Shocking! ESPN tells us how irrelevant UM and Notre Dame are

Submitted by poseidon7902 on

http://espn.go.com/college-football/story/_/id/11465494/notre-dame-mich…

 

Snipet:
 

All of which brings us back to Notre Dame Stadium on Saturday night. The Fighting Irish and the Wolverines conclude a stirring 35-year rivalry with a lot of fanfare and not much else. Tickets on the secondary market are more expensive than ever, an economics lesson in artificial shortage. If the Irish and Wolverines were playing next season, tickets wouldn't be so costly.

I'm like everyone else. I wish Notre Dame hadn't pulled the plug on the rivalry. There may come a time, in the distant future when this rivalry is resumed, when more than bragging rights are at stake. But the truth is, Notre Dame and Michigan are groping about for national relevance.

It has been 26 years since Notre Dame won a national championship, nearly a decade longer than the previous longest drought (1949-66). How long ago? In 1988, Irish coach Brian Kelly was an assistant coach at Grand Valley State. How long ago? Four days after the Irish completed the regular season at 11-0 by defeating No. 2 USC 27-10, Seahawks quarterback and Super Bowl XLVIII MVP Russell Wilson was born.

Notre Dame stayed nationally relevant into the mid-1990s under Lou Holtz. They came back to the top five as recently as two years ago. But they have yet to make it clear they will stay.

It has been 17 seasons since Michigan won a national championship and that's not even the jaw-dropper. It's been 10 years since Michigan won a Big Ten championship. In the 10 years before that, Michigan won four Big Ten titles. In the 10 years before that, Michigan won six. In the 10 years ... you get the point.

So we say that college football is an oligarchy, because we know that the last 40 national championships have been won by only 22 schools. But there are some different names among the powers that currently be. Yes, Oklahoma and Alabama are there. But so are Oregon and Stanford. So is Baylor. Florida State has just returned to the top after a decade in the wilderness.

Michigan and Notre Dame will play for the last time in many years on Saturday night. It's a blow to anyone who likes neighborhood rivalries. But the national news being made has more to do with the end of an era than it does the top 25.

 

In other news, ESPN thinks the SEC is the Bees Knees and no, they have no reason to be biased.  

MGoBoard

gmoney41

September 5th, 2014 at 12:42 PM ^

No doubt about that, I haven't watched a whole sportscenter in years and all of the other talking idiot shows.  I love, love, love NBC Sports coverage of the Premier league, and their highlight show is bar none the best on TV.  They spend 10-15 of highlights for each game, and their talking heads are barely present.  I know that college gameday has a lot more games to discuss, but I swear, that show is 20 minutes of highlights, 20 min of commercials, and 20 minutes of the 3 idiots talking and bitching to each other.  I just don't have time to watch that bullshit.

Joined: 07/13/2009

MGoPoints: 3938

SalvatoreQuattro

September 5th, 2014 at 10:44 AM ^

UM and ND both have not been as good as they were in the 70's,80's, and 90's. Both need to get better quick.

To be honest I'm glad the series is ending. UM needs to test itself against teams from outside the Midwest.

Joined: 11/30/2010

MGoPoints: 79290

robpollard

September 5th, 2014 at 1:55 PM ^

- ND is as "national" as any team in the nation. Their relevance (in terms of fan interest) far exceeds their on-field performance (though obviously their many mediocre seasons has hurt that).

- The writer mentions secondary market tickets only being expensive b/c the series is ending. It would take 10 seconds to see last year's game also had tix that were $250 and above (http://michigan.247sports.com/Board/59424/Contents/UTL-2-Ticket-Questio…) and that has been true throughout the series.

- Finally, UM-ND is annually one of the top rated TV games. So the interest is there.

Joined: 06/03/2009

MGoPoints: 14005

Schembo

September 5th, 2014 at 10:45 AM ^

Funny, I've never heard an ESPN broadcaster who has called the game say anything like this.  Quite the contrary actually.  I've never heard them complain about the ratings the game generates for them either.

