A team of sentient robots. And dolphins.
Who should replace ND in a long-term series?
I was gonna go with sharks with lasers attached to their heads, but I smell what you're steppin in...
i would go with Florida or Florida State
Living in Florida, this would make me incredibly happy.
Florida, Florida State, and even Miami are the sexy opponents to me...Also the most likely places I'd travel for an away game.
LSU... It would be interesting for sure! Just for the pure mad hatter effect
It would have to be a location where many alumni could make the trek to the stadium. Why not Stanford?
I could be wrong, but it seems to me that recruits are paying more attention to the academic ratings of schools. In that case, since Stanford is a better school than Michigan overall (I understand there are certain programs that we rank better in, but it is virtual consensus that Stanford is better ranked than we are), Stanford will be a strong competitor for the recruits that care about football and academic quality.
I know that Stanford has been doing well in football recently (and have won the Rose Bowl in this century), but entering into a long-term non-conference rivalry with Stanford would grant them legitimacy that I'd rather they not receive.
Also, they're not a traditional power, and I'd love for us to replace ND with someone a bit more long-standing.
the majority of bowl games are going to be in the south, rutgers and maryland games are east, so it would be nice to get a bit of a presence for recruiting and alumni out west.
however, i think stanford's dance card is full, as they have ND and a 9 game PAC12 schedule.
Let's just talk Stanford into cancelling the rest of their series with Notre Dame then.
These are schools that I think are worthy of a long-term association with us, comparable in class and academics. Possibly Florida as well. FSU and LSU - no way. Oregon is comparable only in microbrews and weed.
I would rather have a rotation of higher level competition vs having one long standing series but I would say either Florida or Georgia would be a good series.
I would like to play a long term series with Wisconsin, Nebraska, Minnesota, Northwestern, or Iowa.
Who or what is Wisconsin?
I don't care, as long as that giant dick face recycle monster Mike Tirico doesn't announce them.
I bet that bastard doesn't even tip.
But my real vote is UCLA.
Doesn't give enough scheduling flexibility to lock in an opponent now that we're at 9 conference games a season.
I personally would like to see a rotating home-home series across the 4 Pac-12 California teams though - this would mean that I can actually attend a few games now that I'm living out here.
Welcome to the Golden State, amigo!
Unfortunately the Big 10 already tried that and the PAC 12 sashayed out of the deal.
Well what he's suggesting isn't a full conference agreement, just Michigan and a few teams from the Pac 12. It certainly isn't unreasonable.
They must be chicken. Should we rename to Bawk-14?
I could go for that if a couple Bay Area teams are included. First choice would be Stanford, otherwise my regional pick would be Cal-Berkley. Think we could beat on ‘em 3 out of 4 years and get good strength of schedule from it.
would be the one that makes most sense. From the perspective of alumni, future recruiting on west coast, and it would feel like a little jab back at the irish if we could some how swing it.
Stanford would be a good choice.
I'd like it to be Stanford, with all the UM-grads in the Bay Area.
But to play along, I'd probably go with Stanford. Like institutions, across the country. Not sure I'd want to reward an every year battle to someone in the SEC, and when I think USC I think Rose Bowl. I guess we could play Stanford twice, as we've played them in Rose Bowls and it even happened once with UCLA, but everything else Stanford brings to the table would let me excuse it.
Texas would probably want a 2 for 1 or something demanding and ridiculous like they always do, and no one else really excites me. Really, someone like Nebraska or Penn State would have been a good replacement before they joined the conference.
How about Duke? If they won't play us in basketball anymore....
Talking basketball powers, I'd take Kentucky, if only to raise our batting average against the SEC.
Our batting average against the SEC is just fine. Before last year and the RichRod farewell Gator Bowl, we had won 6 of our previous 7 against the SEC.
We're pretty much the only team in the Big Ten who has favorable records recently against the SEC and favorable historical records. I think Ohio State is like 1-10 in their last 11 vs the SEC. We're the only one's saving the conference from total humiliation
I'd prefer Tennesee. Traditional SEC power, but is struggling lately. Plus Knoxville is a good college town that reminds me a bit if Ann Arbor but with mountains, and warmer.
Not true on Texas. They have 1:1 home and away scheduled with ND in 2015/2016 and 2019/2020. (might have years off by 1 but they have two home and homes) So it's doable even with a team from the north.
