hangdog

A lot of coaches don't have votes. Don't know why.

We are irrelevant on the national level until we become relevant again. In other words until we start having an impact in any way shape or form. (Other than Bo's antics). Until we win a division we are irrelevant to anyone outside Nebraska. Until we win a conference championship we are irrelevant to anyone outside the Big 10. Until we get into the four team playoff we are not relevant on the national level. Don't see how you can say otherwise.

What Pelini did is common practice by coaches. From www.al.com Nebraska's Bo Pelini gets the award this year for highest inflation of his own team. Pelini ranked the Cornhuskers No. 25 -- the only vote they received. Based on the final poll results, Pelini inflated Nebraska by 11 spots. Pelini did not rank Minnesota, which finished with the same overall record as Nebraska and beat the Cornhuskers 34-23 on Oct. 26. * Twenty-six of the 62 coaches in the poll voted for their own team. On average, they ranked their own team three spots higher than the final poll. Florida State's Jimbo Fisher and Alabama's Nick Saban were the only coaches to rank their teams exactly where they finished. Auburn's Gus Malzahn did not have a vote. Biggest Vote Inflation of Own Team Coach His Ranking of His Team His Team's Actual Ranking Difference Bo Pelini, Nebraska No. 25 No. 36 +11 Rod Carey, Northern Illinois No. 13 No. 23 +10 Jerry Kill, Minnesota No. 25 No. 34 +9 Brian Kelly, Notre Dame No. 25 No. 33 +8 Dave Clawson, Bowling Green No. 25 No. 32 +7 Mark Helfrich, Oregon No. 7 No. 12 +5 James Franklin, Vanderbilt No. 23 No. 27 +4 Mark Richt, Georgia No. 20 No. 24 +4 Charlie Strong, Louisville No. 12 No. 16 +4

KSU in Tempe would have generated more interest. But wouldn't have gave us to an opportunity to make a statement win. This Georgia team is more injured than even Nebraska. Even a win over an "injured" UGA would still look 100x's better then a win over KSU. A win over an "injured" UGA will look 1000x's better than a loss to KSU.

Mostly agree, but I think many of Michigan's early 1900s "national championships" are quite questionable. If it's okay for you to question championships from 100 years ago others can question the ones from 20-40 years ago. While our championship teams could easily whip our current team I doubt they would be on the same field with the current elite teams. Do you know why I question those "national championships?" And why I'm not remotely alone in questioning them? Please enlighten me.

I wonder how much better it would have been if we hadn't dumped Frank.

Our schedule may be weak but would we really want a tougher one? Let's face it, we don't improve anyones strength of schedule ratings. Wrong!!! Okay, our three B1G conference wins come against teams with records of 0-13. That doesn't help our SOS ratings. Therefore it won't help our opponents SOS ratings. Seems logical to me.

Mostly agree, but I think many of Michigan's early 1900s "national championships" are quite questionable. If it's okay for you to question championships from 100 years ago others can question the ones from 20-40 years ago. While our championship teams could easily whip our current team I doubt they would be on the same field with the current elite teams.

Our schedule may be weak but would we really want a tougher one? Let's face it, we don't improve anyones strength of schedule ratings.

Michigan 35 NU 13 Rush yards 132 Pass yards 140

Elite in the past. Certainly not now. Don't see it in the future; not with the conference we are in. The bloom is off the rose.

I think we are fortunate to have a coach who is able to put his players in a position to win, as he did Saturday.

I'm just disappointed that since we joined the B1G that the conference as a whole has gone to crap.

To be honest though isn't the whole football program getting somewhat mediocre?

Yeah, competitive with each other but not with other conferences.