I love that Michigan did this

Does that make you feel better? Are you feeling good enough to leave 1997 alone?
He is NEVER letting 1997 go. EVER. It is all they have left of the 80's and 90's. What do they have to look forward to now? Their coaches now complain their schedule is too hard, while playing in one of the weaker division in CFB.
 
Even more excuses. Tell us more about the teams you beat that Michigan didn't play. That will definitely prove your point. :pound:

Nebraska fans -- AP voters turned their vote in after the Rose Bowl or they would have voted for Nebraska -- post that for all to see, i'm sure there are articles everywhere of the AP writers saying this:rofl:

Reality -- Tom Osborne announced his retirement right before his bowl game and coaches gave him votes as a retirement gift, as everyone knew the AP was going to the #1 team in the country.
Is that why the Sears trophy is awarded to the coaches poll champion?
 
On August 27, 2022 Nebraska will be playing Northwestern. I would advise the Cornhuskers to forget about 1997 and focus on that.
LMAO!!! That's the kind of childish shit we get when they have no answer.

Seems you michigan fans should "focus" on your next game against Georgia TOMORROW FUCKING NIGHT!!!

how-bout-that-how-about-that.gif
I am not worried about 1997 … I wish we were playing any other team but Georgia, but you have to deal with the hand you have. I am focused, I am praying and I might sacrifice a chicken. Nothing else is my old ass going to do to help the Wolverines.
But here you are....

Take your own advice.
I only reply to your 1997 panic … it’s kinda funny.

Hey, Hoss.

You brought up 1997 in this thread long before I did. SEE??

Awwww .... isn't that cute ... Nebraska shared that "Fake: Championship with us.

You certainly project a lot.

Projecting that it is I that should focus on the next game in August instead of 1997, when it is you that should focus on your next game tomorrow fuckinjg night.

Projecting that it is me that is in "panic" regarding 1997, when it is you who posted about it long before I did.

Project, Project, Project. You're like a 10 year old sister.
 
Even more excuses. Tell us more about the teams you beat that Michigan didn't play. That will definitely prove your point. :pound:

Nebraska fans -- AP voters turned their vote in after the Rose Bowl or they would have voted for Nebraska -- post that for all to see, i'm sure there are articles everywhere of the AP writers saying this:rofl:

Reality -- Tom Osborne announced his retirement right before his bowl game and coaches gave him votes as a retirement gift, as everyone knew the AP was going to the #1 team in the country.

And there it is again.
Michigan's ONLY argument for 1997 is the transitive property where Michigan played both opponents in Ann Arbor and Nebraska played both on the road.

3,2,1,...

Something Something, current Nebraska recruiting, in the middle of nowhere, sold their soul for money, something something distractions.
 
He is NEVER letting 1997 go. EVER. It is all they have left of the 80's and 90's. What do they have to look forward to now? Their coaches now complain their schedule is too hard, while playing in one of the weaker division in CFB.

Distract, Distract, Distract
 
The Top Five Most Undeserving National Champs Of The Last 25 Years.

"Michigan, 1997

In a year in which Michigan's Charles Woodson won a controversial Heisman vote over Tennessee's Peyton Manning, the Wolverines were voted No. 1 by the AP Poll over an undefeated Nebraska juggernaut, which won the ESPN/USA Today national title.

In the usually tough Big Ten, Michigan ended up being the only conference member to finish in the top 10 of the final AP rankings. Arguably, their best three wins were against Ohio State, Penn State, and Wisconsin, teams that got beaten handily by SEC teams in their bowl games.

Why does it matter that they got beat by opponents from the SEC? Because co-national champion Nebraska steamrolled SEC champion Tennessee in the Orange Bowl, 42-17. Meanwhile, Michigan was scraping by outmatched Washington State in the Rose, 21-16.

Had Michigan and Nebraska played a game for all the marbles, it is likely that the Cornhuskers would've been favored and, as most experts agreed at the time, the Huskers probably would've won the game handily."


Copy, Paste, and remove the (=) before bleacherreport to read the article.

https://(=)bleacherreport.com/articles/41764-college-football-the-five-most-undeserving-national-champs-of-the-last-25-years
 
And there it is again.
Michigan's ONLY argument for 1997 is the transitive property where Michigan played both opponents in Ann Arbor and Nebraska played both on the road.

3,2,1,...

Something Something, current Nebraska recruiting, in the middle of nowhere, sold their soul for money, something something distractions.
Your argument is Nebraska would win because of how they fared against teams UM DID NOT FACE, while making excuse, after excuse, after excuse, after excuse, on the games where they DID PLAY THE SAME TEAMS. :facepalm:

But hey -- i honestly couldn't care less. I have a game to get ready to watch tomorrow. I'm sure Nebraska will be back and bowl eligible some time soon -- right after they are a national power again
 
Your argument is Nebraska would win because of how they fared against teams UM DID NOT FACE, while making excuse, after excuse, after excuse, after excuse, on the games where they DID PLAY THE SAME TEAMS. :facepalm:

But hey -- i honestly couldn't care less. I have a game to get ready to watch tomorrow. I'm sure Nebraska will be back and bowl eligible some time soon -- right after they are a national power again

See? There it is again.

