Brandon prefers UM, OSU in different divisions
David Brandon just said live on WTKA that he personally advocates putting UM and OSU in different divisions, which surprises me. He then hinted he would not be opposed to moving the UM-OSU game from its traditional spot as the last game of the regular season, so as to avoid the situation of playing OSU twice in a row.
I must say I'm extremely surprised, given his previous comments seemingly showing his opposition to monkeying around with the rivalry.
August 20th, 2010 at 7:48 AM ^
in his new job. UM v OSU on the last weekend of the B10 regular season is one of the special things about college football that makes it different and special vs all the other rivalries. I would be wholly disappointed if that happens.
August 20th, 2010 at 8:36 AM ^
both teams are in contention for the conference championship and, in that case, they will play the last game of the season.
August 20th, 2010 at 9:56 AM ^
and then I watched UM vs ND last night and there she was. So hot and so sad. Love it.
August 20th, 2010 at 8:12 AM ^
The rivalry will still be the rivalry. It's not going to matter what day its played on as long as they play every year, at least thats how I feel. I am not even opposed to them playing twice in a row. I think it would be great actually, ratcheting up the tension for the championship game. I would have loved to have had that chance a few years back. Honestly, its hard for me to imagine a setup where OSU and Michigan can't play each other in the championship game. Only thing I would be slightly worried about is that having them as a every year OOC opponent might end up in some tough schedules, but thats what we all want right?
August 20th, 2010 at 8:37 AM ^
us compared to the rest of the conference that we have to beat. We already are locked in to power teams that other schools get to skip a couple years in a row. Regarding the day of game, it does matter-the last weekend is part of the tradition, and tradition is what makes college football so great. Additionally, there is so much hype on that game, and the players are so focused on it, that if it was in the middle of the season it would really be almost impossible for the guys to get focused and up for their next game. Imagine beating or losing to OSU in an epic game and then traveling to Purdue. Very tough to avoid letdowns/defeats.
Lastly, I just don't understand the meme that says that two OSU games would be great. One critical part of the entire rivalry is the fact that it is do or die, one matchup for one year's bragging rights. That nature makes the one game huge, two lessens that. And also the chances of us or them winning both is very very small. Winning the regular season matchup would be diminished thoroughly if we then lost to them in the championship game.
August 20th, 2010 at 8:40 AM ^
if we beat them then it doesn't make the rest of the schedule any tougher, and as it stands, we have to beat them every year anyway.
August 20th, 2010 at 8:49 AM ^
Kids are kids, and with the hugeness of the game, it will be very difficult to get up/prepare for the following week. That makes a game against Minnesota tougher than it would be earlier in the season IMO.
August 20th, 2010 at 9:26 AM ^
But the first game would be huge! Michigan playing OSU for the right to go to the Big Ten championship game? We all would get pumped for that game. I know I would. The possible rematch in the national championship game a few years back is a perfect example of this. We would then get even more pumped heading into the actual title game. The weeks leading up to the games and the anticipation would be amazing, only in hindsight would it diminish the value of the regular season contest. A rematch would probably happen only once or twice a decade anyways.
"Self proclaimed MGoBlog quiz bowl stud"
Showoff!
August 20th, 2010 at 8:02 AM ^
I don't think he would say that publicly if he thought they were going to end up in the same division. Kinda bums me out because I hoped they would stay together.
August 20th, 2010 at 8:07 AM ^
We'd better get used to change.
My takeaway was that U-M and OSU will be in different divisions, but will play each other every year, toward the end of the season but probably not the final game. Brandon said he wants the possibility of playing Ohio State twice a year -- reg. season and the championship game. He said the TV folks wouldn't take kindly to two Michgan-Ohio State games within 7 days.
Competitive balance seems to be the main issue in making the divisions. Just me speculating -- based on Brandon's comments and his tone -- sounds like Michgian and Ohio State will be in separate divisions.
August 20th, 2010 at 8:19 AM ^
That he's talking about it like this probably means it's a done deal and that he's just preparing the fan base.
August 20th, 2010 at 8:22 AM ^
Although it's somewhat disappointing that UM and OSU might be in different divisions, you have to love his enthusiasm for the team come Sept. 4th. If you weren't listening, he roughly said 'regardless of the pregame we have prepared and the rededication of the stadium, we have a game to play and I want the fans to show support for the coaches and the team because they deserve a victory over UConn.'
