Text Size

College Sports Arena

Doesn't look good for preserving OSU-Michigan

Talk Buckeye football and hoops, Viking hoops, as well as all other discussion on college sports in here.

Moderators: peeker643, swerb, danwismar, furls

Doesn't look good for preserving OSU-Michigan

Unread postby danwismar » Wed Aug 25, 2010 12:49 pm

It looks more and more like the Big Ten will say "screw tradition" and separate OSU and Michigan into different divisions, which will entail moving "The Game" from its traditional late November date, and making it just another conference game on the schedule. This makes me sick to my stomach.

If you missed Doug's PD article Sunday, you really need to read it. Doug is not a local native...he doesn't hate Michigan...but he "gets it" when it comes to the tradition of OSU-Michigan...and he can't understand what the Big Ten powers are thinking. Here's his weekend column:
http://bit.ly/bixt1s

---

Then Dan Wetzel of Yahoo Sports nails it on Monday with another great column using the same "sellout" theme:
http://bit.ly/cfV7KP

---

Marcus Hartman (BSB/Scout) thinks it's a done deal. His blog post is titled: "Regarding the Pending Travesty"
http://bit.ly/b01e1L

His post includes this informative reference link on OSU-Michigan history:
http://bit.ly/c4zX1C

---

Discuss....(not much more I can think of to say that these guys haven't said....except that, as we are reminded more and more every day...change is not synonymous with progress)


EDIT: Facebook page: "Don't Mess with Ohio State-Michigan"
http://www.facebook.com/group.php?gid=1 ... 262&ref=mf

More commentary at WFNY: http://bit.ly/bz4bYX
"I believe it is the nature of the human species to reject what is true but unpleasant and to embrace what is obviously false but comforting." H.L. Mencken

Dan's OSU Links - http://bit.ly/1o9DwFo
danwismar
 
Posts: 2550
Joined: Fri Apr 25, 2008 4:05 pm

Re: Doesn't look good for preserving OSU-Michigan

Unread postby noles1 » Wed Aug 25, 2010 1:07 pm

Just getting caught up with all this and have to say I absolutely despise even the thought of it. It's the foremost concern in college football at this point though. The money chasing that is going on is likely to ruin the tradition and pagentry, let alone destroy the product over time.

This is yet another shining example of complete morons hatching up crap ideas simply to reap larger profits from tv revenues. Pathetic.

Big Ten... it's really simple. Here's your fuckin divisions. Stop with all the bullshit.

East (Come up with a stupid catchy name if you'd like)
OSU
Penn St.
Michigan
Michigan St.
Indiana
Northwestern

West
Purdue
Nebraska
Iowa
Minnesota
Wisconsin
Illinois

Keep the basketball divisions fairly even and put Northwestern in the "bigger market" division to push the rivalries. Then when you add Notre Dame you can throw them in the other division and really have something. Rutgers or whomever else you can pull in, naturally slots into the "big market" East.

So what's the big problem with this?
Playing here is the closest thing to heaven. Really, I mean it's amazing to be in a place where the fans truly cherish their football team and stick behind them win or lose. We players love them, too. I feel a sense of accomplishment playing here, we are a special breed of football players with a great opportunity." ~ tOSU LB Brian Rolle
User avatar
noles1
 
Posts: 2114
Joined: Fri Jun 01, 2007 2:32 pm
Location: Clarion, PA
Favorite Player: Jason Kipnis
Least Favorite Player: Mark May's Parents

Re: Doesn't look good for preserving OSU-Michigan

Unread postby swerb » Wed Aug 25, 2010 1:25 pm

This is inconceivable. How can they possibly do this?

