Even with the payday that was a bad move and dilutes the M brand to a certain extent. He seems pretty level-headed, though, so I'm willing to bet he'll learn from it.
What's so awesome about Dave Brandon, anyway?
Brandon may well conclude from the failed SBC deal is that if he's going to sell out, it needs to be for more money than what Martin was willing to do. He's openly talking about increasing our revenue streams and going to "non-traditional" sources. People should think about what he means by that.
While I agree with you that I am concerned about those statements, if increased revenue streams do lead to more home-and-homes with higher profile teams and more sports (like lacrosse) and more scholarships for non-revenue sports, I may be okay with it.
I'll still be pissed when I see the Arby's logo inside Michigan Stadium at the Big Chill.
it DB's idea to play the Bed Intruder song. he pushed Special K down a set of stairs to get control
I will take a game at a neutral site against a quality opponent over a home game against the likes of Delaware State any day.
Other than that, you make some good points.
There is no reason for the choice to be between a neutral-site game and a I-AA opponent. If those are our only two options, it's because we're thinking only about the bottom line. For crying out loud, MSU just got Alabama to agree to a home-and-home later this decade. Good teams can and will sign home-and-home contracts. Don't believe for a minute that it can't be done.
So take my opinion for what it's worth. But I love that Michigan is playing 'Bama in JerryWorld. It's closer for me (and a lot of other Michigan fans) than 90% of Michigan's games have been. It's huge exposure, and will hopefully jumpstart recruiting in Texas to rival the Florida operation.
I'm sure Michigan will sign a good home-and-home, preferably in years when UM/ND is on hiatus. Adding Nebraska makes our schedule tougher than just about ever.
I do understand the frustration for season tix holders re: 2012, tho'. Hopefully DB brings in a good team in 2014. (2011 and 2013 are going to be very good years for home games.)
I don't have a problem with the fireworks either before or after the game, but I certainly hope more sensible heads prevail and kill the idea of launching fireworks after every Michigan goal. Very tacky indeed.
I'd be okay with one fireworks show - either before or after the game. But not both. And definitely not during the game. That's veering straight into Bill Veeck territory.
Bill Veeck is a hall-of-famer. Maybe we need to venture towards his territory more often.
He also stated on WTKA that he wasn't against The Game being played in the middle of the year. That was certainly unsettling. I haven't been overly impressed but when you go from Martin to Brandon it's expected that people will view him in higher regard. It has everything to do with how he conducts himself in pressers and other speaking platforms.
I believe he made that comment knowing it would draw a huge negative reaction and compel the Big 10 to keep the game in its traditional position. I think he understands and fully supports the Michigan traditions and is working to maintain them. One doesn't reach the level achieved by DB without being very shrewd.
I don't think you can make an assumption like that without any facts or even rumors to back it up. Conspiracy theories are only cool when they're about aliens or the government.
When asked directly as to why he and OSU's AD mentioned this, he all but confirmed it was done to cause a groundswell of ANGAR to get the Big Ten to back down on the matter. It was cold, calculated and deliberate.
One doesn't reach the level achieved by DB without being very shrewd.
No one will accuse the man of lacking intelligence. My concern is that his long-term ambitions are different than those of much of the fanbase - but that he's savvy enough to nudge us towards them all the same. .
If he did leak that information then why support the decision of moving The Game?
He didn't support it.
He "leaked" the information to mobilize both fanbases against it. I remember him explaining this in a speech to the Detroit Economic Club.
We are talking about a former politician here. It's possible that he initially was in favor of moving the Game, but after the massive outcry, flip-flopped and now is simply in denial about his initial position.
That was a shrewd move on his part, I had no idea that was the case. Well played, DB.
I was unaware of that entire situation. Thank you for pointing me in the right direction. +1
Edit: Meant for aaamichfan.
I think he handled a bit better than what is "expected" from an AD. At no point did he plead for the NCAA's forgiveness. He brought forth Michigan's case and stood by our head coach.
The Alabama game was a big deal because at the time the it was announced the program needed some positive buzz. Jerry Jones be damned we needed something to get in coming recruits excited about Michigan again.
OSU in a different division is the work of Delaney. OSU vs. UM x 2= dollar, dollar bills yall.
DB is the only thing the old guard and the new guard can agree on. So that makes him great as well.
