Reality Check - UM Football Has Been Mediocre by "Blue Blood" Standards ...for 20 Years
Preface: (a) I am prepared for the downvotes and hate messages and (b) this has little to do with the Penn State game and more to do with the now years of sweating out games with the likes of UConn / Akron and knowing a typical game versus a program like Purdue or Illinois is now a sweat it out game with a >35%+ chance of a loss.
I cannot remember the last time we had a servicable OL that did not require a superman QB to create offense. I am sure it was 2007 but it sickens me to see we have a MAC level OL - whatever the age - with an All American holding down 1 of the 5 spots, and a theoretical NFL pick at another. It sickens me that this is not a 1 year issue, or a 3 year but with the youth of 2014 will be a year 7 issue. At Michigan.
We have let the Big 10 down, and our biggest rival down. It is not just since Rich Rod got here, but aside from one special season, and a few other very nice ones, UM football has been quite "average" (I don't know the right adjective and I know the board police will attack whichever adjective I use so insert your own) not for 6 years but 20 versus our "pedigree". 5 Big 10 titles, outright or shared in 20 years. Wisconsin has more in that time.
Being a statistic geek I took a look at the top programs in all time wins, excluded the Harvard/Yales and added in Florida and we don't compare very well at all for the past 20 years. By that I mean 0, 1, or 2 loss seasons. [i.e. my ARBITRARY signal of what would indicate you have a pretty damn elite team, allowing for 1 screwup a year - it's a basic eye test, not science] We have been consistently meh (insert your adjective here) - and well below our rival OSU who both share a very average conference for about a decade now. We laugh at Notre Dame here on so many levels but frankly we have become Notre Dame North. For comparison sake, the previous 20 year period, we had 13 seasons of 2 losses or less; we had an elite program.
Since 1993, the # of years UM has lost less than 3 games: 4.
We sit here on our boards and so many are all high and mighty and mock Notre Dame. Yes they have only had 2 of less than 3 losses in 20 years. Somehow they have been even worse. But what a lame yardstick at this point. Hey we are better than Charlie Weiss and Bob Davie - yippee.
Our rival? They are making us look pathetic. OSU with 12 years of 2 losses or less.
- PSU with a "over the hill Paterno": 6
- Nebraska: 8
- Texas: 7
- Oklahoma: 7
- USC* (*cheaters): 9
- Florida: 11
- Georgia: 5
- Tennessee: 6
- Bama: 6
Aside from consistency over 20 years most of the teams above had 4-5 year periods of super elite status where they were "dominant", before cycling back down. Unfortunately while we got our 1 NC, we also have not had that sort of "consistent elite/feared for a # of years". Georgia is probably the only other one along with our friends in South Bend.
Our recruiting classes have, aside for maybe 2-3 years out of 20 been consistently top 10ish. We tsk tsk at Texas for doing less with more but the reality is many of us (myself included) are living in glass houses as we have been doing the same.... or one could argue less with the same.
I get caught up in the day to day and week to week analysis as much as anyone, but when you really sit back and look at the big picture it has been a relatively mediocre era, thankfully to a degree covered up by a supernova in 1997. Just very frustrating to analyze and compare to what Ohio is doing - we are not in the same conversation anymore. Hopefully our "cycle" comes soon (latter 2010s) but it's been a long time waiting for it.
October 14th, 2013 at 9:30 AM ^
October 14th, 2013 at 9:36 AM ^
You are correct. However, this conversation still does not look favorable to Michigan if you go 5, 10, 15, or 20 years. That is the problem.
October 14th, 2013 at 10:18 AM ^
October 14th, 2013 at 11:20 AM ^
Um, osu still wins on more success if you go back 25 years.
October 14th, 2013 at 3:40 PM ^
October 14th, 2013 at 9:34 AM ^
This whole OP is stupid but the line that pissed me off the most was "we have let our biggest rival down". Aside from how asinine that statement is, even if it were true, over the past 20 years we are at (or maybe 1 game below, I'm not sure) .500 against Ohio. What they accomplished under Tressel was just to get them back to treading water after how we owned John Cooper's teams.
