Rivals has a nice series called "Mount Rushmore Michigan" that is free. It rates and talks about the top five all time at each position plus the ones who just missed. So far they have RB, QB and WR.
Michigan All Time Greats on Rivals (free)
Braylon definitely was not here in 2007 or 2006.
Also the fact that Jeremy Gallon isn't anywhere on that list is complete bullshit.
You just can't see him
Yeah . . . What a joke of an article. Braylon left after 2004 with the Biletnikoff in hand and a 3rd pick in the NFL draft to the Browns. Who writes this crap? And, further more, who fact checks it?
No Justin Feagan?
No Nick Sheridan?
Ya and Denard wasn't there from '04-'07 lol. I think Henne was a really great QB but I would have put Robinson there instead of Henne. Denard had the most total offense in Michigan history, was a once in a generation athlete to watch, and also basically kept the program relavent during some really bad years. Also, Denard at least beat OSU once.
watched both play for four years and both are fantastic, but I'd take Denard any day of the week and I think he had a better career.
Henne was playing better OSU squads though.
Man, I am having a hard time with the A-Train not earning a spot on the RB list, but Wheatley, Hart, Lytle and Johnson were all quite good indeed. The quarterback list actually makes a little more sense to me although Grbac - in my estimation - might have a good argument just from a production standpoint alone, never mind the 4 Big Ten titles.
I don't wan't to tear anyone down while bringing someone up so I will just say this, Grbac probably should be on the top list. 4 Big Ten titles.
What's a big ten title?
Crap. Pure Crap. The years are all wrong. Braylon, Denard. Perry and another RB don't even have years.
These types of lists always lead to some interesting discussion, but they always seem to have some flaws. I find the logic in the "Tom Brady" argument particluarly odd - we "cannot exclude his NFL accomplishemnts". Well, ok, I guess . . . so what about David Terrell??? Me thinks his NFL "accomplishments" might take him off the list. Oh well, its summer. Gotta write about something.
Tom Brady should be off and Benny Friedman should be on.
Three are not really debatable in my opinion. AC, Desmond, and Braylon. After that there is nice list to choose from. Terrell was pretty dominant in college. I'm amazed still that he missed in NFL. Yes Gallon should at least be on the discussion list.
The App State game was 90 percent the defenses' fault. He also lead us to a # 2 national ranking in 2006 and a few plays away from the NCG.
The defense couldn't stop them, but the O-line never had control of that game against a much smaller D-line - Hart had that one big run and other than that had no room to work with all day. Henne missed several routine throws that he'd been making the previous season and would make later that season. It was just an all-around awful performance from virtually everyone playing.
WIDE RECEIVERS - Perfect. Those 4 were truly the best. There's no way to argue with those picks.
QUARTERBACKS - This is where it could get messy. Leach and Harbaugh belong on there, no questions asked. Brady is given bonus points because of the NFL career (which really shouldn't count) but I'd take the 99 version of him being the comeback king. As far as college career goes, I would take Elvis Grbac over Brady. We played brutally tough schedules in his day - Notre Dame was an elite program at the time, Florida State, Boston College, Washington teams in the Rose Bowl led by QB Mark Brunell, plus we won big ten titles every year he was here and we never lost to Ohio State.
I think I like Chad Henne being on there with Denard just off the list. Please don't shoot me. Denard was likable, electric, and ran for an insane amount of yards. But the 40 interceptions keeps him down. I was scared to death every time he passed the ball.
If Drew Henson came back in 2001 and continued doing the kind of stuff he did the previous year, I would have to put him on there. I still maintain that he's the most all around talented QB we have had in my lifetime.
RUNNING BACKS: Wasn't alive to see Lytle and Johnson but their stats speak for themselves. Wheatley had to be on there. With the record, I have no problem with Hart being on there but I think Jamie Morris had some qualities that were more pleasing to watch. He was about the same size as Hart but with more speed. Whenever he got tackled, he almost always seemed to fall forward and get a couple extra yards. He ran the "long ball" more often while Hart had a ton of 10-15 yard runs through his career. They all added up in the end but Jamie's style was more fun to watch.
...national championship. But that's just like my opinion.
Tough to argue against a QB that brings home a National Championship.
Who can forget Touchdown Timmy Biakabutuka. Shredding Ohio's defense at Michigan Stadium for over 300 yards in a blow out win made the world seem right. Chris Perry and Hurryian Harlan Huckleby were not too bad either.
The link below is fukn glorious and where we need to get back to.
Cutting the "best" down to four or five is ridiculous. It's more clickbait by Rivals than anything else.
Have to beat OSU to make any top list. All he did was beat his gums.
And run for more yards than anyone else ever has in this program
going forward, so that kind of eliminates Tom Harmon, whose number is actually worn by our current starting qb. Don't understand how you diminish the status of the
A-Train inalso rans and ignore Harmon, age of play notwithstanding. He is part of college football's Mount Rushmore, not just Michigan lore, legend and records.
You either acknowledge greatness or just prentend there are consequences for celebrating it. Age isn't one of those consequences.
It's like claiming Babe Ruth's record doesn't count because it wasn't in this era of our recognitiion and Aaron and Bonds chase to succeed him only matters becuase they surpassed his historical numbers even if they contain asterisks. You play when you play regardless of when we watch.
Harmon has to matter. He and Charles Woodson matter because they won Heismans, which automatically put them in a different category.
And Thomas is only discounted careerwise because he was a freshman in a championship year in which he didn't get as many carries because of that.
And so if achievement is recognized over ability why is Drew Henson still getting the benefit of the doubt when he left early? I guess you could say he was special like No. 2. But the man whose career he is inexorably linked with suffered productionwise and careerwise because of him. And Henson never got his team to a BCS bowl like his contemporaries, Brady and Griese who both won their only opportunities.
I agree with Henne in the Top four because of his production, but why is John Navarre left off the list completely, because he wasn't as popular and couldn't run?. And if passing is the primary criteria, why is Denard listed last because his work outdistanced Henson as well and rivaled him in the only category that Henson challenged any other qb on the all-time list, 7.93 yard average per play.
The problem with listing all-time greats is having so many who fit the bill. Brady gets
greater shine in hindsight because of his pro career than his time at Michigan allowed. Still, he belongs. But Denard should be higher and Navarre needs to be on the list, because he set a bundle of records all because Henson left early.