2019 Michigan Season Thread

[Cincydawg]

Ole Miss is probably a better example.  A strong run in the early 60s under Vaught, but then only one top ten finish since 1969.  Vaught retired and his replacements were not nearly as successful.  

https://www.sports-reference.com/cfb/schools/mississippi/

Were they a Blue Blood?  No, but they were consistently ranked up there preseason.  Coaching.

It's "funny" they had this recruiting flurry not that long ago that raised eye brows, and then slam.

[medinabuckeye1]

Miami has worked very hard in the last couple of decades to increase its academic stature (it has). I don't know if this is coincidence or not. I also think moving away from Orange Bowl Stadium really hurt too. They might be best off moving to Marlins Park, if they could make the dimensions work.

Miami and FSU are not helmet schools.

I get the impression that part of the issue for Miami is that there is very little alumni support for the program for multiple reasons including:

• It is a relatively small private school (enrollment <20k).  
• I get the impression that a substantial portion of those students are non-local and my guess is that a lot of them go back home or closer to home when the graduate.  I would guess that a fair portion of their students just decide that spending four years at the beach for college sounds like a lot of fun.  
• I *THINK* that a lot of their students hail from the Northeast where CFB generally just isn't a very big deal so they probably aren't predisposed to cheer on their school.  Ie, they'll probably show up for the games if the Hurricanes are in the top-10 but they aren't going to spend four hours in a WAY off-campus stadium watching a mediocre team.  

[Cincydawg]

The off campus stadium is a large issue I think, but larger is their mediocre record of late.

FSU should be "back" faster than Miami, but it hinges on coaching.  Duh.

[medinabuckeye1]

Anyone have data on Minnesota after their great run?  Did they slowly fade or was it more of a collapse?

Minnesota is 263-324-5 since they won their last (shared) Big Ten title in 1967. Prior to that, their record was 431-194-36, with 18 Big Ten championships and 7 MNC's.

But, if you go back to 1941, Minnesota had 16 Big Ten championships and 6 MNC's. It's record was 306-94-25.

From 1942 through 1967 the record was 125-103-11, with 2 Big Ten championships and 1 MNC.

So, which is the inflection point? 1941, or 1967?

The Gophers were pretty mediocre for much of the 50s and 60s anyway.
https://www.sports-reference.com/cfb/schools/minnesota/index.html
In 1960, they were voted Number 1 because the Rose Bowl loss didn't count and they were 8-2.

So, the transition probably is closer to 1941, with a few up seasons thereafter.  I'm not sure we can discern much from pre1941 results relevant today.

I was going to basically say what Badge already said.  I'll expand on it a little bit.  

The major inflection point is definitely WWII.  When they won the 1941 NC is was their second in a row and fifth in eight years.  NC's are a little bit fluky but using league titles as the gauge, the Gophers' league title in 1941 was their:

• second consecutive league title
• seventh league title in nine years
• 16th overall league title

The Gophers were a Charter Member of the league so they began competing in 1896.  In the 46 seasons from 1896-1941 the Gophers won 16 titles.  That is a little better than one every three years.  From 1942-1967 they won two in two in 26 years that isn't nearly as good.  Since then, obviously, they have none in 51 years which is even worse.  

1960 and 1967 were both split titles.  Minnesota shared the 1960 title with Iowa and they shared the 1967 title with Indiana and Purdue.  They also had an OOC loss both years.  In 1960 they lost to Washington in the Rose Bowl and in 1967 they lost 7-0 to the Cornhuskers in Lincoln.  Also note that the Nebraska team that Minnesota lost to in 1967 was not part of Devaney/Osborne's glory days of Husker football.  That team was 6-4 with losses to Kansas, Colorado, Mizzou, and Oklahoma.  

Up through 1941 it was not unusual for Minnesota to go undefeated.  From 1942 through 2018 their best ever seasons ended up 8-2 (1960, 61, 67), 10-3 (2003), and 9-4 (2016).  In the last 77 years they best they have ever finished is two losses.  They finished undefeated back-to-back the two years prior to that.  

[Cincydawg]

Vis a vis Michigan, I doubt they fall as far as Tennessee has.  They won't lose much luster by 10-3 seasons.  They'd have to be 7-6, 8-5, 4-8, ... over 20 years to really fall out of favor I think.

Minny and Ole Miss are not good examples I think, OM a bit better.  But the Vols could be one more bad coach away from dropping from near Blue Blood to mediocre.

[ELA]

Vis a vis Michigan, I doubt they fall as far as Tennessee has.  They won't lose much luster by 10-3 seasons.  They'd have to be 7-6, 8-5, 4-8, ... over 20 years to really fall out of favor I think.

Minny and Ole Miss are not good examples I think, OM a bit better.  But the Vols could be one more bad coach away from dropping from near Blue Blood to mediocre.

Yeah, I included Tennessee and Penn State for comparison purposes, but I've already said I don't think they are.

I've said 7 for sure, and I'm willing to debate Nebraska.

