Even More Uniforms?

About four days ago, the Michigan athletic department released images of the commemorative uniforms that will be worn in the upcoming 2012 season opener against Alabama.

The design features most notably a maize coloring along the shoulder-line. The football gloves, which are also part of the ensemble, display the entire chorus text of "The Victors," Michigan's famous fight song. You can see a closer image of the gloves here. There is also a short hype video featuring the uniform.

We apparently live in a world where Michigan will without a doubt produce these kind of uniforms on a regular basis. I'd like to offer another 1,000-word rant on why Michigan has no business changing uniforms that looked perfect and stunning during the Charles Woodson era, but there's really nothing more to say.

I had a general reaction to the sea of uniform change when Michigan released "special uniforms" months before the Notre Dame night game, although that was based on the assumption that the special uniforms would be a one-time thing, and then I had a more visceral reaction, though not in so many words, to the downright ugly uniforms the Michigan athletic department thought would be a nice surprise for the Michigan State game. And then of course Michigan had special uniforms for the Sugar Bowl.

The rationale here from the Michigan athletic department, at least according to the press release, appears to be that Michigan players and staff like to change things up once in a while. "From time to time, whether it's a regular-season or bowl game, our coaches and players enjoy an opportunity to choose an alternate jersey to wear," athletic director David Brandon said in the released statement.

It sounds innocent enough, and most people are on the sides of the players--whatever can help them win, do it. The hardcore Michigan fan in me immediately thinks all this means is "Tradition be damned," but I suppose I wouldn't have such a colossal problem with the new uniforms if they weren't always such an eyesore. Not to mention how much of a departure it is for Michigan suddenly wanting to become Oregon, at least in a visual sense, though that's probably an extreme position.

There have been a couple of reactions to these uniforms. As expected, the reaction on Michigan football's Facebook page has been mixed. I am continuously amazed that there are always people who love everything the athletic department does, no matter what it is. On the other side, most of the dissenters are hardcore traditionalists like myself.

Meanwhile, at mgoblog.com, Brian Cook (the website's administrator and lead blogger), who has long been a protester of uniform changes, said in a recent blog post that he is "filled with moderate distaste, so these are probably good as far as alternate uniforms go."

He also pointed out an important caveat: the season opener against Alabama in Dallas, Texas, will be the final time that the Michigan winged helmets feature numbers. As it says in the previously linked press release, the practice of numbers on the helmets "will be suspended after the season opener." Michigan will also use its traditional home and away uniforms for the remainder of the regular season, so that's good. Nothing was said, however, about the uniforms that could be worn if Michigan played in a bowl game.

Brad at Maize n' Blue Nation said that these commemorative uniforms are "not bad" and sees a "steady march towards the more subtle and toned down maize." He's also relieved that the pants aren't white, and unlike myself, he rather likes the gloves. "The 2011 helmet numbers will make a single game cameo for this game only, then discontinued," he added, "which I think is for the best."

The irony is not lost on me that most of what Michigan fans complain about these days are the decisions with the uniforms rather than the decisions in coaching. Dave Brandon bought himself a lot of slack by hiring Brady Hoke and delivering the smash hit that was the "Under the Lights" event against Notre Dame that kicked-off Michigan's 11-2 run. This is probably even the most traditional fan like myself doesn't call for Brandon to be fired all based on these uniforms. It's just a little depressing that there doesn't seem to be an end to it.

As Michigan fans we're so used to the uniforms changing only extremely rarely, and under Brandon's tenure, the uniforms changed more times in one year than they did in the past decade. So, forgive me if whenever I see a new uniform design, I get a little queasy about it. I'd also have less of a problem if, at least once, we just stuck with something consistent.

Like I said, there doesn't appear to be any type of end to Michigan making "special" uniforms. This is a bold new era in Michigan football, and I don't think I'll ever get used to it. Hopefully there will be more victories on the field to make the new uniforms a little easier to handle.

The Horizon

First, this needs to be said: Suck it, Buckeyes.

Ohio State fans often loved to repeat the number of days since the Maize and Blue had last beaten the Scarlet and Gray. Before November 26, 2011, it had been 2,925 days, and the Buckeyes were always happy let you know. (The Columbus Dispatch, which follows Ohio State football, kept a ticker on their page that reminded everyone of the number of days, but yesterday they had to change it.) This game means everything in the world to both teams. Some will say that it actually means more to Ohio State, because they don't really have another rival that keeps them up at night, but it means plenty to Michigan. And after eight years, the number of days that Michigan had last beaten Ohio State goes to zero.

Not surprisingly, Ohio State fans, who often can dish trash-talk out but can't ever seem to take it, have a million excuses. They "congratulate" Michigan fans that it took the Wolverines eight years to beat the Buckeyes. Yet they forget—understandably, given the nature of this rivalry, that you only see what you want to see—that Michigan dominated the rivalry not so long ago when John Cooper was the Buckeyes' head coach, that no matter how good Ohio State would be Michigan would always be better, and when the rivalry first began back in the late 1890s, Michigan once beat Ohio State 86-0.

But see, tell a Buckeye about that, and you'll get a healthy helping of context. 1890s football was not like ours is today. Yet we could use the same argument of context for Ohio State's eight year reign of dominance. It had been four years of an Ohio State winning streak between Jim Tressel and Lloyd Carr—legitimately, and you'll be hard pressed to find a reasonable Michigan fan unwilling to give the Buckeyes props—but the dominance extended to seven (with one Buckeye win vacated, appropriately) because Michigan selected the wrong coach to renew the rivalry. Now, Michigan has obviously selected the right one, and the reign of dominance has ended.

You won't find too many instances of Schadenfreude from Ohio State's fan base after this game, however. The rational ones fully expected a loss, and most of them are content with entertaining the rumors that Urban Meyer will be the Ohio State next head coach instead. They'd prefer to think about that than what had happened in the Big House. A few weeks after he resigned, Jim Tressel told the Buckeye faithful that Michigan would lose. In fact, he practically guaranteed it. "Don't forget," he said encouragingly, but with a distinct tone of hatred that he no longer needed to hide. "November 26, we're going to kick their ass!" Well, as it turns out, Mr. Tressel... you were wrong. Payback sucks, doesn't it?

After the 40-34 win against Ohio State, Michigan fans everywhere uttered the same phrase: it's about time.

If anyone ever doubted Brady Hoke, they probably don't now. Within a year, he has changed so dramatically the play of the Michigan football team. Last year they were determined but uncompetitive. This year, they were still determined, but because they were competitive, they won a lot of games—the most important of which was Ohio State—putting Hoke's first season record at an astonishing 10-2 and the possibility (likeliness still to be determined) of going to a BCS bowl.

Hoke, of course, gives all the credit to the players, particularly the seniors. After the Wolverines clinched the win over Ohio State with the victory formation, Hoke went onto the field and was given a Gatorade bath that echoed San Diego State's program-changing victory over Navy in the Poinsettia Bowl. When a reporter asked Hoke what it felt like for him to win ten games, Hoke said, "Oh, that doesn't matter. I'm happy for those kids. That's what this game's all about." He also said, in a later press conference, when asked about Urban Meyer as the potential next coach of Ohio State, "You know, the good thing about coaches...we don't do the competing. It's the kids. It's the guys on the field."

