It's UConn Comment Count

Brian July 30th, 2009 at 3:40 PM

connecticut_logo_2003 henri-the-otter-of-ennu

Stupid being correct:

UConn has reached an agreement with Michigan on a home-and-home series that will see the Huskies travel to Ann Arbor in 2010 and the Wolverines head to Rentschler Field in 2013, according to sources with knowledge of the negotiations.

Well, at least it's not a MAC school, but if Michigan was going to give up a home game I'd rather seem them play someone more interesting.

(That's Henri, The Otter of Ennui, by the way. Wave all you want: he doesn't care.)

Comments

mgovictors23

July 30th, 2009 at 3:48 PM ^

Like I said earlier this is kind of a downer. Sure UConn has upgraded their talent level but they don't offer as nearly as much prestige as the other schools that were considered.

wile_e8

July 30th, 2009 at 3:50 PM ^

Spot on. If you created a list of all BCS teams in order of big game appeal, I'm pretty sure UConn would end up in the bottom quarter. This after a few days of build up once it was announced that it would be BCS opponent for the 2010 opener and fans started hoping for a team in the top quarter of that list, creating a game that would be one of the biggest stories for the entire offseason leading up to it (sorta like all the hype that lead up to the first OSU-Texas game and made it one of the biggest regular season games that I remember). They aren't the sort of scalp you can brag about in the end of season strength of schedule conversations, but I guess we are supposed to be happy it isn't a MAC team.

msoccer10

July 30th, 2009 at 4:28 PM ^

that the name isn't that impressive, the quality of the game will depend on what they do in their season. A bit like Utah last year. At the end of the year, everyone admitted that Utah was a good team and had it mattered at all, it would have helped out strength of schedule. If they have a good year and win the Big East, we could definitely brag about that win. The bigger issue is the ability to hype the game before it happens.

Jorel

July 30th, 2009 at 4:32 PM ^

It's not that UConn is a bad opponent, it's that it's nuts to give away a home a game to a team such as UConn. Plus, UConn is not exactly an exciting opponent for the Stadium opener. Army would have at least been "special." Oh well. On with life.

Tim Waymen

July 30th, 2009 at 3:49 PM ^

Eh, at least they're BCS. They better win the fucking Big East next year. I was going to make a joke about RR thinking he's in the Big East, but forget it.

rdlwolverine

July 30th, 2009 at 4:31 PM ^

that the road game will be played on the East Coast where Michigan has a huge alumni base and does not play often. One time (BC) in the last 40 years, and this one could be in the greater NYC area. (I am not counting Penn State as East Coast.) Although the game is currently being identified as being at Rentschler Field, I would not be surprised if it were moved to the Yale Bowl or Yankee Stadium. I know UConn is prohibited from moving a home game out of state for a period of time, but the fact that this game is not until 2013 may make the Yankee Stadium prospect possible.

MichIOE01

July 30th, 2009 at 3:54 PM ^

because UConn is actually a better team than most people will give them credit for, but based on their reputation did this have to be a home and home? Couldn't we have just paid them to play here like most of our non-con games?

David

July 30th, 2009 at 3:55 PM ^

Pretty lame. I just don't get it. It's not lucrative (as a two for one), won't get our name out there (like a Georgia game), and won't help our recruiting in an important region (like a Florida school would).

Seems bad all around.

Shalom Lansky

July 30th, 2009 at 3:59 PM ^

So Michigan's home schedule alternates being good and atrocious, yet tix cost the same amount.

This year, and every other year we get OSU, Notre Dame and Penn State at home, then we follow that up with MSU at home and UCONN!!! In the off-years (ND, PSU and OSU) on the road Michigan needs to make the home schedule a little more enticing.

MichIOE01

July 30th, 2009 at 3:59 PM ^

Especially after all the talk and speculation. We dreamed of Georgia, or even Boise St. Kind of telling when your BCS opponent is a dissappointment compared to a possible non-BCS opponent.

DCBlue

July 30th, 2009 at 4:02 PM ^

We are "building a program" here. We can't expect to bring in Miami (Fla.) or Cal just yet. Christ. Between this and the fucking piped in music, I can't decide whether to gouge my eyes out or go to my first WNBA game.