Would be like effing with Army/Navy, or The Iron Bowl.
"It's like dating a woman who hates you so much she will never break up with you, even if you burn down the house every single autumn." ~ Chuck Klosterman on Browns fans relationship with the Browns

http://www.twitter.com/theclevelandfan
User avatar
swerb
JoBu's bee-yotch
 
Posts: 17918
Joined: Thu Jan 19, 2006 5:04 pm
Location: Twinsburg, OH
Favorite Player: Mango Hab
Least Favorite Player: Bob LaMonte

Re: Doesn't look good for preserving OSU-Michigan

Unread postby peeker643 » Wed Aug 25, 2010 1:38 pm

I wonder how much of it is UM not protesting too heavily. There are parties and factions up there now who'd welcome a respite from the pressure of The Game. ;-) ;) :wink:

After the last ten years those parties may actually hold some sway. People love tradition til it works against them for a decade.

And before some hump calls me crazy, I'm not saying there isn't a huge percentage up there that care for and want it the way it's been. I'm just saying they're probably not as bold or vocal as they once were.
"Great minds think alike. The opposite is also true."

"None of us is as dumb as all of us."


I'm on Twitter at http://twitter.com/peeker643
User avatar
peeker643
Duly Noted
 
Posts: 22683
Joined: Tue Jun 26, 2007 1:33 pm
Favorite Player: Smokey Rowe
Least Favorite Player: Dingle Stetson

Re: Doesn't look good for preserving OSU-Michigan

Unread postby Ziner » Wed Aug 25, 2010 1:43 pm

Someone explain to me why it REALLY matters when it is played as long as it is played? Are you not going to watch? Is it going to make the game less exciting? IMO it doesnt weaken the rivalry, especially because when the game will be truly epic will be the Conference championship game when (if?) UM comes back to prominence.

I like but certainly dont love OSU like some of you, just seems like an over reaction to me.

Here come the tomatoes. :hide:
In the end, we're all "only for a limited time," you guys.
User avatar
Ziner
Tot-Lovin' Hippy
 
Posts: 7062
Joined: Thu Jan 03, 2008 4:04 pm
Location: Boulder, Colorado
Favorite Player: Tater Tots
Least Favorite Player: Yam Fries

Re: Doesn't look good for preserving OSU-Michigan

Unread postby danwismar » Wed Aug 25, 2010 2:14 pm

Ziner wrote:Someone explain to me why it REALLY matters when it is played as long as it is played? Are you not going to watch? Is it going to make the game less exciting? IMO it doesnt weaken the rivalry, especially because when the game will be truly epic will be the Conference championship game when (if?) UM comes back to prominence.


No tomatoes....but consider this date: 1935

That's how long this game has been played as the last game of the season. For me...my dad...his dad...this would be like moving Thanksgiving to October. You're young...hence the indifference.

To your other point: consider this scenario. Both OSU and Michigan are undefeated...no one else in the conference has less than 2 losses or if they have one, they lose a tie-breaker with OSU or Michigan. Supposedly, this is the dream scenario you imagine.

How "epic" will it be that when they do play, both teams know that the loser is probably still guaranteed a spot in the BT title game?...that they'll likely have to play again....that whoever wins will have to win again to win the BT title?

That won't cheapen and dilute the importance of The Game?
"I believe it is the nature of the human species to reject what is true but unpleasant and to embrace what is obviously false but comforting." H.L. Mencken

Dan's OSU Links - http://bit.ly/1o9DwFo
danwismar
 
Posts: 2550
Joined: Fri Apr 25, 2008 4:05 pm

Re: Doesn't look good for preserving OSU-Michigan

Unread postby Ziner » Wed Aug 25, 2010 2:22 pm

apparently I didnt make myself clear. I am saying the B10 Championship would become epic when they are both good and fighting for the league championship. You get "The Game" and then you get another game that is even more important. Shit changes, I just find it funny that you get so worked up over the week the game is played.

