Who Replaces Notre Dame?
![lamichael-james-opxu-4444[1]](https://mgoblog.com/sites/mgoblog.com/files/images/Who-Replaces-Notre-Dame_B71A/lamichael-james-opxu-44441.jpg "lamichael-james-opxu-4444[1]")
![dawgs4[1]](https://mgoblog.com/sites/mgoblog.com/files/images/Who-Replaces-Notre-Dame_B71A/dawgs41.jpg "dawgs4[1]")
OR A TEAM THAT IS FROM ALABAMA OR BORING
Michigan now has a rather large Interesting Nonconference Game-shaped hole after Notre Dame decided it was really important to play Stanford for some reason and backed out of the Michigan series. Who fills that hole?
Well… probably someone not that interesting. A list of interesting teams follows, ordered by availability. I'm assuming that Michigan wants to go on the road in odd years and be at home in even years, that dates can be moved, and that they'll be looking for a home and home.
Out
Virginia Tech (full schedule including OSU in 2015)
Texas (full schedule w/ ND, Cal)
Oklahoma (full, @ Tenn, ND, OSU in 2016)
Miami (not that they'd be any good anyway)
Stanford (playing ND for some reason)
UCLA (full)
Florida (full, annual FSU game)
West Virginia (full)
Arizona State (full, LSU and ND on the docket)
Unlikely
Cal. Open dates but already has a home and home with Texas and 9 game conference schedule. Would want a home game in 2015, so that's a positive.
USC. Already lined up with ND and A&M, plus a Texas series the couple years after that. Adding Michigan would be a bit much even for them.
Washington State. Probably does not want to bite off more tough games after putting Wisconsin and Boise State on the docket in the near future.
Tennessee. Already lined up with Oklahoma and a Nebraska series during the time in question.
Kansas State. I'll believe they schedule Michigan when I see it.
LSU. Award since Les Miles and their slate in 2016 is full. They have Arizona State both those years and NC State in 2017. Some chance it could work out but doubtful.
South Carolina. Full in 2015 and has an annual game with Clemson.
Clemson. Has annual game against South Carolina and will be playing a nine game conference schedule in 2015. They've got room, but I doubt they'll go for it. OTOH, they have played Georgia and Auburn in addition to the Gamecocks.
Georgia Tech. See Clemson, replace "South Carolina" with "Georgia," add in "Michigan just got reminded it's a bad idea to schedule an option team."
Florida State. See Clemson, replace "South Carolina" with "Florida," remove bit about how they have played a second interesting team in the past.
Possible
Oregon. At Michigan State in 2015, but has nothing for 2016 and just a game at Wyoming in 2017. If a double dip of Michigan in 2015 doesn't work you could still see something working for 2016 and 2017.
Washington. Full in 2015 but could probably cancel Sacramento State or something. Nothing but a Montana game the next couple years.
Alabama. Preferably on an aircraft carrier on the moon. Nothing 2015, just State in 2016 and 2017. May not want to keep beating up on Michigan teams.
Arkansas. Just TCU in 2015 and 2016.
Auburn. Nothing scheduled except Idaho.
Missouri. Nothing but Memphis and Wyoming.
Oklahoma State. Would have to cancel a game in 2015, but those are against Central Arkansas, UT-San Antonio, and at(!) Central Michigan, so I think they'd have little difficulty doing so. They're showing games at UTSA, CMU, and South Alabama the next few years as part of 2-for-1 deals… so this may be a KState/Wisconsin kind of thing where they refuse to schedule anyone credible in the nonconference.
NC State. I know this is the opposite of thrilling, but they've got openings.
Georgia. Annual game against Georgia Tech hurts things but they don't have another real nonconference opponent lined up in 2015 or 2016.
TCU. Normally I'd look at a team playing nine conference games with a real opponent lined up (Arkansas) and say no way but TCU may want to go for it to establish their bonafides, that sort of thing. They would want a home game in 2015, too.
This Guy's Vote
Georgia, as per usual. Oregon would be exciting as well, unless we just get obliterated again. Which we might.
September 25th, 2012 at 6:18 PM ^
September 25th, 2012 at 4:34 PM ^
Put me down for Auburn, Arkansas, or Missouri.
September 25th, 2012 at 4:40 PM ^
University of Virginia. They have had a couple of good recruiting classes and may be quite good by then. Good match of schools. But the best reason is I could drive there.
September 25th, 2012 at 4:41 PM ^
Probably a pipe dream, but I would love to see some type of ongoing arrangement with a couple of teams whereby we play team A home and home two years, then go home and home with team B for two years, then back to A... Over time you'd play them enough to establish a rivalry, but get some variety so as not getting sick of playing them every year.