ND, Michigan, OSU, Texas, Oklahoma, Alabama, USC

I posted the worst 15 from all of those.

Aside from the 3 Florida schools, who would obviously have the best, I wonder what the BEST 15 year stretches from any school not among those 10 in the past 50 years.

[Cincydawg]

While I usually see 8 "Blue Bloods", the scale is analog, whoever is 9th is still a program with a lot of helmetosity.

I'm happy to list them by number of wins or cumulative rankings or whatever floats your boat.  The Vols could be near that point where a team loses considerable helmetosity and thus recruiting potential.  Michigan might dim just a bit, but not much.  

I'd have to think Boise State found recruiting a lot easier when they made noise.  

The Vols are looking at three losing seasons in a row.  They were the second to last team never to have had 8 losses.  They were 0-8 in conference two years ago.  They lost to GaState for crying out loud.  FSU and Miami have not done THAT.  I guess Michigan did have that one loss to a battery team a while back.

[FearlessF]

900 wins has got to count for a helmet at least for the next year or two

[847badgerfan]

Aside from the 3 Florida schools, who would obviously have the best, I wonder what the BEST 15 year stretches from any school not among those 10 in the past 50 years.

Probably Clemson? I just looked at the 15 years prior to this year. Really wish we had ftbobs to weigh in.

Rank	Team name	Winning  Percentage	Games  Won	Games  Lost	Games  Tied	Games  Played
1	Boise State	0.83249	164	33	0	197
2	Ohio State	0.83243	154	31	0	185
3	Alabama	0.80328	147	36	0	183
4	Oklahoma	0.79500	159	41	0	200
5	Louisiana State	0.76289	148	46	0	194
6	Appalachian State	0.75000	48	16	0	64
7	Wisconsin	0.74874	149	50	0	199
8	Clemson	0.74627	150	51	0	201
9	Georgia	0.73367	146	53	0	199
10	Texas Christian	0.72917	140	52	0	192
11	Southern Cal	0.72527	132	50	0	182
12	Oregon	0.72165	140	54	0	194
13	Florida	0.69430	134	59	0	193
14	Virginia Tech	0.69000	138	62	0	200
15	Penn State	0.68586	131	60	0	191
16	Texas	0.68394	132	61	0	193
17	Utah	0.68229	131	61	0	192
18	Auburn	0.68205	133	62	0	195
19	Florida State	0.67568	125	60	0	185
20	West Virginia	0.67539	129	62	0	191
21	Oklahoma State	0.66667	128	64	0	192
22	Brigham Young	0.64583	124	68	0	192
23	Notre Dame	0.64211	122	68	0	190
24	Louisville	0.63492	120	69	0	189
25t	Michigan	0.63158	120	70	0	190
25t	Cincinnati	0.63158	120	70	0	190
27	Navy	0.62887	122	72	0	194
28	Stanford	0.62827	120	71	0	191
29t	Michigan State	0.62694	121	72	0	193
29t	Houston	0.62694	121	72	0	193

[CWSooner]

Minnesota is 263-324-5 since they won their last (shared) Big Ten title in 1967. Prior to that, their record was 431-194-36, with 18 Big Ten championships and 7 MNC's.

But, if you go back to 1941, Minnesota had 16 Big Ten championships and 6 MNC's. It's record was 306-94-25.

From 1942 through 1967 the record was 125-103-11, with 2 Big Ten championships and 1 MNC.

So, which is the inflection point? 1941, or 1967?

Minnesota was not a helmet in 1967.  The question is when after 1941 that status went away.

Michigan today is in a better place than Minnesota was in 1967.

EDIT: I see that there has been much more thorough discussion of this issue since Badge's post quoted above.  But I'll stick to what I said, and in answer to Badge's question about the inflection point, I think it was 1941.

[Brutus Buckeye]

There's two kinds of Helmets. The ones that can still compete for a NC, and the ones that are essentially a museum. 

Not sure which side of the divide Notre Dame is on. Mostly a museum, but they do make a run from time to time that ultimately "falls short" (to put it mildly). 

[Cincydawg]

I think of a helmet as a program that gets attention from recruits, a lot of excitement and attention, these days.

An elite recruit gets a letter from Alabama, WOW.  He gets another letter from Virginia, and Minnesota, and Ohio State, WOW.

I think a letter from ND is at least a smaller WOW, a wow in effect.

[ELA]

There's two kinds of Helmets. The ones that can still compete for a NC, and the ones that are essentially a museum.

Not sure which side of the divide Notre Dame is on. Mostly a museum, but they do make a run from time to time that ultimately "falls short" (to put it mildly).

Some UM writer said that UM football right now is just a helmet a stadium and a song.

I agree, but that's what being a helmet is.  You are still something, even when you aren't something.

[ELA]

Not sure if anyone else listens to the Shutdown Fullcast, which is the podcast remnants of EDSBS, and I know team radio broadcasts are pretty niche, but their episode this week discussing just how bad Brandstatter/Dierdorf are is hilarious.  It's a shame they let Frank Beckman go.