Michigan still making excuses.

[SuperHornet]

[youtube]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WeYsTmIzjkw[/youtube]

[rkwittem]

Hoke was named Big Ten Coach of the Year by both the media and the coaches and was a finalist for national coach of the year honors....seems he did something right.

Ok....so what? This means he's an elite coach? His career record is barely about .500. Jeez, all it takes is one good season to convince Michigan fans that you're the next Bo and not another Lloyd Carr?

The main reason Michigan was terrible under Rich Rod was their defense. That problem has been more or less solved.
Michigan's defense went from being ranked 107th in scoring defense in 2010 (35.2 points per game) to being ranked sixth (17.38 points per game) in 2011. Michigan recovered a lot of those fumbles because Mattison stresses stripping the ball and jumping on it. Will it be 80% again this year? Likely not, but it will be over 50 again. The defense also returns 8 starters from last years team this coming year.

All you did was agree with me here. That 80% figure comes from theirs and their opponents' fumbles, not just Michigan's. I hope you followed that. That number is going waaaaaaay down this year. As a result, Michigan will be lucky to top 9 wins. They won't get the 50-50 breaks they got. That's not me being a hater, that's the law of averages.

The offense was always good, but last year had 2 1000 yard rushers for the first time since 1975, both are back this year. Michigan finally found it self a kicker after about 4 years without one. Under Rich Rod it was TD or nothing. The FG team was horrible, and many times a FG wasn't attempted on 4th and 5 from the 15-25 yard line because there was no kicker. Last year Gibbons went 13-17 and was 54-55 on EP's. It's no longer TD or bust for Michigan.

I hope he's ready. He's going to be busier than expected from kicking all those FGs this year.

In one month of being the HC Brady Hoke put together a top 25 ranked recruiting class for the 2011 signing class.

Ok, and Urban Meyer out-did tubby in less time from when he took the job. Hoke has already clogged his signing class, whereas Meyer is still in the running for a ton of other elite recruits. So odds are pretty good Michigan will be sliding down the recruiting rankings, as well as the polls.

All of those close games Michigan was lucky to win? Of the 11 wins, only 3 were by less than a TD....Michigan's W's last year were by 24, 4, 28, 21, 58, 18, 22, 17, 38, 6, 3. Yeah...average margin of victory was 27.2 last season. Oh, that's because the schedule was weak? How many ranked teams did Alabama beat? A massive 4. Oregon? 3. Wisconsin? 3. Michigan State? 3. Nebraska? 2. South Carolina? 2...last two games of the year. Southern Cal? 1. Arkansas? 4. Hell, every single team I thought would have more than Michigan had less than 4 ranked wins...only team that had more than that was LSU at 8. I guess all of those teams seasons are overrated too....they didn't beat that many ranked teams. Was Michigan's SOS top in the nation? Nope. It was still top 30-40 depending which SOS system you look at.

Margin of victory is not the question. The question is whether Michigan will get away with as much luck as they had in 2011. I say no. And so do most major experts and analysts. The skunk weasels should consider themselves grateful they got placed in the weaker Big 10 division. They need all the help Minnesota can give them in the W department.

Oh, and Hoke brought in the #4 recruiting class in the nation this past year....and with 22 commits for the 2013 class is #2 in the nation for that class so far. The Wolverines' 14 four-star commitments matches LSU for most in the country.

Already addressed this...it's August. Your class is full. Most other teams aren't full. They will be once the commitments are made on. Don't come crying to me when Meyer waxes Hoke during the offseason...again. (after probably doing it on the field to boot).

Is Hoke at Saban level? Not yet, but Michigan isn't far from what they were of the late 90's and early 00's right now.

Wait, so they're going to steal another title from a more deserving team and remain title-less for the 70 years they were since the end of WWII?

[UNI88]

It's kind of humorous watching a champion of all things upper-crust BCS rip on one of the most storied programs in FBS football. I'm not health professional, but the dichotomy in his arguments make me wonder if he suffers from some sort of dissociative identity disorder.

