good point, but we dont need the night games for exposure, just for the sheer fun of being there at night under the lights
This is maaaaybe premature there, ESPN. Maryland #1 FWIW.
good point, but we dont need the night games for exposure, just for the sheer fun of being there at night under the lights
mind if i ask why you are so against night games?
I didn't know there was already a petition for night games.. My bad..
As far as night games go... I really don't see how they ruin the "traditions" of Michigan. Do I want it to be a Thursday or Friday night game a resounding "HELL NO". But every year or 2 having a night game against MSU, PSU, WISCO, ND, IOWA would be cool. If it was against EMU or someone lame then no it's stupid. But if it was against a quality opponent underneath the lights at the big house it would be awesome.
Some of our greatest victories have come underneath the lights at the big house and my favorite Michigan game of all time was the 06 game underneath the lights at PSU.
IMO if you've never been to a night game and are just blindly saying no to it then you're an idiot. Go to a night game somewhere else and you'll realize that Michigan should do it EVERY ONCE IN A WHILE.
I vehemently disagree with you.
You are right. They don't in any way ruin the tradition of Michigan football. Great things happen under the lights...Mario Maningham's catch, Braylon Edward's catch, OT game against Penn St. in 2002 with Chris Perry punching it in for the win...How can you be so against night games with the three examples I just gave???
I was at all three of those games and I can't recall leaving the stadium and thinking how it would have been better if only we'd kicked it off at 7 pm. Look, the reasons why we don't play night games have been addressed by the city and the athletic department, and frankly they're more convincing than "OMG night games are sweeeet dude!!!!!"
Also: more exclamation points.
The way I see it, you must not be a fan of U of M football. You see, if college football was just about the players and competition, then they wouldn't need to spend millions upon millions of dollars for a stadium, they could just play in a field someplace. And the city needs to realize that the fans bring money, shit tons of money, to the city when there are home games. So, with that said, I say since college football is obviously around for fans, and the team benefits from the fans by our money supporting them and their facilities, the college benefits from the fans for the same reason, and the city benefits from our money, I say they should listen to us, and not you, who seems more interested in city politics than U of M football.
Does this make any sense to anyone else? This might be my favorite post ever.
sorry, I guess my point was too complex for you. In layman's terms, the people who provide the money, which are the fans (stay with me now, I know its getting complex) should be pandered too. Which means if the fans want night games, the city and school should provide one for them, since without them, there would be no football team and a lot less money going through ann arbor on saturdays in the fall. Was that simple enough for you?
the people who reallly don't want night games donate a lot more money than the people who reallly do.
And people who pay tuition and buy the majority of the tickets do want night games.
And as with season tickets, the waitlist for the opportunity to pay tuition is also long. You cannot use it as leverage against the AD.
You are making an emotional argument that has no basis in fact and does not take into consideration the economics of the issue. Emotion will not win the day here.
NONE of that tuition goes to the Athletic Department. And those people who pay tuition get cheaper tickets than anyone else. They are the last people the athletic department are going to listen to.
Your season ticket (assuming you have one) and "preferred seating" donation are drops in the bucket. Even if you could get a thousand people to band together and refuse to re-up without a night game, there would be a thousand more ready to take your place. Even in this economy, I am will to bet the season ticket waitlist is that long.
exactly. the waiting list for season tickets is ridiculous. Bill Martin is not afraid of people not renewing, even in this economy.
realized that a night game or two spiced up their seasons. Even the daytime purists came around and like the night time vibe a Wrigley.
let me guess, your a morning person? night games are fun. I wouldn't mind one or two a year.
Except maybe the delusions of some very belligerent posters...
The only real reason I can think of for not having night games is so that all of the senior citizens who sit between the thirties can get to bed on time.
Other than that, I think it would be great. The "safety issue" is hogwash. When traffic is gridlocked and the nearest car is less than a foot away, what does it matter that you can't see a mile down the road?
The Big House needs a noise/attitude infusion. I think night games might provide that infusion. It sure would be worth trying once to see if it made a difference. It would be great if the Big House had an atmosphere like the Swamp or "Death Valley" (LSU's, not Clemson's). As it stands, the Big House sounds more like the Big Recital at Hill Auditorium on Saturdays.
And, as for the "neighbors," if you really, honestly can't stay up until eleven on Saturday night, MOVE.
If anyone is really concerned about the logistics of having night games in a town the size of Ann Arbor, there are plenty of people in places like Norman, Gainesville, Tallahassee, State College, and Knoxville who will be more than happy to explain why any fears are unfounded.
The only thing they could do that would be better is to start selling beer at the games like they do in most states.
