Is Alabama the best team you've seen play Michigan?
While trying to put Saturday into perspective, I've been trying to decide on/remember the best team that I've ever seen Michigan play. I'm not sure I've seen Michigan play a better team. The team that may have been superior was 1991 Florida State, who won 51-31 in the Big House against a Michigan team that would go to the Rose Bowl. USC was very good in '03 and '06, too, but I don't believe they were as good as Alabama or '91 FSU. I can't think of anyone else.
Have you seen Michigan play a better team? Does anyone remember the '68 Buckeyes?
September 4th, 2012 at 9:52 AM ^
Yes.
I do not think that Alabama had the best set of skill position players that I have seen Michigan play in 25 years, but they did have the best offensive and defensive lines.
If ever there were a game that proved the concept that football is won in the trenches, this was the game.
September 4th, 2012 at 9:35 AM ^
September 4th, 2012 at 12:00 PM ^
Don't forget 1991 Washington, which ripped us 34-14 in the '92 Rose Bowl to cap off its national title season. We could not block their pass rush (especially Steve Emtman) at all. Tyrone Wheatley scored a late 50-yard TD to make the score slightly less embarrassing.
September 4th, 2012 at 1:24 PM ^
This was the first one that came to my mind at least defensively. Michigan's offense had no answer for Washington's defense (specifically the DL) the whole game. I would have to go back and watch to be sure, but in my memory I can't remember one drive where I really thought, now they are getting it going.
September 4th, 2012 at 1:35 PM ^
IIRC, Desmond only caught one pass that day. No one had ever shut him down before, FSU included.
September 4th, 2012 at 6:12 PM ^
September 4th, 2012 at 9:22 PM ^
September 4th, 2012 at 11:29 PM ^
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/1995_Ohio_State_Buckeyes_football_team Yup. They also lost in their bowl game. Looks like they had a killer schedule though.
September 4th, 2012 at 9:45 AM ^
2002 Citrus vs. Tennessee was a worse beatdown than 1991 FSU, but the FSU game is the one that that I always remember as the day Michigan was completely outclassed.
September 4th, 2012 at 9:49 AM ^
I think the drinking has gotten to me, because i checked the boxscore and it was bad. I dont remember that game. But, I do FSU1991. Well, parts of it. And we were a good team. Only loss we had and we beat ND back then. Best team we played, FSU is up there. I would love to see Grbac, Wheatley and Des against this Alabama team.
September 4th, 2012 at 10:11 AM ^
Grbac, Wheatley, and Howard wouldn't have helped us. We needed Hutchinson, Jansen, Backus, Long, Baas, Steele, Renes, Hall, and Woodley to have had a shot against Bama.
September 4th, 2012 at 9:59 AM ^
That 2002 Citrus Bowl remains the worst, most soul-crushing loss I ever saw Michigan experience.
With the FSU loss, we at least scored 31 points. Amp Lee ran circles around our defense and overall that game made it clear we needed to recruit more speed, which we promptly started doing. But at least we were able to do something on the offensive side of the ball.
In that Citrus Bowl, Michigan couldn't do anything on offense or defense. It was basically a series of (i) go 3 & out, (ii) punt, (iii) give up long TD to Jason Witten, (iv) repeat. You left that game thinking UM was awful in every facet of the game and had really nothing to build on.
I personally see this Alabama game as being more like the FSU game than that Tennessee game. Yes, Michigan got dominated on both sides of the ball. But we did do some things well, and there is a clear path to improvement (i.e., a couple more Hokian recruiting classes). That said, I think what made both the FSU and Tennessee losses so difficult was that, while Michigan was an underdog in both games, nobody saw 20+ point blowouts coming. With this Alabama game, it really wasn't much of a surprise.
September 4th, 2012 at 11:15 AM ^
As it relates to the Alabama game, I think this Michigan team is much better than the '01 team, so this massive defeat is far more significant.
September 4th, 2012 at 1:52 PM ^
Good point.
But for perspective, though, remember that in 1997 Michigan won a national title, and then we posted double-digit wins in 1998, 1999, and 2000. Getting rocked by some SEC power was not on our radar screen. Perhaps it should have been, but I never saw that Citrus Bowl coming.
We knew that 2001 team wouldn't be as good as its predecessors due to the early exits by Henson & Terrell. But even the games we had lost that year had all been very close: we lost on a couple flukely plays @ Washington, we lost to MSU on the Spartan Bob extra second play, and then we lost 26-20 to Ohio State in a game we had a chance to win despite being completely outplayed. Getting totally shellacked by Tennessee was pretty jarring.
