CS: Definitive 8 College Football Blue Bloods

[MAIZEandBLUE09]

Michigan is also 24th in winning % this century.

Unsurprising given the RR and Hoke eras. But as far as consistency throughout history goes, Michigan is one of the best. You won't find a team without some down stretch. Just 10 years ago Alabama was coming out of the
Mike Shula era.

 

[MAIZEandBLUE09]

I actually missed your post, I think we were at the same time. You weren't fair off to assume that, given not only his inability to beat michigan but his overall poor bowl record, though the Rose and Sugar Bowl wins he had were impressive.

The 90's were awesome.

 

[MAIZEandBLUE09]

Yup, good year, good start and like I say I think Michigan made the best possible hire that they could. I think the biggest hurdle will be recruiting vs other blue bloods. It might work out, time will tell.

In what way? We just landed a top 5 class and got the first ever consensus #1 player by all recruiting sites.

 

[Bamabino]

Alledged blueblood all-time vs the other alledged bluebloods:


1. Texas 84-63-6(.549) 61-44-5 vs OU
2. ND.....95-78-7(.527) 46-36-5 vs USC
3. Mich...92-79-8(.512) 58-48-6 vs OSU
4. USC...70-67-3(.500) 13-9-1 vs OSU
5. OU....98-116-9(.439) 45-38-3 vs Neb.
6. OSU...67-80-7(.435)
7. Bama..17-22-2(.415)
8. Neb.....56-75-4(.412)

 

[Across The Field]

The 90's were awesome.

 

[ericd7633]

Unsurprising given the RR and Hoke eras. But as far as consistency throughout history goes, Michigan is one of the best. You won't find a team without some down stretch. Just 10 years ago Alabama was coming out of the
Mike Shula era.

2010-Present - 37th in win %
2000-2009 - 22nd in win %
1990-1999 - 7th in win %
1980-1989 - 9th in win %
1970-1979 - 3rd in win %
1960-1969 - 52nd in win %
1950-1959 - 40th in win %
1940-1949 - 2nd in win %
1930-1939 - 34th in win %
1920-1929 - 6th in win %

That screams pretty inconsistent to me.

 

[MAIZEandBLUE09]

2010-Present - 37th in win %
2000-2009 - 22nd in win %
1990-1999 - 7th in win %
1980-1989 - 9th in win %
1970-1979 - 3rd in win %
1960-1969 - 52nd in win %
1950-1959 - 40th in win %
1940-1949 - 2nd in win %
1930-1939 - 34th in win %
1920-1929 - 6th in win %

That screams pretty inconsistent to me.

Compare that to other teams man. You can't just present that data and say it's inconsistent without putting that up against others. 5/9 decades Michigan was in the top 10 of winning percentage. That screams consistency to me, especially in sports. We had two bad stretches during that time frame, the 50's and 60's until Bo and then 2008-2014. That's not bad in relation to probably most teams.

 

[GoldRusher]

In what way? We just landed a top 5 class and got the first ever consensus #1 player by all recruiting sites.

Location mostly, Harbaugh has done a good job so far getting the UM name in the limelight as much as possible and good start on the field. Looks like your on the right track but I wonder how it goes if Michigan struggles this year and some o the buzz wears off. I think Texas is an easier sell than Michigan due to weather ect. But I'm not sure about their leadership So.. We'll see.

 

[ericd7633]

Compare that to other teams man. You can't just present that data and say it's inconsistent without putting that up against others. 5/9 decades Michigan was in the top 10 of winning percentage. That screams consistency to me, especially in sports.

And those other years they are outside the top 20. That's anything but consistent IMO.

 

[MAIZEandBLUE09]

And those other years they are outside the top 20. That's anything but consistent IMO.

In relation to what? That's extremely consistent in the sporting world. since 1969, Michigan had 40 straight years of consistent football. And prior to 1950, Michigan had another 50+ years of consistent, winning, football. In the last 100 years there's probably 20 or so years of bad football for the Michigan program. Few programs could claim better.

 

[B_dub]

For the record, Michigan just won 10 games last year and dominated an SEC division champ in a bowl game...

 

[MAIZEandBLUE09]

And those other years they are outside the top 20. That's anything but consistent IMO.

Quarter century rankings:
Rankings Index

1901-1925: Michigan #1
1926-1950: Michigan #4
1951-1975: Michigan #16
1976-2000: Michigan #4

Again, few teams can match Michigan's consistency for the last 100+ years. I'm not saying we've been the best lately, clearly we haven't, but it's rather rare for Michigan to go through a bad stretch.

 

[Shanemansj13]

You said 100 years, not "recent history". Michigan has 7 national titles in the last 100 years....

They have one since 1948 and that one is sort of tainted, lets be honest. So they beat scrubs in the good ole days. They have a lot of wins bc they have been playing forever. They are the closest thing to a "blue blood fraud". They don't qualify IMO

 

[outofyourmind]

Alledged blueblood all-time vs the other alledged bluebloods:


1. Texas 84-63-6(.549) 61-44-5 vs OU
2. ND.....95-78-7(.527) 46-36-5 vs USC
3. Mich...92-79-8(.512) 58-48-6 vs OSU
4. USC...70-67-3(.500) 13-9-1 vs OSU
5. OU....98-116-9(.439) 45-38-3 vs Neb.
6. OSU...67-80-7(.435)
7. Bama..17-22-2(.415)
8. Neb.....56-75-4(.412)

2 things that stick out is the number of games played

 

[Shanemansj13]

Quarter century rankings:
Rankings Index

1901-1925: Michigan #1
1926-1950: Michigan #4
1951-1975: Michigan #16
1976-2000: Michigan #4

Again, few teams can match Michigan's consistency for the last 100+ years. I'm not saying we've been the best lately, clearly we haven't, but it's rather rare for Michigan to go through a bad stretch.

Yeah, consistency is key. 1 tainted NC the last 68 years. That is consistency. 10 NC's when they gave out ties, when they had no competition and barely any teams playing college football. Not impressed

 

[Across The Field]

In relation to what? That's extremely consistent in the sporting world. since 1969, Michigan had 40 straight years of consistent football. And prior to 1950, Michigan had another 50+ years of consistent, winning, football. In the last 100 years there's probably 20 or so years of bad football for the Michigan program. Few programs could claim better.

I'm sorry, but the leather helmet days are irrelevant. The game is dramatically different in essentially every single possible way.

Since 1969, michigan has .5 national championships, bottom on the list of Blue Bloods. In fact, most of the Blue Bloods have multiple titles in that time frame. They've been consistent in terms of winning regular season games, but when it matters most they just don't measure up.

 

[oaknightshockey1]

I'm sorry, but the leather helmet days are irrelevant. The game is dramatically different in essentially every single possible way.

Since 1969, michigan has .5 national championships, bottom on the list of Blue Bloods. In fact, most of the Blue Bloods have multiple titles in that time frame. They've been consistent in terms of winning regular season games, but when it matters most they just don't measure up.

I'm a big fan of that timeframe...Nebraska is the winningest program since then

 

[Bamabino]

2 things that stick out is the number of games played

Yeah, OU has played Texas and Nebraska a bunch.

 

[outofyourmind]

Yeah, OU has played Texas and Nebraska a bunch.

That Alabama number can't be right.

 

[fishinabarrel]

Yeah, I am not sure what I was thinking there. As much as Cooper is bashed for not beating Michigan, I guess I just assumed it didn't go so well overall. I admitted I was wrong above.

That is kind of an important game to us Ohio State fans. Doesn't matter how many games you win, there is one that trumps all the others