Expectations for football in the future
In the Schlissel on athletics thread there was a comment about us basically only competing for a national title once every ten years under Carr which is true.
My question is, why is that good enough? Why do we invest more money than only a few other athletic programs on football only to not get the return they do?
I also post on Michigan's 247 site, and here is a comment the other day that I found slightly depressing in terms of our coaches vs OSU's coaches:
Ohio State's succession of coaches is freaking incredible. 1. Woody Hayes: won 3 National Championships and 13 Big Ten Championships in 28 years
2. Earle Bruce: played for 1 National Championship but choked in Rose Bowl to Stanford / won 4 Big Ten Championships in 9 years / was fired for basically not being Woody.
3. John Cooper: built 3 National Championship caliber teams (1995, 1996, and 1998) but all choked / won 3 Big Ten Championships in 13 years.
4. Jim Tressel: won 1 National Championship (2002) / played for 2 more (2006, 2007) / won 7 Big Ten titles in 10 years.
5. Luke Fickell: 1 year - lulz
6. Urban Meyer: now 32-3 at Ohio State. won 2 division titles, will win 3rd. No conference titles so far though.
By comparison, Michigan went from Schembechler to Moeller to Carr but then things fell off.
Also, worth pointing out that Ohio State played for the National Championship in 1954, 1957, 1968, 1975, 1979, 2002, 2006, and 2007. That's 9 times. Ohio State has won 4 out of the 9.
Clarification: "played for a National Championship" means had the #1 or #2 ranking in a premier bowl game and could therefore win. (Hence, I left out the teams that were national championship caliber but suffered a loss that prevented them from playing for a national Championship - for instance the 1996 OSU team was 10-0 and #2 going into the Michigan game. The loss dropped OSU to #4 and OSU didn't get a chance to play for the title.)
Meanwhile Michigan has played for only 1 National Championship in the last 65 years - 1997 - and won. So we're 1-for-1. Woot! We're batting 1.000! F*** us. Schembechler was a choker. Carr is spelled with a capital C for conservative. Rich Rod sucked here. Brady Hoke is the Bump Elliott of this era but arguably worse.
I'm still waiting for our John McKay / Bear Bryant / Barry Switzer / Tom Osborne / Bobby Bowden / Pete Carroll / Nick Saban..ya know...the guy that will leads us to multiple national championships in his tenure. COME HOME JIMMY!
So while saying going back to the Carr years seems great with that we're seeing now, I have not forgotten what actually happened. We lost early nonconference games every year to put us out of the national title picture. Then we lost a big ten game in the middle somewhere. And then top it off with an annual loss to Tressel.
Now instead of Tressel we are dealing with Urban who just like Tressel is one of the best coaches in the nation. If we don't get someone that can compete with Urban we are going to be watching the same thing we did 7+ years ago only we have to deal with Dantonio now too.
With the money and resources we have the only thing stopping Michigan from going toe to toe with OSU is Michigan.
November 11th, 2014 at 2:46 PM ^
I concur.
November 11th, 2014 at 1:47 PM ^
I know it's always easy to blame it on coaching but I think it's more on who's hiring the coach. When you hire a coach with MAC experience only with a sub .500 record, you're just not going after the right people. And while RichRod was a good coach, someone had to realize he just wouldn't fit in this program. So for me, all eyes will be on this AD search
November 11th, 2014 at 2:02 PM ^
They lose their scandalous sweatervest, and UM's kryptonite, and replaced him with a two time national championship coach who's 50 years old... And as long as he has his quarterback... err I mean is in good health, he won't be leaving any time soon.
November 11th, 2014 at 2:12 PM ^
Urban Meyer going to OSU was an incredible stroke of luck. How often is a two-time national title winner just sitting around doing nothing right when an elite program has a coaching vacancy? It was an obvious move and as usual, OSU benefitted from their own misconduct.
November 11th, 2014 at 4:18 PM ^
Ain't it a bitch? OSU and USC both get hit with NCAA sanctions and are already back to a better place than Michigan is, OSU a much better place. Penn State should have been nuked to the Stone Age and, barring a Harbaugh hire, I'll wager they're fully "back" before Michigan as well. All Michigan did was <insert whatever your version is of "How we got here">...
November 11th, 2014 at 2:27 PM ^
If Rich Rod "wouldn't fit in this program," it's the program that needed to change. That was the entire fucking point of hiring Rich Rod: to update the program and pull it into the 21st century. Unfortunately, the "culture" didn't want to change. So now we are back to LC's last few years, but even worse: a "culture" of mediocrity.
I definitely agree with one thing the OP said: nothing is holding back Michigan except Michigan. It is time to clean house. It is time that the program with the best tradition and resources in college football started putting a product on the field that reflects those resources and tradition.
