somehow we're only 124th
- Member for
- 6 years 4 weeks
- View recent blog entries
|1 year 1 week ago||Underachieved assumes||
Underachieved assumes something that was expected; what I'm arguing is that the "expectation" in 1997 was sky-high and impossible for any program, ever, to achieve. We've been to five BCS games in the 16 seasons since (winning two of them).
You could similarly say LSU has "underachieved" since 2007, but you'd be insane to do so, given that at that point in time they'd won 2 NCs in 5 years. IN 1997, Michigan's previous decade included two Heisman winners, a NC, and four Rose Bowl appearances. You're drawing too small of a sample size, IMHO. Measure the program from the last 25 years and we're still crushing it (post-Bo, by the way).
|1 year 1 week ago||Also||
Also: 1997 was our first NC in 49 years. You reasonably expected more to follow in quick succession, and the lack thereof has you upset? Come on.
|1 year 1 week ago||Perspective||
In terms of college football history, 16 years is actually pretty recent (and in the interim we've also gone to three more Rose Bowls, an Orange Bowl and a Sugar Bowl, and won 4 more B1G titles). There are 120 teams in D1-A, and only 11 teams have won more recently than we have; that means ~90% of football fans have won a "national title" less recently than Michigan.
I think a lot of Michigan fan angst is coming from two things right now: (1) the fact that it's OSU and Sparty who are doing well right now while we are slightly down, and (2) a lack of perspective and unrealistic expectations. Read the above paragraph and remember that MSU is heading to its first Rose Bowl since the 1987 season (and first BCS game...ever).
When I read "Im sure many believed we would win at least 1 more NC within the next 10 years and a few more Heisman winner" my reaction is purely "you are an uninformed idiot." You do realize that Michigan's two Heisman winners in a decade (and 3rd overall) came before ALABAMA had ever had ONE, right? Again: 120 teams. Do the math. We've been extraordinarily blessed as fans with 42 B1G titles, 11 NCs and 3 Heismans, and had a run of a bunch of that all at once in the 1990s; you cannot remain at a historical peak forever (see: Alabama pre-Saban).
If you define your happiness as a fan by winning national championships in a sport with 120 teams, you're always going to be miserable and there's nothing the world can do for you. If you define it by enjoying your team and winning big/rivalry games and conference titles, you'll still have rough patches, but be much, much more content in life. If you reply to this with "lowered standards grumble grumble" then I have one word for you: Bo.
|1 year 19 weeks ago||Don't Worry||
As an M-Law grad myself, don't worry about tickets too much if you don't get them from the waiting list. Because you're a 1L, tons of your friends who have season tickets will be giving them away for free every week to spend Saturdays freaking out and outlining contracts/property in the law library (despite it being an overreaction and unnecessary). For regular games you'll get them much cheaper than face value, and for ND/OSU you'll be able to get them around face value (particularly OSU, as so many of your classmates will go home for Thanksgiving).
In short: just make friends and you'll get to every game you want to. With the new GA policy the location of your ticket won't matter anymore anyway.
|1 year 20 weeks ago||Sophomores||
I'm all-in on Brady Hoke's recruiting and loving the direction of the program, but can sanity prevail and let this come a bit to fruition first? Campbell hasn't begun his junior year of HS yet - not time to compare to historical duos.
Although I suppose it is summer, where football-deprived brains will wander. Still...
|1 year 28 weeks ago||Ignore All Rumors||
If you think coaching searches are run in a tight-lipped manner, you have no idea how guarded this process will be. Interviews will be at undisclosed locations (unrelated to any of the parties involved), any information that the press gets will be misinformation or speculation, etc. I was intimately involved in the 2002 process when MSC was hired, and if you don't believe me regarding the usefulness of these rumors, look back to see what the scuttlebutt was then and how "off" it was.
I was awed then to see the caliber of candidate UM received for its presidency (presidents of other top-flight universities, US cabinet members, etc.) and you can rest assured that any and all athletic directors are off the table, definitely, no ifs, ands or buts.
|2 years 5 weeks ago||Lesson from your Elders||
For those of you too young to remember, MSU is called "Little Brother" (and Mike Hart said it) because they always have, and always will, care about beating Michigan WAY more than Michigan cares about beating them. Watching MSU unravel every year after the Michigan game is a time-honored tradition; the only reason to note MSU's existence at all is to make sure we don't slip up and lose to them, thus having to hear them consider themselves equal until we put the universe back in order again.
The last four years have been excruciating to watch Michigan fans obsess over MSU; we won; now we can stop. On to OSU and the other big boys that matter. Return MSU to the irrelevance they deserve - they're a 5-5 team that obsesses way too much about their better, more established in-state rival. Don't give them extra publicity/attention and validate them any further - what annoys them the most is us ignoring them.
