What Should We All Have Had From 2001-10?

This is all you need to know:

From 2008-2011, OSU won 3 out of 4 recruiting battles. However, Michigan was in transition between coaching changes in two of those years. I am still waiting for the argument to surface that exposes OSU for illegal recruiting practices that gave them a competitive advantage. Everything after that is on the coaching staff. Tressel developed players better than Carr. Carr left Rodriguez with a bad offensive starting line-up. Rodriguez's system scared away the offensive talent and enabled 3-9. However you want to look at it, OSU's "competitive advantage" over us was minimal at best and for many years, non-existent.

I want to see OSU wins vacated for the sole purpose of OSU fans getting theres in regards to calling the Fab Five the "best basketball team that never existed".  But reality is, they kicked our ass and everyone else's on the field. And Tressel did it without being the best team in his conference in recruiting. Unless you want to elaborate a hoax that he somehow convinced high schools and recruiting websites to downgrade recruits in exchange for cash/tattoos.

Furthermore, if you want to talk about "woulda, coulda, shoulda", OSU beat us with 7-5 and 8-4 teams when we had bigger things going for us. Give this up.

Tressel, as a human being was less than Carr. As a coach? Tressel > Carr. Rodriguez vs. Tressel? We will never know how that battle would have turned out had both been established coaches. As is, Tressel > Rodriguez.

From 2002-2007, UM won 4 out of 6 recruiting battles according to Rivals and 5 out of 6 according to Scout. In short, Tressel beat Michigan with less talent coming out of high school than Michigan had acquired. 

There is no excuse for 1-6 and there is no excuse for 1-9. 

If you want to wade through and try and decipher OSU's "competitive advantage" throughout the conference for Tressel's career, be my guest. 

He kicked the Big Ten's ass and that is all there is to say. I find no solace in regards to our record in the Tressel era since the finding of the transgressions.

According to Rivals Rank (5*/4*) | Scout Rank (5*/4*)

2002 

OSU: 5 (3/14) | 3 (3/13)

UM: 16 (1/11) | 19 (1/8)

2003

OSU: 41 (0/7) | 25 (1/6)

UM: 17 (2/11) | 8 (3/8)

2004

OSU: 9 (1/9) | 11 (1/7)

UM: 5 (1/12) | 5 (1/9)

2005

OSU: 12 (1/9) | 7 (3/8)

UM: 6 (1/10)   | 2 (2/12)

2006

OSU: 12 (2/8) | 12 (3/9) 

UM: 13 (2/9)    | 9 (5/5)

2007

OSU: 15 (0/12) | 16 (1/10)

UM: 12 (2/5)      | 10 (2/12)

Rivals Totals

OSU - Avg. Rank: 15.6 Total 5*: 7 Total 4*: 59

UM - Avg. Rank: 11.5 Total 5*: 8 Total 4*: 58

Scout Totals

OSU - Avg. Rank: 12.3 Total 5*: 12 Total 4*: 53

UM - Avg. Rank: 8.8 Total 5*: 14 Total 4*: 55

I think we do have to face facts that on the field in both the Carr and Rodriguez years, Tressel outcoached our sideline. 

Michigan lost 2 games in 2006: one to OSU and one to USC.  So I guess we actually went 11-0 that year.  Let's go rush South U.

Interesting diary.  I'm curious to see your assessments of the Pryor era, given that he had such a dominant record as a starter.  Keep up the good work.

I have a small request - can you elaborate more on why you think the games would have changed? Particularly the seasons early in Tressel's career. For example, what is it about the 2001 season that you see changing to cause him to lose the Michigan and Minnesota games? I wouldn't think you'd see any impact for 2-3 seasons, but that's just my opinion.

One thing that stands out to me in your standings recap from 2002-2005 is how bad Illinois was pre-zook. 10 wins in 4 years? Holy crap. No wonder he's still employed.

if you're not considering alternative recruiting histories then none of the records would change. the violations didn't give osu an edge on the field, only a leg up in recruiting. i don't understand how not getting free tattoos and cars turns wins into losses otherwise.

If only.

If you exclude “alternate recruiting histories,” then Ohio State would have had the identical players. And none of their rule violations made them better at football. Terrelle Pryor didn’t become a better passer by selling his autograph.

Now, you could say that if Jim Tressel had reported the Tat 5 as soon as he knew of their violations, those players would have been suspended for some number of games during 2010. But their suspensions would likely have come at the beginning of the season, not the end of it, and in most of those games they would have been heavily favored anyway.