November 11th, 2014 at 2:53 PM ^
November 11th, 2014 at 3:17 PM ^
I agree that the point of hiring Rich Rod was to modernize Michigan football, and I still think it should've been a good hire. But when your new head coach knows nothing of the traditions at an institution where tradition is literally the only thing keeping us relevant, you have to realize that might cause a problem with alumni, former players, coaches, and others in the athletic department. I agree that it was a culture problem, and it's tough to change the culture. It's up to the AD to notice these potential problems, and Martin did not do so, which is the point I was trying to make.
November 11th, 2014 at 5:10 PM ^
what traditions that make michigan relevant did rich rod not keep? people talk about this somewhat often, but i don't really know what they're referring to...
November 11th, 2014 at 10:25 PM ^
Only one: not winning lots of football games each season. All the other justifications offered are just window-dressing bullshit by people who aren't honest enough to admit the truth.
If he'd won more games, the vast majority of Michigan fans would love his folksy ways.
November 11th, 2014 at 9:03 PM ^
This culture of Bo discipleship is definitely obliterating this program. Canning Richrod and going back to "Big Boy" football? It was the stupidest thing I ever heard.
We do have the resources, we have the facilities, hell we even have the personnel out there to get the job done. It's just seems that there are people who have more influence than they should who are holding this program back. . .
November 11th, 2014 at 1:47 PM ^
We get it...Ohio is the paradigm and they are better than we are at this moment. Enough.
November 11th, 2014 at 1:51 PM ^
I would say they've been better a lot more often than just ''at this moment''.
November 11th, 2014 at 2:07 PM ^
Well then you're incapable of simple arithmetic.
November 11th, 2014 at 2:10 PM ^
What does that even mean? I'm pretty sure any fan that is not a blind homer can tell that they have been better than us for the majority of the last 20 years.
November 11th, 2014 at 2:14 PM ^
Okay, well the majority of the last 20 years is 11 years. Yes, a ton of programs have been better than us 11 of the last 20 years. It's not hard to do when we've sucked horribly for the last 7. Based on the post you cited, I figured you were talking about a longer time period.
November 11th, 2014 at 9:05 PM ^
long ass moment. . .
November 11th, 2014 at 1:47 PM ^
Jim or bust right now. It's all or nothing in my mind.
November 11th, 2014 at 1:47 PM ^
Well, first and foremost we really need to drop the "must be a Michigan Man" criteria. Knowing the words to "the Victors" does not a good coach make. With Dave Brandon out of the picture, I think we are less likely to use that as a requirement. Why else would a coach who had one good year at Ball State and one moderately good year at SDSU be coaching Michigan? Hoke had Ball State performing below their historical average for awhile there.
Astounding.
November 11th, 2014 at 1:48 PM ^
November 11th, 2014 at 2:11 PM ^
that peppers will transfer. if he does he will automatically have to sit out ANOTHER season, and will not have played football for effectively two seasons. i doubt that is what a seemingly intelligent and future oriented person would do.
November 11th, 2014 at 1:48 PM ^
for the younger guys like me who never got to see Bo's teams.
Sent from MGoBlog HD for iPhone & iPad
November 11th, 2014 at 3:59 PM ^
It would be insane to take a flyer when the $85 million annual football cash flow is at risk of decline. It's the #3 revenue stream in college football*. It needs to be protected with a proven, elite hire, not taken for granted with a cheap hire.
*Michigan is listed at #2 in football revenue ($85.0mm) and #3 in total athletic department revenue ($128.8mm), but I'm guessing that there's some revenue classification issue that puts OSU at #11 in football revenue ($58.2mm) but #2 in total athletic department revenue ($142.0mm), so I count OSU as #2 and Michigan as #3.
http://www.businessinsider.com/the-25-schools-that-make-the-most-money-…
November 11th, 2014 at 1:49 PM ^
Cliffnotes:
1.Ohio State is sooo much better than Michigan!
2. We need a better coach.
November 11th, 2014 at 1:56 PM ^
but we haven't had any tatoo scandals!
November 11th, 2014 at 9:27 PM ^
November 11th, 2014 at 9:25 PM ^
November 11th, 2014 at 1:53 PM ^
Yes, he lost a lot of bowl games (largely home games for a OPAC 10 opponent). Look at them individually though, and you'll see many were coin flips. Much like Carr needed a lucky break against Iowa to win the NC, Bo needed a couple too and never really got one. The Michigan teams from '69 to 89 enjoyed as good a run as any in the era. Period.
As for your original question, we need to be in the top 10 aobut 50 to 75 percent of the time. this gives us genuine near-end-of-season hope of being in the playoff about 1 year in 3.
November 11th, 2014 at 2:06 PM ^
I'm old enough to remember a lot of people complaining about Bo losing bowl games. I don't think he much cared about them or rankings- he cared about winning the Big 10 and beating ohio. Bowls and rankings were side-dishes, not the main course.
November 11th, 2014 at 2:18 PM ^
So why did he not care about Bowl games but Woody did?
November 11th, 2014 at 2:38 PM ^
Bo winning a lot of games against the Big Ten and losing a lot of bowl games. Saying you don't care about winning it all only serves to lower your expectations, thus making it easier to feel good about yourself when you do moderately well.
