@TreyDoyle4 "Way to support the team through thick and thin. "
To bash the head coach is NOT to bash the team. The head coach and team are different concepts and different entities. You cannot logically equate the two. So shut the fuck up about me not supporting the team and explain to me why I should support dickrod.
I GUARANTEE that the team supports RR %110. You support RICH RODRIGUEZ b/c he is the current coach of the Michigan Wolverines, a team I'm sure you claim to love. That's why you support him, so stop being such a douche. If RR doesn't work out, then you support the next man appointed to the job. It's really quite simple.
@TreyDoyle4 "I GUARANTEE that the team supports RR %110."
all this means is that Brandon still personally supports him and the players personally support him. this does nothing to explain how the head coach and the team are the same concepts
@TreyDoyle4 "You support RICH RODRIGUEZ b/c he is the current coach of the Michigan Wolverines"
so what? he's done a SHITTY job as the teams head coach. His record is 8-16, and he's bought nothing but bad news on and off the field. why the hell should I support a head coach who's utterly FAILED o do his job, which is make Michigan a winner? should the president be supported no matter how much of a fuck up he is just becuse he's the president of the USA? that makes no sense whatsoever.
@TreyDoyle4 " If RR doesn't work out, then you support the next man appointed to the job"
nope. ain't happening. until you prove that the head coach and the team are the same thing, you have no leg to stand on. when a coach fails to do his job, he deserves to be fired, case closed.
LoL, the fact that you made it a point to come back to this...months after the fact is pretty pathetic. But not nearly as pathetic as you spending all fall cheering AGAINST "your team". Characteristics of a true douche bag.
@TreyDoyle4 I was never cheering against Michigan. NEVER. I was hoping we'd be where Auburn and Oregon are right now. Alas, it did not happen. Shit, we only went 7-6 in dickrods third year on the job. He HAD to be fired!
Only Navaree scores a touchdown ;) LOL! and the Minnesota game of 97 what network was that on? I cant remember? and the interception by Woodson against Wisconsin! Keith Jackson showed alot of ENERGY HA NOT! and the Woodson int against MSU I was at ABC WAREHOUSE AND GOT KICKED OUT OF THE STORE FOR BEING SO LOUD I WAS 8 GIVE ME A BREAK!
Ok guys michigan is coming back, they have awesome freshman, they are 4-0 this year, and we don't need to fire rich rod cause he is awesome he has put together a team now, instead of a field of players.
This comment has received too many negative votesshow
Funny the other similarity is that both teams are overrated. 1997 team was pretty much exposed by Washington State (Not deserving of a split national title) while the 2003 team was exposed against USC.
97 nebraska wouldve torn this team apart. michigan played no1 that year mainly because the big 10 was and is a 2 team conference every year. big 12 was and is more competitive. the huskers shredded tennessee and they wouldve beaten michigan 31-17 that year
What are you talking about that the Big Ten was a two team conference? Penn State was ranked #1 up until they lost in November and until Curtis Enis and Joe Juvicius were suspended, one of the best teams in the country (they beat a good Ohio State team 31-27 and smothered ranked Wisconsin and Purdue). The Big Ten was at least a four or five strong team conference that year.
@MVillani1985 Your smoking some good stuff if you think the Big 10 was a strong conference in 97! Bowl results of 97 tell a completely different story about the Big 10 in 97 dumbass!
Mich State lost to Wash 51-23!!!
Iowa lost to ASU 17-7
Wisc lost to Georgia 33-6!!!
PSU lost to FL 21-6
OSU lost to FL 31-14!!
All losses by 10 or more points! By an average score of 30-10! The best the big 10 has to offer in 97 getting beat down like bitches by an average score of 30-10!!!!!!!!! Near 3 td's!
@lovdahuskers The lower half of the Big Ten was weak, sure, but the upper half was strong. Most of those games you don't know the stories behind. Penn State's star WR and HB were suspended, a team already banged up from injuries still gave a Florida that was one of the best teams in the nation an upset, remember it was a 7-6 game until late in the fourth quarter. Ohio State, the #3 team in the conference that year was matched up with the ACC Champion. MSU, well they can't win bowl games.
@MVillani1985 You're so full of shit!. You're so blind to it you're in complete denial! Everyone of those Big 10 teams that you claim were the class of the Big 10 got their BUTTS HANDED TO THEM IN BOWL GAMES! EVERYONE! There is no explanation needed other than the Big 10 was made to look foolish in the bowl season! It's hard to explain away a negative other than putting on blinders, being in denial and being full of LAME EXCUSES! And to put the cherry on top.
@MVillani1985 excuses excuses excuses! Just win baby Don't tell me shit about winning without your best players. 94 Nebraska did it and earned a national championshsip missing one of the greatest college qb's of all time for 8 games. And missing a 10 year NFL starting safety for 10 games! if Frazier plays all year in 94, PSU isn't the number one offense in the country. 94 would have been a precursor to the 95 unit that put up 52 a game!
@lovdahuskers That's the point, Penn State did win every game that year in 1994. And that wasn't enough. And if you're comparing 1997 Penn State to 1994 Nebraska, well of course 1994 Nebraska is better than 1997 Penn State, since the 1997 Nittany Lions lacked the depth to keep winning big after getting banged up. But one year makes a big difference, the 1994 Huskers were not the 1995 Huskers. Just like the 1993 Nittany Lions were not the 1994 Nittany Lions, despite having the same players.
