AnnArbor.com: Michigan's Dave Brandon a 'reluctant participant' in new College Football Playoff
In Brandon's eyes, 15 games is too many. And if the format eventually expands to eight teams, then what?“I just worry about these young men playing 15 games," he said. "That’s kind of the road that we’re on. You play 12 regular-season games, you play a 13th championship game in conference, then you play a 14th game as part of the four-team playoff and if you do well, it’s a 15th game.He continued by expressing concern over player health and readiness that late in a season, explaining how Michigan's recent bowl trips have left the team with multiple injuries after a 13-game schedule.Making him wonder if a team would be able to field a decent roster to play games 14 and 15.
It has to be a concern.
In the 1970s, you played 10-11 games max, it's a big increase now.
I can't see the number of games going anywhere but higher.
I'm also, Master of the Obvious and an excellent repeater.....
If playing 15 games becomes a consistent "problem" for us, I'd think it would be a good thing.
That's because football is a lot harder on your body than basketball, so the number of games is a much bigger concern.
The issue being addressed here isn't player safety, it's the length of the season and how that interferes with classes. 2-3 basketball games per week over the course of 4 months is very different than 1 game per week for 12 weeks with a 2-3 week break and then 2 more games for the top 4 teams. Your answer leads me to believe you've never played either at a high level or you are just picking a battle with me for some reason. Either way, you're wrong.
Googling up Brandon's past objections to the expansion of the regular season from nine to ten, to eleven, to twelve, to the addition of a conference championship game....
"No results found."
was he in a position to do something about it...much less did he have a platform where his potential past objections could be heard, and therefore found?
Football teams have been playing at least 11 games in the regular season since 1971, when Brandon was 19 years old and in college.
He wasn't AD for any of those events.
the 85 man scholarship limit. Remember, back when Bo was coaching they had 105 scholarships until 1978. From 1978 to 1992 they had 95; from 1992-1994 they reduced that number down to 85.
That's a good point. BTW, I'm not arguing above that the number of games isn't an issue, but that Brandon would not have been in position to ever comment on it before, aside from the Big Ten title game.
They're having tons of money thrown at them and despite hitting harder, are more physically developed and can better handle it.
Notice that suggestions of 18-game NFL seasons have been met by the players with demands for raises. There's a reason for this. Asking college players to play more physically taxing games while giving them nothing in return is rough even on this level.
Also, NFL teams regularly call guys up from the practice squad and sign free agents to fill roster holes while the season's going on. You can't do that in college.
And have incredibly short careers with the average being around 4 years. Have you also heard the rumor that they are having a decreased quality of life after football do to mental and physical disabilities?
If these kids stopped going to classes and were paid millions of dollars then your argument might hold weight.
So he's saying that FCS, Division II and Division III is tougher than FBS?
Because they play up to16 games max including playoffs.
Also, D3 doesn't offer athletic scholarships.
Off topic but I have to ask this. Lately you've been all over the board with very strong insight and (to my untrained eye anyways) excellent comments and suggestions. You and I joined the board at roughly the same time but for the life of me I don't remember seeing you post before quite recently. Can I ask if you were a lurker and just now coming out? And if so what prompted the flurry of activity?
Don't get me wrong. I really like your comments so by all means keep it up. I just wondered what happened that got you engaged all of a sudden.
I hope he answers your question, but in the event that he doesn't, I think a great addition to the site in terms of usability would be to ping your account when someone responds to one of your comments. I personally am pretty bad about going back to look at my previous posts to see when people have responded to my questions or statements. It'd be nice to know when I've been responded to so I don't have to check myself.
/rant
But you can go to your account and click the TRACK tab, and see the threads you have posted in, which have been posted in most recently, and which have had new comments in them. It doesn't actually tell you when you have a response specifcally to you, but you can always just click on the ones with new posts, and quickly scroll down to the you/yellow posts and see if any of them are in response to you, if you don't want to read them all.
You may have very well meant you don't really take the time to do that either and only want to know when someone posts after one of yours, which I understand, but just in case you meant you don't bother to scroll through the board or sidebar to see what you posted in, this is an easier way.
I've been a silent participant. I rather listen (or read) than attempt to add something at the risk of embarassing myself. I've always been like that.
I used to have a subscription to GBW and was a regular there, but I just can't take the low maturity level over there. Refering to rivals as "TOS" (the other site) and state as "spartina". And here I thought paying for a service would weed out the village idiots.
I think the maximum number of games in Division II (11 regular season plus 4 playoff) and Division III (10 regular season plus 5 playoff) is 15, not 16.
I guess it's possible that an FCS team could play 11 games plus 5 for 16, but the 4 play-in winners are unlikely to advance to the FCS championship game, so I think the "real-world" maximum is still 15.
Those divisions aren't full of future NFL players, though. D-3 guys are pretty small in comparison to I-A players.
Dave Brandon would be fine with 15 games if they were all home games.
Nail on the head. How about cutting a non-conference cupcake or two, Dave?
He says that, but he'll turn right round and schedule Alabama in Game 1 if he's offered enough money. So...save it Dave.