But beyond that, the only reason the Tat 5 scandal could happen was that Ohio State had a lax compliance department and a coach who looked the other way. If you assume a law-abiding Ohio State all along, that scandal probably never happens in the first place.

I think the only really interesting thing to come out of this is the potential effect of 2006 on UM and how it may have changed things. If Troy Smith was ineligible for 2006, UM probably wins that game and finishes an undefeated regular season and goes on to play Florida for the national championship.  Would UM have fared better in that game than OSU, who knows. Had things played out that way, would Lloyd have retired after that season win or lose? Would we have seen an uptick in recruiting that would have left more talent on the team when Lloyd did eventually leave after 07? Would Lloyd have had more power to name his successor, or would there have been less of a desire to revamp the program, thus RR never happens? Yes, Tressel was already having success against UM and had won a national championship, but looking at the standings from 01-05, the programs were pretty much equally successful which remained true in 2006. Following the 06 game though, there was a drastic divergence between the programs. I think we all know that the 06 game was the hinge point of the last decade and I think that's the only true hypothetical worth considering.

that three of the games we lost through 05 were close ones, and say what if? I kind of take it for granted that recruiting guys who take the short cuts helps you on the field--and helped you get them on the field (including the knowledge they would be paid) and assume that translates to a few points. 

And I think that--everything else being equal (which it is not)--if Lloyd has a couple more wins over OSU, a winning record, then we are looking on him in a different light. Some people regard xs and os more highly than I do, I'll admit. I'll take my lumps for it on what is essentially a football site, but I think it could have something to do with how invested you are in the rest of the university, and its integrity, as I think that Lloyd (without being a saint) was. 

The only thing I have to disagree with you about though is 2001, maybe I'm being foolish but I don't think Tressel/OSU had any illegal players that year. That team was basically all Cooper's players and I just doubt any of them were dirty. Pretty much agree with you on the records for the other games, maybe a bit more elaboration would be nice (possibly a future-future post?)

I don't get it. Why is OSU struggling? In 2002, you've got an identical OSU team (you mentioned Clarett) losing four games instead of winning the national title. Is this just a portrait of what you would have liked to have happend?

Seriously, what is your premise? If all the same players and coaches are on the team, why are they losing several more games each season?

...dumbfounded.

this is an incredibly long exercise in futility....

I haven't seen so much work go into a fruitless exercise since Charlie Weis stopped eating carbs.

I don't think us playing LSU in the Sugar Bowl in 2001 would have been as great as you think.  Before the RichRod years, 2001 was unique to me in the fact that we looked worse and worse every week.  When it was announced that we would be playing Tennessee in the Citrus Bowl, my first reaction was, "Crap!"  Any other year I would have said, "bring them on!" But not in 01.  With that said, it still annoyed me big time to see Illinois crowned Big Ten champs after we destroyed them at the Big House.  We could have made it 52-20 in the final minute but Carr decided to call off the dogs and we took a couple knees at the 10 yard line.

LSU and us were going completely different directions throughout that season so I certainly wouldn't have wanted to play them in any bowl game.  

There's too much "what if," in this diary.  It pretty much just reminded me how extremely fortunate OSU was to barely escape crappy teams so many times in 02 and 03. 

This gets really tough since no one knows how long Tressel would have kept the job, what later years would have looked like with even less talent and potentially a different coach.  It just sucks that the cheater owned UM during his stay.  Those pissed off memories can't be undone by anything.  I have holes punched in walls to prove they happened.

I guess I fail to see where all the commenters are unable to grasp the premise, at least as I see it.

The basics are that if tOSU missed out on just a couple of their players who we choose to assume played there due to the millionaire lifestyle they wouldn't get anywhere else in the big ten, the close games those types of players presumably kept them in would have gone the other way.

The idea is that just one player that didnt enroll there could have changed history seems really clear to me. Remove just Troy Smith, and how does Carr's record vs Tressel look now?

This is just a light look at the records that might have changed in games OSU won by one score or less that might have been different if some of the players had gone to another school for the free stuff, as in this make believe exercise, OSU wasnt handing uot illegal bonuses like candy.

well, theres my first double post.....yay me.

augh. nothing follows.

sorry but, tt would have been better if you had just flipped a coin to decide the outcomes

Tressel had just taken over in mid-Jan, and this is saying off the bat that he improperly recruited players that played in the 2001 season, which I find hard to believe.  My guess is that most of that team was already recruited by Cooper.

And the 2001 UM game would have pretty much the same result, that was really a poorly played game by Michigan. 

What an awful diary.  You should have called it "Michigan's Adventures in LaLa land" or "A Highly Selective Alternate History Based on Personal Fandom."