Win #900
Who does it come against?
Schedule:
Alabama*
Air Force
UMass
@Notre Dame
@Purdue
Illinois
Michigan State
@Nebraska
@Minnesota
Northwestern
Iowa
@Ohio State
*neutral site
I'm gonna say we'll have #900 by the time the Michigan State game is over. I think the win comes against Illinois.
January 6th, 2012 at 1:44 PM ^
I'm going with at Homecoming against Illinois. MSU at the latest!
January 6th, 2012 at 1:51 PM ^
Purdue.
January 6th, 2012 at 2:29 PM ^
Right on. Why are we already giving the game to Bama? It's a long time from now until September.
January 6th, 2012 at 4:50 PM ^
to UMass.
January 6th, 2012 at 1:52 PM ^
Any guesses on when win 1000 comes? Opponent?
January 6th, 2012 at 1:57 PM ^
Against Ohio in the BTC. MgoBlog's servers will suffer irreparable damage and all top 5 recruits will switch to the Wolverines. Their SEC mothers will not be pleased.
January 6th, 2012 at 2:07 PM ^
A decade from now, MGoBlog will pretty much be the internet so I don't think that will happen.
January 6th, 2012 at 5:03 PM ^
If we can make "Craig James Killed 5 Hookers At SMU" a top search, we CAN be the Internet. I like where this is headed.
January 6th, 2012 at 7:52 PM ^
"Craig James Killed 5 Hookers at SMU" is not a top search because of MGoBlog. In fact, we have nothing to do with the fact that "Craig James Killed 5 Hookers at SMU" is a top search. The reason that "Craig James Killed 5 Hookers at SMU" is a top search is simply that while attending SMU, Craig James Killed 5 Hookers at SMU. Nothing to do with us.
Now, if it were not true that Craig James Killed 5 Hookers at SMU, it would be more likely that we had skewed search results for "Craig James Killed 5 Hookers at SMU". But given that Craig James Killed 5 Hookers at SMU, this is simply not the case.
Shameless, I am . . .
January 6th, 2012 at 5:06 PM ^
For me, it already is pretty much half of the internet...
January 6th, 2012 at 5:14 PM ^
in 10 years, all websites will be named www.[domain].mgoblog.com
January 6th, 2012 at 1:54 PM ^
We're at 895 right now, for those, like me, that had to look it up. I'm just hoping to stay alive to see win #1000.
January 6th, 2012 at 2:03 PM ^
Well, I like my chances. Assuming 14 wins/yr we will be there in 2019.
January 6th, 2012 at 4:41 PM ^
I guess that means that you don't think a FBS playoff is coming.
January 6th, 2012 at 2:06 PM ^
The MSU game will be even more epic if we go into it 4-2...but I'd obviously prefer going into it 6-0 and it will still be awesome.
January 6th, 2012 at 3:24 PM ^
Being 6-0 would make it a bigger deal than being 4-2. The vast majority of fans won't know or care that we'd have 899 wins.
January 6th, 2012 at 4:49 PM ^
I think this is the prototypical ESPN latch-on and cover the bejesus out of it type of event.
January 6th, 2012 at 5:07 PM ^
Why? Is 900 that much more remarkable than 800 or 700? We won't be breaking any record. We already own the record and are just adding on to it.
January 6th, 2012 at 5:45 PM ^
I don't think ESPN made a big deal at all about our 700th win. Losers.
January 6th, 2012 at 2:17 PM ^
I just don't get everyones dread over this schedule. Alabama is of course a massive challenge, but the rest seems manageable. I think people get tripped up over the road games at Nebraska and Ohio, but even those don't send shivers down my spine. We beat Nebraska at home this year, but we'd have beaten Nebraska if it were played in Tom Osborne's backyard. Ohio loses a lot of players off of an already turrible team, and has to break in a new system. Notre Dame is the perennial "watch what we can't acchieve this year" team, so that matchup doesn't worry me. Sparty is losing a lot, and the rest of the B1G schedule appears to be a laugher.
