The whole game I was thinking a lot of the same things that you posted. I feelike Michigan is a university forst with a great football tradition. I could not stop thinking about how the commentators were slobbing all over Bama and Saba. Even though there is so much shady activity down there.
We will never be Bama....
Our group had to mute our television multiple times because we had grown so very very tired of the heaping of SEC praise that Musberger was throwing around.
The tipping point for me where I began cussing out my television was when we took a penalty for 12 men in the huddle, and Musberger says, "They should let Michigan keep 12 men on the field so they have a chance against Alabama". I lost my shit there, thats beyond commentating, thats insulting. He follows it up with, "Just kidding Michigan fans"!
I dropped a few FU bombs then.
We got our ass kicked by a better team. Nothing more and nothing less. We will undoubtably do the same to others at some point this year but to claim its because they "cut corners" screams of sour grapes to me. What would our reaction be if U Mass or Minny says that about us when we crush them?
A better team won last night. We Ned to recruit better (and we are) and play better (and we will) to compete with them in the future.
We kick the shit out of U Mass and Minny on AND off the field, so there is that.
But I understand your point. I don't want to turn into Northwestern fans.
Michigan was, at one time, or at several different time, as powerful and dominate as Alabama is now. Things are cyclical bro, economy goes up and down, time change. Try to keep prospective in mind.
Unless you are well over 60, Michigan has never been as good as Bama has been of late at any point in your lifetime. We have a very high ceiling, but until we actually break through it the thing is still there.
Do you have any backing info regarding Alabama cutting corners in the classroom? Complain all you want about over signing or medical scholarships, but you probably have no idea about the classroom aspects of Alabama football. You sound like an ignorant sheep for much of your post.
that Alabama and the SEC are rotten and dirty.
You must be either blind as a bat or the most naive person on this board.
Why's that? What actual information do you have? It's disturbing how dumb our fanbase can be when it comes to other teams. You probably have nothing of substance to back your claim. Keep regurgitating your wisdom though.
Good. Don't want to be.
If you're saying we're not likely to compete for the natl championship at least every other year, or more, then you're probably right. But who in this fan base expects that? By highlighting this, at best, you are stating the obvious, and at worst you sound like a whiny apologist. Notre dame fans talk like this. Let's not go that route.
I think most people are saying we will be able to compete with them, which I agree with. Take our '06 squad as a good example. I bet they make it a game against these guys, but would still likely lose. That doesn't mean they are the equivalent of bama, just competitive... Which we clearly weren't last night. I guess we're reading the comments differently
Michigan has won a single national title since the late 1940's. Our fiercest B1G rival has won only one since the late 1960's. In the year we won, we split the title with a good team that we didn't have to play, and got to wrap up the crown by beating #8 Washington St. in our bowl game in a system that is no longer in place (now we would have had to beat OSU or PSU again and then played Nebraska, in the future we'll have to win a playoff game too). The two best teams we beat along the way (OSU and PSU) were beaten handily in their bowl games by Florida State and Florida respectively. From 1998-2007 we were eliminated from the national title race by early October in every season but one, and that is with a Hall of Fame coach at the helm and lots of good players.
The 1969 team we make such a fuss about lost 40-17 to eventual Big 8 champs Missouri. Bo's only perfect regular season was spoiled in the Rose Bowl by a 3-loss Stanford team (while #1 Nebraska crushed #2 Alabama). In fact, Bo lost his first 7 bowl games. I can't think of a time when we've beaten another national title challenger in a bowl game. We had a nice season in 1985 but only beat the 2nd place team from the Big 8 in the Fiesta Bowl. In 1988 we won the Rose Bowl over a good SC team, but lost head to head against both Miami and ND who finished #1 and #2 (ND had also beaten that SC team). The 2006 version of The Game was a big event, but OSU beat us and were promptly thrashed by Florida (and we lost badly to a 10-2 USC team).
In other words, we're pretty much right where we've always been (which isn't a bad spot to be in the world of college football). Expecting more after 40+ years of evidence would require the team to do more first.
I think we became more of a national program at that point and started to come out of the dark ages offensively. '85 we won the Fiesta Bowl and finished #2. Lost the Rose Bowl in '86. Won it in '88 and finished #4 behind Miami and ND teams that we played down to the wire. Lost it in '89. Won a bowl game in '90 and finished in the top-10. Went back to Pasadena in '91 but lost to a national title Washington team, then went undefeated and beat them a year later (damn ties). Add in the role Moeller's guys played in '97 and '99 major bowl wins and that looks like the peak run in its entirety.