It might be me, but it feels like DB loves Michigan as much as us. That's reassuring when the team has been under pressure lately.
August 20th, 2010 at 8:24 AM ^
As long as they play every year I don't mind. However there is something magical about it being the last game of the season, it would be odd if it was scheduled in the middle of the season, or once every two years.
Perhaps there is a way to just throw it as the last game just like they have VT and UVA play every year and it's always the last game for VT in the "regular season".
So to sum up this rambling, yes, different divisions could work, and they could also keep it as the last game of the season. The teams playing twice in the B10 championship game, if Mich wins their division, would also be interesting, playing twice in 2 weeks.
August 20th, 2010 at 8:23 AM ^
As M-stache mentioned, Brandon said the best thing would be if UM and OSU played twice in a year. I guess I feel completely different—to me, the thing that truly revived the rivalry under Bo was the fact that one single game between UM and OSU determined the conference championship, for better or worse for UM. I fear playing twice will diminish the dramatic impact that the single-game arrangement engendered.
August 20th, 2010 at 8:26 AM ^
I feel the same way.
GRRRR CHANGE GRRRRRRR
August 20th, 2010 at 8:29 AM ^
Huge mistake to split em.
August 20th, 2010 at 9:04 AM ^
I'm not sure how I feel about it yet.
My knee-jerk reaction is that I want U-M, OSU as the final game of the year. It's college football's greatest rivalry for a reason, and I think when it's played is one of those reasons.
BUT . . . maybe there are good reasons for what Brandon is proposing.
I don't know, man. There's just been a lot for us to process lately. All the RAM in the Michigan Football sector of my brain is getting used up and the season hasn't even started. I need an upgrade.
August 20th, 2010 at 9:11 AM ^
I know what you're saying. I also remember a similar situation with Florida State and Miami, although this rivalry is not one that names a conference champion. FSU played Miami on October 11th, 2003 and lost. Then FSU and Miami were selected to play in the Orange Bowl in the 03-04 bowl season on January 1st, 2004--FSU lost again. FSU lost a third time to Miami on September 4th, 2004--3 losses to the same team, a rival, in 11 months. It made for a diluted rivalry.
August 20th, 2010 at 9:27 AM ^
I agree with the sentiment, but let's be honest here: OSU-UM has determined the conference champion (within that game) something like once or twice in the past decade and, no offense intended, it probably won't determine it this year either (maybe next year?). A lot of us have fond memories of years gone by where it was OSU-UM for all the beans on what seemed like a perennial basis. That's not the current reality, and it hasn't been for some time.
This isn't a dig on Michigan's woes of late, either. The entire conference is getting better; PSU, UW, and Iowa generate a viable contender between them each year, and some years Ron Zook is abducted by aliens and replaced with a robotic doppelgänger who can actually coach. As much as I would like to see OSU-UM for all the beans, the most reliable way to have this happen is to put them in different divisions so they have the opportunity to play for a conference championship (and play a protected inter-division rivalry game). The alternative is having them battle for a single seed in the championship game. Personally, I prefer the former to the latter.
August 20th, 2010 at 4:53 PM ^
In the last 10 years, the OSU-Michigan game had Big 10 implications for both teams 5 times*. Three other times it had implications for OSU. Two other times it had implications for Michigan. Summary, EVERY YEAR of the 2000's, this rivalry game has had Big 10 Title implications.
In the 1990s, the OSU-Michigan game had Big 10 implications for both teams only 3 times. Three other times it had implications only for OSU. Only 1 other time it had implications for Michigan.
In only 2001 did one of the teams not capture at least a share of the Big Ten title.
Let's be honest. The Game will never be The Ten Year War again with each team fighting for outright Big 10 titles, considering scholarship limits, the watering down of national television coverage (the current TV climate vs approx 2 games on per week in the 70's), and the addition of a national power (Penn State) to the conference.
Considering Ohio State and Michigan still have the opportunity to win the Big 10 or derail the other every season on the last day, The Game is that much more impressive as a rivalry compared to any other.
*2005 deserves an asterick here. For Michigan to capture a share of the Big10 in 2005, Michigan would have had to beat OSU and have MSU beat Penn State later in the day.
