Historically...Michigan is overrated honestly

[ericd7633]

No, because from 1906-2014 ND played about 40 more games than Michigan. So it all practically evens out.

Except for the fact that Michigan has still played like 45 more games. And for the first 25 years of Michigan's football existence they were beating teams who were just getting started with it, hence, were not at that level yet.

 

[craigk217]

You know your team might be a bit overrated when ...

happens on your home field.

 

[Wamu]

You know your team might be a bit overrated when ...

happens on your home field.

I think the very next year they also lost to Toledo when the Rockets visited the bigSHIThouse.

 

[craigk217]

I think the very next year they also lost to Toledo when the Rockets visited the bigSHIThouse.

Dunno bout that game, but I can never resist an opportunity to 'remind' meatchicken fans of tGreat Debacle.

 

[Red_Alert]

I think the very next year they also lost to Toledo when the Rockets visited the bigSHIThouse.

Michigan is (0-1) vs Toledo

2008

Toledo....13
Michigan 10

It was @ Michigan and Toledo finished (3-9) that season.

 

[Wamu]

Michigan is (0-1) vs Toledo

2008

Toledo....13
Michigan 10

It was @ Michigan and Toledo finished (3-9) that season.

Didn't realize the Rockets finished 3-9 that year. Makes that loss even funnier now.

 

[Red_Alert]

Didn't realize the Rockets finished 3-9 that year. Makes that loss even funnier now.

Toledo's only wins were

Eastern Michigan
Miami, (Ohio)
Michigan

 

[umichgradfan]

So do Yale, Princeton, and Harvard. They were great when Michigan was great.

Heck, they were greater.

Unfortunately, the teams you mention are not now D-1 teams. Like the University of Chicago, they gave up CFB at that level (at the time) to concentrate on academics.

 

[nddulac]

Unfortunately, the teams you mention are not now D-1 teams. Like the University of Chicago, they gave up CFB at that level (at the time) to concentrate on academics.

All of the Ivy League programs have competed at th Division I level since the inception of the three-tier division system in the NCAA. Comparing them to the University of Chicago, which competes on the Division III level, is an exceptionally good way to display ignorance of how the divisions are organized.

 

[umichgradfan]

All of the Ivy League programs have competed at th Division I level since the inception of the three-tier division system in the NCAA. Comparing them to the University of Chicago, which competes on the Division III level, is an exceptionally good way to display ignorance of how the divisions are organized.

See Yale Bulldogs football - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

"The NCAA decided to split Division I into two subdivisions in 1978, then called I-A for larger schools, and I-AA for the smaller ones. The NCAA had devised the split, in part, with the Ivy League in mind, but the conference did not move down for four seasons despite the fact that there were many indications that the ancient eight were on the wrong side of an increasing disparity between the big and small schools. In 1982, the NCAA created a rule that stated a program's average attendance must be at least 15,000 to qualify for I-A membership. This forced the conference's hand, as only some of the member schools met the attendance qualification. Choosing to stay together rather than stand their ground separately in the increasingly competitive I-A subdivision, the Ivy League moved down into I-AA starting with the 1982 season."

The emphasis is mine.

 

[nddulac]

Choosing to stay together rather than stand their ground separately in the increasingly competitive I-A subdivision, the Ivy League moved down into I-AA starting with the 1982 season."

While the division I-A and I-AA (Now Division I FBS and Division I FCS) are two separate subdivisions, both are, and have always been a part of NCAA Division I.

 

[OregonDucks]

Which is why Michigan is always better than Oregon. Despite the CEO of Nike basically dumping money into the Oregon AD -- Michigan holds their biggest apparel contract for a reason; and it's that rusty nail that Oregon just doesn't have.

have you paid attention to this thread? I don't want Oregon to be like Michigan.

 

[umichgradfan]

While the division I-A and I-AA (Now Division I FBS and Division I FCS) are two separate subdivisions, both are, and have always been a part of NCAA Division I.

Mea culpa.

 

[nddulac]

Mea culpa.

Te absolvo.

BTW, don't take me too seriously. I certainly don't.

 

[craigk217]

Toledo's only wins were

Eastern Michigan
Miami, (Ohio)
Michigan

Just lookin at that powerhouse list ...

 

[Red_Alert]

Just lookin at that powerhouse list ...

but, but, but, Michigan won a bunch of games in the 1890's. pennstatenut slobbers on the knobs of any Big 10/Notre Dame team that won in the 1890's.

 

[MAIZEandBLUE09]

have you paid attention to this thread? I don't want Oregon to be like Michigan.

And your trophy case shows that....

 

[MAIZEandBLUE09]

Except for the fact that Michigan has still played like 45 more games. And for the first 25 years of Michigan's football existence they were beating teams who were just getting started with it, hence, were not at that level yet.

It's not like we created the game. We were also new in the 1800's, along with the new teams we were beating. And some were around just as long at the time. Michigan only played 18 games before Notre Dame started football. That's barely 1 single season in today's game.

 

[ericd7633]

It's not like we created the game. We were also new in the 1800's, along with the new teams we were beating. And some were around just as long at the time. Michigan only played 18 games before Notre Dame started football. That's barely 1 single season in today's game.

The decade head start wasn't so much of a factor as far as games played before ND started, the difference was directly after that. Michigan started playing double figure games in the 1890's while ND was still playing 5-6 games a year. That's why Michigan has played many more games, and subsequently have more wins. They basically had a 70 or more game head start on most other power programs prior to 1900.

 

[MAIZEandBLUE09]

The decade head start wasn't so much of a factor as far as games played before ND started, the difference was directly after that. Michigan started playing double figure games in the 1890's while ND was still playing 5-6 games a year. That's why Michigan has played many more games, and subsequently have more wins. They basically had a 70 or more game head start on most other power programs prior to 1900.

No doubt, ND would be almost even with Michigan in total wins if the two played an equal number of games. I just did the math and based on ND's win percentage, they'd be almost even. I'm not sure that disproves the fact that Michigan is one of the elite teams still -- with or without the 1800's.