Phil Steele Bowl Prediction (Week 3)....wait for it....Michigan vs. Arizona in San Francisco Bowl! :)

Submitted by markusr2007 on September 15th, 2014 at 2:38 PM

Right. And since when is Phil Steele correct in predicting anything?

Okay, I know, I know.

But today he really did day this is gonna happen and so I just think that....

And at Levi's Stadium! Woo Hoo! Thanks Phil!




September 15th, 2014 at 2:45 PM ^

If this happens you know RR is gonna come up with some crazy shit in an attempt to absolutely destroy us. I can either see it working spectacularly or failing miserably.


September 15th, 2014 at 2:52 PM ^

Section 1 would literally not know what team to cheer for, but he would definitely demand to know what Lloyd Carr said about the bowl game, and to whom.


September 15th, 2014 at 3:21 PM ^

Well put.  The trajectory we're on right now does not point at being elite.  I'm not really sure what needs to change, though I've/we've some plausible ideas, other than Michigan re-locating to the South.  But, maybe something like that happening, like you state, may help change perception issue we have these days and be a bit more forward thinking to help get back on track, being successful.


September 15th, 2014 at 3:30 PM ^

to the South" raises an interesting question.  Is it possible that we will never be elite, nor will Ohio State, nor will Michigan State, nor will anybody from this conference because we, as a conference, have never played the kind of football they do down south or out west?  I mean, if you consider the BCS era as the "modern era" of college football with the best of all conferences getting an opportunity to prove it against each other on the field, can the Big Ten say it has ever been legitimately competitive?  Is Michigan v. USC 2006 and/or Ohio State v. LSU 2007 the best we got?  If so, could a Big Ten "elite program" simply be an oxymoron that only exists to torture us until we learn our lesson and settle back into a regional college football interest?


September 15th, 2014 at 3:36 PM ^

It's certainly something I've started pondering, oh, the past 2-3 years.  I used to dismiss the notions that the Big Ten is weak and flat out isn't very good.  Well, results speak loudly, and we've been weak and not very good.  Sparty has recently, but Ohio State has been THEE team from our conference competing at a high level.  Some were pretty good squads but some didn't quite live up to competing with the other "cream of the crop" teams from the other conferences. 

It's a scary notion but is it that far off that the Big Ten may be unfixable?!

Avon Barksdale

September 15th, 2014 at 4:05 PM ^

The Big Ten has been atrocious as of late, but it has not always been that way. The SEC hates the Big Ten, because the Big Ten was VERY competitive with them through 2007. Herbstreit mentioned in the offseason how the B1G actually had a leg up on the SEC in the ten years prior to 2007.

I believe we even had a diary by LSA not to long ago that showed how competitive the conference was compared to the south. The SEC became dominant because of one reason: coaching. The Midwest coaching tree (Saban, Miles, Pinkel, Bielema, Mullen, James Franklin, Kevin Sumlin, and many up and coming assistants) embarked on a journey through the South while the Big Ten coaches were getting older. It has left the Big Ten with terrible coaching ever since.

The Big Ten would be fine right now if Bielema, Miles, Meyer, Sumlin, Franklin, Dantonio, Tressel (Illinois should seriously consider him after this season), and Greg Schiano were all still pacing a B1G sideline. Instead we've had to watch MAC/WAC level guys like Brady Hoke, Danny Hope, Gary Anderson, Kyle Flood, and Tim Beckman lose all respectability for an entire conference.

The Big Ten can get back to elitism by getting coaches back in the Midwest (where they would've never left had they been paid better). A league with Jim Harbaugh, Jim Tressel, Urban Meyer, James Franklin, Mark Dantonio, and a guy like Dan Mullen going to Nebraska would go a LONG WAY to getting the conference back to respectability.



September 16th, 2014 at 8:35 AM ^

The Big Ten has good academics and, for the most part (I'm looking at you Ohio State) integrity.  How does the SEC match up there? 

Do you really want guys like Tressel coming back to coaching?  Not me and, at least so far, no Big Ten school wants him either.

One huge difference between the Big Ten and the SEC is oversigning.  The statistics have shown quite clearly that the average SEC school gets about 5 classes worth of recruits for every 4 classes that Big Ten teams get.  If you get to choose from 120 recruits - and just jettison the 24 who do not perform at an acceptable level, you will be consistently ahead of the program that only gets 96, because if that program jettisoned 24, it would have 13 free scholarships.