@MVillani1985 You don't get it do you. 94 Nebraka would have been as dominant in the regular season as 95 Nebraska was if not for the injuries, mostly Frazier having to sit out. With Frazier and Phillips together for an entire year in 94 Nebraska is likely leading the country in scoring. Why? Same offense as 95! Same team that scored 52 a game. And they scoreed that 52 a game in 95 without Phillips for more than half those games!
@lovdahuskers Even with Frazier and Phillips in they had to come back and beat Miami. 1994 Nebraska was a good team, no doubt, but they weren't the 95 Huskers. One year makes a LOT of difference in a team. Look at 1993 Penn State vs 1994 Penn State, same team, one loses two games but looks mostly dominant, one destroys everything in their path. I gotta admit, the 1995 team was something else, proving it with that beatdown on Florida, but the 1994 team was "merely" exceptional.
@MVillani1985 You dumb mother fucker! Frazier played less than a half you dumbass! If Frazier and Phillips play all year together in 94, they are probably the ones leading the country in scoring and not PSU! Same god damn team! The 94 team was hardly different from 95 other than the fact that Frazier didn't play much. So, if 94 PSU gets a full game of Frazier/Phillips it is largely the team that scored 52 a game in 95!
@MVillani1985 Miami benefited from Frazier not being in game shape, due to missing 8 games. In fact all of college football benefited form Frazier missing 8 games in 94. Frazier/Phillips for an entire season and the 94 NU games that were reasonably close aren't close at all. And even so, without Frazier for 8 games and Mike Minter (NFL starting safety for 10 years!) for 10 games, 94 NU still beat every team on schedule by 10 or MORE other than Miami.
@lovdahuskers I'll be willing to give you that many of the close games with Frazier and Phillips in would've been a different story, but I don't think it'd have been 52 points a game. As I've said a hundred times before, the 1994 Nebraska team was good, but they weren't the same as the 1995 team. Frazier and Phillips, along with the rest of the team improved a lot from 1994, yes even over the first half of 1994 when they were in. In 1995, that team was almost an NFL team playing college ball.
Michigan had the best defense in college football history that year, in addition to an offense which allowed them to win by an average of two touchdowns.
So...no. If the BCS had been in place, we would've destroyed Nebraska.
@SmallvilleFanCK1 Destroyed Nebraska in 97!? LMAO! Keep dreaming idiot! The bowl results of the 97 season speak very highly to what happens if 97 Mich found themselves on a football field with 97 Nebraska. Mich struggels terribly to beat Ryan leaf and WSU, while over in the OB Nebraska is whiiping tenn, up 42-9 with less than 2 minutes left. A tenn team with Manning, Lewis, Wilson, Fair, Little etc.. Tenn would have whipped WSU!
@SmallvilleFanCK1 And more bowl results from 97. Each and every Big 10 team that Mich played in 97 that went to a bowl LOST THEIR bowl games! And ND too! The Big 10 was overrated trash and a joke in 97!
Mich. State lost to Wash 51-23!!
Iowa lost to ASU 17-7
Wisc. lost to Georgia 33-6!!
PSU lost to FL 21-6
OSU lost to FSU 31-14
These aren't one, two or losses by less than a td. All lost by more than 10 points and an average beat down of 30-10. And Mich struggles to beat overrated WSU
@SmallvilleFanCK1 All that tells me all I need to know about Nebraska and Michigan facing off on the same field. Nebraska waxes, dismantles, and monkey stomps the Wolverines of 97. probably something similar in nature to what they did to Tenn. Tenn had a far far better offense than 97 Mich, and Mich defense was overrated due to playing the pathetic Big 10 offenses! And actually, the bowl opponents of those 5 aforementioned Big 10 bowl losses held those Big 10 teams to fewer points than Mich!
That season, how many teams did Michigan hold to 17 points or less? 11. We played the toughest schedule in the nation. 7 ranked teams, at Iowa, MSU, PSU, and Wisconsin. Not to mention two Big 12 teams, and the Pac-10 Champ. Our defense was the best of all-time.
Nebraska struggled to beat Missouri and Colorado, and only remained undefeated by dumb luck.
How does the Big Ten's bowl performance have anything to do with how we did? We'll see how "easy" the Big Ten is once you join.
@SmallvilleFanCK1 Very true. And don't forget that Michigan waxed Colorado 27-3 like they were from a lower division. Nebraska's best win was a 77-14 win over an Iowa State team that was about as good as Harvard's football team I'm sure Michigan and Penn State, maybe even Ohio State that year, could have hung 100 on. Honestly, I think 1997 Penn State (before Enis and Juvicius were suspended) could have beaten Nebraska or Tennessee that year. Ohio State, maybe not, but Penn State yes.
@MVillani1985 Oh my god! you are one dumb SOB! Lets see Mich gets Colorado in Ann Arbor with JOhn Hessler playing his first game at QB! And Nebraska gets Colorado 11 games later in boulder in a rivalry game. Do you think the kid might improve some from his first game in ANN ARBOR to playing at home? Freaking dumbass! Use that PSU education to think! Come on you can do it! THINK!
@lovdahuskers Typical Huskers fan, freaks out if you don't agree that their 1997 and 1994 teams at being the second and third best teams of all time. The 1995 team may be the best of all time, but 1994 and 1997, not so much. Do my responses really touch a nerve that much? And do you really think he improved that much in a few games? Usually it takes quarterbacks a couple years to improve to that level. Look at Troy Smith of Ohio State in 2004, then look at him in 2005 and 2006. Big difference.
