The New The Game (three different ones)

Submitted by 909Dewey on

Though I was disappointed with the decision to move Thanksgiving to the Thursday BEFORE the Michigan-Ohio game, it is now the way things are and I have made peace with the new normal.  That being said, I wanted to bring up the three scenarios under which The Game could be played now that there is an actual B1G championship game, instead of The Game acting as proxy.

Dave Brandon had said, when it was announced that Michigan and Ohio would be in separate B1G divisions, something to the effect of “The only thing better than playing the Ohio game would be playing it twice.”  For Brandon, this stems from the idea of increased brand proliferation.  Though for fans this is supposed to stem from the idea of being able to beat Ohio twice in the same season.  While this would seem to be incredibly gratifying, it ultimately breaks down functionally.  If the same team wins both games then what was the point of the rematch?  If the series is split, then what was proven on the field?  See 2011-2012 Alabama/LSU and SEC ad absurdum.

Let us take a step back however and examine the three scenarios.  They are:

  1. Michigan and Ohio enter The Game with each team having no chance of reaching the B1GCG.  While this likely means more joy in Madison, Lincoln, or East Lansing than Ann Arbor, the effect on The Game is minimal.  Though neither team controls its own destiny, the usual grudge match applies and the victor will revel in adulation while the loser suffers the humiliations of another year of failure.  This is the scenario of the 2011 Game.
  2. Michigan and Ohio enter The Game with at least one team having a chance to secure a spot in the B1GCG.  This scenario sees the grudge match in its more traditional role of having a great impact on trips to Pasadena and B1G championships.  Again, the victor will enjoy spoils and the loser sees another season spoiled.  If both teams need the win to secure a spot in the B1GCG, the intensity could be even more pronounced than usual.  This is a scenario similar to the 2006 Game but with the immediate implications regarding the B1GCG rather than the BCSMNCG.
  3. Both Michigan and Ohio are already guaranteed their spot in the B1GCG.  This is the scenario that Brandon supposedly thinks would be so great though I suggest it is sad and superfluous.  The Game would not be The Game, next week's Game is the real Game.  The rematch will determine the B1G champion while the first version will determine nothing.   It is simply a qualifying heat and it isn’t even that since the qualifying has already been accomplished.  Is there truly value in beating Ohio twice when once is all that would be needed?  Why risk injury?  Why risk spoiling a perhaps undefeated season for a game that is functionally meaningless?  Think about that - The Game being functionally meaningless.  Now perish the thought.

Ways around this sad situation include moving The Game to earlier in the season, and changing the conference alignment.  In my next entry I will propose a new conference alignment.  Thanks for reading.

  

Comments

ballertim87

August 15th, 2012 at 10:25 AM ^

I've never even thought about that third scenerio...I hope that doesn't happen (but that we still make it to the B1GCG).

We need to keep The Game as the last game (of the reg season) and I was a proponent of an East-West split of the conference, which I still think makes the most sense.

OverDey

August 15th, 2012 at 11:52 AM ^

the third scenario really worries me also, and hadn't thought about it before. too many of these would severely tarnish the game, or make it nothing more than a "scrimmage" before the title championship on those particular years.

MGoCombs

August 15th, 2012 at 10:41 AM ^

I had the same thought. It could be a situation where Ohio is locked in and Michigan has to win to earn its spot in the championship game (or vice versa), which creates a win or go home scenario, with the potential to rematch at a neutral site for the Big Ten Championship. While I think this would be kind of odd, I imagine it would yield two really great games with so much on the line.

909Dewey

August 15th, 2012 at 11:14 AM ^

to both of you.  You are correct.  The fourth scenario has an A and B version where, in A, one team is locked in and the other is locked out.  This would be the functional equivalent to somewhere between my first two scenarios.  Four B has one team locked in and the other playing to get in - this is the only scenario where both versions of the game have increased meaning assuming the team needing to win The Game #1 does so.  I think the risk of my scenario 3 isn't worth the reward of scenario 4B.  Imagine if Hoke and Urban establish a new ten year war and we get up to 20 instances of the game, yet only haf of them mean anything and the ones that did were all played in Indiana.

Jeff M

August 15th, 2012 at 11:00 AM ^

I'm encountering scenario #3 in my NCAA 13 Road to Glory -- Michigan and Ohio are both undefeated and have locked up berths to the conference championship. I'm having similarly mixed feelings -- UM-OSU is always UM-OSU, but that there's a guaranteed rematch the next week with more on the line diminishes the meaning. This scenairo will probably not occur too much for UM-OSU or other teams, but seems likely enough that we'll see it in our lifetime.

