Brandon and The Money

Submitted by 543Church on November 9th, 2012 at 12:37 PM…

Does anybody else think it is an a-hole move of Brandon to keep trying to convince UConn to move this game?  I imagine whatever football fans UConn has have been looking forward to UM coming to campus for a few years now and he wants to pull out and move it to a sterile NFL stadium. 

It is always about the money with Brandon.  BOO-urns!




November 9th, 2012 at 12:58 PM ^

Remember when ND and UConn were trying to schedule a series that had neutral site games in New York instead of UConn home games and the legislature said GTFO?

UConn's home field is a boondoggle and the legislature will freak if they move the Michigan game. Brandon must know this, but he's got to create the future so he keeps talking shit about UConn's inability to understand his grand plan. 


November 9th, 2012 at 4:39 PM ^

Playing the game at Rentschler is good deal economically for the members of the East Hartford Chamber of Commerce and therefore a good deal politically for the members of the Connecticut state legislature, who want to be able to portray themselves as pro-business and to portray the state bonds that paid for the stadium as good for the local economy. It's also good for the state treasury which gets to collect the sales tax and hotel tax revenues associated with fans going to the game.

UConn's AD is not the relevant economic stakeholder here.


November 9th, 2012 at 5:45 PM ^

Well sure - having the stadium occupied is better than not for the people that have to pay its bills.  But for visiting teams, it must be a pretty bad deal to play there, if both ND and Michigan are adamantly opposed to going there. 


November 9th, 2012 at 1:12 PM ^

...this: DAB wants the game to be more accessible to Michigan's large and relatively well heeled NYC-area alumni. Moving the game to the Meadowlands allows for the game to be much more than a simple away game (another "Wow" experience). So, he is attempting to negotiate a modifaction to the contract and UConn is free to enter into those negotiations, counter offer, or reject the overture.

It's beyond me why anyone here should give two shits about poor UConn and its relationship with the CT state legislature. They either think it's a good deal or they don't. Free enterprise and 'Merica and all that jazz.


November 9th, 2012 at 1:13 PM ^

I think my big problem with this is that UM agreed to play on UConn's home field.  It's their game.  If UConn wants to move the game then move it and cash in.  If they don't want to move it then stop whining.


November 9th, 2012 at 1:44 PM ^

 I understand why Brandon wants to renegotiate, and from Michigan's standpoint, he has to try. But he's tried to reason, and UCONN said "no". He tried to bribe, UCONN said "no". Now he's using the media to ramp up pressure, and UCONN is still saying "no". What's next? Astroturfing dissent in Storrs? The guy's a shark, and I'm glad he's on our side, but he's in the no man's land between competent and shameless right now. Michigan's stupid for agreeing to it, and UCONN is probably stupid for not renegotiating. Call it a tie and play the game.  

French West Indian

November 9th, 2012 at 3:40 PM ^

Just play the game.

It one damn road game and it will probably be a win so what's the big deal?  Money? Exposure?  We're Michigan, we've got plenty of that.

Maybe it was stupid to schedule.  Maybe it's the boondocks.  But it will be unique & a bit quirky to see M on a high school-ish field so why not just roll with it?  Isn't that half the fun of college football to begin with?

Real Tackles Wear 77

November 9th, 2012 at 2:07 PM ^

Not at all. UConn's stadium isn't even on their campus, students take a long bus ride to get out to East Hartford. I've been there and it is the definition of "sterile" plus it has a capacity of ~40K, much less than in a pro stadium. Wherever the game is, it will the 50% or more UM fans.

eamus_caeruli (not verified)

November 9th, 2012 at 2:27 PM ^

No, he isn't being an "ass".  Remember he and Brady never agreed to this in the first place.  This is a Martinism.  DB wants whats best for Meechigan, not UCONN.  That means getting a better venue.  I mean seriously, this game will be at noon on ESPN 2 or worse potentially. 


November 9th, 2012 at 2:17 PM ^

I could be wrong here, but as I recall, David Brandon was not part of the initial scheduling of the home-and-home with UConn.

As there is only the one game left and the opportunity to exists to improve revenue for Michigan as well as UConn, then I don't see any reason to fault Brandon for wanting to put the game in a larger venue which is still fairly easily accessed by UConn fans as well as a very large contingent of the Michigan alumni base (as well as not terribly far from Newark, for those who would fly into the area).

So, to the OP's question, I don't see this as an "a-hole" move at all. This is an athletic director trying to make a move which makes complete business sense for his program and, in many ways, the program that his will play in that game. If the negotiations don't pan out and we play at Rentschler, then that's fine, but I don't see where trying to improve the overall situation for both schools potentially is in any way insensitive.


November 9th, 2012 at 2:31 PM ^

and are looking for a reason to bash him. He is looking out for Michigan's best interests whether you agree with him or not. People make mistakes but overall he is doing a great job.


November 9th, 2012 at 2:59 PM ^

Dave Brandon is awesome.  Michigan football was a dumpster fire before his hire and now the program is heading in the right direction.  The basketball program was struggling to make the NIT and now is a legit top ten team.  New facilities to boot!  I think some of you are still upset that he fired RR.  What was the score of that Arizona vs UCLA game?


November 9th, 2012 at 3:26 PM ^

For what it's worth, UConn's stadium is not remotely close to their campus. It is over 1 hour away. This stadium is also not the University's - they rent it.

So every single "College games belong on college campuses" person out there - blame UConn for not putting a stadium on their own damn campus. As it is, Brandon wants to move it from from one location to which UConn students need to bus to another. Hell, Foxboro is almost as close.


November 9th, 2012 at 4:14 PM ^

As a UM fan (orignially from Ann Arbor) that lives in CT, the only time I have seen UM play live was the last time they went to PSU two years ago...I won't discuss the outcome.  I have been looking forward to this game for a long time & really hope he game stays because it will be my only chance to see them play live next year.

Perkis-Size Me

November 9th, 2012 at 4:15 PM ^

brandon is looking out for michigan's best interests. he didn't ink the uconn deal, and frankly, i'm sure he probably wouldn't have considered it to begin with unless uconn approached playing their home game at a neutral site. still, at this stage i think he ought to just suck it up and play at uconn. they've probably been looking forward to this game for a while, and i see no scenario in which uconn elects to drop it as a home game.


November 9th, 2012 at 8:02 PM ^

Mr. Brandon is doing the job he is paid to do.  He has a fiduciary responsibility.  He needs to create revenue and protect, promote and market the brand name.

The previous athletic director might be criticized for the uconn game - easier to argue Mr Martin failed in his duties.

Brandon gets it right 90+% of the time!


November 9th, 2012 at 8:02 PM ^

Mr. Brandon is doing the job he is paid to do.  He has a fiduciary responsibility.  He needs to create revenue and protect, promote and market the brand name.

The previous athletic director might be criticized for the uconn game - easier to argue Mr Martin failed in his duties.

Brandon gets it right 90+% of the time!