I can get beer while watching a crap school like USF, but it still isn't legal in Michigan. What a crock.
I was under the impression that you couldn't sell booze if the stadium was on a college campus - hence your ability to drink yourself more retarded than usual at USF (raymond james stadium) but not at Michigan, or any other stadium on a campus.
you can on non-college stadiums (like the Metro-dome) but not on college campuses...
You hit the nail right square on the head! 70-80 percent of Michigan fans definately need an attitude adjustment. It's getting to the point of being totally ridiculous.
attitude adjustment," what do you think the other 20-30 percent need when, in order to have more fun at a game, need it to be dark and later on in the day?
Sorry, I've gone to plenty of Michigan games in the past, and had plenty of fun. I didn't think it needed anything.
Maybe its the 20-30 percent that need the attitude adjustment.
Whether you or I feel that way or not, there are laws on the books in Ann Arbor that make it very expensive for UM to schedule a night game, and there are some very vocal opponents waiting to cause a stink. They would have to grease palms from here to Detroit to make it happen. It ain't gonna happen anytime soon. Take my word on this.
The safety issues are real, in my opinion, just from my experience driving around town on game day. But even if they were illusory, UM has to pay for the extra cops and the rerouting as it is and increased hazard (as darkness is deemed to be) would merit increased staffing/costs. Because Ann Arbor is losing tax revenue because Pfizer left and residential properties are being devalued, there is increasing pressure from the citizenry for UM to pony up for services, like fire protection, etc. No one would let this slide by.
Right now, people are up in arms because the bridge at Stadium has been closed to one lane in each direction because it is falling apart and the construction traffic on the stadium is being blamed. Bill Martin isn't looking for a new fight right now.
Obviously. There is no way night games could happen until 2010 or 2011. But I also heard rumors about an ice hockey game that could happen in the future at the Big House once the construction is done. Theres no way they could have a hockey game at night? Maybe if they experiment with the hockey game, they will see how great night games really are.
As is often the case, Other Chris hits the nail on the head. No matter how great the game would be, no matter how fun, no matter what sport is played, it's not going to happen unless "fun" can be translated into the dollars and political capital necessary to overcome the above obstacles. While hearts are in the right place, an online petition about the "electricity in the air" at a "party game," isn't going to amount to a hill of beans (no matter what the assistant AD said) unless those issues are addressed.
How has virtually every other major college program in all types of cities solved these problems (or worked around them), yet Ann Arbor still hides behind the same "safety/costs" concerns?
Why does only Michigan and Notre Dame (to my knowledge) continue to refuse night games? Personally, I think we should distance ourselves from ND as much as possible on principle.
How come Texas Tech can find the "dollars" necessary for extra security/lights/police, yet Michigan cannot?
Pose those questions to the AD or those opposed to night games. Better yet, provide them with the answers, because those are the people that need to be convinced. They won't be convinced to hold night games simply for the fun of it.
It doesn't matter if any of the arguments in opposition to night games are legitimate or not. They exist and they need to be addressed, either by demonstrating to the AD or the opponents that those arguments are unfounded, that a workable solution can be provided, and/or that any costs will be outweighed by the benefits. It's a business/political decision, and it needs to be approached as such.
I directed them to you because you seemed to be suggesting that real concerns for safety and the extra cash demands are preventing the night game from happening.
I apologize; I seem to have misunderstood your post. And you are correct: those questions should be directed to the AD.
My personal belief is that many of the wealthy alums are strongly aligned against night games, and the administration hides behind the safety/cash cards. Because given the resources available to the athletic department (one of few that operates in the black), I have to believe night games could happen with a proper commitment.
Therefore, I am forced to agree that the "fun" of night games will be unpersuasive alone. But I really wish it were not so.
1. Are any of them as big as the Big House?
2. For the few that are nearly as large (or temporarily larger during the reconstruction), are they located at the main intersection of the city, or are they out in a cow pasture miles from anything?
You know the answers.* As many people have pointed out, there is no compelling reason to generate excitement -- the stadium is going to fill unless the weather is shockingly bad -- and there are all the reasons the city has to fight this tooth and nail.
(*Texas Tech had a record attendance of 56,333 for their game against Texas. Beaver Stadium is roughly ten miles away from campus, but conveniently situated near Interstate 80.)
Yes, it is nearly as big as the Big House at 90,000+ and is not at all conveniently located near a highway. In fact, it is pretty close to being in the middle of campus. Somehow the LSU administration has managed to cope with the safety issues that have been repeatedly mentioned in this thread. Part of this probably has to do with how blazing hot it would be to have day games at the end of August in Louisiana, but the point remains that these problems can be solved.
