Rank the Michigan teams from best to worst in the BCS era
Now that the BCS era is over and it being the midst of the off-season for college football, lets rank the Michigan teams from best to worst, 1 to 16. As a reminder, the BCS era was 1998 to 2013. All just opinion and for fun of course.
I'll start:
1. 2006
2. 1999 (Not sure how they lost to Illi at home)
3. 2003
4. 2000 (perhaps our best and most talented offense during this era)
5. 2004
6. 1998
7. 2011
8. 2007
9. 2002
10. 2001
11. 2012
12. 2005 (Probably Carr's worse team. Defense was out of shape, and I didn't mind Herman being canned after this season)
13. 2013
14. 2010 (more fun to watch than 2013 but defense was sooooo bad)
15. 2009
16. 2008 (duh)
To recap, 2003 team:
- Lost @ Oregon by 4 with a net turnover margin of –3; ‘nuff said.
- Lost @ Iowa by 3. Carr punted from the Iowa 35 in the first quarter, team failed to score a TD after 1st @ Goal from the Iowa 8 in the second quarter, had a punt blocked in the third quarter leading to a 3 and out FG for the Hawkeyes.
Scoring differential says a lot IMO.
- 2003 - better offense and better secondary than 2006
- 2006
- 2000 - got beat by drew Brees; inexplicable ATrain fumble
- 1999
- 1998
- 2011
- 2002
- 2005 - never got blown out despite a ton of injuries
- 2004
- 2001
- 2012
- 2007 - Appalachian State penalty: engaged. Probably too harsh.
- 2013
- 2010
- 2009
- 2008
- 1999
- 2006
- 2003
- 2000
- 2011
- 2004
- 2002
- 1998
- 2007
- 2012
- 2005
- 2001
- 2013
- 2010
- 2009
- 2008
So just throwing this out there: does anyone else think that the 2012 team was probably better than the 2011 iteration? Don't get me wrong, Team 132 was one of my favorite teams ever, regardless of sport -- that was my freshman year of college and that season was absolute magic, not to mention eight home games. But I feel that without an exponentially more difficult schedule and some very detrimental injuries that Team 133 was better despite the losses of Martin, Molk, and Van Bergen.
Yeah, in my hypothetical scenario that team was injury free. I think we likely beat Ohio as well with a healthy Denard despite the Hoke-era teams' futility in road games.
This is a depressing exercise.
1. 2006
2. 2003
3. 2004
4. 1999
5. 2000
6. 2011
7. 2007 (excluding the App State game, that team was loaded but had way too many injuries, and beat the Heisman trophy winner in their own state)
8. 1998
9. 2001
10. 2002
11. 2012
12. 2005
13. 2010
14. 2013
15. 2009
16. 2008
1. 1999
Yes, the loss to Illinois boggles the mind. If Brady had played the entire game against Sparty, UM wins that one. If that team had played its cards right, they should have had their second perfect season/national championship in three years. What might have been.
2. 2006.
One or two different moves in Columbus would have been huge. Win that one, and play the bowl game (BCS title tilt) the way they played against the Urban/Tebow Florida crew the following year, and yes, that '06 team might have run the table and won a national title as well.
3 2000.
Yup, the best all-around offense of the BCS era, no doubt. We can only wonder what 2001 would have been like had Henson stayed.
4. 2003.
Even though ohio won the national ttile the previous year, it was very easy to feel good about the state of UM football with the '03 team, even give the losses against Oregon and USC.
5. 2011.
Honestly, I'm torn on this one. I'm inclined to thnk this team was a little on the overrated side, and was very fortunate in more than a few occasions. Still, 11 wins is an impressive feat, no matter how you slice it.
After that, it's not so clear. What is clear is that UM usually needs a better pass rush. The overall criticism of team speed hasn't always been accurate, but there have been teams at other schools with a better pass rush. Accomplish that and you'd see a significant improvement.