For what it's worth, I think that Hoke is a heck of a coach and was the right hire for Wolverines. He's turning that program around and will have it competing for B1G0 championships and more. He might or might not be as good as Meyer, winning games & championships is about more than just top recruiting classes.

I also think it would be hilarious if App St backed out of the game and left Michigan to stew on that loss for another 5-10 years. Don't give them the chance to redeem themselves.

[rkwittem]

It's kind of humorous watching a champion of all things upper-crust BCS rip on one of the most storied programs in FBS football. I'm not health professional, but the dichotomy in his arguments make me wonder if he suffers from some sort of dissociative identity disorder.

For what it's worth, I think that Hoke is a heck of a coach and was the right hire for Wolverines. He's turning that program around and will have it competing for B1G0 championships and more. He might or might not be as good as Meyer, winning games & championships is about more than just top recruiting classes.

I also think it would be hilarious if App St backed out of the game and left Michigan to stew on that loss for another 5-10 years. Don't give them the chance to redeem themselves.

Michigan was storied...that story is mostly fluff. One title in 60 years isn't my idea of relevance anymore. They're a 2nd tier team now, just like Notre Dame. Make room for the big boys- Bama, USC, Ohio State, Oklahoma, Texas, etc.

[UNI88]

It's kind of humorous watching a champion of all things upper-crust BCS rip on one of the most storied programs in FBS football. I'm not health professional, but the dichotomy in his arguments make me wonder if he suffers from some sort of dissociative identity disorder.

For what it's worth, I think that Hoke is a heck of a coach and was the right hire for Wolverines. He's turning that program around and will have it competing for B1G0 championships and more. He might or might not be as good as Meyer, winning games & championships is about more than just top recruiting classes.

I also think it would be hilarious if App St backed out of the game and left Michigan to stew on that loss for another 5-10 years. Don't give them the chance to redeem themselves.

Michigan was storied...that story is mostly fluff. One title in 60 years isn't my idea of relevance anymore. They're a 2nd tier team now, just like Notre Dame. Make room for the big boys- Bama, USC, Ohio State, Oklahoma, Texas, etc.

All the schools you listed have gone through rough patches as well. Time will tell whether Hoke and Michigan will be relevant on the national stage again but I'm betting they will. And my favorite team growing up was the Buckeyes so I'm pretty sure I'm not looking at this from a homer's perspective but rationally.

[Franks Tanks]

It's kind of humorous watching a champion of all things upper-crust BCS rip on one of the most storied programs in FBS football. I'm not health professional, but the dichotomy in his arguments make me wonder if he suffers from some sort of dissociative identity disorder.

For what it's worth, I think that Hoke is a heck of a coach and was the right hire for Wolverines. He's turning that program around and will have it competing for B1G0 championships and more. He might or might not be as good as Meyer, winning games & championships is about more than just top recruiting classes.

I also think it would be hilarious if App St backed out of the game and left Michigan to stew on that loss for another 5-10 years. Don't give them the chance to redeem themselves.

Michigan was storied...that story is mostly fluff. One title in 60 years isn't my idea of relevance anymore. They're a 2nd tier team now, just like Notre Dame. Make room for the big boys- Bama, USC, Ohio State, Oklahoma, Texas, etc.

You're a dumbass. 6 years ago you could've said the same thing about Bama. 12 years ago about USC, 15 years ago about Oklahoma etc. Michigan won a NC in 1997 and owned Ohio State for much of the 80's and 90's. 6 years ago they were an inch away from playing in a National Title game. They have underachieved a bit over the last 10 years because they haven't had the right coach, but I think Hoke is that guy. Michigan is a top tier FBS football program, historically and currently, and only a moron Ohio State lover like you would argue otherwise.

[jmufan]

I wonder what kind of excuses VT will be making in 3 years when that 5 year anniversary comes up? Or will they be smart and keep it hush as not to draw attention? I'm thinking VT players are smarter than Michigan players.

[rkwittem]

Michigan was storied...that story is mostly fluff. One title in 60 years isn't my idea of relevance anymore. They're a 2nd tier team now, just like Notre Dame. Make room for the big boys- Bama, USC, Ohio State, Oklahoma, Texas, etc.

