UM, OSU Different Divisions and Last Game?
First, I want to apologize ahead of time if this has been discussed before. I don't read all of the threads and a search of this topic turned up dozens of threads. If it's been discussed before, someone just send me in the right direction thread-wise. Thanks
So I'm wondering what's so bad with having UM, OSU in different divisions with them playing the last game. I know, I know - then they might play each other again the next weekend in the B10 Championship game. But is that all bad? I personally don't have an issue with it, does anybody out there have a problem with it?
Wouldn't it be similar to the CCHA situation? UM played MSU in a best of 3 series in order to advance deeper into the CCHA playoffs. I know we're talking about two different sports here, but the fact is, immediate rematches happen sometimes in college sports during the "playoffs". Thus, I don't see an issue with UM, OSU in different divisions playing the last game.
Thoughts?
August 29th, 2010 at 7:34 PM ^
The issue that comes into play is that if UM and OSU have already wrapped up the division and are going to the championship game regardless of The Game, then it really takes a lot away from it knowing beforehand that there are playing again next week.
August 29th, 2010 at 7:49 PM ^
Problems also arise when one team has clinched the division and the other has not. An example is a situation where OSU has clinched their division and has no shot at the national title and Michigan is fighting to make it to get to the championship game, then Michigan is going to care more and OSU can choose to not play guys with minor injuries and things like that because even if they lose, they can have a rematch in the championship. There are similar problems that can come in other situations.
The issue with splitting the teams is that inter-divisional games are inherently less likely to have implications beyond the rivalry than an intra-divisional game. And playing the game at the end of the year further reduces the probability that it will have implications for each team's season.
August 29th, 2010 at 9:18 PM ^
An example is a situation where OSU has clinched their division and has no shot at the national title and Michigan is fighting to make it to get to the championship game, then Michigan is going to care more and OSU can choose to not play guys with minor injuries and things like that because even if they lose, they can have a rematch in the championship.
I hope you are kidding, right? We are talking here about the best rivalry in college football and probably all sports. In your scenario OSU has the chance to spoil our season by keeping us out of the championship game. Remember one of the greatest think about this series is exactly the possibility of ruining the other team's season. Something like this will never happen. The only ones complaining about a rematch are the TV people, I doubt it that we us fans will ever complain too much about that.
August 30th, 2010 at 1:02 AM ^
As structured, The Game awards year-long bragging rights and has an impact on the season for both teams. In this situation, Ohio State would still have a shot at bragging rights and The Game would have no impact on their season. This doesn't make The Game meaningless, but it does mean that Ohio State might decide not to go all out and play guys with minor injuries if they're down by say, 2 scores in the 4th quarter because they'd have another shot at us the next week.
No matter when The Game is played, both teams will be up to play against each other. However, if the stakes are low enough or there is going to be a rematch, then it will lose some of its meaning and the rivalry will be weakened. In my opinion, the best thing about The Game being played at the end of the year today is that by being played at the end of the year, it is generally the most important game for both teams with regard to defining their season by determining both teams' final placement in the Big Ten and which bowl both teams go to. As such, when divisions are adopted, The Game should be placed at the point on the schedule where it will matter most. And I think that if the league office decides to take the completely terrible action of placing the teams in separate divisions, then placing the Game at the end of the year would mean that it would have less of an impact on both teams' seasons than if the Game were placed earlier in the year.
August 29th, 2010 at 7:38 PM ^
then it should be the first. not ideal, but thats the only way it even comes close to maintaining what is has now.
August 29th, 2010 at 9:28 PM ^
Sorry, but that doesn't come close. There is simply no alternative to playing OSU last.
August 29th, 2010 at 9:45 PM ^
if we were both good and ranked in the top 25, an entire summer of anticipation heading into The Game wouldn't come close? I'm not saying it would be better than last, but it would be better than mid-October.
August 29th, 2010 at 10:37 PM ^
Nom, it's not close. Moving the Game is simply non-negotiable.
August 29th, 2010 at 11:04 PM ^
The next best thing to beating an 11-0 OSU team is beating a 10-0 OSU team. The next best thing to beating a 10-0 team is beating a 9-0 team. And so on.
Accordingly, the next best thing to making OSU your 12th victory is making them your 11th. And so on.
