1997 Football Season
Since we are headed to the Bdubs Bowl and excitements at a low i thought id post the good old days of every game from the 1997 season. Michigan was at the top of college football. We won the big ten won the rose bowl gained another Heisman Trophy winner. Im sure many believed we would win at least 1 more NC within the next 10 years and a few more Heisman winner. 16 years later and we seem far from these goals. My question, was 97 just a one hit wonder or can Michigan get back to this level of football again and prove they are a national program?? Enjoy the videos.
December 8th, 2013 at 11:30 PM ^
Its gonna be a long offseason so these should keep some people busy
December 9th, 2013 at 11:20 AM ^
In terms of calendar days/months, the off-season is indeed long. However, there are quite a few things to keep us occupied as UM/NCAA football fans.
-Bowl season
-HS All-America games
-Finishing off 2014 recruiting
-Signing day
-Continuing to build the 2015 class
-Possibly adding a 2016 guy or two
-Spring football
And then.....yeah, it'll be a long summer from a football perspective. Grab a cold one and hit the beach, your deck, or whatever else gives you your outdoor fix.
December 8th, 2013 at 11:33 PM ^
December 8th, 2013 at 11:39 PM ^
The really sad thing is that it was 15 years ago,
December 8th, 2013 at 11:47 PM ^
I think I went to 5, I know I didn't go to Iowa or Ohio State, not sure about Northwestern. Maybe my favorite year of sports ever, between the football, basketball, and hockey teams and the Wings.
December 8th, 2013 at 11:39 PM ^
December 9th, 2013 at 12:55 AM ^
December 8th, 2013 at 11:45 PM ^
1994 - 8-4
1995 - 9-4
1996 - 8-4
The seeds for that team were planted in some pretty tough soil. We have talent coming in, if it gells right, who knows. Maybe 2014 and 2015 will be 1997-like.
(Like I said, its hope. Be nice to me. I just watched MSU win a ticket to the Rose Bowl. This is all I have.)
December 8th, 2013 at 11:57 PM ^
Meh, that's not a fantastic comparison. All three of those teams were way better than their records indicated. Hell, 1995 was probably good for one or two more wins if not for Scott Dreisbach's traitorous thumb. Griese was REALLY shaky, especially against Michigan State. Then there was the glorious Will Carr Fullback Experience in 1996 which cost us the Purdue game, plus the trip to the Outback Bowl to show Gene Stallings out the door at Alabama.
And remember, it was a pretty quirky time for the conference, too. A lot of competition for the top. Northwestern's two best seasons ever, Penn State was pretty much a worldbeater, Ohio State was rolling...
December 9th, 2013 at 12:47 AM ^
December 9th, 2013 at 1:07 AM ^
December 9th, 2013 at 7:41 AM ^
That competition was better in comparison to what we're playing against now. The B1G was one of the top 2-3 conferences. If not for us screwing OSU's season in 1995 and 1996, the B1G may have had two MNC's. And PSU should've won at least a share of the MNC in 1994. So you're looking at 2 maybe 3 MNCs in that period. That tells you how strong the conference was.
Being B1G good doesn't equate to national success, but I think we'll probably be at least that good.
December 9th, 2013 at 8:45 AM ^
I'm curious to hear which 3 conferences are better than the B1G this year.
December 9th, 2013 at 4:28 PM ^
Pac-12, SEC, and Big 12
December 9th, 2013 at 6:31 PM ^
Clemson, FSU, Miami is a pretty good trio. And I don't know if the bottom of their conference is as much of a tire fire as ours.
December 9th, 2013 at 6:34 PM ^
Big East (YTM, Va Tech, etc) was still around and the ACC had FSU, UNC (Dre Bly squad) and others. Now it's like five legit conferences and a bunch of mid-tiers.
December 9th, 2013 at 9:38 AM ^
Iowa, Penn State, and Nebraska aren't half bad, and Neb/Iowa should be able to win their bowl games. And MSU and OSU are BCS-bound and have a great shot to win them. It's not a murder schedule, but the whole idea of the Big Ten being the worst conference is way overblown
December 9th, 2013 at 8:13 AM ^
I don't think so... the '96 team wasn't the best but they had a great defense, which of course became the dominating defense of '97. I don't know if there is any one area on this team that you can point to and say it will be a dominating force next season.