Yet it is impossible, especially after what we have witnessed over the past three to four years, to discredit the effect of having the right coaching staff. The fact that Brady Hoke is Michigan's head coach is precisely the difference. Under Rich Rodriguez, the Wolverines got worse defensively each year, and by the time they faced Ohio State at season's end, they never stood a chance. There is no doubt that the players wanted a win, even then. So why didn't they win? It was not like they didn't care and suddenly in 2011 decided that they were going to work hard and do the right things on the field. That passion has always been there. It's what keeps the players going day to day. It's why they play the game.

The reason they are winning, however, is because Hoke's staff has done a fantastic job preparing them. You can have all the passion and willpower in the world, but if you aren't executing good fundamentals, you're not going to play effectively, and ultimately you're not going to win. Hoke came in and taught the players what they needed to learn, so that by the time they faced Ohio State, they'd be ready, and they'd be competitive. Thanks to Tressel (and Rodriguez, to some degree, as he must endure at least some blame given the radical change we've seen recently), the Buckeyes were used to winning, but this year it wasn't going to be so easy. (Don't feel too bad for Rodriguez, by the way. He's got another BCS coaching job.)

Hoke also emphasized the rivalry more palpably since day one. He was asked about it in his introductory press conference, a time when he won a lot of people over because it was an opportunity for him to show his passion. He ended every team meeting with "Beat Ohio." And, of course, much like Woody Hayes only referred to Michigan as "that school up north," Hoke will only refer to Ohio State as "Ohio." However, unlike Hayes, Hoke has an incredible respect for Ohio State and won't hesitate to admit it.

I'm very proud to have Brady Hoke as Michigan's head coach. Most Michigan fans are, especially since in his first year he has snapped the most frustrating losing streak in Michigan's history. I also say "he" and give him credit because he justly deserves it. Bo Schembechler was given credit for upsetting Ohio State in 1969. The head coach prepares and motivates the team, the players go and execute. 

It is an often unbalanced system, where coaches are rarely recognized for victories but are almost unequivocally given blame for failures. The seniors and the players did a fantastic job, and they deservingly get their credit from Hoke (as well as everyone else), but it was Hoke who transformed the team, not the team which transformed itself. That's why you have coaches in the first place. The buying-in to Hoke's methods combined with a staff that competently coaches has resulted in a good transition and an even quicker turnaround. The demands of trust and hard work were needed and met on both sides.

The victory over Ohio State obviously means more than just one thing. It validates that Hoke was the right hire and is the right man for the job. The man who hired him, athletic director Dave Brandon, admitted that he was actually a little surprised on how well Hoke has done in such a short amount of time—considering the state of the program when he inherited it. 

"Coming off the disappointments of last year, particularly with the performance of our defense, I would have expected it would have taken us longer to be in a position where we have a shot at a BCS bowl berth and a shot at a hugely successful season," Brandon said on a radio show the week before the Ohio State-Michigan game, unaware that Michigan was going to snap the losing streak that Saturday. "Brady has done exactly what I hoped he would do, exactly what I expected him to do, and maybe a little faster than I thought it could be done."

Which brings us to the much larger point. The win against Ohio State confirms Hoke as Michigan's Man, but it also puts a stamp on this being a completely new era. It allows us to look at the night game against Notre Dame as the beginning of a great season, rather than as a repeat of last year. I'll be hesitant to say that "Michigan is back" as Detroit News writer Bob Wojnowski does, or at least "back" in the sense that Michigan is the dominating, national championship contender it was more than a decade ago. Yes, this team has progressed, but it still has a long way to go. What Michigan is now is a team that has a firmer sense of direction and, perhaps even more importantly, a firmer sense of identity.

In the Rodriguez era there was more uncertainty: every game could be lost, and Michigan didn't really scare anybody. If anything, the win over Ohio State proves that Michigan, as a program, can make strides to improve and become as excellent as we remember. I don't know what it was—and a lot of people just blame Rodriguez—but the last years' teams were always full of hope, seemingly ready to make a stride, and then could not get it done. Seeing that year after year was not only frustrating, it was disheartening.

Had Michigan lost to Ohio State, it may not have been as bad as I initially predicted. Michigan would have still been 9-3, a vast improvement over any of the Rodriguez years, but there would have remained that impending sense of uncertainty. Can Michigan ever beat Ohio State, we'd ask? We would go into 2012 never fully sure that Michigan would do well against Alabama in that season opener. Most would probably predict a blowout loss. Let's not go crazy: Michigan still could lose (a loss against Alabama is always possible)—but now we can say it's not a foregone conclusion. We don't have any reason to be afraid or uncertain. The coaches have a plan, and they're going to carry it out, and the program is going to be successful.

It has a head coach who is devoted heart-and-soul to the program, the university, and the team. He is competent and demands competence. That's what we've known Michigan to be for so long, but because we fell away from that for the past three years, and we fell away badly, we stopped expecting it. Some of us even stopped believing it could happen. Yet we can see it now, the direction in which the program is headed. We know that Michigan is going to be fine, but we always should have known. There was a head coach who knew all along, and he knew why, and he tried to tell us the reason a long time ago. It was simple and elegant, as most powerful things are.

This is Michigan, he said. That's why.

Michigan-WMU Game Called in Third Quarter because of Lightning, Thunderstorms

Brady Hoke cinched his first victory as Michigan's head coach, but it came in one of the most "unusual circumstances" of college football.

With Michigan up 34-10 in the third quarter, the game was delayed for the second time after thunderstorms rolled in and lightning was spotted. It had been delayed once earlier in the third quarter. After the second delay, the storms showed no signs of letting up, and the game was called as a Michigan victory. It was the first time in recorded Michigan football history that a game was called because of the weather.

When I first heard that the game had ended prematurely, I was livid. Yes, it meant that Michigan walked away with a 34-10 victory (the whole "a win is a win" thing), but both teams deserved to play four quarters of football. The Broncos were never given the chance to stage a possible comeback—with fifteen minutes in the fourth quarter, they might even have done it—and Michigan was never given the chance to put this one away.

The reason that perhaps I was (or am) the most upset is because I am not a fair weather fan. Football is played in rain, snow, or shine. As fans we come out and support the team no matter how good or how bad the weather is, and we already know that in the state of Michigan the weather can get pretty unpredictable. While I understand why they delayed the game and ultimately ended it prematurely, I'm not happy about it. I don't care if Michigan was winning; you play four quarters of football.

What if the situation was reversed? What if Michigan was down 10-34? What if this was a rivalry game, against Ohio State or Michigan State? What if it were the National Championship? What if we were losing by one point and lightning struck within five miles? Fans of Western Michigan feel cheated, and they should. Michigan fans should feel cheated too. It wasn't fair to either team to let the weather dictate who won and who lost the game. I can tell with near certainty that if the situation was reversed, everyone on Michigan's athletic staff would have pushed for the game to play out no matter what the weather was.

The weather was obviously the primary topic of discussion in Michigan athletic director Dave Brandon's press conference. He explained why it was acceptable to call the game early. MGoBlog has a full transcript:

We got through the first delay, and we actually thought we had another hour and a half window before the next big front was moving through, but this time of year, with the humidity and heat that we had, we just had buildups come out of nowhere. In a conference situation, as I understand it, the Big Ten has some very specific rules and protocols to follow. In a non-conference game, it's a little more open-ended in terms of how this is managed. But in the conference rules, the officials and the head coaches and the home athletic director meet with the director of operations—and in our case that would be Rob Rademacher—and we would make a call.