@MVillani1985 Point is that if not for Frazier being out those games that the Nebraska offense likely matches what they did in 95, 52 a game. And if PSU had played Nebraska with Frazier/Phillips for an entire game behind that O line PSU is seeing an offenses very similar tot hat of the 95 squad! It is a very simple, fact based correlation to make. Fct is the 94 Huskers could have been as good as 95 if Frazier plays entire year. No difference ifrom 95 if PSu sees Frazier/Phillips entire game
@MVillani1985 it's not even improvement that is the issue A first TIME QB AND MICH GETS HIM IN ANN ARBOR!!! HELLO! HELLO!!! EARTH TO DUMBASS!! WHAT DID YOU EXPECT?? P. Manning! Furthermore, I am sure you like to say what most everyone else does "Tom and Nebraska ran up the score" Guess what.. Nebraska was up 17 late on COLORADO IN BOULDER AND COULD have scored more if TOM HAD CHOSEN TOO! That simple. So here's an example of Tom doing exactly opposite of what so many claim he always did.
@lovdahuskers Do you have Tourette's Syndrome or something? Your responses seem to indicate that. But anyways, getting to the point. I know that Tom Osbourne didn't run up the score on opponents. But Michigan didn't run up the score either. And as far as the first game, no quarterback that leads a major college team should have such jitters playing in the Big House, which isn't even that loud of a stadium, but Colorado turned out to not even be that good that year if you remember.
@MVillani1985 And the Big 10 was a joke in 1997! Big 12 went 4-2 against the Big 10 in 97! 94 Nebraska ran for 230+ yards on a great Miami defense with Frazier playing less than a half. If Frazier plays that entire game with Phillips, that miami defense is done and gassed much earlier than they were and they likley give up nearly 350 rushing if not more and 35 points. Imagine what Frazier/Phillips do to that 70th ranked Lions defense!
@lovdahuskers In my honest opinion, it would've been a battle of not only offense and defense but underrated offense vs underrated defense. Who knows how the game would have turned out? In all honesty, I think Nebraska and Penn State would have played each other close, either some 10-7 game (in which case I give the edge to Nebraska) or a 35-34 shootout (in which case I give the edge to Penn State). And the Big Ten as a whole in 1997 wasn't bad, it was maybe just Big Three, Little Eight.
@MVillani1985 it is a very simple and easy correlation to make, ' "That Miami gives up more rushing yards and more points if they see full game of Frazier/Phillips" since that great Miami defense with Sapp and LEwis was done, gassed on their knees giving up late yards and late points in early to mid 4th quarter. Only would have happened much sooner and 350 yards rushing and 35 points is easily within reach for Nebraska with Frazier and Phillips!
@MVillani1985 And we know that if Miami gets a game ready, game shape Frazier for an entire game with Lawrence Phillips that the OB isn't close. If Miami gets the real Frazier for an entire game Nebraska puts 25 on that defense! EASY! Just imagine what they do to the 70th ranked defense of PSU
@lovdahuskers Well, they'd have gashed Penn State's backup defense (who is responsible for the 70th ranked defensive ranking) no problem, but you wouldn't be seeing them. Nebraska was too good for Penn State to have rolled up that kind of score on. And we don't know just how good Frazier would have been had he been in the entire season, but I still don't think it'd have been the same thing as the 1995 team. That would mean that Frazier and Phillips didn't improve from 1994 to 1995.
@SmallvilleFanCK1 I am sure you dumb SOB that if the shoe were on the other foot i.e. that the Big 10 dominated in the bowl season that you would use that to claim just how good Mich was. So STFU and talk to my fucking hand! Toughest schedule in the country my ass! Everyone of the bowl teams that made that inflated that Mich schedule LOST! Including ND! At the end of the season after the final polls, Mich played 3 ranked teams, (Big 10 got exposed in bowl games) and Nebr played 5 ranked
@lovdahuskers You know what? This debate will never be resolved, simply because the BCS didn't yet exist and we couldn't take you to the woodshed on the field, where it mattered.
Nebraska joining the Big Ten is perfect timing: Michigan will be elite again right about the time the Cornholes are joining.
Because we all know Nebraska certainly wasn't invited to the Big Ten (#2 academic conference holistically, behind the Ivy League), based upon academics and research.
@SmallvilleFanCK1 you keep dreaming! yeah, you better hope Mich gets it together pretty quick because Pelini has something pretty strong going and they are on the verge of signing a very highly ranked recruiting class. One year goes pretty quick and you might just have a very highly ranked team to contend with in 2011
@SmallvilleFanCK1 Cat got your tongue? I see... Turning the conversation to unrelated BS. Must have really got you that that "vaunted" Mich defense gave up more points to the Big 10's 5 bowl teams than did the 5 teams that whipped there ass! It would be one thing if those bowl losses by Big 10 teams of 97 games were close, decided by one possession, (a fg or td) or less. But, it is something completely different when every team losses by 10 points min and by average of 20! ASS KICKED!
@lovdahuskers Each game is a different story. Shouldn't Penn State have kicked Michigan's ass in 1997 based on their games against Wisconsin, using that logic?
@SmallvilleFanCK1 And to top off the Big 10 bowl struggles Mich struggles terribly to beat a very overrated WSU!Don't tell me shit about holding Big 10 teams to 17 or less. The 5 Big 10 bowl teams that Mich beat in 97 scored more against Mich (69) than they did against the 5 bowl opponents (56)! bet you didn't know that. So, what does that say about the other lameass Big 10 offenses that didn't make bowl games!