October 14th, 2013 at 9:38 AM ^
fuck ohio
October 14th, 2013 at 9:42 AM ^
Michigan fans cannot keep living in the past. Hoke BARELY beat a wounded OSU team with sanctions and no long term head coach in the big house in '11. Yes, we owned Cooper. I was also a child when that happened.
Where are the recent results? I am not saying fire Hoke or even Borges. Where is the accountability from fans? Players overall are not the problem (this is college, not the pros). It is play calling, player development, adjustments, and game planning that has cost this team winnable games in the last few years. Fans need to realize that.
October 14th, 2013 at 9:58 AM ^
I wasnt even mad, bc he's 100% correct. It seems most people associated with UM are ok with going 8-4 every year. This has truly been a mediocre program. Maybe not for the last 20 years, but definitely the last 10.
October 14th, 2013 at 10:02 AM ^
What do you mean by "accountablity from fans?" That seems like a pretty strange concept.
Seems to me that the team is either going to play well, or not play well, irrespective of what some fan thinks.
October 14th, 2013 at 10:50 AM ^
Demand more from your team, staff, AD. Most M fans donate, pay big dollars, and spend time and effort to support this team at home and on the road. They deserve better and should demand more...but they don't. They are turning into Lion fans where they just sit back and bitch and complain.
October 14th, 2013 at 11:30 AM ^
I still don't follow. The bitching and complaining seems to follow logically from a team having failed to meet whatever "demands a fan has placed upon it.
October 14th, 2013 at 1:53 PM ^
Donations stop + Attendance goes downhill = changes get done. That simple.
Some people will go to the Big House every single Saturday and that is fine. But when the product you pay for does not meet YOUR standards (and even standards set by the school/team themselves) then it is not worth it.
I understand this is a drastic measure to some but why fire Matt Millen when fans still go to the games and spend money? It took Ford Field to become empty before change happened. DB starts losing money...he makes a few phone calls (Borges, Hoke, others).
College football is already heading toward the pro game...so DB better be ready to handle the consequences of high ticket prices if your product is not good. As a recent alum I do not want to be dropping hundreds of dollars (maybe 1-2 thousand + parking + time) for a team that goes 8-4 year in and year out. Yes, blame the younger generation but that is our mindset. We have no loyalty to brands. If a new phone company came with a better phone all those iphone lovers would have no problem bailing. I love Michigan and Michigan Football but for what they ask me to pay/donate I expect a certain standard.
October 14th, 2013 at 4:54 PM ^
Well, thank you for providing that explanation. I can now at least understand where you are coming from, even if I don't have the same perspective.
October 14th, 2013 at 7:45 PM ^
dump the good seats I've had since I graduated in 1993 to induce DB into putting a better product on the field and then when they get better, get back on the waiting list to try and get 6 seats again together. Ummmm....No. Sorry. You should totally do it though!!! Make a stand!!!
October 14th, 2013 at 10:07 AM ^
Why do you think the Big 10 has such a pathetic world view the past 10 years? Because Ohio is the only one carrying the flag for the conference at the highest level. Michigan has not. If anything Wisconsin has been carrying it for Michigan for nearly a decade now.
The rivalry will always be there even when one team is down. Not going to change. But even Earl Bruce said after one of the games of the RR era (2008 or 2010 - dont remember which) he was dismayed with what he saw here. That is in the past but when UM was beating OSU in the Carr v Cooper era, many (not all, and not early in the Cooper era) Cooper was usually bringing in elite OSU teams with 0 or 1 losses and we were beating them... with our 3-4 loss teams. Compare that to what has been happening lately (save 2011). It is a let down to the rivalry IMO. Just as there has been times OSU has been a letdown to the rivalry - albeit the last time on a sustained basis was the early Cooper years.
October 14th, 2013 at 9:56 AM ^
lack of line coaching and lack of a real leader since Carr
October 14th, 2013 at 10:00 AM ^
This reeks of a familiar strawman made by other teams' fans. Who is seriously still unaware that UM has underperformed lately? Did you know that M has only won one MNC in the last 50 years? AMAZING. I am really bummed about this "reality check," as it totally tempers my "Why Fitz Will Win the Heisman" diary.
