Schedule of Successories!

Submitted by Seth on April 6th, 2011 at 3:19 PM


The Conference of Leaders and Legends and Champions and Successes and Deliverables has released its industry-leading, no frills, easy-to-use schedule of play through what we can only hope will be Brady Hoke's fourth consecutive Big Ten Championship. ESPN's Adam Rittenberg managed to get early dibs on the Big Ten's 2013 and 2014 conference schedules (HT: dkeesbury), so we can bring you the near future's road to Pasadena / Wherever-Probably-Not-Glendale-lolz:

2013 Big Ten Schedule:

Date Opponent Location
Sep. 28 x TBA
Oct. 5 MINNESOTA* Ann Arbor, Mich.
Oct. 12 @ Penn State* University Park, Pa.
Oct. 19 INDIANA* Ann Arbor, Mich.
Oct. 26 x TBA
Nov. 2 @ Michigan State* East Lansing
Nov. 9 NEBRASKA* Ann Arbor, Mich.
Nov. 16 @ Northwestern* Evanston, Ill.
Nov. 23 @ Iowa* Iowa City, Iowa (We're from Iowa!)
Nov. 30 OHIO STATE* Ann Arbor, Mich.

2014 Big Ten Schedule:

Date Opponent Location
Sep. 27 @ Indiana or Illinois? Bloomington, Ind. or Champaign, Ill.?
Oct. 4 x TBA
Oct. 11 MICHIGAN STATE Ann Arbor, Mich.
Oct. 18 @ Minnesota Minneapolis, Minn.
Oct. 25 PENN STATE Ann Arbor, Mich.
Nov. 1 IOWA Ann Arbor, Mich.
Nov. 8 @ Nebraska Lincoln, Neb.
Nov. 15 x TBA
Nov. 22 NORTHWESTERN Ann Arbor, Mich.
Nov. 29 @ Ohio State Columbus, Ohio

There's no Purdue. :-[(


And no Wisconsin.

I said No Wisconsin!

Where's Wisconsin?


And no Illinois.


Earlier there was a discrepency on that had Michigan playing the Illini instead of Indiana. That has been cleared up - the mothership just had a typo.


By 2014, Michigan State gets moved back to mid-October, which if I knew Michigan State existed when I was a kid* I guess that would feel more appropriate than mid-November. This seems to be a quirk of the schedule and not the Big Ten acknowledging rivalry dates are important, other than the BIG rivalry between Legendary Leadership, and Leaders of Legend. That – the conf. championship – will be on Dec. 7, 2013, and Dec. 6, 2014, respectively; locales TBD.


* My father went to MSU in the 60s - but like who of his generation remembers anything from that time? Nobody talked about Michigan State at Quarton Elementary School is what I mean.


The Rittenberg article also quotes a TV guy in the conference who seems to favor 9-game conference schedules:

"That's just the mathematics of it," said Big Ten senior associate commissioner for television administration Mark Rudner, who puts together the schedule. "While teams are still playing eight conference games, out of the total inventory of games available, we're playing a smaller percentage. We've added a 12th institution. Part of this could be solved if we went to a nine-game [Big Ten] schedule moving forward. 

"It's not ideal, but hopefully moving forward it can be addressed."

Okay, so there's one guy who's maybe probably voting for 9 games at the next meeting. Reason for: one week in September we play the Wisconsin Badgers instead of the Not-a-State University Baby Seals (and MSU lines up Ohio State instead of the Northern Colorado School for Mimes). Reason against: fewer bowl-eligible Big Ten teams -- you're turning 12 almost-guaranteed wins for conference teams into exactly 6-6), plus all the same reasons BCS teams choose to play kick the can in September instead of each other. I'm for 9. I also think it's a pipedream.

Other random, non-bulleted thoughts:

Nothing lasts forever: Other than Penn State games, the schedule does set up nicely early in the season, but with brutal Iowa/Nebraska/Ohio State Novembers broken up by that quasi-traditional Northwestern-in-a-cold-November-Rain game.