3 major bowl wins in 8 years, 6 appearances, seven top-10 finishes and three in the top-5.
I'm not sure your point. Did you mean to respond to another post?
As a Michigan alum, this is the best response too sum up our football history I have seen on this site in years. extremely accurate. In order to play on a national stage we needed to change the culture of football here. I always felt that "Michigan Man" stuff is nonsense. We are going back to the way we used to play, which really won nothing on the national stage. Winning the big10 was great, but now football is more than just a regional game, it is national and we cannot compete.
We cannot compete right now. Let's not gloss over the fact that the '97 team had a fuckload of nfl talent and a heisman trophy winner. That team would have beaten that bama team we played on saturday. Some of the other late Bo teams would have too. In a few years, Michigan is probably good enough to beat this Bama team, just not today. It's likely that no one beats that Alabama team this year.
Yeah, this is rationalization at its finest. Bama won. They had a way better team. That's pretty much it. They have oversigning issues, but there's no proof at all that anything else shady is going on. Stop making excuses.
Fact stating =/= excuse making.
First of all, read the OP again. Well, not so much "again" since you probably didn't read it entirely in the first place, but you get my point. Nowhere does it state that Michigan lost to Alabama because they're a bunch of cheating cheaters who couldn't get out of a paper bag without cheating. In fact, quite the opposite, it says exactly what you did - Alabama won because they're the better team. The stuff about Alabama playing fast and loose with the rules was simply stating that Michigan will not be Alabama because they're not going to do that.
And secondly, Alabama pushes every boundary and tests every rule that the NCAA has. There's plenty of proof of that. And the fact is that every school/team/coach/player/person in the world - college sports, pro sports, and every day life - who pushes every boundary and tests every rule...is also breaking rules left and right without yet getting caught. Alabama has been caught several times in the past, and they will again. To say it's not happening because "there's no proof" is just naive.
I agree on some of the things you've posted - Michigan has morals. Michigan does require some "student" in the contract still.
But then why schedule this game? For the money? For the brand? So... we're willing to get beaten by a team we know has an unfair advantage just for a paycheck? What does that make Dave Brandon - a willingly abused performer?
WE NEED TO EITHER TAKE THE HIGH ROAD OR NO ROAD. No more gray stuff. You want to have some academic standards, then that is fine - but then don't schedule stupid Alabama in the opener for a few million dollars. Win games, get into a top bowl or the National Championship and then get exploded on national TV. At least us, the fan base, will be happy with the come-up and the National Championship appearance.
I'm sick of being happy with second-tier status. Not interested in that or rather, not interested in pretending to be first class then and not going all out to be first class. You don't want to be like SEC cheats and football factories? Fine - but then don't schedule them until the bowl or playoff season. Schedule pansies, win the four non-conference match-ups, and then go through the season and win the B10. Then have a party when we go to the National Championship.
Never? Only a fool would say that.
What I find fascinating is how much of a "Big Ten" team Alabama is in their playing style. They line it up and come right at you. And they are devastatingly effective at it. They don't spread you out or go five-wide.
The big advantage the SEC has over the Big Ten is not scheme. That's a myth. The elite SEC teams look more like Wisconsin or Lloyd's Michigan teams than they do Oregon or WVU or Boise State.
What the SEC does have that the Big Ten does not have, is NFL talent. Both in the coaches and in the players.
Michigan is catching up in the coaching department. Due to reasons of geography, demographics, and yes basic ethics, it will be difficult to catch up in recruiting. We will never be able to recriuit like Alabama or USC.
We will have to settle for getting in the general neighborhood and then hope lightning strikes once in a while like the 1997 team.
we are recruiting like Alabama and USC. It's been happening since Hoke got here.
Coach Hoke's first recruiting class just arrived on campus. We have no idea how well he's been recruiting. Shane Morris might be awesome and he might not be any good. Plenty of 5-star QBs have not panned out. Same goes for everybody else. There's reason for optimism but just saying "We're there" is very premature.
