PSU has chance to win 11 games 3 of last 4 years. Michigan has done it 4 times in 100 years.
- Thread starter Judge Smails
- Start date
Heh I like you and agree with a lot you say but why do we want to compare our team to Michigan?
What’s Michigan done that’s elite or exceptional in the last, I dunno, fifty years? One shared national championship. No conference title since 2004...
The win total over the last four years is starting to share air with the programs we should be using as a measuring stick - Bama, Clemson, OSU... Now we want to get over the hump and play for it all.
I have no question Franklin is the guy for Penn State but I think he needs a better supporting cast to achieve his (and our) goals.
What’s Michigan done that’s elite or exceptional in the last, I dunno, fifty years? One shared national championship. No conference title since 2004...
The win total over the last four years is starting to share air with the programs we should be using as a measuring stick - Bama, Clemson, OSU... Now we want to get over the hump and play for it all.
I have no question Franklin is the guy for Penn State but I think he needs a better supporting cast to achieve his (and our) goals.
I think the national perception is Michigan has a "better" program than Penn State. Every year they are ranked too high preseason.
I'm also amused at the schizophrenic behavior of this board. Bash people over the head with "Can't beat Michigan"....then we aren't allowed to compare to them when we look better.
I guess the original poster was only impressed by winning exactly 11 games... maybe he’s a numeral it’s and thinks there is a significance between 11 wins and 11 players on the field for each team.
i misspoke on the 2006 and meant 1997. Not sure what I was looking at there.
Some of us care. Why did you click on the thread and post in the thread if you didn't care about it?
That may be but we have had 16 11+ win seasons. That is more than 3 times as many.
In fact - we have had 5 (not counting this year) since 2005. That is more than they have total.
Or maybe I quickly scanned down their list of seasons and missed it originally.
Before 2006 there were only 11 regular season games unless a team played in a "kickoff classic". Now, you add to that a conference championship. So comparing today "11 win seasons" to those 20+ years ago is foolish.
Are you going to declare for the fan transfer portal?
I posted this the other day:
2016: UM pre-season 7, finished 10th
PS pre-season UR, finished 7th
2017: UM pre-season 11, finished UR
PS pre-season 6, finished 8th
2018: UM pre-season 14, finished 14
PS pre-season 10, finished 17
2019: UM pre-season 7, finished 17 (as of Dec 1)
PS pre-season 14/15, finished 11/12
Draw your own conclusions. In only 1 of the 4 years did UM finish ahead of us in the polls at year's end. In all 4 years we finished in the top 20 while UM went unranked in 2017. Both teams had their share of pre-season glory, so we shouldn't be banging the drum too heavily on the 'michigan is always picked ahead of us... i think that happens in the rags, though.
________
Now that's just last 4 years.
I suspect if I had the time to go back 15-20 years we'd see it differently with an strong lean to michigan being better than they showed on the field. A lot of michigan's problems seem to be in how they finish (typically a loss to osu and then one in the bowl which negates what might have been considered a strong season.. but that is my perception...reality might prove me wrong, but i don't have the time to do that research).
Again, while AP/Coaches polls go one way, the rags almost always put um ahead of us.
- Like it or not, perception of the program is a significant factor in recruiting. For example, whether they were correct or not, posters in this very forum were complaining as recently as yesterday about "lost momentum" in 2020 recruiting due to the 2019 bowl loss to Kentucky.
- PSU directly competes with UM (among others) for top-end recruits. For example, PSU is currently competing with UM (among others) for a promising TE recruit.
- Everyone also likes to pretend that program perception doesn't matter as it relates to playoffs and bowl selection, but yet there are people expressing concern that PSU's bowl placement was adversely affected by the Rutgers blowout not being more definitive than it was. PSU played OSU better on the road than UM played OSU at home, and yet PSU dropped more spots after its OSU loss than UM after its OSU loss...was it due to preconceived perception?
Agree with much of this... but we did not blow rutgers out. They out-muscled us much of the game and only better, faster athletes overcame a lackluster effort (and yes, we were a few men down but...).
Agree fully that perception is very important. No one I speak with understands why we didn't destroy rutgers. As in by 50 or more points. Losing to kentucky last year -- and worse, the way we lost -- did not help us. We're supposed to be a very well prepared and very good bowl team and we were dreadful for much of the game. It garners more negative attention than some might like to accept.
