10-2)  USC 32 M 18   

Both teams came in wanting to run the ball.  Neither could.  The score was 3 - 3 at the half.  USC adjusted in the third quarter and went to the pass.  Michigan didn't and kept trying to run.  Game over.  USC exploded for two touchdowns and a field goal in the third quarter while Michigan kept beating its head against the wall . . . and punting. 

Michigan finally adjusted in the 4th quarter and successfully went to the air themselves.  Michigan finished the game with nearly identical passing stats as USC (M: 26 - 41 for 353 yards, USC 27 - 45 for 399 yards).  But the adjustment, which could have been done all along, came too late to catch up.

1-1-08  Citrus Bowl unranked Michigan (8-4) vs #9 Florida (9-3)  M 41 FL 35

Here is an example - one of very few - that went in the other direction.  Michigan came limping into this game after a disastrous season that included getting pantsed by the zone read spread against Armanti Edwards led App State and Dennis Dixon led Oregon.  Now they were facing Tim Tebow led Florida in a bowl game.      

Perhaps because it was his last game, Lloyd finally decided to let go and let his talent at QB, WR, and RB win a game on offense.  Michigan, an under-center team all season, went to the shotgun in a passing oriented offense that went for almost 400 yards passing on 39 attempts . . . a radical stat line for a Lloyd Carr team.  They needed all of those yards to keep up with Florida's high-powered offense, and they did.  They were not going to win this game by playing a normal Lloyd Carr punt-and-play-defense game.  It was a bowl game adjustment that Michigan was indeed capable of, and they won because of it.

That we have not had more of these kinds of adjustments ready to go, adjustments that we are capable of, is the reason that we have lost so many bowl games we could have won.    

one other factor in all of this is that for nearly every single bowl game we were the 'away' team, and by that i mean teams like USC, UCLA, heck, even UW were playing either in their home state/stadium, or much, much closer than we were.

speaking about my time as a student and with our buddies on rose bowl trips, it was a whole new world out there for a midwestern kid.  it is just another day for the USC/UW kids.

same thing for the florida bowls, alamo bowl and on and on.  easy drive for, say, south carolina (x2), FSU, KSU, etc.  

not saying we win those games, but i am saying being the away team for literally (or nearly) every single bowl game is a disadvantage.  over time that factor makes a difference.  

No denying those stats but that all changes when Michigan shocks the world and wins it all by taking care of Alabama and then Texas in the NC game. 

The old sayin: Wait 'till next year. Well, next year is here. It's do or die at the Rose Bowl.

I like our chances and as a number's guy, I gave Michigan a 55% chance of winning.

No doubt that the record in bowl games since 1970 has been abysmal. I know that the trend is your friend but I have a guarded sense of optimism come Monday, Jan 1st.

Given that it's been established over 6 different coaching staffs

You shouldn't regard the entire post-1970 era the same way.  We went 5-5 in bowls in the 1980s and 7-3 in the '90s.  Moeller went 4-1 in bowls!  Carr was 6-7, but started out 5-3.

Our rough periods have been the '70s (0-7) and since the 2003 season (3-13).

There was a time when the Big Ten was regarded as the best conference in the country. That was a long time ago when the running game dominated college football. Certainly by the early '70s it was history, having lapsed into the Big Two and the Little Eight.

Michigan has always been built to win during the difficult November stretch, in cold weather against Big Ten teams. We've always depended on the run game setting up the passing game. It's how we've won Big Ten championships, or come damn close. When it works, that's great.

When the run game doesn't work, we find ourselves stuck in a shootout with teams built for the passing game and wind up trying to play catch-up. 

A team that is built to win one way doesn't suddenly change into a different team, built to win a different way, very often.

We often pay the price in bowl games.

Rose Bowl games skewed by a few pts becomes of home/away with USC. But mostly Michigan has tended to lose those bowl games because they have historically been overrated while PAC teams are usually underrated.

You are what your record says you are, and any other explanation is an excuse.

In the book that Bo co-wrote w/JUB, Bo says that he focused on having his team ready to execute, and did not focus on being an innovator on offense. His results very much reflect this approach: against teams where we had a clear talent advantage (i.e. the “Little Eight”), his record was outstanding (15 losses in 21 seasons). Against a team that was basically our mirror opposite, he was slightly over .500. Against teams that had similar talent levels and were willing to be more creative (ND + bowl teams), his record was pretty bad, even accounting for some bad luck. (I realize this says nothing about our poor bowl record post-Bo.) 

Like Don I am a lifelong Michigan fan and I remember watching that 13-12 Rose Bowl loss to Stanford on a small, square black and white tv almost 50 years ago. I agree that for whatever reason Michigan's coaching staff has never emphasized bowl success, instead seemingly focused on beating OSU and winning the Big 10 championship as if it was the National Championship. In hindsight the bowl games felt like desserts to celebrate successful seasons in which we had already fulfilled our primary mission.

Of course none of this has to effect the game on Monday. From my point of view, with everything going on this season, including coach Harbaugh's future status as our coach vs. leaving for the NFL, this matchup with Alabama is a legacy game. Harbaugh's bowl record stinks, just like Bo's did, but a win on Monday in which we play well and beat the SEC champions and advance to the National Championship game would do a lot for Michigan's reputation (as well as Harbaugh's legacy).

Even though I doubt that Harbaugh would ever admit it I think that as a keen student of Michigan football history as well as a former player himself, he knows this and is determined to approach this game differently. This is in addition to being motivated to overcome CFP losses in the last two semi-finals and prove that despite this season's adversity we are truly capable of playing our brand of football and winning on a national stage (outside the B1G).

I also agree with the poster who said that Vegas seems to know what they're doing. I have no idea what their basis might be but I'm going with it (in spirit--not a gambler). As the game gets closer I'm feeling more optimistic. Go Blue!

It could be worse. Minnesota fans are crowing about PJ Fleck  being 5-0 in bowl games, which is exceptional.  The only problem is which bowl games they were: 2 Quicklane bowls, Pinstripe,  Holiday, and Outback.

A Michigan coach would never reach 5 wins in those bowls because he would be fired long before he coached in his second Quicklane Bowl.

That ‘05 Alamo Bowl really pissed me off.  Those Sun Belt Conference refs were incompetent and Lloyd kept having to use his limited challenges to get calls correct.  Such a bullshit game.

I'm feeling that today (it is Jan 1st!) will be for JH what 1/1/81 felt like for Bo.

Critics blasting his team for losing bowl games (0-7 at that point) only to play to a 7-6 lead in the 1st half. Washington dominated the 1st half but our great D held them to 2 FGs and a failed 4th and goal. 2nd half was all UM. We finally opened up the O and had Anthony Carter is amazing formations and plays. 

I've watched the nearly 2.5 HR YouTube full game replay several times.  As the game finished, Dick Enberg (a Michigan native) commented about how Bo was a "different man" upon coming to Pasadena for the game and seemed way more relaxed. That's what I'm expecting TODAY.

Go Blue!

ps I'm going to watch that 81 RB again - plenty of beer in the fridge