October 14th, 2013 at 10:05 AM ^
October 14th, 2013 at 10:14 AM ^
Which number would you use for sustained excellence in a season? Feel free to use 1 loss or 0 losses if you wish. UM will fare worse in those analysis. I chose 2 losses as an elite team with 0-1 losses can stumble somewhere on their schedule and have a 2nd loss and/or come up against a tough team in a bowl game and go from say 11-1 to 11-2.
I am trying to find the # of seasons over the past 20 any team could be considered excellent. You can't use 0 as it would exclude most teams in the nation. You can't use 3 or 4 as those are not excellent seasons for a blue blood program. So that leaves you with 1 or 2. I chose 2. Feel free to run the analysis with 1 and get back to me. It's the same or worse for UM.
October 14th, 2013 at 10:18 AM ^
Well Alabama has been mediocre for a good majority of the past 20 years
October 14th, 2013 at 10:07 AM ^
I don't mind losses, but sometimes I get annoyed by the "way" we lose... i.e., getting too conservative at the end of the game because we're playing to not lose instead of to win.
Other than that, I, honestly, don't have any complaints and I will be a loyal Michigan supporter (and I'm going to keep writing checks and supporting the team, the team, the team).
October 14th, 2013 at 10:17 AM ^
Overall record from 1990-present - 205-92-3, .688 win %
Overall Big Ten record since 1990 - 130-54-2, .707
Overall record vs. rivals (OSU, ND, MSU) since 1990 - 34-29-2
Gary Moeller overall record (1990-1994) - 44-13-3, .758
Gary Moeller Big Ten record - 30-8-2, .775
Gary Moeller record vs. rivals - 7-5-2, .571
Lloyd Carr record overall (1995-2007) - 122-40, .753
Lloyd Carr Big Ten record - 81-23, .779
Lloyd Carr record vs. rivals - 21-14, .600
Rich Rodriguez overall record (2008-2010) - 15-22, .405
Rich Rodriguez Big Ten record - 6-18, .250
Rich Rodriguez record vs. rivals - 2-7, .222
Brady Hoke overall record (2011-present) - 24-8, .750
Brady Hoke Big Ten record - 13-5, .722
Brady Hoke record vs. rivals - 4-3, .571
But yes, fire Brady Hoke!
October 14th, 2013 at 10:31 AM ^
That should tell you everything you need to know. Our overall record from 1990 is less than 70% which is, you guessed it, MEDIOCRE.
October 14th, 2013 at 11:09 AM ^
Pretty much. I keep reading comments about "We're Michigan, we deserve better!!" that I just do not understand. Michigan is a team that should be expected to win 9 games a year, with a 10 win season mixed in occasionally. Most programs would be thrilled to have that. I still think the worst thing Hoke has done was winning 11 games and a BCS bowl in his first season. That set up unrealistic expectations. I still firmly believe in Hoke, Mattision and even Borges. Fans freak out after losses and I get that. But some people need to realize this is not the same Michigan program that we grew up watching in the '80s. We are a step behind the Alabama's and OSU's of the world. Those teams have elite players and depth at most all positions. Right now we simply do not have that. Until we get to that point, mediocrity, as you say, is what we are.
October 14th, 2013 at 1:49 PM ^
" Those teams have elite players and depth at most all positions."
We had depth and elite players from 1993 to 2006. What was the excuse? Cooper > Carr...except for the 1 game they played each other? Tressel? To say we can't even be OSU is defeatist.
I know we are "mediocre" now (versus the standard) but my point is let's wake up, it is not a 5 year problem. It's not been a premier program other than 1 season since the 70s/80s. And a lot of people just seem to be accepting of it... 4 losses is now "typical Michigan football". Urban is not going to let the peddle off the metal... if this does not get turned around in 2015/2016 with the talent being brought in, we are going to be having the same conversation in 2023, while our friends in Ohio are flaunting their feathers for another decade.. Only pissing some of us off even more.
