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 2:03 PM ^
Can these guys really be this mind-fucked?
No one's chances at winning a Big Ten championship increase or decrease with this asinine move. All it does is devalue the game to UT-OU status, a nice early season side show that is clearly outweighed by late season games.
August 20th, 2010 at 2:05 PM ^
somewhere, pigs are learning to fly
August 23rd, 2010 at 7:33 AM ^
"I didn't sign up for this shiiiiiiiiiiiiiit....................!"
August 20th, 2010 at 2:06 PM ^
Et Tu Brandon?
August 20th, 2010 at 2:14 PM ^
... to win a Big Ten championship.
That'll happen.
As for the rivalry, *see Nebraska-Oklahoma circa 1994-2010.
All of you who wanted expansion, were excited about expansion, and looked forward to a conference championship game -- SHAME ON YOU.
The destruction of the importance of the M-OSU rivalry is EXACTLY what movitated the Barry Alvarezes and JoePas in the first goddamm place.
Who has the guts now to admit they were wrong? C'mawn? Fess up.
Some of us have been railing against this possibility for years, re what expansion would mean to Michigan.
The world has changed. Forever. Enjoy.
August 20th, 2010 at 2:35 PM ^
We don't have to beat him twice just have to beat them in the championship game, and if we are the best team in the big ten we should be able to beat them twice in one year. I for one think RR is going to start steam rolling the Big Ten then the OSU fans will be saying we have to beat RR twice in one year.
August 20th, 2010 at 2:16 PM ^
I think this is a great idea, we all want Michigan to play OSU for the Big Ten Championship right? Well that can only happen if they are split, What if we start out Big Ten play with OSU and finish with Nebraska, with OSU finishing with Penn State, Iowa can finish with UW. I think that would be a great weekend of football.
August 20th, 2010 at 2:27 PM ^
No. Just no.
August 20th, 2010 at 2:33 PM ^
In opposite divisions, the game will rarely result in a rematch. Its just one more loss in-conference, meaning you have to go through the rest of your slate with 0-1 other losses. A UM-OSU big ten championship game will happen once in ten years in this scenario.
What we want is for them to play for the most they can possibly play for every year, not a hope for a chance at a rematch in the big ten championship.
August 20th, 2010 at 10:26 PM ^
We all wish things would stay the same but college football has been changing at a dramatic rate since the mid 90s. So if everyone is all for "The Game" being the last game of the season it could still work if we are split , (according to most people we would only have a rematch once out of ten years) so I don't see a big problem playing them twice in a row once a decade.
August 21st, 2010 at 4:11 PM ^
Most people seem to think UM & OSU will now be meeting twice a year. WRONG! The likelyhood is just the opposite. You guarantee that one of them will have at least one loss by year end each year and therefore less likely to make the championship game. Also, you now give these 2 schools a more difficult schedule each year since they will have to play each other and either PSU or Nebraska. To be fair, you would also have to make PSU & UN play each other each year. Another thing that is wrong with this arrangement is that you will see the other schools in the other division less often. For example, if you play 5 division games and 3 non-division games, if one of the 3 non-division games is always OSU, it will take a year or 2 longer to cycle through the other 5 non-division schools. So maybe we only get to play PSU or Nebraska every 3 years instead of every other year. That sucks.
The only reason that this is being done is to insure that THE GAME doesn't over shadow the Big 10 Championship game.
August 20th, 2010 at 2:30 PM ^
preceding Brandon taking the "compromise position" of THE GAME - SPONSORED BY DOMINOS or whatever.
He may be smart but money drives everything. Once 8 figures are on the table tradition goes out the window, sorry to say.
The only real way to counter this is to convince the people in power that the move will result in a net loss in profits from fewer ticket sales, reduced ratings/apparel sales directly related to The Game, etc. And, let's face it, that's a losing argument. No real fans are going to stop watching and no casual fan is going to care and the break in tradition.
We lose.
August 20th, 2010 at 2:38 PM ^
The season-ending game is a wonderful tradition that I wouldn't like to lose. But a) why does it have to go by the boards if M and OSU are in different divisions? And b) is it possible that Brandon thinks (first thought that came to me in contemplating the subject) that if M and OSU each anchor a division--with implicit possibility of a meeting for a championship--then Michigan's supremacy has greater likelihood of continuing?
