3 rocky mountain teams in 2 seasons. Would much rather see a Cal or UCLA on that list.
Michigan 2014-2016 Nonconference schedules released (EDIT: Colorado is a one-off game)
Let's get Michigan to come out to LA so I can finally see them in my neck of the woods. I have been waiting so long for them to make it out here. Every year I keep my fingers crossed for a Rose Bowl....and every year..poop =(
Man, if those aren't some boring teams.
I like the Oregon State and UNLV matchups. Not power houses by any means but it is nice to see Non-MAC schools on the schedule.
You'd prefer Western, Eastern, and BG? Utah and Ore St are solid programs, Colorado may have its act together by then, and even UNLV is better than an average MAC team in a typical year.
It's going to be soooo weird to watch UofM football on a Thursday night.
Eh... Those of us who are old enough remember at least two Friday night games against Minnesota in the Metrodome (10/10/03 and 10/25/91), so Thursday night isn't a huge stretch. If you ask me, playing on Friday night in a dome is much weirder than playing on Thursday night in an actual college football stadium.
I like Thursday night games. It's in prime time, and there's really nothing else to watch. I don't want it to become a yearly event that we play on Thursday nights, but I don't mind it once in a while.
I can drink to a Michigan win and know that I only have to deal with one tired day at work until the weekend.
This will be fun
A small price to pay for the smiting of one's enemies.
we need to schjuhzz you up, magnus
Yeah but their stadium is teeny. They could bring their whole stadium's worth of fans to the big house and we would still outnumber them by 25,000.
Houma better be ALL-WORLD if we've all of this just to get his commitment.
Why do you care how big their stadium is?
Because all the recruits are going to see us playing in a 45,000 seat stadium and then they'll pick MSU instead.
If we are going to play away out of conference it would be nice to be on a large stage. I understand that the Thursday night game will draw big TV ratings but I just think it should be in a proper football stadium.
Are you going? If not, what does it matter? It basically looks the same on tv. It's not like you'll be subjected to the atmosphere.
I don't care how big their stadium is, I'll be at the game with great seats.
They just recently moved up to a BCS conference, so it will take time for them to upgrade their facilities to match their new neighborhood. Also, they've come to the Big House for one-offs twice in the past 10 years, so it's fair that we should pay them a visit now that they're in the Pac-12.
Well to be fair, maybe we should play at Eastern and Western too
Utah in the MWC >>>>>>>> Any MAC school
Utah in the Pac-12 >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Any MAC school
That's also part of the reason why Brandon tried to get out of playing at UConn but doesn't seem to mind playing at Utah. The MWC was better for exposure, recruiting, and TV ratings than the Big East, even before the Big East imploded.
I was kidding.....
Are the non-Utah Pac-12 games part of the new scheduling alliance between the conferences? If so, bleh.
EDIT: Checked. From everything I can tell, the scheduling agreement's supposed to start in 2017, so maybe we don't owe return games?
Who gets USC?
2015 we've effectively replaced two cupcakes with two Pac-10 teams...and still play ND. We better be good by then.
To be fair, the PAC-12 teams that are replacing the cupcakes are pretty much cupcakes.
...still, I think it's an improvement over the MAC/division I-AA.
I wouldn't call Utah and Oregon State cupcakes. They're not the cream of the crop, but they're dangerous teams.
I agree somewhat; my comment was about 50% facetious. Oregon State hasn't had a winning record since 2009 and seem to be going down instead of up. Utah has had the record the last few years, although they too have tailed off a bit since beating Alabama in 2008. (Even though they were 8-5 last year, I don't think they beat anyone of consequence with the exception of a mediocre Georgia Tech). I guess my point is that although it is an slight improvement, the lineup is still on the underwhelming side of things.
is a well coached team, once they get a solid group of seniors and juniors they are dangerous.
take this great 2013 recruiting class against USC in 2016
We will in the Rose B--
update the wiki
never thought i would see the day when we play on a Thursday...even for an away game.
Just imagine what kind of uniforms we will be wearing then given that DB has years to prepare.
I thought the way the contract was structured they have to renew it every couple of years to continue playing.
to cancel, so it's still technically possible for no more games adter 2016
I don't think a contract was ever signed and we are working off of a hand-shake agreement to just keep playing.