Also, I'm not sure you're aware how Bama has been recruiting. In 2008 (5th year Seniors) their 32!!!! man class was ranked #1 in the country. In 2009 (Seniors/RS Juniors) their 27!!!! man class was ranked #1 in the country. In 2010 (Juniors/RS Sophomores) their 26 man class was ranked #5. Those are the classes that usually determine if you're going to be a good team or not. That's 85 guys in three classes (I think we all know what the overall scholarship limit is), 56 rated 4-star or better on Rivals. That just isn't something we can replicate here at Michigan. They again had the #1 ranked class in 2011, so the young guys are probably pretty good too (though this time they took only a pedestrian 22 players). The new freshmen were also rated the #1 class in the country (that makes 4 of 5 for this year's team). It had 26 guys in it.
Just for a comparison, Michigan from 2002-07 signed classes of 21, 17, 22, 23, 19, and 20. The most we got in any three class run was 64. That was 21 fewer bites at the apple than Saban is getting just for the upperclassmen on this current team of his. Over a five year period, they signed 133 guys who would have had a shot to be on this year's team. Michigan got 105 from 2002-06 and 104 from 2003-07.
You think getting a look at 28 extra recruits might have pushed us over the top in 2006? Think The Horror happens with so many more guys competing for PT? Yes and No.
Very compelling analysis. I'm going to save it off somewhere and come back to it when I start to feel we are getting in Alabama's league in terms of recruiting . . . to see if we really are.
It will be interesting to see if Alabama themselves ever make a run like that again with the new focus on Oversigning and the new rules put in place to limit classes and sign players to 4-year scholarships.
The SEC and Saban in particular will try to skirt these token rules, but I don't think they will be completely successful. CFB may never see a recruiting run again like Alabama ovef the last 5 years.
Do 4 year scholarships matter when someone that doesn't produce can be removed for a violation of team rules? Do 4 year scholarships matter when people that don't produce are "strongly encouraged" by the other 100 men on the team that they should consider having a run with an FCS school? Would a hard limit not simply move more borderline players to the AAA minors, I mean MIssissippi JuCo system?
Recruiting is like investment banking, people will find a way to get the big bucks no matter what rules you put in place.
I was saying the same thing yesterday to my captive family crowd. 'Bama has a fantastic o-line, goes 3-4 deep at RB, runs the ball down your throat effectiviely, and has a QB who is efficient but nothing flashy. They also happen to play phenomenal defense. Sounds like a recipe to win the Big 10 in the 70's! Or how Wisconsin has risen to Big 10 elite levels over the past 10-15 years. 'Bama is basically Wisconsin on steroids.
I strongly dislike Saban. But the football display they put on yesterday was nothing short of impressive.
I agree we don't want to become a football factory like Bama, with its oversigning and splendid academic standards. But, if you think about it, the worse-case scenario is OSU, a football factory that would nevertheless get its ass kicked by Bama.
I have a lot of faith in Hoke's recruiting and coaching. I don't think it is a stretch to think we could get to Bama's current level. Remember that Saban lost to ULM in his first season and went 7-6. We just don't have the depth right now. Rich Rod really recruited poorly on the offensive and defensive lines. Hoke has done a great job of getting big, strong linemen for the future.
with Brian's cats, and assumed a lot of people would downvote it. But it's generally true. It could be that people more deeply invested in the U as a whole are likely to resonate with what you're saying.
...that this thread will be quoted quite liberally in this week's edition of TWIS.
...that this thread will be quoted quite liberally in tomorrow's edition of This Week in Schadenfreude.
The OP is absolutely correct. It's not whining or making excuses, but Michigan does not and should not run its program like Alabama does. We will be extremely good under Hoke, but we will never be more loaded with talent than the Jacksonville Jaguars. That's perfectly fine, because we will still win Big Ten titles and Rose Bowls, and do it with our heads held high.
Up until 2007 bama was pretty irrelevent in the national scope. They only had 5 winning seasons between '97 and '07, 3 of those 5 years they were 7-5. You could look at them and say "they'll never be USC or Florida or Texas" but now they are and the other schools are on the outside looking in. The players they recruit aren't predestined to be NFL first round pics, either. Saban is taking top talent, then developing it to an NFL level. Hoke and Mattison and Borges are doing the same thing, now. We weren't even that bad for the first game of the season. Our makeshift Dline and smattering of true freshmen forced quite a few 3 and outs and 50 yard fg attempts, and sacks. Our scary thin OLine and makeshift receiver corps and backup running game did better than any SEC school did last year against an "NFL talent factory." They jumped all over us in the 1st quarter when Countess went out, but we did better than I expected, all things considered. Michigan's gonna put all this anger, frustration, and embarrasment into practice and annihilate every team we see from here to January. Book it. We're trending up.