They added Nebraska, they need divisions, the problem should be with the expansion not the week the game is played. I just think it is excessively whiny if the game will still be a yearly occurence to bitch about the week it is played in. That's all. I am sure I just don't understand it because I am not a OSU fan of the level of you guys or I am young, but I just kinda laugh at the anger over it.
Last edited by Ziner on Wed Aug 25, 2010 2:40 pm, edited 1 time in total.
In the end, we're all "only for a limited time," you guys.
User avatar
Ziner
Tot-Lovin' Hippy
 
Posts: 7062
Joined: Thu Jan 03, 2008 4:04 pm
Location: Boulder, Colorado
Favorite Player: Tater Tots
Least Favorite Player: Yam Fries

Re: Doesn't look good for preserving OSU-Michigan

Unread postby aoxo1 » Wed Aug 25, 2010 2:36 pm

It will never become "just another conference game". That's silly. Is OU-Texas? UF-UGA? Or any other number of big time rivalries considered just another yawn inducing conference game?

I think they should keep them in the same division, but come on.
I know more about pizza than you. Much more in fact. - Cerebral_DownTime
User avatar
aoxo1
 
Posts: 2934
Joined: Fri Dec 26, 2008 12:23 pm
Favorite Player: Hover Jetski
Least Favorite Player: Eric Wright

Re: Doesn't look good for preserving OSU-Michigan

Unread postby JCoz » Wed Aug 25, 2010 2:47 pm

Ziner wrote: You get "The Game" and then you get another [Big ten] game that is even more important.


Wow. Really, you wrote THAT question and then don't get why OSU fans might not be in favor of this?

Well, hey, I can see your point. It worked out swell for the Big 12. So well in fact that I, being a very new college football fan relatively speaking, didn't even know that there ever was a rivalry of note between Oklahoma and Nebraska until last year.

No joke, learned right here on the boards.

I can't wait to have the opportunity to educate a young fan one day on the once great Ohio State/UM rivalry. :pb:
User avatar
JCoz
Donnie, you're out of your element
 
Posts: 4158
Joined: Thu Oct 04, 2007 11:57 am
Favorite Player: Competency
Least Favorite Player: Gene Smith

Re: Doesn't look good for preserving OSU-Michigan

Unread postby JCoz » Wed Aug 25, 2010 2:50 pm

aoxo1 wrote:It will never become "just another conference game". That's silly. Is OU-Texas? UF-UGA? Or any other number of big time rivalries considered just another yawn inducing conference game?

I think they should keep them in the same division, but come on.


I will say that keeping them in the same divisions and moving the game is not even close in my mind to the travesty of splitting them into different divisions and introducing the possibility of playing them twice in one year.

The games you mentioned do not apply to separate division argument, and what you are saying and what is being suggested is apples and oranges.
User avatar
JCoz
Donnie, you're out of your element
 
Posts: 4158
Joined: Thu Oct 04, 2007 11:57 am
Favorite Player: Competency
Least Favorite Player: Gene Smith

Re: Doesn't look good for preserving OSU-Michigan

Unread postby JCoz » Wed Aug 25, 2010 2:53 pm

wiz1001 wrote:
Ziner wrote:
How "epic" will it be that when they do play, both teams know that the loser is probably still guaranteed a spot in the BT title game?...that they'll likely have to play again....that whoever wins will have to win again to win the BT title?

That won't cheapen and dilute the importance of The Game?


Ding ding ding!!! Sickening to think about.
User avatar
JCoz
Donnie, you're out of your element
 
Posts: 4158
Joined: Thu Oct 04, 2007 11:57 am
Favorite Player: Competency
Least Favorite Player: Gene Smith

Re: Doesn't look good for preserving OSU-Michigan

Unread postby Ziner » Wed Aug 25, 2010 3:01 pm

JCoz wrote:
Ziner wrote: You get "The Game" and then you get another [Big ten] game that is even more important.


Wow. Really, you wrote THAT question and then don't get why OSU fans might not be in favor of this?

Well, hey, I can see your point. It worked out swell for the Big 12. So well in fact that I, being a very new college football fan relatively speaking, didn't even know that there ever was a rivalry of note between Oklahoma and Nebraska until last year.

No joke, learned right here on the boards.

I can't wait to have the opportunity to educate a young fan one day on the once great Ohio State/UM rivalry. :pb:


Someone doesn't get it. I get the argument against expansion and thus divisions but there are two separate discussions IMO, however expansion is already done and divisions are coming.