The later in the year, the higher the stakes.
August 29th, 2010 at 8:00 PM ^
I'll give you this, there have been zero threads or diaries about this topic.
August 29th, 2010 at 8:02 PM ^
I dont belive for one second that OSU or UM will mail one game in agaisnt each other because they play again and they have other things wrapped up. If you think that the boosters or alumni or fans will accept a loss at any time for any reason, then I dont think you really know about this rivalry. They could play on a box with a fox on a train in the rain, and It will still matter. It will still mean bragging rights, even for one week. When you hate someone, you HATE them.
August 29th, 2010 at 10:08 PM ^
And this here I think is one of the better arguments against the position that we need to split them into different divisions in order to maximize the importance of The Game. The Game is important because it The Game. It's been awesome in seasons where it had massive national/conference implications for both teams, sure. It was also awesome during those years in the '90s where we had nothing to play for other than blowing up OSU's seasons. It would be awesome if we were both 0-11 going into it. It's awesome b/c OSU is the Devil, and, as you say, when you hate someone, you HATE them.
August 29th, 2010 at 8:02 PM ^
I don't read all of the threads and a search of this topic turned up dozens of threads.
So you decided to start another one?! WTF?!
August 29th, 2010 at 10:23 PM ^
The poster asks a reasonable question that really hasn't been discussed.
It sounds like they have narrowed the division options and most likely OSU and Michigan will be in different divisions. So if that is true, then we really are left debating whether it makes sense to keep the game as the last game, or if the game may be more meaningful if played earlier.
August 29th, 2010 at 10:45 PM ^
For the record, the question posed by the OP came up on a number of earlier threads, so it has been discussed here before.
It didn't bother me that this thread was started, but I did find it funny that it was posted not very long after one of the mods deleted a thread with this comment: "If you apologize for making a topic in the first sentence of your post, there's a good chance you shouldn't have made the topic in the first place."
August 29th, 2010 at 8:09 PM ^
Rivalries in college football matter more than in any other sport, even other college sports. Why? Because there is no second chance. MSU-Michigan hockey is big, but it isn't "the world stops and everyone watches" big. Same goes for MSU-Wisconsin basketball. Even when both teams are top 5, it's just one game among many, jockeying for a higher seed in the (conference and national) tournaments. A bit more animosity than most, sure, but you know you'll get another crack at them. Or the game will be early in the season and the loser has plenty of time to make up that ground.
If Michigan and Ohio State are playing in the last week with both having clinched the division, nothing is at stake. Because even if you win, the other guys will get another crack at you when it counts. If they are in the same division and one has clinched, at least the other side gets to try to play spoiler on potential national title hopes.
The only way it can be close to as meaningful as it currently is is to keep it on the last day in the same division. You won't get a matchup in the title game, but you'll get de facto division title games instead of games that are merely warm-ups for the Real Game.
August 29th, 2010 at 8:10 PM ^
Same division, final game is the only acceptable solution for me. I hate the idea of a rematch with OSU. It diminishes the importance of the first game. A rematch with Iowa or Wisconsin? That's how it will have worked out. Not a big deal.
Having no direct power over the situation, if I am forced to accept different divisions I want the game in early November, but not the final game. I'm not sure why, but back-to-back just doesn't seem right.
August 29th, 2010 at 8:37 PM ^
We will find all of this out soon, but even if they are in opposite divisions and play the last game of the regular season it still should be meaningful. Winning the division is not going to be easy because you have to be at least two of Wisco, Iowa, Nebraska, and Penn State to run the table in your division. Secondly, I'm guessing that they are going to count overall conference records as opposed to simply divisional records to see who makes it to the championship game.
Therefore, lets say we are 7-0 (or 8-0) in the conference and have our division clinched going into The Game and OSU is 6-1 (or 7-1) and needs to win to get in. We have a chance to send them home early and thereby not play them a second time. If it was the other way around too I think both teams will fight because 1. you get to stop the hated rival from making the championship and 2. You then don't have to play them a second week in a row. I feel it will be very rare that both of us will go into the game unbeaten or with the division clinched. Maybe once in 10-20 years. And when that happens, likely both or one team has a chance at the NC and therefore nobody will want to throw that game.