I understand that not only is this no longer the 70s but that Nebraska, PSU and several other schools may become perennial challengers for the B10 title--from many people's POV that's a good thing. But don't Schembechler and Hayes divisions kind of cement the historical supremacy of the two schools? (Okay, I realize these division names aren't a foregone conclusion. . .)
I guess a lot of this devolves on the question of just how much Ohio-Michigan emphasis other schools are willing to accept in the first place. Not a good time to be negotiating all this, given our recent travails.
August 20th, 2010 at 2:58 PM ^
There is absolutely no guarantee UM and OSU meet every year in the championship. See what the ACC did with Florida State and Miami as a good example of how that retarded logic can = fail grenade.
August 20th, 2010 at 3:40 PM ^
am I assuming that it comes to pass. But setting them up as the two main implicit rivals--and acknowledging their historical supremacy--does help to reinforce a culture that celebrates them. Of COURSE we have to hold up our end.
I assume that "retarded logic" is meant to apply to the ACC, but. . .
August 20th, 2010 at 4:48 PM ^
But could refer to Big Ten if we're stupid enough to try to predict future competitive balance of the league. The Big 12 is a good example of a league utilizing straight geography to achieve an epic fail and the ACC is a good example of a league doing the same with competitive balance as their ostensible guide. Hopefully we find somewhere in the middle, but right now I'm not optimistic.
August 20th, 2010 at 8:46 PM ^
... (and I agree that it is), what do you have to base divisions on besides rivalries and geography? And in our case, both of those point to exactly the same thing: a pure E-W split.
I'd think the presidents and ADs can't possibly be dumb enough not to realize this, but the evidence seems to suggest otherwise.
August 21st, 2010 at 12:38 PM ^
However, The new Big Ten will have 4 teams that have been historic powers. I think its reasonable to assume that those four teams will be able to sustain that status into the future.
I also think the rest of the Big Ten is much more stable than other conferences. Iowa, Wisconsin, and Michigan State have their ups and downs but they don't dip very far on their downs; Hell I'd even throw Purdue and Northwestern into that group. Illinois, Indiana, and Minnesota are the only teams that I think will rise up infrequently (Illinois has the best shot).
I'd ideally split the two divisions into A-A-B-B-C-C groups by geography, then protect rivalries if required.
Div X: OSU - MICH - MSU - PU - IU - MINN
Div O: PSU - NEB - IOWA - WISC - NW - ILL
The geography is awkward for PSU & MINN and B's and C's might need to be swapped to optimize rivalry protection (I don't know them all), but I think the competitive balance in these splits would be pretty stable. Having BTN revenue should neutralize the costs associated with the weird geographical splits.
If ND joins, slide them into Div X and the other team (Mizzou?) into Div O.
August 21st, 2010 at 12:51 PM ^
If you're going to split the "top four" (again, based on the 11-team era there's virtually no difference between the non-OSU members of that group and Iowa and Wisconsin, so I don't see the point), you have to split Iowa and Wisconsin too, or you end up with one division with four top teams and the other two. If you want to ensure that the division races are rarely runaways, splitting them 3-3 means you need two teams out of those three to suck in order to get a non-competitive division race. The split you recommend would, if done the last two years, have been OSU ten miles ahead of everyone else, MSU decent but not even close to competitive with OSU, and the others as four of the worst five teams in the conference.
August 21st, 2010 at 2:13 PM ^
Why restrict it to the 11 team era though? In the 80's it was Ohio State that sucked. I'd also say that although OSU has beaten Michigan way too frequently recently, most of those games weren't runways. Ohio State had to earn their wins. You're on point with the last two years, but do you really think those last two represent the next 10? Regardless of what happens with Rodriguez, Michigan will be much better and, if Dantonio is as good as MSU thinks, you guys will be pesky mo-fos.
I see what you're driving at and I would agree with you on splitting up Iowa and Wisconsin but I'd also say that at least the geography and rivalry protection concepts would justify keeping them together. I wouldn't object if they were split though.
If you narrow your focus to the timeframe you suggest it's hard to argue, but I don't agree that is a necessary or appropriate restriction.