For example, when Countess went down, no one in the country outside of Musberger and Saban thought about testing his replacement. How can we ever even hope to get to that level?
We are still paying the price of a couple of recruiting classes that were a bit light on linemen, not to mention the attrition. I'm hoping that the AMHGs don't extract payment in the form of cartilage.
I see UM having a great run going forward. I also would not be surprised if your QB gets the Heisman.
If we continue to recruit well and keep our coaching staff in place we could easily become a dominant football program like Alabama is now. Alabama hasn’t always been on top and they haven’t always got the top recruits. What they have now is a great coach (and staff) that has been there since 2007 and they have been successful which makes it easier to recruit etc. In fact, I see us being very similar in the near future - two talented well coached teams built around a strong defense. Say what you want about how they got there but you have to respect that team we played yesterday - they were tough, aggressive and well coached.
I didn't read all of that because you sounded like a piss poor whiny loser.
If you had read that - any of it - you would know that it didn't sound like that.
Of course, that assumes an ability to understand what you read.....
doom and gloom is disappointing. "SEC dominance" is a ten year old concept. Before 2000, the SEC was mortal, average even. Michigan is recruiting as well as ever and is certainly competing with the SEC in that regard. Just give it a few years.
With the level of talent in the 2012 and 2013 classes......plus the potential for 2014 and beyond. We are in uncharted territory for a roster laden with talent. Give it time and be patient. It was one game that gave our players a realistic look at where they are, we're they need to go, and how good they cold be. Chill out. Dream of the 2015 and 2016 teams.
Aside from the factual elements of oversigning and JUCOS, the foundation of your point is based in innuendo and hearsay. You're not inside the walls, man. You don't know exactly how Alabama (or Michigan, for that matter) approach academics regarding their football players.
All that stuff aside, a bigger reason (in my opinion) for the disparity is that their main recruiting ground, the South, produces better football players than our main ground, the Midwest. And they have cleaned up that recruiting ground since Saban came in.
They're good. They got through good at least in part through old cliches like strong preparation and good fundamentals, which even their new starters played with last night. To demonize them and bring up the old "smell test" seems a bit petty in the wake of defeat.
I made it this far: "we will never be loaded with that much NFL talent" before logging in to neg you. How old are you?
The reason we will never be Alabama is because the two programs have different goals. Michigan's goal is to win a Big Ten championship every year. Alabama's goal is to win a national championship every year. IMO the difference is huge.
So what is your argument? That Michigan didn't try as hard as Alabama did last night because it was a non-conference game?
I'm not sure how these media-professed "goals" have anything to do with how the team performs. Michigan supposedly had the goal being a Big Ten title in 1997 and they won a NC. Alabama may have been shooting for the NC in the Mike Shula era for all we know.
If you're good, you're good. If you're not, you're not.
I don't want to be Bama, I want to be MICHIGAN, fergodsakes.
M can be like 1996 - 2006 Alabama no problem.
Michigan is looking to have a very similar offense in a couple years imo. A huge offensive line where we can line up and run the ball right at you, and control the clock. As well as a deep talented defense that swarms to the ball.
Spread > MANBALL
It's hard for me to argue with this, but I think what people mean when they say that we'll be on the level of 'Bama is that we'll be among the truly elite in college football. We still won't be as good as 2011 or 2012 Alabama, but no one will. The SEC has finally banned oversigning, which won't allow scheisters like Saban to assemble such a loaded roster by signing and purging. He also won't be around at Alabama forever. People tend to forget that Alabama was a non-factor during most of the 90's and 00's under DuBose, Franchione, and Shula.
And aside from the ethical issues in the SEC, they have a lot of natural, built-in advantages down there that we'll never have. None of the football factory schools in the SEC are in the same universe as Michigan academically. Some of these schools take two or three JUCO transfers every year, whereas we've taken two in the last thirty years. Also, football is like a religion in the South, particularly in Alabama. That affects all aspects of their culture. They built a bronze statue of Saban after he had been there only three years. Every other elementary school in Western Alabama is named after Bear Bryant (in contrast, remember how people scoffed when someone suggested that Skyline High in Ann Arbor should be named after Bo?). All of the athletically-inclined kids are pushed toward football because football players are treated like gods. That, coupled with the massive population shift from the Midwest toward the South that has occurred over the last generation or so, is going to make it difficult for us to compete with the SEC year in and year out.
