Historically...Michigan is overrated honestly

[Wamu]

Nice suspensions, Buckeyes. Dirt program.

Taylor Lewan says hello.

 

[MAIZEandBLUE09]

I-A Wins 1906-2014

10th in total wins but 5th in terms of winning percentage. And did you notice the difference was mostly because of the "games played"? Alabama and Oklahoma played 50-60 more games than Michigan during that span and finished with about as many more wins -- My guess would be due to bowl games.

 

[ericd7633]

Yeah, the 1800's, the 1900's and the early 2000's. But who's counting. It's not like ND doesn't count all those wins from the 1800's either. Despite not winning as many randomly handed out national titles as Notre Dame, Michigan has won the most games, and is only 2nd to ND in winning percentage, for a reason; and it has little to do with the probably less than 50 games that happened pre-1900. Prior to the Rich Rod hire, Michigan hadn't had a losing season since before Bo. We have historically just won a shit ton of games.

Michigan won 54 more games than ND did in the 1800's. And had a head start on collecting those wins. That might be the reason why Michigan has more? Not because they're better but because they started sooner?

 

[outofyourmind]

10th in total wins but 5th in terms of winning percentage.

So how is that the best??

 

[4down20]

10th in total wins but 5th in terms of winning percentage. And did you notice the difference was mostly because of the "games played"? Alabama and Oklahoma played 50-60 more games than Michigan during that span and finished with about as many more wins -- My guess would be due to bowl games.

All time Michigan has played way more games than Alabama.

Alabama has played: 1218
Michigan has played: 1279

And Alabama has been to about 20 or so more bowls than Michigan.

So if Alabama has 50-60 since 1906, then holy shit Michigan got an early head start.

 

[Wamu]

So how is that the best??

It's called wolvereeeen math.

 

[Red_Alert]

You are right about the majority of Michigan's titles, but if you say "historically," you have to include all of history--you can't leave out half of to suit yourself. Well, you can, but that wouldn't be "historical." Michigan does deserve to be in the discussion of historically great programs.

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

Heck, they were greater.

 

[Red_Alert]

If you divide CFB history in half, Michigan certainly hasn't had the accomplishments of others in the second half of CFB History.

If you take the first half of CFB History they come in behind Yale, Harvard, Penn, Princeton, Notre Dame in wins and winning percentage. So there is evidence they didn't even make the top 5 in the first half of CFB history either.

Just sayin'

I should have read further, but BOOM, you said it.

 

[outofyourmind]

Michigan fans need to get on the same page.
Is Michigan the best team of all time or are they Historically Significant??
It's not the same thing.

 

[Wamu]

Michigan fans need to get on the same page.
Is Michigan the best team of all time or are they Historically Significant??
It's not the same thing.

To certain fans of that team they are both.

 

[7Samurai13]

Which team had a better decade, one that 10-2 all ten years or one that went 12-0 twice won two national titles, three 10-2, and five 9-3 seasons? I will take the titles over compiling wins with nothing to show for it.

 

[MAIZEandBLUE09]

So how is that the best??

Did I say it was the best? My argument was that Michigan has done a hell of a lot of winning; even minus the 1800's; despite what some are claiming.

 

[MAIZEandBLUE09]

Michigan won 54 more games than ND did in the 1800's. And had a head start on collecting those wins. That might be the reason why Michigan has more? Not because they're better but because they started sooner?

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

 

[Wamu]

My argument was that Michigan has done a hell of a lot of winning.

Well they sure haven't been doing alotta winning lately...

2014: 5-7
2013: 7-6
2012: 8-5
2011: 11-2
2010: 7-6
2009: 5-7
2008: 3-9

 

[4down20]

So basically what I've learned in this thread is that Michigan's history is basically all prior to 1906, after which point they are basically just an above average team.

They have "history" in that earlier time period and have things like a good win% and lots of wins, but it turns out it's because most of the teams that were also playing football in that time just aren't in the top level of football anymore. Otherwise, their record during that time period is actually kind of average.

It's kind of like handicap drag racing and Michigan got a 10 second head start on a 1/4 mile track, but still ended up losing.

 

[MAIZEandBLUE09]

Well they sure haven't been doing alotta winning lately...

2014: 5-7
2013: 7-6
2012: 8-5
2011: 11-2
2010: 7-6
2009: 5-7
2008: 3-9

Nope. But almost any team you look at has seen a down 4-8 years or so in the last 50 years. In a few years that will just be a minor blip on the radar.

 

[MAIZEandBLUE09]

So basically what I've learned in this thread is that Michigan's history is basically all prior to 1906, after which point they are basically just an above average team.

They have "history" in that earlier time period and have things like a good win% and lots of wins, but it turns out it's because most of the teams that were also playing football in that time just aren't in the top level of football anymore. Otherwise, their record during that time period is actually kind of average.

It's kind of like handicap drag racing and Michigan got a 10 second head start on a 1/4 mile track, but still ended up losing.

Then you didn't read. Because we've already determined that from 1906, Michigan still has the 5th best winning percentage and 10th most number of wins.

 

[Wamu]

Then you didn't read. Because we've already determined that from 1906, Michigan still has the 5th best winning percentage and 10th most number of wins.

Still reliving the past huh? Well you're in luck, all this weekend on the History Channel...

 

[4down20]

Then you didn't read. Because we've already determined that from 1906, Michigan still has the 5th best winning percentage and 10th most number of wins.

So you drop from #2 to #5 and from #1 to #10.

That's a pretty big drop.

Also what about the other stats? Like National Championships?

 

[Wamu]

So you drop from #2 to #5 and from #1 to #10.

That's a pretty big drop.

Also what about the other stats? Like National Championships?

I'm pretty sure meeeechegan has more national titles than the Yankees have rings.