The choices that we had were to wait it out—and we looked at that—the choices that we had were to suspend the game and leave the score where it was. There were some other options, but none of those were acceptable. We decided after a bit of discussion, and I want to compliment coach Cubit and Kathy Beauregard at Western. They were really terrific about this. We really thought about the safety of the fans, and we thought about the safety of the players, because to make them sit what could have been an hour and 45 minutes based on some of the projections we had with the weather, and then try to go out and get warmed up again and play more football would have not been in the interest of either team.

If this was a close game that was into the fourth quarter and the game was in doubt, I think we would have waited it out because—well, we would have either waited it out because that was what the coaches wanted to do, or we would have decided that this would have gone in the books as a non-game, but the agreement that was reached between Western [WMU] and Michigan was that the game was in hand, and that the game would stand as the final score would be indicated, so that's kind of where we are.

I understand Brandon's point, but I don't necessarily or completely agree with it. First, unpredictable weather is a part of college football, and in Michigan, bad weather is practically predictable. Michigan football has existed for 132 years and never once in recorded history has a game been determined prematurely because the weather was unbearable. Even the "Snow Bowl" game against Ohio State played four quarters. In football, whether you're a player or a fan, you tough it out. It's just another aspect of adversity that you have to overcome.

I almost feel like I have to bring up the slippery slope argument here. I mean, seriously, where does it end? If you're going to cancel or postpone a game because of a little rain or thunder, then the only acceptable way to play football is in an indoor stadium. Okay, yes, Brandon was probably thinking lawsuit-avoidance most of the time that the lightning flashed, but part of me thinks that the only vulnerable part of the stadium is at the very top—on the roofs of the expanded, executive suites, where no one is standing at that point anyway. I can hardly see how someone way down in the bowl of Michigan Stadium is at risk. Most (if not all) of the fans in the stadium that day had no problem with the rain or the lightning, and they wanted the game to go on. Besides, if someone can sue because they got struck by lightning, why not sue if you get pneumonia from a snowy game, or slip when it's rainy? The argument that I presume would've held up in court is that Michigan's athletic department cannot control the weather and thus is not responsible for it. Now, because the game was called because of the weather, it brings that argument into serious doubt.

Anyway, I suppose I should talk a little bit about the game itself. For as long as they were able to play, Michigan struggled in the beginning of the game (especially the first quarter and a little bit of the second) before it finally clicked and started producing. The biggest difference from 2010 was that Michigan produced more as a team than individually. The stats were delegated to various players instead of just one. Had Denard Robinson been able to lead the team through the fourth quarter, it's likely he would have at least produced a passing or rushing touchdown. Instead, the offensive touchdowns came from running backs Fitzgerald Toussaint and Michael Shaw. The defense also surprised everyone in the stadium with their own touchdowns. Redshirt senior Brandon Herron picked off a deflected pass and took it 94 yards for a touchdown, the longest pick-return in stadium history. Herron also recovered a fumble for a touchdown. He was named Walter Camp Defensive Player of the Week.

As much as Herron's efforts are appreciated by the Michigan faithful, he was really just in the right place at the right time, and he capitalized on Western Michigan's mistakes. The Broncos proved to be an adequate test against Michigan's pass defense, the weakest aspect of Michigan's defense in 2010 under Rich Rodriguez. The Broncos produced very little by running the ball. In the first quarter, Michigan gave up short yards (usually passing) but did not surrender any big plays. In the second half especially, Michigan defensive coordinator Greg Mattison made some adjustments that resulted in the Wolverines getting far more pressure on WMU's quarterback, Alex Carder. Redshirt junior Jordan Kovacs (a former walk-on) recorded two sacks, one of which resulted in a fumble that was picked up by Brandon Herron and returned for a touchdown. Kovacs, a definite impact player, notably led Michigan's defense in tackles last year.

Considering how much Michigan's defense struggled last season, it was good to see them get physical. The biggest difference I noticed was tackling. Michigan only had one open-field missed tackle, by sophomore Carvin Johnson. The defense otherwise swarmed to the ball and held WMU's offense when it needed to. As much as I would say that the defense had a great game even though it stumbled out of the gate, Brady Hoke still feels that the defense isn't there yet. "We're not playing the way we need to play Michigan defense," he told sideline reporter Jeanine Edwards at the end of the first half. "Not even close."

One of the best aspects of Michigan's game-playing was the turnover margin. Michigan's defense forced three turnovers, and Michigan's offense had none. Denard threw no interceptions, and no Michigan player fumbled the ball. We'll have to see how Michigan fares when it hits tougher opponents, especially those in the Big Ten, but for now this has been probably one of the biggest areas of visible improvement for the Wolverines.

Offensively, Michigan was impressive but not spectacular. Junior quarterback Denard Robinson looked good in the pro-style offense, taking snaps under center and multiple times from the shotgun. He passed far more than he ran. Denard did run effectively several times for a first down, but he did not score any touchdowns rushing or passing. Offensive coordinator Al Borges spread the ball around, having Denard pass to different receivers. Sophomore Jeremy Gallon and senior captain tight end Kevin Koger were the two most frequent targets. Roy Roundtree and Junior Hemingway also had successful receptions.

Notably, and perhaps negatively, Michigan's first drive of the game took 16 plays and over eight minutes. Perhaps it can be chalked up to Michigan exercising ball control and, more importantly, getting into a rhythm, because after that the offense was just rolling under Fitzgerald Toussaint and Michael Shaw. The game's last touchdown came when the offensive line opened a hole and Shaw ran 44 yards to the endzone. Western Michigan then buckled under the pressure of Michigan's defense, which continued to get to the quarterback. Storms rolled in, and the game was delayed and eventually called.

Special teams, not surprisingly, were discernibly the worst part of the game under Michigan. Placekicker Brendon Gibbons had a blocked extra point, and Michigan struggled to prevent big returns on kickoff and punts. On the other side, wide receiver Jeremy Gallon returned the ball for the Wolverines but rarely got the offense into good starting field position. Gallon was far more effective receiving passes from Denard Robinson.

In what was perhaps the worst news, cornerback Troy Woolfolk (Michigan's best at that position) sprained his ankle and had to be escorted off the field. It was not the same ankle that he injured last year, which kept him out of the 2010 season. Brady Hoke assured reporters that Woolfolk's injury was not serious and, had Michigan needed him, he would have returned to the game. Hoke felt that cornerbacks Courtney Avery and J.T. Floyd managed well without Woolfolk. In the first quarter, Woolfolk had made a big open-field tackle that reminded Michigan fans of how competent a defensive player he is. Hopefully, he should be able to return for the remainder of Michigan's games.

Aside from the way the game ended, I was very satisfied with how Michigan played. The biggest aspect I was looking for was how both sides of the ball were adapting to the new coaching staffs. Tackling has vastly improved from last year, which if you saw 2010 you know that the Wolverines couldn't tackle to save their lives. Denard is coming along very well as a passer—and while some of my peers may prefer to see him run for big yards and even touchdowns, I'd rather have a healthy Denard who can throw the football. The reason: Denard will always have that threat of a big run. It will always be an ace in his back pocket, but it shouldn't be the staple of our offense. If it is, Denard is far more likely to get injured. I was very pleased to see him throw the ball (successfully) rather than run. He obviously still ran on occasion and was successful there too.