Here's my baseline: if we can pull off a '97-like season once every 20 years or so and consistently win 8-11 games in all of the seasons in between, then I think this program will have achieved to its potential. That '97 team will never be regarded as among the absolute best in the history of college football, like a '95 Nebraska or an '01 Miami, but the trophy says "National Champions" on it just the same.
Bama won the SEC in 1999 under DuBose and played Michigan to basically a stalemate in the Orange Bowl. Franchione won 10 games in 2002, won the SEC West, but was ineligible for the title game or a bowl due to probation. He left after that, his second season. Shula went 10-2 in 2005.
All of that while dealing with varying degrees of sanctions and probation that prevented any kind of continuity. They weren't a consistent beast, but the ceiling was still high, even with guys who aren't that highly thought of running the program.
That's why I said "most". You've pointed out three seasons out of 20, none of which were as dominant as 'Bama '09, 'Bama '11, or (likely) 'Bama '12.
They went 11-1 in '91 and finished at #5 in the country. Won the national title in '92 (blowing out Miami in the Sugar Bowl). In '93 and '94 they won the SEC west, finishing the latter season at 12-1 with a bowl win over OSU and a one point loss to Florida in the SEC title game as their only blemish. They finished #5 in the country that year as well. In '96 they were back in the conference title game, beat Michigan in a bowl game and finished #11 in the country. Then Stallings left and after two poor seasons they won the SEC again as I mentioned under Dubose.
If you want to go back further, they were really good when this guy they called the Bear was walking the sidelines too. This recent run is probably unsustainable for any program in the longterm, but Bama at full strength (no probation/sanctions) has always been strong, even in their recent "dark period".
There are the ethical issues in the SEC (the only school that has never faced sanctions is Vanderbilt, as I recall), but there is also the money, and I believe it deserves some mention.
Something that much of the SEC has been able to do as well is convert the regional passion for the game into money. Only a handful of SEC school have endownments over $1 billion, but yet they can match and even exceed many other schools when it comes to athletic donations. In many cases, the donors didn't even attend the school, but are from that area and were fans. I think this is part of the reason that they can build facilities which are top-tier despite being in a less economically diverse (or endowed) part of the country, facilities which impress and attract top talent.
They also generated income from the rule that allows conferences to stage championship games, a rule basically ignored until the early 1990s when the SEC began playing such a game. They've had the deal with CBS since the 90s as well, I believe.
In short, they've found a way to more or less neutralize an advantage that northern schools (for example, schools in the Big Ten) had for a long time, and it has also helped schools like Alabama become a destination for players.
It will be a few years, I believe, before we see any effects from the ban on oversigning in the SEC, but it would be interesting all the same to do a multi-year statistical comparison on both sides of the ball to see where the productivity falters the most.
But I'm not confident in making any derogatory claims about Bama's team other than some (pretty well known) roster management tactics (cutting, medical redshirts, JUCO transfers). They're also not an academic institution of the calibur of our beloved Michigan, but few (if any) traditional power programs are.
But the biggest reason I don't want to be Bama is that the win appeared joyless. When you see video of our couching staff during the Nebraska game last year they're joking around with eachother, talking candidly, shrugging, that sorta thing. When you looked at Saban last night he was ice-cold focused when the score was already something like 35-7. Even at the end of the game he seemed unhappy and was still chewing people out at every penalty and Michigan 1st down. You don't want to be too joyful, out of respect, but comeon man...
Saban is a robot
Um, that's probably the reason they beat us 41-14 and LSU 21-0 and . . .
I never want to be Bama. I want us to return to "The Old Michigan" and I feel like we are making strides to do so. I personally feel like it would be nice to see us line up in the "I" formation and try to pound the ball a little. I would like to see more of a power running game. I realize that the "big play" potential goes down if we do that, but I think that it would possibly lengthen the time of the drives and potentially wear the opposing defense down. Run Hopkins behind Kerridge and force teams to respect the fact that we are going to put drives together and score without Denard throwing a deep slant or taking it to the house when a play breaksdown. Just a thought.