September 25th, 2012 at 4:42 PM ^
I would recommend considering Clemson as an opponent for 2015 and/or 2016, they are a nationally ranked team recently, and as a member of the ACC, they would dovetail the ND game, if we switch back to ND later on.
Also Clemson has a well established endowment for athletics that privately funds their football team. They have a reasonably large stadium, and they are an entryway into Southern football in a quiet but savvy fashion.
September 25th, 2012 at 4:50 PM ^
I want to see Auburn. For some reason, I just can't stand anything about that team and would love to see Michigan put it to them for a few years. There's just something about their coach that makes me not like him.
September 25th, 2012 at 5:15 PM ^
According to Cam Newton, he is a man of integrity.
September 26th, 2012 at 8:31 AM ^
My wife is an Auburn alumnus. There is nothing I would like to see more than Michigan thrash them. I would be a good winner, I promise. We would travel to both games if there was a home and home.
September 25th, 2012 at 4:54 PM ^
I'd like to see a preseason NIT type arrangement with: Michigan, Alabama, Oregon, and Texas at Jerryworld for a two week marketing extravaganza.
Friday Night: Michigan v Texas
Saturday Night: Alabama v Oregon
Following Friday: Losers matchup
Following Saturday: Winners matchup
September 25th, 2012 at 5:23 PM ^
That's intriguing but unprecedented. I don't know if there's ever been a regular season tourney-like arrangement in which teams didn't know their opponent in advance. It might violate some kind of rule.
September 25th, 2012 at 5:06 PM ^
one, ONE game outside the South since their last trip to Ann Arbor in the early 60's.
ONE!!!!!!
September 25th, 2012 at 5:08 PM ^
Missouri, Boston College, Virginia, Vanderbilt......all teams UM has played before.
TAM would be a nice one now that they're in the SEC.
September 25th, 2012 at 5:10 PM ^
September 25th, 2012 at 5:13 PM ^
I got a great idea! How about we start playing Army every year? Maybe make it a rivalry even? That would be totally aweso...
Wait...
I guess that would kind of suck to keep playing a team that we would crush every year when we could play a quality team instead.
I'm sorry I even mentioned it. I mean what kind of douche bag team would want play cupcakes when they could play a quality team year after year instead?
September 25th, 2012 at 6:25 PM ^
September 25th, 2012 at 9:29 PM ^
I wonder though, would they still want to keep playing them if Navy beat them on a regular basis?
Also, classy move handing Brandon that letter one hour before kickoff.
September 25th, 2012 at 5:13 PM ^
It would be nice to give them some payback...
September 25th, 2012 at 5:18 PM ^
lets just go to a ten game conference schedule and play the two mac cakes we will get anyway. i feel like for every 1 georgia home game we get, we get 1 away game and then about four random Pitts, Utahs or San Jose States. i would rather see Penn State or Wisconsin or even indiana for that matter than the group no team that i have no interest in watching and will never see again.
my lawn
September 25th, 2012 at 5:30 PM ^
I'd much rather play Wiconsin, Penn State, and IL every year than these tune up games.
September 25th, 2012 at 6:45 PM ^
Playing more than 8 in conference is a bad idea currently. Every week you add, you add six losses to your conferences bottom line. And add another game that could expose your big teams.
Until they go with a committee that factors in strength of schedule for the BCS, it's better to minimize risk.
September 25th, 2012 at 6:44 PM ^
I'd be careful about disparaging the Mac right now. If the Big Ten gets any worse, they might literally be the better conference in the Midwest.
September 25th, 2012 at 5:22 PM ^
My first Michigan game was the 1 vs. 2 with Rahib Ishmail running back two scores. Michigan Notre Dame is a classic match up/rivalry of storied programs. Touchdown Jesus or not, Notre Dame has no soul. You should want to play your rivals. You should be driven to play your rivals.
That said, as there are no more regional power houses with any guts, I'd like to see Michigan play Texas or USC on a regular basis Traditional power houses with good schools. When there students come to Michigan, or Michigan students go there it is a networking/ future grad school check-out opportunity. Standford could be cool, but 4 years sans Harbaugh and they'll be back to mediocre. Maybe Cal or UCLA but their football teams are inconsistent?
September 25th, 2012 at 5:31 PM ^
September 25th, 2012 at 5:40 PM ^
September 25th, 2012 at 5:49 PM ^
BC in Fenway? Could the Sox get a field together in time for a 12p kickoff?