We have a very very good football program but we need to kick it up a notch if we're going to overcome the michigan bias so many cling to... btw, their BB program is superior to their FB, imo (THAT osu vs um game is one I really want to watch
As to whether we played osu better than um... depends on what you were looking for. We made plays and got ourselves back into what was very nearly an ugly blowout. UM otoh moved the ball very well most of the game vs the vaunted osu defense (arguably missing a very key DB who will return for wisky). Our D was marginally better but if we don't cause those TO's... uh oh.
All part of the game, but despite being doubled up on, I can see why some would prefer UM's performance (at home) to ours (on the road). That part is pure perception but it is guided by the talking heads who attributed our staying close to luck while michigan got high marks for being rolled by a superior osu. Those words linger and affect perception of casual fans and keeps the michigan mystique alive.
We have to be better. We have to win thopse close osu games and we need to go into AA next year and beat them. Do that and we will surplant michigan as #2 in the B1G (from a fans perspective... i think we've already done that in reality).
https://thegruelingtruth.com/college-football/michigan-football-elite-or-overrated/
This article was written before the 2019 cfb season.
This article was written before the 2019 cfb season.
Last edited:
Well in head to head, post-sanctions, Michigan blew out PSU in in 2016 and 2018, PSU blew out UM in 2017 and beat them narrowly this year. So by that measure the two programs are pretty even. Michigan's lost more noncon games but they've played a tougher noncon schedule (Notre Dame)
PSU has beaten tOSU once (2016) and Michgan hasn't beaten tOSU since like 1997? Michigan has also performed a little worse than PSU in bowl games, though PSU losing to Kentucky last year wasn't so great.
Still, it seems to me Michigan and PSU programs are pretty close to parity. The difference is really perceptions -- Michigan has been seen as an elite program underachieving where PSU is seen as a rising program trying to become elite like ti once was.
If I were a Michigan fan I'd be more optimistic than I have been in a long time. That Michigan offense looks really good. If they upgrade their OL and running backs, they have a scheme that works well.
Meanwhile PSU has regressed from a potent cutting-edge offense to something that looks like it's from the Paterno era -- with talented players all over the field getting wasted by the scheme.
PSU has beaten tOSU once (2016) and Michgan hasn't beaten tOSU since like 1997? Michigan has also performed a little worse than PSU in bowl games, though PSU losing to Kentucky last year wasn't so great.
Still, it seems to me Michigan and PSU programs are pretty close to parity. The difference is really perceptions -- Michigan has been seen as an elite program underachieving where PSU is seen as a rising program trying to become elite like ti once was.
If I were a Michigan fan I'd be more optimistic than I have been in a long time. That Michigan offense looks really good. If they upgrade their OL and running backs, they have a scheme that works well.
Meanwhile PSU has regressed from a potent cutting-edge offense to something that looks like it's from the Paterno era -- with talented players all over the field getting wasted by the scheme.
We'll see what the offenses look like next year when they have the first year quarterback and we have an experienced QB and 9 starters return. They will also lose 3 or 4 starters off that offensive line, so I'm not sure how much "upgrading" they are going to do there.
Agree with much of this... but we did not blow rutgers out. They out-muscled us much of the game and only better, faster athletes overcame a lackluster effort (and yes, we were a few men down but...).
Agree fully that perception is very important. No one I speak with understands why we didn't destroy rutgers. As in by 50 or more points. Losing to kentucky last year -- and worse, the way we lost -- did not help us. We're supposed to be a very well prepared and very good bowl team and we were dreadful for much of the game. It garners more negative attention than some might like to accept.
We have a very very good football program but we need to kick it up a notch if we're going to overcome the michigan bias so many cling to... btw, their BB program is superior to their FB, imo (THAT osu vs um game is one I really want to watch
As to whether we played osu better than um... depends on what you were looking for. We made plays and got ourselves back into what was very nearly an ugly blowout. UM otoh moved the ball very well most of the game vs the vaunted osu defense (arguably missing a very key DB who will return for wisky). Our D was marginally better but if we don't cause those TO's... uh oh.
All part of the game, but despite being doubled up on, I can see why some would prefer UM's performance (at home) to ours (on the road). That part is pure perception but it is guided by the talking heads who attributed our staying close to luck while michigan got high marks for being rolled by a superior osu. Those words linger and affect perception of casual fans and keeps the michigan mystique alive.
