SB Nation Asks: Can Michigan, Tennessee and Washington bring the 90s back to football?
Interesting SB Nation article on the parallels between U of M, Tennessee and Washington.
Discusses how all 3 teams were riding high and optimistic at the end of the 2000 season, after being dominant teams in their conferences throughout the 1990s (and in our case, since the late 1960s) but paints the aftermath of all teams as dismal since then, especially against their rivals. (Tennessee hasn't beaten Alabama since 2006 or Florida since 2004, Washington has lost 12 straight to Oregon, and we all know our own difficulties against the two Big Ten rivals).
And now, in 2016, all 3 are being hyped for big returns, lauded as conference co-favorites, and hold nearly identical rankings to how the 3 teams were ranked in January of 2001.
I think this timeline is most unfair to us, as our downfall didn't actually happen until 2007/2008. (Also, we won 6 games in a row against MSU from 2002-2007, despite them saying that since 2000 we can't beat our rivals).
I think that we have the best chance of the 3 to actually get back to our historical levels, but who do you think has the best chance of the other two? I actually think Tennessee will win the SEC East, but I don't view winning the SEC East as a significant accomplisment. Last year a Florida team we absolutely clobbered was the East champ (despite us being only the 3rd place team in our own division), and several crappy Missouri teams won it in the years prior. I highly doubt they win the whole SEC.
As for UW, I think they could pose a threat to the PAC 12, but that conference just has so much parity that they could lose to some random, mid-PAC 12 team, at any point in the season to derail them. I'd like their chances to knock off Oregon this year if the game was in Seattle, but I have a hard time thinking they'll end the streak in Eugene.
Peterson is a good coach and it seems Oregon may have lost its luster. With continuing doubt about USC coaching, this is a good time for Washington to make a move. Long term though Washington is like UCLA, they will have their years but will not consistently be at the top of the conference.
Tennessee may have its moment, but will get derailed by scandal at some point.
Among the 3, Michigan is by far the most likely to succeed big time.
All true.
Although, for 2016, I think Stanford is definitely the bigger threat from California than USC.
I'll believe the Trojans are back when I see it.
He is recruiting at a high level right now and has proven that he can win without the talent of other teams. He made a BCS Bowl winner out of a bunch of 2 and 3 star recruits. I would highly recommend against doubting this guy
Proven he can win without the talent of other teams - kind of. I'd venture to guess that Boise St had better talent than most of the teams in the WAC and Mountain West. I don't know if he'll ever really have that advantage in the Pac-12.
Boise did pull off some nice upsets but those were usually in bowl games where they had weeks to game plan, and the opponent might not have taken Boise that seriously. This isn't to say Peterson isn't a good coach, I think he is but it'll be interesting to see how he does at Washington.
He has, but the Pac-12 has a lot of good, maybe not great, teams and will be difficult to gain much traction for a long time in my opinion.
Not to be a dick but everyone keeps spelling it wrong and it's bothering me
While Peterson is good, he may not be a great coach. Dan Hawkins kickstarted the BSU program, then went onto Colorado and failed miserably. Peterson kept the momentum going at BSU and maybe improved it a little more. We're all well aware of the criticisms of the Mountain West conference. Peterson took over a middle of the pack Washington team under Steve Sarkisian and really hasn't made them better yet. His first two seasons have yielded records of 8-6 and 7-6. So far the wow factor is not there and his record is very Steve Sarkisian like.
Boise was good and improving before Hawkins got there
Sent from MGoBlog HD for iPhone & iPad
Well a Clinton's running for office and the kids are playing the Pokemon, so you bet your ass we can
And Blink 182 just had a #1 album
http://www.billboard.com/charts/billboard-200/2016-07-23
It dropped to #3 this week, still impressive that they were able to dethrone Drake for a week though.
I think it's really good. They've replaced Tom with Matt Skiba from Alkaline Trio, and they don't seem to have a missed a beat. Tom was more interested in side projects and aliens so I'm glad they've been able to move on, plus Matt's voice and guitar sounds awesome, especially live compared to Tom. Travis is a beast as always
Michigan has the talent, schedule, and coaching. Check
Tennessee has a tougher path playing in the SEC and I am not sure I buying the hype.
Washington has a ton of young talent and will be stout on defense. They have a good shot at a very solid year.
App State. They're doomed.
Washington is getting hype because they have some promising talent and a coach in Christ Peterson that is thought to be very good. However, they have not yet shown a serious upgrade on the field; they seem more analogous to Michigan last year, with a coach and some guys that were good recruits, albeit Michigan's 2014 was pitiful.