You're a dumbass. 6 years ago you could've said the same thing about Bama. 12 years ago about USC, 15 years ago about Oklahoma etc. Michigan won a NC in 1997 and owned Ohio State for much of the 80's and 90's. 6 years ago they were an inch away from playing in a National Title game. They have underachieved a bit over the last 10 years because they haven't had the right coach, but I think Hoke is that guy. Michigan is a top tier FBS football program, historically and currently, and only a moron Ohio State lover like you would argue otherwise.

Your point is only half-right. Bama, USC, and OU may have been down, but they all bounced back with championships and a high, sustained degree of success. One season does not constitute "being back." Did you think that Notre Dame was back when they had that nice year under Charlies Weis?

I said Michigan was a 2nd tier program. I don't adhere to a black-and-white college football view where you're either great or not. I would argue there are degrees of greatness, and Michigan is not at the top of the food chain right now.
I'll put it simply- there are more than 2 tiers of college teams. Michigan is outside the top tier. They are storied, but they aren't elite. Not yet. Using your logic, I could argue that any team who wins 10+ games after a rough decade or so is now elite. So let's add Houston to the mix. And Arkansas State. And anyone who wins an unexpected 10 games this year and is coached by someone half-decent.
They were, once upon a time. Just not right now. Give the fat man a couple of years to prove that he is the next Nick Saban before we anoint him 'the next Bo Schembechler'. God, everyone wants to jump off the cliff and believe Michigan is back. Excuse me for throwing cold water on it just because I'm skeptical. IF they win 10 games this year, I'll say they're back...to getting their butts kicked by Ohio State in the most painful way possible.

[Franks Tanks]

You're a dumbass. 6 years ago you could've said the same thing about Bama. 12 years ago about USC, 15 years ago about Oklahoma etc. Michigan won a NC in 1997 and owned Ohio State for much of the 80's and 90's. 6 years ago they were an inch away from playing in a National Title game. They have underachieved a bit over the last 10 years because they haven't had the right coach, but I think Hoke is that guy. Michigan is a top tier FBS football program, historically and currently, and only a moron Ohio State lover like you would argue otherwise.

Your point is only half-right. Bama, USC, and OU may have been down, but they all bounced back with championships and a high, sustained degree of success. One season does not constitute "being back." Did you think that Notre Dame was back when they had that nice year under Charlies Weis?

I said Michigan was a 2nd tier program. I don't adhere to a black-and-white college football view where you're either great or not. I would argue there are degrees of greatness, and Michigan is not at the top of the food chain right now.
I'll put it simply- there are more than 2 tiers of college teams. Michigan is outside the top tier. They are storied, but they aren't elite. Not yet. Using your logic, I could argue that any team who wins 10+ games after a rough decade or so is now elite. So let's add Houston to the mix. And Arkansas State. And anyone who wins an unexpected 10 games this year and is coached by someone half-decent.
They were, once upon a time. Just not right now. Give the fat man a couple of years to prove that he is the next Nick Saban before we anoint him 'the next Bo Schembechler'. God, everyone wants to jump off the cliff and believe Michigan is back. Excuse me for throwing cold water on it just because I'm skeptical. IF they win 10 games this year, I'll say they're back...to getting their butts kicked by Ohio State in the most painful way possible.

I don't adhere to a black & white view, but I instead have arbitrary standards which I make up on the fly. Good one

It is stupid to break everyone down into super small tiers. Michigan may not be at the top of their game, but they are top tier. They get some of the best recruits on the country, have a 110k seat stadium and get to and win BCS bowl games on a fairly regular basis.

Who the hell is "top tier" by your definition? 6 teams?

Texas just has two mediocre years back to back. Are they no longer top tier? Florida sucked last year- not top tier. Georgia hasn't won a national title in 30 years, so also not top tier. Give me a break.

[clenz]

We need to remember one thing about this guy....he's a Fuckeye fan - he will NEVER admit Michigan is good....Michigan could go defeated 8 years in a row with an average margin of victory of 42 and every single win would be flukey.