With this Alabama game, deep down inside I knew we were toast. I didn't think it would be over by the end of the first quarter, or that we'd wind up losing by 4 TD. But it didn't come as a shock the way the Tennessee game did. To me, the difference is that this 2012 team is still rebuilding and, though we are on an up-swing, we still have a couple years to go. In 2001, that Citrus Bowl seemed to signal that we weren't just a Henson & a Terrell away from a championship team--that we had deeper problems and wouldn't be a serious title contender again until we figured out what was missing.
September 4th, 2012 at 10:26 PM ^
I always felt like the 2001 team exceeded expectations after the departure of Henson and Terrell . Looking back at the roster, the lines on both sides of the ball (DL: Rumishek, Heuer, Lazarus, Orr; OL: Pape, Goodwin, Anderson, Petruziello, Solomon) were nothling like what we had seen the previous 3 years when you had a roster riddled with veteran multi-year, NFL caliber staters (Hutchinson, Backus, Brandt, Wilson, Renes, Hall). Youth at the skill positions (other than Walker) and secondary. It's actually pretty amazing to think that this team was just one special teams disaster and an itchy trigger finger away from playing OSU undefeated in A2.
Tennessee, OTOH, was loaded (10 players drafted, 2 1st round DL!) and blew their opportunity to play Miami for the title by losing to LSU. They certainly would have given the Canes a better game than Nebraska.
M benefited from a weak schedule in '01 and when they finally faced a legit opponent they got their ass kicked.
September 4th, 2012 at 11:22 AM ^
I think the difference is that in 1991 we were a good team and still got outclassed. In 2001, with Navarre as a freshman, we were not a very good team. We would have been beaten pretty good by a number of teams that year.
September 4th, 2012 at 11:26 AM ^
'91 FSU sticks out for me too because that Michigan team talent-wise was pretty stacked. I remember being at that game and being really excited at halftime because the score margin was only 2 points or something like that. Winning the game and making a case for advancing to the number 1 ranking in the country seemed like a possibilty. Then the 2nd half started and FSU just steamrolled us.
Alabama is a great team, but them shellacking us doesn't mean a whole lot other than confirming was we all feared coming into this game, that Michigan isn't in the same league as the elite teams in college football right now.
September 4th, 2012 at 2:35 PM ^
September 4th, 2012 at 11:46 AM ^
Didn't we score 31 against that FSU team? (I recall it being 51-31, but I was 13 so my memory may be off). What made the Alabama game so depressing was the dominance on both sides of the ball...I don't think you can say the same about FSU.
September 4th, 2012 at 12:02 PM ^
Yeah, it was 51-31. They scored two defensive TDs and scored another on a fake FG. I think we were pretty close to them in terms of yardage. As I was saying above, the Washington game (in the Rose Bowl that year) was worse IMO.
September 4th, 2012 at 9:40 AM ^
Defensively, it is Alabama. But as a whole it was that 1991 FSU team. Although, they threw some gimmick plays in there. They had so much speed and we looked much slower, but we were out physicaled. Bama just looked like a NFL team and we were a good college team.
September 4th, 2012 at 2:01 PM ^
I don't agree with your assessment that FSU out physicaled us in 1991. They had speed all over the place, but our defensive line was more out-schemed than manhandled and our offensive line pushed them around pretty good that day. The power running game was on point. Against Washington, we just got swallowed on both sides of the ball.
FSU, though, was the first time I watched Michigan and thought the opponent's coach was better than ours.
September 4th, 2012 at 3:36 PM ^
Sorry, you are right, meant to say we were not out physicaled. You have to bear with me about my typing skills.
September 4th, 2012 at 9:41 AM ^
But I've only really started paying attention in the early 90's.
September 4th, 2012 at 9:42 AM ^
Hard to say because we have no idea how good this Michigan team is. They definitely dominated the lines of scrimmage and flow of the game as well as any opponent I have seen Michigan go up against in the past decade. So...
Physically dominating, I would say yes.
Explosive, run you out of the stadium...I would say Oregon 2007.
But if you match Oregon 2007 vs. Alabama 2012, I take Bama 9 out of 10 times.
A couple of those USC teams we faced in the Rose Bowl (2004, 2006) were also loaded with talent, just not sure they were as physically dominant as Bama 2012.
September 4th, 2012 at 9:55 AM ^
September 4th, 2012 at 9:42 AM ^
Hard to say because we have no idea how good this Michigan team is. They definitely dominated the lines of scrimmage and flow of the game as well as any opponent I have seen Michigan go up against in the past decade. So...
Physically dominating, I would say yes.
Explosive, run you out of the stadium...I would say Oregon 2007.
