SimPLLLLLLLe Jim "6-13" Harbaugh (B1G Suspenders McKhakiPants, Cheater Cheater Booger Eater)

[ORD_Buckeye]

And here in a nutshell (taken out of the comments section) is the essence of their arrogance.....

"To be fair, UM has the additional challenge of maintaining a world class, highly ranked academic institution in addition to their
athletic program. MSU and OSU don’t have that challenge, considering their mediocre academics and lack of focus on/interest in that component of their universities."

Fucking Christ, I hate these assholes. I'm sure this guy would be shocked to learn that OSU has 40 National Academy members on faculty compared to Michigan's 60. That we did 900M in research to Michigan's 1B. That we have the second largest endowment among Big Ten publics. And that the average SAT gap between the schools is less than 40 points, which is much much smaller than the gap between Michigan and all those private schools from which the Michigan Men were rejected. And oh yeah, if we shrunk our freshman classes down to the size of Michigan's we'd easily match them and probably surpass them. I'm not seeing too much of a gap between the schools. Yes, it's there, but it's nowhere near what these asshats think it is.

 

[Jagdaddy]

From the article cited above:


Ohio State has a 247 Composite score of 291.60 with 22 commitments.
Michigan has a 247 Composite score of 251.15 with 24 commitments.

That's a forty point difference. That's not "neck-and-neck". That's not even close. And the gap will likely grow as Ohio State fills out its class. Fact-free articles like this perpetuate the myth that Harbaugh is some kind of ace recruiter. News flash: He ain't.

Let's keep the myth going. It gives them false hope and helps them keep Harbaugh. If they can him, the blind squirrel rule says that they might accidentally stumble into hiring a great coach.

 

[Wingate1217]

From the article cited above:


And by the way, according to the article, Michigan spends nearly twice as much on recruiting as Ohio State. So Harbaugh's not a great recruiter, and he's inefficient as well.

Trying to make up the difference by spending extra...Hmmm....what other organizations try to fix problems (unsuccessfully) by throwing money at a problem. Oh, yes public education and government. Maybe TSUN should look at the root cause of their recruiting discrepancy and it may be the moron wearing the Big M on his hat.

 

[jakenick06]

And here in a nutshell (taken out of the comments section) is the essence of their arrogance.....

"To be fair, UM has the additional challenge of maintaining a world class, highly ranked academic institution in addition to their
athletic program. MSU and OSU don’t have that challenge, considering their mediocre academics and lack of focus on/interest in that component of their universities."

Even knowing the source of such garbage, I get irrationally angry when I read shit like that....

 

[Buckeyeskickbuttocks]

Fucking Christ, I hate these assholes. I'm sure this guy would be shocked to learn that OSU has 40 National Academy members on faculty compared to Michigan's 60. That we did 900M in research to Michigan's 1B. That we have the second largest endowment among Big Ten publics. And that the average SAT gap between the schools is less than 40 points, which is much much smaller than the gap between Michigan and all those private schools from which the Michigan Men were rejected. And oh yeah, if we shrunk our freshman classes down to the size of Michigan's we'd easily match them and probably surpass them. I'm not seeing too much of a gap between the schools. Yes, it's there, but it's nowhere near what these asshats think it is.

This:

Should be downgraded to "Low"

 

[DaddyBigBucks]

This:

Should be downgraded to "Low"

...and “touting” should be changed to “overblowing”

 

[zincfinger]

...and “touting” should be changed to “overblowing”

While overblown, you could still give this kind of coward-boast a little credence if we were talking about a sport that actually applied some of those vaunted admissions and academic criteria. But the Michigan football program clearly does not, as Rain Man famously noted not that long ago.

When is the last time OSU admitted a football player that didn't meet baseline NCAA academic eligibility requirements? Because I can remember the Harvard of the Midwest doing so.

 

[ScriptOhio]

 

[LordJeffBuck]

World class (1) academic's.....

Confirmed: JT Turner did not graduate high school, now at TSUN

 

[DiamondBuck]

So, they're now taking the Mike Brown approach - "as long as we're making money, we're kind of ok with losing."

The past three coaches have had decidedly different trajectories over their time at ttun.

Rich Rod: 3-9, 5-7, 7-6 (fired while trending upward)
Brady Hoke: 11-2, 8-5, 7-6, 5-7 (fired while trending downward)
Harbrau: 10-3, 10-3, 8-5, 10-3 (not really trending in any particular direction)

When it comes to Harbrau and whether he stays or goes, the question is: are they happy with their ceiling being 10-3?