He stated that Michigan only won close games because of lucky bounces....when I pointed out Michigan won by an average of 4 TD he said it wasn't about margin of victory but lucky bounces....that's a fuck load of lucky bounces to win by 28 points per game. Also pointed that the defense is why Michigan won those games...yep, a top 20 defense in the nation will help a lot of teams win a lot of games. Good defenses force turnovers, and good offenses don't turn the ball over. Good recipe for success.

Most major experts expect Michigan to suck this year? Um, most have them in the B1G Title game and a BCS bowl....whereas the other division has 2 of their 6 teams indelible for the title. Wisconsin could finish THIRD IN THEIR DIVISION AND STILL PLAY FOR THE TITLE.

Brady Hoke leads the nation with the number of 4 star recruits, and is second in the nation with an overall recruiting class...AND IT'S A BAD THING according to this fuck. Most programs are sitting at 15-20 commits right now. If you are fighting for the elite of what's left at the end of the season you probably don't have a very good class.

50 years for national titles? What Michigan did during prior to WW2 is irrelevant to you....so is anything before the seniors on each team were born really.

Break it down to the last 20 and see what you get.

Michigan has played in 5 BCS bowl games the last decade....7th most in college football...Just as many as LSU (who has only one national title the last 50 years by the way), more than Alabama, Oregon, Wisconsin, Migami, Texas, Notre Dame, Stanford, Georgia, WVU, Cinci, Illinois, Iowa, Nebraska, PSU, Tennessee, TCU, Auburn, Boise State, Utah, Arkasnas, Clemson, Colorado, UCONN, GT, Haiwaii, KSU, Maryland, Pitt, I could keep going.

[Franks Tanks]

We need to remember one thing about this guy....he's a **** fan - he will NEVER admit Michigan is good....Michigan could go defeated 8 years in a row with an average margin of victory of 42 and every single win would be flukey.


He stated that Michigan only won close games because of lucky bounces....when I pointed out Michigan won by an average of 4 TD he said it wasn't about margin of victory but lucky bounces....that's a **** load of lucky bounces to win by 28 points per game. Also pointed that the defense is why Michigan won those games...yep, a top 20 defense in the nation will help a lot of teams win a lot of games. Good defenses force turnovers, and good offenses don't turn the ball over. Good recipe for success.

Most major experts expect Michigan to suck this year? Um, most have them in the B1G Title game and a BCS bowl....whereas the other division has 2 of their 6 teams indelible for the title. Wisconsin could finish THIRD IN THEIR DIVISION AND STILL PLAY FOR THE TITLE.

Brady Hoke leads the nation with the number of 4 star recruits, and is second in the nation with an overall recruiting class...AND IT'S A BAD THING according to this ****. Most programs are sitting at 15-20 commits right now. If you are fighting for the elite of what's left at the end of the season you probably don't have a very good class.

50 years for national titles? What Michigan did during prior to WW2 is irrelevant to you....so is anything before the seniors on each team were born really.

Break it down to the last 20 and see what you get.

Michigan has played in 5 BCS bowl games the last decade....7th most in college football...Just as many as LSU (who has only one national title the last 50 years by the way), more than Alabama, Oregon, Wisconsin, Migami, Texas, Notre Dame, Stanford, Georgia, WVU, Cinci, Illinois, Iowa, Nebraska, PSU, Tennessee, TCU, Auburn, Boise State, Utah, Arkasnas, Clemson, Colorado, UCONN, GT, Haiwaii, KSU, Maryland, Pitt, I could keep going.

I guess he forgets that OSU would've lost in the 2002 title game if a BS pass interference call didn't give them another chance. That was a lucky 'bounce" for OSU if i've ever seen one that gave them another chance to score in OT. If they didn't get that gift it would be 44 years sonce OSU's last national title.

He has no objectivity here.

[grayghost06]

Your point is only half-right. Bama, USC, and OU may have been down, but they all bounced back with championships and a high, sustained degree of success. One season does not constitute "being back." Did you think that Notre Dame was back when they had that nice year under Charlies Weis?

