A Different Kind Of Football Armageddon
I have terrible news: David Brandon's pimp hand has badly malfunctioned and is now marching, Godzilla-style, on the greatest rivalry ever in the history of ever. This morning he showed up on WTKA to discuss Big Ten divisons and said this:
SAM WEBB: If you are making the decision, are Michigan and Ohio State in the same division?
[pregnant pause in which Brandon struggles valiantly against the malfunctioning pimp hand's electrosteam power source. "NO," he stammers. "MUST… NOT… SUBMIT." He feels like he's trapped in an episode of Star Trek, playing Kirk in any one of the dozens of episodes in which something in his brain compels him to evil. Sweat breaks out on his brow; he begins to tremble. The shaking increases in intensity, threatening to break out into violent convulsions! At any moment David Brandon's existential dilemma will come to a head! Things are afoot—
A twitch. Two twitches. Now a facial tic. All is silent. An unnatural calm descends.]
DAVID BRANDON: …No.
[Deep in a bunker underneath a Kenosha corn field, Barry Alvarez allows himself the deep rumbling bass laugh only the blackest hearts can muster. Yes. All according to plan.]
SAM WEBB: And why? [Ed: …GOD WHY?]
THE UNSPEAKABLE THING THAT POSSESSES THE BODY OF DAVID BRANDON: Because we're in a situation where one of the best things that could happen … would be the opportunity to play Ohio State twice.
As highlighted by Doctor Saturday, Ohio State seems awfully wishy-washy about the whole thing, too:
He said he has received only a couple of e-mails from people worried about the possibility of moving the Michigan game to earlier in the season. Whether those – and other critical opinions expressed on the Internet – are reflective of the broad fan base is impossible to know, Smith said.
"I know one thing for sure - that we're going to play (Michigan) every year," Smith said. "We may end up playing the last game of the year, or not. I just don't know that yet."
The "not" scenario will only come to pass if the two teams can play again and the Big Ten is trying to avoid the farce of a best-last-one-out-of-two scenario. And with both ADs at Michigan and Ohio State trying to prepare the fans for a soft landing, it's clear which way this is going: the stupidest possible way.
ONE: It is extremely unlikely that Michigan and Ohio State would ever actually score a championship game rematch. Splitting the two teams is a pointless exercise in hoping that once every ten years you get another one. This is no longer the 1970s.
TWO: Michigan's year-end opponent: Michigan State? Boy, that will fire up everyone on Rivalry Week: "It's Michigan! It's some team that's been within a game of .500 every year since SEC schools started recruiting black kids! On ABC!"
THREE: Whatever damage the rivalry sustains because of the split is going to vastly outweigh the piddling slice of extra revenue Michigan and Ohio State will get from a 1/12th split of the incremental bump the Big Ten Championship Game gets because maybe once every ten years they'll get to pit Michigan against Ohio State.
FOUR: Dennis Dodd thinks this is the way to go. QED.
Not that this matters. Apparently it's done. Get ready for Michigan-Ohio State sometime in October, not even playing for a division or anything, because the "TV people" really want it. Do I need to remind you about Mark Shapiro?
August 20th, 2010 at 1:47 PM ^
but I think that would be badass.
August 20th, 2010 at 3:27 PM ^
For sure, our maize jerseys would look awesome on thursday night!
/s
August 20th, 2010 at 1:16 PM ^
I certainly am one to Have them. though I don't necessarily understand them, nor do I know how to process them or articulate them after said processing. If I must be somewhere where the Scary is near, so be it. The Scary knows. I do not. I only cower.
August 20th, 2010 at 1:16 PM ^
else to add other than OUTRAGE.
this sucks. i guess there is no such thing as tradition, rivalry, pageantry etc when bigten cash is involved.
August 20th, 2010 at 1:17 PM ^
first assuming this happens the way it's rumored/proposed, i.e. Michigan and OSU in separate divisions, game played every year, but not the last regular game on the schedule; then this is how I see the thinking by the AD's and TV people.