My question to the board -- imagine my scenario happens in real life (UM and Ohio both undefeated, ranked in BCS Top 5 going into The Game). What would the Rose Bowl and national championship repurcussions be?

-Would a team that lost twice still almost certainly go to the Rose Bowl?

-If the teams split and there was only one remaining major undefeated team, how do you determine who goes to the national championship?

-If the teams split and there are no remaining undefeated teams, could you reasonably make a case for a rubber match in the national championship?

Tulip Time

August 15th, 2012 at 1:52 PM ^

I was going to neg you for pretending that a video game was real life, but then you asked this question: "Would a team that lost twice still almost certainly go to the Rose Bowl?"

That's a really good question. I think the answer is probably yes, isn't it? I can't imagine losing my last two games and still getting to go to the Rose Bowl.

Jeff M

August 15th, 2012 at 2:07 PM ^

Thank you?

I'm inclined to agree - the Rose Bowl loses some of its luster if you back into it. At the same time, that theoretical team would be the second best Big 10 team, with the best team gong to the national championship. So which makes less sense for a Rose Bowl berth -- that Big Ten team, another Big Ten team who didn't make the conference championship, or an at large selection?

Also, not to start a whole thing, but how was I pretending that a video game was real life?

bluebrains98

August 15th, 2012 at 11:21 AM ^

Why do these scenarios affect The Game any more than the pre-B1G championship days? Each of these scenarios (other than #3) could have existed, but substitute Rose Bowl for B1GCG. I wholeheartedly agree with the comments suggesting you are fishing for a non-existent problem.

bluebrains98

August 15th, 2012 at 12:00 PM ^

Actually, you are only talking about scenario 3, which I acknowledged is different from the pre-B1GCG days. My point is just that all the other possible scenarios existed before. The OP could have just posted, "sometimes there will be a rematch, and that will lessen the importance of The Game." I agree with this. My point is that other than those years, nothing is different from before.

slipknot

August 15th, 2012 at 11:30 AM ^

This thread made me curious as to the idea of a rematch and what that has meant historically.  Did some looking around and this is what I found:

 

Game

Game 1 winner

Game 2 winner

Consequence

UF/FSU 1996

FSU

UF

UF-MNC

UF/Bama 1999

Bama

Bama

Bama loses to U-M in Orange Bowl

UF/Auburn 2000

UF

UF

UF loses to Miami in Sugar Bowl

OK/KSU 2000

OK

OK

OK beats FSU Orange MNC

OK/Colo  2002

OK

OK

OK beats Wash St Rose

OK/Missouri 2007

OK

OK

OK loses to WV in Fiesta

Bama/LSU 2011

LSU

Bama

Bama-MNC 

FWIW 5 of 7 times the winner of the first game also takes the rematch, but both times the original loser wins, it's for all the marbles!

 

OverDey

August 15th, 2012 at 11:41 AM ^

heard an interesting insight into initial b1g division splitting talks recently. seems msu was one of strongest opponents to east-west split as they were very fearful of being shut out with bucks, um, and psu; and were envious of an easy road to title game for wisc and neb. personally think um and msu should be split for best parity.

BlueDragon

August 15th, 2012 at 11:52 AM ^

I think the grudge match aspect of The Game will hold even if we reach 3A/3B scenarios. The conference is much more balanced than it has been in years past so the chances of UM or Ohio sitting on the rest of their divisions is lower than it would have been in, say, the 1970s. That said, it is a brave new world with the Bo/Woody divisions. I am still not happy about not getting to play some of the teams in the Woody division for very long times but that's the way these things go.

I look forward to reading your next diary. Nice work!

NYWolverine

August 15th, 2012 at 1:50 PM ^

If Michigan and Ohio are both undefeated in their Divisions and guaranteed to play each other in the Championship Game when it's time to play The Game, I would want The Game to be made into the Championship Game, and for a win to be weighted the same as going 2-0.

Give the winner the title, the BCS points and the bragging rights. Any other scenario diminishes the outcome of the first game, which even the context of a Championship on the line in the second game won't restore. Going 1-1 in either direction diminishes both teams' chances of playing for a national championship.

Bottom-line: If a national championship berth is within reach for The Game's winner, the B1G loses more than it gains by forcing a rematch. Also, the potential to sustain injuries in the rematch additionally hurt the B1G's chances in whatever Bowl games each team draws.