Don't we want a disruption to the UM/ND schedule?
DetNews has an article on how Brandon is considering a disruption to the UM/ND game. Nothing scadalous, just that he has to balance the new B10 schedule and home games in years that he only has four home B10 games. Wouldn't we want to do that sooner rather than later to get off the ND/Neb/OSU all home or all away schedule? Sure it is good when they are all home, but a bear when we have to play them all away so I would rather have those three split up. Not sure if that is the correct strategy or not. Maybe somebody else has a better take on the advantages/disadvantages.
I'm fine with it, especially if it means flipping around the home/away setup so we aren't always playing ND/Neb/OSU home the same year.
from the schedule, two happy dances if they get replaced with various BCS conference opponents in home and homes. 1.2 happy dances if they turn into neutral site games.
Let me know if I misunderstoond your comment.
Why would you not want to play Notre Dame anymore? They are a rival, typically good, a reasonable distance to travel for away games, we live amongst much of their fanbase in MI/OH/Chi/NYC and we get maximum exposure for the Michigan program when we play.
I want to play Notre Dame every single year. I'm fine with skipping a year to align seven home games and get OSU/Neb./ND into two home and one way, but I think dropping this rivalry is crazy. It's great to play other national powers, but I don't think dropping this game and all our history sounds like a good idea.
ND is playing NW in 2014 and 2018, I am pretty sure UM was who they replaced
My mistake, 2018,19 ND and Mich have the series off. In 2014 its MSU
I believe Bill Martin tried to get ND to change the home/away schedule with ND so that it did not coincide with the *uckeyes, but ND declined because the current setup has USC and Michigan away on different years for them.
ND doesn't want to switch because they alternate us with USC and MSU as well. The easiest fix for this would have been playing Nebraska at home during ND/OSU road game years, but somehow that didn't happen.
ND doesn't want to join the Big 10 screw them. All Big 10 teams drop them.
2 year disruptions in the rivalry are the norm (1983-84, 1995-96, 2000-01.) But we're currently in a stretch of 12 straight years without a break which is the longest in the series history.
With Wisconsin and Penn State off the schedule the next couple of years, I think everything remains about the same in terms number of tough away and home games.
I wish all B1G schools would drop nd ! They are so pompous (and if you do not live in Indiana you have NO clue !). Let them join the Big East ... they were offered to join the B1G and they gave the conference the "finger". Let NBC broadcast all their games against those other mighty Big East teams ... oh yeah and Army and Navy (woooo).
We just added Nebraska to our schedule every year and over the last 15 years, tell me who has been a better team .... Nebraska or nd ?
I 100% agree that we join PSU and tsio in have a 2 year home and home series with some football traditional schools like Alabama, Texas, LSU, Oklahoma, etc. That would be a hellofa lot more fun than this every year "non conference rivalry" BS.
Go Blue !
I don't understand the logic of refusing to play ND because they aren't in our conference, yet choosing to play other major schools that also aren't in our conference. If ND would join some other conference, would that make it okay?
And besides, aren't we considered pompous by everyone else?
I've heard the argument that all major programs should refuse to schedule ND, which would force them to join a conference. Basically, their independent status is totally dependent on other schools' willingness to schedule them as OOC opponents.
Why we would want to chase them to the Big East, specifically, I have no idea. If they were to end up in any conference, the Big East would give them the easiest road back to big time bowls. But that doesn't really benefit Michigan or the Big10.
I have the same feelings. I want to play Notre Dame because they're our rival. MSU and Purdue aren't going to stop scheduling ND anyway, so the argument to not schedule them is useless anyway. They'll just play Miami, Oklahoma, Texas, etc. etc. and be just fine.
Our fanbase and program, whether people want to believe it or not, is perceived in very much the same way as Notre Dame. We might as well play a team in which we have history and emotional investment.
Go Navy
There, I said it.
Wouldn't mind dropping a year to balance the schedule but it seems like they have issues with that and their USC series. Seems like it would be easier to just swap one of the Big Ten teams and just play them away two years in a row to get it all back on track.
EDIT: Or just play at Nebraska this year. Who came up with this dumbass schedule?
April 18th, 2011 at 12:06 AM ^
Or Leaders, don't remember which.
I wouldn't mind dropping them, but four times a decade is enough for me. Like Indiana said ND needs the Big 10 more than the other way around.
What is that based on? ND sells out UM's stadium and luxury boxes every time they come to town, the same for Purdue, and MSU. Who again will UM be playing in their first ever home night game?
Actually, I know this is hard to believe, our stadium sells out because we all show up to watch Michigan. The night game this year is just so the West coast can get to see us ruin your season again nice and early.
oh ok thanks enlightening me, lol
Anytime. My brother is a ND fan so winning that game is the 2nd most enjoyable win on the schedule. Although shutting Sparty up is closing the distance.