August 20th, 2010 at 2:58 PM ^
There is absolutely no guarantee UM and OSU meet every year in the championship. See what the ACC did with Florida State and Miami as a good example of how that retarded logic can = fail grenade.
August 20th, 2010 at 2:51 PM ^
For me, the most anticipated time of year is that November afternoon when Michigan takes the field against Ohio State, regardless of the postseason ramifications. We could be having a terrible season, Ohio State is that one last chance to redeem ourselves. We could be undefeated, Ohio State is that chance to test our true worth. Everything builds to this game. This is why The Game is as big as it is. You really think all of those Bo/Woody games would be as legendary as they were if they were played in October? Hell no. They would be good games, but so is the Iowa game! College football is defined by its rivalries, its history, its TRADITION. These things are what makes it superior to the NFL. I like waking up that November morning, throwing on my pathetic Michigan slippers and my beat up AC jersey, turning on the T.V. and listening to the Victors blast as the Winged helmets run under the "M Club Supports You" banner. I say, split the two if you must, but maintain the importance of November. One thing is for sure, this wouldn't be up for debate if Bo was still around, or Woody for that matter.
Go Blue.
August 20th, 2010 at 4:03 PM ^
It is tradition that defines college football and makes it the best sport of all...no way should Brandon ever agree to have the two teams meet before the last game of the regular season...Bo and Woody are both somewhere tearing up yard markers just thinking about this.
August 20th, 2010 at 4:47 PM ^
Everything builds to it, and then when it is over, there is no more. Winning the game makes the season, losing it is poison.
Think of 2003 vs. 2006. Both teams gave us tremendous, and somewhat unexpected, blowouts of ND. Both had painful disappointments, both ended in almost exactly the same way, a double digit loss to USC, but there will always be a particular joy in memories of the 2003 team that there aren't with the 2006 team. Braylon bouncing off the safety and Perry cutting hard to the open field to the left vs. the ball going just that far beyond an open Manningham and that awful, awful second between Smith's pass falling incomplete and the moment the yellow marker appeared in the corner of the screen. It's the moments in the game that form my lasting memories of a particular team. When the Game is over, the season is over. The bowl game is far in the future, and that feeling at the end of the game echos for that month and forms particular memories that last longer than those from other games.
Obviously, some of that will go away with a championship game. But not the finality of the Game, not the feeling of the season's end forming the way I will remember the team. It has shaped the way that both Michigan and Ohio State fans think about their teams. But it won't work with a game in October. It won't linger in the same way.
I really hope they don't screw this up.
August 20th, 2010 at 2:53 PM ^
This is another example of a few suits that think they are smarter than the masses and refuse to give the people what they want! Don't mess with the greatest rivalry in sports!
It will never be the same! Sure, a big ten championship game with Michigan/Ohio State would be exciting, highly rated, and hyped by ESPN. Can you imagine the excitment of the bands marching out in Indiana at a cooperate Dome? I'm all in for Big Ten exapanion, divisions, and a championship game. However, I never thought the Big Ten would be stupid enough to put Michigan & Ohio State in opposing divisions and to move the game in the schedule. Furthermore, I would have bet a house and car payment that a Michigan AD who played for Bo Schembechler would never allow the greatest rivalry in sports to be bent over! I can't believe Brandon supports this!
Given the misery of the Tressel era, the only postive aspect of this news is that Michigan will probably play in more Big Ten title games as a result.
August 20th, 2010 at 3:05 PM ^
That's what hurts the most: that Brandon doesn't get this or, at the very least, isn't willing to fight for the best rivalry in sports.
August 20th, 2010 at 3:05 PM ^
I thought I could go one day going into the weekend where some Michigan Football disaster doesn't obsess my every waking moment, causing me to be on this site constantly, with no real game in sight to discuss.
August 20th, 2010 at 3:18 PM ^
Sick and tired that no one seems to care about THE GAME anymore? Join this facebook group to help organize opposition to the idea of moving the game to any week besides the last week of the regular season.
August 20th, 2010 at 3:29 PM ^
Everyone knows it takes 12 weeks from the begining of the season to build the just the right amount of hate going into the OSU/UM game. Tards!