I said Michigan was a 2nd tier program. I don't adhere to a black-and-white college football view where you're either great or not. I would argue there are degrees of greatness, and Michigan is not at the top of the food chain right now.
I'll put it simply- there are more than 2 tiers of college teams. Michigan is outside the top tier. They are storied, but they aren't elite. Not yet. Using your logic, I could argue that any team who wins 10+ games after a rough decade or so is now elite. So let's add Houston to the mix. And Arkansas State. And anyone who wins an unexpected 10 games this year and is coached by someone half-decent.
They were, once upon a time. Just not right now. Give the fat man a couple of years to prove that he is the next Nick Saban before we anoint him 'the next Bo Schembechler'. God, everyone wants to jump off the cliff and believe Michigan is back. Excuse me for throwing cold water on it just because I'm skeptical. IF they win 10 games this year, I'll say they're back...to getting their butts kicked by Ohio State in the most painful way possible.

I don't adhere to a black & white view, but I instead have arbitrary standards which I make up on the fly. Good one

It is stupid to break everyone down into super small tiers. Michigan may not be at the top of their game, but they are top tier. They get some of the best recruits on the country, have a 110k seat stadium and get to and win BCS bowl games on a fairly regular basis.

Who the hell is "top tier" by your definition? 6 teams?

Texas just has two mediocre years back to back. Are they no longer top tier? Florida sucked last year- not top tier.

Georgia hasn't won a national title in 30 years, so also not top tier.

Give me a break.

In my opinion, there is no more of an under achieving program than Georgia. Sure they usually finish in the top 20 but they have a lot of built in advantages that they don't capitalize on for making a championship run.

Year after year they get awesome recruiting classes, only to be outdone by others from their conference or the other football powers. They usually have a nice pre-season ranking as a starting point. Some years they play only 3 away conference games due to the neutral site Florida matchup. They rarely ( until the last couple of years) play an OOC road game and NEVER a northern team. And they get to play Ga Tech every other year in Atlanta where they get a good bit of support.

I'd stack their recruiting classes over the last 20-25 years above several teams that actually won a National Championship- Nebraska springs to mind- and certainly on par w/ many others. At some point you gotta step up to the alter.

[SuperHornet]

Ohio State...the Minnesota Vikings of the FBS....

[rkwittem]

We need to remember one thing about this guy....he's a Fuckeye fan - he will NEVER admit Michigan is good....Michigan could go defeated 8 years in a row with an average margin of victory of 42 and every single win would be flukey.

He stated that Michigan only won close games because of lucky bounces....when I pointed out Michigan won by an average of 4 TD he said it wasn't about margin of victory but lucky bounces....that's a fuck load of lucky bounces to win by 28 points per game. Also pointed that the defense is why Michigan won those games...yep, a top 20 defense in the nation will help a lot of teams win a lot of games. Good defenses force turnovers, and good offenses don't turn the ball over. Good recipe for success.

You twisted what I said. I said that Michigan's close wins and 80% fumble recovery rate aren't likely to repeat themselves. If they don't repeat themselves, it stands to reason that Michigan will probably lose a few more games than they did last year. But no, in clenz's world, an 80% fumble recovery rate, well above the natural average, is completely repeatable because outliers like that repeat themselves so often in college football. 2012 Michigan is not 2011 Michigan. I'm 100% sure Michigan won't repeat that rate. Go ahead and talk shit all you want. We'll see in the end.

Most major experts expect Michigan to suck this year? Um, most have them in the B1G Title game and a BCS bowl....whereas the other division has 2 of their 6 teams indelible for the title. Wisconsin could finish THIRD IN THEIR DIVISION AND STILL PLAY FOR THE TITLE.

I'm of course referring to some preview magazines I read, namely Phil Steele's, that has Michigan as his 2nd highest "bear market" team. So take that for what it's worth. Of course, Michigan's standards for what constitutes a crappy season have been lowered in recent years...so maybe they won't suck. 8 wins is probably acceptable nowadays.