Not a good refrain: When we rebooted the ND rivalry again for '02, I wanted somebody to notice that Michigan would end up getting both the Irish and Ohio State at home on odd years, thus leaving Michigan State the de facto big home game of even years. Surely when adding Nebraska, this would be rectified so that…dammit! So from now until the conference adds a 9th game or whatever, on odd years we get Nebraska, Ohio State, Notre Dame, and the Brown Jug game. On even years we visit all of them, and get Michigan State at home.

Also, MSU doesn't play Ohio State these two years, if you're the type who likes to grumble early.

I've added the info to the future schedules wiki.



April 6th, 2011 at 4:08 PM ^

I'm kind of upset that we don't play Wisconsin, one of my favorite games at the Big House was the '08 Wiscy comeback. Plus then we can see how we match up in MANBALL v. MANBALL.


April 6th, 2011 at 4:38 PM ^

I think it is entirely possible that we will play Wisconsin in the B10 title game before they return to our regular season schedule.

Ok, maybe "entirely possible" is a bit strong. How 'bout "not unthinkable"??



April 6th, 2011 at 4:40 PM ^

the tough teams at home one year and all on the road the next -- schedule is stupid, not to mention unfair to our team. Do the other top teams in conference have to do that?


April 6th, 2011 at 11:51 PM ^

Penn State's in the South/East/Woody/Why Do We Have Wisconsin Division. We see them for a few years then they disappear.

I guess if the Big Ten keeps Wisconsin or Penn State opposite OSU, ND and Nebraska that's kind of okay. But think about it: we're going to be facing Nebraska every year, many of those years expecting to compete with them for the North/West/Bo/Where's Wisconsin Division championship. They're liable to become, if not an Ohio State, an inimicus novus, l kind of like the Tigers and Blue Jays were during the late-'80s / early '90s.

In 10 years, I would expect Michigan and Nebraska to see each other as true rivals, probably passing Minnesota, Wisconsin, Penn State, and Iowa in the pecking order of which game a typical Michigan fan would wish to attend first. If you think you've had the 1997 debate out now, just wait: we're going to hear every year how they were just as champion-y as we were and they're going to have bleeding ears from hearing about the damn "foot-ball" overtime play with Missouri.

If Nebraska was put on the same schedule as Michigan State, that would give us two huge games at the Big House every year: either ND and OSU, or Neb and MSU. This way, MSU still sits alone, with only the home of a Penn State or Wisconsin for another top draw. And really, much as I respect those programs, they're not really hardcore rivals, y'know?


April 6th, 2011 at 4:45 PM ^

Nebraska game should be moved to match MSU, I agree.  Does anyone know if Michigan will actually be playing Uconn again in 2013?  UConn's website says it's happening 9/21, but I feel like i've heard rumblings to the contrary.


April 6th, 2011 at 5:16 PM ^

I was mildly suprised to see Michigan would be playing Nebraska and Ohio State at home in 2013 and both away in 2014. With U-M playing Notre Dame in Ann Arbor in 2013 and in South Bend the following season, it means the home and away schedules are going to be a bit lop-sided at least through 2015.

I see that U-M is playing only teams in-conference in November with the exception of the season ender against Ohio State. That makes sense see that you want to keep interest in the division title races to the end.

It will be interesting to see if the Big Ten opts to go to nine conference games during next month's meetings. If that does happen, then it should start in 2015. Since ND plays Texas that season (on 9/5) and in 2016 (on 9/3) as the season openers in September, I half expect to see at least a two-year hiatus in the UM-ND series during those years.  ND's future schedules show the Irish opening the season with Texas and Michigan in the first two weeks of the 2015 and 2016 seasons--I don't think that's very likley and I don't expect to see Notre Dame on Michigan's 2015 or 2016 schedules.  See

What happens in 2017 and beyond depends on what UM, ND and the Big Ten can agree upon regarding the schedules.  If the B1G doesn't opt to split the Ohio State and Nebraska games and Notre Dame can't be persuaded to change the years of the home/away games with Michigan, then the ND series might to kaput and some other major BCS programs will be brought in to do home-and-hom series in lieu of the Irish.

