Michigan is 2-0, ranked in both polls, and off to a much needed great start to the season. However, as Michigan fans, we are all proceeding with caution due to the events of last year. Everyone knows the story, 4-0 start and then a 1-7 finish. Why should we think this year is any different? There are a lot of similarities between this year and last. Why not take a look at some:
 

Michigan is off to a 2-0 start, including a heart pounding, come from behind win on the last drive of the game against Notre Dame. 

Michigan has a chance to get to 4-0(like last year) and then 5-0. They would go into the Michigan State game unbeaten and ranked, similar to last year. 

Like last year Michigan has a Quarterback emerging as a star in the college football world after 2 weeks. Last year was Tate Forcier, this year it is Denard Robinson.

So why should we think this year is any different? It looks like we are following almost the same story line as last year. I will tell you why 2010 is nothing like 2009.

The book is still out on whether or not UConn is a good team. However, they are from a BCS conference, and coming off a bowl win. There is no way you can compare a win against Western Michigan or Eastern Michigan (which Michigan had in 2009) to a win against UConn. The win against UConn is just a better win, and Michigan smacked them around pretty good.

This year the Notre Dame game was on the road. Everyone knows home field advantage is big in college football. Michigan did not win one road game last year, not one. That includes teams like Illinois. So to get a road win against Notre Dame is a huge step in the right direction.

Tate Forcier had a good start to last season, and had a lot of great reviews and hype. However, he never did anything like Denard Robinson has done this year. Not any record breaking performances, he was good, but what Denard has done in week 1 and week 2 is absolutely special, and something I have never seen before.

The offense is just better than last year. The offensive line is stronger, more experienced and everyone is more experienced in the system now. When you watch this offense, you see a team that is clicking, and running the offense the way you want it to be run.

Denard is exactly the kind of QB Rich Rodriguez needs to run this system. As good as Tate Forcier was at the start of last season, he does not have the same skill sets as Denard does to run this offense.

Both quarterbacks (Tate and Denard) are now sophomores. They have a year of experience in the system now and will obviously be improved from last year. This should mean less of the turnovers(none in the first two games) that plauged Michigan last year. Where that also helps is if Denard were to get injured, we are stronger at back up than last year. When Tate got hurt last year we had an inexperienced Denard to back him up. Obviously as we watched, it was not a very good situation. Now if Denard gets injured, you have a sophomore QB who started 12 games last year, and a Freshmen who enrolled early ready to go behind him. The QB situation is WAY better than last year, even if Denard were to get injured.

Looking at the upcoming schedule. Last year after the 4-0 start Michigan played MSU and Iowa on the road. Lost one in overtime, and the other by 2 points. This year both teams travel to Ann Arbor. That is not to say this means Michigan will win for sure, but I like Michigans chances at home against these teams better than on the road. After that, Michigan plays Penn State, who last year was an 11-2 team, with a lot of depth and experience. This year they are a young team trying to find their way and the book is still out on them. I like Michigans chances against the 2010 Penn State team better than the 2009 Penn State team. Also this year, Michigan will get Wisconsin at home instead of on the road. The only thing I do not like is seeing OSU in the shoe, instead of the Big House.

Nobody will deny that so far, 2010 looks similar to 2009. However, it is a new year, and a new set of circumstances. We should all take a breath and realize that similar does not mean the same.

mrlmichael