Historically...Michigan is overrated honestly

[Across The Field]

So did all those other teams in question, which combined with the fact they had an easier schedule they could go undefeated easier than Michigan. Which was more or less a requirement to win a title in those days.

OSU played in the same conference and won multiple titles in that era.

Also, Nebraska and Oklahoma played a fierce conference slate as well and both claimed multiple titles.

As it's already been said, michigan was great back in the dark ages of college football and it has led them to become overrated compared to the elite teams in the nation.

 

[outofyourmind]

Michigan fans are getting desperate.
On the verge of.....

 

[GoBlueNavyNuke]

What time frame are we talking here?

Convince me

Middle of the 20th century. Michigan, Ohio States, MSU was good in the 50's and 60's under Duff Daugherty, and hell Minnesota was good in the 1940's!
It wasn't until the 1970's/80's did the Big Ten become the "Big 2, Little 8." And even then, I would take the Big Ten over any other conference.

While in the Big 8, all Nebraska had to worry about was Oklahoma (and vice versa)

 

[GoBlueNavyNuke]

OSU played in the same conference and won multiple titles in that era.

Only for a period of about 10 years, until Bo made Woody his bitch.

Also, Nebraska and Oklahoma played a fierce conference slate as well and both claimed multiple titles.

All those two had was each other in the Big 8, who exactly was in this "fierce" conference? Kansas? Iowa State?

As it's already been said, michigan was great back in the dark ages of college football and it has led them to become overrated compared to the elite teams in the nation.

Again, it's worth stating, and?????????

How exactly are the Woody Hayes years at Ohio State any different than the Fielding Yost years at Michigan?

 

[OregonDucks]

And your trophy case shows that....

yeah we have 0 titles. you have 1 title (which was shared) in 1997. Then as stated prior, all your trophies are made practically pre world war 2.

 

[Across The Field]

Only for a period of about 10 years, until Bo made Woody his bitch.

This is about as retarded as you can get.

All those two had was each other in the Big 8, who exactly was in this "fierce" conference? Kansas? Iowa State?

Texas?
And who did michigan have that was so amazing other than OSU?

Again, it's worth stating, and?????????

How exactly are the Woody Hayes years at Ohio State any different than the Fielding Yost years at Michigan?

Seriously? They're completely different. The game itself was dramatically different, and Woody Hayes faced other elite teams as opposed to teams that don't even have football programs anymore, like Yost was doing.

 

[Red_Alert]

Middle of the 20th century. Michigan, Ohio States, MSU was good in the 50's and 60's under Duff Daugherty, and hell Minnesota was good in the 1940's!
It wasn't until the 1970's/80's did the Big Ten become the "Big 2, Little 8." And even then, I would take the Big Ten over any other conference.

While in the Big 8, all Nebraska had to worry about was Oklahoma (and vice versa)

Fair enough. Nebraska was turrible in the 1940's and 1950's. We call it the Dark Ages. The last 15 years are nothing compared to them.
If it weren't for Michigan St's Duffy Daugherty, Nebraska would have never found Back-to-Back National Champ ('70-'71) Head Coach Bob Devaney.

I'll back away from the 40's/50's.

 

[Red_Alert]

This is about as retarded as you can get.




Texas?
And who did michigan have that was so amazing other than OSU?




Seriously? They're completely different. The game itself was dramatically different, and Woody Hayes faced other elite teams as opposed to teams that don't even have football programs anymore, like Yost was doing.

Of course that only applies to Oklahoma.

Yes, Nebraska had Oklahoma, Texas had Oklahoma, but Oklahoma had BOTH Texas and Nebraska. Two top notch bluebloods where it was rare for both to be down in a given decade. Yet Oklahoma had all that success.

Truly remarkable.

 

[MAIZEandBLUE09]

yeah we have 0 titles. you have 1 title (which was shared) in 1997. Then as stated prior, all your trophies are made practically pre world war 2.

One in the last 25 years is better than 0.

 

[ellupo]

One in the last 25 years is better than 0.

1/2

 

[Wamu]

One in the last 25 years is better than 0.

One in the last 25 years? You should have said 1 title since 1948 instead.

 

[ericd7633]

I'll give Michigan being a top 5 program from 1879-1949. However, from 1950 on I just don't see them as a top 10 program over that time frame.

Since 1950:
National Titles: 1(split)
wins: 505
Winning%: 68.8

In terms of National Titles, these programs have more over that time frame: Alabama, Auburn, Florida, Tennessee, LSU, USC, Notre Dame, Nebraska, Ohio State, Penn State, Michigan State, Texas, Oklahoma, Florida State and Miami.

 

[outofyourmind]

I'll give Michigan being a top 5 program from 1879-1949. However, from 1950 on I just don't see them as a top 10 program over that time frame.