It's not that they can't emerge, but it's a lot dicier. There is real quality in the Pac 12 that even a good Washington team could lose to. It seems like their best scenario is a solid season with one major upset and something like 9 wins, re-establishing them as a force.
Tennessee has talent and it has chaos and it has Mike Debord. I have no idea what they will do this year. I think Georgia is a real threat to them in the division even if they're good, and there's simply no way they have more than a puncher's chance to win the SEC championship game even if they make it.
The key thing about Washington and Tennessee is that they are in positions where it won't surprise anyone if they don't win the conference. Both would need at least a couple of teams to spit the bit and a major upset of their own to pull it off. So neither team necessarily has to look at a 9-3 or 10-2 season without a championship game appearance as a blow.
I don't believe Michigan is in the same position. MSU is replacing key skill and quantity on both sides of the ball; OSU just saw off one of its great generations of players. Michigan has the experience and the coaching and the track record of growth, particularly on defense. We are supposed to be good this year.
9-3 would be a terrible disappointment this season for us.
I think that viewing Washington in a similar vein to U of M in 2015 is a very deft analogy.
As for Tenn, I think that people are too high on their last season's results.
Two of our three losses were to teams that finished in the top 5 (OSU and MSU); Tennessee can also say this (Oklahoma and Alabama), however they also had two losses to teams that were not good.
Losing to Florida and especially unranked Arkansas at home, means that Tennessee definitely did not have as good of a season as we did last year. Add in that Alabama will be a bigger obstacle this year than Ohio State will be, and I'd say we definitely have better odds than them.
Tennessee fans are high on themselves because they absolutely destroyed Northwestern in the Outback Bowl. A Northwestern team that we similarly destroyed in the regular season. We destroyed a team that Tennessee lost to in the regular season, in a higher ranked bowl matchup. The fact that some UT people think Michigan is the poser this offseason is ridiculous.
I think Tennessee fans are high on their team for more than the Northwestern win:
- Loss to Oklahoma in OT
- 1 pt loss to Florida in Gainesville
- 4 pt loss to Arkansas
- 5 pt loss to Alabama in Tuscaloosa
Their home win over atrocious South Carolina (3 points) was closer than either of their losses to Arkansas or Alabama.
Also, it's not like their 38-31 home field win over Georgia was dominating. I don't think they should be that excited.
The Florida and Oklahoma games were epic collapses; it's embarassing they lost them given where they were late in the game.
If we want to play that game, they could respond and point out goal line stances against Minnesota and Indiana as a counter to your argument. A win is a win.
Yes, but they had more losses than we did.
And of common opponents, we both killed Northwestern, but we beat a team by 34 points that they lost to.
Sent from MGoBlog HD for iPhone & iPad
You evidently think very highly of the Washington coach.
let's forge a greater path. If we're gonna bring anything back from the 90's I'd say Alice in Chains, Steve Urkel, and the NWO!
to de bad guy
fantastic show! I want AIC with Layne Staley though!
They're about to get Baylor'd, at least if there is a shred of decency in the world. Good luck with dominance, fuckers.
Have you gone your entire adult life, presumably through at least a somewhat respectable high school and 2-4 year undergraduate education, thinking the phrase is "intensive purposes"?
Sent from MGoBlog HD for iPhone & iPad
Sent from MGoBlog HD for iPhone & iPad
You do know that intensive purposes is an Mgoblog meme, right? as well as a common eggcorn for intents and purposes?
What a moran.
Until new stuff floats to the surface, which IMO is inevitable.
Mind bottling.
I could care less.
...with baited breath.
but recruiting against Oregon is tough these days. USC, UCLA, and Stanford make plucking talent out of California tough.
Tenne$$ee has $$$$ to pay players, but no Saban, so you can expect Auburn like results out of them...a great year followed by meh years, like most of the SEC schools that aren't BAMA or LSU to a lesser degree.
Michigan has Harbaugh so as long as he's around, we'll be relevant.
Tennessee? We're the only top ten I see
/I'll show myself out
Tennessee has several serious problems going on right now. I imagine those may set them back a little
Butch Jones is a mediocre coach and a scumbag, so in that sense he may be Phil Fulmer redux. Though I doubt he gets a Peyton Manning-esque talent to lead him to a national title. Tennessee will remain a mediocre program.
Petersen is a good coach, but the Pac-12 is much more competitive now than when Washington was last good. They have to compete with Oregon, Stanford, USC, and UCLA for recruits, and Oregon and Stanford will always be good in the north division. Washington will probably be a good program under Petersen and will occasionally compete for a Pac-12 title and a CFP spot, but won't be consistent contenders.
And we all know Michigan will be elite under Harbaugh