Why, of all arguments, would this be the argument he would make for keeping ND...wow haha.
I completely agree. I'm sure no one would show up to the games if we didn't play ND. If we replaced ND with, say, Oklahoma, Stanford, or some other BCS school, I would guess only MGoBlog would show up.
/s
I hate to tell you this Irish, but Notre has NEVER played at Michigan since the luxury boxes were installed. Last season was the first year they existed in Ann Arbor. Also, Michigan doesn't need ND to sell out Michigan Stadium. Sure, ND brings more interest than SDSU or Eastern or other non-BCS team.
I love the series with ND, it has historically been a great game and series of games, so I do like to see it continue. But since their are breaks, I think it would be great to see a home and home with another top BCS program.
Irish- you're better than that. It's a great, marquee game, but ND isn't why Michigan stadium sells out. Michigan is why Michigan stadium sells out. Same would hold true for ND stadium.
April 17th, 2011 at 10:41 PM ^
I think everyone's being tough on Irish tonight. I see his point. Michigan wouldn't have scheduled the first night game against Western, Minnesota, or even Ohio State (noon in late November is too much of a tradition to change). Michigan fans come to see Michigan, but the ND tickets still go for a much higher price than others on the secondary market. As annoying as Notre Dame is, they still have cache and luster, and people like to watch them, wherever or whoever they are playing.
Charity +1
April 17th, 2011 at 11:38 PM ^
Keeping Ohio state at the end of the schedule means a night game will always be out of the question since B1G doesn't permit night games in November.
You can replace Notre Dame with a decent opponent from a BCS conference and have the same effect from a financial standpoint. However, playing a rival for the game is preferable.
I don't care if we continute to play Notre Dame, but whoever scheduled Nebraska right before Ohio State should be fired. Who comes up with this shit? That's just as bright as scheduling Wisconsin right before Ohio State in 2007 and 2009.
The plan was to play OSU in mid-October. Putting Michigan and OSU in separate divisions is the reason that whole shit-show happened in the first place.
The idea of “punishing” the Irish for being independent is going nowhere. There are plenty of schools around the country that are delighted to play Notre Dame. It’s just not realistic to imagine that, by “de-scheduling them,” they’ll come crawling back to the Big Ten on hands and knees.
It’s arguable that the Big Ten schools get at least as much out of the relationship as the Irish do, if not more. For Purdue and MSU, it’s often their marquee game of the year. The Spartans were delighted to beat the Irish in a nationally televised night game last year. There was probably no higher-profile game in their season. For recruits to those schools, knowing they’ll play Notre Dame every year is a significant attraction.
Michigan gets less out of the relationship than Purdue and MSU. Still, look at the press that Tate Forcier and Denard Robinson got out of beating Notre Dame in consecutive years. There are very few opponents against whom that kind of performance would make national news.
Brandon does have two problems. If the Big Ten goes to a nine-game conference schedule (a terrible idea, in my view, but it’s probably happening), Michigan doesn’t want to play Notre Dame on the road the same years it has five conference road games. Obviously, the impact can’t be ascertained until the schedule comes out. Scheduling will be a nightmare, because every Big Ten team wants seven home games a year, and a number of teams are locked into annual home-and-homes with non-conference opponents (e.g., Missouri with Illinois, Iowa State with Iowa).
Beyond that, if there are only three non-conference games a year, Michigan will probably not want more than one of them to be a big-name opponent. If you’re playing Notre Dame every year, it limits your scheduling options.
Why ? Simple nd is #2 in all time wins and #2 in all time winning % .... to who ? Yeah that's right ... Michigan ! It's not USC ... shit that series is so lop-sided since Holtz left.
You give us Alabama, Texas, Florida or LSU at home and the game would be HUGE. It would draw national attention. And guess what ,,,, nd doesn't draw the big ratings anymore. They have their own freaking network and make less than the B1G schools from TV revenue.
I will agree that you are correct that if no B1G team plays nd then we are punishing the irish. Go ahead go see who will play you .... hahahaha !!! Here's the simple fact .... nd wouldn't finish higher than 5th in the B1G if they joined the conference AND this is why they said NO ... no other reason. Hell look what tsio did to them in their last 2 games series ... it was like 45 -10 both years !!! Gimme a break ... nd would rather play only 2 tough games a year. Only problem is that they have sucked so bad that Navy has gotten them twice now ... so even the supposed easy games are tough.
Go Blue !
I 100% agree with you. I so wish Delaney would simply tell ND either join us or stop playing us. Today we give them all the benefits of scheduling our teams and what do we get out of it? Take us, MSU, Purdue and the occasional Northwestern or Indiana game off their schedule and they've got a HUGE scheduling problem on their hands.
I'm pretty sure the Coast Guard doesnt have a football team but perhaps the Merchant Marines do. Lord knows if there's a service academy out there....ND is playing them!