Brady Hoke leads the nation with the number of 4 star recruits, and is second in the nation with an overall recruiting class...AND IT'S A BAD THING according to this fuck. Most programs are sitting at 15-20 commits right now. If you are fighting for the elite of what's left at the end of the season you probably don't have a very good class.

Again, you twisted what I said. Michigan was in this same situation last year and everyone was ready to anoint them the top recruiting class in the country...before all of the major recruits had signed. Michigan is top 2 FOR NOW, but they won't finish there because they can't add many more recruits, whereas other teams with more available scholarships can still add a handful of top recruits and potentially leapfrog Michigan's ranking. There class will be just fine for Michigan. Don't take it so personally.

50 years for national titles? What Michigan did during prior to WW2 is irrelevant to you....so is anything before the seniors on each team were born really.

Break it down to the last 20 and see what you get.

Michigan has played in 5 BCS bowl games the last decade....7th most in college football...Just as many as LSU (who has only one national title the last 50 years by the way), more than Alabama, Oregon, Wisconsin, Migami, Texas, Notre Dame, Stanford, Georgia, WVU, Cinci, Illinois, Iowa, Nebraska, PSU, Tennessee, TCU, Auburn, Boise State, Utah, Arkasnas, Clemson, Colorado, UCONN, GT, Haiwaii, KSU, Maryland, Pitt, I could keep going.

LSU has 2 national titles. 2003 and 2007. Did you give the earlier one to USC and not LSU?

And for Franks, since he doesn't like my idea that there are more than 2 tiers...do you have a better alternative?

[Franks Tanks]

We need to remember one thing about this guy....he's a **** fan - he will NEVER admit Michigan is good....Michigan could go defeated 8 years in a row with an average margin of victory of 42 and every single win would be flukey.

He stated that Michigan only won close games because of lucky bounces....when I pointed out Michigan won by an average of 4 TD he said it wasn't about margin of victory but lucky bounces....that's a **** load of lucky bounces to win by 28 points per game. Also pointed that the defense is why Michigan won those games...yep, a top 20 defense in the nation will help a lot of teams win a lot of games. Good defenses force turnovers, and good offenses don't turn the ball over. Good recipe for success.

You twisted what I said. I said that Michigan's close wins and 80% fumble recovery rate aren't likely to repeat themselves. If they don't repeat themselves, it stands to reason that Michigan will probably lose a few more games than they did last year. But no, in clenz's world, an 80% fumble recovery rate, well above the natural average, is completely repeatable because outliers like that repeat themselves so often in college football. 2012 Michigan is not 2011 Michigan. I'm 100% sure Michigan won't repeat that rate. Go ahead and talk **** all you want. We'll see in the end.

Most major experts expect Michigan to suck this year? Um, most have them in the B1G Title game and a BCS bowl....whereas the other division has 2 of their 6 teams indelible for the title. Wisconsin could finish THIRD IN THEIR DIVISION AND STILL PLAY FOR THE TITLE.

I'm of course referring to some preview magazines I read, namely Phil Steele's, that has Michigan as his 2nd highest "bear market" team. So take that for what it's worth. Of course, Michigan's standards for what constitutes a crappy season have been lowered in recent years...so maybe they won't suck. 8 wins is probably acceptable nowadays.

Brady Hoke leads the nation with the number of 4 star recruits, and is second in the nation with an overall recruiting class...AND IT'S A BAD THING according to this ****. Most programs are sitting at 15-20 commits right now. If you are fighting for the elite of what's left at the end of the season you probably don't have a very good class.

Again, you twisted what I said. Michigan was in this same situation last year and everyone was ready to anoint them the top recruiting class in the country...before all of the major recruits had signed. Michigan is top 2 FOR NOW, but they won't finish there because they can't add many more recruits, whereas other teams with more available scholarships can still add a handful of top recruits and potentially leapfrog Michigan's ranking. There class will be just fine for Michigan. Don't take it so personally.

50 years for national titles? What Michigan did during prior to WW2 is irrelevant to you....so is anything before the seniors on each team were born really.

Break it down to the last 20 and see what you get.

