2016 Non-Con

Submitted by jimmyshi03 on

Perhaps the one thing Brandon did decently after losing the ND series was attempting to fill the void with good future opponents, including Florida (at JerryWorld, but better than nothing) U-Dub, Arkansas, Virginia Tech, UCLA, Texas and Oklahoma. But next year is hot garbage, aside from the return of Wisconsin to the schedule. Michigan may well be facing three new coaches (though I'd doubt CU makes a change and George O'Leary is his own boss at the moment). Does anyone recall if this is largely the result of the move the 9-game conference schedule or a lack of creativity in finidng a good Power-5 opponent, or a combination of the two? 

Two of the teams currently have winning records (including Hawaii beating CU), but I'd imagine Brandon was counting on UCF to be the strongest of the three, and they just lost to Fuman. But hey, at least its a good way to break in a new quarterback and linebacking corps. 

And, it's rare for a schedule to have three past BCS selections, I suppose.

MLaw06

September 21st, 2015 at 1:57 PM ^

I kind of like the warm-up (but still FBS) games.  I think we need a few games to see what we have.  I wish we had UNLV and Oregon State before Utah this year - I think it could have made a big difference.

Moonlight Graham

September 21st, 2015 at 2:52 PM ^

slate gives the team a good opportunity to get out of gate really strong after a second offseason with Harbaugh's staff. Granted, Hawaii/UNLV are MAC equivalents but they're not Directional Michigan schools so they "look" a bit better on the schedule. Colorado is indeed a Pac 12/P5 opponent. And Central Florida was *quite recently* in a "BCS conference and bowl." UM scheduled UCF about the time Bortles was leading them to a win against Baylor in the Fiesta Bowl.  

LSAClassOf2000

September 21st, 2015 at 2:04 PM ^

It looks like the switch to the nine-game conference schedule slowly begins to sort itself out in terms of overall quality of opponents in the OOC schedule as we move forward, at least looking at the spots currently filled, but next year is going to be a ho-hum three weeks at the beginning with pockets of "meh" throughout the season in general really. 

I hope Bielema somehow manages to hang on until 2019 at Arkansas, just for the potential comedic value. 

umbig11

September 21st, 2015 at 2:23 PM ^

As we continue to play cross-divisional games in the future Delaney has instituted the parity based scheduling policy. Teams at the top of each division are supposed to play the top teams from the other division. We shall see what that looks like when they release future B1G schedules.

WolverineHistorian

September 21st, 2015 at 2:58 PM ^

Getting Colorado back on the schedule was something the athletic department wanted to do for years, I assume. The Hail Mary in Ann Arbor and the Fail Mary in Boulder made the media absolutely fall for this matchup. When we thrashed them to start the championship season in 97, Keith Jackson and Bob Griese were practically mourning over the concept that there were no more future meetings scheduled. The main difference from then to now is how far Colorado has fallen as a program. They were one on the most dominant programs in the country and that beating they took at the big house was the start of the program's decline save for a couple years with Garry Barnett. They went to hell long before Michigan did and I don't believe they have a Harbaugh to turn things around. Their dynasty years were built off of Bo's assistant.

lilpenny1316

September 21st, 2015 at 3:03 PM ^

The SEC basically gets a home game in Atlanta and Dallas every year against top competition without a return trip.  Between Indy and Chicago, we have two great venues to host those teams.  I could better understand playing Florida in Dallas if there was a return game in the Midwest.  If they're too chicken to play in our stadium, then at least play in our region.

drzoidburg

September 21st, 2015 at 9:08 PM ^

that'd be even more infuriating to me than a one off. At least this way both sides can pretend they can't fit 2 games in the schedule, but doing it like LSU-wisconsin in much smaller stadiums in both states is a disgrace. I can't find any defensible reason for that. It's purely tv "wow" factor, but fortunately, it seems the fans are getting over neutral site

NittanyFan

September 21st, 2015 at 3:24 PM ^

if Michigan finished 2015 on a real high and is a perceived MNC contender for 2016 --- perhaps they can work with ESPN to get a better OOC game.  ESPN has done this sort of thing before.  It's a potential "win-win": Michigan gets a better OOC game for a stronger schedule, and ESPN gets a game to show that would get big ratings.

Michigan of course has one OOC opening in 2018.  Hawaii and COlorado are already booked for 2018, but UCF has only 1 OOC game out of 4.  Considering they're struggling now, they may be amenable to lessening their own 2016 schedule, and moving the 2016 game back to 2018.

NittanyFan

September 21st, 2015 at 6:31 PM ^

We're not at a point where either:

(1) "win your conference, you get a guaranteed chance to play for a title" --- which exists in FCS and Division 3.  (some conferences like the Ivy, MEAC, SWAC, and NESCAC willingly don't participate in the playoffs).

OR

(2) "there's a clear and very transparent formula for determining which teams make the playoffs" --- which exists in Division 2.

Make it there, and it's a true National Championship.  Now we either have conferences with basically no access (Sun Belt, MAC), or teams that get chosen for the playoff without a transparent reason why (nobody can tell you exactly why Ohio State made it in over Baylor OR TCU).

drzoidburg

September 21st, 2015 at 9:21 PM ^

your (2) is hardly necessary depending how large the playoff. There's no such formula the basketball committee is bound by. I don't see how that could be done either since there's not enough data points - not enough H2H or common opponents for the P5 teams. For instance, 1 game between BIG and SEC this year and 1 between PAC and SEC, how to create with this a formula that's better than old poll style points? IMO, 8 teams with auto bids and 3 at large and 1st round on campus would accomplish a few things - preserve the regular season and nonconference game significance, give further incentive to finish top 4, and pretty much eliminates controversy since all deserving teams will qualify. I would not want to see it expand beyond that however

NittanyFan

September 21st, 2015 at 11:54 PM ^

(1) You are right, a formula would never really work for determining CFB playoff participants. Teams will never be "connected" enough for a robust FBS formula.  That's why I'd like to get as many conference champions in as possible: then at least we have the fallback "angry you weren't selected?  Don't blame us, win your conference!"