You can watch the Michigan highlights of the game against WMU here.

In a somewhat-related piece of news, Michigan made a small change to their uniform that was present and visible during the game. There is now a small Block M on the back, above the player's name. It's small enough to where it will possibly go unnoticed. Personally, I don't think Michigan's uniform needed to be changed or altered in any way. However, the Block M on the uniform is small enough and subtle enough to where it doesn't detract from the uniform's appearance. We'll have to see how other people eventually react when they see it.

The Wolverines go on to face the Notre Dame Fighting Irish in Michigan Stadium's first night game on September 10. The Brady Hoke era begins with a win, albeit a premature one, but at least we've gotten off to a good start.

Appalachian State to be Michigan's 2014 Season Opener

The University of Michigan athletic department released a statement today announcing that, in 2014, the Wolverines will face Appalachian State in the football season's opening game. Michigan fans across the blogosphere were understandably upset that they would have to face Appalachian State again.

The Appalachian State Mountaineers have become well known around the Michigan fan base for upsetting the Wolverines in the season opener of 2007. It was the first time Michigan had ever lost to an FCS school. (The Mountaineers were reigning FCS national champions.)

That game, which MGoBlog has nicknamed "The Horror," was the beginning of the end for Lloyd Carr. Michigan alumni and fans everywhere were calling vehemently for him to step down: such a loss at the hands of an FCS school could only spell incompetence, they claimed. For that entire season, Carr never heard the end of it. He eventually announced his retirement after losing to Ohio State (for the fourth consecutive time) at the end of the season. Carr was able to leave on a high note, however, when the Wolverines defeated Florida in the Capital One Bowl. Despite the painful losses, he was eventually named to the College Football Hall of Fame.

The loss to Appalachian State was heartbreaking, confusing, and deflating. It deflated the entire 2007 season, with Michigan going 8-4 in the regular season but finishing strong against Florida. Some Michigan fans attribute that game ("The Horror") as the moment when Michigan football began its downward spiral, while others say that the essence of Michigan football died with Bo Schembechler in 2006.

Michigan fans loathe remembering the Appalachian State loss, but Michigan's rivals cherish it. Ohio State fans gathered to watch the game in Ohio Stadium and cheered like maniacs when they either witnessed or received the news that Michigan was upset by Appalachian State. For a Michigan fan, it was brutal.

And for Appalachian State themselves, it was arguably the biggest and greatest victory in the entire history of their program. Signs and mementos of that game are posted all over Appalachian State's locker room. The Mountaineers treasure the memory of that one victory every day. It was the game that changed their program forever. Suddenly, with just one game, everybody was talking about them.

"Appalachian State gained monumental coverage and reaped huge economic benefits from merchandise sales after the upset," wrote Angelique Chengelis in her book, 100 Things Michigan Fans Should Know and Do Before They Die. "Michigan also received monumental national coverage, but of a negative variety. Michigan rivals overwhelmed the Appalachian State bookstore with orders for Appalachian State t-shirts and apparel, and within hours of the upset, anti-Michigan fans had posted online their cell phone videos from a variety of locations, like Beaver Stadium and Ohio Stadium, capturing the moment when Penn State and Ohio State fans heard that Michigan had lost."

Chengelis, a writer for the Detroit News, does not sugarcoat her account of the Appalachian State game, describing it candidly and honestly. While Ohio State fans may choose to sugarcoat the departure of their beloved Jim Tressel, Michigan fans typically do not sugarcoat the loss to Appalachian State. However, that doesn't mean there isn't a silver lining. The reaction that everyone had to Michigan's loss—especially how much it has helped Appalachian State, even though technically it's just one game—only shows how huge Michigan football is and how great of an impact it really has. Michigan is a nationally-recognized, elite program, one whom many rivals despise because of its long tradition of success. It shouldn't be surprising, then, that Buckeyes sing of the Appalachian State victory over Michigan at their birthday parties.

Mike Hart, Michigan's running back at the time, called the defeat the "worst ever in Michigan football history." It certainly was. Never was there a game whose outcome was so unexpected and so devastating at the same time. (To those of you who don't know, it should be noted that Michigan wasn't blown out in the game. Appalachian State won by a very narrow 34-32. Their victory came in the final seconds of the game when they blocked a field goal that would have won Michigan the game. Still, it never should have happened.)

Now, Michigan will have the chance to play Appalachian State again in 2014, as the first game of the season.

Understandably, there are mixed feelings about this. Brian at MGoBlog comically refuses to even acknowledge that the 2007 upset ever happened, so he calls this game the "first" time that Michigan and Appalachian State will play. Personally, I am torn by the prospect of playing Appalachian State in 2014.

On one hand, I can understand why athletic director Dave Brandon scheduled it. The loss in 2007 was such an embarrassment and such a disappointment that he's looking to rectify it. While possibly defeating Appalachian State can not and will not erase history, nor will it erase the memory of how devastating that 2007 loss was to Michigan fans, it can at least provide some form of payback. There are many, or at least some, who would have no problem with that. Payback is often very satisfying.

On the other hand, do we really want to run the risk of another upset? I mean, I'm all for payback, and Appalachian State definitely deserves it for everything they reaped after beating us, but the main reason why Michigan lost in the first place was not because they sucked, it was because they were overconfident. It could go either way in 2014. I can see Michigan coming in expecting to win and being overconfident, or I can see them doing the opposite: being so fired up that they just flat out destroy Appalachian State. Obviously, the latter is what most Michigan fans want and what most of them are feeling right now.

However, it kind of seems pathetic that beating Appalachian State because they upset us once would be so important. Would fans really relish it that much? I mean, sure, it would feel like Michigan set things right by getting payback, but isn't it kind of sad that thumping a weak program would make us feel that good? Michigan should be more concerned with its rivals, its push into Big Ten domination, and its push into BCS prominence. That doesn't mean it should overlook Appalachian State. Michigan should never overlook any of its opponents. It should understand that wins are earned, not guaranteed.

Playing FCS schools like Appalachian State is just like playing MAC schools: there is so much more to lose than there is to gain. That's why I don't think we should have ever played them. (That's also why I think we should never play Slippery Rock, with whom we have a somewhat affable relationship.) If we win, it's like, "So what? They were a small program, and Michigan is huge. No surprise." If we lose, it's like, "What is wrong with Michigan?!"

I do like Dave Brandon's confidence in the program enough to accept them on their schedule. If he really didn't think Michigan could beat Appalachian State, he wouldn't have scheduled them.

Maybe we should just trust that everything is going to work out for the best. It's been kind of hard to do that for the last couple of years, but then again, believing in Michigan is what being a fan is all about.

Expectations for Brady Hoke's First Season

I know it's been a while since I've posted anything on this blog. Like many of my fellow Michigan bloggers, my excuse is that I've been on vacation—well, if by "vacation" I mean relocating to California. I have been enduring the long, arduous process of moving across the country and finding an adequate place to live, and after that, establishing my internet connection.

The process has taken several weeks, but that's really no excuse. You want Michigan football, and you want it now. I sympathize, and I will oblige.