Of those choices, Stanford. Actually I like that idea in general.
Notre Dame has had some pretty hot women over the years and substituting them with some really hot Texas women would be fine by me.
I'm starting a PhD program at Florida State in the fall, so they get my vote.
Elvis Grbac says no!
Bring the Wolverines to Philly.
Moar East Coast recruiting.
I'd be shocked if we can ever put another long term series together. It'd be great but I doubt most schools would want to commit to it. Count anyone in the SEC outside of Alabama and Vandy out, since the rest of them won't cross the Mason Dixon line. The ACC has Notre Dame so they're out. Stanford would be nice but I really don't see anyone wanting to commit to it.
But I would consider Stanford if they canceled their series with ND to play us.
Texas A&M or Oregon have my vote.
Stanford, UCLA or Florida would be my choices. Maybe Texas. They are in recruiting hotbeds, and are also good to great academic institutions.
I hope they do not do a long running series. I like the idea of a home and home and then move on to another team. Just keep quality opponents.
Florida would be swell.
rotating series with USC, LSU, Texas, Oklahoma
Least cheatin'est school in the SEC, huge fan base of FOOTBALL fans, excellent academics. Would love to add the Dawgs.
Syracuse for purely selfish reasons
CUSE. I could list a lot of reasons, but they would all come off as selfish.
My vote is one of the strong academic public schools on the west coast, 1) Berkeley 2)UCLA
Most teams want at least 7 home games a year. The Big XII and the Pac-12 both play 9 league games, The SEC will probably go to that format sooner or later. That leaves room for at most one home-and-home with a non-conference foe.
Bear in mind that Florida and FSU already have an annual non-conference game with each other; Stanford has an annual game with Notre Dame that neither side plans to give up.
Another issue is that many of those teams probably prefer variety to the same opponent over and over again. Everyone wants to get on Texas's schedule, so they don't need the certainty of a common opponent every year. Their future non-conference home-and-home opponents include USC, Maryland, Notre Dame, Ohio State, BYU, Cal, and Arkansas.
Oregon has scheduled similarly: their future home-and-homes include Wyoming, Texas A&M, Virginia, Michigan State, and Ohio State. If this happens at all, it's going to be in the 2020s, not right away.
Lastly, it's worth noting that most of these teams play in warm-weather climates, where a September game is going to put Michigan at a disadvantage. That, at the very least, is one issue they didn't have to deal with when playing Notre Dame.
Replace our Rival with the Rival of our Rival, who in turn is our Friend? But a friend who we hate and are our Rival as well.
I hate USC and the fact we don't ever play them outside of the damn city that their university is in. Come up north(east) you punks and we will start leading in this series in no time!
But out of that group, Stanford would be cool. Just give us that California footprint!
The idea of a long-term series with a strong opponent is a longshot, but I would vote for either UCLA or Texas, with the slight edge to UCLA. Why? First I eliminated teams who would likely not accept the offer due to current long-term series with strong OOC opponents (Stanford, USC, Florida, Florida State, and South Carolina). Then I eliminated teams with poor recruiting grounds (Arizona and Oregon). That leaves us with LSU, Texas, and UCLA.
These teams are all located in exceptionally fertile recruiting grounds. I think it would be harder to pull kids from Louisiana (since almost all the good talent there goes to SEC teams), so let's eliminate LSU. That leaves Texas and UCLA. Texas is a historical powerhouse, so that would be fun. However, if we played UCLA in Pasadena every other year, that would give us some familiarity with the Rose Bowl, which could be good for our team come the post-season. Also, UCLA is more similar to Michigan academically (two of the top three public research universities in the world--the other being Cal). It would also help with recruiting since players would be guaranteed to play in southern California two or three times in their career. Win-win-win.
Is there any real evidence that playing a road game someplace really improves your chances of pulling recruits from there? I know this is something coaches talk about, but to me it just seems like a relic of the old days when most games were only regionally-televised (if at all) and it was hard to really get exposure to teams outside your area.
make some inroads in SoCal, and we could definitely beat them for the short-term future.
My close second is Florida.
Bama. I want revenge. And I want it hard.
I would be okay with that in about 3 years, let's have those great recruiting classes become upperclassmen before we get into that.