So lets make myself clear... I THINK IT IS EXCESSIVELY WHINY TO BITCH ABOUT THE WEEK THE GAME IS PLAYED SINCE IT WILL STILL BE PLAYED.

Is there any discussion of not playing the game? Then I can see the outrage, but I have not heard such talk anywhere.
In the end, we're all "only for a limited time," you guys.
User avatar
Ziner
Tot-Lovin' Hippy
 
Posts: 7062
Joined: Thu Jan 03, 2008 4:04 pm
Location: Boulder, Colorado
Favorite Player: Tater Tots
Least Favorite Player: Yam Fries

Re: Doesn't look good for preserving OSU-Michigan

Unread postby danwismar » Wed Aug 25, 2010 3:13 pm

Ziner wrote: I just find it funny that you get so worked up over the week the game is played.

I just think it is excessively whiny if the game will still be a yearly occurence to bitch about the week it is played in. That's all. I am sure I just don't understand it because I am not a OSU fan of the level of you guys or I am young, but I just kinda laugh at the anger over it.


I take back what I said about your youth being the reason for your indifference. Swerb (as one example) is 20+ years younger than I am, and he gets it.

The discussion wasn't about the awesomeness and spectacle that is possible once we have a Big Ten Championship game every year. No argument from this corner about that.

The discussion was about the effect that will have on The Game. There is an easy way to preserve the tradition of The Game as much as possible, given the expansion and divisional set up. The Big Ten has apparently decided to go another direction...and in the opinion of a lot of people, they're doing it for all the wrong reasons...and that's a damn shame.

...and it's not anger. It's more a gnawing in the gut...born of memories...nostalgia, and an appreciation for long-standing tradition. Truly sorry you don't get it.
"I believe it is the nature of the human species to reject what is true but unpleasant and to embrace what is obviously false but comforting." H.L. Mencken

Dan's OSU Links - http://bit.ly/1o9DwFo
danwismar
 
Posts: 2550
Joined: Fri Apr 25, 2008 4:05 pm

Re: Doesn't look good for preserving OSU-Michigan

Unread postby danwismar » Wed Aug 25, 2010 3:17 pm

Ziner wrote:
So lets make myself clear... I THINK IT IS EXCESSIVELY WHINY TO BITCH ABOUT THE WEEK THE GAME IS PLAYED SINCE IT WILL STILL BE PLAYED.

Is there any discussion of not playing the game? Then I can see the outrage, but I have not heard such talk anywhere.


You avoided even addressing the scenario I described above that shows how the game can be diluted and cheapened regardless of when it's played. And I think we get your point above...you don't have to shout.

Cordially,

The Excessive Whiner
"I believe it is the nature of the human species to reject what is true but unpleasant and to embrace what is obviously false but comforting." H.L. Mencken

Dan's OSU Links - http://bit.ly/1o9DwFo
danwismar
 
Posts: 2550
Joined: Fri Apr 25, 2008 4:05 pm

Re: Doesn't look good for preserving OSU-Michigan

Unread postby Ziner » Wed Aug 25, 2010 3:23 pm

Nothing to be sorry for. I dont feel left out. I understand the nostalgia and traditions of the game, I just didnt know people placed such an importance on the week it is played opposed to it being played. Once the decision to go to divisions and have a championship game it diminished "The Game". That should have been realized from the moment they started looking at expansion. To see you guys get all worked up over the week it is play is just funny. The week it is played won't effect that tradition of the game half as much as the B10 championship game. "The Game" was fucked a while ago, I find it funny the delayed reaction and deflecting the blame towards the week it is played opposed to the expansion.

