Would You Want Michigan to Play Internationally?

Submitted by VCavman24 on October 9th, 2013 at 8:34 PM

With Notre Dame having played in Ireland last year and Penn State playing in Ireland in the upcoming years, I began thinking about whether or not I would want Michigan to play a game internationally.  While I obviously wouldn't want to lose a home game, I personally think it would be extremely cool for Michigan to play a game internationally.  An international game would allow for Michigan fans from outside of the U.S. to potentially see a game and would allow for foreigners to see Michigan play as well.  Additionally, this game would allow me to do my two favorite things: travel and watch Michigan.  However, that is just my opinion.  What would the board think of an international Michigan football game?



October 9th, 2013 at 8:39 PM ^

Maybe I'm a curmudgeon but no. I don't like neutral sites for college football. All games should be on campus. I know there are arguments both ways but I'm in the camp that I'd rather have had a home and home with Bama than one neutral site game at Jerry World. Bowls are the only neutral site games and nowadays only a few of those even sell out and have an actual atmosphere.


October 9th, 2013 at 8:42 PM ^

For any sports besides sicker to play in other countries. This is our sport and us citizens invest a lot of money into them. Why should they stab us in the back by going off and playing in another country, when honestly most of the people in those other countries could give two shits about those teams. Think about it... Say 2 Collegiate teams from Ireland were to play, say, idk.... A rugby game here in America. Would any of us really care that much to go see it, let alone care enough as to who wins. Just my thoughts on it...


October 10th, 2013 at 3:22 PM ^

Basketball, absolutely. There are a lot of good prospects coming out of Ontario these days, and the occasional game in Toronto might help us in recruiting the next Stauskas, or even the next Wiggins.

M vs. Syracuse at the Air Canada Centre? I'd go to that, especially if I was a 19 or 20 year old student.

Perkis-Size Me

October 9th, 2013 at 9:00 PM ^

Not really, no. I just don't see what it'd accomplish. Michigan is already a world-renowned brand, both academically and athletically, so it's not like we need the added exposure. Also, its not like we're trying to open up the fertile recruiting grounds of the Scottish highlands anytime soon.

I know there's alums living abroad who'd love to see a game, but I just don't see it being worth going halfway across the world to play a football game in a country where few people, if any, really care about the sport.

I'm also starting to become of the mindset that games should try to remain on campus as much as possible. Especially come playoff time. Yeah yeah I know, schools can make more money if they do a neutral site vs having to give up a home game, but neutral site atmospheres just don't even remotely compare to home-and-homes. If I'm going to play a series with LSU, I want to play them in Death Valley, and I want them marching their asses up to the Big House as well.


October 9th, 2013 at 9:02 PM ^

I do not want to see Michigan play internationally.  It seems like it would just be for the money. Plus, if it's a good matchup, I'd rather it be in the Big House.  We have the best facility in college football.

I would, however, like to see Staee play intergalactically.  They recruit there now, from what I hear.


October 9th, 2013 at 9:04 PM ^

I think the ACC has occasionally floated the idea of playing a few basketball games in Europe and the Pac-12 has considered playing exhibition basketball as well as football in China, but I suppose the question for a Michigan football game is this - does anyone think there is a sufficient market for this to be more than a one-off type of event (i.e., an expensive neutral site game)? Not sure what the attendance was at ND-Navy, for example, but an OOC game at the beginning of the season might be in danger of garnering as much interest internationally as it sometimes does domestically. 

Wolverine Devotee

October 9th, 2013 at 9:14 PM ^

Hot rumor for awhile was ND-Stanford in China. That was supposed to happen this year. 

I just don't understand the point. They don't appreciate it college football over there like we do. Nor do they spend the money on the tickets, gear, food/drink like we do. 

So why do it? Unless you're an irrelevant brand like sparty and want to create your brand based off of gimmick events. Another hot rumor for awhile was sparty-USC in Greece in basketball.

The only gimmick game I would want to see would be Michigan-Army at Yankee Stadium or Michigan-NW at Soldier Field. Both of those are rematches of games that happened way back when. 


October 9th, 2013 at 9:26 PM ^

Basketball is much more popular on an international scale and less expensive logistically. It would be incredibly more expensive, with or without band, to schedule a football game. The NFL Europe experiment failed miserably and the NFL only schedules one game abroad per year. Canada might be feasible though.


October 9th, 2013 at 9:15 PM ^

Or Toronto... But that wouldn't make much sense. But let's invade anfield in Liverpool or Wembley in London. I'm sure a game in London would go over nicely there but not here.

Zone Left

October 9th, 2013 at 9:33 PM ^

1. Original Big 10 home and home
2. Quality, diverse home and home
3. Home games against MAC schools
999,999. Penn State, Rutgers, Maryland, Notre Dame
1,000,000. Away at App State
1,000,001. Made for TV neutral site
1,000,002. Overseas