Riiiiiight ... you’re harping about the “error of recency” thing again - Ohio State’s 47-45-4 Big Ten record against Michigan, over the past 104 years (the “recent” past).

Oh ... you mean you’ve given the Michigan Fan view on Elliott’s supposed infraction. Because he played the next week, and 42-13 ... Got it!

Cornell holds a 12-6 record over Michigan. Are you going to suggest that Cornell's program is historically better than Michigan's?

You've yet to explain exactly what Elliott should have been punished for - did he rape another student, or threaten to rape her for talking about having been raped?

Ohio State has a few championships under Smith's reign, as well. Of course, I'd imagine Buckeye fans would trade it all for a juicy tweet about professional 'rasslin' or milk ... you know - something more in the "public eye".

Perhaps that’s the prevailing view at Michigan, where things have been fucked up for some time. That isn't the prevailing view at many schools, including at Ohio State, I'd imagine - schools in which the AD has led a successful program that resulted in national championships.

Nope.

Gotcha!

Let’s recap ... first fifteen games of the series, played from 1897 to 1911: Michigan leads series, 13-0-2. From 1912 - the year Ohio State joined the Big Ten - Ohio State leads the series 47-45-4; and from 2000 on, Ohio State leads the series 13-3.

AD’s are only relevant when they say something that makes waves. That makes him more relevant.

What does Smith “being in the public eye” have to do with Smith directing a program that has won a national championship and multiple conference titles since the “tattoo scandal”? Which makes Smith "more relevant" - "being in the public eye" by tweeting incessantly about Judge Judy, or leading a program to a national…

LOL!

It doesn’t have to be either/or. No, I wouldn’t describe Michigan as “needing a jump-start”.

Yes - I mistyped.

Just discussing this article - which is the sillier supposition? That a team that has floundered for over a decade but which just managed a 10-3 season might still be in “need a jump-start” mode? Or that a program that has won a national championship and multiple conference titles since a “dumb tattoo scandal/vacated…

Michigan joined the Big Ten in 1896 - Ohio State began playing organized football in 1897, reaching a level of competence sufficient for acceptance into the Big Ten in 1912. Michigan had a 13-0-2 record prior to the Big Ten’s acceptance of Ohio State. From 1912 on - the year of Ohio State's entrance into the Big Ten -…

You'd make an EXCELLENT Michigan fan - little in the way of comprehension skills ...

Denying? No. Deflecting? Most certainly. And who can blame you? 3-13 THIS century? A losing record (45-47-4) following a 13-0-2 start to the series? Hell - if I were a Michigan fan I'd hang on to those 1890s/1900s wins like grim death, too - it's all you have ...

Speaking of "pumping your chest" ... they carry the same significance only if the team you're rooting for has gone 3-13 in the CURRENT CENTURY. Yes - Michigan's 13-0-2 stretch to end the nineteenth century/start the twentieth century tells us the exact same information about the two programs' relative strengths NOW as…

By my reckoning, a team that has sucked balls for over a decade but manages a 10-3 season the most recent year is much, MUCH closer to "needing a jump-start" than being considered a "traditional power". And if that 10-3 team - after a decade-plus of futility - is a "traditional power", what do we call programs like…