That would be interesting. Maybe after UA finishes home and home with MSU. Saban wants to move to playing more top conference opponents.
but I'd like to see a solid Pac-12 team (preference would be Cal, UCLA, or Stanford). That or Rutgers, you know New York market and all.
Rutgers in a non-conference series when they are in our division starting in 2014? Yeah ok.
They're going to be playing Rutgers every year as it is...? Also, they weren't on the list.
Without question Stanford or UCLA. This would give Michigan a West Coast presence and would help recruiting in the long run in California.
I want to play USC. Traditional power and they have gotten the better of us for the most part when we've faced them. Would not be happening if we played them yearly. Plus...like California.
I'd prefer LSU or Stanford. We go to Florida enough for bowl games (thought that might change a bit in the future), it'd be nice to get another bi-annual game in another fertile recruiting area. Louisiana or California clearly fit the bill. I know Texas fits this criteria as well...but I'd just prefer LSU/Stanford.
Texas or Oklahoma.
with all of these teams instead of picking one as a long term series. Since I have to pick one.... I choose Texas. Probably the college town with the best nightlife, it's not in Florida or California (where we seem to play all of our bowl games), a program with a lot of history (like ND) and definite recruiting advantages.
Looking at FBSchedules.com, the nearest open slot appears to be 2017, where Cinicinnati is the only non-conference opponent locked up. 2018 and 2019 have the home-and-home with Arkansas and then 2020 and 2021 have the home-and-home with Virginia Tech.
Like others, I actually find the idea of rotating some of these teams intriguing with the limited non-conference space that will be available starting in 2016 with the expansion to nine conference games for us. In 2018 and 2019, for example, with an SEC team already booked, it would be interesting to go with USC or Stanford, and then maybe in 2020 and 2021, perhaps someone like Texas.
If not a continuous series, then setting up a rotation with a few teams where most Michigan teams will see some of the better major conference opponents at least once in their Michigan careers might be interesting. If I have to choose just one, then probably USC with Texas as a backup.
We play the SEC enough in bowl games. Personally I'd prefer rotation non-conference scheduling with the better football teams in the other two more academically minded conferences (i.e., ACC and Pac 12). Stanford, USC, Oregon, FSU, Virginia Tech, Miami, etc.
We know the SEC oversigns. We know most of them have lower academic standards. We know they have highly compensated coaching staffs. If we sign up to playa against the SEC, it should not be against Alabama or LSU. Playing against lesser stack SEC teams early in the season will help build experience and momentum towards being able to compete with the SEC champion int he post season. Playing Alabama out of the gate sets you back the whole season, morale, injury, and perception-wise.
I'd much, much rather replace them with home-and-homes with several of these:
The only teams of the above that we've played in the regular season are Georgia and USC, and the last time for those was in '65 and '58, respectively. Stone age, in other words.
I don't have much interest in playing the PAC-12 since it's been such a frequent source of opponents in the regular season or in the Rose Bowl. I suppose Arizona with RR would be "interesting" but I can't see that happening as long as DB is around.
I'd pick a school with a good recruiting base and not in the SEC b/c I'm Sec'd out.
In no particular order my choices would be:
Oklahoma (Not a recuiting hotbed but the Texas tie-in is cool and it's a top 20 Program)
SEC teams are pipe dreams. No way in hell any good SEC team comes up here every other year.
I'd say Syracuse. Historical reasons. Michigan and Syracuse had a rivalry going when Michigan went independent in 1907. Quite competitive actually and it even showed in 1998-1999 when they played a home and home.
I kinda miss the old home and homes with Pac-12 teams. Look how many of them Michigan has played-
the last thing we need is another Big East/Acc turd on the schedule, especially one that plays in a frickin dome. Terrible.
Florida State. They cheated us out of the Best Helmet poll, and the best Pregame Tradition poll. Plus, like ND, they are perennially overrated, and I'd love to benefit from derailing their anuual hype train instead of letting the NC States and Wake Forests of the world do it.
Aren't we perennially overrated?
Ouch. Fan on fan crime...
Stanford,UCLA, and Washington and make them primetime home and series. Good for TV Networking and recruiting. they are familiar oppenets from the past.
There is no doubt about it; USC is the best choice to have a long time rivalry with. Besides, with Lane Kiffin there, NOW is the time to start playing them!