1 - There were already complaints on the Rivalry game being pushed to after Thanksgiving, which kills all the on-campus (read as NON-TV based) fun. Destroys vacation for the players, coaches etc.
2 - Wisconsin and Penn State were the most vocal when the expansion exploration started, so I wouldn't start off blaming Michigan and Ohio State as the main driving force behind the reduction of the rivalry in favor of the Championship Game.
3 - Illinois, Pennsylvania, Ohio State and Michigan are the most populous states, Michigan lagging the other 3 by a couple million, but somehow have the largest population of Alumni, but this still means Penn State is going to have pull in this discussion, lots of pull.
So to summarize, there are strong forces that do not want the Rivalry center stage at the very end of the season, and they've won, since the Championship Game is happening and must be the last game of the season, moving the game one week earlier and then finishing with a non-conference cream puff gives Michigan the rest they need to be ready to win the Champtionship game, and finally;
you can bitch as much as you want about double takes, but you know deep down in places you don't talk about at parties, you want that extra game, you need that extra game.
August 20th, 2010 at 1:33 PM ^
Regarding #1:
Play tOSU as the last conference game of the season on the weekend before Thanksgiving. Schedule some MAC team as our Thanksgiving Turkey and to give us a week to rest up / tune up before the conference championship.
August 20th, 2010 at 1:17 PM ^
What about opening the season every year against Ohio State??? Move the rivalry to the exact opposit part of the season, and who knows maybe by keeping it the furthest possible distance away from the Championship Game, It could help to increase the likelyhood a season ending clash is arranged
August 20th, 2010 at 1:18 PM ^
Michigan-Ohio State sometime in October = mosque at ground zero.
August 20th, 2010 at 1:24 PM ^
That it's a pointless non-issue that haters are going to hate no matter what the real situation is? Good to know.
August 20th, 2010 at 1:39 PM ^
the non-historic middle of the season for an extra $ is as unemotional and callous as building a mosque at ground zero (at the risk of crossing the line and getting political).
August 20th, 2010 at 2:23 PM ^
Yeah, I think the "political line" is about a mile in your rear-view mirror.
August 20th, 2010 at 4:15 PM ^
Delany hates us for our freedom!
August 20th, 2010 at 1:20 PM ^
Hold on, folks. Some tradition of The Game was dying with expansion.
Do they play at the end of the year in same divisions, therefore ensuring that The Game will never decide the Big 10 Title again. Or separate divisions, at the end of the year, it could decide the title, but only first after going through a charade of sorts in the first game the week before. Think those awful Week 17 and Wildcard round rematches.
Or separate divisions, move it early in the slate, the game still stops the college football world and with a viable chance that OSU/UM rematches 2 months later with more time in between games to decide the title.
I dont like the move personally. But, we were going to lose some tarnish on The Game to begin with. The concept of playing in back to back weeks, with a Week 17/Wildcard rematch feel, I think is a bad outcome.
The game never ever deciding the Big 10 title again is a badt outcome
Maybe this isnt the worst. I'm down with a OSU/UM, Texas/Oklahoma doubleheader the second week of October. Sounds like a killer day of football.
August 20th, 2010 at 2:23 PM ^
Not even the college football world stops for an October match up of teams of almost unknowable quality. Its too early. This game should be played for as much as it can possibly be played for. With two divisions, that is a Division Championship and an almost guaranteed spot in the Big Ten title game.
Were we pissed that the '06 game did not determine the National Champion? Hell no! It meant everything to us and to our teams at the time. Everyone knew that the MNC game would likely feature only one of us, and it was fine.
Splitting into divisions takes that one small step backwards, but putting M and OSU on opposite sides and playing early will relegate the greatest rivalry in sports to Formerly The Greatest Rivalry in Sports, and Now Just Another October Warm Up Game, The Results of Which Will Be Overshadowed in November.
FTGRISANJAOWUGTROWWBON, for short.
August 20th, 2010 at 3:16 PM ^
August 20th, 2010 at 3:59 PM ^
But just because the economy is down, doesn't mean we have to go back to Great Depression traditions. If it's worked since WWII, why change it?
