Future Football Schedules and Wisconsin

Submitted by ChalmersE on November 15th, 2017 at 3:56 PM

I was perusing Michigan's future football schedules with a colleague who went to West Point to see the date of the Michigan-Army game in 2019.  While doing so, I noticed Wisconsin was again on Michigan's schedule in 2018, and 2019, and 2020, and 2021.  That will make six straight years -- 2022  B1G games aren't posted yet.  Whatever happened to rotating versus the B1G West teams.  

Comments

CLion

November 15th, 2017 at 4:01 PM ^

I love playing Wisconsin, just wish one of MSU, OSU, PSU had to play them as well. The imbalance this season in crossovers for us vs. our divisional foes is nothing short of absurd.

NittanyFan

November 15th, 2017 at 4:17 PM ^

Group 1 of B1G East = PSU, OSU, U-M

Group 1 of B1G West = Iowa, Nebraska, Wisconsin

Group 2 of B1G East = Maryland, MSU, Rutgers

Group 2 of B1G West = Northwestern, Illinois, Minnesota

Group 3 of B1G East = Indiana

Group 3 of B1G West = Purude

The 9-game B1G schedule is in a 18-year cycle.  The first 6-year cycle, you play 1 team from the fellow Group all 6 years, and play every other cross-divisonal foe twice over those 6 years.  Then again and again.

Each of PSU, OSU and U-M will play each of Iowa, Nebraska, and Wisconsin 10 times over 18 years.  Each of PSU, OSU, and U-M will play each of the other B1G West teams 6 times over 18 years.

If anybody wondering about exactly how PSU, OSU and U-M were paired off with Iowa, Nebraska, and Wisconsin ---- look at the 2012 conference standings (the year before the 9-game schedules for 2016 and beyond were announced).  They appear to have been paired off precisely according to their conference record in 2012.  OSU (8-0) #1 vs. Nebraska (7-1) #1.  U-M was tied at 6-2 with PSU but PSU did have sanctions upcoming.  Wisconsin was #2 among the west teams in 2012 conference record - they were 4-4 vs. Iowa's 2-6.

NittanyFan

November 15th, 2017 at 4:29 PM ^

may have something to do with keeping a home-road cadence going.

If they did that cycle like you say, you'd still have to sprinkle in other PSU/OSU/Mich vs. Iowa/Nebraska/Wisconsin games to get to "10 of these match-ups every 18 years" - I'm not going to set up a Excel spreadsheet but my intuition says home/away equality potentially gets a bit out of balance in some smaller-time periods.

ldevon1

November 15th, 2017 at 4:21 PM ^

Wisconsin should be complaining about playing us. I don't get this fan base. To be the best, you have to beat the best. Now, I understand complaining about playing MSU on the road 2 yrs in a row, but playing Wisconsin, who cares. We haven't beat a team with a winning record yet. That's pathetic. I understand Florida is a mess, but the rest of the schedule is garbage. We need Wisconsin this year, just to gain a little respect.

corundum

November 15th, 2017 at 4:23 PM ^

Playing the hard teams is one part of it, the other is getting some variety for the season ticket holders. It would be preferable to mix it up once in a while rather than going so many years without playing Iowa.

MGoOhNo

November 15th, 2017 at 4:23 PM ^

I think it's time for UM to go independent. We own a money cannon. We have a brand. Playing in the "toughest division in college football" isn't responsible for any of this. Hurts more than it ever helps. While there may be penalities for opting out of conference, that would be offset by TV down payments. Let's get all ND up in here and win one of two non body bag games per year and be in the discussion and eligible for the mythical national championship. Don't care about MSU. Don't care about Minny. Don't care about Iowa. Rutgers (rivalry game) can pound sand. OSU once a year. Florida once a year. Then service academies and smart schools that need some cashish, I'm all for helping Vanderbilt, Stanford, Northwestern, Columbia, etc. Amiright?!

Rdog

November 15th, 2017 at 4:48 PM ^

The Big10 likes to shit on Michigan every chance they get.  I really hope that Manuel gets these things fixed.  If they are not corrected we really should look at our options outside of the Big Ten.  

Here is my quick list of grievances:

1)  Scheduling Michigna to play at Michigan State 2 years in a row

2)  Setting the fixed crossover game for Michigan to be Wisconsin for 6 years while giving OSU Nebraska for 6 years.

3)  Using OSU fans as refs in the Game last year.  Incredibly poor and one sided officiating cost Michigan that game (yes, Michigan could have made less errors but U of M still would have won with officiating that was just close to unbiased)

4)  Forcing more Night Games on Michigan.  

 

Winthorpe. Louis III

November 15th, 2017 at 5:07 PM ^

First, MSU was on Brandon. Secondly, I would much prefer playing Wisconsin than Nebraska for a number of reasons including quality of competition and proximity for away games (Michigan has a much larger fan base in Chicago than in Omaha). Thridly, last years Game was not some conference wide conspiracy. Lastly (regarding this particular post) do you think any network with which we would sign wouldn't require us to play night games in proportion to all other big time programs?  Until there are no conferences, I think we are in about as good a place as we could be.

 

WorldwideTJRob

November 15th, 2017 at 5:33 PM ^

This is weak! It screams of the conference is too tough “let’s take our ball and go home” we have the right coach and talent we can navigate through the schedule. We play 3-4 tough games a year, it is not some overbearing schedule that should be too hard for us. OSU played Iowa at Kinnick in a crossover this year, so did PSU. MSU played the hottest team in the conference in Northwestern(and loss). All the top teams in the division had to go on the road and play a top B1G West team. This is not some conspiracy by Delaney, he just wants to create good content for the television partners, and as one of the premiere programs in the conference we play in a marquee crossover game.

GoBlueTom

November 15th, 2017 at 4:34 PM ^

Wouldn't of been easier to switch every three years play three teams in a two year cycle home-away then they drop off and add three new teams more so IE

Michigan first west divison opponents be Minnesota, Nebraska, Northwestern Home-Away, then Purdue, Wisconsin, Illinois home-away then Iowa, Minnesota, and Nebraska so every third year get three new opponents?

bertsteele11

November 15th, 2017 at 4:50 PM ^

Let us recall the real issue here: Expansion. Life was simpler before Nebraska, Maryland, and Rutgers. (And it's not like joining the B1G has worked out great for those three either.)

Matte Kudasai

November 15th, 2017 at 5:13 PM ^

Is let ND back on our schedule...
We already have the toughest conference schedule.
And we have Washington and VA Tech after the ND years.

It’s our own fault. I would cancel the ND games and VA Tech or WA
Wiscy is proof that strength of schedule is meaningless

Carcajou

November 15th, 2017 at 7:40 PM ^

...part of their Shamrock series or whatever they call it (played in Dublin, or Europe, or NYC), I'd rather keep WA (or Wazzu or Cal or UCLA) and cancel ND. Michigan needs more games in more parts of the country including the west and the south and the east, not fewer.