I would prefer like everyone else, that we stay in the same division and the winner goes to the conference championship. But since it seems we will be in the same division, I see no problem in playing the last game of the regular season because very rarely will it not carry meaning for at least one team. And if you can prevent the other team from going to the championship I have a feeling you will play your ass off.
August 29th, 2010 at 9:34 PM ^
I totally agree with you. Too many people are concentrating on one scenario, when both teams have clinched their division and forget to realize that that means both teams may be in the hunt for the NC and nobody will like to lose then. For me this rivalry is so intense that I believe that they can play each other 12 times a season and every game will matter.
August 29th, 2010 at 10:14 PM ^
It is ridiculous to have games scheduled against the other half of the conference in the last game of the season. By doing that you're always running the risk of two teams playing each other two weeks in a row.
The only way the Michigan-Ohio State rivalry will remain epic is if they are put in the same division and play in the last game. In fact, I argue that this will even increase the importance and scope of the game as it would mean something to the top of standings more often than it even does now.
August 29th, 2010 at 10:35 PM ^
Under no circumstances will any teams in CFB take a game off, even if they play back to back. This is because every loss affects your bowl game. The significance of every single game is one of the things that makes college football great.
To answer your question, I do think that we salvage a little bit if we keep the game at the end of the regular season. I have already resigned myself to seeing them split up, so that is the consolation I am hoping for.
August 29th, 2010 at 11:06 PM ^
Wisconsin, 2007.
August 29th, 2010 at 11:01 PM ^
What if Michigan and OSU end up in different divisions, finish the regular seasons ranked #1 and #2, and play each other on consecutive weeks, and split the two games, and then are ranked by the BCS #1 and #2??? My conjecture is that the world will explode. Therefore, I believe that Michigan and OSU should be in different divisions.
August 29th, 2010 at 11:08 PM ^
I like your positive thinking. Or is it negative thinking? Whatever, I'm for it!
August 30th, 2010 at 1:14 PM ^
This might be the 2012 scenario the Mayans are talkin' about.
August 29th, 2010 at 11:25 PM ^
will have more meaning than ever.
With only 6 teams, in most years it will be for, or directly impact ,the division championship and the right to move on to the B10 chmapionship game.
It actually brings back some of the glory of the '70's when The Game decided things every year.
However, as compelling as that is, I don't think that is what is going to happen. The B10 and our own Michigan administration have convinced themselves that the only possible scenario is to have Michigan and OSU in different divisions so that they could potentially meet in the B10 chmapionsip game.
Most Michigan fans (and OSU fans) would much rather play for something meaningful every year - the division championship - then only potentially play for the B10 championship in some corporate NFL dome once or twice a decade.
I am trying not to be cynical, but this reeks of being all about the dollars. And the dollars are speaking louder than we are.
Where we are making progress is in keeping The Game the last game of the season. That message is being heard, especially down at OSU.
We may make some progress there. The B10 may decide to just live with the potential of back-to-back Michigan-OSU games.
Beware, however, of some weasel tactics such as leaving The Game on the Saturday before Thanksgiving and declaring "we left The Game the same as it was", and then scheduling another non-rivalry Big 10 game after that for Micihigan and OSU so that they would never play back to back.
August 29th, 2010 at 11:53 PM ^
Beware, however, of some weasel tactics such as leaving The Game on the Saturday before Thanksgiving and declaring "we left The Game the same as it was", and then scheduling another non-rivalry Big 10 game after that for Micihigan and OSU so that they would never play back to back.
This is a great point that I haven't seen made before. So we would play Indiana or Purdue, for example, in the final game? How lame would that be? There would also be the potential for Michigan suffering a huge letdown following the OSU game and then losing that final game, which might be crucial for winning the division.
August 30th, 2010 at 12:22 AM ^
I don't see where that scenario actually gets them more dollars. If OSU and Michigan are dominant enough that they meet in the title game frequently, it means the rest of the conference has become a disaster and something else went horribly wrong. If they meet only rarely in the title game (more likely), the diminution of the regular season matchups by splitting them will more than offset whatever minimal gains are made by having them in the title game instead of Michigan-Nebraska or OSU-Iowa.
It might, short term, if it persuades some network to pay an extra $1M for the title game. But the long term damage would offset that pretty quickly.
August 29th, 2010 at 11:32 PM ^
***OR***