August 20th, 2010 at 5:44 PM ^
August 21st, 2010 at 2:20 AM ^
Because that changed, everything has to change? Everything's up for grabs? Can we award championship game berth's on the best fitting uniforms? Silly, sure....but because one factor changed (the Championship Game...not Nebraska joining; we've had expansion before without The Game changing), it means nothing means anything or has any value anymore? It's not like we're saying we're not accepting losing or changing anything. Just the fact that it exists means The Game won't be the last one, for all the marbles, without rematch/other teams/other games. But your idea that if we're willing to give a little, we should have no problem with giving a lot doesn't fly with me.
August 21st, 2010 at 8:28 AM ^
season is important, but I wouldn't go so far as to call it everything. So no, everything is not changing. We're still playing the same teams, still wearing the winged helmet, still playing "The Victors", still going to have a crappy secondary, etc.
My point has been, with the addition of Nebraska, the conference gained quite a bit, but that didn't come without a cost. Assuming that Michigan and Nebraska are in the same division, then moving the OSU game and having Nebraska as the last game of the regular season, for the right to play in the conference championship game (likely against OSU) would make sense.
In short, now that were having divisions, closing the season with Nebraska to determine the divisional winner and with the right to play OSU (or PSU) in the championship game, is not that great of a sacrifice. We just netted another huge game to our schedule at the cost of moving the still very important OSU game.
I really don't see this as such an "OMG this is such a disaster I hate it everything in the world is changing and all is now coming to an end" scenario.
August 21st, 2010 at 2:48 PM ^
If you equate playing Nebraska-Michigan at the end of the season with playing Michigan-OSU at the end of the season, we just have an impassible misunderstanding. Because I don't see that as a "fair trade", or in any way equivalent.
August 20th, 2010 at 1:26 PM ^
What is the point of being Michigan if when all the other little teams cry we just say "uh, I'm going to be a team player". How does this benefit Michigan at ALL?? (And connectedly, OSU). The greatest rivalry in all of sports is THE LAST GAME OF THE SEASON. He's just turned it into Nebraska-Oklahoma. Oh, yeah, that's right. Well, you can play earlier in the season, have it be meaningful, and have a rematch later....just like Miami-FSU. Oops. No, none of that ever works. The division thing is minor....but THE GAME must be the LAST game of every season. Because if you're planning for big rematches in November/December...THAT'S NOT GOING TO HAPPEN. The Big Ten just got tougher, not easier. So even Brian's once out of ten years may be optimist (really, in the last 10 years, how many times would it have really happened, that the two teams were 1-2 in the conference after The Game? WITHOUT Nebraska). So playing back to back is almost never going to happen. Playing each other some shitty day in September? Annual. And we'll never have Michigan and OSU playing each other undefeated for something meaningful at the end of the season again. 2006 was our last chance. Why? Because they play each other before....one will always have a loss. If #1 vs. #2 only happened once, when they didn't play each other, think we'll ever see that again? Don't hold your breath. At least if they're in the same division, they can be battling it out for a championship game berth. Now they're playing for nothing. Because it will only matter if the two can get back to the championship game. And if they don't play, all those historic upsets...will mean nothing now. No team will be thought to be that good earlier in the season, so it's no upset. And no team will have nothing else left to play for, but The Game. They'll just be stuck finishing off the slate against Who Cares U.
This could be bad for Brandon. It might be a PR hit he can't recovery from. He's going from moral authority to boob instantly. Because he's either looking like the guy who endorses this idiocy, or the guy too gutless to at least go down fighting for his University. Either way, he's been on the job for less than a year, and he's making Tom Goss look good. If he can't figure out what matters here, who has any faith in him to make any coaching decisions? It might wait till the officially announcement....but I can now see rock bottom for Michigan Football.
Change isn't always good. Sometimes it's a violent, degrading, invasive thing.