August 20th, 2010 at 5:27 PM ^
This is true, but I don't think I made my meaning clear; what I intended to say was that The Game has only decided the conference title twice (give or take) in the past 10 years, in the sense that the winner of The Game was the conference champion. It has had implications for teams splitting titles, as you pointed out, and that's definitely important.
Frankly, I don't have any particular feelings one way or the other about this. I would like to see The Game remain as the last game of the (regular) season, and I would like to avoid the situation that the Big XII generated by unbalancing their divisions. That's more or less the extent to which I care. There is something very special about knowing that Michigan is the last game of the regular season; it's something that we can always anticipate, despite the fact that the outcomes have been one-sided lately. It's an important ritual, and I'd like to see it stay.
However, if you want the two teams to play for conference championships, the only way to do it is to split them. So you really have to take your pick.
August 20th, 2010 at 5:48 PM ^
But if you put both teams in the same division, there's a good chance that the game will be a de facto playoff, with a bid to the conference title game on the line. That would keep it as meaningful as possible.
If you split them up, then you'd either have 1) an end-of-season matchup that might not have title implications for either team involved (since they'd not be in the same division race) with the possibility of an immediate rematch or 2) a game in the middle of the season, which would end 75 years of tradition and make the game a mere prelude to the stretch run.
Besides, do you really want to play us in a neutral-site, domed stadium in December? That would just be weird.
August 20th, 2010 at 5:53 PM ^
"Besides, do you really want to play us in a neutral-site, domed stadium in December? That would just be weird. "
Yes, that would be weird, but I'm having trouble getting over the notion of never ever ever having even the possibility of playing tOSU with the winner guaranteed a spot in the Rose Bowl/BCS Championship game. That would also be weird.
The bottom line is that no matter what happens, we'll never see a group of Michigan (or OSU) players walking off the field in Columbus or AA with roses in the mouths ever again. That's really weird.
August 20th, 2010 at 6:19 PM ^
Yes, and I don't like that. I don't like conference-title games in general, but fighting them is a lost cause.
If we want UM-OSU to be meaningful on annual basis, we have to be in the same division. Splitting us up so we aren't competiting for the division title would almost be like playing in separate conferences. And most years, we won't meet in the conference title game. That's what people have to accept. Are we willing to see the Game diluted on a yearly basis just for the off-chance that we might get a rematch in December? Think about that. Our best-case scenario involves having a rematch (which most people say they hate) which would make the first game functionally meaningless. The worst-case scenario involves the Game being a midseason cross-division game that decides nothing in the conference standings. And that would happen more often than people realize.
August 20th, 2010 at 6:39 PM ^
Well-stated, and a much better argument than your OU-Nebraska analogy. As mentioned, I'm torn, but you've almost got me convinced. Unfortunately, I'm not Dave Brandon, Gene Smith or Jim Delaney, so I'm not sure that does you any good.
At the end of the day, I still believe that so long as the teams play each other every year, and neither team has an extended (and I'm talking much longer than our current swoon) fall from grace, the rivalry will be fine. After all, it's a matter of perspective -- as any Sparty knows, the UM-MSU game is the biggest game of the sporting world every year, and it's usually played in October with no B10 title implications. And the perspective of the average Michigan-OSU fan will not change regardless of when the game is played.
August 20th, 2010 at 8:34 AM ^
Love Brandon.....absolutely hate this idea to my core. I thought this was the only absolute no brainer in the expansion talk. OSU-Mich needs to be the last game of the year. The SEC set it up right. Why are we fucking with a good formula? Alabama-Auburn play the last game of the year with 1 or the other usually having SEC title game implications. K.I.S.S. people. So now what is the last game of the year? Nebraska? MSU? Let's play our big rival Illinois last that seems like a good idea.
August 20th, 2010 at 8:34 AM ^
as the premier teams in the league. Bet that's how he sees it.
August 20th, 2010 at 8:37 AM ^
I think this is a done deal - I'll quote my thinking from this thread [since we can't link to specific comments any more]:
If we count:
- five votes "west" for containing OSU and Michigan in the "east"
- four votes east for splitting us up (I'll put MSU and PSU down for the split)
- Nebraska doesn't get a vote
So it comes down to what do OSU and Michigan want. If one of us votes with the west, then same division. If we both vote split ....
