All or Nothing
- Thread starter DarkCock
- Start date
I guess not. They've won more games than them all-time and own a higher winning percentage.
I fail to see how that has worked out for us up to now, other than a few flashes here and there. "Demographics are destiny" is a prime example of sophistry.
What do you mean "up to now"? The whole point is demographics are shifting. Michigan and Ohio State are two of the great football programs in college football history (OSU is still elite, to be clear), but since 2000 what's their combined record against Carolina and Clemson?
It's this simple: high schools in the southeast produce a ton of future NFL players. It's good to be close to those high schools. Don't make this complicated.
I'll make it simple for you. We ain't done it yet. Michigan has. They have a better chance of doing it in the future than we do. But that's not even the point. Scattered games that are few in number don't prove anyone owns anybody else, which is what got this discussion started.
Using that rationale, we should never play UPC again. The main and maybe only thing that would hold Michigan back is that they play nine conference games, often have ND on the schedule and often do one of the kickoff classics - against much higher profile programs than ours. They don't have many openings.
Last edited:
Will you stop with the "own" red herring? I never said that. You're conflating my opinion with another poster's. My point of discussion is the relative chances of the teams going forward. Obviously, beating them twice in the last 5 years is relevant to that discussion.
It was the other poster's point that I found particularly ludicrous. Yours, slightly less so.
All Michigan needs is the right man in place at the top. If Harbaugh isn't that person, they will keep plugging away until they find him. The long-term prospects for Michigan will always be better than ours as long as even the youngest person on this board is alive. Shoot, man, there were more pro prospects in the Southern Tier of States when all those teams up there were having great seasons. That's not going to stop them. Pennsylvania and Ohio still field great high school teams and Michigan, Ohio State, and Penn State spend enormous amounts recruiting between the oceans.
It was the other poster's point that I found particularly ludicrous. Yours, slightly less so.
Think about it this way: From 1990 to 2000, the South's black population increased by 3 million. The trickle-down effect of that demographic shift can be seen in the fact that southeastern teams have won 11 out of the last 12 national championships and the last 3 championship games featured an all-southeastern teams. If you want to narrow down even further, just 3 states (Bama, SC, GA) represented in the last 3 championship games.
But anyway...I thought you would be happy (to the extent that you're ever happy..haha) that I'm not giving us any excuse for not competing against the best.
He's a pessimist when it comes to Carolina, an optimist for UM. Surprised? I'm not.
For historical reasons. If I'm ever proven wrong, you won't be around to see it.
You make good points about particular trends. You've made none of which I wasn't aware, at least in general. But certain schools not in the South are destined to remain among the nation's elite and occasionally win championships and Michigan is one of those. And when they do, some of those Southerners will be there to help them do it.
Nobody currently on the board will be alive when Carolina's longterm prospects are better than Michigan's. How old are you? Maybe 15. Can you make it to 90? That would be 75 years. It will be longer than that.
Well, not entirely. Someone might be alive to see our program perennially at a higher level than Michigan's. It just won't be you or I.
(Perennially) 1. On a yearly basis for several years.
We started our higher level under Spurrier and in the last 13 years combined we have won more Football games then Michigan. Rejoice, you lived to see it. In addition, we are fresh off of beating them head to head and will go in to this season ranked ahead of them. Michigan is striving to be us. This aint Bo Schembeckler anymore. Celebrate your Gamecocks and quit being a stick in the mud.
Let me bring it into focus for you. From the actual Merriam-Webster Dictionary:
Perennial -
3a : persistent, enduring
- perennial favorites
- the perennial quest for certainty
- a perennial student
The self-deception manifest among the fans of aspiring but unrealized programs is lamentable to observe. Only one year in our history did we come close to playing for the national championship, the ultimate achievement that Michigan has attained several times. But we failed with a thud at Navy and that was 34 years ago. Call me when you have something.
Last edited:
13 years and a better winning record, let go of the Michigan past, nobody remembers it but you.
But you weren't around to see our program surpass the eminence of theirs and the all-time achievement, and respectfully, neither you, I not the other gadfly poster engaged in this discussion will be. We've got a long climb still ahead of us. We played them four times over 37 years and we were blessed to win three of those games. We don't "own" them based on that. What UPC has done for Virginia is "owning" a team. UK has a greater claim to "owning" us than we have to "owning" Michigan. But looking at the overall history, I don't buy that one either.
Last edited:
Even you aren't that naive. I refer you to my answer delivered to the more sensible participant just above.
Right. Michigan established overall supremacy a long time ago. A couple of decades of relative inertia isn't going to change that. They've been playing football for 138 years.
And to tell you the truth, I don't care, either. I pull against them every game they play, except maybe against Ohio State. I just don't buy into the idea of us "owning" them. You and I will.have to agree to countenance each other's differing opinions on this.