Hell, even funnier, wasnt JCoz in here pimping the expansion? What did he think they would do bring in 1, 3, or 5 teams and not have a championship game? Expansion weakened the tradition, not the week it was played.
In the end, we're all "only for a limited time," you guys.
User avatar
Ziner
Tot-Lovin' Hippy
 
Posts: 7062
Joined: Thu Jan 03, 2008 4:04 pm
Location: Boulder, Colorado
Favorite Player: Tater Tots
Least Favorite Player: Yam Fries

Re: Doesn't look good for preserving OSU-Michigan

Unread postby JCoz » Wed Aug 25, 2010 3:31 pm

Ziner wrote:Nothing to be sorry for. I dont feel left out. I understand the nostalgia and traditions of the game, I just didnt know people placed such an importance on the week it is played opposed to it being played. Once the decision to go to divisions and have a championship game it diminished "The Game". That should have been realized from the moment they started looking at expansion. To see you guys get all worked up over the week it is play is just funny. The week it is played won't effect that tradition of the game half as much as the B10 championship game. "The Game" was fucked a while ago, I find it funny the delayed reaction and deflecting the blame towards the week it is played opposed to the expansion.

Hell, even funnier, wasnt JCoz in here pimping the expansion? What did he think they would do bring in 1, 3, or 5 teams and not have a championship game? Expansion weakened the tradition, not the week it was played.


Expansion does not weaken the game substantially.

While moving the game does cheapen it, the prospect of OSU/UM being in different divisions and possibly playing 2x in a season is another matter entirely.

What you are saying about expansion makes no sense, being that there is ABSOLUTELY NO NEED, in an expansion scenario, to either split up OSU/MICH or Move up the game.

Read that again, because it appears this is something completely lost on you.

Expansion did not force these decisions in any way shape or form. It did give them the option to make them.

These choices are 100% VOLUNTARY for the B10 at this point. Period. The End.
User avatar
JCoz
Donnie, you're out of your element
 
Posts: 4158
Joined: Thu Oct 04, 2007 11:57 am
Favorite Player: Competency
Least Favorite Player: Gene Smith

Re: Doesn't look good for preserving OSU-Michigan

Unread postby danwismar » Wed Aug 25, 2010 3:38 pm

I think the delayed reaction is because most of us assumed that OSU and UM would be placed in the same division, and that the greatest rivalry in sport would not be thoughtlessly screwed with. We're all resigned to expansion, and I have no great objection to divisional play or a title game.

But like I said, there was a way to preserve The Game as much as possible, given the new realities. A lot of us are shocked that they're planning to spit on tradition and go the other way. You say...

What you are saying about expansion makes no sense, being that there is ABSOLUTELY NO NEED, in an expansion scenario, to either split up OSU/MICH or Move up the game.

Exactly right. There's no need to do what they're doing. Keep them in the same division and preserve the tradition. They aren't doing that. That's why we're sick.

You seem to think I oppose expansion...that expansion is the problem....I'm not saying that. It's the decision to put them in separate divisions that makes zero sense.
"I believe it is the nature of the human species to reject what is true but unpleasant and to embrace what is obviously false but comforting." H.L. Mencken

Dan's OSU Links - http://bit.ly/1o9DwFo
danwismar
 
Posts: 2550
Joined: Fri Apr 25, 2008 4:05 pm

Re: Doesn't look good for preserving OSU-Michigan

Unread postby JCoz » Wed Aug 25, 2010 3:43 pm

Ziner wrote:Hell, even funnier, wasnt JCoz in here pimping the expansion? What did he think they would do bring in 1, 3, or 5 teams and not have a championship game? Expansion weakened the tradition, not the week it was played.


Along with every one of those expansion threads this EXACT topic is included wither in that thread or in a thread around the same time.

It was probably 3 iterations of the same thing - Expansion thread/Talk of OSU/UM rivalry and div splits.

In every one I can been seen with this EXACT same take, so it's not like this possibility snuck up riding the law of unintended consequences...

I just was naive enough to think there was no fucking way they were dumb enough to pull the trigger on this rivalry.

Someone here told me that I shouldn't be so sure, and was pointing to that OK/NEB rivalry. I said, "but this is OSU/UM, and this is the big ten. They give a shit about tradition."

