Playing IU as a protected rivalry seems silly to me, but I guess MSU needed someone else and it is better than PSU. Personally, I like the idea of one home game in September for everyone so that some night/special games are possible.

I get to see Michigan at camp randall once during grad school!

"Meanwhile: enjoy storming the @ ND, @ Wisconsin, @ Nebraska, @ OSU castle. Hopefully we have an Andre the Giant by then."

Always love a timely Princess Bride quote.  

Looks like my prediction of a 2015 national championship will be easier than I thought.

but MSU recruits from Ohio may never have a game in their home state, compared to guaranteed games in the ol' state every other year for Michigan recruits.  And just last Saturday, saw a little kid proudly wearing his UTL #16 jersey at a restaurant here in Ohio...

 

I think MSU-Indiana is a protected rivalry because that's what was leftover after the rest of the cross-division rivalries were made.

M-OSU, Nebraska-PSU were obvious

Minnesota-Wisconsin: had to protect the oldest rivalry in college football

Illinois-Northwestern: in-state rivalry.

Iowa and MSU were left from the Legends, and IU and Purdue from the Leaders. The rivalries  it seems were more or less randomly assigned from there

One constant in the life of UM fandom is having to listen to the constant breast-beating about "leaders and best" and "little brother LOL" and the simultaneous whining about a schedule that reflects that relationship.

It's not like the Michigan teams of yesteryear played a compelling conference home slate every season. Just as a fer instance, here are the entire home skeds for three seasons during Bo's first decade, including non-conf. games:

'76
Wisconsin
Stanford
Navy
Wake Forest
MSU
Minnesota
Illinois

'78
Illinois
Duke
Arizona
MSU
Minn
Purdue

'80
NW
South Carolina
Cal
MSU
Illinois
Purdue

The only teams among these that were ranked were the 78/80 Purdue teams, at #15 and #16 respectively. Oddly enough, there were capacity crowds at Michigan Stadium anyhow, and that's what will happen in 2016 too.

I can't find the link, but David Brandon said something to the effect that he couldn't see Michigan playing Notre Dame, Nebraska and Ohio State and Wisconsin all at home or all on the road.

Well, that's what we currently have and now that the 2015/6 schedule has been published, the schedule in those two years would have UM playing not only ND, UN-L and OSU all home or all away those two seasons, but it adds Wisconsin to the mix.

With the Pac 12 home-and-home series starting in 2017, it likely means the Michigan-Notre Dame series is over.  The current agreement allows either school to cancel out with a three-year notice, so I assume Michigan could do exactly that and cancel the series no earlier than 2015.  

That might allow Brandon the opportunity to replace Notre Dame with another major non-conference opponent, but that could be difficult.  With college football in such flux concerning conference alignments and the post-season bowls and playoff, there might not be too many major programs willing to schedule a home-and-home on such relatively short notice with Michigan.

Also keep in mind that Bill Martin had a bear of a time finding an opponent for the stadium dedication game.  He finally had to agree to play a home-and-home with Connecticut in order to get any sort of BCS conference opponent in place.   If past is precedent, Brandon may well have the same troubles.

The Big Ten ADs approved the schedules last Tuesday and presumably Brandon knew about this possibility for awhile.  Hopefully, he has done his homework regarding major programs that would be willilng to play in 2015/6 as part of a home-and-home series.  A team like Georgia that doesn't have all its non-conference opponents lined up for those two years, for example, would be a good candidate.  See http://www.sicemdawgs.com/football/sched/fb_sch.php.  Note that Georgia has a home-and-home with Ohio State in 2020/1, so that means they might be amiable to playing a second Big Ten opponet in 2015/6.

One other thing to keep in mind is that Jim Delany had to be mindful of Michigan's situaiton vis-a-vis Notre Dame when this conference schedule was put together.  If the UM-ND series does end, it would be done with Delany's approval and probably with the understanding that Michigan would replace the Fighting Irish with a quality opponent.