The ONLY argument Michigan fans have about 1997 is the transitive property where Michigan played the two common opponents in Ann Arbor (OOC) and Nebraska played them both on the road (In Conference).

Finished with a distraction about the current state of Nebraska football as if that has anything to do with 1997.

It's like listening to a broken record.
 
I'm sure Nebraska just let up on the two teams UM beat the shit out of, while Nebraska almost lost Colorado. I'm sure Nebraska let those teams score 45 points on them, while they score 6 on UM.

Disregard that UM gave up 6 to Baylor and Colorado, while Nebraska gave up 45. Disregard that UM outscored those teams by 59, while Nebraska only beat them by 27.
I like this common opponents idea that you‘re basing your entire argument on. It makes sense.

this season, UoM and tOSU had six common opponents - a sample size three times that of what you’re using. Rutgers, Nebraska, MSU, Indiana, PSU, and Maryland.

Michigan went 5-1, outscoring opponents by a combined 194-121 (+73 point diff)

Ohio State went 6-0, outscoring opponents by a combined 287-85 (+202 point diff)

Clearly, based on your 1997 Nebraska/Michigan argument, you must believe that Michigan got lucky as fuck in Ann Arbor last month and caught some lightening in a bottle.
 
Hey, Hoss.

You brought up 1997 in this thread long before I did. SEE??



You certainly project a lot.

Projecting that it is I that should focus on the next game in August instead of 1997, when it is you that should focus on your next game tomorrow fuckinjg night.

Projecting that it is me that is in "panic" regarding 1997, when it is you who posted about it long before I did.

Project, Project, Project. You're like a 10 year old sister.
You have posted 1997 on several threads … As Elsa would say “Let It Go”.
 
Distract, Distract, Distract
Nothing I said is to distract. I simply stated facts. What is it you have to look forward to? It isn't a bowl game, you haven't been to one in like 5 years.

Did your coach not complain that your schedule was too hard?

Do you not play in one of the weaker division in CFB?

Do you not have a national rival anymore?
 
I like this common opponents idea that you‘re basing your entire argument on. It makes sense.

this season, UoM and tOSU had six common opponents - a sample size three times that of what you’re using. Rutgers, Nebraska, MSU, Indiana, PSU, and Maryland.

Michigan went 5-1, outscoring opponents by a combined 194-121 (+73 point diff)

Ohio State went 6-0, outscoring opponents by a combined 287-85 (+202 point diff)

Clearly, based on your 1997 Nebraska/Michigan argument, you must believe that Michigan got lucky as fuck in Ann Arbor last month and caught some lightening in a bottle.
Is there any doubt? Sometimes the best teams don’t win. I think Georgia was superior to Alabama this year. I am hoping we can pull off another one.
 
Nothing I said is to distract. I simply stated facts. What is it you have to look forward to? It isn't a bowl game, you haven't been to one in like 5 years.

Did your coach not complain that your schedule was too hard?

Do you not play in one of the weaker division in CFB?

Do you not have a national rival anymore?

What does any of that have to do with 1997?

It's meant to distract from 1997 because... The ONLY argument Michigan fans have about 1997 is the transitive property where Michigan played the two common opponents in Ann Arbor (OOC) and Nebraska played them both on the road (In Conference).
 
Winning alot isn't 1 in 25 years. The fact this has to be explained to you is ridiculous. If UM had been competing for national titles and lost multiple times over those 25 years -- I can understand your statement. That is most definitely not the case.
It’s 1 + 10 others. I didn’t say “a lot in a span of 25 years”.
 
Michigan also had twice as many wins where they struggled, despite playing one fewer game.

Michigan was also statistically worse in basically every single category.



Lolz this is fun.
Nebraska required a once in a century fluke play to stay undefeated. They should have had a loss.
 
I like this common opponents idea that you‘re basing your entire argument on. It makes sense.

this season, UoM and tOSU had six common opponents - a sample size three times that of what you’re using. Rutgers, Nebraska, MSU, Indiana, PSU, and Maryland.

Michigan went 5-1, outscoring opponents by a combined 194-121 (+73 point diff)

Ohio State went 6-0, outscoring opponents by a combined 287-85 (+202 point diff)

Clearly, based on your 1997 Nebraska/Michigan argument, you must believe that Michigan got lucky as fuck in Ann Arbor last month and caught some lightening in a bottle.
I think, as a whole, OSU is a better team than Michigan -- it is why they were a 7.5 favorite. They are just soft as hell on defense, which is why I think Utah does the same thing to them tomorrow that UM and Oregon did. Run it right down their throat.

Michigan was just a horrible matchup for OSU as our strength was your weakness this year. If you go down the rosters -- UM doesn't have many players who'd start over OSU's option on offense. OSU is just so soft on defense. If a team plays physical, they will push around their front 7. It is all that gives me hope going forward in the rivalry, that the defense continues to be soft, but with the type of recruits OSU pulls in -- that isn't likely.
 
Back
Top