I'd also be open to a series versus Maryland.
September 25th, 2012 at 5:46 PM ^
September 25th, 2012 at 6:30 PM ^
September 25th, 2012 at 5:52 PM ^
The reason why they have games scheduled against Auburn and Georgia is that they are traditional rivals. Clemson-UGA played almost every year between 1962 and 1995, and Clemson has played UGA more times than they have most of the teams in the ACC.
Clemson, OTOH, hasn't played a regular season game outside the ACC footprint since the 90s, and those games were in MO and TX (I'm not counting the game against Duke in Japan in 1991 which, yeah - weird).
UGA under Damon Evans really stepped forward scheduling some decent OOC games, and on the road outside the SEC footprint. I'm not optimistic that Michigan would get a home-and-home against UGA now, based on this very recent article:
In McGarity’s tenure, the plan has remained the same. Schedule one difficult non-conference game — for Georgia, it’s Georgia Tech — and fill the rest of the schedule with home games against manageable competition.
Which is too bad, as I would LOVE to see UM-UGA as a Georgia boy, born and raised (and, as they say, a Michigan alumnus by the grace of God).
September 25th, 2012 at 6:11 PM ^
September 25th, 2012 at 6:29 PM ^
September 25th, 2012 at 6:48 PM ^
Weird. Maybe they are planning to opt out and pay the penalty. Or maybe with Phil Knight's money you can do whatevs...
September 25th, 2012 at 6:33 PM ^
good teams should just boycott playing Notre Dame...i'm sick of their elitism and their ability to control their own college football world. Their best team in 20 years only beat a mediocre Michigan team with 6 turnovers by 7 points. I think they know that Michigan is starting to get back to form once again and they don't want any reason to move any further into second place in the wins/winning % category by losing to Michigan in the remaining years of the contract.
September 25th, 2012 at 6:47 PM ^
It's about time we finally settled this "Michigan of the East" business.
September 25th, 2012 at 6:49 PM ^
tsio and PennState have both been able to get home and home series with some easily recognized names .... Alabama, USC, Texas. So why in the world are we not looking to get these on the schedule down the road, EVEN if that means we have to schedule Baby Seal U for a couple of years. Those will at least be home games. (Michigan should NEVER have only 6 home games).
One of the great aspects of being a season ticket holder is the opportunity to see these highly regarded programs in person. I would love taking 10 years and doing the SEC (Florida), the Big 12 (Texas and Oklahoma), then PAC 12 (USC and Stanford), then ACC (only FSU) or something like that.
Goodbye nd ... and good riddence!
Go Blue!
September 25th, 2012 at 7:09 PM ^
September 25th, 2012 at 7:29 PM ^
This has to be unusual to be searching for a new rival. I do not think that recruiting for potential high school kids should drive our priority. I think we should pick a school that has passion and panache. Texas, Stanford, Florida, Virginia, Cal, UCLA and perhaps Colorado are all good possibilities. They are all schools that can afford to play anyone, have a strong and loyal fan base (maybe not always for football). With the exception of Colorado and Florida, all of these schools are in major population centers and near Michigan fans. We can experiment before we find our next long-term rival but I would have a long-term plan in mind regarding our future partner. We want a partner that strikes a balance between good sportsmanship (plays fair in terms of recruiting) and enthusiasm for the game. Hopefully, this enthusiasm would extend into other sports. Cal would be my first choice because the San Francisco area is awesome and Berkley has a new stadium and they are excellent in many sports, just not football right now.
September 25th, 2012 at 8:08 PM ^
As a Berkeley resident and Michigan student, I think a Cal-UM series would be awesome. As someone pointed out previously, they're very similar schools. They just completed about 500 million dolalrs of work on the football stadium and adjacent student athlete center in Berkeley, and everything is absolutely gorgeous. The biggest thing that worries me about this series is that Cal just won't be good enough, but considering that Tedford has managed to hang with Stanford and compete with USC using absolutely horrendous facilities by high school standards gives me hope that he'll be able to pick things up in the future.
Both schools have huge alumni bases that I think would show up very well for these games. It would be a lot of fun, and a really great series in terms of the academic quality of the schools, something you don't see often enough.
September 25th, 2012 at 8:18 PM ^
I am stubborn and facts don't matter to me. I want Texas.
And, maybe it's been said already, but I'm also lazy and didn't read all the posts, but...Fuck Notre Dame. What an enormous bundle of soft bitches.
September 25th, 2012 at 9:22 PM ^
Anyone know the role athletic dept. sponsors play in getting games scheduled?