November 11th, 2014 at 9:30 PM ^
November 11th, 2014 at 1:53 PM ^
If having the same win/loss success as ohio means accepting all the other nonsense that goes on in that program (Clarett, tatoogate, "I ain't come here to play skool"), then no thanks.
I'm decidedly NOT one of those "winning is the only thing that matters" fans, and I'm glad to see that the president of the university seems to feel the same way.
November 11th, 2014 at 1:54 PM ^
The reality of it is that our expectation year in and year out is not a national championship. It is to beat our rivals and play for the B1G championship....which we are not very good at doing.
November 11th, 2014 at 1:54 PM ^
November 11th, 2014 at 1:59 PM ^
Yeah, because he ran such a clean program at USC. He's been good in Seattle, but he bailed out of USC right as he was about to get severely whacked for violations.
November 11th, 2014 at 2:05 PM ^
The "played for a championship" thing is bullshit. Michigan was undefeated before their last game in 1970, 1971, 1972, 1973, and 1974. The fact that the AP had them #3 or #4 instead of #2 really doesn't make it any less impressive. It just makes it a neater fit for your/the poster's argument.
November 11th, 2014 at 2:14 PM ^
No, you just didn't read it right. He was talking about going into the bowl game at #1 or #2 not the OSU game.
In 1970, 72, 73, and 74 we didn't go to bowl games.
In 1971 we were #4 and undefeated but Nebraska and Alabama were #1 and #2 and also undefeated. Nebraska won the national title and we lost to an 8-3 Stanford. team.
November 11th, 2014 at 2:16 PM ^
Okay, who cares? Why is finishing #3 or #4 in the country significantly different from finishing #2 or having the chance to finish #1? It's a stupid criterion specifically intended to carve out Bo's best season's and highlight Woody's best seasons.
November 11th, 2014 at 2:28 PM ^
What do you mean? It means that Woody managed to actually get past The Game with a chance to win a national title which Bo rarely did.
November 11th, 2014 at 3:46 PM ^
If the point of your post is that OSU has had superior coaching over the last ten years, nobody disputes that. If your point is that OSU historically has had better coaching, it simply isn't supported by the numbers.
Since Bo, both schools have 21 conference titles and one national title. We have three more top-ten finishes and one more bowl victory.
November 11th, 2014 at 9:33 PM ^
November 11th, 2014 at 2:03 PM ^
Harbaugh for AD and HC? Who wouldn't want to be their own boss?
November 11th, 2014 at 2:02 PM ^
Yeah Bo didn't win the championships that some of the other greats did and that weighs on his record but since then ohio state has only been slightly more relevant on the national stage, can't call bo a choker and then think Cooper was good, hell carr was better than cooper. Also you say other programs put in less money and get better results which programs would that be? Osu puts in more so not them, how many programs over the last 40 years have had periods were they were competitive for national championships more than once every 8-10 years? You've had teams with good 5 year stretches but then they go 10-15 with nothing. You just have unrealistic expectations of what a program should look like.
November 11th, 2014 at 2:05 PM ^
Historically at Michigan it is winning 3 out of 4 games each season. So at least 9/10 wins every year. That is what a program should look like. You do that and the championships will come.
November 11th, 2014 at 2:15 PM ^
Alabama, Miami, Florida State, USC, OSU, Oklahoma, Nebraska, Notre Dame, Texas?
November 11th, 2014 at 4:18 PM ^
9/10 wins a season doesn't equal fighting for a national championship most years which is what the OP wanted and for the schools you listed. I'll even ignore since before 1990 since that is pretty much what everyone is doing anyways.
Since 1990 Michigan has had 8 seasons over 10 wins and a national championship.
Alabama has had 13 (some were vacated due to sanctions, and 5 of them have come in the last 5 years) and 3 national champioships. They are the cream of the crop and the only team that comes even close to what the OP wants and even still their 5 year stretch nicely covers over that they were bad and missed bowl games in multiple years in the ealry 2000's and at times in the 90's.
Miami has 8 seasons with over 10 wins and 2 national championships and have had 2 seaons with over 8 wins since 2006 which is a worse stretch than michigan is currently in. They also have missed bowl games in both the 90's and 2000's
Florida State has 15 seasons with 10 wins or more and 3 national championships. They also have not missed a bowl game since 90, probably the most consistent team of the period.
I'm bored and this is already long enough to prove my point. While Michigan hasn't been great recently the expectations expected by the OP are insane. The most successful programs of the last 20+ years still have "only" 3 national championships, which comes out to about once every 8-10 years. Expecting more than that is insanity.
November 11th, 2014 at 4:58 PM ^
I do not nor did I say I expect a national championship every few years. That is ridiculous. What isn't ridiculous is competing for national championships for a long stretch which all of those programs did and Michigan did not. And by competing for national championship I mean being ranked in the top 5 at the end of November with a chance to make the national championship and winning 11-12 games. That is what puts those programs above Michigan is that they have more 11 and 12 win seasons.
November 12th, 2014 at 12:27 AM ^