We have to be better. We have to win thopse close osu games and we need to go into AA next year and beat them. Do that and we will surplant michigan as #2 in the B1G (from a fans perspective... i think we've already done that in reality).
Sorry, but you have to be a full-on half glass empty guy to think anyone would rather lose to a team by nearly 30 points at home versus losing to that same team by 11 (while playing your backup QB most of the 2nd half) on the road. I'm not into moral victories but we played OSU hard. IMHO Michigan's effort defensively was embarrassing. And who the heck cares how many yards they had? They lost by nearly 30 freakin' points! At home!
Exactly ! The UM offense was unstoppable in the 1st half last Saturday and had that "supposedly" no 1 (they're overrated) OSU defense reeling. Chase Young - no sacks. What a joke. Enough said. And let's be honest, the refs let the OSU OL hold all day as the B1G wanted OSU to win so the conference gets a playoff team this year. Can you say "FIX." Unreal ! A person would have to be blind not to see what really went on.
Jim has it set up now for a monster run starting in 2020. The returning talent is off the charts. He set his recruiting up based on needs for next year. Should be a heck of a battle between UM and PSU for the conference championship ! GO BLUE !.
Not
Not my point at all... my point is about perception. The talking heads created the perception we were lucky while michigan was outclassed by perhaps the greatest osu team in decades and still moved the ball well etc etc.
Nothing was said by the heads to explain how we were playing with our backup or how we made those great plays. It was all about osu not doing their job and making mistakes. That resonates with fans not in HV and pollsters... I am not advocating for it (I agree we played them very tough and most of us thought we might actually pull it off this time).
Not my point at all... my point is about perception. The talking heads created the perception we were lucky while michigan was outclassed by perhaps the greatest osu team in decades and still moved the ball well etc etc.
Nothing was said by the heads to explain how we were playing with our backup or how we made those great plays. It was all about osu not doing their job and making mistakes. That resonates with fans not in HV and pollsters... I am not advocating for it (I agree we played them very tough and most of us thought we might actually pull it off this time).
Agree with much of this... but we did not blow rutgers out. They out-muscled us much of the game and only better, faster athletes overcame a lackluster effort (and yes, we were a few men down but...).
Agree fully that perception is very important. No one I speak with understands why we didn't destroy rutgers. As in by 50 or more points. Losing to kentucky last year -- and worse, the way we lost -- did not help us. We're supposed to be a very well prepared and very good bowl team and we were dreadful for much of the game. It garners more negative attention than some might like to accept.
We have a very very good football program but we need to kick it up a notch if we're going to overcome the michigan bias so many cling to... btw, their BB program is superior to their FB, imo (THAT osu vs um game is one I really want to watch
As to whether we played osu better than um... depends on what you were looking for. We made plays and got ourselves back into what was very nearly an ugly blowout. UM otoh moved the ball very well most of the game vs the vaunted osu defense (arguably missing a very key DB who will return for wisky). Our D was marginally better but if we don't cause those TO's... uh oh.
All part of the game, but despite being doubled up on, I can see why some would prefer UM's performance (at home) to ours (on the road). That part is pure perception but it is guided by the talking heads who attributed our staying close to luck while michigan got high marks for being rolled by a superior osu. Those words linger and affect perception of casual fans and keeps the michigan mystique alive.
We have to be better. We have to win thopse close osu games and we need to go into AA next year and beat them. Do that and we will surplant michigan as #2 in the B1G (from a fans perspective... i think we've already done that in reality).
N&B, as always, you make astute points. However, I disagree with the portion of your post highlighted above.
You say Penn State lost in what was "nearly an ugly blowout." Well, an 11-point loss wasn't a blowout .. on the road ... with a very seldom-used backup QB for 1/2 the game. Yet Michigan DID suffer an ugly blowout ... no "nearly" to it ... at HOME ... with its starting QB the entire game ... and, I must add, a DON BROWN defense.
You add that PSU's defense was marginally better (than OSU's, I think you are saying),"but if we don't cause those TO's ... uh oh."
Well, isn't that equivalent to saying, "if Fields doesn't convert those 3rd/4th down scrambles, uh oh"? The fumbles were not on punts or the result of a snap over the punter's head (as in 2016 by PSU). The defense forced those fumbles through solid play, the way Fields converted 1st downs through his excellent play.