MichIOE01

July 30th, 2009 at 4:05 PM ^

because it was a home and home, I think we could expect to bring in a Miami or Cal, or just about anyone else. M had a down year, but is still one of the top brands in the nation, and pretty much guaranteed to sell out any stadium.

doxa

July 30th, 2009 at 4:02 PM ^

Bill--How many times has Michigan unveiled a massive stadium renovation to the world? The home opener in 2010 is a special occasion that deserves a special team and I’m sorry but UConn doesn’t meet that standard. Hell, I wouldn’t have even batted an eye if UConn was on the schedule before the PR blitz. Utah and Oregon are FAR better teams to play in the Big House than UConn…

Bill’s had how many freaking years to plan for this date and all he could scrape up is the 5th best team in the 4th or 5th best conference, count me unimpressed!

Ugh.

Michigan St. gets Alabama
Ohio St. gets USC and Texas
Minnesota gets USC

DAM IT!

Thanks for ANOTHER lose-lose, Bill.

david from wyoming

July 30th, 2009 at 4:41 PM ^

I'm sorry, you are a moron. We have ND and now UConn. List me off ten teams (hell, list five if you want/can) that play in a good conference and have two good non-conference games AND aren't getting face stomped just for the money (Minnesota).

Go ahead, I'll wait.

doxa

July 31st, 2009 at 12:19 AM ^

Yes, we have ND and UConn. ND is an average team with national appeal, while UConn is an aveerage team with very limited appeal.

Hell, our current 2010 scheduel is nothing compared to the average gauntlet faced by an SEC team. I'm not going to sit back and applaud Michigan for signing a game with a powerhouse in basketball. This game does NOTHING to enhance our season, reputation, or opening day.

My point is clear. Opening day 2010 is a special moment in the history of Michigan football, UConn does not rise to the occasion.

A game against UConn is fine, just not on opening day.

Again, it’s a lose-lose.

Do you think ANYONE outside Michigan and Massachusetts gives a damn about this game?

Don

July 31st, 2009 at 1:10 AM ^

Which brings up the question: On Sept. 4, 2010, are there going to be any formal dedication ceremonies or celebrations commemorating the "new" stadium, or will they occur later in the year? If they're planned for the UConn game, then the comparison with the opening game against Ohio Wesleyan is inapt, since that was not the dedication day in 1927. The dedication ceremonies were held the day of the Ohio State game that year.

If formal ceremonies are planned for later in the year of 2010, then the comparison is relevant. UConn would be a far better opponent for us in 2010 than Wesleyan was in 1927. It would be hard to take a team called the Battling Bishops seriously in any century.

doxa

July 31st, 2009 at 10:04 AM ^

You're argument is arbitrary:

We played team X in 1927 in a parallel situation.
Team X in 1927 was unimpressive.
Therefore, it’s ok that Team X in a parallel situation is unimpressive.

We agree. Ohio Wesleyan is unimpressive just like UConn is unimpressive.

It’s a lose-lose situation. The game has zero recruiting ramifications and if we win no one notices.

Look, I’ll be at the game, but don’t ask me to get all excited for a game against the 5th best team in the 5th best conference in college football.

cfaller96

July 30th, 2009 at 4:08 PM ^

Connecticut's a good and rising program, and the road game will most likely occur after UConn's stadium expansion is done. Quality BCS opponent? Check. Negligible financial penalty for the road game? So what's the fucking problem here?

What was the alternative here? Cal? Pitt? Oklahoma State? None of those programs are on the upswing like UConn is, and there were no other superior programs with available scheduling.

This is a good OOC opponent not named "Notre Dame," which is exactly what we wanted. Be happy with this, you fucking ingrates.

rdlwolverine

July 30th, 2009 at 4:24 PM ^

for a home and home is that the home team keeps all or most of the $$ for the game it hosts. So, we end up with the same or nearly the same $$ for a home and home, no matter how big the opponent's stadium. Only for the games with no return, eg Delaware St, directional Michigan school, does the visitor receive a check for coming - a "guarantee." Fewer and fewer Div. 1-A teams are willing to take guarantee games or have raised their price. That is why there are more and more games against Div. 1-AA teams throughout NCAA and why teams like Ohio State are playing at Toledo (in Cleveland).