-I'm curious to know why you think Brandon handled the sanctions better than what is expected. I don't think he said or did anything remotely unusual.
-I don't care what "buzz" the Jerryworld game got us. That deal deprived 109,000 season-ticketholders of a home game. (And sadly, we aren't likely to see any reduction in per-game ticket prices, despite this.)
-Brandon has freely admitted that he was fully in favor of putting us in a separate division from OSU. He actually made the "one Game is special, two are better" argument, which made me cringe.
-I really don't care what the old, new, or middle-aged guard thinks.
-I'm curious to know why you think Brandon handled the sanctions better than what is expected. I don't think he said or did anything remotely unusual.
I think that it is fair to compare and contrast Brandon's response to the sanctions with other ADs. First of all, Martin didn't do much when it came to addressing the Freep allegations. I realize that Martin was in his last days and all, which is why he didn't do much to respond, but it was nice to see a more decisive response from the University when Brandon took over the reins.
More importantly, the investigation and sanctioning process turned out very well for Michigan. We successfully fought one of the allegations and did not receive any damaging penalties. And we came off fairly well in the press. This is rather remarkable because we managed to be (or at least appear to be) cooperative and defensive at the same time, something that other ADs (looking at you Mike Garrett) cannot pull off. In sum, Brandon did a very good job of PR during the sanctioning process, which is a clear positive, imo.
That said, I too have a major issue with Brandon. This issue is that his priority is clearly to make money at the expense of the wishes of the fanbase, which I think is made clear by the contents of the list of problems you have with Brandon.
I can see both sides of most of these arguments. But the "buzz" the program gets from the Alabama game, in terms of national exposure, in terms of recruiting hype is extremely significant. It's also a sick matchup we would have been unlikely to see otherwise. There's certainly a "this is Michigan, we don't need national exposure" argument, but after the last few years in football and the last decade in basketball I'd firmly disagree with you.
The cost is one home game, one year. The mild disappointment on a single Saturday of the subset of fans who would rather watch a MAC opponent at home vs. Alabama on TV is a cost I'm willing to bear.
Do you have season tickets?
Why do you assume it would be a MAC team? Maybe not Alabama, but it seems that we could get someone decent in on a home and home basis.
Don't have them, but I don't really think that biases me here, since in NY Michigan season tickets would do me little good. As a season ticket holder for the NY Giants, I'd be very annoyed if we had a home game taken away to play in London, so I think at a bare minimum I understand.
The difference, of course, is that there would be no benefit to me or the team from a game in London - it's an absolute loss in exchange for some amorphous NFL growth opportunity. Here, there are a number of significant benefits to the school and program that go beyond that sweet cash money (non-exhaustive list above). If I were a UofM season ticket holder, I'd be happy to do the balancing test and realize that the partial loss to me of an experience (since you would still be able to watch the game) would be worth those benefits. I do it every week - it can even be fun if you close your eyes during turnovers.
Let's say we get a Cal-level program for a home and home, forget the MAC. It's a somewhat notable OOC game, we'd get a home game, potentially expand our footprint in California in some minor way. We'd stand to ruin a season, of course, if we lost to them, which would not be true of a competitve loss to Bama. And you wouldn't get any of the unique benefits from this arrangement. I think we'll all survive a once-a-decade at most, crazy-but-cool neutral site game. Notre Dame seems to get through it somehow, and they play teams like Army in their "lost" home games.
is the handling of the divisions. I think I understand now why they did it (nobody wanted to be in the other division), and I think it's possible the dynamic that led to it had played out before Brandon came in, but the announcement was handled poorly. Instead of trying to sell it [my reaction to "one Game is special, two are better" was the same as yours], which I guess is his first instinct, he should have just explained why having Michigan and Ohio State in the same division was a non-starter. There's a positive way to do it -- just say "Nobody wanted to be in a division without either Michigan or Ohio State."
They really should name them the Bo and Woody divisions, because that's what they are -- the "Michigan" division and the "Ohio State" division.
Ok. It seems most people's main concern is DB selling out UM for the sake of turning a profit. Also I think it is safe to assume that we all want UM to not only win but become dominant in football and competitive in basketball. In order to do this it takes money. College sports is an arms race toward bigger and better facilities.