August 20th, 2010 at 1:31 PM ^
Dude, I'm having fond thoughts for Bill Martin. How wrong is that? That man couldn't conduct a coaching transition to save his life, but suddenly I miss him. I feel like Bill was the kind of guy that would smiled, nodded and pressed the little button for the Blackwater hit squad to take Alvarez and Delany out back, then held a press conference denying all knowledge. After which of course he'd have gone boating.
August 20th, 2010 at 1:33 PM ^
He looks like a guy with an incredible amount of experience in PR and Brand management. Who knows that no matter what is hinted at, there will be high emotions, but rather than keeping everything behind closed doors, he reluctantly leaks out one view point with some details attached.
Then sits back while the internet flares up from the lighter fluid he just sprayed on the fire and gauges the reaction.
I guess I really don't understand why we think Brandon is a genius when he says something we agree with, and then switch to thinking he's a spineless toady when we don't agree with him.
Oh wait, it's the internet and only our narrow-minded point of view counts.
sorry I forgot. I thought this was a place for rational discussion, my bad,
where did I leave that pitchfork?!?
August 20th, 2010 at 1:36 PM ^
Your comments on narrow minded and calling out of other posters isn't actually going to help the internet become a place for rational discussion.
August 20th, 2010 at 1:49 PM ^
To engender "genius" status. We don't even know how the NCAA will have taken his crafted response for a couple of months. If they come back and go "Nope, here's some more sanctions", he'll officially have accomplished nothing so far. (A night game? That was some work of genius??).
If someone had "an incredible amount of experience in PR and Brand management" you'd think he know how horrible an idea this is, and be fighting it. Privately, and if that isn't working, publicly. It's not his job to be a good soldier for the Big Ten. They don't pay his salary. It's his job to do what's best for Michigan. He shouldn't be leaking bad news...he should be attacking it.
And it's a place for rational discussion. No one stopped you from posting this. So that's kinda a non-starter. So try making a point other than "maybe he's just checking out the temperature" (I mean, WTF? What is he doing as Athlete Director if he doesn't already know what it is, and feels the same way??), and doing exactly what you're trying to accuse, which is attack the argument, rather than the points behind it.
Edit: But I do like your avatar.
August 20th, 2010 at 1:31 PM ^
So in the accounting of "Winners and Losers of 2010 Expansion", Michigan is firmly a loser now, correct?
August 20th, 2010 at 1:40 PM ^
The Mayans (or was it the Aztecs?) must be right- the world will end in 2012. This is just another sign of the demise of western civilization as we know it. Time to breathe through my eyelids and party like it's 2011.....
August 20th, 2010 at 1:42 PM ^
Looking back 20 years, I come up with eight potential rematches, in some cases depending on how the other teams were split between divisions:
2007 - Definite rematch. UM and OSU are the only one-loss teams, rematch guaranteed.
2006 - Definite rematch. OSU undefeated and UM holds tiebreak (head-to-head) over Wisconsin. Rematch no matter which division Wisconsin is in.
2003 - Definite rematch. UM 7-1, OSU and Purdue 6-2, and OSU holds tiebreak (head-to-head) over Purdue.
2002 - Maybe. OSU 8-0, Iowa 8-0, Michigan 6-2. If Iowa were in OSU's division, the two would have played and there's maybe a 50-50 shot at a rematch. I'd count this as 25% (50% of 50%) of a rematch.
1998 - Most likely. UM, OSU and Wisconsin 7-1. If Wisconsin is in OSU's division, they would have played and there's a 50-50 shot; if Wisconsin is in UM's division rematch is guaranteed on Michigan's head-to-head win over UW. I'd count this as 75% (50% plus 50% of 50%) of a rematch.
1997 - Maybe, slight chance. UM 8-0, OSU/PSU/Purdue all 6-2. OSU lost to PSU and didn't play Purdue. If PSU were in UM's division AND OSU held a tiebreaker over Purdue. I'd count this as a slim (~10%) chance.
1992 - Definite rematch. UM (6-0-2) and OSU (5-2-1) were alone in 1st and 2nd place.