@SmallvilleFanCK1 And after the bowl season after the final polls were out Mich played 3 ranked teams because the Big 10 was exposed as a FRAUD! Don't tellme the rankings are only important at game time! Bullshit! They award a national championship at end of bowl season and take final polls for a reason. The final polls are just as important for theother 24 teams as they are the team that wins the NC! Fact is at end of year Mich played THREE RANKED TEAMS, NEbraska 5!
@lovdahuskers If you want to go on ranked teams at the time they played, that's fine. But don't give me garbage about "final rankings". This issue can be argued until we're both blue in the face. This should've been settled on the field.
If you compare both schedules, both teams played an okay schedule. I'm looking at the quality of the Big 12 that year, and it wasn't exactly intimidating either.
What I do know is, Michigan had a stout defense, I don't care what conference you're in.
@lovdahuskers The lower half of the Big Ten wasn't that great out of conference, but the upper half actually was good. Rankings aren't as much of the tell-all-end-all that you think they are. I prefer looking at the number of 6-6 or better opponents myself. Sometimes polls may leave a 10-3 team unranked because of bias against the conference, while an 8-5 team may end the year ranked if they play in the SEC, the perceived third conference ot the NFL by these biased pollsters.
@lovdahuskers Sounds a lot like the argument I heard that 94 Penn State was no better than 94 Colorado I already explained the bowl games. And even so, look at some games that year. Remember the Penn State who was without their best players yet nearly beat #4 Florida? Michigan beat them 34-8 in Beaver Stadium. It was 34-0 after three! Curtis Enis (wasn't in the Citrus Bowl) scored against Michigan reserves. So I guess the other teams' starters were slightly better than Michigan's backups?
@RebelfanfromBamaland the big 12 was considered by most journalists to be the weakest major conference in the league. Nebraska had a lot of close calls especially with the lucky play at the end against missouri. on top of that, they barely won against colorado while michigan blew them out of the water. How about that for a more direct comparison. You couldn't run against mcihigan and you couldn't pass against them. there offense won ugly but they were like the 85 bears.
Wazoo was an excellent team that year, hence them making the Rose at all. Behind Leaf, they were a great team. Also, in 03, Michigan just didn't stack well against a loaded USC team that we've discovered hasn't been beaten often in the past ten years, and especially not in the Rose Bowl. The 97 Huskers got sympathy votes.
USC should have been in the national championship and michigan would have beaten any other team.....and r u serious they beat washington state by 2 tds and made ryan lead ( a good college qb) look terrible....in 97 the big ten was hands down the best conference and they breezed through it
Also, don't forget that Big Ten #2 Penn State only lost a close game to #6 Florida in the Citrus Bowl because two key players (who were in when Michigan dumptrucked Penn State 34-8 in a game not as close as the score) were suspended, and Iowa was the only team to give Michigan a game that year.
You know if Oklahoma would have fallen big after the KSU loss, and LSU would have lost the SEC championship game, Michigan would have been playing for the national title on a neutral site, unlike in California against USC.
Actually dude, that KSU loss was Oklahomas first loss of the season, so if LSU had lost the SEC title game, then it would ahve been Oklahoma-USC in the Sugar Bowl, and Michigan vs ? in the Rose bowl. Michigan had 2 losses at the end of the regular season, while Oklahoma only had one. BUT, if Michigan had beaten either Oregon or Iowa, THEN they would ahve been in the NC game ahead of Oklahoma
As A Browns fan I am really wishing that Edward would get his head out of his ASS and start holding onto catchable balls and get back to last season's form.
I'm surprised you didn't mention the Ohio State game was on November 22 in both seasons. (as well as 1969 along with probably many others)
Knightmessenger 1 year ago
@Knightmessenger excellent point
Poole1Dan 1 year ago
number 3 the one with woodson was a zone coverage and the 2003 season that was man on man
headstrong420 1 year ago
@headstrong420 I don't think the play calls have to be the same for the plays to essentially look the same, you know what I mean?
Poole1Dan 1 year ago
all of michigan's GREATEST coaches went 20 years or more
lloyd carr went 12 years
rich rod shouldnt be coaching right now
carr should still be coaching i believe
paioshgoasdasdfhgaas 1 year ago
"Fire Dick Rod"? Way to support the team through thick and thin. A true Wolverine you are for sure (hope you pick up the sarcasm).
TreyDoyle4 1 year ago
@TreyDoyle4 "Way to support the team through thick and thin. "
To bash the head coach is NOT to bash the team. The head coach and team are different concepts and different entities. You cannot logically equate the two. So shut the fuck up about me not supporting the team and explain to me why I should support dickrod.
Poole1Dan 1 year ago
@Poole1Dan
I GUARANTEE that the team supports RR %110. You support RICH RODRIGUEZ b/c he is the current coach of the Michigan Wolverines, a team I'm sure you claim to love. That's why you support him, so stop being such a douche. If RR doesn't work out, then you support the next man appointed to the job. It's really quite simple.
TreyDoyle4 1 year ago
@TreyDoyle4 "I GUARANTEE that the team supports RR %110."
all this means is that Brandon still personally supports him and the players personally support him. this does nothing to explain how the head coach and the team are the same concepts
Poole1Dan 1 year ago
@TreyDoyle4 "You support RICH RODRIGUEZ b/c he is the current coach of the Michigan Wolverines"
so what? he's done a SHITTY job as the teams head coach. His record is 8-16, and he's bought nothing but bad news on and off the field. why the hell should I support a head coach who's utterly FAILED o do his job, which is make Michigan a winner? should the president be supported no matter how much of a fuck up he is just becuse he's the president of the USA? that makes no sense whatsoever.