But if you match Oregon 2007 vs. Alabama 2012, I take Bama 9 out of 10 times.
A couple of those USC teams we faced in the Rose Bowl (2004, 2006) were also loaded with talent, just not sure they were as physically dominant as Bama 2012.
September 4th, 2012 at 9:42 AM ^
across eras, but I think this team (and maybe last year's Bama squad) could compete with the best teams from any era. The athleticism of their defense (from the big men up front to the secondary) is incredible, and their big ugglies on offense are all very, very good, with a few being all-american candidates. The team may be lacking on big play ability in the passing game (when going up against guys not named Avery), but McCarron is a very solid QB who kept their offense humming. Not to mention their three headed moster at RB.
I like the comparison to the '03 USC team, a squad that was very balanced on both sides.
Yes, these guys are very, very good, and we'll see how the rest of the SEC matches up to them this year. This past weekend, IMO, showed more of how good Alabama was rather than what state our team is in (which is better than average B1G, nowhere near nationally elite).
September 4th, 2012 at 9:45 AM ^
I think this Alabama team is indeed the best one. The 1991 FSU team is probably #2. A few others some others (not mentioned yet) that might come close are 1994 Penn State, 1991 Washington, and 2001 Tennessee. SUNY-Columbus has also had a number of teams that might qualify.
September 4th, 2012 at 9:53 AM ^
I forgot about them. That's a good pick. They were an excellent team.
September 4th, 2012 at 11:00 AM ^
I was beginning to wonder if anybody was going to mention that Huskies Rose Bowl team.
September 4th, 2012 at 9:51 AM ^
Alabama is a really good team this year (and last) however I believe some Michigan teams in the past could take them like the 97 squad.
The 97 squad had a better defense - Steel, Sword, Woodson, Hendricks, Hall, Jones, Peterson, Gold were all NFLers.
September 4th, 2012 at 10:00 AM ^
I would take Michigan 97 over Bama 2012, 7-3 on a Woodson pick 6. Don't think Lloyd would take to many shots down the field like we did last Saturday.
September 4th, 2012 at 2:36 PM ^
man I don't know. I am not saying that the 1997 team was not a very, very good team, but Alabama means business. 97 was pre-BCS, and while Washington State was no push over (and OSU and PSU good teams as well), there was not a measuring stick that year as to just how good Michigan was as compared to the rest of the country, in particular the South. I love me some 97, but I have watched a lof of college football in my day and let's just say that 2012 Alabama would give 1997 Michigan all they could handle (or maybe more appropriately said the other way around). Bama was all kinds of fast, everywhere on the field.
September 4th, 2012 at 3:17 PM ^
It's a total homer pick. That being said, I think that 97 defense translates to any era, and while it's really reaching, if there is one critique of Bama, it's that they don't have explosive playmakers to stretch the field....or at least they don't use them that often.
Now maybe it's that Saban doesn't need to take shots down the field because he knows he can get 7 yards a carry grinding it out. But that would not be the case against the 97 defensive front, and if we could get them passing, I like my chances with Woodson led secondary vs. a game manager QB like McCarron.
But you are right. Bama is absolutely loaded.
September 4th, 2012 at 9:55 AM ^
I would have said no, because last year I thought Bama's offense was so-so. I still think it is not the level of USC 2006, but that defense .... woah. Those guys came in like it was Tuesday at the office, and just executed with very few mistakes. They clearly did not overlook us, and Nick Saban put a heck of a gameplan together.
To me the funny thing is the all so polite fans were taunting us with S-E-C, S-E-C, when I think they should just be shout ROLL TIDE, or ALABAMA. Most of the SEC looks good but flawed and therefore beatable with a decent game plan and execution. Alabama was impressive.
It will be interesting to see if a team like USC can keep it close, cause some mistakes and beat Alabama. But they don't have the dual threat at QB. If our offense had more game time under their belts, and Denard could connect on more of his passes / Devin could haul them in, it would have opened the game up more. Enough? Not without a similar near flawless game by our defense.
Bottom line: end of season (with the injury caveat), this game looks different and we at least feel better coming out of it. After playing a few warm ups, maybe a little better. We just weren't ready, because practicing against each other, is nothing like playing a hard hitting team at full speed. I am glad by the way that the coaching staff "blooded" some of the Freshment. They will remember that experience and draw on it down the road.
So, long story short, this is the best team, that was fully prepared, we have come up against in a long time. (I think the '69 Buckeyes did not mentally prepare like Bama did. I also think the 2006 Wolverines did not mentally prepare for USC like Bama did.)
September 4th, 2012 at 11:37 AM ^
This.