Joined: 01/06/2011

MGoPoints: 6374

xxxxNateDaGreat

September 5th, 2014 at 10:45 AM ^

I know that ESPN's journalistic integrity is almost nonexistent at this point, but wouldn't their relationship with the SEC network be a huge conflict of interest? I know they aren't legally doing anything wrong, but I don't understand how anyone can watch sportscenter or ESPN news and see constant highlights and opinions from SEC v cupcake blowouts without noticing how incredibly self serving this is...

Joined: 11/28/2011

MGoPoints: 2315

gwkrlghl

September 5th, 2014 at 11:53 AM ^

but that's not the point. ESPN has always been viewed as a news source which is presumably 'fair and balanced' as some networks say. Now that they're full-on into SEC love, they're really like a State Run News channel. You hear news there, but you know the people behind the scenes are very interested in controlling what the people watching hear and see. Massive conflict of interest

Joined: 04/13/2012

MGoPoints: 72

xxxxNateDaGreat

September 5th, 2014 at 12:46 PM ^

Uh, okay guy... never said otherwise. My point that you clearly missed was how can ESPN claim any journalistic integrity when they have a vested interest in hyping up the SEC? Whether or not they are the best (and I tend to agree that they are for now, just not by as much as everyone wants to believe), ESPN has a tangible benefit to keep promoting them over the other conferences, which seems like a conflict of interest for a self proclaimed news organization.

Joined: 11/28/2011

MGoPoints: 2315

MichiganSports

September 5th, 2014 at 12:55 PM ^

The top of the SEC has been the best, i wouldn't say the conference as a whole has always been the best. Also its funny how 2 Big 12 teams came into their conference and rec'd shop almost right away. I still think the conference is and always has been overrated. If you take away Bama/LSU/Florida what have they done, and Florida is irrelevant now.

Joined: 05/20/2014

MGoPoints: 2777

itself

September 5th, 2014 at 10:46 AM ^

to what extent is an article like this just espn kowtowing to its SEC constituents? not like this article presents any information both fan bases dont already find frustrating.  

Joined: 11/08/2008

MGoPoints: 1306

xxxxNateDaGreat

September 5th, 2014 at 10:48 AM ^

And now a comment from myself that is actually a response to the OP: This is most likely a typical devil's advocate counterpoint, probably written at the 11th hour to fill some quota.

Joined: 11/28/2011

MGoPoints: 2315

Chuck Harbaugh

September 5th, 2014 at 10:51 AM ^

with their own priests

Kelly cited Ohio State’s national reach as to why the Buckeyes fit the Irish schedule well.

“They’re probably equally as excited to have Notre Dame on their schedule,” he said. “We’re looking for those high-profile programs throughout the country. We’ve added Georgia, we’ve added Texas. We continue to look at the kind of programs that have that national appeal, and certainly Ohio State has that as well.”

link

Joined: 07/05/2008

MGoPoints: 113

I Like Burgers

September 5th, 2014 at 11:00 AM ^

That article is spot on.  Both programs are only relevant because of past glories.  And they've been that way for a while.  I'm hoping that changes, but I'm honestly not sure if either program has what it takes to compete for national titles these days.  College football has changed a lot in the last 10-20 years.

Joined: 10/06/2012

MGoPoints: 30575

Farmhouse Funk

September 5th, 2014 at 11:01 AM ^

Of course they put something out like this they don't want people watching this game they want them watching 1 of the 2 games on ESPN or ABC.

ESPN has become such a joke with all sports not just college football. There was a time where they would cover all games and break down upcoming matchups. Now it is all about whatever is the latest buzz, be it Labron, Manzell, Tebow........

I was really hoping that fox sports was going to be a serious sports channel, but then they came out and said they were going to be more laid back joking.....

 

Joined: 06/26/2010

MGoPoints: 368

LSAClassOf2000

September 5th, 2014 at 11:04 AM ^

But the truth is, Notre Dame and Michigan are groping about for national relevance.

That's probably the sentence that stands out the most to me when I really sit down and think about the recent history of this rivalry actually. On this point at least, it is difficult to disagree with Maisel.

