Maryland contacts Richt

Submitted by CoMisch on November 30th, 2015 at 8:10 PM
Sorry, but I like this news. DJ can get something better after more time with Harbaugh.



November 30th, 2015 at 8:21 PM ^

I don't think anyone in any seriousness thinks that Durkin is actually "too good" for Maryland.

It's just a fun joke, akin to the whole "Jordan Lewis is too short for the NFL, needs a year to grow".

Nearly every single Coordinator/Position Coach, has to step down to a lower-tier school in order to take a Head Coaching job, unless they are promoted from within.


November 30th, 2015 at 8:59 PM ^

Durkin is potentially the "next Harbaugh" ... he needs more time and games like last week. Learn, Learn, Learn ... from the master. Overcoming adversity is the key to success ... forge that steel of spine. Let's go get them on the recruiting trail, DJ. Time to right the Michigan ship and your path to greatness is assured. Maryland isn't the promised land. Good pay increase, but it's a dead-end job.


November 30th, 2015 at 8:45 PM ^

If either is "too good for Maryland" based on resume, it's Richt.  

Here's my hope: Durkin and Drevno stay long enough to finish what they have started at Michigan and then get jobs at quality programs that aren't in the Big Ten.  This would be the best for everyone.  Let Harbaugh get his systems fully established with his own players at Michigan before he starts losing assistants to HC jobs.  

Imagine how great it would be for either or both assistants to have "National Championship" on their resumes.


November 30th, 2015 at 8:25 PM ^

They're in the B1G, and they're not Michigan, so I want them to be bad.  I will be thrilled if Urban Meyer retires and OSU hires, say, Condi Rice.  Or Adam Sandler.

Even better than that, though, would be for Rutgers and Maryland to be expelled, so I can return to not caring about them whatsoever. :-)


November 30th, 2015 at 8:22 PM ^

Not to beat a dead horse... but what are the chances of realignment happening in the B1G? It's ridiculous how unbalanced these divisions are. While I support overall strength of the conference, the strength within divisions needs to be adjusted. I almost feel like an assessment should be made every 2 or 3 years to ensure the balance of the conference divisions.

snarling wolverine

November 30th, 2015 at 8:29 PM ^

There is no perfect way to arrange the teams.  Their fortunes are going to rise and fall.  You may as well stick with geography and keep all the rivalries together.

In our case, we're going to play OSU and MSU every year, regardless, so we may as well be in the same division.  The Legends/Leaders setup wasn't fair to us. 


November 30th, 2015 at 8:43 PM ^

I think you need the Championship game, it's what helps us avoid a Big 12 scenario. The north/south idea would be interesting, hopefully with a protected rivalry game for us and OSU. I would think that fans would enjoy seeing Wisonsin and Iowa a bit more often.

snarling wolverine

November 30th, 2015 at 8:57 PM ^

If Michigan and OSU are in separate divisions but playing each year, that's not fair to either school.  All conference games count equally in the standings, regardless of whether they are intra-divsion or not, so we would be penalized for having a harder crossover than the rest of our division rivals.  And then there's potential of playing on back-to-back weeks.  I'd rather just be in the same division as OSU.



November 30th, 2015 at 9:35 PM ^

I think a loose reseeding every year based on the previous year's record would be a nice start. The divisions could still be east and west or north and south and the teams would loosely be placed in their geographic area...but who cares if penn state is in the west division or illinois in the east in a given year. The next set of years they can be assured of being in their more local division and each team always has plenty of home games and would be favored for closer geographic crossover games. The teams on the extreme geographic edges may always stay in that division though.

It is harder for record keeping but I'd suggest it is more of a bracket than divisions. A few crossovers can be protected at the wish of teams so that osu and michigan could play each other no matter the bracket they are in.

A system like this could give more hope to the Indianas who are almost doomed to rise to the top in a tough division. They should still be rewarded with a 6-6 season for their program and be able to rotate brackets and maybe they'd have a greater chance of 8-4.

Similarly the best team in the Big Ten would normally have a few guaranteed patsies to play.

I'm not saying it is easy, but if they flashed the year's brackets on the screen before each game, it might even ignite greater interest from fans who would find each new season random, fresh, as fair as is possible, and interesting. We like March Madness, this seeding is smaller scale but fun.

snarling wolverine

November 30th, 2015 at 10:13 PM ^

I think most fans just want to play their rivals every year.  Geographical divisions accomplishes that.  

In the current arrangement, the West teams shouldn't have any complaints, and neither should Michigan/OSU/PSU - we're traditional powers and can handle competing with each other.  MSU is getting by okay, and Maryland/Rutgers are not in a position to dictate where they go.  That leaves Indiana.  Yeah, they got screwed.  But that's one team out of 14, and they care more about basketball anyway.


December 1st, 2015 at 1:04 AM ^

And have notre dame play in the west.

Notre dame should play in a conference. The whole "X didn't win their division" or "didn't need to play a championship game" gets wholly ignored with notre dame but I think it would have came to a head if they would have defeated the cardinal. As strength of schedule is becoming more important than overall record, I can see a situation where Notre dame joins the big ten and balances out the divisions.