In my mind, the only motivation for not having night games is money. Between those who give big dollars to the University and don't want night games, and the costs of addressing the potential safety concerns, there isn't much motivation to make any changes. However, if ESPN (or any other network) would put up enough cash to turn some heads, don't you think this might happen?
To be fair, Les Miles has some damn strong traffic cops.
I fully support the idea of a night game, but what people fail to explain is how a night game would benefit Michigan Football or Ann Arbor? We already sell out the stadiums and fans already hit up restaurants and bars after the game.
I could be missing something here, but I think neither Ann Arbor nor U of M has any incentive (financially or otherwise) to have a night game instead of a day game.
Also, I don't really understand how a night game will make the stadium louder. More excitement and energy caused by something new?
By the same token, I don't understand fans' strong opposition against a night game. Is it really that offensive?
I think fans don't get how us being "different" is what makes us special. I live in SEC country and a fan of UGA, Bama, etc. gets on you the one thing you can say is "We're Michigan, you don't get it". It's the truth because we do several things a certain way because we are purists. I just want noise like all given hell in that stadium. I also live by a decree that you will make fun of when it comes to UM football, "WWBD?"
That's the fundamental problem here: Michigan fans have a well-deserved reputation for arrogance because we say things like "We're Michigan, you don't get it." The better or at least more accurate response is "We're Michigan, we've always done it that way, and it's worked pretty well so far."
We also utter nonsense like "we're purists," and you're not. When did we appoint ourselves the protectors of how to properly play football? Where is it written that games must be played in the daytime? Is it in the rule book? Simply because Michigan has done it forever, and all other teams should adhere to Michigan's standards because we have the most all-time wins? Because we're the "leaders and best"?
Now, I love Michigan. I am obsessed with Michigan. And I love Michigan's traditions. But here's the thing: I don't believe that a night game detracts from any of that. Not the traditions, not the aura around the program, not the wins, not the championships, not the lack of advertising inside the stadium, not anything.
Quite frankly, I see no correlation between "football purity" and playing games exclusively in the daytime. When other teams' fans think about Michigan, I GUARANTEE you that their first thought is not "why don't they play night games?"
You know what their first thought is? It's "they are a bunch of stuck up, arrogant, wine and cheese eatin', quiet-during-the-game idiots" which is true for about half of 'em
not really the wine and cheese part but everything else
hey. we're purists. we don't need 'noise' like all those SEC schools. our proud tradition lacks noise, we enjoy our 9-3 seasons in silence. let alabama cheer loudly. THEY DON'T UNDERSTAND
well I'm sick of 9-3 seasons. noise will get us 10-2, 11-1 and 12-0 seasons
you can't possibly believe that
Yes I do believe it. How do you explain Oregon being a mediocre team, yet they hardly ever lose at home? It's the fans yelling that does it. The opposing teams can't call out plays and they get screwed up. Why does nobody take this seriously?
Dude, 9-3 is looking pretty good to me right now. Have you been in a coma for the last 2 seasons?
Nope. I have been fully alive and well the last 11 seasons, which are the 11 seasons after the national title. 1998: 10-3, loss to ohio state 1999: 10-2 win against ohio state and orange bowl win (this has been probably the most successful season since the national title) 2000: 9-3 win against ohio state 2001: 8-4 loss to ohio state 2002: 10-3 loss to ohio state 2003: 10-3 win against ohio state 2004: 9-4 loss to ohio state 2005: 7-5 loss to ohio state 2006: 11-2 loss to ohio state 2007: 9-3 loss to ohio state AND APPALACHIAN ST. 2008: 3-9 loss to ohio state
It's clear that changes have to be made and I hope Rich is working on it. Not saying I'm expecting more than 9-3 the next couple years, but in the next 3 or 4, I'm expecting more than what the last 11 years have showed, which is lots of seasons with 9 and less wins, and ohio state owning us.
last 11 years against ohio state: 3-8
"I have been fully alive and well the last 11 seasons"
This explains so much.
What does it explain then?
In 1998, two of our losses were at ND and at OSU. Winning the additional home game doesn't get us in the MNC game.
In 1999, one of our two losses was at MSU. winning the additional home game may get us in the MNC.
In 2000, our losses were at UCLA, at Purdue, and at Northwestern. No home losses.
In 2001, three of our losses were at Washington and at MSU, and in the Citrus Bowl. Winning the additional home game doesn't get us in the MNC game.
In 2002, two of our losses were at ND and at OSU. Winning the additional home games doesn't get us in the MNC game.
In 2003, our losses were at Orgeon, at Iowa, and in the Rose Bowl. No home losses.