October 14th, 2013 at 5:56 PM ^
Our overall record from 1990 is less than 70% which is, you guessed it, MEDIOCRE.Yes, but the three RichRod seasons really drag that down. From 1990-2007 and since 2011, we've performed at almost exactly our all-time win percentage, which is .735.
October 14th, 2013 at 10:24 AM ^
This Michigan team is not very good and could quite conceivably lose the rest of their games this season. Everybody on this board was thinking 'in 2 years we'll be great!', but now I don't see a light at the end of the tunnel. The problems of this team reach far greater than Hoke or Borges and the fact that NOBDY can spot the true problem is very concerning. This makes me think were are a lot further off from being 'championship contenders' then 2-3 years. At this rate it's more like 8-10 years and I'm sure Hoke won't be around that long if that's the case.
October 14th, 2013 at 10:38 AM ^
October 14th, 2013 at 10:40 AM ^
@alum96,
I agree 100%, although I think your thoughts timeframe is a bit off. I've thought and talked a lot about this over the years, and I think the Michigan program was in a downward spiral that started sometime after the 2000 season. Yes, there were some good/great seasons in there, but there was a festering mediocrity growing inside the program that manifested in the outdated facilities, and ultimately resulted in a break down in the all important recruiting pipeline. That is not to say that Michigan wasn't getting talent, it was. But, the depth of talent was shallowing out quickly, and it really only became apparent when the program's veil was lifted in 2008 when RR came in, and we all saw that Michigan only had 65 (IIRC) scholarship athletes on the roster.
I know people are rolling their eyes and saying, "it's 2013, why the hell does that matter?!?" It matters because RR did very little to restore the pipeline, especially with OL recruiting, and it takes time and continuity to develop the talent that comes in the door. Don't think it matters, look at the benefit that a team like Alabama was getting from having what amounted to an extra full recruiting class every 4 years.
Effectively, when Hoke took over in 2010 he was starting basically from where RR started from a pipeline rebuilding standpoint. Add to that, the fact that Hoke's 2010 class was small due to timing, and it really could be argued that 2011 was the real beginning of the "rebuild."
I know many of you won't argee, and don't want to hear that shit. You want to win now! You want consistency NOW! You think we have enough talent on this team to win, and that the coaches are fucking everything up. Well, I would say that the absolute LAST thing the program should do at this point is start changing coaching staffs. Hoke might not be "the guy" to lead Michigan back to national contention (I happen to think he is). But, the facilities have been upgraded and are now among the elite in the nation, and Hoke is opening the pipeline back up. He MUST be given the time to do that, or else we'll be right back where we started again.
Tough as it might be to accept it, Michigan shot itself in the foot over a decade ago, and we're just now beginning to heal from that wound.
October 14th, 2013 at 11:21 AM ^
Stan,
First, nice post. Very well presented. The one point I will argue is that there should still enough talent on this team to win games like last Saturday. I believe this is where the frustration stems from.
The level headed fan base understands that it will take time, and many are ok with that, as long as there is progress being made. What is very troublesome is that lack of progress, which actually seems to be a regression by this staff.
I am not calling for National Titles and such, however, do I expect Hoke and co., who are in their third year, to out perform the bottom of the FBS? Ya, I do, and I don't think that is selfish of me to believe and expect this program to be farther along than it is.
GO BLUE!
October 14th, 2013 at 11:48 AM ^
Diag,
Thanks! It's "STEN" btw (no biggie I've been dealing with that my whole life).
"The one point I will argue is that there should still enough talent on this team to win games like last Saturday. I believe this is where the frustration stems from."
I am not a big fan of the "should," but I agree that this is where the frustration stems from. Michigan did 99.9% of what it needed to do to win, despite the poor running, the turnovers, and the botched endgame. If we have enough talent to win, we would have won.
What I am trying to get across to the furious masses in here is that we're rebuilding, and we are bascially where we were had RR never taken over, right now. There was a huge talent and number deficiency when RR took over, and he did very little to rectify those issues, and in terms of OL recruiting, he actally made it worse.
"What is very troublesome is that lack of progress, which actually seems to be a regression by this staff."