It's still a nationally relevant game in that NBC will probably be neck-and-neck with ESPN's 8 PM offering in the ratings, I would assume, so there is always that. It's definitely relevant to both fanbases and always has been. If we're talking about, as others have mentioned, two teams that - most years - inhabited the upper half of the polls from start to finish, it hasn't been about taking someone down a notch in that regard for a while now, at least not routinely. 

Really, in all the ways that matter to the people involved or who have some vested emotional interest (fans, alums, etc...), it's still a relevant game. 

Joined: 01/07/2011

MGoPoints: 130679

funkywolve

September 5th, 2014 at 11:10 AM ^

While there have not been to many matchup's lately where both teams are ranked in the Top 10, doesn't this game generate some of the higher TV ratings of any game every year?

Maybe that's just a credit to the size and devotion of each school's fanbase, but to me it shows that it is fairly relevant when it comes to the people watching TV.

Joined: 10/08/2008

MGoPoints: 20263

CLord

September 5th, 2014 at 11:13 AM ^

The hypocricy is incredible.  I'd love ESPN to explain why 30% of their NFL coverage is devoted solely to the Cowboys - a team that has been irrelevant for over a decade.

Joined: 09/11/2011

MGoPoints: -6341

ADSellers

September 5th, 2014 at 11:23 AM ^

Oh is that why ESPN College Game Day was on campus for this game in 2011 and 2013? They just like to pick the most irrelevant matchups to cover?

Joined: 08/26/2013

MGoPoints: 982

Soulfire21

September 5th, 2014 at 11:38 AM ^

While there is some truth to the article, I love how they blast ND and Michigan for being nationally irrelevant but then gush over Florida State for their season last year.  Their motivations could not be more obvious.

Joined: 03/18/2010

MGoPoints: 22716

NCWolverine

September 5th, 2014 at 11:39 AM ^

because whoever wins the game will own the ALL-TIME winning percentage title.  Everyone wants a title, especially the Worldwide Leader in Sports.  This means as great as the SEC is now, they still trail both of these programs, and therefore can't claim supremacy over the world no matter how great that conference is right now.

Joined: 06/30/2008

MGoPoints: 134

aiglick

September 5th, 2014 at 11:41 AM ^

This whole sentiment pisses me off more than it should considering this is just a game. All great empires fall. It will be absolutely delicious when Alabama and the SEC eventually get theirs. Our program has obviously been experiencing a pretty bad downturn. FSU returned from the wilderness. We can do that too. Heck, look no further than our basketball program. We were in program purgatory, due in no small part to our own decisions, and now lo we are at the top of the pile competing with the sport's blue bloods. Michigan can and should be a great football program again there's just too many resources and support. Please let's finally seize that opportunity this season.

Joined: 11/27/2010

MGoPoints: 21563

stephenrjking

September 5th, 2014 at 11:42 AM ^

Many of the replies here disappoint me. Michigan fans ought to be better than flaming an article they might not have even read and assuming it only exists because of perceived SEC bias. Maisel is not some mindless conference flunky taking cheap shots here; he is making observations about the ephemeral nature of modern college football as perfectly demonstrated by this game that meant a lot more in the last than it does now. What's unfair about that? Are WE happy with how good Michigan has been in the past ten years? If we're not, why should national media pretend we're a modern power? There's no need for SEC bias here. We know the B1G has been down lately, yet Michigan has been so mediocre we can't even get into a conference title game. And no one here would suggest that Notre Dame has had a particularly better run of success than we have, lucky run to an Alabama annihilation notwithstanding. Winning will answer the critics. Until then, observing that UM-ND is more about history than the present seems... Rather accurate.

Joined: 03/15/2012

MGoPoints: 20144019

One Inch Woody…

September 5th, 2014 at 12:10 PM ^

You forget that according to these same talking heads, games like South Carolina and Clemson or Georgia Clemson or Texas Oklahoma or UCLA USC are nationally relevant or something. I mean come on... When have any of those teams won a national championship in recent years? Only Texas and USC have any right to be called somewhat nationally relevant according to this guy.