I'm just hoping that when we start back up, we can alternate the home/away schedule with them so that it's opposite of OSU and Nebraska.
ND currently has either us and USC on the home schedule every year. Switching home/away makes great sense for us, but little for them. Then again, by 2016 they might be about to fire Kelly's successor and feel the game is worth it either way.
If so, here's to hoping for USC by 2028
Is there anyone that doesn't think this is an upgrade from the usual scheduling of MAC teams? I think the only disappointment is that it's not as much of an upgrade as it could have been.
Playing middle of the pack Pac 12 teams >>>>>>>> Playing MAC teams
Playing helmet programs we are unlikely to see again once the Pac 12 scheduling agreement starts >>>>>>>> Playing middle of the pack Pac 12 teams we might see again one the scheduling agreement starts
I don't know... It seems like national championship-caliber teams always player one or two patsies. Maybe that helps them rest up or improves team morale. When you've got a tough battle every week, maybe it wears people down.
Alabama, Auburn, and LSU haven't seemed to mind playing patsies in the past few years, and it's worked out well for them.
As a football fan, I want to see good football games. But as a Michigan fan, I want to see them go undefeated, even if they have to play a patsy or two.
Agree completely. To combat this, I hope that the new 4-seed system holds strength of schedule as a higher priority. That would give us the better games (because I believe Mr. Brandon would schedule them in that scenario) and it would level the playing field by not punishing Michigan for playing the tougher opponents.
but I'm just happy we're playing some real teams even if they aren't great. I'd rather watch us play Utah, Oregon State, or Colorado on a Tuesday morning in East Lansing than have to watch another MAC match-up
Plus, when we go undefeated those seasons, no one will be able to say our schedule was soft
I think I'd rather watch them play Grand Valley at the big house than play any of the above in EL
at Utah. That's depressing. I'd much rather see pretty much any PAC12 team save for Colorado or Oregon State, wait...those are the following seasons....
I am not fond of a Thursday game at all. Certainly not away. Especially 2 time zones away. Hello 1am bedtime and hello shitty Friday.
I expect this will be an 8 PM EDT start. ESPN loses too much viewership in the east if it starts later, and I'm sure they had something to do with making this game happen as a Thursday game.
Last year ESPN went with a single game on the opening Thursday (Wisconsin v. UNLV), as opposed to a double header in previous years.
...that that game will start any later than 8PM Eastern.
OK both of your posts make me feel a little better.
I'll have the opposite problem if it's going to be an 8 PM ET start. I live on the West Coast and I don't get home from work until 7:30 or 8, so I'll have to watch most of the game DVRed. Not a huge deal, but I don't like watching DVRed games, even if I don't know the outcome. Just the knowledge that the game is not live and has already concluded puts a damper on the experience for me.
As an aside, I think it's hilarious that we're complaining about the start time of a game that will take place over three years from now. Only on MGoBlog.
I'm excited for Oregon State. Mike Riley is a great coach, just had a rough year last year. With the impending sanctions to Oregon, the Beavers' recruiting will improve. It should be good game.
Didn't know there were any? And sanctions really hurt USC and Ohio for that matter
The sanctions haven't really hit USC yet, and it's too early to say for Ohio State.
But when they are pulling in half the class of 15 with 5-star talent or close to it, and the rest will likely be consensus 4-stars, they should be able to field a very competitive team.
With no depth, they are one injury at a key position from being screwed.
Also, Utah is semi-trash talking by showing the scoreboard on their athletics website from the 08 game and all I have to say is wow was that a game of rushing ineptitude
It shows that we each only had 36 yards rushing at the end of the game. I didn't remember it being so ugly
It's not really trash talking if they're posting the score of our previous matchup, just like it's not trash talking Virginia Tech to post a picture of the Sugar Bowl trophy on MGoBlue.com or something. Sometimes things just are.
Your examples aren't the same. If we scheduled VT and put up a Sugar Bowl graphic with the match up, that would be the same. Saying we won the Sugar Bowl just in general isn't related. I mean, we didn't post a graphic of the last time we beat Utah with our announcement.
Nothing I'm going to lose an ounce of sleep over, but it is what it is.
