Blue Durham

March 9th, 2009 at 5:58 PM ^

We would have more wins total because our new, night games would be so cool and intimidating (even though they would have no impact whatsoever on our home record, as Chitown shows) they would have a carry-over effect on the away games. Hence, more total wins. Now, if we could have only night games, with all-black unis with purple trim (for Dex), we would never lose.

Joined: 06/30/2008

MGoPoints: 6082

UMxWolverines

March 9th, 2009 at 5:06 PM ^

Theres a difference. That year was better teams beating a not so good Michigan team. 2007 was worse teams beating a better Michigan team. 2008: I don't care if they were bad. They still lost to Toledo at home...a much much much worse team. But did anyone think about why Michigan almost came back against Utah? The crowd started to get rowdy after the first touchdown, and for the rest of the game, Utah had problems and barely held on...I remember the crowd against Toledo...dead silent the whole game.

Joined: 03/01/2009

MGoPoints: 65643

wile_e8

March 9th, 2009 at 6:22 PM ^

Ignore the defense's inability to tackle Dennis Dixon less than 10 yards down field, Chad Henne's injured shoulder, or the the offensive line's inablility to block anyone on the OSU defensive line. If these games had been at night, MICHIGAN WOULD HAVE WON!!!111one!!!!

Joined: 06/30/2008

MGoPoints: 7381

UMxWolverines

March 9th, 2009 at 6:19 PM ^

Cmon. you know Michigan was good that year. Why do you think they were preseason #5? Once they got beat pretty soundly the first two games, they got things together. If they had been ready for that App St. game, they wouldn't have slacked so badly in the Oregon game. That could have been an 11-1 or 12-0 season if they had been properly prepared.

Joined: 03/01/2009

MGoPoints: 65643

Blue Durham

March 9th, 2009 at 6:58 PM ^

legitimate reason that, in the "old days" the first poll was in early October, after a few games. Preseason polls mean next to nothing. The Penn State, Michigan State and Illinois games all could have gone the other way. You just can't look at one side, the games that we could have won. And yeah, the team looked crappy against Eastern Michigan, too, in a 33-22 win. Michigan would not have beaten Oregon if the game was played at 2 AM in Yost after a 52-0 blowout of Appalachian State. The team, its players and how they perform, is, at least in part, dependent upon the coaches. They are part of the team. So, yeah, if the team is "unprepared" that is part of the game. As Bill Parcells has famously said, you are your record. Michigan was 9-4. That is what they were, not #5 - that was an illusion that was quickly exposed. Finally, I don't know if fan noise would be so different at night versus the day. The composition of the crowd, and its over-all demeanor, would not likely change much. I'm not as impressed with the Penn State/LSU thing as you and announcers appear to be. I don't see changing to night games changing Michigan's record at all. USC is a good case in point. Historically, they have had problems selling out their home games, even since the arrival of Pete Carroll. USC now wins, not because since the arrival of Carroll their stadium somehow got louder, the team got better. Michigan's all-time night game record is 22-10 (regular season 19-5, bowl 3-5). These are all away games, and mostly against opponents that are above average on the schedule. The first was 1944 at Marquette. I very strongly suspect that the 19-5 night game away record is superior to Michigan's overall away record. Night game advantage for the opponent, perhaps not so much. Want more wins for Michigan. Apply Occom's razor - Michigan just needs to field a better team, not search for tertiary factors of dubious effect such as night games.