I don't think the regression is coming from the staff, I think it's coming from the players. Hear me out. The RS Sr. came in in 2009, after the 3-9 debacle, and there are only 2 of them -- Lewan and Gallon -- who have done anything of significance in their careers. Is it that hard to believe that RR didn't recruit that many good players in 2009 after the worst year in Michigan football history? Now go to the 2010 class, is there anyone besides Gardner and Ryan that have done anything? Black has come on of late, and Dileo has played very well at at times. As a whole those, of the 18 players, there are only 2 that stand out. The regression that you think you're seeing a product of a lack of talent in the classes that RR (and Hoke in 2010) brought in.
October 14th, 2013 at 1:51 PM ^
Thanks for your cogent comments.
October 14th, 2013 at 10:46 AM ^
Football has changed since we were an elite program. This is big business now and while I love our culture and history, in some ways that stubborn-ness has held us back. We all love Bo, but what worked for Bo won't work today. We need to evolve. Unless you're one of those few programs that are the top dog in a talent rich state (Texas, OSU, USC, Florida, Georgia, etc.) or unless you have Saban, you have to appeal to kids. We can no longer rely on our history and tradition, be man-ball, run the ball every first down, etc. And, We HAVE to recruit national talent to win and we are. We have recruited well in the mid-west, but until this year's class we have not recruited well nationally with top 50-type kids for as long as recruiting services have been around. It's been a long time since we have gotten a Green, Peppers, Hand, Campbell, D. Harris level talent (top 50 kids outside the mid-west). Those are the kids that are gonna help us win. We are now getting them and that trend appears to continue. Once our '13 class of o-lineman are in year 3, and once some of these top national-level kids are on the field I am confident that will make a difference. But, it's none the less frustrating it hasn't happened yet. Hoke is good for people and recruits, which I beleive will be more important than his weaknesses. Granted it would be nice to have Saban-level results but that ain't happening. I think Hoke gets enough talent to make us a consistent 9-11 win team, unfortunately it will just take another few years and we are losing our patience.
October 14th, 2013 at 4:55 PM ^
October 14th, 2013 at 5:45 PM ^
This is a lot of rationalization. Everyone cheated so they are ahead of us, or their program is in shambles. Guess what 4 years ago UM was in shambles. Every team has up and downs. My point is we have not had the ups at a consistent level the past 20 years other teams have - the ones you point as only successful due to cheating or other reasons. Who cares what the down years are like (we have had em, OSU had em at the beginning of the Cooper era) if they lead to a sustained period of excellence for 5+ years where you are in the NC conversation repeatedly? If you need to slink back to a 7-5, 8-4 season for 5 years, a decade later to offset so be it. We are basically doing that already without the upper level success.
What about Oklahoma? They were terrible for the first part of this measure period but I dont think are cheating now and have had a good 10-12 year period, well in excess of anything UM managed. Was Nebraska cheating for 8 years in the mid to late 90s? What about Tennessee - they stink now but have outperformed in that 20 year period as I measured it. Etc. Georgia is basically UM South IMO but in a tougher conference.
"Give me a good clean program that loses 4 games almost every year" has become a mantra of Michigan football. It is not either or....
October 14th, 2013 at 8:47 PM ^
October 14th, 2013 at 10:41 PM ^
Thank you for your last paragraph. As Bo said, "Winning by cheating equates to losing." I agree wholeheartedly that I would rather never win one than win by cheating. That's one thing that bothers me so much about the direction of college football in general. The money has gotten so out of hand that it has raised the bar so high that it is very difficult to get to the top without something shady. And I hate that. I want Michigan to have players I am proud of and want to root for as people. Hoke seems to be successfully recruiting high level players with high character. I am okay with being "near the top" rather than "at the top" if it means the team and school have integrity. Maybe I'm just showing my age with that old fashioned sentiment...
October 15th, 2013 at 10:53 AM ^
12 of the 19 years Oklahoma has lost 3 or more games, and is well on their way to #13. And won one national title. They were in the conversation, sure, but when they go to the bowl games they regularly got rocked in them. It's more how awful the Big 12 was making even the Big Ten over those years look good. It was Texas and nobody else on their schedule.