Since 1950:
National Titles: 1(split)
wins: 505
Winning%: 68.8

In terms of National Titles, these programs have more over that time frame: Alabama, Auburn, Florida, Tennessee, LSU, USC, Notre Dame, Nebraska, Ohio State, Penn State, Michigan State, Texas, Oklahoma, Florida State and Miami.

Coming in 5th in the first half of CFB history and 16th in the second half of CFB history somehow makes you #1 in CFB history from start to finish.

 

[Wamu]

Coming in 5th in the first half of CFB history and 16th in the second half of CFB history somehow makes you #1 in CFB history from start to finish.

What really makes meeeechegan # 1 is their coach, Crazy Jimbo.

 

[MAIZEandBLUE09]

I'll give Michigan being a top 5 program from 1879-1949. However, from 1950 on I just don't see them as a top 10 program over that time frame.

Since 1950:
National Titles: 1(split)
wins: 505
Winning%: 68.8

In terms of National Titles, these programs have more over that time frame: Alabama, Auburn, Florida, Tennessee, LSU, USC, Notre Dame, Nebraska, Ohio State, Penn State, Michigan State, Texas, Oklahoma, Florida State and Miami.

That's just not true. If Michigan claimed titles the way Michigan State does, we'd have like 3 or 4 in that time span. MSU has 1 coaches or AP title in that span.

I-A Winning Percentage 1950-2014

And Michigan's win percentage 1950-2014 puts us well within the top 10 at #8. Notre Dame falls in at #11 -- so who's really banking off wins prior to 1950? Michigan also falls in at #8 in terms of wins. Notre Dame? #12. The only thing we really fell short compared to the rest of that list is in terms of national titles in that span.

 

[Shanemansj13]

OK. Then, the OP should have said "In the last 60 years. . ."

I guess you didnt read my first post. I said that Michigan is still a historic program but their last 60 years are so have been overrated. While doing well in the conference in the 70's and 80's even the 90's. One National Title and lack of championship appearances is the definition of overrated for a top tier program historically of all-time. Most of it was before anyones' time and before football really evolved and was competitive.

 

[ericd7633]

That's just not true. If Michigan claimed titles the way Michigan State does, we'd have like 3 or 4 in that time span. MSU has 1 coaches or AP title in that span.

I-A Winning Percentage 1950-2014

And Michigan's win percentage 1950-2014 puts us well within the top 10 at #8. Notre Dame falls in at #11 -- so who's really banking off wins prior to 1950? Michigan also falls in at #8 in terms of wins. Notre Dame? #12. The only thing we really fell short compared to the rest of that list is in terms of national titles in that span.

Michigan State has 2 I believe. Does the 1965 National Championship not count? They finished #1 in the coaches poll.

And I'd gladly take 13 less wins for 3 more National Championships over that time frame, but that's just me.

Again, IMO Michigan is not a top 10 program when factoring in everything since 1950.

 

[outofyourmind]

I-A Winning Percentage 1950-2014

And Michigan's win percentage 1950-2014 puts us well within the top 10 at #8. Notre Dame falls in at #11 -- so who's really banking off wins prior to 1950? Michigan also falls in at #8 in terms of wins. Notre Dame? #12. The only thing we really fell short compared to the rest of that list is in terms of national titles in that span.

AP/Coaches Poll Consensus National Championships
Michigan 0
Michigan State 1
Ohio State 3
Texas 3
Nebraska 3
USC 4
Oklahoma 6

AP/Coaches Poll Consensus Top 5 Finishes
Michigan 10
Michigan State 9
Ohio State 21
Texas 18
Nebraska 12
USC 13
Oklahoma 24

Congrats on a lot of wins, but the results of those wins didn't translate into much as compared to everyone else.
Without looking it up I'd bet Michigan falls behind Alabama, FSU, Miami, Tennessee, PSU, Florida, LSU, in both of those categories and maybe a half dozen more.

 

[outofyourmind]

If it's all about wins then Crown Boise State the Champion of the BCS Era.
After all, they won a lot of games.

 

[MAIZEandBLUE09]

Michigan State has 2 I believe. Does the 1965 National Championship not count? They finished #1 in the coaches poll.

And I'd gladly take 13 less wins for 3 more National Championships over that time frame, but that's just me.

Again, IMO Michigan is not a top 10 program when factoring in everything since 1950.

Yes, MSU only has 2 AP or Coaches titles. 52 and 65 I believe. And all you have to do is back up 4 years to Find Michigan's 2nd AP title. It's not like the spans are all that off. MSU also claims a bunch around that from other selectors. If Michigan did the same thing, like I said, we'd have like 4 since then.

You're basing the bolded entirely on national championships. Because factoring in wins, winning percentage and conference championships -- Michigan would be a top 10 program. The only thing we fell short in is naitonal titles.

Put it this way, would you put Oregon in the top 10 programs of the last 15 years? I would, despite 0 national titles.