Surely they ask themselves "Are Stanford and Harvard okay with 10-3?"

 

[Jaxbuck]

When it comes to Harbrau and whether he stays or goes, the question is: are they happy with their ceiling being 10-3?

That's who they are.

The myth is perennial power house.

The reality is they have always been a 3-4 loss a year team

2009-2018...48 losses (4.8 per season) ((only 1 season of the 10 had less than 3 losses....and it was 2))
1999-2008...38 losses (3.8 per) 1 in 10 had less than 3, it was a 2 loss season
1989-1998...26 losses and 3 ties in the 0 loss 1992 season, 4 consecutive 4 loss seasons before the outlier of the 1997 undefeated season.
1979-1988...31 losses, 4 times in this 10 year span they had less than 3 losses
1969-1978...15 losses, unbeaten but once tied in 1973 (perhaps you've read about that one somewhere).

So the best they ever were was the first decade of Bo. The last 40 years they have averaged 3.6 losses per season and have suffered 3 or more losses in a season 29 of those 40 years.

Three point six

losses per season

for the last Forty Fucking Years

 

[sparcboxbuck]

That's who they are.

The myth is perennial power house.

The reality is they have always been a 3-4 loss a year team

2009-2018...48 losses (4.8 per season) ((only 1 season of the 10 had less than 3 losses....and it was 2))
1999-2008...38 losses (3.8 per) 1 in 10 had less than 3, it was a 2 loss season
1989-1998...26 losses and 3 ties in the 0 loss 1992 season, 4 consecutive 4 loss seasons before the outlier of the 1997 undefeated season.
1979-1988...31 losses, 4 times in this 10 year span they had less than 3 losses
1969-1978...15 losses, unbeaten but once tied in 1973 (perhaps you've read about that one somewhere).

So the best they ever were was the first decade of Bo. The last 40 years they have averaged 3.6 losses per season and have suffered 3 or more losses in a season 29 of those 40 years.

Three point six

losses per season

for the last Forty Fucking Years

They should have quit the fucking sport a long time ago.

 

[LovelandBuckeye]

That's who they are.

The myth is perennial power house.

The reality is they have always been a 3-4 loss a year team

2009-2018...48 losses (4.8 per season) ((only 1 season of the 10 had less than 3 losses....and it was 2))
1999-2008...38 losses (3.8 per) 1 in 10 had less than 3, it was a 2 loss season
1989-1998...26 losses and 3 ties in the 0 loss 1992 season, 4 consecutive 4 loss seasons before the outlier of the 1997 undefeated season.
1979-1988...31 losses, 4 times in this 10 year span they had less than 3 losses
1969-1978...15 losses, unbeaten but once tied in 1973 (perhaps you've read about that one somewhere).

So the best they ever were was the first decade of Bo. The last 40 years they have averaged 3.6 losses per season and have suffered 3 or more losses in a season 29 of those 40 years.

Three point six

losses per season

for the last Forty Fucking Years

I love math!

 

[zincfinger]

I love math!

Just like all the scholars on the Michigan football team.

 

[MililaniBuckeye]

That's who they are.

The myth is perennial power house.

The reality is they have always been a 3-4 loss a year team

2009-2018...48 losses (4.8 per season) ((only 1 season of the 10 had less than 3 losses....and it was 2))
1999-2008...38 losses (3.8 per) 1 in 10 had less than 3, it was a 2 loss season
1989-1998...26 losses and 3 ties in the 0 loss 1992 season, 4 consecutive 4 loss seasons before the outlier of the 1997 undefeated season.
1979-1988...31 losses, 4 times in this 10 year span they had less than 3 losses
1969-1978...15 losses, unbeaten but once tied in 1973 (perhaps you've read about that one somewhere).

So the best they ever were was the first decade of Bo. The last 40 years they have averaged 3.6 losses per season and have suffered 3 or more losses in a season 29 of those 40 years.

Three point six

losses per season

for the last Forty Fucking Years

Further perspective: Since 1975, where they're played at least 12 games each season, they have exactly one 12-win season (12-0, 1997). Since that sole 12-win season, they've had at least three losses in 18 of the 21 seasons (2-loss season were 1999, 2006, and 2011). UFM has 12 wins every year of his 7-year tenure except for 2016 (11-2) and averaged 12.3 wins a season.