Michigan has played in 5 BCS bowl games the last decade....7th most in college football...Just as many as LSU (who has only one national title the last 50 years by the way), more than Alabama, Oregon, Wisconsin, Migami, Texas, Notre Dame, Stanford, Georgia, WVU, Cinci, Illinois, Iowa, Nebraska, PSU, Tennessee, TCU, Auburn, Boise State, Utah, Arkasnas, Clemson, Colorado, UCONN, GT, Haiwaii, KSU, Maryland, Pitt, I could keep going.

LSU has 2 national titles. 2003 and 2007. Did you give the earlier one to USC and not LSU?

[]quote]

I don't have the time or energy to debate how many tiers exist in college football, but I think tier 1 teams are big time programs with large fan bases that land top recruits consistently and have a realistic shot at winning a national title. The true big time tier 1 college football teams would be something like


Big 10- Penn State, Ohio State, Michigan, Nebraska and maybe Wiscy

Big East- Nobody

ACC- FSU, Miami, VT and maybe Clemson

Big 12- Texas and Oklahoma. Ok St. will get their if they continue playing like this for another 5-10 years

Pac 12- USC and Oregon. Washington used to be there, and I can probably be convinced that they still belong

SEC- Alabama, LSU, Auburn, Florida, Georgia and Tennessee. Texas A&M and Arkansas would be considered as well

Indy- Notre Dame

[AZGrizFan]

It's kind of humorous watching a champion of all things upper-crust BCS rip on one of the most storied programs in FBS football. I'm not health professional, but the dichotomy in his arguments make me wonder if he suffers from some sort of dissociative identity disorder.

For what it's worth, I think that Hoke is a heck of a coach and was the right hire for Wolverines. He's turning that program around and will have it competing for B1G0 championships and more. He might or might not be as good as Meyer, winning games & championships is about more than just top recruiting classes.

I also think it would be hilarious if App St backed out of the game and left Michigan to stew on that loss for another 5-10 years. Don't give them the chance to redeem themselves.

Michigan was storied...that story is mostly fluff. One title in 60 years isn't my idea of relevance anymore. They're a 2nd tier team now, just like Notre Dame. Make room for the big boys- Bama, USC, Ohio State, Oklahoma, Texas, etc.

But one (gifted) title in 30 years IS your idea of relevance? A 1-5 bowl record in the last 6 years is your idea of relevance? Winning the Big 10 <> "relevance". Ohio State has shown, without a shadow of a doubt, that when paired with the "big boys" of college football (LSU, Florida, Texas, Arkansas) over the past 6 years they are no longer competitive. On a national level the sport has passed the entire conference by.

[clenz]

Michigan was storied...that story is mostly fluff. One title in 60 years isn't my idea of relevance anymore. They're a 2nd tier team now, just like Notre Dame. Make room for the big boys- Bama, USC, Ohio State, Oklahoma, Texas, etc.

But one (gifted) title in 30 years IS your idea of relevance? A 1-5 bowl record in the last 6 years is your idea of relevance? Winning the Big 10 <> "relevance". Ohio State has shown, without a shadow of a doubt, that when paired with the "big boys" of college football (LSU, Florida, Texas, Arkansas) over the past 6 years they are no longer competitive. On a national level the sport has passed the entire conference by.

Michigan has, can, and does compete with SEC teams (minus the Dick Rod team that made a bowl game that didn't deserve it). Ohio State doesn't....don't let their record against the SEC fool you about the rest of the conference.

[AZGrizFan]

http://www.foxnews.com/us/2012/08/23/ok ... nside-out/" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

And this article shows just how far Michigan has fallen.

An Oklahoma City student was forced to turn his shirt inside-out because he was wearing a University of Michigan T-shirt, violating the district’s dress code.

Fox 25 reports that the 5-year-old kindergartner violated a 2005 rule created by the Oklahoma City Public Schools banning clothing with sports team logos unless they are from Oklahoma colleges or universities. The rule, which was established due to gang affiliations some teams carry, excludes all professional teams, including the Oklahoma City Thunder.