Nebraska might not have been cheating, but they took a major philosophical turn in the types of kids they recruited. They went from a program that was up there with Michigan and Penn State (in reputation) losing bowl games every year, and losing to Switzer's corrupt Oklahoma teams, to one that recruited a lot of guys who got in trouble for beating up women and other legal problems. And still playing them. They sold their soul to take the next step.
Tennessee has 15 years of 3 or more losses. Including 7 of 5 or more. (And let's be real, it's going to be 8 very soon). THAT'S what you want our program to be like??
October 14th, 2013 at 10:45 AM ^
October 14th, 2013 at 10:46 AM ^
October 14th, 2013 at 11:01 AM ^
we are going to die.
October 14th, 2013 at 10:59 AM ^
He went 10-2 against the easiest schedule in decades, which I"m not sure Rich Rod wouldn't have done as well, and he's a good recruiter.
We have a poor man's Les Miles, but at least he loves Michigan.
We are the Targaryens.
October 14th, 2013 at 11:03 AM ^
Having read this board over the last 3 days.It is clear that this board just isn't what it used to be. We have become a dangerously over-reactive fan base that I thought we were above.
Anybody who has done any coaching at all knows that the lows are never that low and the highs are never that high and when you are dealing with what is essentially teenagers these things happen. Did you think they were going undefeated? National Championship?
Are people actually suggesting we fire Hoke? Who are we Notre Dame?
October 14th, 2013 at 11:08 AM ^
If we were Notre Dame we would've given Hoke a ten year extention after the first season. We haven't stooped that low yet, but we're close.
October 14th, 2013 at 11:12 AM ^
yea seriously. Lets just steal Bill Obrien away and make him our OC.
October 14th, 2013 at 9:14 PM ^
This is absolutely it. I think the late Lloyd Carr years and then the RR years has taken what little patience this fan base has. We're in a rebuilding phase with an average team. We're sitting 5-1 in a medeocre conference. Every game showed some concerns (ND included). If I remember, most people on this board were predicting a 9-10 win season this year. We may be 1 game off from that in reality (maybe I'm still one of the more optimistic people on this board, but to me 8 wins is very realistic).
October 14th, 2013 at 11:06 AM ^
This loss (and quite frankly, this whole year) has been difficult to deal with, yet you would think we would know how to since we have been dealing with these feelings and results for years now. How a program with this many resources, and this much history continues to be this average is confounding.
I really wanted to believe that Hoke was the guy, and he still might be, but with the body of work we have to judge, he seems to be in over his head at times. One could argue, in his third year, he is at the helm of his worst team during that span. This is a bit concerning.
By no means do I expect this program to be in a position to be contending for MNC's at this time; however, we are talking about a team that is struglling to beat the bottome dwellers of FBS. In year three we should be competing for conference titles, which we haven't tasted in almost 10 years.
Changes need to be made. Now, what type of changes that means can be debated (and has been). What we all can agree on, is that this program can not continue to head down the path we are on. It is time for Hoke and these coaches to swallow their pride and make some tough decisions.
GO BLUE!
October 14th, 2013 at 11:07 AM ^
we just lost a road game where we played like dog crap and still should have won...cmon guys calm down just a bit. Very tough game to watch but if Gibbons kicks that field goal for the win, the tone of this message board changes immensely.
We are 5-1 and we knew what the expectations were this year. Didnt most of us think we would lose this game anyway in the pre-season predictions, or at least most of us said a toss up game? I am not as mad at Borges as the rest of you guys, I am mad at our O-line coach and the lack of development. If our O-Line plays average at best Borges can then do somethings he wants. Our O-line gets zero push and then we are a 1 dimensional team. I think it would be tough for any OC out there.
Regroup and beat Indiana.
October 14th, 2013 at 11:13 AM ^
How many times are you willing to use the excuse for this team ''we played our absolute worst and still won, or were close to winning''. We've played like dog crap 3 times this season. We were lucky to escape the first two with wins and I'll remind you that neither of those teams have won a FUCKING GAME.
Something has got to change.