Before people flip out... I am not saying hopkins should move to HB, I am merely suggesting that we inject a power run scheme into what we are doing. Mix it up.
running game for that entire game last night. Averaged about 2.0 yards a carry.
Disagreed. Our talent is nowhere close to where it will (hopefully) be with these recruiting class's. 'Bama's built off of talent. Our 2012 and 2013 class's are stockpiled with talent, more then the previous years. I think we can be an excellent team like 'Bama in 2/3 years. We're definetly not there, but come on... Everyone has KNOWN this is a rebuilding program. You look at the positions and you say "average big 10 starter" for a lot of them, not "future 1st rounder" like 'Bama. But there have been times where Michigan has had that talent. So its not at all a far stretch to see us reaching that talent level again. And Brady Hoke is a great coach and I believe we will be a great team, both talent wise and coaching wise. Just give it time. We're a good team this year. But not an excellent team this year like Alabama. This is what we expected. Rationally, did we really think we were going to beat Alabama this year? When it was first scheduled, we were just HOPING it'd be close. I believe it'll be a different story in time...
I don't completely disagree. The one shining light, if you will, is that all of the teams you listed inevitably fell, and usually quite far, from their heights. Miami hasn't been anywhere close to the dominance they showed in the 80's save for that short run under Davis/Coker, and the same with FSU. USC looks to be back somewhat, but rest assured Kiffin will muff it up sooner rather than later.
Alabama has a great team, and Saban is a hell of a coach and recruiter. Those teams are strong, disciplined, and talented. Sure, that talent comes at a price other teams won't take on, but it's not like Bama would be a MAC team if they only recruiting 85 athletes every 4 years. They will be good for some time, but soon enough someone will mess up, Saban will get busted, and they'll be back on probation. It's the inevitable end for teams like Alabama, just like the end of Carr/RR eras were for a UM program that was too set in its ways to wholly evolve with college football.
I will say, though, that game was closer than it appeared, given what UM was missing. People kept harping on Alabama being without some stars, but UM lost its Remington-winning center, top two defensive linemen, and its stud RB. Those are big losses, and I definitely think they had an effect on the performance we saw. And despite all that, UM was hanging around. UM will be back, and while I have my doubts that they'll be playing for a title in 3 years, I do expect them to be competitive with every team on their schedule.
... I would not overreact to one game.
Truth is, we had played Alabama three times previously and won twice.
Saban is a great coach. Combine great coaching, great tradition and the ability to make a team incredibly deep through oversigning, and you have a program on a roll.
But if -- and this is a big IF -- the NCAA really does crack down on roster manipulation (Stewart Mandel, for example, thinks the new rules will not stop oversigning), and as Hoke continues to recruit players head-to-head with Alabama (as in the Turly-Tillman and Dawson commits), we'll see things level out over the next few years.
Someone should run the numbers on this, but I'll bet the edge Alabama holds in the number of scholarships given out over the past four years, not to mention that Saban has been recruiting players to fit his system, which is more like the days of Bo.
I don't think we'll ever be Alabama in terms of how we go about things -- Michigan is a serious university, while Bama is your typical, average state school -- but I think we'll be able to compete with them in two years. There's nothing fancy about what they do. They get great recruits, they've been cutting recruits they missed on and replacing them with more recruits, and that just gives more talent to a great coach. They'll always get great recruits. If we can stop them from manipulating the rules to correct their misses, we can compete.
Indeed, if we can get everyone playing by the same rules, we have the coaching staff and recruiting power to return to beating Alabama again. The competitive edge brought by oversigning is depth, and we saw it last night. It is the reason Alabama can 'reload, not rebuild.' They've been stockpiling as much as they can get away with.
Remember, there were years before the SEC went on an oversigning rampage started by Saban at LSU (and then Alabama), along with Arkansas and South Carolina. And Michigan dominated the SEC in bowl games before the binge. And which SEC team was the first to ban oversigning? Florida, by the order of the school president. And looked what happened -- they started getting dominated in the SEC.
The SEC teams you see on the field really are better and much deeper. It's how they got that way that doesn't get any discussion on television.
I get really sick of ppl saying that Alabama is a representation of Ess-Eee-See football as a whole. Alabama and LSU are on another level from the rest of their conference. If Michigan were playing, say, UGA's SEC Schedule, we could win the SEC East for the chance to get thrashed by Bama on a neutral field like we did last night (which UGA will probably do this season just as they did last year before getting trounced by LSU).