I'll be curious to see what Brandon does with the 2014 schedule since the Notre Dame, Nebraska and Ohio State games are on the road. He got Air Force to bolster the 2013 home schedule--I suspect he'll try to do something similar with one of those available dates.

Michigan has seven home games in 2013 and 2014. If the B1G does go to nine conference games, then 2011 might be the final season U-M plays eight home games for the foreseeable future. 

In answer to your question, I haven't heard anything to suggest that the game at UConn in 2013 has been rescheduled.

The schedules below are based on the schools release plus the best information published to date:

2013 (Not on schedule: Illinois, Purdue, Wisconsin)

Sep. 21 at Connecticut
Sep. 28 Open
Oct. 12 at Penn State
Oct. 26 Open
Nov. 2 at Michigan State
Nov. 16 at Northwestern
Nov. 23 at Iowa
Dec. 7 Big Ten Championship Game

2014 (Not on schedule: Indiana or Illinois, Purdue, Wisconsin)

Sep. 20 at Notre Dame
Sep. 27 at Illinois (per or at Indiana (per ESPN)
Oct. 4 Open
Oct. 18 at Minnesota
Nov. 1 IOWA
Nov. 8 at Nebraska
Nov. 15 Open
Nov. 29 at Ohio State
Dec. 6 Big Ten Championship Game


April 6th, 2011 at 4:50 PM ^

At least this way should MSU somehow ever reach a title game (Michigan, Nebraska, and Iowa explode), they'll still most likely have to encounter OSU... pending this Tressell situation.  No more B10 titles without playing OSU (or I guess Wisconsin, though that'd be less likely).

Hardware Sushi

April 6th, 2011 at 5:16 PM ^

I abhor the idea of a 9-game conference schedule. The negatives far outweigh the positives.


  • More Big Ten games (re: more meaningful games)
  • More television revenue from these Big Ten games (as opposed to a baby seal opponent)


  • One less home game every other season
  • Guaranteed 6 wins and 6 losses for Big Ten teams as opposed to potential for 12 Big Ten wins
  • Less time to prepare for Big Ten season
  • Massive hit to the Big Ten image

It's the last bullet point that gets me. Sure, we might initially get the nod and slight mental bump from college prognosticators and fans for playing a tougher and longer Big Ten schedule, but we all know that newspapers, the WWL, other media outlets, and the general college football fan are not the most thorough detectives nor the most thoughtful pollers (outside of MGoCommunity). This isn't a revelation.

It will devolve into an on-screen chart in an SEC-Big Ten bowl showing how the SEC and Big 12 average more wins per year, leading to even more ridiculously inflated rankings for the SEC/Big 12, leading to me being more angry (and you don't want to see me when I'm angry ARRGH insert photo here).

I believe the short-term realized gains from playing 9 games will be much less than the value lost in perception/totals wins/whatever due to 6 more guaranteed losses to Big Ten squads. Keep Big Ten sched at 8 games. 4 home, 4 away, play 50% of the other division each year. Simple. Glad Brian said something.

<sorry for long post>


April 6th, 2011 at 6:05 PM ^

Ted - 

Very thoughtful post. Really, you hit the biggest concern I had about 9 games.

I'm guessing the guys who make the decision care less about what Joe Q. SEC fan is going to think about 5-6 more losses.

But I struggled with that a lot -- the lower rankings, the greater plagues of dumb fans and dumber commentators, etc. My solace is pragmatic: no matter how much fuel they have or don't have, SEC fans aren't going to stop being SEC fans. Hey, Charles Woodson actually WON the Heisman DESPITE the offensive/skill bias, and they still think Peyton Manning was "robbed" because -- get this -- the bias was the rule!

So what's it worth to me to avoid giving people like that a faulty arrow that I already know will bounce off my armor at 2 feet? Or six? Is it worth trading a game against an opponent with zero to offer in victory and everything to lose in defeat for the chance to see Wisconsin before there's hovercars and power laces?

Anyway, that's my thought process. Honestly, though, it's not all that dissimilar from your own.