Yes, We Know That Most of You Don't Want UConn.

I guess I'm one for scheduling at least 1 cupcake and it should be the season opener to get the gears turning right. The problem with playing a big time BCS team in the opener is generally how sloppy the game would be since it would be the first live contact for a lot of the team since the spring game. And choosing to do so against a Florida, Georgia, or a USC increases the odds of a loss (Michigan hasn't faired particularly well the past few seasons in the early season) My theory is this: Win 8 games this year and have the college football world take notice that Michigan is "back" lock down a great 2010 class and then start prowling the globe for a top 15 program. We want as many prospects as possible to see the Maize and Blue on the big screen in prime time. But for the time being I'll take the huskies until we can prove that we're worthy of a big time opponent.

It's just that old debate that many high school teams have. Do we schedule "puppies" to get to six wins and get into the playoffs or do we schedule tough opponents and when we make the playoffs we are better for it.

I would love to see big blue play some tough opponents like Texas/USC/Florida, how fun would that be! It would create a ton of hype around the program and I would think be better for recruiting.

Hopefully U of M learns from this and gets on the ball a little quicker next time.

This whole discussion is similar to the closing-time monologues that go on in people's heads. 'She's not great, but she'll do.' 'He's not Mr. Right, but he is Mr. Right Here.'

Coach Rodriguez should have talked some junk to Florida and tried to get them to bite on a home-and-home. With the loss to Coach Carr in recent memory, I bet Urban Cryer would bite on that. They only play 4 away games, and have home games scheduled against OOC powerhouses Miami of Ohio, South Florida, Kentucky (not SEC, right?), and - wait for it - App State. They play Furman the following year. Talk a little shit about how they scheduled the wrong Miami, or how you didn't know the National Championship went through Appalachian State, and I bet you'd have that arrogant douchenozzle chomping at the bit. More importantly, you'd have a REAL opener, one that matters intensely and would have significant impact on the BCS standings right out of the box. Hey, even I would cheer for Michigan in that case. But I guess Michigan would rather play a team it should beat rather than challenge itself...

Well said! I'm very curious to see how much UConn can get done without Donald Brown this year. Plus I might still be on the East Coast by 2013 - it would be a lot of fun to go to the return game.

Can't wait for that Thursday night game in 2013!

But, seriously, I'm on board for this. I don't know that we could have asked for BM to find a much better team with only a one year notice. Granted, I'm not sure why attempts to schedule this opener hadn't started much earlier (unless they were kept private). It's a solid opponent and should be a good game, with little prosepct of Michigan being blown out for the opening of the new stadium.

Could be worse. Could have scheduled MINNESOTA.

Being a Connecticut resident (and assuming to still be one four years from now), I guess I should warm up to this. And I'm all for moving the game to the Yale Bowl, which would be even closer.

Still would have liked Syracuse-in-Yankee-Stadium better, though, especially because of this: http://thequad.blogs.nytimes.com/2009/07/24/a-snub-for-syracuse/

I'm probably being a nitpicky douche here, but it was in 1995 that we beat BC on the road. In 1994 we played them at home.

This was a great post though. Very informative and well-researched. My only beef with playing UConn is that with only 40k stadium capacity, it might make it tougher for me to get a ticket -- but I'll still plan on being there.

I'm going to be 26. Hmm...it might be fun to make the trip out there for the return game.

First off, here's what the full 2010 football schedule looks like with the addition of UConn:

9/4 - CONNECTICUT
9/11 - At Notre Dame
9/18 - MASSACHUSETTS
9/25 - BOWLING GREEN
10/2 - At Indiana
10/9 - MICHIGAN STATE
10/16 - IOWA
10/23 - Bye
10/30 - At Penn State
11/6 - ILLINOIS
11/13 - At Purdue
11/20 - WISCONSIN
11/27 - At Ohio State

I think Connecticut is a good team to schedule for the 2010 season opener. The Huskies should be the type of opponent that should be get Michigan's full effort and will be good preparation for the following week's game in South Bend against Notre Dame. If the offense comes around in 2009, it should be in pretty good shape by 2010. I think it'll take a bit longer for the defense. That said, I don't think it made sense to UM to start the season with a marquee opponent, especially prior to a road game at ND.