Well, JB and RIBrownsFan sure showed me.
Last edited by JCoz on Wed Aug 25, 2010 3:53 pm, edited 1 time in total.
User avatar
JCoz
Donnie, you're out of your element
 
Posts: 4158
Joined: Thu Oct 04, 2007 11:57 am
Favorite Player: Competency
Least Favorite Player: Gene Smith

Re: Doesn't look good for preserving OSU-Michigan

Unread postby JCoz » Wed Aug 25, 2010 3:46 pm

wiz1001 wrote:I think the delayed reaction is because most of us assumed that OSU and UM would be placed in the same division, and that the greatest rivalry in sport would not be thoughtlessly screwed with. We're all resigned to expansion, and I have no great objection to divisional play or a title game.

But like I said, there was a way to preserve The Game as much as possible, given the new realities. A lot of us are shocked that they're planning to spit on tradition and go the other way. You say...

What you are saying about expansion makes no sense, being that there is ABSOLUTELY NO NEED, in an expansion scenario, to either split up OSU/MICH or Move up the game.

Exactly right. There's no need to do what they're doing. Keep them in the same division and preserve the tradition. They aren't doing that. That's why we're sick.

You seem to think I oppose expansion...that expansion is the problem....I'm not saying that. It's the decision to put them in separate divisions that makes zero sense.


Wiz did you mistake my post for Ziners? That must have been fairly confusing.
User avatar
JCoz
Donnie, you're out of your element
 
Posts: 4158
Joined: Thu Oct 04, 2007 11:57 am
Favorite Player: Competency
Least Favorite Player: Gene Smith

Re: Doesn't look good for preserving OSU-Michigan

Unread postby Ziner » Wed Aug 25, 2010 3:51 pm

JCoz wrote:
I just was naive enough to think there was no fucking way they were dumb enough to pull the trigger on this rivalry.

Someone here told me that I shouldn't be so sure, and was pointing to that OK/NEB rivalry. I said, "but this is OSU/UM, and this is the big ten. They give a shit about tradition."

Well, JB sure showed me.


Maybe that is the funniest part then, because how could you possibly overlook that matching up OSU and UM in one game provides huge ratings. You dont think they thought about the possibility of twice a year? No one wants to watch a OSU/Iowa B10 Championship. They want OSU/UM. They did the entire expansion for money and they were going to leave that potential gold mine on the sidelines? Isn't really that shocking.

Anyone tell me why they think the rivalry is so big, I know why I think, but I base it a ton on the game deciding directly or indirectly who goes to the Rose Bowl. Once the idea of a championship game was introduced this would no longer be the case, ever. It would only provide an opportunity to play for a BCS bowl.
Last edited by Ziner on Wed Aug 25, 2010 3:56 pm, edited 2 times in total.
In the end, we're all "only for a limited time," you guys.
User avatar
Ziner
Tot-Lovin' Hippy
 
Posts: 7062
Joined: Thu Jan 03, 2008 4:04 pm
Location: Boulder, Colorado
Favorite Player: Tater Tots
Least Favorite Player: Yam Fries

Re: Doesn't look good for preserving OSU-Michigan

Unread postby danwismar » Wed Aug 25, 2010 3:54 pm

Duh.

I should have known that Ziner wouldn't be making my point for me so cogently.
"I believe it is the nature of the human species to reject what is true but unpleasant and to embrace what is obviously false but comforting." H.L. Mencken

Dan's OSU Links - http://bit.ly/1o9DwFo
danwismar
 
Posts: 2550
Joined: Fri Apr 25, 2008 4:05 pm

Re: Doesn't look good for preserving OSU-Michigan

Unread postby JCoz » Wed Aug 25, 2010 3:58 pm

Ziner wrote:
JCoz wrote:
I just was naive enough to think there was no fucking way they were dumb enough to pull the trigger on this rivalry.

Someone here told me that I shouldn't be so sure, and was pointing to that OK/NEB rivalry. I said, "but this is OSU/UM, and this is the big ten. They give a shit about tradition."

Well, JB sure showed me.


Maybe that is the funniest part then, because how could you possibly overlook that matching up OSU and UM in one game provides huge ratings. You dont think they thought about the possibility of twice a year? No one wants to watch a OSU/Iowa B10 Championship. They want OSU/UM. I guess you didn't see it, they did the entire expansion for money and they were going to leave that potential gold mine on the sidelines?