Poole1Dan 1 year ago
@TreyDoyle4 " If RR doesn't work out, then you support the next man appointed to the job"
nope. ain't happening. until you prove that the head coach and the team are the same thing, you have no leg to stand on. when a coach fails to do his job, he deserves to be fired, case closed.
Poole1Dan 1 year ago
@TreyDoyle4
I support RR.
RequiemForABuckeye 1 year ago
@RequiemForABuckeye And in your case, I don't blame you one bit.
Poole1Dan 1 year ago
@TreyDoyle4 Dickrod is GONE!!!! Like I said he'd be!!!!
Go Blue!
Poole1Dan 1 year ago
@Poole1Dan
LoL, the fact that you made it a point to come back to this...months after the fact is pretty pathetic. But not nearly as pathetic as you spending all fall cheering AGAINST "your team". Characteristics of a true douche bag.
TreyDoyle4 1 year ago
@TreyDoyle4 I was never cheering against Michigan. NEVER. I was hoping we'd be where Auburn and Oregon are right now. Alas, it did not happen. Shit, we only went 7-6 in dickrods third year on the job. He HAD to be fired!
Poole1Dan 1 year ago
Only Navaree scores a touchdown ;) LOL! and the Minnesota game of 97 what network was that on? I cant remember? and the interception by Woodson against Wisconsin! Keith Jackson showed alot of ENERGY HA NOT! and the Woodson int against MSU I was at ABC WAREHOUSE AND GOT KICKED OUT OF THE STORE FOR BEING SO LOUD I WAS 8 GIVE ME A BREAK!
bluejayforever2006 2 years ago
michigan should of been in the national championship game in 06
zachbird27 2 years ago
yeppers if Crable wouldnt have gotten that 15yard pentaly, and if Bod did not die ;(! RIP BO!
bluejayforever2006 2 years ago
Ok guys michigan is coming back, they have awesome freshman, they are 4-0 this year, and we don't need to fire rich rod cause he is awesome he has put together a team now, instead of a field of players.
bryancolegrove 2 years ago 2
This comment has received too many negative votes show
Funny the other similarity is that both teams are overrated. 1997 team was pretty much exposed by Washington State (Not deserving of a split national title) while the 2003 team was exposed against USC.
vaalinor 3 years ago
LOL. Michigan would ahve beaten the 97 Huskers 20-7. Michigan deserved an outright national championship that season.
Go Blue!
Poole1Dan 3 years ago
97 nebraska wouldve torn this team apart. michigan played no1 that year mainly because the big 10 was and is a 2 team conference every year. big 12 was and is more competitive. the huskers shredded tennessee and they wouldve beaten michigan 31-17 that year
RebelfanfromBamaland 2 years ago
What are you talking about that the Big Ten was a two team conference? Penn State was ranked #1 up until they lost in November and until Curtis Enis and Joe Juvicius were suspended, one of the best teams in the country (they beat a good Ohio State team 31-27 and smothered ranked Wisconsin and Purdue). The Big Ten was at least a four or five strong team conference that year.
MVillani1985 2 years ago
@MVillani1985 Your smoking some good stuff if you think the Big 10 was a strong conference in 97! Bowl results of 97 tell a completely different story about the Big 10 in 97 dumbass!
Mich State lost to Wash 51-23!!!
Iowa lost to ASU 17-7
Wisc lost to Georgia 33-6!!!
PSU lost to FL 21-6
OSU lost to FL 31-14!!
All losses by 10 or more points! By an average score of 30-10! The best the big 10 has to offer in 97 getting beat down like bitches by an average score of 30-10!!!!!!!!! Near 3 td's!
lovdahuskers 1 year ago
@lovdahuskers The lower half of the Big Ten was weak, sure, but the upper half was strong. Most of those games you don't know the stories behind. Penn State's star WR and HB were suspended, a team already banged up from injuries still gave a Florida that was one of the best teams in the nation an upset, remember it was a 7-6 game until late in the fourth quarter. Ohio State, the #3 team in the conference that year was matched up with the ACC Champion. MSU, well they can't win bowl games.
MVillani1985 1 year ago
@MVillani1985 You're so full of shit!. You're so blind to it you're in complete denial! Everyone of those Big 10 teams that you claim were the class of the Big 10 got their BUTTS HANDED TO THEM IN BOWL GAMES! EVERYONE! There is no explanation needed other than the Big 10 was made to look foolish in the bowl season! It's hard to explain away a negative other than putting on blinders, being in denial and being full of LAME EXCUSES! And to put the cherry on top.
lovdahuskers 1 year ago
@MVillani1985 excuses excuses excuses! Just win baby Don't tell me shit about winning without your best players. 94 Nebraska did it and earned a national championshsip missing one of the greatest college qb's of all time for 8 games. And missing a 10 year NFL starting safety for 10 games! if Frazier plays all year in 94, PSU isn't the number one offense in the country. 94 would have been a precursor to the 95 unit that put up 52 a game!
lovdahuskers 1 year ago
@lovdahuskers That's the point, Penn State did win every game that year in 1994. And that wasn't enough. And if you're comparing 1997 Penn State to 1994 Nebraska, well of course 1994 Nebraska is better than 1997 Penn State, since the 1997 Nittany Lions lacked the depth to keep winning big after getting banged up. But one year makes a big difference, the 1994 Huskers were not the 1995 Huskers. Just like the 1993 Nittany Lions were not the 1994 Nittany Lions, despite having the same players.
