ND / Michigan TV Ratings Prove Game is Relevant
I did some research on TV ratings for 2013 season. Some very interesting insight on the ND/UM Game. Last year this game was 5th in overall viewership. I wonder why ND thinks this game is NOT national. ND had an average of 3.92 million viewers per game.
Here are the top 5 games nationally:
1) Bama / Auburn
2) Bama / Texas A&M
3) Bama / LSU
4) The Game
5) Michigan / ND
Also it was reported in a previous post that Michigan was 2nd in team ratings (6.18 million viewers per televised game). Bama was #1.
On another note: Michigan State averaged 2.28 million viewers. This is a bitch-slap in the face of the players who worked so very hard to win the Big Ten Championship. It just goes to prove that no one really cares about MSU. I almost feel bad for the players....almost.
September 3rd, 2014 at 12:34 PM ^
I was listening to the Sirius/XM morning show this week, and one of the hosts--not a UM or ND or USC fan--was zealously making the argument that he thought ND should have dropped USC to continue the UM series.
I think most USC and ND fans would choke if they heard that. But it shows that a big deal the ND/UM game is too non-fans. Probably because they like seeing at least one of the teams lose.
September 3rd, 2014 at 1:22 PM ^
It would be dumb to drop USC. USC is as much of a national brand as UM and it gives ND exposure to the west coast and their recruits along with their alumni in the west. If you made that argument for Stanford whose history leaves something to be desired and until Harbaugh got there was rarely a top 10 type of team for decades on end, I could understand. But USC is no different than OSU, Texas, Georgia, Alabama, UM. All great programs that bring a lot of interest nationally.
September 3rd, 2014 at 1:55 PM ^
Wasn't Stanford so bad in 2007 that the USC loss was considered (on paper) a bigger upset than the Horror? Stanford is a pretty short sighted series to maintain.
September 3rd, 2014 at 2:06 PM ^
I think it was actually the 2007 Louisville-Syracuse game that was, on paper, a bigger upset (though I don't think there was an official spread for Michigan-App St). Louisville was a 36.5-point favorite at home against a bad Syracuse team and was expected to score a million points. Syracuse won, 38-35.
No doubt, though - that was three huge upsets for one season.
September 3rd, 2014 at 2:10 PM ^
Depending on where you looked, Stanford was around a 41-point underdog against USC in 2007. It was deemed to be the largest upset in terms of point spread in the history of college football.
September 3rd, 2014 at 2:18 PM ^
Thanks. I stand corrected. Losing as a 41-point favorite is nuts. I found something on this from Phil Steele (in August 2012), though I think he's missing Michigan-App St because they didn't do spreads for FCS games at the time.
Since 1997 there have been 596 teams that have been favored by OVER 31 points in a game. Of those 596 only SIX have lost the game straight up. The biggest upset ever was when Stanford (+41) upset USC in 2007 and showing what a weird year that was, the 2nd biggest upset ever was also in 2007 when Syracuse (+37) beat Louisville. The other 3 huge upsets since 1997 were: Temple (+35.5) over Virginia Tech in 1998, Central Michigan (+35.5) over Western Michigan in 2000, James Madison (+35) over Virginia Tech in 2010 and North Texas (+32) over Texas Tech in 1997. Basically if your team is installed as an underdog of 31 points or more in a game, they have a 1% chance of winning.
September 3rd, 2014 at 2:30 PM ^
You're right about the Mich/App State game -- there were no official lines for FBS/FCS matchups at that point in time. However, I want to say I recall some "unofficial" ones pegging ASU underdogs by 35-36 points.
That CMU/WMU game caught me by surprise. I can't imagine a gap that big in perceived talent/ability in a conference like the MAC such that one team would be favored over another by five+ touchdowns.
September 3rd, 2014 at 6:30 PM ^
Dropping Stanford would mean replacing it with another West Coast team, so ND could play out there every year, bring the recruits, etc. If ND is "stuck" playing another West Coast team besides USC, Stanford makes the most sense. The game has tradition, the challenge hasn't historically been too great, and the campus is a fabulous place to bring your 'cruits.
Frankly, if I was ND's AD, I'd drop Michigan as well. And Michigan wasn't the only team dropped from their schedule. They only play Navy regularly among the service academies going forward.
They had some tough choices to make given their new deal with the ACC. I hate to see the M-ND game go away, but I can understand the reasoning behind the decision, and can't say it was wrong.
September 3rd, 2014 at 12:38 PM ^
We have owned them in the last iteration of the series as someone mentioned even when we sucked! Both schools recruit the same targets for the most part and ND despite 2012 has been mediocre for the better part of the last 20 years. Playing Michigan and taking a loss effects them more than just on the field. I can see why they chickened out but they still suck. To hell with them, although I will happily buy some tickets to the next game at the Big House.
September 3rd, 2014 at 12:48 PM ^
TV ratings for particular games in any given year are very subjective. A lot of it has to do with what other games are competing in that time slot. IIRC, last year UM-ND was the only good game on. This year it's going to be competing with Oregon-MSU and OSU-VT.
September 3rd, 2014 at 1:00 PM ^
To Hell with Notre Dame.
September 3rd, 2014 at 3:01 PM ^
Why have I never seen this picture before? Is that real?
