Historically...Michigan is overrated honestly

[MAIZEandBLUE09]

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.

What do top 5 finishes have to do with being a top 10 program? And don't give me that BS "consensus" crap. All that means is that another team just happened to not also have a great year on the same year as your team. It's pure luck.

We're talking top 10 because I don't think Michigan has been one of the best 5 teams since 1950.

 

[Wamu]

The only thing we fell short in is naitonal titles.

Oh is that all? Hate to be the one to point this out but national titles are kinda important when discussing the greatness of a program. And w/ only 1 national title in the last 67 years meeeechegan falls short of being on that list right now.

 

[ericd7633]

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.

So 2 is more than 1, correct? That would put their place on the list warranted.

And yes Michigan is in the top 10 in wins and winning %, at 8 and 7 respectively. But there are teams behind them in those rankings that have 3, 4 and 5 times as many National Championships. That's to much to overlook IMO. I'm not saying I would put a team like MSU ahead of Michigan despite them having more titles, because Michigan heavily outweighs them in everything else.

And without doing any research on the Oregon question, I would put, Bama, LSU, Florida, USC, Ohio State, Oklahoma and Texas definitely ahead of them. Boist State and TCU come to mind, and of course FSU, Miami, and Auburn have all won a title over that time frame, but they've had some leans years along with those titles so I'd have to research it.

 

[MAIZEandBLUE09]

Oh is that all? Hate to be the one to point this out but national titles are kinda important when discussing the greatness of a program. And w/ only 1 national title in the last 67 years meeeechegan falls short of being on that list right now.

Sorry I would take 50 years of great seasons with just one national title over a decade of success followed by mediocrity. Are you going to suggest the a few good years like Iowa had and won three titles in the late 50's and 1960 offsets consistently winning for 50 years? I wouldn't even consider trading places with them in a heartbeat. The same could be said about many teams with a few titles during that time than Michigan (and might I add, randomly voted upon titles that Michigan got screwed over by a few times). I wouldn't switch with Auburn, Iowa, Michigan State, Georgia tech, Washington, and probably a few more. Like I said above, I'd put Oregon in the top 10 teams of the last 15 years despite no national title. Winning alone means a heck of a lot, especially in the CFB format that we had up until last year.

 

[MAIZEandBLUE09]

So 2 is more than 1, correct? That would put their place on the list warranted.

And yes Michigan is in the top 10 in wins and winning %, at 8 and 7 respectively. But there are teams behind them in those rankings that have 3, 4 and 5 times as many National Championships. That's to much to overlook IMO. I'm not saying I would put a team like MSU ahead of Michigan despite them having more titles, because Michigan heavily outweighs them in everything else.

And without doing any research on the Oregon question, I would put, Bama, LSU, Florida, USC, Ohio State, Oklahoma and Texas definitely ahead of them. Boist State and TCU come to mind, and of course FSU, Miami, and Auburn have all won a title over that time frame, but they've had some leans years along with those titles so I'd have to research it.

Off the top of my head, I'd value what Oregon did the last 15 years over what a team like Auburn did -- despite winning a national title. National titles are fun and do mean something, you were the best that year. But it doesn't overtake consistently winning 9/10+ games a year. That's harder to do than being the best one or two seasons in the last 60 years.

 

[outofyourmind]

We're talking top 10 because I don't think Michigan has been one of the best 5 teams since 1950

Not even top 10. Seriously.
I've already listed 10 teams better than Michigan in every category that anyone talks about except for Michigan fans. Is there even a trophy for "Most Wins Ever"??? Post it, we would like to see what that looks like.

 

[ericd7633]

Sorry I would take 50 years of great seasons with just one national title over a decade of success followed by mediocrity. Are you going to suggest the a few good years like Iowa had and won three titles in the late 50's and 1960 offsets consistently winning for 50 years? I wouldn't even consider trading places with them in a heartbeat. The same could be said about many teams with a few titles during that time than Michigan (and might I add, randomly voted upon titles that Michigan got screwed over by a few times). I wouldn't switch with Auburn, Iowa, Michigan State, Georgia tech, Washington, and probably a few more. Like I said above, I'd put Oregon in the top 10 teams of the last 15 years despite no national title. Winning alone means a heck of a lot, especially in the CFB format that we had up until last year.

Except Iowa never won three AP/Coaches titles, let alone one. The one they claim in 1958, LSU was both the AP and Coaches #1 team, and finished undefeated, while Iowa had a loss and a tie.

I would take Michigan over those schools too, with the exception of Auburn. The number of wins and winning % doesn't offset an extra title IMO.

 

[ericd7633]

Off the top of my head, I'd value what Oregon did the last 15 years over what a team like Auburn did -- despite winning a national title. National titles are fun and do mean something, you were the best that year. But it doesn't overtake consistently winning 9/10+ games a year. That's harder to do than being the best one or two seasons in the last 60 years.

And Auburn would be a fringe top 10 program from 2000-2014 as is. I think the top 7 are pretty clear from 2000 to today. The next three are debatable.