Prior to the 2005 season, Michigan played Penn State/Michigan State at home and Ohio State/Notre Dame on the road during the even numbered seasons. PSU was off UM's schedule in 2003/4, then came back on in 2005. In that season, Michigan played Notre Dame, Penn State and Ohio State in Ann Arbor and Michigan State in East Lansing. During the even numbered seasons, it goes vice versa--that's what Michigan will see in 2010.

In 2011/12, Penn State and Purdue fall off Michigan's schedule. I suspect Bill Martin has asked the Big Ten to rectify the schedule and put it back to what it was in 2002 and earlier by 2013 so that PSU/MSU are road games and ND/OSU are home games in the odd numbered seasons and vice versa. That should even things out.

Given the BCS format and the fact the Big Ten has no conference championship game, any team from the B10 pretty much has to go undefeated to get to the championship game. As a general rule, it makes sense to schedule "smart", i.e., with only one major non-conference opponent at the maximum. I don't think this schedule would do much to jeopardize Michigan's chances to get into the national championship game (although I think the team will have to wait until 2011 to really get to national championship/BCS bowl game calibre).

Is Notre Dame a major or marquee opponent? Despite being #2 in overall winning percentage and #3 in overall wins, the last two decades (since ND's 1989 national championship) have been kind of a mixed bag for the Irish. Their overall winning percentage is .65984. That's good for #17 overall in Division 1-A and #16 among BCS teams (Brigham Young is #16 overall). But there's been a marked drop off at ND since 1994--Notre Dame drops to #34 overall (.59615) and #26 among BCS programs.

The reason I bring this up is that Michigan has a scheduling agreement with Notre Dame going up to 2031. While the terms of the agreement haven't been made, it can be assumed that there will be some breaks in the schedule (this has happened three times since the series was renewed--the most recent was in 2000/1). It can also be assumed that the Michigan Athletic Department sees ND as a marquee opponent and shapes the football team's schedule with that in mind.

That means Michigan will not play a second major non-conference opponent as long as Notre Dame is on the schedule. The only time UM fans will see teams like Texas or LSU or Miami-Florida on the non-conference schedule will be when ND falls off of it. It makes no sense--its not smart scheduling--for any major BCS program to put two major non-confernece opponents on its schedule unless its conference is weak (the only one I think that hits that criteria is the Big East).

Why does the Michigan Athletic Department like having Notre Dame regularly on the schedule? Despite thier recent recent, ND still has the highest name recognition above any other program in college football. That means there are large fan segments who like the game, its easy to promote for the television networks, recruits like to visit during that game, each team keeps their home receipts, etc. In sum, the UM AD seens ND as a net asset to the schedule and isn't willing to change things up. You could argue--and I would agree--that there are a score of programs Michigan could play that would have essentially the same effect, but we aren't in the meetings making the decisions.

It will be interesting to see if this series with UConn marks a change in Michigan's overall scheduling strategy. In recent past, UM's had alternating seasons of seven and eight home games with an eye on revenue maximization.

But the landscape is changing and the amount of money programs have been asking for to playing games with no return dates has increased. Just recently, New Mexico State University received nearly $1 million to play at Georgia. UM paid Utah $800 K last year while the two MAC teams--Miami-Ohio and Toledo--received a total of $975K. Will the dollars and cents change the way UM does things so that the Wolverines will only play seven home games a year and annually have a second non-conference home and hom series?

It will be interesing to see if UM sets up a second home-and-home series as part of the non-conference scheduling (along with the Notre Dame game). If so, I suspect Michigan will be playing teams in the Top 25 to Top 50 of college football--that would be programs like Clemson or Texas A&M or Arizona State. It would certainly be a step up for Michigan if the Wolverines regularly scheduled Notre Dame, a Top 25-50 program, and two lesser/MAC opponents. We'll see what transpires for 2011/12 when Penn State rolls off the schedule.