August 20th, 2010 at 3:35 PM ^
First off, Brandon didn't say he wanted to move the game - the AD from OSU said "I don't know". In the quote, Brandon says nothing about the timing of the game. You're jumping to the conclusion that The Game will inevitably be moved to avoid a two-week-in-a-row rematch. That may happen, but it's still a huge leap from there to OMG BRANDON IS DESTROYING EVERYTHING FOREVER. Heap your hate on Smith.
Why is a two week in a row rematch a bad thing? BOTH GAMES WILL MATTER, and here's why: assume the "worst" case scenario, where both UM and OSU go into the last regular season game undefeated. Clearly, they would meet again in the championship game. HOWEVER, the regular season game will still be critical in the National Championship picture - you'll likely need to win both games to make it to the NC, and the loser of the regular season finale can still play spoiler in the Big Ten championship. So you won't have the NFL "rest your starters no one cares" issue. It is distinctly not a "best one out of two" because 1-1 is a very different result from 2-0. And anyway, as has been mentioned, the scenario of both teams being in play for the championship in a rematch will be rare .
The ideal might be to have UM OSU in the same division (mostly because of schedule difficulty), but barring that I'd rather risk playing twice in a row than move the game.
August 20th, 2010 at 4:51 PM ^
DB's words were "I think there's a distinct possibility that The Game will be played later in the season, but not necessarily the last game of the season."
Taken one way, this means that there is not a distinct possibility of The Game being the last on the season. A more optimistic interpretation is that it is not likely to be the last game of the season.
August 20th, 2010 at 5:18 PM ^
If that's a direct quote from the remainder of the interview, I apologize - can't listen to it at work. In the OP, the only quote about moving the date came from the OSU AD, and I was going off of what Brian gave me. I stand by the rest of my argument.
August 20th, 2010 at 3:38 PM ^
I can't believe the b10 powers will move "The Game" to October! This game trumps all others and moving it to the middle of the season will diminish it! The only time the game will mean something is that once every 5 to 10 years when UM and OSU are division champs and play in the b10 championship. This is a sad day indeed!!!! I wonder what's next up their bag of tricks. They may not even have OSU and UM schedule every year! I'm sick of this.
August 20th, 2010 at 3:53 PM ^
The idea to move the game really bothered me for a bit today. I was sick to my stomach... but after a little while I realized, with seperate divisions, Michigan would benefit.
Otherwise they would have to beat Ohio State, and win the conference championship in consecutive weeks just to have a shot at the Rose Bowl or National Title.
Now, they would just have to put themselves in a position to play in the championship game, which may or may not feature OSU. And that doesn't necessarily mean they even have to beat OSU. If they play them in the last game of the season though, and lose, it could be more costly.
August 20th, 2010 at 3:51 PM ^
If we can't find a solution that makes sense for Blue's best interests Michigan should just leave the Big Ten behind. The suits seem to have forgotten that Michigan is the Big Ten. Our 4x10^9 alumni don't give a rip about what Purdue does to Illinois. They tune in from around the globe (and space, bitches, space) each autumn saturday to watch Michigan. We proved last year that even Delaware State can draw 90 K+ fans just by playing us.
Notre Dame has done it right all along. Nobody, other than the NCAA, sometimes, tells them what to do.
Go independent. Strike our own network deal, or create our own network. Find a rabid fan with some communication skills to announce all of our games, ala TV version of Bob Ufer. Worst case scenario: no Pam Ward.
August 20th, 2010 at 4:03 PM ^
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.Dude isn't rocking a goatee, is he?
August 20th, 2010 at 4:12 PM ^
Kirk not brain taken-over Kirk.
Kirk's brain was taken over by those telekinetic Roman dudes on that planet and those flying fried egg things and those flowers that sprayed happy hippie dust.
August 20th, 2010 at 4:25 PM ^
Something this big, Brandon/Kirk would be able to fight it off. It's like trying to make someone murder under hypnosis. I'm thinking if he's doing something this bad, it's got to be outright replacement.
August 20th, 2010 at 7:23 PM ^
Romulan ale
August 20th, 2010 at 4:27 PM ^
Anyone have the relevant email addresses to send word of our discontent? I saw the feed back link posted earlier, but it didn't feel that productive.
The earlier link was:
Tell the AD how you feel:
http://www.mgoblue.com/feedback/mich-feedback.html
Anyone have anything better?
edit: I did use that link and also put my name on the petition.