December 8th, 2013 at 11:45 PM ^
Upvoted for not being another MSU circle jerk thread
December 9th, 2013 at 12:47 AM ^
December 8th, 2013 at 11:47 PM ^
December 9th, 2013 at 12:17 AM ^
December 9th, 2013 at 12:21 AM ^
My question, was 97 just a one hit wonder or can Michigan get back to this level of football again and prove they are a national program??
I think this can be answered by a reflection on the 16-year history of the BCS, which started the next year.
Multiple BCS title game appearances - 10 programs: Florida State 4, Oklahoma 4, Alabama 3, LSU 3, Ohio State 3, Auburn 2, Texas 2, Florida 2, USC 2, Miami 2. Single BCS title game appearances - five programs: Notre Dame, Oregon, Nebraska, Virginia Tech, Tennessee.
We all know how many times UM made that game, but it gets more dour when you consider how many times we were a late-season contender for it: ONCE (2006). So until we prove otherwise, yes it was a one-hit wonder and no, we are not currently a national program.
The real question is exactly how deep does the poison of UM football politics run to take grand resources and over a long period of time, not accomplish something 15 other programs did and 10 programs did more than once? Outside of three years with an "outsider" coach, why haven't these failures appeared to bother UM establishment figures all that much?
And finally, when/how can this problem get better?
December 9th, 2013 at 3:17 AM ^
Of course,of those teams that have multiple appearances in the the BCS title game, at least 8 of them were/are dirty as hell. I'd rather be a fan of a clean program if the alternate is winning the way they did.
December 9th, 2013 at 6:57 AM ^
"The real question is exactly how deep does the poison of UM football politics run to take grand resources and over a long period of time, not accomplish something 15 other programs did and 10 programs did more than once? Outside of three years with an "outsider" coach, why haven't these failures appeared to bother UM establishment figures all that much?"
Agreed.
From 2013, 1997 looks like a lightning-in-a-bottle year.
Michigan had top 5 (or at least top 10) talent for a few years after that but underperformed. There were a lot of good players on the '06 team, but Michigan's ranking that year was based much on beating an overrated ND team early in the season. Look at what happened to them in the Rose Bowl. Their close loss to OSU looked a lot worse after the BCS championship game.
December 9th, 2013 at 7:46 AM ^
"Their close loss to OSU looked a lot worse after the BCS championship game."
I still think the reason we only got a split MNC with Nebraska is because the B1G stunk in the bowl games. 2-5 and the only other win was Purdue, a team we didn't face. People cry about Osborne getting a going away gift, but the fact remains that our conference did us no favors that bowl season. Our wins did not look as good.
December 9th, 2013 at 8:06 AM ^
be that Phat Phil, upset that his boy Peyton didn't win the HT, took his revenge on Michigan and down voted them. That's all it would have taken, a 5 vote becoming a 2 vote and there is no split decision.
December 9th, 2013 at 8:27 AM ^
But Nebraska did stomp Tennessee by 25 points and many coaches changed their vote after the poll. And we barely beat WSU. And the B1G sucked in the bowl games. I just don't think it was a "retirement" gift to Osborne.
December 9th, 2013 at 12:02 PM ^
Okay, so which conference had the best bowl record that year (hint: the Pac-10)? And who was the champion of that conference (hint: Washington State)? And what happened to the champion of that conference in its bowl game (hint: they lost to Michigan).
No matter how you slice it, Michigan got jobbed.
December 9th, 2013 at 6:39 PM ^
PSU in 1994. But that's a different discussion. I don't feel jobbed, especially since most people in 49 other states and however many other countries there are thought we were the true best team in college football.
December 9th, 2013 at 10:48 AM ^
My question, was 97 just a one hit wonder or can Michigan get back to this level of football again and prove they are a national program??
1987-1996: 74.3% winning percentage
1998-2008: 74.4% winning percentage
1997 was a one hit wonder.
December 9th, 2013 at 11:09 AM ^
Most of the schools with multiple BCS title game appearances have one thing in common - they are shady as shit when it comes to their football programs. A lot of them have a history of NCAA infractions and some of those infractions have been during the BCS era.
This isn't to say you can't win or get to the highest level when you're trying to run a clean program but I think you're at a disadvatage. I'd rather run a clean program and catch lightning in a bottle every so often then sell your soul and try to win at all costs.
