In partnership with CBSSports.com
Online Now 463
Online now 105 Record: 7264 (3/12/2012)
You have no favorite boards.
The most viewed topics.
The most replied to topics.
The most up-voted topics.
The most down-voted topics.
The most up-voted posters.
The most down-voted posters.
The most followed posters.
If Hoke is legit which I think chances are he is and Urban doesn't have another heart attack OSU and UM could play 3 times in 5/7 weeks if we go to a 8 team playoff. I could even see it happening with a 4 team playoff if we each go 12-1. I think we need to change the game to opening day or the start of BIG play.
What do M fans think?
I'm a traditionalist, so I'd really hate to see The Game moved. I think the best, easiest and most logical solution is to make sure Michigan and Ohio State are in the same division.
The fact that the Big Ten was stupid enough to put them in different divisions in the first place is mind-blowing. Does anyone think it ever crossed the SEC's mind to break up Alabama and Auburn??
This is a league run by blind, incompetent, money-grubbing degenerates, with no regard for common sense.
I deff think that would work but I just don't see the BIG doing it. Having UM and OSU in the conference championship game brings in a lot of money. NEB just returned half their allotted tickets to the game. Last year you could get tickets for $10/15 game day.
Its all about the money, hell why do you think the BIG is bringing in Rutgers and Maryland its the $$$$$$$$$ with the TV markets.
I think the Big X did the correct thing in putting them in separate divisions.
Jim Delany has made mistakes but putting Michigan and Ohio - the 2 historic powerhouses of Big X football - in separate divisions is not one of them in my opinion.
The college football landscape has changed such that the Big X has to make sure that its best teams can compete against SEC dominance (which a real phenomenon in the face of changing demographics supplemented by ESPN's marketing efforts).
I understand that people want to preserve a 1970s-like aura to The Game but that time era has passed with the BCS and the imminent playoffs.
And to answer the OP: I'm ok with both teams having a rematch in consecutive weeks. However, if the Big X is adamant about moving The Game then it should be no earlier than the last weekend of October or no later than the first weekend of November.
* * * N E O . R E T R O * * *
This is going to happen. People in both Athletic Departments want it, so you bet the B1G will make it happen.
NO, NO and NO for the game being in the first week. That is such an injustice. The hype, tension and build up throughout the season for the eagerly anticipated game makes the rivalry fun. If anything, make the game week 8 or 9, the last week in Oct. or first week in November at the earliest.
This post was edited by Awink2 17 months ago
Absolutely agree with the first part. The inner debate of what The Game might look like after every weekends performance would be lost if it was at the beginning of the season. We simply have to be in the same division. There's no way around it. Hopefully with the two new teams coming in the realignment will be right after. For The Game to happen there needs to be cold temperatures and a chance of snow.
The B1G sees $$$$. Can you imagine a rematch in the B1G CC game this year? Anyone think either school would be giving half their tickets back or selling tickets for $10? Delaney wants the biggest schools on the biggest stage, and this is how he is doing it.
It is ALL about the money. They make big money on the Game...can you imagine the dollars a rematch would make in a championship game? That is what Delaney wants.
I'm a little confused by your post. Do you mean The Game will be moved, or they'll be moved to the same division? Please clarify when you get a chance.
That's a great point. But on the other hand, let's imagine a (very realistic) scenario where Michigan and OSU both enter The Game having already clinched their respective division titles, so a rematch the following week is already a certainty. The coaches, players and fans would still treat the first matchup as extremely important, but would the B1G lose out on advertising dollars due to less interest around the country? The casual fan with no rooting interest would have much less incentive to watch that first game when he knows the same game will be played the following week.
I don't think it's that simple.
If both teams are in the top 10 (or better yet top 5) coming into The first Game, then it will draw national attention even when a rematch is imminent.