You're right that we didn't put up a graphic of our last win against Utah...because it happened 10 years ago and they beat us last time.
There's no need to be wimps about it. They beat us in the last matchup. It's relevant, and they're stirring up happy memories for their own fan base. Who cares?
And if it has to do with who won last, we didn't put up a pic of Colorado, or Oregon State...both who we beat the last time we played.
It's not a matter caring. It just a matter of not denying what they're doing. There's a difference between saying "It's silly to object to what they're doing" and "they're not doing that because they're really doing this".
That's probably at least partially because we don't care about beating Colorado and Oregon State. That's not an accomplishment at Michigan. However, it is a significant accomplishment for a team like Utah to come into the Big House and win against Michigan, regardless of whether Michigan had a crappy team that year or not.
But I do think we care about winning the Sugar Bowl, and I don't think we'd put up the score of the game if we scheduled VT for a home and home in place of ND. I get it's a big deal to Utah; it's act like we've been there before for us. I don't mind them doing it. I'm just calling it as it is.
But I mainly continued just to say I'll always care about beating Colorado. we can get it to 100-1 all time and it won't be enough to punish them for the Hail Mary. (I know, your point still stands. Just have to say while getting "revenge" against Utah won't mean that much to me....I'm always glad to beat the Buffs).
I don't recall that we fielded a team in 2008. So I have no recollection of this alleged 2008 Utah game you speak of. The pic must be photoshopped.
*sticks fingers in ears*
La la la la la la la la la.....
2015 appears to be one of our tougher non conference schedules from top-bottom
All I ask is that we score 100+ points.
by the biggest margin in history with Brady Hoke's young niece taking the carries in the second half and I still wouldn't be happy with, or ever brag about, this game. Brandon made a big mistake scheduling this game, and nobody will convince me otherwise.
And just think. In August when everyone is breaking down every singe matchup over and over again because we're junkies....The Horror will be replayed over and over and over and over and over again. "And who could forget that fateful day in 2007 when Appalachian State entered the Big House as the largest of underdogs, and left victorious"
2015 schedule excites me! We are playing 2 BCS teams, and a UNLV who has been improving as of late. It should be an exciting year.
but UNLV is nothing but a delicious cupcake. It appears they finished 155th in the 2011 Sagarin ratings which would not even put them in the top 25 of FCS
You're absolutely right bluetell. UNLV is an awful, awful football team. I live in Vegas, no one even cares about them. UNLV is all about basketball, always have been, always will be. UNLV football can't even get enough support to build an on campus stadium, which would likely bring the PAC 12 Championship Game here.
That's September 21, 2013.
believe thats to be in 2013 unless michigan wiggles out of it
Thursday Night Utah Game. Why I don't like:
- Thursday Night
- Mountain Time Zone
- Stadium is 4,657 above sea level
- 46,000 capacity stadium
- Utah is not fertile recruiting grounds
Utah may not be fertile recruiting grounds overall, but we have been recruiting Utah the past couple years (Sione Houma, Bryan Mone, Troy Hinds, Moana Ofahengaue). It could pay off for us...
Good point, but I still think we would be better served playing teams from Cali.
San Jose State and Fresno State don't really wet my whistle, and games against Cal, UCLA, and USC are dangerous (well, maybe not UCLA so much right now, but they might improve in the next few years).
It's a balancing act.
I completely agree about the danger and balancing act. If we lose to Cal, UCLA or USC we still have a chance at a great season. If you lose to Utah it's pretty much a destroyed season. Don't you think we could have scheduled a better home and home than with Utah?
11-1 with a loss to Utah isn't much different than 11-1 with a loss to Cal/UCLA/USC. I'd still call that a great season.
Why I do like:
1. It is the first game of the college football season
2. A lot of people will be watching due to having college football withdrawals.
3. It's a very winnable game and helps the S.O.S factor
4. We promised Sione Houma a game in his home state
Do we know if there are any other games that Thursday night?
Yes, judging by recent history, there will be 10-20 other FBS teams playing that day. Some of them might even be playing each other, but most will be playing FCS teams.
If i'm not mistaken, I believe there is generally just the one game on the first Thursday.
No, that's not true. On the first Thursday of 2011, we had 14 games involving FBS teams. A total of 20 FBS teams played that day.