December 9th, 2013 at 11:56 AM ^
Bob Stoops runs a fairly clean program at Oklahoma. So does Frank Beamer at VaTech. Texas is pretty clean. Tennessee was clean under Phil Fulmer.
The fact that even Notre Dame, one of the most pathetic programs in college football, was able to get its shit together for a season and earn a BCS title game berth should be supremely embarassing to Michigan.
December 9th, 2013 at 12:18 PM ^
Frank Beamer caught lightning in a bottle with Vick. Fulmer might have run a clean program but Arian Foster recently came out and said he was getting paid while he played at Tennessee. I'm guessing he wasn't the only player boosters were hooking up with benefits on the side.
Agree with Stoops and Texas. ND is probably fairly clean but I wouldn't want a coach like Brian Kelly anywhere near Ann Arbor.
December 9th, 2013 at 1:03 PM ^
"Clean" is a pretty subjective term when it comes to the Vols...they don't call it the Fulmer Cup for no reason. You can say the same thing for Georgia. No grayshirting/oversigning, no sanctions or probation under Mark Right, but my GAWD the players he signs spend a fair amount of time on police blotters.
2012 was Notre Dame's "lightning in a bottle" year...there is no way they are going to get that close to a national championship in the next 20 seasons. Points to them for doing it last year and making those "...Returning to Glory Since 1993" T-shirts largely irrelevant, but come on...even Charlie Weis got them to a BCS-level bowl once. Look for them to return to that post-Fiesta Bowl arc under Kelly the Purple, as well.
December 9th, 2013 at 11:32 AM ^
THIS.
+1000
December 9th, 2013 at 12:10 AM ^
We were out of the national title game contention by October every single year after 1997 excpet 2006. So anybody who wishes for the Carr days are wishing for 1 or 2 losses before October. Not what we should be striving for.
December 9th, 2013 at 12:32 AM ^
Honest question: Did you actually watch those teams live, or are you working from Wikipedia and YouTube?
December 9th, 2013 at 12:36 AM ^
I started actually watching and being able to understand in 2002 when I was 8.
2002: Lost to Notre Dame and crushed by Iowa
2003: Lost to Oregon and Iowa
2004: Lost to Notre Dame
2005: Clusterfuck
2006: Great until last two games
2007: The Horror and Oregon
Completely from memory.
December 9th, 2013 at 12:48 AM ^
December 9th, 2013 at 12:58 AM ^
December 9th, 2013 at 3:18 AM ^
On the plus side I could actually hear the band during some of those years.
December 9th, 2013 at 12:57 AM ^
What exactly is your point? Regardless of his age, he accurately recited results.
Michigan lost six straight road openers under Carr. That is a very, very bad mark and an underrated factor in our long program funk.
December 9th, 2013 at 7:58 AM ^
He's somewhat correct about being in the MNC conversation. And even in 1999 we lost back to back games in mid-October to put us out of the picture. The pattern was start the season ranked high, lose a game in September or early October, win a couple games to be on the fringe of the MNC conversation, then stumble again and completely fall out of the picture. I noticed that trend in Moeller's last year (1994).
December 9th, 2013 at 10:49 AM ^
I started at Michigan in the fall of 1993 and graduate spring 1998.
I saw ALL those teams live.
December 9th, 2013 at 12:46 AM ^
December 9th, 2013 at 7:33 AM ^
Never has a Michigan HC had so much for so long to accomplish so little. And then there is his deal with the devil....errrr Drew Henson. To allow a teenager tell him, and Carr agree, that he'll play for Michigan if, and only if, Carr doesn't take another QB in 1998.
December 9th, 2013 at 7:29 PM ^
It's kind of surreal when the guy who's won our only national title in the last 60 years is blasted for not achieving enough.
December 9th, 2013 at 8:44 AM ^
A lot of that was Llyod's philosophy on the schedule. He would schedule tough road games in the nonconference to prepare his team for the B1G. I remember hearing him talk about it before, he didn't care about winnning the national title because there was so much out of your control involved. His goal was to use the nonconference schedule to prepare his team for conference play, win the B1G and let the chips fall where they may.
If those teams played schedules like we play now, where Syracuse (At that time), Oregon, Colorado, etc. are replaced with Akron, directional state college, and that kind of schedule, he's probably looking at a few more seasons where we're in contention for the MNC in November.