The same thing as that? We didn't play any extra games to play Alabama. If it had been at Alabama would that have changed anything?
I seem to remember Hoke saying that Michigan couldn't have put a d-line on the field after the Sugar Bowl a few years ago if they would have had to play the next week. Although it is easy to point out the hypocrisy spewed by tons of college football decision makers I think too many games is a legit concern.
I know I am in the minority, but I really didn't want a playoff but after thinking about it, I can live with a four team playoff as long as they don't expand it to 8 teams. The regular season is what makes college football great.
Problem is, most years it ended up being a crapshoot trying to figure out who the two best teams were. It was pretty rare to hear even a general consensus regarding who the top two teams were, given the number of undefeated and one loss teams. And of course, personal bias is always a factor in the coaches poll and AP.
(edited for spelling derps)
A legitimate concern voiced by a world-class bullshit artist.
The man brings up a good point. I think some people around here hate Dave Brandon just because Brian hates Dave Brandon...
Who knows, you might be right in that there could be some posters on here who are incapable of making judgements about about person based on said persons actions. I would bet however, that the vast majority of people on this site that dislike Dave Brandon decided to do so all on their own. Let's be honest here...it isn't like the guy hasn't made enough questionable decisions/comments to warrant some people thinking he's a bit of an ass.
Some people like the guy and some people don't, but just because people disagree with your stance on something doesn't make them a bunch of mindless sheep. That's a pretty condescending attitude if you ask me.
C'mon, you've got to get the lingo straight: Those of us who aren't big Dave Brandon fans are just Brian Cook fanbois.
Personally, I don't make a move without considering carefully what Brian would do. The main trouble I have is with David Foster Wallace, who Brian thinks is awesome. I've just read a little of Wallace, and I thought it was pretentious self-absorbed crap. There must be something wrong with me.
to sell out the date of The Game. Some Michigan fans want The Game to stay right where it is. Therefore, Some Michigan fans don't like Dave Brandon. The end.
This rationale didn't even require one single sniff of Brian's jockstrap.
Are you sure? I think it's just as likely that he wanted to float it out there to drum up public reaction before the conference could make it official. I don't recall him actually saying he was in favor of moving it.
http://www.maizenbrew.com/2010/8/20/1633680/what-becomes-of-the-game-michigan
This is pretty self-explanatory:
DAVID BRANDON: I think there's a distinct possibility that game will be a later game in the season, but not necessarily the last game of the season. And simply that's because... I don't think the coaches, or the players, or fans, networks or anyone would appreciate that match up to happen twice within a 7 day period. So however the division alignments occur... What you're really going to want is for that last game of the season to determine who's going to be the champion of that division and who is going to play for the Championship... Although I love playing OSU the last game of the year, I don't thinks it's necessarily a slam dunk.
But Brandon's a pretty savvy guy in terms of PR. He's not going to say anything to ruffle the league office's feathers. I don't know if that represents his personal opinion or the explanation he was given by the league. In any event, he certainly didn't seem disappointed when it turned out that the Game wasn't moved.
In the provided link, Brandon was very blunt in his opposition to putting Michigan and OSU in the same division because he wanted the opportunity to play OSU twice. He could have shaded that question like he shaded the last-game question, but chose not to. This, in conjunction with his suggestion that The Game can get moved back, leads me to conclude that he willfully hoped that The (regular-season) Game would get moved back, since there now is true motivation to move The Game back so as to prevent back-to-back games.
But even assuming that this wasn't Brandon giving his honest opinion on The Game, then that suggests he acts more like a self-serving politician than a Michigan representative. Then the (weaker) transitive property becomes:
1. Dave Brandon acts like a politician.
2. Some people don't like the way politicians act. Therefore,
3. Some people don't like Dave Brandon.
While people have to be more straw-grasping* to use the Politician label to not like Dave Brandon, it still doesn't require being a sheep of Brian.
*Many politicians act like politicians out of necessity, given that they can't be in a position to do the right thing without kissing ass to certain special interests. Please don't engage me in a political discussion regarding how right/wrong I am on this.
But I've got my own reasons, so don't accuse anybody who disagrees with you of being a sheep.
but hockey players take just as violent hits and they play many more games...granted that might be comparing apples to oranges (a little bit), but I am pretty sure these Division 1 massive athletes can handle 15 games pretty easily
The biggest hits have more force, obviously, but they occur a lot less frequently. From what I've read, the problem isn't taking a big shot from Chara or Suh once in a while, the problem is clanking helmets together time and time again, which happens every play on the lines in football and there isn't really anything comperable on the ice.
You might get more acceleration, but how often do you have more mass involved? I'd say if you compare equal levels you're going to find football players on average larger.
I also think getting hit planted in grass causes more issues than sliding on ice, but imagine getting hit into the boards probably evens it out on the whole.
As to what the effects are of experiencing the hit, I would agree that the worst case is getting laid out flat on grass, followed by the boards, then rolling on grass followed by ice (although the hardest I've ever been hit was not sliding on the ice).
The amount of times a guy gets to full skating speed not for a breakaway but to lay a hit on somebody seems far less than the amount of times a guy runs full speed into a tackle or hit.