Joined: 06/25/2011

MGoPoints: 1434

Nickel

September 5th, 2014 at 11:47 AM ^

Hard to get too upset about this.  The reality is that it's typically an exciting game.... followed by both teams stumbling their way to mediocre records.

Sure there have been some outlier seasons here and there but recently this game has meant the difference between 8-4 or 7-5 for the winner, not the difference between having a national title shot or otherwise.  I think between Kelly & Hoke they can build programs that will be able to compete for national championships, but over the last decade or so this rivalry hasn't meant much in the national picture.

Joined: 06/30/2008

MGoPoints: 2768

ifis

September 5th, 2014 at 11:48 AM ^

but this game is relevant from almost any objective standpoint. This game very well could have playoff implications (personally, I think this game is MUCH more likely to have playoff implications than South Carolina/Texas A&M).  Notre Dame and Michigan are two historic football teams that excite two of the largest and most invested fanbases in the country.  Tickets for this game cost nearly twice as much as the second most expensive week 2 game.  This game have been one of the most exciting matchups in college football over the last 5 years.  Notre Dame is two years removed from a national championship appearance and Michigan is three years removed from a Sugar Bowl victory.  Devin Gardner vs. Everett Gholson.  Denard Robinson, Monte Teo, etc., etc.

For the 'just win' crowd, the two programs need to improve, but they are not bad, let alone THAT bad.  Notre Dame flopped in the National Championship, but Alabama would have thrashed almost anyone that year.  Any non-Alabama SEC team would have had a very hard time going undefeated against ND's schedule that year.  Hell, Alabama would have had a hard time going undefeated against ND's schedule that year.  Luck played a part, but ND was a solid football team.  MIchigan had one really bad year in the Hoke era that was actually quite predictable, based on past recruiting.  Michigan and Notre Dame will vie for playoff spots for the foreseeable future. 

 

Joined: 12/07/2011

MGoPoints: 1853

jocular_jock

September 5th, 2014 at 12:13 PM ^

I seem to recall Herbie et al making a big deal about it last year.

Also, it seems that his only bar is national chamipionships then he goes into a list of teams that have not won a national championship, since WW2 or... like... ever, Standford, Oregon, Baylor. 

Joined: 01/03/2012

MGoPoints: 561

Steve in PA

September 5th, 2014 at 12:50 PM ^

The article makes valid points but I still consider the source.  The source has a vested interest in hyping all things SEC because they are heavily invested in a joint venture with the SEC network.  What struck me was seeing former A-team announcers doing games on the conference channel.

Why didn't they get Beth and Joey last week?  Oh, that's right...The casual fan doesn't want to listen to Monotone Jane and The Fastest Man in the Stadium.

I'd really love to see the B1G move to Fox1 and flip a bird to the mouse. Fox1 does a great job with PAC12 games and a B1G game would give them an early pame/late game pairing.  Since they are also in on the PAC12 andB1G networks it's not much of a stretch.

Right now the mouse has a vested interest in getting 2 SEC teams in the playoff and will lobby for that all season.

TO HELL WITH NOTRE DAME!  Them and their "network" are what started all of this.

Joined: 08/10/2009

MGoPoints: 6327

wayneandgarth

September 5th, 2014 at 12:57 PM ^

Tickets on the secondary market are more expensive than ever, an economics lesson in artificial shortage. If the Irish and Wolverines were playing next season, tickets wouldn't be so costly. 

This statement is bs.  These are two passionate fan bases that have supported this game with the utmost interest for many years (until ND decided Michigan refused to lay down for them).  The ticket has been very tough (i.e. expensive) for years.  I'm from out of town and I went last year regardless of the price.  I didn't go because it was the last meeting.  I went because I really, really wanted to go to this game (period).  Oh, was it worth it.

I will say Poseidon, your snipet did leave out the last paragraph of Maisel's article, which is here.  For this I give him a bit of credit, although it is sort of a backhanded complement.

I hope that changes. College football is more fun when Notre Dame and Michigan are near the top. Trust me. I'm old enough to remember. 

 

 

Joined: 10/10/2012

MGoPoints: 12961