Joined: 06/30/2008

MGoPoints: 6082

StephenRKass

March 8th, 2009 at 10:08 PM ^

I am not opposed to a night game or two in Ann Arbor. BTW, I remember going to a Michigan - ND night game in South Bend. Night games are occasionally done there. Having said that, here are a few other reasons against night games. First, Michigan doesn't need them. When you fill up the stadium, whether day or night, there is less motivation to do them. If a team has 5-10% of its seats empty, and a night game fills them, the cost benefit of those additional seats outweighs the safety, police, infrastructure costs of night games. This benefit is never there for Michigan. Night games will only increase the University's costs, because the stadium is always full. If the AA chamber of commerce (hotels, restaurants, etc.) wanted to pay the cost differential between day and night games, because of perceived benefit, I would think that Martin et al would listen. It is almost ALWAYS about the money. Unless someone stands to make a lot more money, it isn't going to happen. But say ABC was willing to pay significantly more directly to UofM for a night game, such that additional costs were covered, and UofM still got more money (and didn't lose money as a result, e.g., from wealthy alums.) I would almost guarantee that there would immed. be serious discussion about night games. Second, it can get awfully cold at night, unlike Florida, Texas, California, etc. For this reason, even if night games were done, I would simply eliminate November night games. Third, I do believe it is easier for routine for the players to play in the day. (I think this was Bo's argument, and Carr's.) I am ignorant of whether or not this is true, and would defer to those who coach and are closer to the game then I. Fourth, Michigan has many, many alumni living in Ohio, Indiana and Illinois who travel to day games in AA, and return home after the game. With the exception of OSU, I believe other Big 10 teams don't have as many alums going to road games. Night games are more of a pain for those in this category (including myself.) As I said in the opening paragraph, I am completely open to a night game or two. But for me, and for many others, I automatically rule out a night game.

Joined: 07/15/2008

MGoPoints: 23103

StephenRKass

March 10th, 2009 at 12:17 AM ^

I am open to a couple night games happening in Sept., for the good of fans who want them. I loved going to big HS night games while living in Florida 10 years ago. For personal reasons, however, I can't easily get to night games in Ann Arbor. Having said this, my personal situation is no argument against the team having them. I believe the other arguments (primarily financial) are the main reason they are unlikely to happen.

Joined: 07/15/2008

MGoPoints: 23103

West Texas Blue

March 8th, 2009 at 11:32 PM ^

The OP is a tool for plastering this topic all over Michigan football forums.... Honestly, I could care less about a night game; I just want us to start winning games. A night game could serve as a great showcase game for a potential BCS team, but we're 2 years away from contending from a BCS game anyways. Plus the boosters don't want to have anything to do with a night game, so all of this is moot.

Joined: 06/30/2008

MGoPoints: 1845

jwfsouthpaw

March 9th, 2009 at 1:29 AM ^

Of course all of this is moot! Everything we discuss is inherently moot because we have no impact whatsoever on RR's coaching decisions, recruiting decisions, and the like. I know this is a crushing blow to some people, but acceptance is the first step towards recovery.

Joined: 01/14/2009

MGoPoints: 1283

heisman2

March 9th, 2009 at 1:40 AM ^

I don't care about whether we have night games or not. I just hate going to games that start at noon. Start a petition for no more noon games, except for maybe OSU (to maintain tradition).

Joined: 02/19/2009

MGoPoints: 3

Seth

March 9th, 2009 at 9:25 AM ^

Hey, Cookie, yeah you with the long hair, are you watching this? It's Spring and the kids are getting restless. So let's have a little fun. Pick leaders from either side of the debate to present, as coherently as they can, their arguments for or against night games at Michigan Stadium. Leave a few days for the comments to pile up. Then blogpoll a vote.

Joined: 10/14/2008

MGoPoints: 149874

CPS

March 9th, 2009 at 5:26 PM ^

Poorly articulated online petitions and fan blog polls is how you get things done. Don't try to use logic or coherent lines of thought. Don't try to address the issues that opponents may have or allay their concerns. Petitions and polls. That's where it's at. Eat your paint chips, and you'll understand soon enough.

Joined: 10/20/2008

MGoPoints: -405

Seth

March 9th, 2009 at 7:49 PM ^

Wolv -- this ain't a political blog. I've got Misopogal standing over me with a fork for my eye if I rise to your bait. If you want to hate on people for not having your political views, there's a whole Internet filled with forums that absolutely adore snide. As to the poll, my understanding of online polls to a targeted group is that they're a good indication of what the respondents to the poll think, and little else. Example: try running a poll on job approval for Rich Rod on this poll, versus a poll of every fan at the next home game, and I promise the results will be different. I doubt our votes will have any real effect. But I, for one, would be interested to see what the informed denizens of these boards have to say.

Joined: 10/14/2008

MGoPoints: 149874