Warde Speaks on UM-ND Renewal

Submitted by Brendan71388 on

Per Brendan Quinn's Twitter timeline, Warde Manuel was on The Michigan Insider this morning talking about the ND series renewal. I'm sure the audio will be available in Podcast form soon, but for now some highlights:

- Negotiations were underway shortly before he arrived, started by Harbaugh and Kelly

- Says he's "hopeful" they can change the imbalance of the MSU and OSU games

- Says ND should be "consistently on the schedule. Maybe not every year..."

 

The last point makes me the most hopeful after the news broke yesterday (officially).

I'm really excited about our future series against Texas, Oklahoma, UCLA, and others and would really hate to see any/all of them canceled for the sake of playing ND. I'm glad to see ND back on the schedule, but we need some variety when it comes to playing strong non-conference opponents. I know if we schedule ND in any given year that's likely to be the only interesting non-conference game we play that year with the move to 9 Big Ten games.

https://twitter.com/BFQuinn

carolina blue

July 8th, 2016 at 8:34 AM ^

Yep. We had the leverage with ND and blew it. We have virtually none with MSU and osu. I can't imagine Manuel is able to convince the conference to allow that kind of change. Msu's AD would throw a fit, I imagine. Either that or say "maybe your school should have thought of this when we changed to 9 games in the first place. It's not our fault your former AD was a fucking idiot."




Sent from MGoBlog HD for iPhone & iPad

doggdetroit

July 8th, 2016 at 9:51 AM ^

Well they just won the B1G by beating both Michigan and OSU on the road so I really don't think it's that big of a deal for MSU. Also the MSU-OSU has only recently become a big game so I'm not sure how big a draw OSU is for them.



If it's honestly so important for Michigan to have those two games home and away, Michigan should just play OSU or MSU twice on the road. Relying on those schools to voluntarily give up a home game is laughable and a Warde move. Those schools have real ADs.

doughboy

July 8th, 2016 at 10:49 AM ^

As someone who grew up in EL during the 70's/early 80's, the OSU game has always been a very big deal.  That game never eclipsed the Michigan game, in my opinion, but it was as heated and hated by players and the local community.  With Michigan it was about beating "those arrogant asses" - with OSU it was about beating "those assholes".  Even back then, Buckeye fans were incredibly rude and obnoxious whenever they traveled to East Lansing.  Michigan fans were smug and entitled, which was frustrating but not mean-spirited.

*caveat - all my brothers and sisters went to State and I went to a real school.

03 Blue 07

July 8th, 2016 at 2:11 PM ^

"Warde move"? What are you talking about? Don't you mean a Dave Brandon move? Where has Warde Manuel ever stated that he believes MSU and/or OSU should play on the road 2x in a row at Michigan in order to assist Michigan with balancing out its schedule? I read his comments, and he didn't say that. He said the topic should be revisited. I imagine he means at a B1G level, with input from MSU and OSU as well. 

Also, where do you get off with the statement that OSU and MSU have "real ADs" in reference to Warde Manuel? On what do you base such a ludicrous shot at our AD? I'm gonna need some support for this currently-baseless statement...

03 Blue 07

July 8th, 2016 at 2:12 PM ^

"Warde move"? What are you talking about? Don't you mean a Dave Brandon move? Where has Warde Manuel ever stated that he believes MSU and/or OSU should play on the road 2x in a row at Michigan in order to assist Michigan with balancing out its schedule? I read his comments, and he didn't say that. He said the topic should be revisited. I imagine he means at a B1G level, with input from MSU and OSU as well. 

Also, where do you get off with the statement that OSU and MSU have "real ADs" in reference to Warde Manuel? On what do you base such a ludicrous shot at our AD? I'm gonna need some support for this currently-baseless statement...

M-Dog

July 8th, 2016 at 8:41 AM ^

But we do have leverage.

State is in the exact same situation we are:  They play Ohio State and their state of Michigan rival (us) on the road every other year.

If you think we have trouble filling the stadium when OSU and MSU are not on the schedule, imagine their dilemma.

It's in their interest to switch as much as it is in ours.

We should just both pick a year and switch the home sites between ourselves.  I don't know if you even need to get the Big Ten or NCAA involved.