I guess I am simply reacting to the bias where when Penn State blocks a FG, it's a fluke, while when in the very same game, OSU also blocks a punt and recovers a fumbled punt and gains a safety when a snap goes over the P's heads into the EZ. Those 3 un-forced errors were never called flukes ... good plays by the Buckeyes.
Anyone who looks at the Penn State-OSU score and the Michigan-OSU score and comes away thinking Michigan played the Buckeyes better than the Lions did just isn't passing his own "eye test."
Good God almighty glad that you’re back. I really don’t care what team you are promoting I just missed the humor.
[QUOTE="...... No one I speak with understands why we didn't destroy rutgers. As in by 50 or more points. .....[/QUOTE]
Think about this.....we played (possibly) the best FBS team in college football one weekend with the whole nation watching, and 7 days later played (possibly) the worst FBS team in college football with no one watching (relatively speaking)....has this even happened in the history of FBS before, the disparity in opponents one week to the next? ....To top it off, we played with a RS frosh QB making his first career start, at the end of the year when everyone is beat up....we won by 3 TDs, and easily could have been 4 if we hadn't subbed so much the last time we had the ball at the goal line after the turnover.
Bottom line, everyone needs to chill about Rutgers - at the end of the day, it doesn't mean anything.
Think about this.....we played (possibly) the best FBS team in college football one weekend with the whole nation watching, and 7 days later played (possibly) the worst FBS team in college football with no one watching (relatively speaking)....has this even happened in the history of FBS before, the disparity in opponents one week to the next? ....To top it off, we played with a RS frosh QB making his first career start, at the end of the year when everyone is beat up....we won by 3 TDs, and easily could have been 4 if we hadn't subbed so much the last time we had the ball at the goal line after the turnover.
Bottom line, everyone needs to chill about Rutgers - at the end of the day, it doesn't mean anything.
N&B, as always, you make astute points. However, I disagree with the portion of your post highlighted above.
You say Penn State lost in what was "nearly an ugly blowout." Well, an 11-point loss wasn't a blowout .. on the road ... with a very seldom-used backup QB for 1/2 the game. Yet Michigan DID suffer an ugly blowout ... no "nearly" to it ... at HOME ... with its starting QB the entire game ... and, I must add, a DON BROWN defense.
You add that PSU's defense was marginally better (than OSU's, I think you are saying),"but if we don't cause those TO's ... uh oh."
Well, isn't that equivalent to saying, "if Fields doesn't convert those 3rd/4th down scrambles, uh oh"? The fumbles were not on punts or the result of a snap over the punter's head (as in 2016 by PSU). The defense forced those fumbles through solid play, the way Fields converted 1st downs through his excellent play.
I guess I am simply reacting to the bias where when Penn State blocks a FG, it's a fluke, while when in the very same game, OSU also blocks a punt and recovers a fumbled punt and gains a safety when a snap goes over the P's heads into the EZ. Those 3 un-forced errors were never called flukes ... good plays by the Buckeyes.
Anyone who looks at the Penn State-OSU score and the Michigan-OSU score and comes away thinking Michigan played the Buckeyes better than the Lions did just isn't passing his own "eye test."
IF the Bucks scored on that second drive and go up 14-0... yes, i think we easily could have been blown out. Instead, we made a huge play and got back in it.. but later, looked to be on the verge of getting snockered... when we again made a play. And so we hung tough and nearly pulled off an amazing upset.
Most of my posts after the game were to the effect of WE MADE PLAYS. That's part of the game (just as TD's dropped etc are also part of the game).
I'm more angry that the msm has downplayed that aspect of the game while playing up michigan.
So yes, I 100% agree with all your points. But in this thread I'm speaking more about nationwide perception as espn/fox/etc present it for joe average... who, sad to say, listens rather than believes his or her eyes.
In an effort to summarize the collective wisdom in evidence on this forum...is it fair to say that PSU players have overcome incredible odds, created by poor coaching, to win 41 games in the past four years?
That would be great! PSU has won 6 of the last 7 against Wisconsin, with their only win coming in 2011 which obviously has an asterisk. One of those wins was in the B1G championship game*.
*The B1G championship game is a game that happens at the end of the season between the first place** teams in each division.
**First place is the team ahead of second place.***
***Second place is the team ahead of Michigan.
My only point was going back 100 years was a little over the top. Other than that the original poster was spot on.