There's been plenty going on (sort of) in the realm of Michigan football, and it's apparent I have a lot of catching up to do. I'll tackle it as best I can, but for right now, I thought I'd start you off with a piece on Brady Hoke and what we as Michigan fans expect out of his first year coaching the Wolverines.

Joel Greer over at Bleacher Report already has created a sideshow titled "10 Reasonable Goals for Brady Hoke's 1st Wolverines' Season," which is not so much ten reasonable goals but rather how Hoke can go from doing really well to doing everything perfect. Greer lists that Hoke should sign a top-ranked (Top 5, at least: that's reasonable, right?) quarterback, such as Zeke Pike, for instance. (Pike has already committed elsewhere.) Greer is certainly entitled to his opinion, and while I think that his goals for Hoke aren't entirely on the reasonable side, here's a run-down of general expectations that Hoke has set and we have set, and where they fall on our wish list.

1. Win the Big Ten

Priority Level: Medium

Brady Hoke has said that this is the main expectation of Michigan's football program and, to a large degree, it is. However, for Brady Hoke's first year, for Michigan's football program after three years of uncompetitive play under Rich Rodriguez, the expectation that it will actually happen falls into the medium range, although Hoke himself probably thinks that it should be put in the "very high" category. Still, we at the Michigan Fanatic don't expect Hoke's Wolverines to win the Big Ten Championship in this first season. With Nebraska joining the conference and looking to make a strong start, with Michigan State brimming with positivity after becoming champions of the Big Ten for the first time since 1990, and with Wisconsin aiming to establish itself as the dominant Big Ten powerhouse, the battle for the 2011 title will be tough.

Fans and graduating seniors would love nothing more than a trip to the Rose Bowl, but as we see it, for Michigan and Brady Hoke to win the Big Ten would exceed expectations rather than simply meet them. If Hoke walks away from 2011 with the Championship, he will have stunned the Big Ten conference and, let's be honest, almost all of the Michigan fan base.

This expectation is "medium" largely because the Wolverines are working with the same football players that Rodriguez used, and they were never truly competitive when the Big Ten schedule hit. While our offensive players are skilled, we aren't exactly stacked on defense. When Hoke's recruits start taking the field in 2012, then the expectation to win the Big Ten will be a lot higher. At that time, watch out.

2. Defeat Notre Dame in Michigan's First Night Game

Priority Level: Low

Athletic director Dave Brandon probably places this expectation "high," especially considering all the money and public relations his department has put into promoting the game as the first ever to take place at night in Michigan Stadium. (He regularly compares the event to the Big Chill.) So for Hoke to cinch a victory would definitely please all of Michigan's corporate fans, and certainly Brandon, but for the rest of Michigan's fans (depending on who you are), this expectation isn't that high at all.

It would be if Michigan had been suffering a losing streak against Notre Dame, but the Wolverines have beaten the Fighting Irish for the past two years in a row, defeating both Charlie Weis and Brian Kelly. The Irish fan base's expectations for Kelly are becoming increasingly high as they expect him to take Notre Dame to the National Championship very soon. He will be hard pressed to win this game against Michigan. If Hoke can defeat Kelly, it will do very little for Hoke, but it will do serious damage to Kelly, who from this loss will have his potential National Championship hopes snuffed out in the beginning of the season, and that will place him in the hot seat.

The game against Notre Dame will likely be very close and very exciting as it has been for the past two years. Both teams are in rebuilding stages, and against each other, they are pretty equally matched. But the pressure to win is more on Kelly than on Hoke.

3. Snap the Losing Streak against Michigan State

Priority Level: Very High

Against friends of mine who go or went to Michigan State, I tend to argue that Michigan's last three losses against the Spartans were not because Michigan State got better, but because Michigan got significantly worse. I often contend that, had Lloyd Carr not retired, it would be highly unlikely that Michigan would have lost three years in a row. Then it leads to a tiresome rant how most of the blame therefore must go to Rodriguez, who shifted recruiting away from in-state and gave up valuable prospects to the Spartans, and really didn't take the rivalry all that seriously.

Presumably, that's all going to change under Brady Hoke, who has put up countdown clocks in the locker rooms ticking down to the game against Michigan State (and Ohio State as well). Spartan fans soiled their undies as they watched Michigan's best in-state prospects commit to U-M, especially on defense, thanks to Hoke and new defensive coordinator Greg Mattison. Nothing would further re-establish Michigan's dominance over their in-state rival than for Hoke to win against the Spartans in his first year.

Most sites and blogs predicting Michigan's win-loss ratio for 2011 consider this game to be the difference-maker. Michigan's schedule before they face the Spartans is really just as light as it was last year (with a possible exception against Notre Dame), and against Michigan State the Wolverines will really be able to show just how much progress they have made. If this were any other year, it probably wouldn't matter as much, but because Michigan has lost three times to the Spartans under Rodriguez, Michigan fans will be looking for a palpable difference from Hoke's regime. This will be it. It will be a very important game for Hoke to win and, just like it would have for Rodriguez, it will quiet much of the negative speculation around his future at Michigan.

4. Show Remarkable Improvement on Defense

Priority Level: High

Rich Rodriguez's supporters believe that it was the defense (and Rodriguez's defensive coordinator, Greg Robinson) that caused his departure, often overlooking the fact that Rodriguez was himself the head coach, not just the offensive coordinator, and hired Greg Robinson. As a result, when Dave Brandon fired Rodriguez, he sought out a defensive-minded coach, Brady Hoke, who in turn hired Greg Mattison, someone whom the majority of the Michigan fan base agrees is a stellar defensive coordinator.

The Wolverines finished 2010 ranked 112th in total defense, so Hoke and Mattison have their work cut out for them. They will be hard pressed to show a tangible improvement right away, returning to teaching toughness and fundamentals. However, let's not forget that these are the same players Rodriguez recruited and suffered losses.

The question surrounding Michigan's defensive situation for 2011 is this: was the terrible defense a result of personnel (i.e. lack of talent in the players) or a result of poor coaching (i.e. lack of fundamentals)? The optimists among Michigan's fans tend to think it is the latter, that Michigan's defensive backs couldn't effectively tackle because they weren't taught properly. Others argue that it was because the defensive players were placed into positions which they weren't comfortable playing.

In any scenario, the expectation now is that Hoke and Mattison will have to get it right. Cornerback Troy Woolfolk should be able to play in 2011 after a serious ankle injury kept him off the field in 2010, and his playing should create a noticeable difference. There is also Will Campell being returned to the defensive line, after Rodriguez inexplicably moved him to the offensive line last year. (If memory serves, Rodriguez claimed it was because he lacked personnel on the offensive line.) Campbell says he always preferred to be on defense, and by all account he is a beast who loves to hit.

Notice that we didn't say the expectation was to show "marginal" improvement on defense. No, for Hoke to truly show that he is moving Michigan football back to a tradition of toughness, the defense must improve remarkably. It must make big stops when it has to, mistakes must be kept to a minimum, and for the love of God they have to tackle in open space. If all the optimists are right, then that's going to happen, because Hoke's focus right now is on the defense. This year, it will have to be.

