It always cracks me up when Michigan people make the comments and don't look at their own modern era (that they've lived through) that is littered with losses at home to powerhouses like Appalachian State, Toledo and Utah.
I hope you aren't talking about me. Appalachian State will always equal a bad loss. Toledo will always equal a bad loss. Utah, however, I’m glad you brought them up, because it helps to prove my point on context. You look at the name Utah and assume it was a bad loss, but if you look at what that Utah team did that season, it is hard to say it was embarrassing at all. That year, Utah eked out a 25 to 23 victory over Michigan, ended the season undefeated, ranked as the #2 team in the country by the AP, #4 by the Coaches, and beat then #4 Alabama 31 to 17 in the Sugar Bowl. Again, if you just look at the name, you might think it was bad, but that is why you always have to look at the context.
The same Ohio Conference that produced the likes of John Heisman
This statement simply isn’t true. The Ohio Conference did not produce John Heisman. Ignoring the fact that the Ohio Conference didn’t exist until 1902, Heisman played for Brown (1887-1889) and Penn (1890-1891). He then had what I would call a coaching blip at Oberlin in 1892 and then in 1894. Oberlin would later become a founding member of the Ohio Conference in 1902 along with Ohio State. Since he only coached 2 of the 36 years he coached (15 out of his 274 games) at an institution that would later become a member of the Ohio Conference… that just isn’t enough to say the Ohio Conference produced him, especially since he started as a player in the Ivy League.
They are all legit, against legit competition at the time, I've confirmed it with a number of drunken tailgate historical scholars.
You have me here. I can’t beat the opinion of drunken tailgate historical scholars, but I do have a couple questions to ask them if you could pass them along. If the Ohio Conference was so legit, then why did Ohio state jump ship to the Western Conference (Big Ten) only 10 years after helping to found it? The Western Conference was founded in 1896, so why not join it then? Also, how come none of the Ohio Conference teams ever really were noticed on the national scene? None of them ever really made the rankings of their day. Can you explain this?
However, I do completely discount victories that Michigan tries to claim over such entities as: American Medical, Ann Arbor High School, Camp Grant, U Club, Cleveland AA, Detroit AC, Detroit Industial, Havard Club Chicago, Iowa Pre Flight, Michigan AA, Michigan MA, P&S Chicago and Quantico Marines - to name a few.
I’m not really going to defend any of these. What is the point, I’m not really qualified to talk about whether some of these wins are quality or not, nor will I question the wins Ohio State counts over Ohio Medical, the Dayton YMCA, the 17th Regiment, Columbus Barracks, Camp Sherman, Iowa Pre-Flight, Fort Knox, and the Great Lakes NAS. It really only amounts to 25 victories for Michigan, 13 for Ohio State, 31 for Texas, 50+ for Notre Dame (Stopped counting at 50, but saw more I think would meet your criteria). I would say though, you may be underestimating the difficulty of those games. Alabama only has a 4-3 record versus Birmingham High School. Essentially, every school counts these victories, so really nothing to see here.
I will say though that it is rather unpatriotic of you to criticize teams such as Michigan, Ohio State, Notre Dame, Texas, and all the others for playing the different military service teams like Iowa Pre Flight, Quantico Marines, the 17th Regiment, Camp Sherman, Fort Knox, and the Great Lakes NAS. These were great moral boosters for the war time effort and many college players were on these teams when they joined the military to serve their country.