<p>Because of the terrible start the team had to the season and all the crap they got from everyone, is it possible that Mich could lose its spot among the super elite of college football? Previously, and possibly even now depending on how they do in Big 10 play, I would have put Mich in the same category as LSU, Florida, USC, Texas, Oklahoma, etc. that are teams that never rebuild, but rather reload. Is it possible that this is the start of a downward trend that could lead them to being a joke of a team? And please don't say its impossible. Remember how dominant University of Washington used to be? Well look at where they are now?</p>
<p>
[quote]
The Big 10 just can't seem to get the speed to compete these days
[/quote]
Would you make the same comment last year around this time?</p>
<p>
[quote]
Is Mich no longer going to be a "top team" because of this season?
[/quote]
Michigan had 4 losses in 2001, 3 losses in 2002-2004 and 5 losses in 2005. (We had precisely the same record after 5 games two years ago.) If we could bounce back after the '05 season, I don't see why Michigan would fall off the cliff after this season.</p>
<p>Remember how dominant University of Washington used to be? Well look at where they are now?</p>
<p>^What's your point? Washington is gonna be in the top 25 preseason next year. Last week they took USC to the wire. They outplayed Ohio State until the 4th quarter. They have probably the best freshman qb in the nation this year. They will surprise some people.</p>
<p>But to answer your question, UM will improve, just like Washington, Cal, and Rutgers have. Heck, if Cal and Rutgers can become powerhouses, then Mich has no excuse!</p>
<p>California_loves8, look at Notre Dame. They haven't slapped together a bowl-winning season since 1993. They are off to a 1-6 start this season. And still, Notre Dame is considered a top program. USC had some mediocre seasons between 1990 and 2000. Top programs never really die. Michigan has had a couple of "bad" seasons in recent years, but the program will endure.</p>
<p>UW isn't going to be T25 next season. The PAC-10 is loaded, and Locker is overrated IMO. He's decent at dual threat, but when the run/playmaking ability isn't there, he's about as good of a pocket passer as that one dog killer QB that used to be with the Falcons. Thats why they lost to UCLA, who has pretty much lost all credibility by losing to Notre Dame.</p>
<p>But yeah, hopefully Mich doesn't die. That would be such a shame given their rich tradition.</p>
<p>Wat Alexandre said is really true, Michigan is one of the extremely prestigious programs around the Nation, but the Big Ten is definitely a joke, no offense but whenever a Big Ten Team plays a Pac-10 or SEC team, they get blown away, for example:
National Championship last year
Rose Bowl last Year</p>
<p>Yellow_Jackets, I am not sure I agree. The Big 10 does fine vs the SEC and PAC 10. The Big 10 has won 6 of the last 10 Citrus Bowls (#2 Big 10 team vs #2 SEC team) , including the last three in a row. Three PAC 10 teams have won the Rose Bowl in the last decade...three Big 10 teams have won the Rose Bowl in that same period. Thee Big 10 teams have played in the Orange Bowl in the last decade and 2 of them have won. Three Big 10 teams have played in the Fiesta Bowl, and all three won it. Finally, 3 Big 10 teams have played in the Sugar Bowl, and 1 of them won it. Altogether, the Big 10 has done well against major conferences.</p>
<p>Maybe it's because Big Ten teams spend the last few weeks of their season playing in adverse weather conditions (and can only practice in smaller indoor facilities between end of season and bowl games), whereas the Pac 10/SEC play/practice in the kind of nice weather bowl games have the whole season? If you think about it, the Rose Bowl was basically a home game for USC taking place in conditions Michigan hadn't played in in months. You think USC would have fared as well as they did if they had to play in Ann Arbor in early January?</p>
<p>california_08: They are in the top-35 right now with a losing record and a freshman quarterback. You think next year they are going to be worse? The Pac-10 is loaded, but look at the SEC.Half their conference is in the top 25. Why? Because those 5 teams are all good.</p>
<p>I bet my next in-n-out burger that UW will be preseason top-25.</p>
<p>dilksy: I love Michigan and hate SC, but I must say that great teams learn how to play in all weather conditions. I was at the Rose Bowl last year, and it was 75 degrees outside-perfect weather for any team.</p>