From that point forward, we would both have only Ohio State or the state of Michigan rival on the road in a season, not both.

Common sense says that the switch should occur when the Michigan-MSU game is supposed to be in EL, since they already got to play us at their place 2 years in a row.  But at this point, I'd even settle for a coin flip to determine it, if it fixes this thing once and for all.

 

PopeLando

July 8th, 2016 at 10:03 AM ^

No matter what happens to them when they attend games at U of M, your experience in Sparty stadium will have been worse.

U of M fans are relatively polite to visitors. Relatively.

MSU fans aren't too bad, it's just that when you see them, they hurl as much stupidity your way as possible.

Even taking the worst parts of the two fanbases and putting them together wouldn't get you close to how bad OSU's fans are at home.

1VaBlue1

July 8th, 2016 at 8:46 AM ^

A coin flip might work...  But I just don't see Dontanio agreeing to play two games in a row at UM, even if it benefits his team in the long run.  Would love to be surprised, but he is a spiteful enough prick to not go along.  And if he says no, Hollis won't force it.  Unless UM agrees to play another two in a row at MSU, I don't think the current situation will change.

And seeing what just happened with ND, I wouldn't put it past Manual to agree to another two road games in a row at MSU.

Blue Durham

July 8th, 2016 at 9:49 AM ^

Of the first 50 games in the series from 1898 to 1957, 46 were played in Ann Arbor. I think we can concede another home game to MSU as a slight correction to this historical imbalance.

Some people might refer to this as ancient history and not relevant to today. But those same people probably point to Michigan's history in all-time wins, winning percentage, national championships, etc., where most of this was accomplished in the first half of the 20th century.

TdK71

July 8th, 2016 at 1:24 PM ^

the Gate at Ferry Field and Michigan Stadium paid a whole lot better than the gate in East Lansing.

 

Capacities of Spartan Syadium:

 
75,005 (2005–present)

72,027 (1994–2004)

76,000 (1957–1993)

60,000 (1956)

51,000 (1948–1955)

26,000 (1935–1947)

14,000 (1923–1934)

75,005 (2005–present)

72,027 (1994–2004)

76,000 (1957–1993)

60,000 (1956)

51,000 (1948–1955)

26,000 (1935–1947)

14,000 (1923–1934)

Hail Harbo

July 8th, 2016 at 9:23 AM ^

To keep the balance of home and away games during the season a third team, Indiana, must be part of the schedule change.  Indiana and Michigan flips their games, Michigan and MSU flip their games, and then MSU and Indiana flip their games.  

tlo2485

July 8th, 2016 at 9:58 AM ^

The divisions teams have to keep an equal amount of home and away each year... they alternate East-West-East for 5 home-4-5 etc. So, yes a third team would have to swap both us and MSU to keep it even, and it works the best for Indiana.

Tuebor

July 8th, 2016 at 10:02 AM ^

Not that simple.  We host MSU and OSU in years we have 4 big ten home games.  Obviously making MSU an Away game in those years leaves us with only 3 big ten home games.  Another big ten east team will have to be involved to balance out the schedule.

Tuebor

July 8th, 2016 at 10:00 AM ^

We are not in the same situation as State.  We host OSU and MSU in years we have only 4 big ten home games.  MSU hosts UM and OSU in years they have 5 big ten home games.

 

A straight switch between MSU and UM would result in us having 3 Big Ten home games in Odd years and 6 big ten home games in even years.  Clearly another big ten east team would have to get involved to put us back at 4/5 home games every other year. 

 

Leaders And Best

July 8th, 2016 at 10:40 AM ^

The years MSU has us at home (even years), East teams have 5 home B1G games. With a swap, MSU would have 4 home B1G games & Michigan would have 6 while the other East division opponents have 5 home games. Like someone else wrote above, you would have to involve a 3rd East team to make this work.

The 9-game Big Ten schedule is set up so all East teams have 5 home games in even years and 4 home games in odd years. I think any changes would have to abide by this.

dragonchild

July 8th, 2016 at 10:00 AM ^

honestly, even if we have leverage, do we NEED it?  I think it's silly to play both rivals at home or away in the same season (DB SMH), so let's fix that, but as far as STAEE goes I'm willing to be easy if it gives Dantonio one less thing to whine about.