Now in order to keep pace we as a fan base are going to have to make some concessions. Yes that means some times you get deprived of a home game but think beyond your own personal loss and what it means for UM to be on center stage once again. Teams like Oregon are starting to pull ahead in the all important battle for recruits and it's because they have cash and lots of it.(fuck Nike) I am not suggesting we go all Oregon and whore our selves out but that we be a bit more open minded about how DB goes about turning a buck.
Other teams might need to sell out to turn a profit on their athletic department. We do not. The University of Michigan has meaning beyond a historically successful football team, and it's ridiculous to slightly tarnish that meaning for more money that we don't actually need.
Being "open-minded" leads to idiocy like Ohio State's "throwback" uniforms from last year. The burden of proof should be on anyone suggesting changes to demonstrate that they aren't messing with the University's image.
Of course you take it that far. By no means does open minded mean fuck with the uniforms or the helmet if you choose to take it even further. Michigan indeed sells itself so we do agree on that point. A little score board advertising wouldn't hurt and neither would a little marketing which I am sure would be done with taste. I think DB is beyond the avoid the noid advertising at Dominos.
Comment I responded to vanished.
"-I really don't care what the old, new, or middle-aged guard thinks. "
Then why are you on this board asking your original question? You have to care because you would not have asked about DB in the first place!
I'm still not sure why it's such a great thing to deprive Michigan fans of a home football game in 2012 to line Jerry Jones's pockets.
This, a million times over. I don't get the huge excitement when this was announced. Maybe it's the matchup, which I'm also looking forward to. But giving up a home game for it still has me pissed off.
I don't know a thing about the finance/$ around booking this game against Alabama, but one would assume there is an economic incentive to do so. (Although that recent post w/r/t Bowl games and losing money has me wondering...)
If not, then the pure buzz/ exposure around it is another positive. I mean, this could go back to the "over-branding" argument some have mentioned above, but I still see this as a positive way to get your name out there.
Either way, I'm still excited about it (although I would have preferred a home and home.)
Also, IIRC, DB took responsibility for the practicegate issue. This is obviously an easy step to take (since everyone really knew it couldn't have been his fault) he handled the whole situation well. Really, he's charismatic.
I'm pretty excited about the matchup... I'll probably go (unless ticket availability goes to those with far more Victors Club points than me).
I don't really get the "it's great exposure" thing. Michigan is the winningest program and the grandest tradition in all of college football. We've been kicking ass for 130 years (minus the occasional season or two). We have the largest stadium in the nation, and our team wears (arguably) the most recognized helmet in the sport. College football fans worldwide know all of these things about us. And many recruits know them too, based on some of the TomVH interviews I've read.
So.... how moving the game outside our tradition-laden Big House atmosphere is "good exposure" for our program is just lost on me.
I agree about not leaving the big house... but playing alabama... probably in prime time. Same goes for the ND night game... it's all about switching it up just a little bit.
I like Dave Brandon's style and he won some favor with his Freep criticism but there is no substance to his tenure, yet, in order to make any definitive praise regarding his job performance. As you stated, the departed Sailboat Willie set up the projects discussed. I agree regarding the Alabama game at Cowboy Stadium which would have been miles better as a home and home.
I believe Martin has the legacy of the builder
Michigan Stadium and laid the groundwork for Crisler upgrades and bball practice facility
also new football practice facility
Jerry World is a win
Jury is out on the night game - I think it will go well but I would like to wait to after the game to call it a win. Worried about the golf course parking and if it will be too dark to see anything
But the jumbotron and the lights at the stadium are wins - he also has not put a halo around the stadium so that is another huge win
My understanding is that Dave Brandon, as a regent, flew the other regents to Columbus to give them a tour of their facilities and show them why UM needed to upgrade immediately.
He's more media-friendly than Bill Martin. That, and he likes fireworks.
he did not bash him
just asked why people like him
I think the jury is still out on whether or not he will be successful at UofM (if he were the football coach I am sure someone would have already called for his firing b/c he hasn't fired the football coach - if that is even possible - very circular)
negged into Bolivian
is so wrong it's funny.
It's kind of Chile in here, no?
It's supposed to be funny.
Mike Tyson got the joke.
Whoa, no need to bite his ear off.
I can't hear you.
I believe that this is a Mike Tyson reference. I take my hand off to you
Edit: Slow typing
My style is impetuous, my defense is impregnable. You are sagacious.
you should be negged into Bolivian. I think ESPN found it on a map a few years ago, I think it's somewhere in the middle of Africa.