1991 - Maybe. UM 8-0, Iowa 7-1, OSU and Indiana 5-3. If Iowa is in UM's division, then OSU holds tiebreak over Indiana. I'd count this as 50% since it only depends on Iowa's location.
Adding up the percentages, that's 5.6 rematches in 20 years, just over one per four years.
August 20th, 2010 at 1:51 PM ^
But I'm having a problem with the first one. Michigan lost the last two games of the Big Ten, to Wisconsin and OSU, in 2007. So they would have been a two loss team. (And if tie-breaking is going to stay the same, and after head to head in three-way ties, it goes to overall record...our non-conference record wasn't good that year either).
Edit: And the rest of the way, I didn't really posit a fair question...because until we know who would be in which division, it's really almost impossible to tell.
August 20th, 2010 at 1:52 PM ^
2007 - Definite rematch. OSU 7-1, Illinois and UM 6-2. UM holds head-to-head over Illinois, so it's a rematch no matter which division Illinois is in.
August 20th, 2010 at 1:44 PM ^
It's Michigan! It's some team that's been within a game of .500 every year since SEC schools started recruiting black kids! On ABC!
<3
August 20th, 2010 at 1:54 PM ^
Because expansion almost inevitably diminishes Ohio State and Michigan to the benefit of Iowa/Wisconsin/Penn State and the others with a dreamer's shot at a BSC bid. Michigan and Ohio State built this league. I suppose I understand the politics behind the evolve/expand or die mentality, but the Pyrrhic victory of strengthening the conference through diminishing the rivalry is a bitter pill to swallow.
August 20th, 2010 at 1:52 PM ^
I have been lurking on MGOBlog for a while, but I can't ignore this news.
The game needs to stay in November as the last regular season game. With UM and OSU in the same division, The Game, would still help decide which team in that division gets to play in the conference title game.
I've emailed the athletic department, emailed my friends, signed the online petition, and posted comments on Rittenberg's Big 10 Blog.
Brian, please rally the troops!
August 20th, 2010 at 1:57 PM ^
Don't just tell your MGoBlog people what you think. If you know any other Michigan fans, people, tell them about this. And have them write.
August 20th, 2010 at 2:26 PM ^
I even called the one OSU guy I know at work and asked him to inform his friends and email the OSU athletic department.
August 20th, 2010 at 1:56 PM ^
...let's try and reason this out.
Why is Michigan-OSU the greatest rivalry in sports? Because when it was Woody vs. Bo in the '70s, every year the last game of the season against your hated rival was for the championship.
That last part is very important. Michigan-OSU was not the biggest rivalry until the Woody/Bo days, and that's b/c it was always for the championship.
If we're in the same divisions, this is not possible.
Question: what diminishes the rivalry more? Moving the game to October or never playing each other for the Big 10 Title?
Question: How do you realign the Big 10 so that a) Michigan-OSU play every year and b) Michigan-OSU can play for the championship?
Auburn-Alabama is still the last game of their seasons, but that game has lost a ton of luster since SEC expansion put them in the same division. Would you now call the Iron Bowl even the biggest rivalry in the SEC? Before expansion, folks in the south claimed it was the biggest rivalry in football, period.
August 20th, 2010 at 2:07 PM ^
If you're ok with them being in separate divisions, what's the difference between playing them back to back, or playing them in September then again in December? They can be in opposite divisions and still play each other the last game of the season. And just from a hype standpoint, I would think back to back games would be a bigger deal than playing each other again 3 months later. Particularly if one had to win to get into the game. But in all the other years that it DIDN'T matter for the championship, it would still be a big game at the end of the year. In the middle...it's Iowa. So both your questions are moot to the biggest objection - that's it's not the last game of the year. Which far outdates Bo and Woody. And I'm not thinking other "unimportant" games like Army-Navy have much luster in say, late September. Why is Alabama-Auburn still big, even though they aren't (and really, rarely were) the two powers in the conference at the same time? Last game of the year.