This Alabama team executed to near perfection (Some penalties, but whatever). The rest of the SEC... ehh not so much. They might have some talent, but from watching most of the SEC games this week (it is week 1, so we'll see how it changes), they do not look to be near even Michigan's level of play.
With this experience, I have no doubt we're going to come out even stronger and possibly dominate the rest of the schedule. We've seen what it's like to play against the best, and if we can mentally raise our level, there is nobody left on the schedule to match it.
September 4th, 2012 at 9:56 AM ^
The first Rose Bowl vs Washington in 91, I think
This Bama game
And Syracuse in 98. That was one of the worst games I ever witnessed at Michigan Stadium
September 4th, 2012 at 10:05 AM ^
That was the one game that I kept thinking of. It seemed like Washington just dominiated Michigan on both sides of the ball. Howard could do nothing, and the d-line seemed to be in the backfield all game. Washington won a share of the national title that year.
September 4th, 2012 at 9:07 PM ^
September 4th, 2012 at 10:04 AM ^
I remember that game well because we got absolutely smoked -- at the Big House, no less. It was another game that felt "over" before most people had even found their seats.
As it turned out, we had a pretty good season in '91, FSU notwithstanding. That's why I'm not yet particularly worried about Team 133. Now, if AFA gives us trouble (if it's even all that "close" regardless of the scoreboard) then I might feel a bit more uncomfortable than I do right now.
September 4th, 2012 at 10:04 AM ^
That 1998 Syracuse team went 8-4, I believe. They matched up well against Michigan during our Jim Hermann-doesn't-worry-about-mobile-QBs phase and caught us during our national championship hangover, but I don't think they merit consideration as one of our greatest all-time opponents.
September 4th, 2012 at 10:16 AM ^
We need to differentiate between 1 game beatdowns and truly great opponents. Often the two are not mutually exclusive because obviously great teams tend to inflict beatdowns more often.
However, 1 game outliers, bad matchups, karma-luck, or simply laying an egg can all lead to an epic beatdown without the presence of a truly great team. Syracuse 98 was a case mostly of a bad matchup. Alabama 2012, given recent history and NFL talent on the team, is a case of a truly great team dishing out a brutal beatdown.
September 4th, 2012 at 10:00 PM ^
Bama didn't give us everything they had. It almost seemed to me like they shut it down a bit in the second half out of respect for the game and the circumstances. Seemed to me like they could have scored at will and just ran the time down and put up a kick here and there to avoid injury and not piss us off just incase. Saban might be a dick, but it sure seemed like he wanted to coach a season opener rather than an asswhoppin against a team like Michigan. That's my take from it right or wrong I could care less. It's what I saw Saturday.
September 4th, 2012 at 10:05 AM ^
I was at the Big House as a flabbergasted UM undergrad. They beat us good at home, and we were a quality team. Terrell Buckley INT returned for an early pick 6 set the tone for this game.
Some interesting tidbits about this game:
(1) We played HOME against Florida St. We never traveled to Tallahassee to reciprocate, at least to my knowledge. This was a bygone era of being able to draw big-time non-conference opponents without having to play at a neutral site or sign up for a home & home series. Strange.
(2) WHY, CANHAM/SCHEMBECHLER/WEIDENBACH (don't know what AD of this era scheduled the game!) DID YOU SCHEDULE THIS GAME AGAINST A VASTLY SUPERIOR TEAM?
I may correct myself to say 'Bama '12 >> FSU '91...we'll see how the season shakes out. Washington '91 was also a phenomenal opponent on both sides of the ball.
September 4th, 2012 at 10:21 AM ^
Was trying to prove themselves as a national power. (People forget not that long before it was a woman's college). And Bowden wisely took the method of playing anyone, anytime, anyplace, because he knew his conference sucked. So they'd go to places beat them, grab some sod for their "graveyard" to take back with them, and show they were for real.
September 4th, 2012 at 11:27 AM ^
I believe that FSU was an independent back then.
September 4th, 2012 at 12:08 PM ^
But didn't start playing ACC teams till 1992. So they had a mismoshed schedule. And still lost to the other two Florida teams.
September 4th, 2012 at 12:24 PM ^
...I think you're right. FSU was a free agent team, so getting them to Ann Arbor wasn't as big a deal as today's super-conference logistical nightmares. Thx for the memory refresher.
September 4th, 2012 at 10:23 AM ^
Michigan used to play multiple big-time non-conference opponents every couple of years. For example, in '88 they played at ND and then played Miami (FL) at home the next week. The 1991 schedule included not only ND and FSU but also a game at Boston College.