In 2004, they were @ ND, @ OSU, Rose Bowl. No home losses.
In 2006, they were @ OSU, and in the Rose Bowl . No home losses.
(I've only included "close" years where one or two wins could arguably take us to the NC).
So, there is only one season in the past 11 where one additional home win means anything to our season.
That was back when the team didn't need our help at home. When the opposing teams were still afraid to play at the Big House. Even 2006 is included. But once Appalachian St. won, everything completely turned around. Now the other teams finally realize that anyone can win in the Big House. It's the fans responsibilities to help bring some of that advantage back. It's can't all be done by the players...
Then why did you list all those seasons in your previous post to bolster your case?
Because I'm not just talking about home field advantage wins. I'm also saying that more wins total would be nice.
"more wins total would be nice."
Now you're on to something.
We would have more wins total because our new, night games would be so cool and intimidating (even though they would have no impact whatsoever on our home record, as Chitown shows) they would have a carry-over effect on the away games.
Hence, more total wins.
Now, if we could have only night games, with all-black unis with purple trim (for Dex), we would never lose.
why are you feeding the troll?
Explain 2005 then please. Why were they not scared for only one year?
If we had night games in 2005 we would've won a national championship. Everybody knows that.
Theres a difference. That year was better teams beating a not so good Michigan team. 2007 was worse teams beating a better Michigan team. 2008: I don't care if they were bad. They still lost to Toledo at home...a much much much worse team. But did anyone think about why Michigan almost came back against Utah? The crowd started to get rowdy after the first touchdown, and for the rest of the game, Utah had problems and barely held on...I remember the crowd against Toledo...dead silent the whole game.
2007 Oregon and Ohio State were worse than us?
Ignore the defense's inability to tackle Dennis Dixon less than 10 yards down field, Chad Henne's injured shoulder, or the the offensive line's inablility to block anyone on the OSU defensive line. If these games had been at night, MICHIGAN WOULD HAVE WON!!!111one!!!!
and the Pittsburgh Steelers (but only their Super Bowl winning teams from the '70s and this year).
All worse than us.
Cmon. you know Michigan was good that year. Why do you think they were preseason #5? Once they got beat pretty soundly the first two games, they got things together. If they had been ready for that App St. game, they wouldn't have slacked so badly in the Oregon game. That could have been an 11-1 or 12-0 season if they had been properly prepared.
Why do you think they were preseason #5?
Because the reporters were wrong.
I'm pretty sure Oregon could have scored 120 on us if they hadn't called off the dogs.
legitimate reason that, in the "old days" the first poll was in early October, after a few games. Preseason polls mean next to nothing.
The Penn State, Michigan State and Illinois games all could have gone the other way. You just can't look at one side, the games that we could have won. And yeah, the team looked crappy against Eastern Michigan, too, in a 33-22 win.
Michigan would not have beaten Oregon if the game was played at 2 AM in Yost after a 52-0 blowout of Appalachian State.
The team, its players and how they perform, is, at least in part, dependent upon the coaches. They are part of the team. So, yeah, if the team is "unprepared" that is part of the game.
As Bill Parcells has famously said, you are your record. Michigan was 9-4. That is what they were, not #5 - that was an illusion that was quickly exposed.
Finally, I don't know if fan noise would be so different at night versus the day. The composition of the crowd, and its over-all demeanor, would not likely change much.
I'm not as impressed with the Penn State/LSU thing as you and announcers appear to be. I don't see changing to night games changing Michigan's record at all.
USC is a good case in point. Historically, they have had problems selling out their home games, even since the arrival of Pete Carroll. USC now wins, not because since the arrival of Carroll their stadium somehow got louder, the team got better.
Michigan's all-time night game record is 22-10 (regular season 19-5, bowl 3-5). These are all away games, and mostly against opponents that are above average on the schedule. The first was 1944 at Marquette. I very strongly suspect that the 19-5 night game away record is superior to Michigan's overall away record. Night game advantage for the opponent, perhaps not so much.
Want more wins for Michigan. Apply Occom's razor - Michigan just needs to field a better team, not search for tertiary factors of dubious effect such as night games.
I am not opposed to a night game or two in Ann Arbor. BTW, I remember going to a Michigan - ND night game in South Bend. Night games are occasionally done there.