This post was edited by Frank C 17 months ago
Michigan missed out on the conf championship game this year because of 1 conference loss. So do you want to play OSU every year as a protected cross-division game, risking 1 loss, while Nebraska plays Wisconsin or Penn State and Michigan State plays Rutgers or somebody? That's the issue Dave Brandon and Gene Smith are facing, IMO, because it makes both of our paths to the championship game harder than everyone 4 of the 5 other teams in our division every year for the most part. Yes, there are going to be years Nebraska is better and Wisconsin/PSU are better, but averaging it out it makes our schedules harder.
No freakin way! People would rage
I see what you're saying, but I don't think there would be quite as much hype on a national stage for the first matchup. The '06 matchup was one of the most hyped college games I can ever remember. I don't think it would create quite as much of a buzz under the current system. I remember hearing from a bunch of people that literally don't even watch the Super Bowl and had no rooting interest for Michigan or Ohio State that they watched that game in 2006 from start to finish. I'm not sure those people tune in with how things are currently set up.
That's an interesting point. My preference would be that the teams that are traditionally at the top of the conference always play each other no matter what, so you'd never have a year where Michigan or Nebraska don't play the traditional powers. I fully realize that's not how the B1G has set it up, though, which is a shame.
This type of thinking offends me because, frankly, it is for the weak in my opinion.
I hear some people label themselves as "old school" and then complain about difficult, unbalanced schedules. To me, that's cognitive dissonance given that Michigan played tough schedules in the pre-BCS era. (Note: This criticism is not directed at you.)
I want Michigan to play schedules comparable to LSU's 2011 schedule. Under the new playoff format, OOC losses (so long as they are not lop-sided) will likely not be held against a conference champion.
Re: Big X conference schedule.
We are Michigan. They are Ohio. Each has the built in advantage of recruiting a top 5 class every year.
Nebraska and Penn State are the only consistent threats to bilateral Michigan-Ohio dominance of the Big X.
One way to solve a potential unbalanced schedule is to make each of the 4 schools plays the other 3 every year.
When Michigan and Ohio are performing up to snuff, everyone else is relegated to a distant second tier. (We saw that happen to Penn State and I hope Nebraska will suffer the same fate.) Undoubtedly, there will be years when Wisconsin might be strong but I expect those to be few going forward.
This post has been edited 2 times, most recently by Frank C 17 months ago
I'm ok with sacrificing hype for The Game. Like I've already hinted, I'm not a traditionalist.
I think some of the hoopla of rivalry games will be transferred to conference championships and then carry over to the playoff games.
Couldn't agree more. Being a "traditionalist" is all well and good but the fact is the game of college football and the structure of conferences has evolved and it's time to move on. I get it that the B1G wants Ohio St and Michigan in separate conferences for the sake of the potential matchup in the B1G Championship Game and the $ it would draw. I think it's the smart move. The more logical move would be to move the Ohio St/U of M to earlier in the season. I don't think it's fair to expect either one of these teams to beat the other in back to back weeks. And I think the match up/rivalry would lose some luster outside of the fans of these teams if you get in a situation where football fans (non-B1G) are having this rivalry jammed at them in successive weeks.
Move Ohio St/U of M to early October and make Michigan/Michigan St the final B1G game of the year. That's a more impactful game for U of M from a division leader standpoint and keeps a rivalry game to close out the season.
If the Big Ten ever moves the Michigan/MSU game to the final game of the year I am done with college football. Or at least watching the Big Ten.
I do not want the Michigan - Michigan State game to be moved to the final game of the year because that would elevate State to a higher status as a rival.
For that same reason, I hope we never have a UTL Michigan - Michigan State game. That move benefits State more than it benefits Michigan.
There's no perfect solution that will satisfy everyone, but you definitely have to balance tradition vs. competitiveness. Personally I like the idea of moving the Michigan-OSU game toward the middle of the season to around the weekend of the Red River shootout and the ND-hosted ND-USC games best. We can play Sparty to end the year or we can play someone different every year to end the season, either way is fine with me.
Sorry... they are going to be in the same division.. That's what I was saying.
Understandable. While we do disagree a bit on this issue, I've really enjoyed reading your thoughts on this.
247Sports In partnership with CBS Sports