UConn will have to do for an opener in 2010. They don't look that bad.
Michigan should be at full strength, personnell wise by then. Another year of seasoning for the o-line and a really good game should ensue. Michigan will win in the end. Our crowd of 112,000 should make them melt in their shorts. The stadium should be so much more loud than in past years. Imagine an ear deafening Michigan Stadium. Can't wait to hear it.

Michigan will be the biggest name ever to play there, and UConn is lucky to have a big-time team there while only sacrificing one away game.

Are you talking about the Yale Bowl here? Because, like, the New York Giants played there for two years.

I was really skeptical when I first heard UConn was the team we had scheduled. Some of the things you said though made me feel a little better about them being the opener.Hopefully they have a good year this year so there will be hype for the game in 2010.

If ND had been a true power along the lines of a USC or a Florida the last few years (i.e, if Weis really did bring a schematic advantage), then I think a lot of fans like me would have had far weaker urges to schedule another strong team. ND is the supposed marquee team in our OOC sked, but they really haven't played like it much.

I still am unenthusiastic about UConn because I don't think playing them has much upside at this point in time, but if they win the Big East title this year and/or have an excellent season and win a bowl game of some note, then by opening day a year from now the matchup will look considerably better.

I'm OK with UConn as next seasons opener. It's difficult to negotiate an addition to your schedule only 13 months from when the game is scheduled and it seems like we had few options. We played Virginia in 1995 and this could be Al Groh's last year in Charlottesville, so they do not want that again if they have to bring in a new coach. I think a home and home with North Carolina would be great to schedule. Butch Davis has that team improving and the UNC campus is great to visit. We've also played UCLA several times in the past and that has always been a good match up.

UConn is a doormat. They're a poor man's MSU. With a stout defense, and an offensive playbook roughly consisting of three different off-tackle runs, it's best to just think of this as that mythical ninth Big Ten conference game.

Well written, but I still disagree. I'll let these speak for me:

That was the same weekend as the ND game last year. Never have I been so happy to have a wedding deprive me of my football.

If that is in fact what it was - a choice. Heck, maybe there just weren't any other options out there at this stage. Tough to tell what other schools like UVa, Pitt, etc. were saying, if they were indeed contacted.

All that notwithstanding, you've only managed to solidify my reasons for disliking it.

A) Yes, CFB world, UConn is a very solid program. Those who didn't know need to educate themselves. This is a very loseable game, whether in 2010 or 2013.

B) There's no real recruiting base out there. If you're heading east, ya don't go to New Englend to find recruits and get nat'l exposure, ya go to Va, Pitt, NJ, etc.

C) There's no substantial payoff there with the return game, as ticket sales (for New Englanders like me) will be hard to come by.

Put all that together, and you have nary a "Win" in the situation to speak of - not much positives if we win, and a whole lot of grief if we lose (even to a very solid team) Still hard to see the silver lining in this one....

I was just suprised to see it was a home and home, we don't do that alot

Great reasoning. Now if Mr. Martin would apply the same 'reach out to the alumni' logic and schedule something with Washington or Washington State.

Texas scheduled a home-and-home with Wyoming? wtf?

It's refreshing to have real content these days.

Four years is a long time in politics, so I'm still hoping an alternate and larger venue can be found.

Great, somewhat calming, post overall.

The only thing I take issue with is the very last sentence. Bill Martin shoulda been on this years ago. I guess I have no way of knowing he wasn't.... but given some of the other matchups that our rivals have managed to schedule, it looks an awful lot like BM dropped the ball.

I'm ultimately OK with the matchup. Just don't ask me to give Martin a pat on the back for this one.

Now that I finished whining about it, I will root for UConn to do well this year and build some anticipation for next year.

Here, and I think someone else mentioned it (and maybe it was the OP in his diary), is to schedule a BCS opponent that you are pretty sure you can beat in the first game at the newly renovated stadium. Not much else to say. I'm on board with UConn and look forward to the game and the unveiling of the new Big House.