Sounds like Brandon is voting split. Based on yesterdays post from Columbus, sounds like tuOSU is leaning the same way.
So, they're just putting the wrapper on the Bo and Woody divisions now. You know the end of the picks when you're picking your team on the playground.
August 20th, 2010 at 8:38 AM ^
would be the only way to provide the opportunity to play each other for the Big Ten Championship - right? What other game could possibly match that hype?
I know keeping them in the same division would still make that game very important if they were both in contention for playing for the Big Ten Championship, but still - actually playing for the BTC, in my opinion, would be much, much better.
August 20th, 2010 at 6:14 PM ^
Even if UM and OSU are both strong programs, they won't meet in the title game very often. People (including possibly Brandon) need to let go of the romanticized 1970s notion of UM and OSU dominating the league. Most years, we won't meet in the title game.
And really, do you want to see UM/OSU on a neutral field in Indiana, in a domed NFL stadium? The Big Ten Title Game will be a craptastic commercialfest like all the other conference title games. That's not how I want to play OSU. Tradition dictates that we play them every year, at the end of the regular season, in either our stadium or theirs.
August 20th, 2010 at 8:41 AM ^
seeming position in splitting the two up.
If the Big Ten is set on splitting UM/OSU up, then it would be best if Brandon comes out for it as soon as possible. This could have been from influence from the Big Ten, or a decision Brandon would have made himself.
To me, this statement is a very strong indicator that UM/OSU will be in seperate divisions.
August 20th, 2010 at 9:01 AM ^
Moving the game to any other point in the conference season would cause me to have to listen to all the TUOOS fans around me say it was moved because it doesn't matter anymore because of their recent domination. The sad part is, the attitude down here is beginning to get that way anyway. The Miami game for OSU is in one half season ticket set for employees and Michigan is in the other. Most of my coworkers that got the packet that included Michigan were pissed off because they didn't get any good games. We need to reverse fortunes this year before it drives me mad.
August 20th, 2010 at 9:22 AM ^
I don't want it moved at all. I want UM and OSU in the same division. Man's game, win or go home. Win The Game in the regular season and lose The Game / B10 CG? The point of The Game is to have all of the chips on the table and someone isn't leaving with them. I just hate everything about what Brandon is suggesting, nothing against the guy personally. As to folks here saying that his suggesting this means it has credo...I don't know, Gene Smith is suggesting the opposite and I don't think that means it has any more whispers of truth than this. We'll see.
August 20th, 2010 at 9:02 AM ^
I think being in different divisions would actually be better. That assures UofM 1 game during the regular season. The "rivalry" game and then of course the bragging rights to the championship game. It also is a bigger draw for fans and if we are both in the same division then we couldn't meet in the championship game. I think most would like to see the big 2 throw down 2 times a year. I have to agree with Brandon on his call.
Go Blue
August 20th, 2010 at 9:15 AM ^
I don't care whether M and OSU are in different divisions or not. The cross-protected game doesn't bother me. But it absolutely, positively, MUST be the last game of the season. I will brook no debate about this. If there's a rematch a week later, so what: I think that'd increase, not decrease, the intrigue.
August 20th, 2010 at 9:15 AM ^
Either way, Michigan OSU is the premier matchup in the Big 10 and one of the top 5 in all of sports. You never want a situation where the best television teams in the conference NEVER get to play each other in a conference title game. That may eventually replace UM/OSU as the biggest Big 10 game of the year. But if there is never a chance that Michigan and OSU can meet in that game? That's a bad tv decision. Best product on the biggest stage. Financially it makes all the sense in the world.
August 20th, 2010 at 11:14 AM ^
That was a huge rivalry and then when the Big 12 they didn't even play each other every year.
August 20th, 2010 at 9:17 AM ^
don't mind it being at different times during the season. Go Miami-Florida State if they want, play it is as the opener, Monday night, Labor Day Weekend, yeah baby!!
August 20th, 2010 at 9:48 AM ^
If so, here's my attempt to shoot it down:
Put Michigan and Ohio State in different divisions with a protected annual rivalry game and say goodbye to any semblance of "competitive fairness" in the Big Ten.