That may also mean that any attempt to keep Notre Dame "close" in the hopes it would join the Big Ten Conference in the future may well be at an end.  It could also be a clear signal that the B10 doesn't consider ND such a quality opponent--or at least not one for one of its flagship football programs to play on a regular basis.

Wisconsin AD Barry Alvarez recently mentioned wanted to have the Badgers play ND because he saw there might be an opening in the schedule.  In the same article, Brandon was pretty circumspect about the future of the Notre Dame series beyond the next three years.  Is this evidence that the series is at an end?  We'll see.

http://articles.chicagotribune.com/2012-05-16/sports/chi-wisconsin-ad-alvarez-pursued-notre-dame-series-20120516_1_irish-defensive-coordinator-big-ten-notre-dame

 

 

 

 

 

 

I can't find the link, but David Brandon said something to the effect that he couldn't see Michigan playing Notre Dame, Nebraska and Ohio State and Wisconsin all at home or all on the road.

Well, that's what we currently have and now that the 2015/6 schedule has been published, the schedule in those two years would have UM playing not only ND, UN-L and OSU all home or all away those two seasons, but it adds Wisconsin to the mix.

With the Pac 12 home-and-home series starting in 2017, it likely means the Michigan-Notre Dame series is over.  The current agreement allows either school to cancel out with a three-year notice, so I assume Michigan could do exactly that and cancel the series no earlier than 2015.  

That might allow Brandon the opportunity to replace Notre Dame with another major non-conference opponent, but that could be difficult.  With college football in such flux concerning conference alignments and the post-season bowls and playoff, there might not be too many major programs willing to schedule a home-and-home on such relatively short notice with Michigan.

Also keep in mind that Bill Martin had a bear of a time finding an opponent for the stadium dedication game.  He finally had to agree to play a home-and-home with Connecticut in order to get any sort of BCS conference opponent in place.   If past is precedent, Brandon may well have the same troubles.

The Big Ten ADs approved the schedules last Tuesday and presumably Brandon knew about this possibility for awhile.  Hopefully, he has done his homework regarding major programs that would be willilng to play in 2015/6 as part of a home-and-home series.  A team like Georgia that doesn't have all its non-conference opponents lined up for those two years, for example, would be a good candidate.  See http://www.sicemdawgs.com/football/sched/fb_sch.php.  Note that Georgia has a home-and-home with Ohio State in 2020/1, so that means they might be amiable to playing a second Big Ten opponet in 2015/6.

One other thing to keep in mind is that Jim Delany had to be mindful of Michigan's situaiton vis-a-vis Notre Dame when this conference schedule was put together.  If the UM-ND series does end, it would be done with Delany's approval and probably with the understanding that Michigan would replace the Fighting Irish with a quality opponent.

That may also mean that any attempt to keep Notre Dame "close" in the hopes it would join the Big Ten Conference in the future may well be at an end.  It could also be a clear signal that the B10 doesn't consider ND such a quality opponent--or at least not one for one of its flagship football programs to play on a regular basis.

Wisconsin AD Barry Alvarez recently mentioned wanted to have the Badgers play ND because he saw there might be an opening in the schedule.  In the same article, Brandon was pretty circumspect about the future of the Notre Dame series beyond the next three years.  Is this evidence that the series is at an end?  We'll see.

http://articles.chicagotribune.com/2012-05-16/sports/chi-wisconsin-ad-alvarez-pursued-notre-dame-series-20120516_1_irish-defensive-coordinator-big-ten-notre-dame

 

 

 

 

 

 

I'm going to be the dissenting voice here and say that I actually think that the home-away disparity in alternate years bodes well for us. Undoubtedly, 2012 and 2016 will be pretty brutal seasons for us schedule-wise, but how about 2011 and 2015? Having most of your tough games at home really makes your schedule more winable without impacting your SOS  too severely. I want a national championship at some point, and I think that's accomplished by putting all your eggs in one basket and hoping for something special to happen.

TL;DR: I'd rather have a season of 12-0 and a season of 10-2 than 2 seasons of 11-1.