Michigan All Time Greats on Rivals (free)
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.
Braylon definitely was not here in 2007 or 2006.
Also the fact that Jeremy Gallon isn't anywhere on that list is complete bullshit.
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 Nick Sheridan?
Complete nonsense
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.
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.
tear anyone down, I would easily put Grbac ahead of both Brady and Henne, but for seperate reasons. Brady, because he's on the top list primarily for his NFL accomplishments. Henne, though he was a four year starter which began as a true freshman, I cannot overlook the fact that as a senior he led his team to defeat against Appy State. This is not to tear Henne down, it is an objective fact, Henne was the man with the reins when Michigan suffered its most humiliating defeat ever.
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.
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.
just two TDs after the first Q meant they were always playing catch up from the middle of the 2nd Q on. Seriously, when your D intercepts the ball and gives it to the O on the Div 2 opponents 40 yard line you're supposed to score a TD instead of being satisfied with a FG. Go back and read the 2nd half drive analysis, the Michigan offense was putrid. Three and outs, four and outs, five and outs, two failed 2pt conversions, interceptions, poor passing. The best drive Michigan had in the 2nd half was a one play Mike Hart 54 yard TD run.
There's enough blame to go around but the discussion was about QBs, if Henne and his offense hadn't stunk up the Big House on 9/1/07 we're not now having this discussion.
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.
Cutting the "best" down to four or five is ridiculous. It's more clickbait by Rivals than anything else.
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.