MVillani1985 1 year ago
@MVillani1985 You don't get it do you. 94 Nebraka would have been as dominant in the regular season as 95 Nebraska was if not for the injuries, mostly Frazier having to sit out. With Frazier and Phillips together for an entire year in 94 Nebraska is likely leading the country in scoring. Why? Same offense as 95! Same team that scored 52 a game. And they scoreed that 52 a game in 95 without Phillips for more than half those games!
lovdahuskers 1 year ago
@lovdahuskers Even with Frazier and Phillips in they had to come back and beat Miami. 1994 Nebraska was a good team, no doubt, but they weren't the 95 Huskers. One year makes a LOT of difference in a team. Look at 1993 Penn State vs 1994 Penn State, same team, one loses two games but looks mostly dominant, one destroys everything in their path. I gotta admit, the 1995 team was something else, proving it with that beatdown on Florida, but the 1994 team was "merely" exceptional.
MVillani1985 1 year ago
@MVillani1985 You dumb mother fucker! Frazier played less than a half you dumbass! If Frazier and Phillips play all year together in 94, they are probably the ones leading the country in scoring and not PSU! Same god damn team! The 94 team was hardly different from 95 other than the fact that Frazier didn't play much. So, if 94 PSU gets a full game of Frazier/Phillips it is largely the team that scored 52 a game in 95!
lovdahuskers 1 year ago
@MVillani1985 Miami benefited from Frazier not being in game shape, due to missing 8 games. In fact all of college football benefited form Frazier missing 8 games in 94. Frazier/Phillips for an entire season and the 94 NU games that were reasonably close aren't close at all. And even so, without Frazier for 8 games and Mike Minter (NFL starting safety for 10 years!) for 10 games, 94 NU still beat every team on schedule by 10 or MORE other than Miami.
lovdahuskers 1 year ago
@lovdahuskers I'll be willing to give you that many of the close games with Frazier and Phillips in would've been a different story, but I don't think it'd have been 52 points a game. As I've said a hundred times before, the 1994 Nebraska team was good, but they weren't the same as the 1995 team. Frazier and Phillips, along with the rest of the team improved a lot from 1994, yes even over the first half of 1994 when they were in. In 1995, that team was almost an NFL team playing college ball.
MVillani1985 1 year ago
Michigan had the best defense in college football history that year, in addition to an offense which allowed them to win by an average of two touchdowns.
So...no. If the BCS had been in place, we would've destroyed Nebraska.
SmallvilleFanCK1 2 years ago
@SmallvilleFanCK1 Destroyed Nebraska in 97!? LMAO! Keep dreaming idiot! The bowl results of the 97 season speak very highly to what happens if 97 Mich found themselves on a football field with 97 Nebraska. Mich struggels terribly to beat Ryan leaf and WSU, while over in the OB Nebraska is whiiping tenn, up 42-9 with less than 2 minutes left. A tenn team with Manning, Lewis, Wilson, Fair, Little etc.. Tenn would have whipped WSU!
lovdahuskers 1 year ago
@SmallvilleFanCK1 And more bowl results from 97. Each and every Big 10 team that Mich played in 97 that went to a bowl LOST THEIR bowl games! And ND too! The Big 10 was overrated trash and a joke in 97!
Mich. State lost to Wash 51-23!!
Iowa lost to ASU 17-7
Wisc. lost to Georgia 33-6!!
PSU lost to FL 21-6
OSU lost to FSU 31-14
These aren't one, two or losses by less than a td. All lost by more than 10 points and an average beat down of 30-10. And Mich struggles to beat overrated WSU
lovdahuskers 1 year ago
@SmallvilleFanCK1 All that tells me all I need to know about Nebraska and Michigan facing off on the same field. Nebraska waxes, dismantles, and monkey stomps the Wolverines of 97. probably something similar in nature to what they did to Tenn. Tenn had a far far better offense than 97 Mich, and Mich defense was overrated due to playing the pathetic Big 10 offenses! And actually, the bowl opponents of those 5 aforementioned Big 10 bowl losses held those Big 10 teams to fewer points than Mich!
lovdahuskers 1 year ago
That season, how many teams did Michigan hold to 17 points or less? 11. We played the toughest schedule in the nation. 7 ranked teams, at Iowa, MSU, PSU, and Wisconsin. Not to mention two Big 12 teams, and the Pac-10 Champ. Our defense was the best of all-time.
Nebraska struggled to beat Missouri and Colorado, and only remained undefeated by dumb luck.
How does the Big Ten's bowl performance have anything to do with how we did? We'll see how "easy" the Big Ten is once you join.
SmallvilleFanCK1 1 year ago
@SmallvilleFanCK1 Very true. And don't forget that Michigan waxed Colorado 27-3 like they were from a lower division. Nebraska's best win was a 77-14 win over an Iowa State team that was about as good as Harvard's football team I'm sure Michigan and Penn State, maybe even Ohio State that year, could have hung 100 on. Honestly, I think 1997 Penn State (before Enis and Juvicius were suspended) could have beaten Nebraska or Tennessee that year. Ohio State, maybe not, but Penn State yes.
