Report that mich/osu game moved to October
- Thread starter WhitUp
- Start date
ShadasRevenge
Well-Known Member
Why not move the game to Lucas Oil while they're at it. Delany cannot possibly be this blind to the backlash that will happen if this comes true.
If Wetzel is correct in his assessment that the Big Ten and Delaney are throwing out trial balloons on this concept....time for Big Ten fans to push back...hard.
I have to think that OSU and Michigan fans would hate this idea.Everything that Wetzel wrote about ''The Game'' is accurate. It is the most valuable property in college sports,and the Big Ten is going to mess it up for possible small shorterm gain?
Learn from history,Delaney...look at OK-Nebraska. Used to be big...then became an afterthought.
As he says, playing this game in October just blows it all up.
Undercutting ''The Game'' by suggesting it could be played twice in a season,and playing it in October, is horrible in every way...kill the golden goose,Jimbo, and watch it all cost revenue in the long run.
I have to think that OSU and Michigan fans would hate this idea.Everything that Wetzel wrote about ''The Game'' is accurate. It is the most valuable property in college sports,and the Big Ten is going to mess it up for possible small shorterm gain?
Learn from history,Delaney...look at OK-Nebraska. Used to be big...then became an afterthought.
As he says, playing this game in October just blows it all up.
Undercutting ''The Game'' by suggesting it could be played twice in a season,and playing it in October, is horrible in every way...kill the golden goose,Jimbo, and watch it all cost revenue in the long run.
ShadasRevenge
Well-Known Member
I'm obviously not a fan of either team, but it would suck to see the biggest game on the Big 10 schedule turn into a sterile, corporate shell like OU v. Texas has.
dsmhawkluva
Well-Known Member
The author of the article was right, all the leaks is to soften the blow when it becomes reality--- pretty dumb idea here if you ask me-- all this for the chance of an additional 2 million dollars? That's IF they rematch--how often is that going to happen? maybe once a decade? too much change in the b10 now--- the days of Michigan and ohio state being the primary brand name is over(with the OBVIOUS exception of OSU--Penn State helped changed, now with NE in the conference, through in the program stability and national upcoming of Iowa and Wisconsin and i just don't see it happening---- not saying Michigan won't return to b10 prominence, i just don't see them coming back and owning the b10 in the historical context of years past. Much like Notre Damn--yeah, B kelly will help make Notre damn relevant again--- but in this modern world of college football--the world that now has Boise State, TCU's of the world in the mix--- a mountain west (that was born in 99) perhaps on route to being a BCS conference, a world where b12 may soon be gone yet this decade..... just saying---- i think too much assumption is going into michigan and ohio state---- clearly it's ohio state as the dominant leader---with the "other 5" fighting to share the podium with OSU......
Last edited:
Wetzel does make a good point,that by splitting OSU and Michigan,and making them guaranteed out of division opponents really does make it tougher on Michigan at least.They will have to play Neb,Iowa,MSU,and OSU every year,and maybe even Wis. if they stay in the West...that schedule will keep them out of the title game most years.
The only reason I can think why this would happen, if it does, is because they do not want to create another Texas vs OU situation where the traditionally 2 best teams eliminate one or the other from the championship game. They would be assuming that Michigan and OSU will usually be the top 2 teams and everybody else will be everybody else.
billdozer15
Well-Known Member
This would not be a good idea to split these two teams up. Splitting up OU/NU killed that rivalry meanwhile the UT/OU rivalry has flourished. If the B10 wants the game to keep its meaning OSU/UM need to be in the same division. Likely they will be playing eachother at the end of the year for the right to represent their division in the title game. However if they are split we could see rematches that will cheapen the rivalry.
Both sides have ups and downs, but personally I think splitting them up has more bad repercussions than good.
Yawn. Sorry but I don't get excited about UM and OSU unless they are playing Iowa. Do you think LSU fans care about when Florida plays Bama? Do you think Oregon fans care when USC plays UCLA? Do Husker fans care when Texas plays OU?
Hawk fans should worry about when their schedule and their schedule only.
Hawk fans should worry about when their schedule and their schedule only.
Hawke
Well-Known Member
My interest is in a widening circle - Iowa > Big Ten > college football in general.
If you are a fan of CFB in general you care about these games. Even though I hate both teams (especially MI) it is the greatest rivalry in CFB maybe all of sports. The tradition makes it great. Moving it cheapens it.
Why has it become a sterile corporate shell? They don't play the game in the new Texas stadium. They play at the old cotton bowl at the Texas state fair. There isn't a home team. Its been like this years. They are in the big twelve south in the same division as Texas.
That is a terrible example.
INTIMIDATORHawk
Well-Known Member
I don't give a crap about OSU. I don't give two craps about Michigan.
However, I do have a lot of respect for the tradition of the OSU-UM rivalry. If they are thinking of moving the game to October, they might as well cancel the freaking thing altogether. What's the difference? If you mess with tradition a little, you've messed with it a lot.
It's the last game of the year. Period. Which division each team is in is totally trivial, and too much is being made about it.
However, I do have a lot of respect for the tradition of the OSU-UM rivalry. If they are thinking of moving the game to October, they might as well cancel the freaking thing altogether. What's the difference? If you mess with tradition a little, you've messed with it a lot.
It's the last game of the year. Period. Which division each team is in is totally trivial, and too much is being made about it.
DBorwig316
Well-Known Member
If they are willing to cheapen this rivalry, what does that say about how they feel about the the rest of the B10 rivalries? It just says to me that they don't really give a damn, and when further expansion eventually happens, expect any and all rivalries to be on the chopping block to make room for the B10 Money Train.
Clonehomer
Well-Known Member
Personally, I don't like the idea of any guaranteed games outside of your division. With division play, you will always have some unbalanced scheduling from year to year, but at least it is cyclical. With guaranteed games, you are almost guaranteeing that Michigan will always have the hardest schedule in the division. The team that has to play Penn State or Nebraska will also have that same argument. The only good way to keep a rivalry is to keep them in the same division.
tm3308
Well-Known Member
The only problem is that a lot of Big 10 teams have more than one rivalry game as it is, and they are not going to be able to keep them all in the same division. For example, Michigan has rivalries with OSU, MSU, and Minnesota. But both Iowa and Wisconsin also have rivalries with Minnesota. You can't put them all in the same division. Sure it's great if you can, but the only way to keep a lot of these rivalries going is to guarantee a cross-division rival. But if they are willing to destroy the tradition of OSU-Michigan, then no rivalry is safe.
Boy, Delany sure is pushing hard to ditch that label that the Big Ten is too trenched into tradition, and has fallen behind the times.
