There Is No Jerryworld Pot Of Gold

Unless you think Alabama would agree to visiting us in 2012 and then waiting until at least 2015 for the home matchup I don't see how we make it a home and home.

If we played Alabama at home this year, we would have two road nonconference games in 2013 or 2014.  We are obligated to play UConn on the road in 2013 and Notre Dame in 2014.

The only way it would get done would be to pay off U-Conn to drop out and that amount would certainly put a dent in any profit we would make in scheduling a bodybag home game.  I think I saw the buyout amount was $2M.

edit: or we just go on the road this year and have one hella awesome Home schedule next year.

Considering how Brandon aced the single most important decision for a UM AD (the football hire - Hoke), and how bad Brian whiffed on that subject, I'd think Brian would lay off the anti-Brandon vitriol.  Guess not.

Brian, U ANGARY? 

Full disclosure: In the 80s, I played fullback for an Ann Arbor youth soccer team that was sponsored by Domino's. Our jerseys were Domino's blue with a Domino's logo on the chest. Many a free pizza was had.

I guess my question is why we couldn't have done a home and home where it was a revenue split (ie @Michigan 75/Alabama 25, then @Alabama 75/Michigan 25) so that both schools could have some positive revenue from the game in each year in which they are playing without a straight "appearance fee" or an "all and nothing" set up?

Also, I know Brandon's still upset about the return game at Connecticut in 2013 and that he can't get them to move it to Foxboro or East Rutherford.

If you think about it, Brian has really become the Rush of the UM blogs ... When someone obstructs the 'people's' agenda he doesn't hesitate to conduct a fair and balanced investigation into them. You can be a leading expert in your field or a 14 year old; he is egalitarian and undeterred.

And every Rush has his dittoheads, showing the power of mass action and mass thinking.

On the subject of the Alabama game, does anyone have any knowledge of tbe negotiations, the Athletic Departmwnt's intentions, or the issues involved in major college sports entertainment events and contracts? Has anyone inquired with the Athletic Dept?

...but is there a slim chance that perhaps 'Bama wanted nothing to do with a home and home?

Playing in A2 as the defending National Champion is very high-risk, low-reward for them to kick off their season, against the lowly B1G no-less (or in 2013, i'm not sure who would have had first ups).

Playing on a neutral-site that is practically a home game is a plus for them, and the national exposure is a plus for Michigan, with or without the band.

I could be way off-base here, as i don't know all the details but it certainly seems like its within the realm of possibility.

is this: If we are making a bunch of money, more than we would a home and home, why aren't we taking the band?

If its all about "brand", then why aren't we taking the band? 

If we're not taking the band because this is a losing effort from a financial standpoint, then its simple: Dave Brandon got owned by Jerry Jones, because a home and home against a national power would have gotten us just as much exposure over a longer period of time. 

But hey, at least now we have guys comparing Brian to Rush Limbaugh. I'm awaiting the Dave Brandon = Hitler retort as that will complete this thread's destination. 

How much money does Michigan stand to make off the T-Shirts, Sweatshirts, Hoodies and JERSEYS going to make?  We all know or fear the teams going to have some special uniform on, that people are sure to go out and buy.  Chances are high there will be some special logo and shirts created for the event.  I'm not referring to the money made at the game but before and after.

that Brandon scheduled this game for 2012 knowing that D-Rob would be a senior. He would not want to throw a rookie starting QB into AL's defense.  

that Brandon scheduled this game for 2012 knowing that D-Rob would be a senior. He would not want to throw a rookie starting QB into AL's defense.  

But Dave Brandon has to be smart, he's tall and white.

So, Brian, if it's clearly not a money move, maybe instead of finger-wagging we can consider it may be something else? And whereas it probably is something else, maybe we can give our AD the benefit of the doubt. Let's try looking at this through a less short-sighted lens.

Brandon said the 967-mile trip is a part of U-M athletics’ effort to rebrand itself. Unless you deny that Michigan, if it wants to win a MNC anytime soon, needs the big-stage exposure that the SEC and Notre Dame routinely get and the B1G struggles to achieve, then some branding moves are in order. The issue here isn't the money-grab, it's the benefit to the program.

In the past year, U-M has hosted its first night game, purchased and installed a $20 million pair of scoreboards and drastically restructured its athletics marketing arm to include more than a dozen marketing professionals, up from three at the start of 2010.

“Where we were before, I don’t know if we would have considered going off campus to play a game like that,” Brandon said of the Alabama-Michigan game. But now Michigan, the school with the new boxes, scoreboards, prime-time games, and fresh off a Sugar Bowl win, is going to Jerry World for the first ever college game played in the largest pro stadium in the country. And we're playing the reigning champs. And we might win.

Brandon says the game will create a lot of buzz around Michigan football at the start of a crucial season. Do you not believe him? Maybe you don't think that buzz is worth it?

“One of the driving forces behind everything we’re doing is to enhance the experience of our student athletes,” Brandon said. “The reason we want to create wow experiences…. is because that’s why student athletes come to Michigan.” 

I think I'm with Brandon on this. To me, this looks like Michigan is spending more money in recent years for the sake of exposure and attraction of recruits to the State of Michigan, as opposed to sunny California, Florida, or the SEC in general. As illustrated by this year's recruiting class, and the general mood around the program, I'd say the tactics are working. As far as I'm concerned, the hype bandwagon and spending is only problematic if Michigan is overspending. So, let's see if that's the case.

First, here’s a look at the money being spent by Big Ten programs on football.

While Ohio State is spending slightly more than the SEC’s biggest spender (Florida at $31,118,134), the average expenses in the SEC are $19,954,052 compared to $17,886,754 in the Big Ten.

With both revenues and expenses being larger on average in the SEC, who turns a bigger profit in football?  Here are the Big Ten figures:

Link. The above link from Forbes establishes that U-M has maintained disproportionately low expenses as compared to its major football competition in the Big Ten, and the Forbes article supposed this may be why its major football competition has enjoyed more success on the recruiting trail and in the BCS.

So to conclude, now Michigan is spending - on scoreboards, stadium upgrades, lux boxes, etc. The attention has mainly been positive (see recruiting success, Sugar Bowl invite, etc.). And re: Alabama game, Brandon will have a game played in the largest football stadium in the country and didn't even have to spend much. We more or less broke even. But, Brian, you want to bust Brandon's balls?

In my e-pinion, DB's playing an excellent game of catch-up, and he'll have Michigan's brand of success and public opinion matching Alabama's and surpassing OSU's in no time. And, all else not being equal, he's really not even overspending in comparison. In any event, my only gripe is we could've spent a little bit more to get the MMB to Dallas.