Games between 2 FBS teams--Bowling Green at Idaho, North Texas at Florida International, Kentucky vs Western Kentucky, Mississippi State at Memphis, Wake Forest at Syracuse, UNLV at Wisconsin.
Games involving an FBS team against an FCS team--UC Davis at Arizona State, South Carolina State at Central Michigan, Western Carolina at Georgia Tech, Murray State at Louisville, North Carolina Central at Rutgers, Villanova at Temple, New Hampshire at Toledo, Montana State at Utah.
Is that different from any other CFB player or HS recruit?
Teams have been scheduling 5+ years in advance for years now, especially the big schools.
We all know what we'll be doing at that date and time too.
In 2015, we get three BCS nonconference opponents, one top non-BCS nonconference opponent, no MAC opponents, and Wisconsin as a cross-divisional opponent. Tough draw. On the positive side, the biggest games are at home (ND, Oregon State, Wisconsin, Nebraska, Ohio). That year will be a treat for season ticket holders (horray for market pressures?).
Well its certainly a nice change to not have to play a directional michigan and another MAC oppenent every year.
Trolling my Domer friend with a fake quote from Jack Swarbrick:
These may not be the most thrilling matchups in the world, but like others, I feel that it is a nice change to see less MAC and some Mountain West and Pac-12 on the schedule, although I wouldn't mind seeing UCLA or USC on the schedule either at some point down the road .
As for these game in particular, they seem like winnable games, but certainly not boring ones necessarily - Utah in particular would not be a pushover game, and Oregon State, though down recently (to the tune of 3-9 last year, I think), has not exactly been a DOA opponent over the past decade or so either.
Isn't one of the minor benefits that we get two extra days of practice?
Needs @ Washington in 2015!!!!!!!
I really like this. Sure we're not playing USC/Oregon, but Utah, OSU and Colorado are still BCS conference schools. It'll be a decent barometer to gauge how we'd match up against the upper echelon pac12 schools since we'll have common opponents on the schedule regularly.
A 2 year hiatus from the Notre Dame game has happened 3 times before since the series renewed in '78. But we've never gone this long (18 straight games) without taking one. It's been overdue.
Seeing us play a Thursday night game will be weird. Very weird. And yes, we had those two Friday night games against Minnesota but that was to accommodate the Twins using the Metrodome in the playoffs. There was no other choice there. Those would have been regular Saturday games. With Utah, it's actually being scheduled years in advance. It's just...weird. When I think of Thursday night football, I think of the ACC or the Big East. Mostly South Carolina, Maryland, Louisville and Virginia Tech. The Hokies used to make half their schedule on Thursday nights to get the national exposure.
I can't think of many other major programs that have played on Thursday night before. Maybe this is just the way college football is going?
Seems like D Brandon is all about making Michigan stick out.
USC, West Virginia, Wisconsin, Florida State, Miami, Alabama, LSU, Oregon, Ohio State, Auburn, Nebraska, and Texas (if you want to count the Thanksgiving night game) have all played on Thursday. USC usually plays a Thursday night game every year!
I think it's the norm now to have those games. It's the spotlight all to yourself. Sure, it will be weird, but I think it will be pretty cool.
some solid non conf games. looking forward to seeing Michigan football on a thursday night!!!
I love it we are playing this game. If you get knocked down you have to get right back up. Hey they caught us that day, we still should have won, but its time we get up and schedule them again. The IDEA that we shouldnt schedule them is soooo stupid to me.
Is our beloved Michigan afraid of a FCS school? If so, stop begging Treadwell and others to come here. You want 'Bama but not App State, get real...
Nobody is afraid of playing Appy State. It's just a excercise in pointlessness. Playing them again isn't going to suddenly make The Horror not exist and beating them proves what? That we should win? Well then it just draws more focus back to The Horror and why we didn't win? It's a lose-lose situation
I can't be too upset because these are legitimate teams from a power conference, but still, Oregon State? Colorado? Utah? This is a much needed upgrade from playing the likes of Bowling Green or Eastern Michigan, but still, for all the hype this got, its pretty anti-climactic.
Here's to hoping this paves the way for USC to come to town in 2016.