The reality is there is no way to split them up without making a mess. Try it, you'll see. Maybe if you also sever MSU, creating a land-grant division and a quality-academics (a.k.a., "our doctors are better than your doctors") division:
- MSU, OSU, PSU, Illinois, Indiana, Purdue
- Michigan, Northwestern, Wisconsin, Minnesota, Iowa, Nebraska
August 20th, 2010 at 9:29 AM ^
I'll say what others have said another time. I think a UM-OSU game at the season's end is a huge part of our season and cannot be eliminated. It's tradition, and that is what MIchigan football is all about.
August 20th, 2010 at 9:31 AM ^
increase our chance to get to the Big Ten championship game though?
August 20th, 2010 at 9:47 AM ^
OSU's Gene Smith has been saying very similar things which leads me to believe like a post already mentioned that this is most likely a done deal and that they're just getting their respective fan bases prepared. Whether it happens or not, it really comes down to revenue for the conference. Afterall, they added the championship game for more late season exposure and ultimately more money. They're going to set this thing up with the highest percent chance of making the most money every single year. With Ohio State and Michigan being the Big Ten's classic "big two," financially it makes sense for them to be in separate divisions. Unfortunately for a lot of us, myself included, having the OSU-Michigan game not be the last game of the (regular) season really tugs on the "tradition strings" we all have regarding this rivalry.
August 20th, 2010 at 9:54 AM ^
It seems like this is happening, so it's probably pointless to try to talk it down at this point. Here are a few positives that I can think of....
- Once UM / Rodriguez get this whole winning again thing worked out, we're probably looking at a much better chance of getting to the title game without OSU in the division. Assuming UM gets back to beating OSU 50/50, UM is looking at making the title game 1 out of 3 or 2 out of 5 times when you factor in other teams rising up. Without OSU in the division, that probably goes up to 3 out of 5 or 1 of 2. So it's better, I think, has to be.
- We can get creative and find another place to traditionally have the UM / OSU game. I'd be for it being the opening game of the Big Ten season. First weekend of October, be there. (theoretically, this could help UM against OSU if we stick to the spread, weather being better).
- Have to assume we're in the same division with Nebraska (I imagine OSU and PSU are going together), so UM is probably going to get to end the season with Nebraska every year, so that would be solid. We could also finish every season with MSU, which would be interesting.
All that being said, I still would rather have it at the end of the season. Just trying to find some positives.
August 20th, 2010 at 10:00 AM ^
1) If M/OSU are in different divisions I feel that The Game would lose some luster since the outcome wouldn't directly affect either team's standing in their respective division. The within-division rivalry would be lacking. The only way to regain some luster would be for both teams to play again in the Big Ten Championship game, which may or may not always happen.
2) If M/OSU are in the same division, we could continue to play them in the last game. There would be a lot more riding on that game (possible bowl game appearance, maybe a chance to play in B10 championship game) and the within-division rivalry would be preserved.
I prefer 2) myself.
August 20th, 2010 at 10:03 AM ^
I would love to continue to play OSU on the last game of the year, but since we are going to 2 divisions, it just isn't practible. within the confines of the new landscape of the Big Ten
Being is separate divisions, if OSU and M are the 2 best teams in the conference, then they will meet in the last game of the season, with the game carrying huge implications. If M and OSU are in the same division they will never meet in the final game of the season, which would also be sad. Gotta pick your poison, I guess.
August 20th, 2010 at 10:52 AM ^
August 20th, 2010 at 11:11 AM ^
Thanks. I wonder though, would it be Michigan vs MSU in the last game of the regular season, since MSU would be losing their game with PSU.
August 20th, 2010 at 1:58 PM ^
August 20th, 2010 at 10:13 AM ^
It's just so unbelievably stupid. Paterno doesn't want to be separated from OSU, so to accommodate him the Big Ten is going to dilute its most valuable property.
Make no mistake, Mr. Brandon -- if you agree to this, it will damage the program -- twenty years from now OSU-PSU will be a more important game than Michigan-Ohio State. It's folly. If you dilute this, it will be your legacy -- you break it, you buy it.
August 20th, 2010 at 10:20 AM ^
No shit. Sounds like a huge factor in this alignment is not wanting Penn State to have to travel very much. So instead, we are going with a screwed divisional alignment that will separate Ohio State and Michigan while making Michigan (and probably MSU) do the travelling. What does Michigan get out of all this? Seems to me the answer is "nothing".