THAT is what little brother is all about.
|2 years 7 weeks ago||Student Section||
The first I remember was 2002 Penn State (first Big House overtime game, a win) - I have a picture from the newpaper with players up in the stands posing with the student section in celebration (I was in the 2nd row for it).
Coming over after every d*mned home win was definitely a RichRod thing.
|2 years 10 weeks ago||Michigan 45, Illinois 6||
Michigan 45, Illinois 6
|2 years 23 weeks ago||2006||
We won 11 games in 2006. Also had a two-loss season in 1999.
|2 years 32 weeks ago||History repeats itself||
Early in the century there were many who questioned whether football could (or should) survive, and as the injuries (and deaths) continued piling up, something had to be changed, right? The century I'm referring to, of course, was the 20th.
Teddy Roosevelt as president helped bring in the era of the NCAA, eliminate unsportsmanlike play, etc., in the first few years of the 1900s. I think we'll see more evolution and protection, but just as Mark Twain's death, reports of football's [imminent] demise have been greatly exaggerated.
|2 years 33 weeks ago||Michigan obsession||
Michigan losing builds their psyche and outlook on life at least as much as MSU winning anything. "Ann Arbor is a Whore." The James Madison political science program is renowned worldwide (vs. reality of unknown outside East Lansing). Obsession with their mascot. The only reason Michigan has a better reputation is historical, bias of elites.
Really - it's the entire "We're just as good as Michigan, who cares about them" strain - evidencing obsession while trying to deny it. That lack of self-awareness permeates the rest.
|2 years 35 weeks ago||Non-stat||
There have been single-digit presidents in that 60 year period, and you're also starting your data set after the most recent positive example, which skews your data. It would be extremely improbable, even with a huge swath of UM grads who are qualified, that we'd hire a UM grad to run the school in that time period. Having been involved in the past, it's a complex matrix to select one, but in the end, we look for the best fit available to push Michigan forward.
By way of example - those who think like you (Michigan Man for Michigan) would have hired Joe White in 2002 instead of Mary Sue Coleman; his tenure at Illinois ended in scandal and MSC has led Michigan to new heights. Whenever a group limits its options in arbitrary ways, it's going to (over time) get sub-optimal outcomes. Thank goodness that's not Michigan!
|2 years 39 weeks ago||1999||
When I was an incoming freshman in 1999 (Tom Brady senior season), tickets were $85.00...for the six-game season ($14.17/game). Inflation has not gone up THAT much in 13 years.
|3 years 4 weeks ago||100% agree||
"Go Blue" would catch on (a key necessity - "Hoke Smash" will not and is gimmicky) and would be infinitely classier. Come on, students, let's get it done!
|3 years 5 weeks ago||Agree with sentiment||
I agree with your sentiment, but (1) it's spelled "privilege" and (2) Wisconsin is not one of the nicer places to visit for a road game in the B1G. In order of hostility, I'd rank them:
2. MSU (for Michigan fans, at least)
4. Penn State
|3 years 10 weeks ago||Exactly.||
If they manage how they do some of this stuff a bit tighter, we'll tolerate the not-so-bad parts and embrace the pieces we really like (bigger video boards probably upset some blue-hairs, but plenty love them, for instance). Nothing will please everybody. I get the sense the athletic department is "trying and adapting" with some of this stuff - the ITBH seemed to end a bit earlier when the team took the field this last week (differing from SDSU, when it rolled right through the team hitting the banner) -- maybe they'll eventually remove it, and they're just experimenting a bit with the "when" and "how".
|3 years 11 weeks ago||Survey = backup for Brandon||
Most on here are interpreting the data wrong. Brandon's marketing (roughly meant to encompass the various music piped in, Pop Evil track, thoughts of a mascot, etc.) isn't trying to find "what do a majority of people want" - with a fanbase as large as ours, that's impossible. What he's trying to do is (a) preserve the central draw (this is MICHIGAN, MClub Banner, band, etc.) while (b) adding new elements that'll draw and entice NEW audiences.
I don't necessarily agree this is the right path, FWIW - the Michigan gameday experience is unique and I'd like to see it preserved. That being said, from a "growing the brand" perspective, these actions can be disliked by 80% of the fanbase, but if it doesn't damper their attachment to the brand, then strengthening the bonds of the 20% who do like it is worth it.
There has to be a breaking point, and clearly some things are in direct conflict (ITBH during the team taking the field, for instance - that is in direct conflict with The Victors while they take the field). Other than those few places, however, it's possible to both pipe in Neil Diamond and Pop Evil and have the MMB playing Varsity.