Read more: http://www.foxnews.com/us/2012/08/23/ok ... z24O7kC1PM" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

[AZGrizFan]

But one (gifted) title in 30 years IS your idea of relevance? A 1-5 bowl record in the last 6 years is your idea of relevance? Winning the Big 10 <> "relevance". Ohio State has shown, without a shadow of a doubt, that when paired with the "big boys" of college football (LSU, Florida, Texas, Arkansas) over the past 6 years they are no longer competitive. On a national level the sport has passed the entire conference by.

Michigan has, can, and does compete with SEC teams (minus the Dick Rod team that made a bowl game that didn't deserve it). Ohio State doesn't....don't let their record against the SEC fool you about the rest of the conference.

Michigan is 2-5 in their last 7 bowl games. You sure you wanna brag about that?

[clenz]

Michigan has, can, and does compete with SEC teams (minus the Dick Rod team that made a bowl game that didn't deserve it). Ohio State doesn't....don't let their record against the SEC fool you about the rest of the conference.

Michigan is 2-5 in their last 7 bowl games. You sure you wanna brag about that?

I said the SEC....

Michigan is 24-9-1 against the SEC.


As many losses all time as OSU has since 2000

[AZGrizFan]

Michigan is 2-5 in their last 7 bowl games. You sure you wanna brag about that?

I said the SEC....

Michigan is 24-9-1 against the SEC.


As many losses all time as OSU has since 2000

10 of those wins are against frigging VANDERBILT. And their only WINS in the last 10 years are against Mississippi State and a 6 point win against a mediocre Florida team in '08 in the Capital One bowl.

They haven't exactly gone out of their way to schedule LSU, Alabama, Auburn, Georgia, Tennessee, etc. over the past 10 years.

[andy7171]

Big 10- Penn State, Ohio State, Michigan, Nebraska and maybe Wiscy

Big East- Nobody

ACC- FSU, Miami, VT and maybe Clemson

Big 12- Texas and Oklahoma. Ok St. will get their if they continue playing like this for another 5-10 years

Pac 12- USC and Oregon. Washington used to be there, and I can probably be convinced that they still belong

SEC- Alabama, LSU, Auburn, Florida, Georgia and Tennessee. Texas A&M and Arkansas would be considered as well

Indy- Notre Dame

It'll be interesting to see how WVU fares in the Big 12 this year. They used to be the only thing going for the Big East. At least after BC and VaTech left.

[clenz]

Michigan plays bama in 9 days....its not like the SEC schools were calling Michigan either...take a look at sec ooc schedules.

You chose an interesting cut off date for the wins leaving out wins in 98, 99, 00, and I think 01. Il look when I grey back to a computet

Sent from my SCH-I500 using Tapatalk 2

[AZGrizFan]

Michigan plays bama in 9 days....its not like the SEC schools were calling Michigan either...take a look at sec ooc schedules.

You chose an interesting cut off date for the wins leaving out wins in 98, 99, 00, and I think 01. Il look when I grey back to a computet

Sent from my SCH-I500 using Tapatalk 2

All more than 10 years ago. And if Michigan keeps it within 21 of 'Bama, we'll talk.

[Franks Tanks]

Michigan was storied...that story is mostly fluff. One title in 60 years isn't my idea of relevance anymore. They're a 2nd tier team now, just like Notre Dame. Make room for the big boys- Bama, USC, Ohio State, Oklahoma, Texas, etc.

But one (gifted) title in 30 years IS your idea of relevance? A 1-5 bowl record in the last 6 years is your idea of relevance? Winning the Big 10 <> "relevance". Ohio State has shown, without a shadow of a doubt, that when paired with the "big boys" of college football (LSU, Florida, Texas, Arkansas) over the past 6 years they are no longer competitive. On a national level the sport has passed the entire conference by.

6 years is basically a blink of an eye when OSU has been revelant for decades. BTW Ohio State beat Arkansas in the 2011 Sugar Bowl and they beat Texas in 2006.

Basically the big boys to you are Florida, LSU and Alabama. Oh and Florida stunk last year and will probably stink again so I guess they are out too since they can no longer compete with Bama and LSU either.