January 6th, 2012 at 2:26 PM ^
I don't think Ohio loses virtually anyone off that defense. Didn't Sweat say he's coming back? I think Braxton Miller year 2 more than makes up for the loses in some skill positions (again, isn't Stoneburner coming back?) as long as they can cobble together an offensive line. Which incidentally, is something we need to do too.
Not saying Ohio is a loss by any means, but I expect them to win 9-10 games next season.
January 6th, 2012 at 2:26 PM ^
Even Bama may be easier than expected. They lose something like 16 starters this year right? I like that it is the first game of the season, when they'll be breaking in all of these new starters against our very experienced team. They'll have the better athletes, but we'll have about 17 multi-year starters
January 6th, 2012 at 2:28 PM ^
They do lose 3 average lineman and Posey is by far their biggest loss. With out him we beat Ohio by 30 this past year.
January 6th, 2012 at 2:34 PM ^
I Pos'd you with the seldom-seen "Underated".
People are overlooking the impact of it being the first game of the season, at a netural site, and Alabama having to mesh in a bunch of new parts. We definitely have a shot.
January 6th, 2012 at 2:42 PM ^
So many people are writing us off against 'Bama. They lose a ton of starters. I know that they have guys waiting to step in but we are talking about guys with little or no game experience. Not to mention that we are playing at a neutral site. They are a very good team, without a doubt, but I don't think this game is in the history books. If the Michigan offense clicks (a la Nebraska game) and the D plays well, I think we can win this game. As for the rest of the schedule, I am not seeing what everyone is worried about. ND? Umm, they are still trying to figure out their offense and are losing their best receiver. MSU? They are losing a few key guys on their D and breaking in a new QB, not to mention that the game is played at Michigan. Nebraska? Aren't they losing a ton of people? OSU? Other than 'Bama, that is the only other hiccup I can see. I think we will go 10-2, perhaps 11-1.
January 6th, 2012 at 2:55 PM ^
I don't disagree with any of this at all; we certainly have a shot - more than a shot I think - because it is the first game of the year (obligatory motivation/ turnover's in early games/etc.). However, I do think the idea of Alabama "reloading vs. rebuilding" is important. It makes me think of the USC teams in the not-so-distant past. Sure, you may have kids starting their first games . . . but they were some of the best recruits in their class (due to the rampant oversigning) and they have also been playing behind/being taught by various All Americans and future NFL prospects.
I guess I haven't really said anything new here. Do I think Michigan has a shot? Hell yes I do, and better than just a swinging chance! But Alabama isn't going to be just some normal team starting a host of new players. IMHO.
January 6th, 2012 at 4:37 PM ^
I am counting that one as "5 wins" on the spot and I will feel like we are at #900. So, "Alabama."
January 6th, 2012 at 3:09 PM ^
5 starters on offense. Remember their offense without Posey and Herron? It was terrible. Now maybe a new offense, addresses that but instilling a new offense creates problems of it's own.
January 6th, 2012 at 2:30 PM ^
Even though ND underachieves every year, I get more nervous each year this win streak continues. It has to end eventually right?
January 6th, 2012 at 2:39 PM ^
Yes, it does have to end. But not now.
Damsel in Distress: "Indiana Jones, why do you keep doing what you're doing?"
Indiana Jones: "Fame and Glory, kid, Fame and Glory."
Damsel in Distress: "You're going to get killed looking for your Fame and Glory "
Indiana Jones: "Maybe so. But not today."
January 6th, 2012 at 2:41 PM ^
I think because we looked the most vulnerable, particularly offensively on the road this year, i.e. Iowa, MSU, and to a degree Virginia Tech. If MSU didn't get dominated by Nebraska at home then it would have looked really bad to leapfrog MSU for the Sugar Bowl. We struggle on the road and this year play most of the better teams on our schedule on the road. Also, TSIO returns nearly their entire defense and most of their offense. Yes, it will be a transition year, but they will probably win 9 +/-1 games. It is going to be tough, especially losing the players we do (the ones we have leaned on so much at times).