5. Win His First Game

Priority Level: High

In the grand scheme of things, this could probably fit into a "medium" priority level, considering that it's arguably more important to beat the Buckeyes and the Spartans than the Western Michigan Broncos. Still, Hoke knows that this will be his inaugural game as Michigan's head coach (his dream job) and that it shouldn't be overlooked.

Like any first game of the schedule, this sets the tone for the rest of the season. Rich Rodriguez's tenure at Michigan started with a loss to Utah, and while his supporters will argue that it wasn't entirely unexpected, it still served as an appropriate precursor to the rest of his career at Michigan: high build-up, little substance. One could even say that his tenure never recovered or never stood a chance after that game. It will largely be the same for Brady Hoke. Western Michigan, however, is not nearly as tough to beat as Utah, and all things considered it should be a relatively easy win for Michigan. The Broncos will show up to play, so Michigan can't snooze it's way through this one.

We rank this priority "high" not because meeting the expectation will bring great satisfaction, but failing to meet it will bring great disappointment. The last thing Brady Hoke wants is to start out his head coaching career at Michigan on a sour note. (As I said, in the grand scheme of things, this one game against a mid-level opponent is not super important, and if Hoke loses he can easily recover credibility with wins over Michigan's rivals.) Many have said that, given all Hoke has accomplished in the offseason, all he has left to do is prove himself on the field, and this game will be the first real test of that. He must win it.

6. Defeat San Diego State

Priority Level: Medium

While at least some (maybe most) of the Michigan fan base would drop their jaws if Michigan lost to Hoke's old team of San Diego State, personally I wouldn't be all that surprised. Hoke turned San Diego State into a winner in two years and defeated Navy in the Poinsetta Bowl. His SDSU Aztecs also came very close to defeating TCU. When they play Michigan in 2011, they'll be looking to win.

At best I think this game will be awkward rather than embarrassing or challenging. Hoke certainly has the personnel on offense (i.e. Denard Robinson) to win against his old team, who didn't have the raw talent to which established programs traditionally have access. However, I wouldn't count out San Diego State. They were more or less primed and ready to execute Al Borges's offense, and they did well against good teams. They will do well against Michigan, but can they win? That's to be determined.

Michigan needs every win it can get in 2011, and if San Diego State loses it will hurt more in the short term than the long term. It will be embarrassing, yes, to lose to Hoke when he hopped a flight to Ann Arbor, but the Aztecs aren't as big a program as Michigan, and as such, they don't have as much to lose. Michigan and Hoke, on the other hand, need to win, and they need to win now.

Still, a loss for Michigan in this game will only remind fans how good Hoke was at San Diego State, and that the Aztecs are mainly reaping the benefits of his coaching. It's hard to say that such a game is a win-win for Hoke, but there really isn't much upside or downside. It won't hurt too badly if we lose, and it won't feel too great if we win.

7. Notch at least 8 wins

Priority Level: High

With all of the returning starters on the roster, Hoke and Brandon are going to look pretty ridiculous if Michigan fails to even go a bowl game this year, but I won't entirely be surprised if the Wolverines go 6-6. That doesn't mean they should. Yes, Denard will be adapting to the pro-style offense as best he can (let's not forget he ran it in high school), and in any transition there's going to be growing pains, which could result in losses. However, despite what Hoke's detractors might say, Michigan isn't starting over from scratch. The Wolverines have at least two effective QBs on the roster (incoming freshman Russell Bellomy has yet to prove himself), a host of speedy wide-receivers, and a decent potential running back in Stephen Hopkins.

The defense may be bad, but we'll at least have a four-man rush in Greg Mattison's 4-3 system, which probably will be loads more effective than Rodriguez's 3-3-5 system. (It certainly worked when Rodriguez occasionally had four linemen rushing the opponent's quarterback.)

However, more than anything else, it will come down to wins and losses. Hoke's record must be better than Rodriguez's for him to survive at Michigan. Fans may have gotten used to 10-win seasons under Lloyd Carr, but because Rodriguez failed to even reach 8 wins in three years, fans would love nothing more than to get back to the standard. Eight wins would be welcomed warmly rather than with scorn. In the past, 8-4 seasons weren't exactly appreciated, but this year it will mean that Michigan is on its way to being a contender again.

8. Beat Ohio State

Priority Level: Extremely High

If you thought snapping the losing streak against Michigan State was important, then this priority is practically a matter of life and death. Michigan has suffered three straight losses to the Spartans but six straight losses to the Buckeyes. Something must be done about this. If there was ever a game in which Hoke had to prove himself, this would be it. He must snap the losing streak against Ohio State.

Really, all the signs are there for Hoke to win the game. The Buckeyes are reeling from scandal, Tressel has resigned, and quarterback Terrelle Pryor has flown the coop before he could be investigated by the NCAA. Ohio State's recruiting has tangibly suffered. There are dozens of question marks surrounding the program's future. High on the list is who will play quarterback for the Buckeyes: either 25-year-old fifth-year-senior Joe Bauserman or incoming freshman Braxton Miller. Bauserman was Pryor's backup and therefore has the necessary experience, but the fans don't have much confidence in him because he's not the savior-level athlete that Pryor was. Miller is a highly-touted recruit who was believed to eventually replace Pryor, but he might be forced to step into the position early. However, despite Buckeye fans thinking that Miller will be awesome, he might be prone to the same on-field mistakes as Michigan's Tate Forcier.

With Tressel gone, Luke Fickell is OSU's interim head coach with no experience at the position. He may turn out to be Ohio State's version of Lloyd Carr, or he might turn out to be Ohio State's version of Tim Brewster. Hoke's experience as head coach easily puts him above Fickell at the position, and he knows it's time for Michigan to capitalize on Ohio State's woes. Fickell knows that, if he really wants to replace Jim Tressel as Ohio State's permanent head coach, he must win this game. But for Hoke, a loss would be unacceptable. Michigan's losing streak alone is enough reason.

Of course, Ohio State fans would love if the Buckeyes can still beat Michigan even when they've suffered so much, but Michigan's needs to win this far more than the Buckeyes do. They need to undo the losing streak and make the rivalry competitive again. It's no fun (really, for either side) when one team is completely dominant. This is Michigan's opportunity to restore what has been lost, and for Hoke to end his first season on a very good note. 

I said this for Rodriguez, and I'll say it for Hoke: it's hard to criticize the coach when he beats Ohio State. Hoke needs to do that. He needs to show that he is not only a different coach than Rodriguez, but a better one. Rodriguez could never beat Ohio State. 

If Hoke could do that in his first year, all will start to feel right in the world.

Does Michigan Need a Mascot?

In his time as Michigan's athletic director, David Brandon has made a number of changes.

He oversaw and approved the renovations to Michigan Stadium, a project which had been started by former athletic director Bill Martin and University of Michigan president Mary Sue Coleman. The renovated stadium extended its capacity to 109,901. (It regularly exceeds that on game day.)

He planned and organized "The Big Chill at the Big House," a special hockey game in which the Wolverines played the Spartans outdoors on an ice rink in the football stadium. (Michigan shut out the Spartans 5-0.)

And when Michigan and Rich Rodriguez were facing allegations from the NCAA, Brandon, by all accounts, handled the situation perfectly, with poise and professionalism.