Anyone tell me why they think the rivalry is so big, I know why I think, but I base it a ton on the game deciding directly or indirectly who goes to the Rose Bowl. Once the idea of a championship game was introduced this would no longer be the case, ever. It would only provide an opportunity to play for a BCS bowl.


Yeah, well, information is always good Ziner. You should try reading some of those links and actually educating yourself about a rivalry you clearly dont understand, and financials you probably don't understand all that well either.

But the good news for you (and bad news for bucks fans) is that you aren't the only one riding that short bus apparently


“One of the best things that could happen, in my opinion in a given season, would be the opportunity to play Ohio State twice,” Brandon told Ann Arbor radio station WTKA.

No, it wouldn’t be the best thing that could happen. It might be fun the first time. It might be unique. It might be new. And then soon enough, it wouldn’t be.

Everything else about it diminishes an event built and maintained for five generations. When you control a 100-plus-year-old tradition, you don’t make decisions based on a four-year television contract. To do so is symbolic of the NCAA run by MBAs, where a projected spreadsheet means more than a history book. It is about selling out a century plus for an overnight rating and then trying to explain it away with specious and short-sited reasoning.

So what’s the mere possibility of a Buckeye-Wolverine Big Ten title clash actually worth? One television executive estimates it at best fetches an additional $2 million on a game that the Big Ten is seeking $15-$20 million no matter who is in it. “And with the state of (the Michigan) program, I doubt it’s that,” said the TV executive who requested anonymity. “That’s absolute the high end, and I haven’t done any research. It might be half that.”

So best case, the league gets $2 million extra per year, which divided 13 ways (12 teams and the league office) is about $150,000 per share. The Buckeyes and Wolverines are going to sell their one-of-a-kind tradition for a buck fifty per?

That’s the going price of history?
User avatar
JCoz
Donnie, you're out of your element
 
Posts: 4158
Joined: Thu Oct 04, 2007 11:57 am
Favorite Player: Competency
Least Favorite Player: Gene Smith

Re: Doesn't look good for preserving OSU-Michigan

Unread postby JCoz » Wed Aug 25, 2010 4:03 pm

Ziner wrote:Anyone tell me why they think the rivalry is so big, I know why I think, but I base it a ton on the game deciding directly or indirectly who goes to the Rose Bowl. Once the idea of a championship game was introduced this would no longer be the case, ever. It would only provide an opportunity to play for a BCS bowl.


Here is a fairly well expressed reason:

The game is the game because they don’t play twice a year. You get one crack and that’s it. It can make or break the season. Careers, both playing and coaching, are defined by it because the lack of a rematch raises the stakes. The single game increases the urgency of the present. Then the location on hallowed grounds – either the glorious Horseshoe or the brilliant Big House, not some corporate event at Lucas Oil Stadium – adds the perspective of the past. As such, the nature of the rivalry should be protected at all costs.


The links, Ziner. They go places with information pertinent to the topic at hand. Don't be afraid to take 15 minutes out of your day to read them.
User avatar
JCoz
Donnie, you're out of your element
 
Posts: 4158
Joined: Thu Oct 04, 2007 11:57 am
Favorite Player: Competency
Least Favorite Player: Gene Smith

Re: Doesn't look good for preserving OSU-Michigan

Unread postby danwismar » Wed Aug 25, 2010 4:03 pm

Going back to the original thread on this topic a couple weeks ago, we all discussed the stupid notion floated at the time that "if one OSU-UM game is a ratings bonanza, think how great it would be if we could do it twice in the same year!"

If some is good, then more is better!

Not.

So, yes, the thought has crossed our feeble minds that the Big Ten just might be making decisions based on their expectations of ratings and dollars.