January 6th, 2012 at 2:52 PM ^
Sorry to play the role of Debby Downer. I have infinite hope BUT the one negative I take away from Team 132 (which forms the basis of much of Team 133) is that they had their worst showings against good teams away from home. 2011 saw only 5 teams away from home (MSU, Northwestern, Iowa, Illinois, and VaTech in the Sugar Bowl). Lets face it, three of our worst performances of the year were in five of those games and the other two don't really qualify as good teams to me.
2012 we have six games away from home (Alabama, Notre Dame, Purdue, Nebraska, Minnesota and Ohio State). I think its reasonable to say that four of those teams are pretty good, or can we at least agree, even with if not better than 2011 Iowa. Other than that, State will be at least good defensively even though they'll be breaking in a new passing game and have to be considered a threat.
To me, one of the big signs of improvement will be to see us beat a good team on the road. Until that time, I think a little bit of question is fair.
January 6th, 2012 at 2:30 PM ^
Purdue.
January 6th, 2012 at 7:59 PM ^
I was gonna say, damn. No one had the stones to say Purdue yet?
January 6th, 2012 at 2:44 PM ^
My gut says the chance it will come per game -
10% chance it happens to be Purdue
50% chance it happens to be Illinois
30% chance it happens to be Sparty
10% chance it happens to be Nebraska
The only reason it won't be Purdue is a loss to either ND or Bama. It wouldn't be Illinois with a loss to both ND and Bama. It won't be Sparty if something really goes wrong next season. I say Illinois.
January 6th, 2012 at 2:40 PM ^
It would be pretty sweet if it were the Purdue game but with 2 of our first 5 away from home and South Bend being Twighlight Zone-like more often than not, I don't know.
Here are the milestone victories going by 100 so far:
*Win #100: October 5, 1901 - Beat Case 57-0
*Win #200: October 9, 1915 - Beat Mt. Union 35-0
*Win #300: October 1, 1932 - Beat Michigan State 26-0
*Win #400: October 23, 1948 - Beat Minnesota 27-14
*Win #500: November 11, 1967 - Beat Illinois 21-14
*Win #600: October 21, 1978 - Beat Wisconsin 42-0
*Win #700: November 4, 1989 - Beat Purdue 42-27
*Win #800: September 30, 2000 - Beat Wisconsin 13-10
January 6th, 2012 at 3:21 PM ^
Since '67, our centennial wins seem to come every eleven years. We were really close to getting it done again, but stumbled a bit in the last couple years. [REDACTED] probably had [REDACTED] it.
January 6th, 2012 at 2:46 PM ^
What are we at now?
January 6th, 2012 at 2:53 PM ^
i believe 896
January 6th, 2012 at 5:07 PM ^
We're at 895.
January 6th, 2012 at 2:48 PM ^
I really wish I could be alive when they reach 1,000 but alas, I will be dead by then, unless I live to about 130 or something.
January 6th, 2012 at 2:54 PM ^
What are you, 115?
January 6th, 2012 at 2:57 PM ^
Beat me by 1 min....great minds and all..
January 6th, 2012 at 2:55 PM ^
Are you 120 now? Or just pessimistic as hell? If we average 10 win seasons over 11 years we hit it in that 11th year. Seems entirely possible to me.
January 6th, 2012 at 2:52 PM ^
This question is beyond the capacities of mere mortals. I refrain from venturing a guess until THE_KNOWLEDGE has spoken.
January 6th, 2012 at 3:34 PM ^
...if only because this will make for an epic homecoming night potentially. Whenever it is, of course, the beer and pizza is on me, of course.
January 6th, 2012 at 3:31 PM ^
against ILLINOISE!
I think we'll beat Bama then somehow lose to ND. They're due right?
January 6th, 2012 at 3:48 PM ^
because it will be achieved at the expense of the Spartoons, and will make Mark Dantonio's permanent "I have the world's largest and most painful hemorrhoid" expression even more priceless.
January 6th, 2012 at 4:50 PM ^
I think #900 for us against Spartonio would be a "program win," wouldn't you agree?
January 6th, 2012 at 4:13 PM ^
If we're going for 900 against Illinois, does that become a night game or have homecoming games always been noon starts?