After Michigan's tumultuous and unsuccessful third year under Rodriguez, Brandon decided to hire a new football coach. He conducted a search that resulted in the hiring of Brady Hoke from San Diego State. Hoke was a Michigan Man and former Carr assistant who had been known for having coached the defensive line. The hire was initially met with skepticism, but Hoke won over the vast majority of the Michigan faithful with his opening press conference. He also revitalized Michigan's recruiting.

As the Wolverines headed into spring practice, it seemed like Brandon had made all the right decisions. He had approved a plan to build new, high-definition scoreboards in Michigan Stadium, and he scheduled the stadium's first ever night game for September 10, 2011, when Michigan would face rival Notre Dame. Like the Big Chill, the first night game is considered a special event. (It is being marketed as "Under the Lights.") As such, Michigan and Notre Dame also designed special "throwback" uniforms for the game. When Brandon presented Michigan's throwback uniform publicly, it was met with mixed reactions.

Brandon had also been in somewhat hot water with Michigan fans for being a part of the Big Ten Conference's schedule overhaul with the addition of Nebraska. The matter that upset fans was the notion that the Michigan-Ohio State game would be moved to the middle of the schedule. The game is traditionally played at the end of the regular season, which amplifies its intensity. The Big Ten eventually decided to put Michigan and Ohio State in separate divisions but protect the rivalry so that it is played towards the end of the regular season.

Now Brandon may be causing even more uproar. On Thursday, June 16, he spoke at length with Michigan Today about the possibility of Michigan having a mascot. Brandon didn't seem opposed to the idea. If anything, he lauded it. "You can't get your picture taken with a Block M," he said. "Mascots are really embraced by the youth demographic and we want to take advantage of that."

His basis for this point seems to come from an observation that young Michigan fans (ages 4-10) want to pose for pictures with rival mascots. "I'm struck by the fact that when opposing teams come to our stadium, and they bring a mascot, all of our young fans are lined up to see if they can get a picture taken with it, whether it's the Penn State Nittany Lion or Sparty," Brandon told Michigan Today. "That's a little annoying to me."

While Brandon's irritation with rival mascots is legitimate, his statement that "all of our young fans" partake in photo-ops with them cannot be true. Are there a few children who want to get a picture with Sparty or the Nittany Lion? It's certainly possible. However, do all Michigan youngsters feel this way? No. The argument that youngsters base their interest in a football team solely on the team's mascot (or whether or not they have one) is dubious.

To be fair, the purpose of mascots makes enough sense. A mascot is an easily identifiable part of a football team who more or less remains constant. In many ways, a mascot is an immortal member of the team. But are mascots necessary? Some people will say that they are.

Michigan Today, clearly in favor of adding a mascot, sees Brandon as a Crusader for Change, someone who is striving to lead Michigan football into the future. They compare him to Fielding Yost, who as Michigan's athletic director in 1927 made the decision to adopt two live wolverines (in "the spirit of competition") named Bennie and Biff to be present at games. The live wolverines, however, were so ferocious that they tried to chew their way out of the cage, and after two games Yost decided that perhaps they weren't such a good idea after all. Michigan Today also describes the other mascots that students have attempted to create: most notably, in the 1980s, Willy the Wolverine, which was repeatedly spurned by the athletic department of the time. Although Michigan Today insists that the vast majority of students were in favor of the mascot, many Michigan fans were staunchly opposed to it. The reason: Willy the Wolverine looked too much like Wisconsin's mascot, Bucky the Badger.

There is also the notion that Michigan perhaps has a tradition of no-mascots, which Michigan Today argues cannot be true since it has attempted repeatedly to have mascots in the past. However, while Michigan has indeed made steps to adopt a mascot, the fact that it consistently failed in doing so is only further evidence that it shouldn't. Dave Brandon, according to his interview with Michigan Today, apparently disagrees with this.

"We're interested in doing a mascot but it has to be something that fans love, that children love and everyone can embrace," he explained. "So far we haven't figured out a way to do it. Until we come up with something we love, we don't have a mascot." Thus, according to Michigan Today, the obstacle is not so much the idea but the design.

Predictably, there was outrage. Brian Cook on MGoBlog said he "took a rage day" to calm down before eventually sending Dave Brandon an email respectfully requesting that the matter of having a mascot be permanently tabled. Brandon's reply was polite, if somewhat condescending:

Please don't be too concerned over this life-changing topic!

All will be OK...

Have a great weekend!

Dave

Meanwhile, the M Zone blog also wrote an emotional piece on how mascots have no place in Michigan Stadium: "You know what's annoying to me? Not realizing you don't need some fur-ball on the sidelines to get kids hooked on Michigan football or to become lifelong maize and blue fanatics. It's been working pretty darn well the last 130+ years without one."

Realizing the ensuing turmoil over something that hadn't even gone into production yet, Brandon quickly told reporters that a Michigan mascot was currently not an active project. 

"There are many other priorities at the present time. And it may never happen," he told AnnArbor.com. "It is a difficult thing to do well, as we have found out with past efforts in this area."

Brandon has been championed and criticized by both sides. He is considered to care greatly about tradition because he hired Brady Hoke, yet he is also believed to be indifferent towards Michigan's traditions because of his decisions in the Big Ten, the throwback uniforms, and now considering a mascot. One minute he is called the defender of Michigan history and the next he is called a corporate sellout to Adidas, who is willing to sacrifice tradition in the name of profit. He could be both, or he could be neither.

His dismissal of the fans and their passion is no surprise for someone in his position. (Rich Rodriguez infamously said that Michigan fans should get a life.) To Brandon, it must seem amusing, if not sometimes annoying, that Michigan fans somehow feel they have a legitimate say in the decisions the athletic department makes. The Michigan football program, after all, is not a democracy, nor is it a republic. Brandon was not elected to his position by Michigan fans. So, strictly speaking, they have no say in what he does.

Yet Brandon would be foolish to be so dismissive of the fans. It is the fans who buy tickets to games, who buy merchandise, whose constant dedication allows Michigan's football program to be so financially successful. If Brandon has an interest in continuing to generate revenue, and he clearly does, as all athletic directors do, then he must not bite the hand that feeds him.

There is an age-old saying in business: give the people what they want. Brandon should know this. The saying is not "give the people what they don't want."

If Michigan adopts a mascot, particularly as someone who wears a wolverine costume, will there be Michigan fans who like it? Certainly. There are always fans of Michigan who like anything and everything that Michigan does. But Brandon said that, if Michigan were to have a mascot, it must be something that everybody loves. This will never happen. There will always be some who think any mascot is a bad idea. Michigan has existed for so long without a mascot that to add one now in 2011 would be a breach of tradition. It would feel strange to say the least.

Does Brandon have a point about the children liking mascots? To some degree, he does, but there are so many of us who just needed to see Michigan in action to become fanatics. We fell in love with the greatest helmet in college football. We fell in love with the fight song, with the maize and blue uniforms, with the Go Blue Banner, with the Big House. We didn't need a mascot, so why would our children and grandchildren? There are so many parts of Michigan tradition that adding a mascot would seem extraneous.

Some changes are good. Keeping Michigan's facilities updated allows for the players to train and practice with state-of-the-art equipment and hopefully become better athletes. Renovating the Big House allows for more seats, which means more fans can watch the game.