(2) 8 auto (for 10 FBS conferences) and 4 at-large is fine with me.  I guess that's contradictory given I said earlier "win your conference and you should be in."  But ultimately: missing an 12-1 Big XII Champion is an issue to me, while missing an 10-3 Sun Belt Champion is not.  Besides, it's more entertaining when teams 11 and 12 are at-large Big Ten and SEC teams as opposed to automatic bids Georgia Southern and Louisiana Tech.

(3) I love your 12-team idea because it incentivizes a top-4 finish.

(4) The usual caveat: we'd need to go to 12+ team conferences.  Conference title game mandated.

McSomething

September 21st, 2015 at 3:40 PM ^

Yes and no. Yes, it's useless to bitch about the schedule we have, because there's really no changing it. However, making a big enough stink about it can potentially (not in any way guaranteed, mind you) lead better scheduling in the future.

Danwillhor

September 21st, 2015 at 4:15 PM ^

no matter what happens this year we need a strong year 2 under Harbaugh. Every other team does it so I'm fine with a bad ooc schedule for a year. Need wins and more than the year before. I'm ok with this.

StephenRKass

September 21st, 2015 at 4:37 PM ^

I'm just crabby about the expansion of the Big 10 in general. Even beyond the non-conference schedule. I'm a troglydyte who doesn't even like Nebraka and Penn State. Let alone Maryland and Rutgers. As an example, I've wanted to go see Michigan at Wisconsin. The fact that Michigan hasn't played Wisconsin for 5 years is inexcusable. 

I really would love to see Michigan play ND about every other year, home and away. And I'd really love to see Michigan play a marquee team about every other year, home and away. I don't care who, but I want a decent team . . . Texas, A & M, Stanford, USC, UCLA, Washington, Florida, Florida State, Miami, Alabama, Georgia, LSU, Oklahoma. I'd like to have a home game against a non con Power 5 weaker team. Give them a bit more of a payday, because they aren't getting a home game out of it. Oregon State, Duke, Georgia Tech, Virginia, Kentucky, Cincinnati, Louisville, Rice, Connecticut, Wake Forest, Boston College, West Virginia, Iowa State, Kansas State, etc. I'd like to see the rest of the schedule filled with MAC teams and the like. If this happened, it would mean two non-conf. games on the road every four years, ND and one other.

nappa18

September 21st, 2015 at 4:55 PM ^

Loved and miss the "old" B1G. Penn State and Nebraska are acceptable and did bring us up to 12 teams and a championship playoff game which can have Final 4 implications.remember how the Big 12 (now 10) got shut out of the playoffs last year because there was no true conference championship. But Maryland and Rutgers? One of Delaneys debacles.

mgoblue0970

September 21st, 2015 at 6:51 PM ^

The Big12 got shut out because their ridiculous tie breaking rules kept them from naming an outright champion.  A conference championship would have helped.  A lack of any direction or leadership at the conference level hurt more.

McSomething

September 21st, 2015 at 5:01 PM ^

I was not a big fan of adding Nebraska to the conference and splitting into two divisions. Mainly because these schedule issues were inevitable. I only half jokingly believe the Big Ten should say "screw it" and jump to 20 teams, with two 10 team divisions. That way the conference name isn't a total misnomer (from a certain point of view), and the split could be the original 10 and then everyone else. But that alignment (considering the "not originals" division would be very widespread) feels almost like a "because get off my lawn!" viewpoint. But I really don't care.

drzoidburg

September 21st, 2015 at 9:26 PM ^

i'm pissed about it to the extent i'd rather see michigan go independent and keep msu/osu on the schedule, or hell even join the PAC, anything to get rid of shameless cash grabs like maryland/rutgers, and perennial shitcans like indiana what would we lose out on, iowa wisconsin every 7 years? Again, go independent, schedule them every 6 years instead, along with msu, osu, and bluebloods like usc texas etc, would be far preferable to this

Maizen

September 21st, 2015 at 7:45 PM ^

Guys, Michigan can't play a Top 25 team every week. They are already in a Division with OSU, MSU, and PSU and Wisconin, Nebraska, Minesota, etc will all cycle on in the coming years. And as you have already mentioned, there are good non conference games coming up.  With only 85 scholarships you just can't put yourself through the ringer like that. I'll believe SOS matters to the playoff comittee when they put a two loss team in the playoff over a 1 loss team. Until then it's all talk. And did i mention people are expecting Harbaugh to bring us national titles? You don't do that by giving yourself moe chances to lose in the non conference. Let's all move on from this subject.

drzoidburg

September 21st, 2015 at 9:29 PM ^

3 crap OOC teams in a row + indiana maryland rutgers is a far cry from "top 25 every week" I even say the same to SEC West fans, especially teams like ole miss that have *four* cupcakes along with vanderbilt and kentucky. That's half the goddamn season down the drain

Frank Chuck

September 22nd, 2015 at 4:18 AM ^

- 8 home games makes

- 1 of our road games is at Rutgers.

- The other 3 road games are at Michigan State, Iowa, and Ohio State. But our 2 major rivals might be significantly weaker because of important departures.

I'm excited for what Michigan can accomplish next season. If O'Korn is legit and Butt returns, then I like our chances.