August 23rd, 2010 at 8:25 AM ^
David Brandon's email address is :[email protected]
Let him know how you feel!
August 20th, 2010 at 4:36 PM ^
The way they treat the messenger there, Brian wouldn't have survived this week. Ugh.
August 20th, 2010 at 4:47 PM ^
This is a new era for the Big Ten, it will never be the same again. The days of three yards and a cloud of dust, the days of the Michigan vs. Ohio State game being "the" game to decide the BT championship has changed with the addition of Nebraska and two separate division. Money has become the priority of the conference and no matter how we squak about it, we better get used to the thought that this is not our daddies conference anymore.
If we have to play OSU twice, it changes the dynamic of the meaning of "the game." If we don't play them for a given year, it does the same thing. Get used to it...as of now things have changed permanently.
August 20th, 2010 at 5:00 PM ^
you just do not cross. Mark it 0.
August 21st, 2010 at 7:58 AM ^
So your argument is this: "We shouldn't complain about the change because its going to happen."
Is that what you are saying?
August 21st, 2010 at 5:07 PM ^
We can complain about whatever we want, it means little if anything at all. The point is that things have changed, this is a point of fact not conjecture. No matter how they configure the divisions and no matter how they try to schedule the Michigan-OSU game, it will not be the same any longer. It used to be "the game" decided the Big Ten title, and therefore it was significant is many ways.
Now, it's simply going to be one game among many with an emotional attachment. If Michigan plays OSU twice in a given year, it will weaken the appeal of "the game." This is not to say that the hatred will not be there for both games, it will lose that extra something. If it doesn' change any thing for you, then great. However, for many of us who do look for the special game at the end of the schedule for all of the marbles, it will not be the same. IMO
August 23rd, 2010 at 12:57 PM ^
I hate you Voice of Reason. You likely would have told Churchill that "things are changing" and that "the Nazis are going to control Europe, so we might as well obtain a Vichy-esque surrender arrangement ." Fuck that. Sometimes evil must be opposed head on. In the college football universe, I can't imagine anything more evil than meddling with the sanctity of the game. We should respond accordingly.
August 20th, 2010 at 5:02 PM ^
August 20th, 2010 at 6:49 PM ^
Why the hell are people so scared of a tough division? What the hell is wrong with having to beat Penn State, Ohio State, Michigan State as division rivals in order to make the championship game. How is that so frickin different from now? Just because it makes the road harder, doesn't mean it's not better. The Big Ten should be fricking hard and these things move in cycles. The SEC east was stacked for a while, but now the west looks tough as hell with Alabama back, LSU, and Auburn on the rise again. The east is weaker with Florida, then maybe South Carolina as the second best team as Georgia struggles and Tennessee rebuilds. Who cares if it makes an easier road for Nebraska, Iowa or Wisconsin to the championship game because whoever emerges from the East (UM, OSU, PSU, MSU, Indiana, Purdue) division by definitiion has be frickin good and would probably beat them like the Big 12 south usually does to the North, except a Big Ten West (led by Nebraska, Iowa and Wisconsin, but occaisionally getting a contender from Northwestern, Illiniois and Minnesota) is way better than than the big 12 north ever was.
This is not to mention that yes, The Game would stay as the last of the year and still have major stakes because in most years it will have serious implications on who wins the division and goes to the title game. This also preserves all natural rivalries in the conference (UM-OSU, PSU-MSU, PSU-OSU, Indiana-Purdue in the east, Iowa-W, W-Minnesota, Miinnesota-Iowa and Northwestern-Illinois, plus intersting new ones involving Nebraska's closest potential geographical rivals like Iowa and Wisconsin).
This also doesn't eff up the rest of the sports by going strictly off football, and specifically by going off football as measured by how good schools are right now. Like I said, you never know how things evolve (If you can't see that after the last two years at Michigan, your head deserves to stay up your own anal cavity) and shouldn't base the long term health of the league, and therefore M, on such thinking.
I'm sure Brian has said most of this many times before, but clearly it isn't sinking in. Big ups to those working to channel the RAGE to the ears of Brandon and those who might have a chance to stop the TV suits from calling the shots and effing the whole conference up. Now is the only chance to get it right. If they don't, the conference will suffer even more in the national landscape.
Comments