What about Michigan's uniforms for the night game against Notre Dame? While the wearing of a throwback jersey can be seen as a one-time thing, the addition of a mascot would be a permanent change. It would become a constant part of the culture at Michigan, just as Sparty is at Michigan State. If someone didn't like the new mascot, it may become hard to look at it every time there's a game.

However, to suggest that there are no Michigan fans craving a mascot would be wrong. Go around the tailgates before a game and you'll see plenty of fans who showcase a stuffed wolverine, either the actual animal or a plush doll, as a part of their experience. There is also a Michigan fan who dresses up like a maize and blue Batman. These instances exist largely because Michigan does not have a defined mascot. Because having a mascot is so expected as a part of football (and sports teams in general), some Michigan fans feel they must create one.

Personally, I tend to err on the side of tradition. If we haven't traditionally had a mascot, then we really shouldn't adopt one now. There are teams out there who may have felt that they've needed a mascot to help them win games or contribute to the game day experience.

As the winningest program in college football, Michigan clearly wasn't one of them. It got along just fine.

Michigan's Throwback Jerseys Receive Mixed Reactions

In a special press conference Friday night, Michigan athletic director Dave Brandon unveiled what will be worn by the Wolverines during Michigan Stadium's first night game, which will be played against the Notre Dame Fighting Irish on September 10, 2011.

Weeks before the unveiling, photos of early designs of the throwback uniforms had been leaked by the Detroit Free Press. Reactions from the Michigan faithful to the leaked photos showed almost unanimous dismay, but Brandon quickly told reporters that those designs were nothing like what Michigan would be wearing.

It seems the actual design wasn't that far off.

On Wednesday, June 8, a reader at MGoBlog stumbled upon another photo from the online catalog of the M-Den, the Michigan athletic department's official store for merchandise and apparel. Likewise, the photo was quickly removed. The goal of the athletic department, it seemed, was to keep the unveiling a surprise. Yet the surprise, as it happened, got out. Some Michigan fans were hoping that it was all a marketing ploy. They were wrong: the picture on the M-Den was indeed the same design as the unveiled jerseys.

Michigan's "legacy uniforms," as Dave Brandon calls them, features a mixture of Michigan's modern look with different parts of the uniform designs of Michigan's early history. This is largely why Brandon insists it is not a "throwback"—at least, not in the strictest sense. The legacy jerseys contain a retro-style Block-M on the front, with 1880s-style stitching over it. There's also the player number on the back with the same stitching. On the front, the player number is small and on the upper side, adjacent to Adidas's retro logo, which rests on the other side. Most notably, however, is the use of maize stripes on the shoulders of the jersey. In the leaked designs, this was what primarily received outcry from the fan community, including several blog writers.

Finally, the throwback uniform's helmet, while still being the traditional Michigan winged helmet, features player numbers on the sides.

Michigan Football's official Facebook page has already received thousands of comments, both positive and negative, on the new uniforms. "We did this with the Big Chill, and frankly it was a little bit of a test for us," said Brandon. "Initially when we launched, unveiled the Big Chill uniforms, like everything else, there were people who loved them and people who didn't love them and that's almost part of the fun of this."

Player reactions were mostly positive. "I like them," said offensive center David Molk. "They're interesting. They're unique. They're different. I mean, we've had the same jerseys for as long as I can remember. It's kind of cool to see something different."

"I love the stripes, man; I'm not even going to lie to you," said wide receiver Je'Ron Stokes. "The Block M, everything. It's something new, and it's original. It's fresh."

Quarterback Denard Robinson and defensive tackle Ryan Van Bergen were the models for the uniforms at the unveiling. They received a sneak peek Friday morning.

"It's tight!" said Robinson, seeing the uniform for the first time. "People thought the stripes weren't going to be right, but I like it. These jerseys are crazy sick right now. I mean, if you're a part of something like this, the University of Michigan, and they got throwbacks on, man—it's crazy."

He especially liked the Block M on the front and the stripes on the shoulders, despite rumors that the designs would be unattractive. It's interesting that Denard pointed these out so specifically and mentioned that people thought the stripes were "going to look bad," because it shows that Denard was clearly aware of the circulating rumors and he may be more in touch with internet chatter than we realize.

"My arms look good in this jersey," he added.

Across the internet, reactions to the uniforms have been mixed. Most of the apprehension, however, seems to have dissipated. "They don't look quite as dumb in pads," wrote Tim on MGoBlog.

"I'll probably get crap for saying this, but I like them," wrote Brad at Maize and Blue Nation.

"All in all, I must say my opinion has gone from 'these are complete disasters' to 'not bad'," wrote the Wolverine Blog. "The shoulder stripes look much, much better when worn over actual football pads, and I really like having the uniform numbers on the side of the helmets."

Some blogs, however, have given scathing reviews. "Those suck ass," writes the MZone blog. "In general, I hate throwback jerseys - even when the design isn't as obnoxious as the one above. Because they are nothing - NOTHING - more than a money grab. Period."

Here, the MZone raises an important point. The concept of throwback uniforms, while sometimes exciting to a fan base, is usually driven more by the desire to profit off them. In the press conference alone, Brandon made sure to mention that these uniforms were already available for sale at the M-Den, and the jerseys of the players would be auditioned off after the night game. Also, if you went on Facebook and clicked "like" on the uniform's page, you'd be able to win tickets to the Notre Dame game, which provides even more incentive that feeds into the throwback jerseys. This leads many (such as the MZone, see above) to have a cynical disposition when it comes to what throwback jerseys mean and what they entail.

Adidas and other sports apparel companies make millions by designing and creating "throwback" apparel, both for players and for the fans. They make money from athletic departments through taking the time to design the jerseys, going through multiple designs, and then, when the athletic department finally likes one, Adidas makes more revenue by putting them into production for the players—and later distributing them to the M-Den for fans.

Brandon noted that, when the hockey uniforms for the Big Chill were unveiled, the athletic department "couldn't keep them on the shelves" because of their popularity and how quickly they were selling. However, while Michigan athletics is clearly a source of high revenue, there's something else to it. Denard and the players are clearly excited to play in these uniforms. Denard's reaction in particular shows that he absolutely loves Michigan and everything about it. So, while people may buy into and even purchase the throwback uniforms, thus making the uniforms generate larger revenue for the athletic department, it's also important to consider that the athletic department is providing merchandise and apparel for something that people love: Michigan athletics.

"It just shows that Michigan fans love these special opportunities to do something unique and to do something different," added Brandon.

Personally, I never thought Michigan needed a throwback jersey. I still don't. (I particularly don't care for the numbers on the side of the helmets, mainly because I think the winged helmet is perfect the way it is.) However, seeing the uniform at the unveiling, I have to admit that it could have been a lot worse. Notre Dame's throwback jerseys for this game, by comparison, are horrible. If I were someone who was trying to pick between Michigan and Notre Dame as my favorite college football program, and these jerseys had to be considered, Notre Dame would be out of the running. People will see the two jerseys on the field on September 10, and it will be no contest that Michigan's is clearly the better-looking one.

When asked if these jerseys would be featured more often than just the night game, Dave Brandon made sure to clarify that this was just a one-time thing. "These things are fun because they're one-off," he said. "It's a little bit like the Big Chill. If you tried to do the Big Chill every year, I think it would lose some of its uniqueness and some of the things that really made it special, and it's probably the same thing with this."