If I had to choose between Hoke and Saban (or Tressel or Meyer), it would be a ridiculously easy choice, particularly if I had a son who was going to play football at Michigan (4 daughters, 0 sons, so no chance of that :-)).

Avon Barksdale

September 16th, 2014 at 10:55 AM ^

I agree it plays a big role, but 1.) The NCAA does not care. 2.) The SEC sends two times the underclassmen to the NFL that the B1G does. So while it may not look good to sign 25 every single year, it doesn't look all that bad when you think that the Alabama's and LSU's typically send three of four underclassmen per team, respectively, each year to the league.

If you're asking me would I rather have Nick Saban oversigning and winning or Brady Hoke signing fifteen/year and losing, I'll take Nick Saban at $10 million dollars/year any day.



September 16th, 2014 at 11:49 AM ^

But "integrity" doesn't score touchdowns nor win football games.  It also doesn't win championships.

Look at Ohio, Alabama, Florida State, Oregon and Auburn football. I rest my case.

College football and the media have exactly what they wants. It's the perfect recipe. The above mentioned products create a massive dose of arrogance, hatred and controversy that keeps the interwebs broiling for years, and the media machines all rolling in a Scrooge McDuck vault of gold and cash.  Michigan's integrity would ruin this.  Wolverine Athletics is obviously clueless and way late to the game on this fact: In college football, Integrity is for chumps.


September 15th, 2014 at 5:12 PM ^

not heading in the right direction. I do see progress that could be signs of being on the path towards 'elite' status. I don't think 'Elite' status is going to happen anytime soon; it may not arrive next year, but I see things that make me feel we are making progress. Lets keep in mind there will be setbacks, obviously the ND game was one of those, but what's important is that the team learns from it's mistakes and makes progress. It looks like they made progress in the Miami game, hopefully the team will be able to run the ball against Utah as well. As well as other things like no INT's, or sacks, etc.


September 16th, 2014 at 6:23 AM ^

Whenever I see that image on your avatar (a co-worker has it as a screen saver) I cannot help but think of Mr. Taylor Lewan. I have been to many UM vs. OSU games in AA. I do not have enough appendages to count the number of guys that should have been wrecked by someone because of their behavior. I wish Taylor did it when he was in the pros. No one cares how you treat people there.


September 15th, 2014 at 3:04 PM ^

For now, of course, it's a mere prediction and we can still rest relatively easily about that, but if it ever were in fact announced as an actual bowl game, I do have a feeling that the room where the server for this blog is would, well....


September 15th, 2014 at 3:10 PM ^

and this seems like a good place. Thread Jack Time!!

Screw this bowl projections nonsense. Let's talk fan base bowl polls! Who would you like to play in a bowl this year? 

Here me out on this. I wanna play Duke. Maybe some of the basketball hate would boil over onto the football field. And Duke actually has looked like they play football okay for the past 2 seasons. And lets be honest. If the Big Ten is going to win any bowls this year, it would be over the ACC.


September 15th, 2014 at 3:11 PM ^

but in the unfortunate event that we lost it would be entertaining to see all those who constantly blabbered idiotically about "Michigan Man" have to suck it during the off-season.

the bee train

September 15th, 2014 at 10:56 PM ^

I think these are two very different examples. While it seems as though neither coach was a particularly good fit, only one had to be replaced by a "Michigan Man" according to a chunk of the fanbase. I can't help but wonder where the program would be if that vocal minority would have allowed a more competent AD find football's John Beilein with no connection to Bo.


September 16th, 2014 at 6:30 AM ^

Michigan Man is the tradition for U of M.

The style of play Hoke endears himself to is not the issue with this team. Any sensible fan would likely be happy with successful manball. If Harbaugh came here and brought his Stanford type teams with him, we would all be loving us some manball from a Michigan Man.

I hope we play RR at some point. I like our chances.


September 15th, 2014 at 3:46 PM ^

Let's be honest here - that match-up, as much as we might hate it, would be ratings heaven for any bowl able to pull it off.  And if we're facing Arizona in anything other than the Rose Bowl it will be a pretty crappy bowl game that would kill for the ratings that game will generate.

And we thought Appy State II was a bad idea.....that game (if it actually happens) will generate so much buzz it will take on a life of its own.