<p>Prestige wise, Michigan will always be up there at the top. But quality wise I think Michigan is def dropping and the years of mediocrity that ND, Alabama, USC, and Nebraska have faced is not out of the question, actually it is closer than most people think.</p>
<p>Alexandre, if you are tying to prove that the Big-10 is the best overall conference, what you just showed me, shows me what I believe(but didnt state in my previous post) the Big Ten is extremely top heavy, while in the SEC every team but 3(Vanderbilt, Miss. State, and Ole Miss.) has been ranked this season, the SEC is clearly the tougher conference on a weekly basis</p>
<p>Well, the point I'm trying to get across is that the Big Ten is an over rated conference, I honestly believe that the ACC is actually superior to the Big Ten, but there is no point me arguing this on this forum , cuz I kno I'll get shoot down, although if you look at ACC Top to Bottom, you will definitely see my point, the ACC has depth that no conference besides the SEC has</p>
<p>I don't understand the doomsday sentiment about Michigan and Big Ten football. Ohio State and Michigan were ranked #1 and #2 up until the last regular seaon game; and there was heated debate about whether they should have a rematch for the BCS title game. How soon people forget! And did Michigan have a bad recruiting season this year? The answer is again negative. So why the prediction about the Michigan program falling off among the elite?</p>
<p>
[quote]
the Big Ten is extremely top heavy, while in the SEC every team but 3(Vanderbilt, Miss. State, and Ole Miss.) has been ranked this season,
[/quote]
The Big Ten used to be called the "Big Two and the little Eight". It didn't hurt its prestige then. The Big Ten is getting a lot more balanced lately. Even this year the Big Ten has seven teams ranked at one time or another. This is not to say that the Big Ten is the best conference. But there is no reason to say that the Big Ten is not competitive.</p>
<p>I agree that the SEC is probably the strongest conference in the last couple years. But what other conferences are much better than the Big Ten?</p>
<p>
[quote]
the ACC is actually superior to the Big Ten
<p>ACC is not the top conference. Pac-10 has 3 teams in the top-10 right now, and 4 in the top-15. SEC is loaded. BC is having a great year, but other than that (and possibly VT) the ACC is definitely not dominating the fb atmosphere.</p>
<p>I know there is no way to back up my statement about the ACC(that is why I didnt bother defending it), I said that in response to the person who was wondering why I was defending the SEC, but the ACC is very deep when you look at it, the only reason they are not nationally respected is because they have no "top" team(although BC is emerging), anyway the reason the Big Ten has no respect is the exact reason that you said
Last year everyone was hyped up about Michigan and Ohio State, yet when they went to play their bowl games, neither of them played a competitive game</p>
<p>look there's no point arguing the ACC superiority on this forum- I understand that, but the Pac-10 is very similar to the Big Ten anyways, very top heavy</p>
<p>I also think that college football is completely screwed up this year, after watching USF play BC for the national championship they will finally switch to a playoff system(hopefully)</p>
<p>Michigan brings in a near-top 10 recruiting class every year. It is just a matter of getting the most out of these guys. Mallett was the number 4 recruit in the country last year. There is a ton of talent on the team, it is just a matter of getting everything together and letting it all develop.</p>
<p>"Alexandre, if you are tying to prove that the Big-10 is the best overall conference,..."</p>
<p>Yellow_Jacket, you are the one who said the Big 10 is overrated. I never said it was the best conference. I don't think it is possible to crown a conference "the best". The Big 10 goes for bigger and stronger players because most games are played in wet and cold weather and the programs emphasize the run and ball control. PAC 10 and SEC teams generally go for smaller and faster players because the weather, climate and general preference favors a quicker game. Add to this the long distances teams have to travel to play out-of-conference foes and weather/climate/timezone differences, and you get too many variables to truly establish a clear cut rating of conferences. Personally, I think the 5 major conferences (Big 10, SEC, Big XII, PAC 10 and ACC) are roughly equal, depending on the year.</p>