We get as much out of playing ND as they do out of playing us. Pretending otherwise is silly. And why would we want a 13th team in the Big Ten now? We've got our 12th team and the conference title game.
As for MSU and Purdue, those aren't exactly red-letter games on ND's schedule. They play them more out of habit than anything. If you think those are the best teams ND can possibly schedule in those September slots, you're crazy.
April 18th, 2011 at 10:54 AM ^
but I think you are absolutely wrong.
The # 1 goal is to win your conference title ... and if you are unbeaten and play in a BCS conference you have given yourself the highest possible chance to play for the national title. If you look at the Michigan this means you will have beaten tsio, Nebraska, MSU and Iowa (plus Minn. and NW) + 2 other B1G schools like perhaps PSU or Wisconsin.
After going unbeaten with those 4 -6 regularly ranked football teams it wouldn't matter who are non-conference games were with ... hell, we could even schedule Youngstown State and Akron !!!
We don't need nd .... but they certainly need the B1G. Go ahead ... see who they would schedule. Like I said earlier ... they only want 2 tough games a year. So if they drop Michigan and MSU I guarantee they only would try to schedule one tough game and then one "creampuff".
Go Blue !
Even if all that is true about our schedule, it does not change the fact that UM-ND is a marquee game that brings our program a lot of publicity. The fact that it has a lot of a history makes it all the better. For them to permanently drop off the schedule would be a blow to both teams.
MSU and Purdue, OTOH, are of little value to ND. They're doing those programs a favor by playing them, if anything.
Navy has beaten ND the last 3 years in a row.
They caught up with and passed ND. ND is still #2 in win %, and could go back to #1 if we keep having seasons like the last 3.
Texas will catch both of us if we don't start having some more 10 win seasons.
However, they had a 5-7, 2-6 Year of Infinite Pain in 2010, and they're going to a 2-OC system next year. Personally, I feel that's always going to turn into a case of too many cooks in the kitchen, but we'll see what happens.
My Go Blue at the end of posts theory holds true.
April 17th, 2011 at 11:37 PM ^
I think your "theory" is evolving into more of an irrefutable "proof." Which is to say I agree.
April 18th, 2011 at 12:16 PM ^
It might even be an "axiom" of MGoBoard culture.
I like the tradition of playing ND. ND and UM have some of the strongest traditions in football and it just feels right to keep our rivalry strong. I don't mind a disruption here and there, especially if there is a greater cause. But I value UM traditions and playing ND is one of them.
I hope ND wins all but 2 of their games every year. (Yeah, I root for MSU whenever their not playing UM and ND when their not playing either MI team.)
"playing ND is one of them"
I think you meant to say this:
"BEATING ND is one of them"
Please take a break. The rivalry is much more intense after a little hiatus, plus making a move so that OSU and Nebraska will be playing us in odd years and ND and MSU will be playing us in even years makes a ton of sense. It would be nice to see Michigan play more elite OOC games against different teams (and home-and-home setups would be the best scenario IMO).
Really want Notre Dame? or is it just a fairly annual ritual dance that sparks interest in both entities just to get the juices flowing?
Look at it this year. EVERYONE assumed it would finally be Notre Dame. The Big Ten merely announced an 18 month window to "consider" expansion and the conference and ND were the talk of the town for the next six months.
Then turds like Pitt, Rutgers, Syracuse, and even West Fucking Virginia are bandied about--and NEBRASKA sneaks in there (like they should have all along).
I don't think the Big Ten needs Notre Dame; I don't think they want Notre Dame. if Notre Dame were to join--that becomes the biggest story in College Football since like, when college football was invented--and ALL the drama is gone. Not to mention ND loses some of its rivalries with other schools and loses its barnstorming circuit.
I think the Big Ten and Notre Dame have a synergy--let's pretend we're going to run off together and when the paparrazzi shows up to catch us making love under a palm tree in Aruba--we'll be fighting and swear we'll NEVER talk to each other again. Oh, we'll still do some fun things (no sex--strictly blowjobs from now on) by scheduling some Big Ten teams with Notre Dame--but we'll NEVER give the world what they want, and we'll keep them on the edge of their seats for the next 50 years!
This post says more about the poster than it does about the rivalry. "Blowjobs only"? Really? How much thought did you put into this?
Absolutely none. I'm having fun.
You might want to try it someday.
He did not want to elevate ND's program by playing them. I dont mind a game with ND every other year or so.
April 17th, 2011 at 10:31 PM ^
I don't think we're elevating ND anymore than them instead scheduling Texas/Alabama/Miami etc., especially because Notre Dame was enjoying one of it's most prosperous on-field eras when Bo was our coach and the rivalry resumed. I don't know exactly what Bo said regarding this, so maybe I'm wrong, but I feel like this is an off-base interpretation.
If it is what Bo said, I'd have to disagree with his premise.