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.
the game gets, but playing ND every year is kind of redundant with our B1G schedule.
Whether they join or not, ND is a defacto B1G school. Recruiting-wise, we get no exposure we don't already have in our base recruiting area.
When the B1G moves to a nine game schedule, we will be in a total Midwest bubble if our only big non-conference game is against ND.
We need some fresh blood. We need some games and exposure in the South, FL, TX, the West Coast, even the East Coast. It would help to get familiar with some of these programs before Bowl games.
I agree. I love playing ND, but it simply isn't as important as it was in today's college football world. Its important that we spread our games out and try to reach different parts of the country. Schools that never left their own bubble are spreading out like never before: even SEC schools are starting to travel north/west.
Does ND bring us good exposure? sure. But the idea of paying a game in front of friends/family would really appeal to recruits. Recruits are increasingly coming from the sun belt. It's time we took a break and played LSU, Florida State, Clemson, or Texas A&M.
April 17th, 2011 at 11:25 PM ^
The UofM v. ND game may seem less important on a national scale right now but thats only due to the programs up and down performances the last 10 years or so.
it is important we keep it on the schedule. although, breaking up the Neb/tOSU/ND correlation part of the schedule would be nice.
Michigan's road to even thinking about a National Championship just got tougher with the addition of not only Nebraska but the BTC game. At this point, they have nothing to gain and all to lose by playing Notre Dame. They could schedule four directional schools for the pre-conference schedule and the conference schedule would still grade out well enough to make the BCS title game if they go undefeated.
Notre Dame needs Michigan a lot worse than Michigan needs Notre Dame.
I don't like Notre Dame.
ND negotiated a deal that will sometimes get them a BCS bid they don't deserve. But non-BCS conferences have the same issue.
I personally would like to see the tradition continue. I like the rivalry, enjoy going to the games (my Father in Law is a ND alum, U of M fan.... go figure) and going to South Bend or Ann Arbor every year for that matchup is like family tradition.
I am not, however, looking forward to the away, away, away years to ND, Nebraska, and tsio.
April 18th, 2011 at 11:23 AM ^
Two on two off would be enough for me. It's fun to play other teams every once in a while.
April 18th, 2011 at 12:21 PM ^
i guess it comes down to who DB would schedule in the years we don't play ND.
i like playing them, it's a game to really look forward to in september, but then i wouldn't mind some home and homes with other big schools.
When Notre Dame first reappeared back on Michigan's schedule back in 1978, the conference had ten members and the U-M played eleven games during the season. There was also a bit more geographic variety when it came to the non-conference schedules back then. Here were U-M opponents non-conference opponents other than Notre Dame prior to the addition of Penn State to the Big Ten in 1993:
1978 - Duke, Arizona
1979 - Kansas, California
1980 - South Carolina, California
1981 - Navy (B10 played nine conference games)
1982 - UCLA (Nine conference games)
1983 - Washington State, Washington (Notre Dame not on schedule)
1984 - Miami (FL), Washington (Notre Dame not on schedule)
1985 - South Carolina, Maryland
1986 - Oregon State, Florida State
1987 -Washington State, Long Beach State
1988 - Miami (FL), Wake Forest
1989 - UCLA, Maryland
1990 - UCLA, Maryland
1991 - Boston College, Florida State
1992 - Oklahoma State, Houston
Since 1993, college football has undergone a lot of changes. Scholarships were reduced to 85. Television made more games available. An additional regular season game was added that brought the number of non-conference games up from three to four. The Bowl Championship Series was introduced. The internet, recruiting websites, blogs and all sorts of electronic media have been introduced that are outside what were the normal news channels.
The conference also changed. Now it has twelve members with the addition of Nebraska and Penn State and the B1G will now have a conference championship game. If the B1G does adopt a nine-game conference schedule, than Michigan will be back to three non-conference games again. And finally, don't forget the introduction of the Big Ten Network.
In that environment for a team like Michigan does have national championship goals, the default non-conference schedule becomes one major non-conference opponents in a home-and-home series along with two additional opponents from the smaller conferences (if the B1G goes to nine conference games by 2015). The larger programs would also want to have seven home games, and as Brandon points out, Michigan will need to make sure its non-conference schedules accomodates that goal. If the B1G is not able or willing to break up the Nebraska/Ohio State games and Notre Dame will not change the way its home/away games with Michigan are set up, then I suspect Brandon will drop ND.
Beyond that though, I have to ask some other questions.
1. Do the fans (including the ones who pay the big dollars for luxury boxes and premium seating) as a whole want to continue to see Notre Dame as Michigan's primary non-conference game going foward? Or do they want to see a variety of major BCS programs play in Ann Arbor in a manner somewhat reminicent of what was on hand prior to 1993?
2. Does playing Notre Dame each year promote the Michigan brand in an exclusive fashion? Or would the television ratings and media attention be the same, worse or better if schools from the SEC (Alabama, Auburn, Florida, Georgia, Tennessee, LSU), ACC (Florida State, Virginia Tech, Miami-FL) or Big XII (Texas, Oklahoma, Texas A&M) were to be part of a non-conference schedule rotation (which is something Ohio State does)? Is UM-ND a uniquely national game or would a UM-FSU or UM-LSU or UM-UT game just as interesting nationwide?
3. Does playing Notre Dame help in the recruiting areas of interest? If UM wants to be a national recruiter---especially in the Southeast, Texas and California--does it make sense to continue to play ND or should UM play other teams from the major BCS conferences (including the Pac 12, which wasn't listed in the second question above)?
My own thoughts on the manner is that Michigan should regularly schedule other major programs from BCS conferences on a regular basis besides Notre Dame. I would continue to keep ND on the schedule, but I'd like to see UM play a host of other schools as part of a rotation through the BCS Conferences outside of the Big East. I think that's especially important for recruiting purposes given the country's demographics at this point. I suspect that if Michigan is really good, then a game against another name school would be a more than adequate substitute for playing ND.
This isn't a punitive strategy against Notre Dame for not joining the Big Ten. I have no doubt ND could find a major opponent to replace Michigan during an open September date (Notre Dame's bigger scheduling problems are for the October and November months) and would do quite well w/o playing UM (Texas has four games with ND on the schedule, Oklahoma with two and Miami-FL with three coming up).
It will be interesting to see who Michigan schedules in the 2018/19 season during the hiatus from Notre Dame to gauge advance fan and media interest in the game. I think that'd give us a good idea of how a non-ND future would look. That said, with the addition of Nebraska to the Big Ten, I think it's safe to say that Michigan's overall schedule (even if you don't include the conference championship game) is going to be pretty difficult.