I like the debate but as someone above noted, I want my team to play more goddamn Big Ten teams. It's not as sexy as picking between a bunch of historic football teams across the country but, it's the truth. Iowa, Minnesota, Northwestern, Illinois, Wisconsin, need to play Michigan more often than they're going to be.
....otherwise, Arizona (!).
Honestly though, any rivalry the university tries to develop will be hollow. We had a reason to hate Notre Dame. I don't think there's any other school in the country besides OSU, MSU, Minn (though how can you hate those cute little gophers?), and Notre Dame that can we just begin to hate. Each rivalry has its own traditions and reasons for a rivalry. I'm upset that we lose a rival, but I don't want to be like ND and have a rivalry against every team you face. I'm content wih 3, though I would like ND to be back on the schedule ASAP.
...nobody would have suggested "Rutgers" or "Maryland."
But back to reality. Do we need to pick just one team to replace Notre Dame? I do like Stanford. That's a good match.
But how about some variety? How about LSU, then Georgia, then Florida, then Tennessee, etc. All home-and-home.
Texas...Austin is a great town for all sorts of reasons
What about a team like Louisville? Kind of on the up-and-up, joining the ACC, and a bit of a media darling this year. I doubt they'll sustain this attention or production, but they're a decent major conference team where travel wouldn't be a big issue. I know it doesn't increase the recruiting footprint, but I think that is a little overstated anyway. They wouldn't be my top choice by any means, but they're realistic. It's odd that ACC teams in general aren't being thrown around (minus FSU). Clemson, Miami, GA Tech, VA Tech (I know we already have them scheduled) would also be decent options, if we're putting down the pipe dreams.
EDIT: To be clear, I would prefer the other teams in the poll, but as others have noted, they're pretty unrealistic in the short term. Also, I am on the West Coast, so I would much prefer a PAC12 team personally.
For the most part, the greatest and truest rivalries have are regional. You can't just start a fierce rivalry with Texas or LSU. You need some kind of turf war.
just keep scheduling games against top notch opponents for home & home or onesies at the Big House and we'll be fine and spread the love...or hate on the field, if you will.
If Notre Dame is really done, let's bring in as many good teams as we can and not just lock ourselves into one opponent.
Texas hands down. The two most profitable schools in CFB. Both have crazy fan bases and would be a Monday Night Football kind of event. Would LOVE a home and home with them
...i.e....California, Texas or Florida.
Personally...Texas or USC would be amazing.
or at least not one the fans would want. It will be an ever changing series of home and homes or nuetral site one offs for better or worse. I like the variety, and to hell with Notre Dame, but I think the schedule just won't be as good without the annual ND game.
At least we will have UM/Rutgers and ND/Duke in its place! Blech.
I'd pick a school that is consistently overrated especially early in the season. Texas and Florida State come to mind. Please no neutral site garbage.
UNC, Duke and Georgia Tech could be fun too. Fun cities and might not have to do a return trip with those schools.
Since Jimbo took over in Florida State, FSU has started to become another powerhouse in college football and haven't been too overrated in recent years. And don't you think we've had enough of playing an overrated team to start the season (Notre Dame with the exception of last season)?
Battle of the Nerds - Stanford
UCLA or Georgia. I don't know why, just think it would be sick.
Navarre wilted in 100 degree weather and went 8-28 with a key interception at end of game. Had Henson been healthy we would have buried that Bruin team like we did in 1996.
My GF fainted from the damn heat at that game. UCLA does an awful job of conducting games at the Rose Bowl, it ain't like the Grand Daddy production at all.
Agree big time about Henson, that season coulda been so much better had Drew not been hobbled early in the season.
I wore a pair of cheap flip flops to the game and I swear to god they got so hot they half melted and got all deformed from the heat...hottest game ever!
We had some epic games with Bobby Bowden's teams in the 90s when I was hanging out with an FSU alumna, and now I live in Tallhassee. It would help elevate one of ND's new rivals in the ACC, and help elevate our own stature on the national stage. Two schools back on the rise.
86 and 91. Was at the game in 91. Michigan got worked. Bad. Terrell Buckley picked Elvis on his first throw for a 40 yard TD. Amp Lee was one of the fastest players I've ever seen at Michigan stadium and if it weren't for a few spectacular plays by Desmond it would have been brutal to watch. 31-51.