August 20th, 2010 at 2:54 PM ^
This post is so full of right, and the world so full of wrong, it makes me want to cry emo tears
August 20th, 2010 at 2:16 PM ^
there's no guarantee how often they'll meet in the title game if they're in separate divisions. Assuming UM returns to be a regular fixture in the Top 10/Top 15, OSU and UM will be at a disadvantage compared to the other teams in their division. UM/OSU will play each other every year i presume, but a couple teams in each divsion won't be playing UM or OSU. If say Nebraska and UM are in the same division and Nebraska doesn't have to play OSU, that's a big advantage for Nebraska imo.
To be perfectly honest, i think the iron bowl is a weak comparison. Without looking it up I don't think that game occured to often with both Alabama and Auburn first and second in the SEC standings.
IMO, a better example would be Oklahoma and Nebraska. Huge rivalry game at the end of the year that usually decided the Big 8. They go to separate divisions in the Big 12. You know how many times they've met in the Big 12 title game which started in 1996? A big fat zero.
August 20th, 2010 at 7:58 PM ^
...you believe if we went separate divisions that there's a good chance either Michigan or Ohio State will be irrelevant for over a decade like Nebraska was.
I don't think so.
August 20th, 2010 at 2:20 PM ^
Since I live in the South, I can assure you that the Iron Bowl is still a bfd here. I would say it is, by far, the most intense rivalry in the SEC and the only one that compares to the OSU/Michigan game. I would argue its lost next to none of its luster and everyone in Alabama takes it very, very, almost tragically serious. Further, the Iron Bowl is more relevant than the Oklahoma/Nebraska rivalry, which used to be huge before the formation of the Big 12 effectively destroyed it (a good example of what putting rivals in opposite divisions does).
You're also making what I like to call the "ACC" mistake (e.g., "put Florida State and Miami in opposite divisions and watch them fight for the championship every year..."). There's no guarantee the best rivalry in college football will occur on that stage ever, let alone often, so why not make one division dependent on it at least?
August 20th, 2010 at 3:27 PM ^
does not decide the Big Ten Championship anymore. It did in the 70's, but it does not now. There is a nostalgia about the game in that it did once decide the Big Ten championship and having it as the last game of the season maintains its importance. Does the UM-OSU game have to be played for a championship for it to still have importance? I say no.
August 20th, 2010 at 4:51 PM ^
You're correct in that it's not that often that UM/OSU enter the game with both having a chance to win the big ten title. However, just about every year one of the two teams is playing for the big ten title.
2008: a loss would have cost OSU the outright title.
2007: winner take all.
2006: winner take all.
2005: a loss would have cost OSU a share of the title
2004: UM's loss cost them an outright title, and at the time the game ended could have cost UM a share of the title.
2003: winner take all.
2002: a loss would have cost OSU the big ten title.
2001: UM's loss cost it a share of the big ten title.
2000: a UM loss would have cost it a share of the big ten title.
August 21st, 2010 at 12:01 PM ^
That is a good point Steve. I just read an article on SI.com I think, were they actually said that Florida/Alabama is the biggest rivalry in college football. Ha.
August 20th, 2010 at 1:59 PM ^
i don't want to play OSU when we're both like 3-1 or something. who cares then? the ramifications of the game aren't as huge as they are when it's the last game of the regular season for both of us.
and then who will we play last? MSU? I don't care about MSU enough. once we get back on our feet, then who's going to care when 9-2 Michigan is playing against 5-6 MSU? Noooo one
August 20th, 2010 at 3:24 PM ^
I want this to be the last game. BTW, my completely uninformed hunch is that the last game won't be with Sparty, but against the other "big" team in our division, and tOSU will play its last game against the other "big" team in its division. Thus, you will have:
M-Neb and tOSU-PSU
or
M-PSU and tOSU-Neb
They will probably set it up as a doubleheader. A fabulous doubleheader, no doubt, but M-tOSU last game of the season *made* the Big 10 and should be kept.
August 20th, 2010 at 1:59 PM ^
maybe Michigan and Nebraska get put in the same division they make that the annual end of the year game.
Comments