MVillani1985 1 year ago
@MVillani1985 Oh my god! you are one dumb SOB! Lets see Mich gets Colorado in Ann Arbor with JOhn Hessler playing his first game at QB! And Nebraska gets Colorado 11 games later in boulder in a rivalry game. Do you think the kid might improve some from his first game in ANN ARBOR to playing at home? Freaking dumbass! Use that PSU education to think! Come on you can do it! THINK!
lovdahuskers 1 year ago
@lovdahuskers Typical Huskers fan, freaks out if you don't agree that their 1997 and 1994 teams at being the second and third best teams of all time. The 1995 team may be the best of all time, but 1994 and 1997, not so much. Do my responses really touch a nerve that much? And do you really think he improved that much in a few games? Usually it takes quarterbacks a couple years to improve to that level. Look at Troy Smith of Ohio State in 2004, then look at him in 2005 and 2006. Big difference.
MVillani1985 1 year ago
@MVillani1985 Point is that if not for Frazier being out those games that the Nebraska offense likely matches what they did in 95, 52 a game. And if PSU had played Nebraska with Frazier/Phillips for an entire game behind that O line PSU is seeing an offenses very similar tot hat of the 95 squad! It is a very simple, fact based correlation to make. Fct is the 94 Huskers could have been as good as 95 if Frazier plays entire year. No difference ifrom 95 if PSu sees Frazier/Phillips entire game
lovdahuskers 1 year ago
@MVillani1985 it's not even improvement that is the issue A first TIME QB AND MICH GETS HIM IN ANN ARBOR!!! HELLO! HELLO!!! EARTH TO DUMBASS!! WHAT DID YOU EXPECT?? P. Manning! Furthermore, I am sure you like to say what most everyone else does "Tom and Nebraska ran up the score" Guess what.. Nebraska was up 17 late on COLORADO IN BOULDER AND COULD have scored more if TOM HAD CHOSEN TOO! That simple. So here's an example of Tom doing exactly opposite of what so many claim he always did.
lovdahuskers 1 year ago
@lovdahuskers Do you have Tourette's Syndrome or something? Your responses seem to indicate that. But anyways, getting to the point. I know that Tom Osbourne didn't run up the score on opponents. But Michigan didn't run up the score either. And as far as the first game, no quarterback that leads a major college team should have such jitters playing in the Big House, which isn't even that loud of a stadium, but Colorado turned out to not even be that good that year if you remember.
MVillani1985 1 year ago
@MVillani1985 And the Big 10 was a joke in 1997! Big 12 went 4-2 against the Big 10 in 97! 94 Nebraska ran for 230+ yards on a great Miami defense with Frazier playing less than a half. If Frazier plays that entire game with Phillips, that miami defense is done and gassed much earlier than they were and they likley give up nearly 350 rushing if not more and 35 points. Imagine what Frazier/Phillips do to that 70th ranked Lions defense!
lovdahuskers 1 year ago
@lovdahuskers In my honest opinion, it would've been a battle of not only offense and defense but underrated offense vs underrated defense. Who knows how the game would have turned out? In all honesty, I think Nebraska and Penn State would have played each other close, either some 10-7 game (in which case I give the edge to Nebraska) or a 35-34 shootout (in which case I give the edge to Penn State). And the Big Ten as a whole in 1997 wasn't bad, it was maybe just Big Three, Little Eight.
MVillani1985 1 year ago
@MVillani1985 it is a very simple and easy correlation to make, ' "That Miami gives up more rushing yards and more points if they see full game of Frazier/Phillips" since that great Miami defense with Sapp and LEwis was done, gassed on their knees giving up late yards and late points in early to mid 4th quarter. Only would have happened much sooner and 350 yards rushing and 35 points is easily within reach for Nebraska with Frazier and Phillips!
lovdahuskers 1 year ago
@MVillani1985 And we know that if Miami gets a game ready, game shape Frazier for an entire game with Lawrence Phillips that the OB isn't close. If Miami gets the real Frazier for an entire game Nebraska puts 25 on that defense! EASY! Just imagine what they do to the 70th ranked defense of PSU
lovdahuskers 1 year ago
@lovdahuskers Well, they'd have gashed Penn State's backup defense (who is responsible for the 70th ranked defensive ranking) no problem, but you wouldn't be seeing them. Nebraska was too good for Penn State to have rolled up that kind of score on. And we don't know just how good Frazier would have been had he been in the entire season, but I still don't think it'd have been the same thing as the 1995 team. That would mean that Frazier and Phillips didn't improve from 1994 to 1995.
MVillani1985 1 year ago
@SmallvilleFanCK1 I am sure you dumb SOB that if the shoe were on the other foot i.e. that the Big 10 dominated in the bowl season that you would use that to claim just how good Mich was. So STFU and talk to my fucking hand! Toughest schedule in the country my ass! Everyone of the bowl teams that made that inflated that Mich schedule LOST! Including ND! At the end of the season after the final polls, Mich played 3 ranked teams, (Big 10 got exposed in bowl games) and Nebr played 5 ranked
lovdahuskers 1 year ago
@lovdahuskers You know what? This debate will never be resolved, simply because the BCS didn't yet exist and we couldn't take you to the woodshed on the field, where it mattered.
Nebraska joining the Big Ten is perfect timing: Michigan will be elite again right about the time the Cornholes are joining.
Because we all know Nebraska certainly wasn't invited to the Big Ten (#2 academic conference holistically, behind the Ivy League), based upon academics and research.