Substituting ND with another Adidas sponsored team is my bet.
Non-Conf Adidas Teams: UCLA, Cincinnati, Stanford, Tennessee, Texas A&M, Louisville
September 25th, 2012 at 9:41 PM ^
If you want to get recruits' attention, perhaps scheduling regular road games with Hawai'i would be a good idea.
September 25th, 2012 at 10:19 PM ^
September 25th, 2012 at 11:05 PM ^
Not the sexiest pick (or the one I'd want), but they only have one non-conf scheduled in 2015 (at ND, coincidentally) and Brandon could easily talk them into "hosting" UM in 2015 at MetLife Stadium outside NYC (which means it is an EVENT) and then come to Big House in 2016.
Syracuse is trying to brand itself as New York City's team, and they are playing a game every year at MetLife Stadium, but don't have one in 2015. It's going to be us as soon as Brandon realizes how many NY/NJ/CT alums we have.
Let's just hope Donovan McNabb doesn't have any more eligibility.
September 25th, 2012 at 11:46 PM ^
I've said this in a couple other similar threads. Although they already have Notre Dame scheduled, that really shouldn't be a factor looking at their past and future schedules. For example, this year they had/have USC & Missouri, as well as Northwestern & Minnesota.
Which brings me to my next point. As of recent, they have been scheduling 2-3 Big Ten teams a season. As mentioned above 2012- Northwestern & Minnesota. 2009- Northwestern, Minnesota, & Penn St. 2008- Northwestern & Penn St. Future years they have some Big Ten teams scheduled as well. 2019: Northwestern; 2020 & 21- Penn St. No Big Ten teams scheduled for 2014-2017 yet.
Also, Brandon likes scheduling teams that have beaten us for a revenge factor: App St, Colorado, Utah... 'Cuse beat us in '98, even though we won on the road the following year. Also, they fired their HC Greg Robinson so RR could hire him as a DC.
So in review: 1)Not afraid to schedule more than one traditional powerhouse, 2)regularly schedules multiple Big Ten teams and none currently on the schedule, 3)revenge factor, 4)a team who we could realistically beat home or away, and 5)establish a NY market like you mentioned (which is something that was discussed before, that's why Rutgers was mentioned during the Big Ten expansion before we landed Nebraska). With all that, it seems like a no-brainer to me. Even if not in 2015, I think we could end up scheduling them on a future schedule, maybe in place of a MAC or Mid-Major and still possibly having a marquee opponent.
September 26th, 2012 at 8:47 AM ^
at least Vt. NH Ma, and southern Maine. Lots of alums there.
September 25th, 2012 at 11:14 PM ^
September 26th, 2012 at 8:28 AM ^
September 26th, 2012 at 12:14 AM ^
I call bullshit whenever teams use the old "it's good for recruiting" when they schedule a road game. Seriously, if we played one game in Georgia or Florida, how much of a recruiting gain would that really give us in those states? As if a lot of top recruits would come to Jesus just because Michigan (or ND or whatever) happens to play a game in their state. Especially now that pretty much all big teams are on national tv all the time.
September 26th, 2012 at 12:34 AM ^
One game probably doesn't help all that much. However, a continuos series like the one ND has with USC/Stanford helps recruiting in that they can tell recruits that they will be playing atleast one game near their home each year where their friends in family can watch them play without traveling across the country.
September 26th, 2012 at 9:21 AM ^
The reason I think the game (if at all possible) will be in CA, NYC, the DC area, etc is those are areas where Michigan has a) many alums and b) many high-rolling alums ("Ah, Stephen Ross! I didn't realize you lived on Manhattan. Would you like to join us in our suite?").
That's much more important for Brandon (or pretty much any big-time AD) - the only reason he'd go somewhere not alum-friendly is if he can get an "event" (see the Thursday night opening game vs Utah).
September 26th, 2012 at 12:31 AM ^
I'd like to see us establish inroads into the Mid-Atlantic. Play 2 games against some combination of UVA, UMD, UNC, maybe even Rutgers and NCSU or VaTech. The region is becoming a recruiting hotbed that PSU has traditionally done very well in but I don't see them continuing their success. Ideally, I'd like to play Home and Homes with UVA and UMD so that we would be near the DC area (which is filled with UMich Alums) each year. Neither team is likely to be a huge threat to Michigan year-in-year-out. Playing Rutgers could also be beneficial as NJ always produces a few top recruits, it would be close to a huge alum base in NYC, and could help to further grow the UM fanbase in NYC.
Comments