September 3rd, 2014 at 3:46 PM ^
I'm not sure. But the internet will be hard pressed to top it.
September 3rd, 2014 at 5:38 PM ^
The 1898 score was M 23 - ND 0. So that part is accurate.
Don't know about the oversized chicken or the smoking child.
September 3rd, 2014 at 1:25 PM ^
It proves they have 2 of the best brands in football. It doesnt mean it is relevant in terms of who is going to be a great team in any year. The UM ND game has not been truly relevant in terms of impacting the national landscape for a decade or so in my book. The 2011 year we were good they were nothing special and the 2012 year they were good we were nothing special. The 2006 game probably in retrospect is the only 'relevant' game the 2 teams have had in a while. Both teams were quite good that year. When Holtz was there this game (to me) was much more nationally relevant in terms of impact on the actual football year. Now its more of a TV event due to the lack of success of the teams most years of the last decade.
September 3rd, 2014 at 1:28 PM ^
Well it will be interesting to see the ratings if Direct TV and NBC don't reach an agreement, as Direct Tv has over 20 million subscribers. These contract disputes are fairly common but with Sunday Night Football and Domer nation blacked out, I imagine it will be back on Direct TV within two weeks. Gonna have to find a bar or a friends house without Direct TV.
EDIT: Apperently this only affects Raycom Media networks - which is what i have in SC - so that's only like 50 stations. Also, thanks to some fact digging, college football and NFL won't be affected. I can step off the ledge now.
September 3rd, 2014 at 1:26 PM ^
is that Notre Dame is a 5 pt favorite in this game.
Maybe it's because ND is 2-0 vs. Michigan at night in Notre Dame Stadium (1982, 2012).
September 3rd, 2014 at 1:36 PM ^
How much are they getting for home field advantage though? 2-3 points? Factor that out and it's essentially a tossup.
September 3rd, 2014 at 1:51 PM ^
September 3rd, 2014 at 5:40 PM ^
They also played at night in 1988 and 1990, also ND wins.
September 3rd, 2014 at 1:31 PM ^
September 3rd, 2014 at 1:58 PM ^
and tossle between screaming obsentities and having a look of utter dissapointment at whoever is around you. Should help you with trying to think like Brian Kelly.
September 3rd, 2014 at 1:37 PM ^
Or not to be relavent, that is the question!
September 3rd, 2014 at 2:01 PM ^
This is an uncharacteristically questionable post, MGoSoftball. It's strange to see you use the word "bitch-slap," you have two spelling errors in one word of the thread title, you're using "prove" a little too loosely for my tastes, and I have no idea how why your post ended up so MSU-focused. What does MSU have to do with this?
September 3rd, 2014 at 2:02 PM ^
that locked down their previous coach with a massive $40 million 10 year contract after a loss. I don't think they really think things out as much as you'd expect they would.
Positive for them, they only have a couple more years left on that contract WOOOO.
September 3rd, 2014 at 2:28 PM ^
All their talk about "national footprints" and "regional rivalries" is crap. ND wanted to dumb down their schedule.
There's no way they are giving up USC or Stanford - too important for national exposure and west coast recruiting.
They looked at their "locked in" games - UM, MSU, USC, Stanford (+ Purdue and Navy), and decided that adding 5 ACC games would be too difficult, especially if they use their remaining games for matchups against good teams from other regions.
Compare their 2014 schedule to 2015:
2014: - 6 really tough games (in my estimation) - Michigan, Stanford, AZ State, USC, FSU and Louisville. Their 3 "easiest" opponents are Rice, Purdue and Navy/NW. If they had kept MSU on the schedule, it would be brutal.
2015 - only 4 difficult games (IMO) - Texas, USC, Stanford, and Clemson. Their cupcake games next year are UMass, Temple and Wake Forest.
Sure, schedules are made in advance, and teams' fortunes rise and fall, but clearly ND wants to position themselves for more wins. Sadly, they bailed on one of their 2 biggest rivalry games.
September 3rd, 2014 at 2:47 PM ^
Notre Dame is now a semi-independent in football in contrast to Brigham Young. BYU has one rivalry opponent in Utah and now they aren't playing each year. The rest of BYU's games this year are with opponents on the West Coast (California), Texas (UT, Houston), East Coast (Connecticut), the Southeast (UCF, Middle Tennesee, Savannah State) and the Mountain West. Not all the opponents are compelling, but they are diverse.
ND has a de facto conference with its five contracted games with the ACC, the annual contests with Navy and USC plus the desire to play on the West Coast each year (which currently translates into playing Stanford). That's eight games each year with four home and four on the road, which means Notre Dame needs to schedule four more games each year.
If they opt to continue the Shamrock Series (SS), then that means six games in South Bend, one neutral site game that counts as a home game, and five road games each year. That leaves Notre Dame with one slot open for a home-and-home series that they have to schedule annually.
Here are the four games they have to schedule going forward:
2014 - Rice, Michigan, at Arizona State, Northwestern
2015 - Texas, Massachusetts, at Temple, Boston College (SS/Boston, MA)
2016 - at Texas, Nevada, Michigan State, Army (SS/San Antonio, TX)
2017 - Georgia, at Michigan State, two TBD
See http://www.fbschedules.com/ncaa/indep/notre-dame-fighting-irish.php