SmallvilleFanCK1 1 year ago
@SmallvilleFanCK1 you keep dreaming! yeah, you better hope Mich gets it together pretty quick because Pelini has something pretty strong going and they are on the verge of signing a very highly ranked recruiting class. One year goes pretty quick and you might just have a very highly ranked team to contend with in 2011
lovdahuskers 1 year ago
@SmallvilleFanCK1 Cat got your tongue? I see... Turning the conversation to unrelated BS. Must have really got you that that "vaunted" Mich defense gave up more points to the Big 10's 5 bowl teams than did the 5 teams that whipped there ass! It would be one thing if those bowl losses by Big 10 teams of 97 games were close, decided by one possession, (a fg or td) or less. But, it is something completely different when every team losses by 10 points min and by average of 20! ASS KICKED!
lovdahuskers 1 year ago
@lovdahuskers Each game is a different story. Shouldn't Penn State have kicked Michigan's ass in 1997 based on their games against Wisconsin, using that logic?
MVillani1985 1 year ago
@SmallvilleFanCK1 And to top off the Big 10 bowl struggles Mich struggles terribly to beat a very overrated WSU!Don't tell me shit about holding Big 10 teams to 17 or less. The 5 Big 10 bowl teams that Mich beat in 97 scored more against Mich (69) than they did against the 5 bowl opponents (56)! bet you didn't know that. So, what does that say about the other lameass Big 10 offenses that didn't make bowl games!
lovdahuskers 1 year ago
@SmallvilleFanCK1 And after the bowl season after the final polls were out Mich played 3 ranked teams because the Big 10 was exposed as a FRAUD! Don't tellme the rankings are only important at game time! Bullshit! They award a national championship at end of bowl season and take final polls for a reason. The final polls are just as important for theother 24 teams as they are the team that wins the NC! Fact is at end of year Mich played THREE RANKED TEAMS, NEbraska 5!
lovdahuskers 1 year ago
@lovdahuskers If you want to go on ranked teams at the time they played, that's fine. But don't give me garbage about "final rankings". This issue can be argued until we're both blue in the face. This should've been settled on the field.
If you compare both schedules, both teams played an okay schedule. I'm looking at the quality of the Big 12 that year, and it wasn't exactly intimidating either.
What I do know is, Michigan had a stout defense, I don't care what conference you're in.
SmallvilleFanCK1 1 year ago
@lovdahuskers The lower half of the Big Ten wasn't that great out of conference, but the upper half actually was good. Rankings aren't as much of the tell-all-end-all that you think they are. I prefer looking at the number of 6-6 or better opponents myself. Sometimes polls may leave a 10-3 team unranked because of bias against the conference, while an 8-5 team may end the year ranked if they play in the SEC, the perceived third conference ot the NFL by these biased pollsters.
MVillani1985 1 year ago
@lovdahuskers Sounds a lot like the argument I heard that 94 Penn State was no better than 94 Colorado I already explained the bowl games. And even so, look at some games that year. Remember the Penn State who was without their best players yet nearly beat #4 Florida? Michigan beat them 34-8 in Beaver Stadium. It was 34-0 after three! Curtis Enis (wasn't in the Citrus Bowl) scored against Michigan reserves. So I guess the other teams' starters were slightly better than Michigan's backups?
MVillani1985 1 year ago
@RebelfanfromBamaland the big 12 was considered by most journalists to be the weakest major conference in the league. Nebraska had a lot of close calls especially with the lucky play at the end against missouri. on top of that, they barely won against colorado while michigan blew them out of the water. How about that for a more direct comparison. You couldn't run against mcihigan and you couldn't pass against them. there offense won ugly but they were like the 85 bears.
Brettwbeyer14 2 years ago
Wazoo was an excellent team that year, hence them making the Rose at all. Behind Leaf, they were a great team. Also, in 03, Michigan just didn't stack well against a loaded USC team that we've discovered hasn't been beaten often in the past ten years, and especially not in the Rose Bowl. The 97 Huskers got sympathy votes.
AllHailtheMaizenBlue 3 years ago
You could also argue that the 1997 Huskers were exposed by Missouri.
MVillani1985 2 years ago
who they only beat on a fluke which shouldne have counted.....there is actually a rule that days a ball can be caught off a kick
momogoblue 2 years ago
USC should have been in the national championship and michigan would have beaten any other team.....and r u serious they beat washington state by 2 tds and made ryan lead ( a good college qb) look terrible....in 97 the big ten was hands down the best conference and they breezed through it
momogoblue 2 years ago 2
Also, don't forget that Big Ten #2 Penn State only lost a close game to #6 Florida in the Citrus Bowl because two key players (who were in when Michigan dumptrucked Penn State 34-8 in a game not as close as the score) were suspended, and Iowa was the only team to give Michigan a game that year.
MVillani1985 2 years ago
it would have been awesome to see # 1 UofM against # 2 Nebraska and see who would have won! well we know who would have won ;)!
bluejayforever2006 2 years ago
You know if Oklahoma would have fallen big after the KSU loss, and LSU would have lost the SEC championship game, Michigan would have been playing for the national title on a neutral site, unlike in California against USC.
gomichiganrailmst3k 3 years ago
Actually dude, that KSU loss was Oklahomas first loss of the season, so if LSU had lost the SEC title game, then it would ahve been Oklahoma-USC in the Sugar Bowl, and Michigan vs ? in the Rose bowl. Michigan had 2 losses at the end of the regular season, while Oklahoma only had one. BUT, if Michigan had beaten either Oregon or Iowa, THEN they would ahve been in the NC game ahead of Oklahoma
Poole1Dan 3 years ago
As A Browns fan I am really wishing that Edward would get his head out of his ASS and start holding onto catchable balls and get back to last season's form.
Cavaliersin07 3 years ago
Very cool! Its too bad that this years team can't win as these guys did.
gomichiganrailmst3k 3 years ago