Having said that, here are a few other reasons against night games. First, Michigan doesn't need them. When you fill up the stadium, whether day or night, there is less motivation to do them. If a team has 5-10% of its seats empty, and a night game fills them, the cost benefit of those additional seats outweighs the safety, police, infrastructure costs of night games. This benefit is never there for Michigan. Night games will only increase the University's costs, because the stadium is always full. If the AA chamber of commerce (hotels, restaurants, etc.) wanted to pay the cost differential between day and night games, because of perceived benefit, I would think that Martin et al would listen. It is almost ALWAYS about the money. Unless someone stands to make a lot more money, it isn't going to happen. But say ABC was willing to pay significantly more directly to UofM for a night game, such that additional costs were covered, and UofM still got more money (and didn't lose money as a result, e.g., from wealthy alums.) I would almost guarantee that there would immed. be serious discussion about night games.
Second, it can get awfully cold at night, unlike Florida, Texas, California, etc. For this reason, even if night games were done, I would simply eliminate November night games.
Third, I do believe it is easier for routine for the players to play in the day. (I think this was Bo's argument, and Carr's.) I am ignorant of whether or not this is true, and would defer to those who coach and are closer to the game then I.
Fourth, Michigan has many, many alumni living in Ohio, Indiana and Illinois who travel to day games in AA, and return home after the game. With the exception of OSU, I believe other Big 10 teams don't have as many alums going to road games. Night games are more of a pain for those in this category (including myself.) As I said in the opening paragraph, I am completely open to a night game or two. But for me, and for many others, I automatically rule out a night game.
Why did you say you were open to a night game or two, then say you automatically rule them out? That makes absolutely no sense.
I am open to a couple night games happening in Sept., for the good of fans who want them. I loved going to big HS night games while living in Florida 10 years ago. For personal reasons, however, I can't easily get to night games in Ann Arbor. Having said this, my personal situation is no argument against the team having them. I believe the other arguments (primarily financial) are the main reason they are unlikely to happen.
The OP is a tool for plastering this topic all over Michigan football forums....
Honestly, I could care less about a night game; I just want us to start winning games. A night game could serve as a great showcase game for a potential BCS team, but we're 2 years away from contending from a BCS game anyways. Plus the boosters don't want to have anything to do with a night game, so all of this is moot.
Of course all of this is moot! Everything we discuss is inherently moot because we have no impact whatsoever on RR's coaching decisions, recruiting decisions, and the like.
I know this is a crushing blow to some people, but acceptance is the first step towards recovery.
I don't care about whether we have night games or not. I just hate going to games that start at noon. Start a petition for no more noon games, except for maybe OSU (to maintain tradition).
Hey, Cookie, yeah you with the long hair, are you watching this?
It's Spring and the kids are getting restless. So let's have a little fun. Pick leaders from either side of the debate to present, as coherently as they can, their arguments for or against night games at Michigan Stadium. Leave a few days for the comments to pile up. Then blogpoll a vote.
ya is there any way we can make a poll to finally settle this?
Do you think a poll will settle this? Does that ever convince the losing side?
Remember 2004? After the election, did all the liberals say "I guess Bush is the man for the job after all."
Poorly articulated online petitions and fan blog polls is how you get things done. Don't try to use logic or coherent lines of thought. Don't try to address the issues that opponents may have or allay their concerns. Petitions and polls. That's where it's at.
Eat your paint chips, and you'll understand soon enough.
Wolv -- this ain't a political blog. I've got Misopogal standing over me with a fork for my eye if I rise to your bait. If you want to hate on people for not having your political views, there's a whole Internet filled with forums that absolutely adore snide.
As to the poll, my understanding of online polls to a targeted group is that they're a good indication of what the respondents to the poll think, and little else. Example: try running a poll on job approval for Rich Rod on this poll, versus a poll of every fan at the next home game, and I promise the results will be different. I doubt our votes will have any real effect. But I, for one, would be interested to see what the informed denizens of these boards have to say.
if the options are noon games or 3:30 games, i will always pick noon. 3:30 games waste your whole day: wake up late, watch football for an hour, go to game, get back at like 8:30, day over
If they're gonna have games, they should either be at noon, or at night! That way your whole day isn't wasted either way!
OK now I know you're not serious. You don't want to "waste" your day with Michigan football? What a miserable, terrible way to spend 7 Saturdays a year. A whole day taken up by Michigan football? FUCK THAT.
I don't think it would be wasted at all. Personally, I think it would be fun to tailgate until 7 at night. I have fun tailgaiting for 3:30 games, but this guy thinks otherwise I guess...
Where is noahtahl? I need to rescind my comment calling him the worst poster on this blog.
I understand your perspective. The 7 or 8 PM kickoff time gives you much more time tailgating.
But with all of that tailgating, don't you think you would miss a lot of the game running to the troughs all night?
Haha maybe. Good thing they are adding more bathrooms!
that bears kill over 2 million salmon a year. Attacks by salmon on bears are much more rare.
Done and done.