I watched the 91 game at a bar while spending a weekend on Drummond Island. Truly bad game for the Wolverines. I never imagined a UM team could give up 50 points.
on the way to a tiny island called Gull some friends owned in Lake Huron. Good times in HS and college.
Stanford and Florida seem like sexy options not only with the current, thriving states of their football programs but from a recruiting standpoint as well. Both would be fun games that would bring in big revenue each year as well.
I'd vote for UCLA (or really any PAC team).
Big stadium, not too far (closest SEC school that isn't Kentucky), travels nearly as well as we do, contentious past (Manning/Woodson), big school who despite their current condition should "return to glory" (at some point).
that would be cool... Mainly because I live just outside of Knoxville, and because I'm tired of hearing of the "poised for greatness Vols" every season even though they look like they have a solid future ahead.
I would love to see FSU
Classic school, tough, but not too tough, good excuse to see what's prob a pretty good campus
I vote Texas. Only because my selfishness overcomes everything in this vote, and I actually want to be able to watch the Maize and Blue play real live football fergodsakes. I don't care for UT, but Tejas would be a nice place to steal a few recruits from.
USC / UCLA / Stanford
Texas / Texas A&M
LSU / Auburn / Alabama
Florida / Florida State / Miami / Georgia
Even Virginia or Virginia Tech would be good (just remembered we are playing Virginia Tech. Wise move Dave Brandon)
Tennessee...this works on many levels. After that...
These in no particular order... but I would like Virginia and/or Vanderbilt.
to be a Southern school, basically, in order to boost recruiting. UGA or Florida or UT would be my choices. West Coast could end up in a rematch in the Rose Bowl, and besides USC, there isn't a school that is really consistently good (Stanford has moments, UCLA was bad for a while, and who knows about Oregon?)
with a solid football program that we can beat regularly and recruit in their territory that would also be interesting to visit.
Cal (the two best public schools)
Virginia (a team that could join the B1G)
North Carolina (another team that could join the B1G)
then Stanford or Georgia.
Of that group, I'd say Texas. Best area to recruit from.
Of course, we should just be playing ND. Local rivalry with loads of history. Unfortunately ND is pretending that they actually have a rivalry with Stanford, and that their series with Purdue and MSU are more important than their series with us.
Purdue and MSU will be dropped, don't worry about that. But that is due more to the fact you guys are going 9 game conf schedule.
Stanford is a west coast recruiting trip alternating years with our chief rival, USC.
Most Notre Dame like in many respects.
...especially for a home and away. Anyone that likes Ann Arbor will love Austin...one of the coolest cities around.
What about Washington? Michigan has quite the history playing them.
While ND has been returning to glory since 1989, Washington actually has won 2 Rose Bowls and a national championship.
They both share the sacred bond of Tyrone Willingham though.
I say schedule exactly like ND does: play a team that can almost beat you, but not quite, and hope they win enough other games to make your victory look good on the computers.
USF is perfect. It would be great for recruiting. Most of all, though, USF should win a few games for the computers, but really shouldn't ever beat Michigan.
My take: they should play a team from one of the "second five" conferences, and the team should be from Texas or Florida.
Among top ten wins all-time, but not at level of Bama and LSU. Two largest stadiums in the country. Manning vs. Woodson. Plus they'll beat us 3 or 4 out of ten times, keeping the rivalry close but in UM's favor.
Vanderbilt, just bc I love 5 minutes from there
I think everyone's idea of a rotation is most achievable. would like to see fsu, miami,Tennessee, Georgia. Oklahoma or osu could be good
With ND. Who would route for those chickens? Maybe they should join the Pac whatever ... that makes sense. Even though LSU is my backup team, since I spent so much time in NO the land of dreams, I'd play them alls. Until they play us ...
1) Both schools have good football history
2) Both states are rich recruiting grounds
3) Academically, they are stronger than SEC schools
Texas: Public school
USC: Rose Bowl country
Both quality institutions that compare very favorably against ND academically, and they bring an extra dimension in that they already loathe each other. I think it would be great to have a home-and-away series where we play one of the two each year.
UT Knoxville. Would love to see a game at rocky top
Are you deployed or just an insomniac?
Navy. They're usually better than Notre Dame.
That is why Notre Dame worked so well, and why Texas-Oklahoma, Michigan-Ohio State, California-Stanford, UCLA-USC, etc work as well.