STAEE is on a downward trend.  They're still running quarters but without the safeties to replicate their 2013 dominance, and last season they were so ridiculously lucky you'd think the whole season was a setup for divine retribution in the form of a CFP curb-stomping.  They probably have the fourth-best B1G roster at best, and if we assume best-case that the officiating was an anomaly, then next season we're heading for a blowout.

I wouldn't want to play @OSU two years in a row, but I'm not scared of playing at East Lansing nearly as much as the officiating horror of last season, which was at home.

jabberwock

July 8th, 2016 at 10:11 AM ^

If having one of the best records in college football the last few years, including beating Michigan & OSU on the road last year, winning the B16 (again) and making the playoff is a "downward trend"

then I want to be on it.

People have been predicting this "trend" for the past 5 years . . .

dragonchild

July 8th, 2016 at 12:46 PM ^

Like, any of it?

In 2013 they beat Michigan by 23, OSU by 10, held 6 opponents to under a TD, won the Rose Bowl by beating post-Harbaugh Stanford and two of the more successful days offenses had against them were Indiana's espresso offense and a blowout against Youngstown State.  I hate that you make me say this but Dantonio had a very legit team there.  They were as dirty as an old diaper but they were unquestionably dominating.

Last season they squeaked past six opponents by >1 TD margins including Rutgers (!), Purdue (!!), Michigan on a fluke play after monumentally atrocious officiating, Ohio "rain makes us forget what a forward pass is" State and an Iowa team that everyone expected to be demolished by whoever won the East.  They lost to Nebraska on a complete horseshit call but A) Nebraska, and B) it wound up not hurting their standing.  Alabama was the outlier only in that they finally played to their actual level.  In terms of talent (as opposed to luck) they were, at best, the 3rd-best team in the B1G last season and that was with the Cook-Burbridge connection.  This year I feel they slipped behind Iowa but you're free to disagree with me there; it doesn't undermine the point.

None of what I'm explaining now is in the least bit complicated or controversial to anyone who paid any attention to last season's conference play.  If you can read a UFR you should already know most of this.  I'm well aware of their record, and well aware of why they did so well.  They were good, nowhere near dominating, and insanely lucky.  If they needed a call against Michigan they got it; if they needed bad weather against OSU they got it; if they needed a loss to not matter they got it.  And don't give me that "winners know how to win" crap; they didn't will a victory in Ann Arbor or Columbus; Michigan got screwed and OSU choked and Alabama ate them.

Yes, they ARE on the decline; the record just doesn't show it.  It's also possible to have decent grades weeks before bombing the final because you stopped studying, and for an imploding business to have an overvalued stock.  Not that I think Dantionio's any less competent -- he's a dick but unquestionably good --but this level of success was never sustainable and somehow lasted longer than it should've.  This is not a mind-blowing concept to anyone who isn't an idiot.

Where MSU is right now is nice compared to where we've been, but I'd rather keep what we have now than be where they are now.

CorkyCole

July 8th, 2016 at 1:22 PM ^

Part of me thinks this would screw up one of the two team's schedules as far as home/road imbalance goes, but if not or if some sort of re-balance can also be done, this might actually be a fantastic idea. At least it sounds highly interesting to my ears.

lbpeley

July 8th, 2016 at 8:24 AM ^

I'm fine with playing ND regularly again, but not at the expense of playing another big name P5 team. I still would have rather played the Arkansas series and then started ND back up. 

jdon

July 8th, 2016 at 8:26 AM ^

I didn't listen, so thanks for sharing.

I am one of the few who is lamenting the loss of the arkansas games;  I want diversity of opponents; I have seen michigan play ND, I have seen a game in South bend, I have seen enough... lets get some different opponents on the board!

 

ijohnb

July 8th, 2016 at 8:29 AM ^

like the "terms" of the renewal, but I cannot complain about having Notre Dame back on the schedule.  Kelly is recruiting very well and always has that team in the Top 10.  I think these future UM v. ND games will look a lot more like the ones in the 80s and 90s than the ones in the 2000s.  These teams will be consistenly Top 10 teams and these are going to be epic games.