This is true over the past to to three years. However, before the SEC championship game of 2009, the dominant program in that league for some time (excluding the Zook debacle) was Florida. It is cyclical. (Except for the obvious caveat, that like him or not-and I do not-as long as Saban is there, Bama will be strong.)
There is comfort in saying "well, at least our team is of higher moral caliber." But, the truth is we had a couple players suspended for the game. We are not of immaculate sterling student athletes, nor is any team. We want to win, and we want to do it the right way. Most teams feel the same, just a matter of if they can.
when ABC told the world that this team has had 6 arrests. I tried to explain to my family that number included things like breaking a parking lot gate and sliding over the hood of a car, but still. The world did not go away thinking that the Michigan team had higher moral character, whether it does or not.
show them the oversigning chart of the SEC compared to the other BCS conferences. You can also emphasize your point with the current Fulmer Cup standings.
I am of the opinion we are never going to win a national title again. I fine with it, since we at Michigan are above the cheating that gets you to the BCS national title game.
If you don't think Michigan can win a National Title or compete every few years for one, you are fools. Once the depth is addressed 2-3 years,this will happen.Some of you guys make me throw up sometimes.
Once we're able to throw the ball consistently to get the opposing D out of the box and then will loosen up the run, we will be more balanced and elite defense just can't sit in the box. We were easy to defend against Bama. Michigan will get enough elite players to compete for the National Title every few years maybe not every couple like Bama and LSU do right now.
Its not the depth..... its the type of bigger player we need, and we are a year away until these types that Hoke recruited, begin to have an effect. We are two full years away from being Michigan again. And it'll be a young Michigan....
Yet we got RR and they didnt..... Saban is doing a fine job hogging the talent, he truly is... .but it was only a moment ago when we were ahead of them, and had equal NFL talent. Pre-Saban wasn't anything special like it is now.
that alabama shutout and beat then no. 1 lsu by 20.... we lost by 27 and were not goose egged.. go blue
Be as good as Bama. I also think in 3-4 years we will be. Saban has a slight limitation now in scholarships, and I think Hoke will continue to recruit top 5-10 every year.
Here is the last decade of Alabama football:
Michigan has been much more consistant. So Alabama is really good now - who is to say what they will be 5 years from now?
Who is to say Michigan won't be national champs in 5 years?
All I know is when people throw around terms like unbeatable, dynasty etc the mighty usually fall.
Michigan is old sexy.
For losers. As we continue to recruit amd get the type athlete we want, there wont be a team in CFB that we cant compete with. Our best player yesterday was a 5'7" WR that runs a 4.7 40. That will be extremely rare in the near future.
I'm sure Alabama said the same thing about us at one time. Historically speaking, no team has a monopoly on football. As much as I hate to admit it, Nick Saban is an extraordinary coach. But, he will not coach forever and the power among conferences and schools will shift. They always do. Fortunately, the SEC and ESPN don't understand that and their contract destiny will experience a plunge in fortune simultaneously.
... the new CJK5H?
With ESPN financially incentivized to push the sec myth, someone needs to get the truth out... Perfect job for the interweb. Whenever someone searches for alabama football, oversigning should be the top return.
And yes, my grapes are vinegar.
What's the point of this post exactly? To prove that we'll never be "great" like Bama? And u post this on a pro-Michigan blog site? Let's not forget that this is still just football and still at the collegiate level. Bama has to deal with kids, 18 years old who have to be trained to make it at the next level just like everybody else. Sure Bama has great players, but since when has Michigan not been capable of getting great players? Someone responded earlier by listing all of the shortcomings Michigan experienced in past bowl games as evidence that we've never had that national championship caliber teams... news flash, Bo got out coached. I can't remember all the times I saw Michigan down in points in the fourth and screaming at the TV screen "Throw something!". Just the same in 2006 UM and OSU got out coached. Florida ran the same play down the sideline like a dozen times and the Def. Cor. never defended it. We may have gotten our asses kicked against a very good national title Bama team, but who on this site will tell you that they expected us to be competing for the title this year? We knew we weren't there yet. But that doesn't mean that I don't fully expect Hoke to come back with a vengeance in a year or two and compete at that caliber. We'll get there. Just gotta have patience. GO BLUE!!