For Michigan, there is no natural replacement for Notre Dame, so I wouldn't lock in another school.
However, there is another way to go. Private, excellent D-1 schools like Duke, Northwestern, Stanford, Wake Forest, Vanderbilt and Rice tend to schedule each other as they are facing the similar challenges and are essentially playing each other on an equal footing.
I would propose that Michigan do the same with excellent public schools and rotate among schools of Virginia, North Carolina, California, UCLA, and perhaps Texas.
Arizona. That way we can have an annual board slapfest between the pro and con RichRod people. Always amusing.
Always ranked high. Also good for recruiting.
the more I like UCLA. We probably get enough exposure in SEC country anyway, and there is probably more willingness on the part of West Coast kids to consider other schools than there would be anywhere else. USC and Stanford wouldn't do it because of the ND series, and there is enough similarity between us and UCLA that it could really get going as a thing.
Lets replace the old gold standard with the new gold standard.
1. This is Michigan fergodsakes. We take on the best. While the pereception of the B1G is down, we can show the world the Michigan difference. We are the best program in football.
2. Potential motivating factor for Alabama recruits to flip to A2. Also, could be advantageous for elite recruits who want to play for a top-5 program (Not in the SEC).
3. Nick Saban needs to eat humble pie. Urban Mayer too. The opportunity to beat Saban, Meyer, and Dantonio in the same season is delicious.
would be that we DON'T lock into a long term deal but rotate many. That being said if I had to choose; I'd say we need that western connection bolstered so UCLA, Cal, or Texas would be just fine.
Texas, so I can make fun of my wife when we win!
There are a number of schools that might be on any list, but are unrealistic choices unless they change their own scheduling practices and/or conference scale back to eight conference games (not likely).
Programs that already have major non-conference opponent on an annual basis include:
USC and Stanford ( with Notre Dame)
Florida and Florida State
Georgia and Georgia Tech
South Carolina and Clemson
The Pac 12 and Big XII have nine conference games and the Big Ten will adopt that practice in 2016. The SEC is considering it and the ACC has gone back and forth on implementing that practice. So who's left?
1. Texas - UT has a four-game series with Notre Dame and has played Ohio State in a home-and-home series, so the Longhorns are a good possibility. Since the Big XII doesn't have a conference championship game, it makes sense for Texas to enhance their non-conference schedule in any possible. Having Michigan on the schedule would help accomplish that goal.
2. Oklahoma - Pretty much the same situation as Texas IRT their situation within the Big XII and the four-team playoff. OU probably doesn't have quite the same profile as UT, but they'd be on the list.
3. Miami - The U has occasional games with Florida, but UF isn't regularly on their schedule. For now, the ACC has an eight game conference schedule, so Miami does have more open dates to fill than other schools. ND has a series of games with them, so playing Michigan could also fit.
4. LSU - This is a program that Michigan has never played, so it would be unique to start up a long term series. Would it happen? Perhaps not with Les Miles as head coach, but some other HC and/or athletic director might be interested. If the SEC goes to a nine-game conference schedule, this isn't a likely scenario.
5. Tennessee - Two schools with large stadiums and large traditions. But like LSU, if the SEC goes to a nine-game conference schedule, a long-term relationship isn't likely. A home-and home might work out (same with LSU).
6. Texas A&M - Another SEC team that is expanding its stadium, plays in front of a passionate fan base and is located in a main recruiting area. They only other SEC team on the list would be Alabama, but it looks llike the Crimson Tide isn't more likely to have a neutral site game.
I"m not real excited about any of the Pac 12 teams outside of USC and Stanford. Washington could be a possibility along with UCLA. But given Michigan's history of not playing well on West Coast and the fact UM has actually played a number of P12 teams in the regular season in recent history. I'd like to see Michigan go in another direction (such as the home-and-home with Arkansas).
There aren't any ACC teams that are realistic possibilities outside of Miami. UM does have the home-and-home with Virginia Tech coming up. But none of the others that are realistic don't move the needle.
This topic makes me wonder why we are waiting so long to play Va Tech (Its far enough into the future that there is no way to know if any of our personnel will be around for the game).
Is this how far in advance scheduling out of conference games will take? If we wanted to schedule a game with USC would we be able to play it in 2015?