In partnership with CBSSports.com
Online Now 463
Online now 246 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.
Sounds good, but they would never agree to do that and it would make the middle of big ten season really hard.
This post was edited by msucantmakebcs 19 months ago
Stealing Sparty's recruits and owning them on the field since 1898
And I'm sure Tampa Bay had a number of players that had played in cold weather climates in high school and/or college. So think of the advantage for Michigan playing against a school where 99% of the players have never played in cold weather.
South Carolina ****
"Those Who Stay...Will be Champions"
I agree that the opponent would likely never agree to it, which is unfortunate.
It would definitely make the stretch run more difficult, but with bye weeks and "easy" games (against a school that's typically a B1G cellar-dweller), I think you can mitigate that a bit. You could even have another OOC game right before or after that game, and have it be against one of the easiest teams on your schedule.
The ND approach I see..
The answer is Texas. Take their recruits, lunch money and women.
doesn't even have to be UT. A&M now has the SEC connection. I can't wait until we play UT in a few years..
I agree....Texas is a magnetic force popping out to me for this thread.....I would love to have an annual game with them, or every other year type of arrangement
This post was edited by Awink2 19 months ago
Sorry guys, a southern team won't play an OOC game in the north after September. They won't ever agree to that unless it's played in a dome and the scheduling works out that they'd have a buy week afterwards.
I'm not sure but doesn't the B1G have an agreement of sorts that all the conference games happen within a certain time frame? October thru November? Each team has 1 off week in that time. Having the conference scheduled played in that time is really one of the only "traditions" left that can be controlled solely by the conference. The OSU game was moved, there's a championship game now, the bowls are/will lose their status with the playoff and other things. I don't see, but maybe they eventually will, see the conference starting to give 2 off weeks in a row to be able to schedule other teams from the south to come north. For that to happen they'd have to start conference games in September and then be "staggered" through the rest of the season to get all the games in. It'd almost create a nightmare for the ADs to schedule, and I'm sure they won't want to work that hard and they'd be able to convince the Presidents to keep things the way they are currently.
Someone said they don't remember the last time someone played out of conference so late in the season... didn't Wisconsin or Illinois or Northwestern recently play Hawaii at the end of the season? That's the only time teams have played OOC that late, and they get a 14th game because of it.
Back to the topic though, I'd like to see any mid to upper level BCS team replace ND, Tennessee, Florida, FSU, N/S Carolina, Texas, A&M, the Oklahomas, Mizzou, UCLA, Washington, USC, Oregon, the Arizonas, or Nearly any ACC team.
And then I'd like to see one of the MAC games replaced with "one off" games with BCS cellar dwellers like Washington State, Colorado, Duke, Kansas, Maryland, Kentucky or even some of the better Mountain West schools or Big East schools. Either of those 2 conferences would improve SoS. Then the other 2 OOC games could be MAC schools.
Do you want to start a petition to bring back the old historical rivalries that fans miss:
I am not a fan of realignment because it's not good for the fans.
Great post all around here. I agree that a southern team would likely never agree to that, but was just saying what my preference would be. Doubt it'll ever happen though.
As for the B1G having an agreement that all conference games are played in a certain time frame, I'm honestly not sure. That's how it's currently administered, so it's possible that there is, but I haven't heard either way whether that's a hard and fast rule. In general, I like that set up, and would like to see it preserved. But if it meant playing OOC games against southern teams later in the season, then I'd be fine tinkering with the current set up.
I'm sure the B1G AD's would complain, but SEC and ACC schools have figured out how to make that staggered set up work. It may mean that Michigan plays a conference opponent in the first or second game of the season, but I'm fine with that.
Great point about Hawaii - I do believe Wisconsin played them late in the season sometime in the past 5-7 years.
If you want more flexibility and choice regarding OOC games, then the B1G and the other conferences need to work together and reverse this stupid realignment. Then, every team in each conference will have more room for OOC games. The B1G and all other conferences need to cooperate.
Can you elaborate on how realignment has affected the ability of B1G teams to schedule OOC games? I'm not disagreeing with you - just want to understand what you're saying.
2015: Michigan v. Georgia* (Cowboys Classic @ JerryWorld)
2016: Georgia @ Michigan
2017: Michigan @ Georgia
* Other possibilities based on schedule availability and national appeal are LSU, Alabama, UF, Oregon and Clemson.
This post has been edited 4 times, most recently by MrWoodson 19 months ago
ACC teams currently play 4 OOC games each season. With realignment that includes Pitt and Syracuse, ACC teams can only play 3 OOC games starting next season. That's a total of 14 less OOC games per season in the ACC.
SEC teams currently play 4 OOC games each season, now that Texas A&M and Mizzou join. Starting next season each SEC team plays 3 OOC games per season.
This means each ACC or SEC team would have fewer OOC games to schedule. If Michigan or any B1G team wants to play ACC or SEC teams, then scheduling conflicts will make it more difficult for them to play the B1G.
The same argument with the Pac 12.
However, the number of OOC games that the Big East or Big 12 can play remains the same, so there are opportunities there. Same with C-USA and Sun Belt.
too much georgia...lets spread it out a little bit with another team, this will create more hype because we play a different elite program...although I do like the notion of a home and home. I think Brandon and Hoke will look for a team that is similar to Michigan in stature and tradition, so maybe a Texas, Oklahoma etc....and hopefully its in a fertile recruiting area
Give me a home and home with vt. 45 min drive is better then 10 hrs for me
We need a home game in 2015 otherwise we'll have 6 home games.
Would love Texas or Oklahoma, but with the B12 now playing 9 conference games a year they only have 3 OOC games to play with. UT is full all three years 2015-2017 and Oklahoma is full in 2015. Oklahoma also already plays OSU in 2016 & 2017, so it's unlikely they will want to play us those years.
That's the same situation we have this year. As long as they pay us enough money for a neutral site game, it replaces the money we would make on a seventh home game. I'm not saying I don't want another home game in 2015, but to get one this late we might have to settle for a baby seal. I would rather play another JerryWorld game against a top tier opponent than another game in AA against UMass or Delaware State.
I gotcha, and that makes sense - thanks for clarifying. Especially in the BCS conferences that can only play three OOC games, many of those schools will only be willing to play one "hard" OOC game. You make a great point that it'll definitely be more difficult for schools like Michigan to find a quality OOC opponent now.
How about Rutgers or Pitt? Both are in prime Penn State territories, so now may be a great time from a recruiting standpoint for Michigan to build more of a presence in both places.
247Sports In partnership with CBS Sports