Just saying - strong numbers "against" don't necessarily mean the marketing department is "ignoring the numbers" when they're making these decisions. Given Brandon's experience at Dominos, I'd be shocked if they didn't have a much more nuanced idea of the brand and how to build it than we do.
|3 years 12 weeks ago||Dumbest thread ever?||
Two schools with red/white playing each other isn't exactly news. I mean, Wisconsin/Indiana and Nebraska/Oklahoma do this every year...?
|3 years 13 weeks ago||Blame||
While I'm sure that to some degree everyone involved could have done better to make Lloyd Carr's retirement work more smoothly for Michigan, as the guy inside following it, knowing what he knows now, who does Bacon blame for the failure of the Rodriguez era? Bill Martin for conducting a search that found someone that "didn't fit"? Rodriguez for not adapting? RichRod for trying to win a MANBALL conference with waterbugs? RichRod's horrible luck with DCs? Michigan's fanbase for not giving him the support needed to recruit/weather storms? The media/Freep for making the path uphill more difficult? Lloyd Carr and his former players for not coming back and helping RichRod garner the power of Schembechler hall? Dave Brandon for having too short a leash?
So many possibilities, and many probably complicit - but at the heart of it, what does John U. Bacon believe was the central catalyst/cause that was irreconcilable and caused the Lloyd to Whomever transition not to work the way we would have wanted?
|3 years 48 weeks ago||Always||
Always went nose tackle up the middle for the insta-sack.
|3 years 48 weeks ago||Thanks||
Thanks, this is how it was intended - Schiano hit a certain angle, but I thought this data was part of the story, too.
|3 years 48 weeks ago||Upward trajectory?||
The point of the above analysis is that we lost more games by double digits in year three than we did in years one or two; that's not upward trajectory. While some simple analysis (# of wins, yardage of offense) may have indicated progress, this post is a counter-point to that perspective.
Also - most Rodriguez teams had a history of a "2nd-year leap" (see: WVU year two), which was always promised to us here - first in year two, then in year three ("discounting" the hole of year one, which I thought was disingenuous). It never came, and these numbers/data show that it got worse this year instead of better - our points for/against were actually better in 2009, and we had 50% fewer "bad" losses.
|4 years 2 weeks ago||Spot-on re Harbaugh||
Were it not for seeing what Jim Harbaugh did at SD and now at Stanford, combined with his iron-clad understanding of our rivalries, tradition, positioning, etc., I would be 100% on the "keep RichRod for year 4, it's only fair" bandwagon. He IS all of those things, though, and a coach this seemingly hand-made for the Michigan coaching job does not, and likely will not, come along very often, maybe not again in our lifetimes (other than Mike Hart someday??).
If Brandon makes the move it's probably not fair to Rich, but a fair decision isn't the same thing as the right decision. There are positive and negative impications to all major decisions at that level, which is why Brandon's the guy making them. He could very well feel Rich has done well in three years but still justify bringing Harbaugh home.
Either way, Go Blue! Thanks as always for the reasoned analysis, Brian.
|4 years 2 weeks ago||I'm pretty sure||
Those are also the two best selling brands in each conference, FWIW - featuring Michigan and Florida prominently for advertising isn't exactly something out of the ordinary.
|4 years 2 weeks ago||Idiotic||
How big of an idiot are you? Talking about expected performance v. the schedule next year is one thing, but trying to say that Tressel can't win national championships or bowl games is ludicrous. OSU has owned the Fiesta Bowl for the last decade, won the national championship in 2002/03 and won the Rose Bowl last year against this year's #1, Oregon. I mean, wtf?
I put this in the same category as the poster a couple days ago who said that Michigan shouldn't go back to the days of losing bowl games all the time like we did in the '80s; calling out Tressel and Bo as not enough for your program are surefire signs that you're a mouth-breather who doesn't know squat about college football.
|4 years 2 weeks ago||Gator||
With Iowa's end of season collapse relative to expectations (while we also collapsed, it was more or less expected), and our fanbase not having been to a bowl game since Henne vs. Tebow, I'm going to assume it's Outback = PSU, Gator = Michigan. My buddy in Iowa says the fans around there couldn't care less about their bowl game this year (despite their reputation for traveling).
|4 years 2 weeks ago||Agree that W/Ls contribute, but||
Fewer players than Illinois, Purdue and Northwestern? 3rd from the bottom doesn't equate with our W/L, and if our offense is "great" and defense "horrible," why are we the only ones recognizing it? It seems to me that the coaches recognized Denard for being a one-man show.
|4 years 3 weeks ago||See, the thing||
about football is, though, that "offensive ability" is not independent of little things like "turnovers" and "age" - it's about putting points on the board. A young team should have more variability (sometimes losing to crap teams, sometimes beating good ones) instead of being consistently outclassed by good teams and marginally defeating bad ones.
|4 years 3 weeks ago||Tate's Loyalty||
Will get rewarded when he becomes the starter in Jim Harbaugh's offense in 2011 (zing!).
Legit question, though - who's the likely starter in the event Jim Harbaugh is the MIchigan coach next year? I am NOT assuming he will OR calling for RichRod's head by asking this question, just thinking through an option. I actually think Tate's probably the guy (Harbaugh recruited him for Stanford, more traditional QB, etc.).