The whole point of this thread is that we believe that way of thinking to be short-sighted...and misguided...and dismissive of tradition...and bad for the sport of CFB... and just plain wrong.
"I believe it is the nature of the human species to reject what is true but unpleasant and to embrace what is obviously false but comforting." H.L. Mencken

Dan's OSU Links - http://bit.ly/1o9DwFo
danwismar
 
Posts: 2550
Joined: Fri Apr 25, 2008 4:05 pm

Re: Doesn't look good for preserving OSU-Michigan

Unread postby JCoz » Wed Aug 25, 2010 4:06 pm

wiz1001 wrote:Going back to the original thread on this topic a couple weeks ago, we all discussed the stupid notion floated at the time that "if one OSU-UM game is a ratings bonanza, think how great it would be if we could do it twice in the same year!"

If some is good, then more is better!

Not.

So, yes, the thought has crossed our feeble minds that the Big Ten just might be making decisions based on their expectations of ratings and dollars.

The whole point of this thread is that we believe that way of thinking to be short-sighted...and misguided...and dismissive of tradition...and bad for the sport of CFB... and just plain wrong.


Yup, and I think it was multiple times Wiz.

Read this one as see how much egg I have on my face now as a result (go about half way down and topic turns to a B10 championship game:

http://theclevelandfan.com/boards/viewtopic.php?f=4&t=16080&p=317793&hilit=nebraska#p317793
User avatar
JCoz
Donnie, you're out of your element
 
Posts: 4158
Joined: Thu Oct 04, 2007 11:57 am
Favorite Player: Competency
Least Favorite Player: Gene Smith

Re: Doesn't look good for preserving OSU-Michigan

Unread postby Ziner » Wed Aug 25, 2010 4:08 pm

That all assumes everyone is as over dramatic as you and will proclaim that it will ruin a once glorious game, oh the humanity... Give me a break. You act as if they just told you the game will never be played again.

I guess all the luster is gone. Hell move it to the B10 network, no need to put it on ABC anymore and bother Brent Musburger, its just another game. At least it frees up College Gameday to head to just another game.

Geezus. Don't make me bust out the crybaby pictures. Instead I will just stop, I asked what the hell the big deal is apparently it is to you guys, can't tell others how to feel. I can however tease them about being babies and whiners :thumb up:

Have fun fellas, I did my fair share to spice up the College forum for a few hours. I need to get some work done. Lighten up too, if shit like this makes you sick to your stomach I cant imagine how you handle life in general.

Edit: This was in reference to JCoz's post about the 2mill, too late to quote it.
In the end, we're all "only for a limited time," you guys.
User avatar
Ziner
Tot-Lovin' Hippy
 
Posts: 7062
Joined: Thu Jan 03, 2008 4:04 pm
Location: Boulder, Colorado
Favorite Player: Tater Tots
Least Favorite Player: Yam Fries

Re: Doesn't look good for preserving OSU-Michigan

Unread postby JCoz » Wed Aug 25, 2010 4:13 pm

I'll also say that that monetary breakdown by Wetzel doesn't go far enough. The PD had that chart showing that OSU-Mich would have only met in the title game something like 4 of 19 years, so it would be more like 8 million/19 years/13 checks = say, $32,500 per year.

Yah, that Sounds like a deal they can't pass up IYAM. :gah:
User avatar
JCoz
Donnie, you're out of your element
 
Posts: 4158
Joined: Thu Oct 04, 2007 11:57 am
Favorite Player: Competency
Least Favorite Player: Gene Smith

Re: Doesn't look good for preserving OSU-Michigan

Unread postby danwismar » Wed Aug 25, 2010 4:14 pm

Ziner wrote:if shit like this makes you sick to your stomach I cant imagine how you handle life in general.


You're right. You can't.
"I believe it is the nature of the human species to reject what is true but unpleasant and to embrace what is obviously false but comforting." H.L. Mencken

Dan's OSU Links - http://bit.ly/1o9DwFo
danwismar
 
Posts: 2550
Joined: Fri Apr 25, 2008 4:05 pm

Re: Doesn't look good for preserving OSU-Michigan

Unread postby furls » Wed Aug 25, 2010 4:17 pm

Man, I go to work and everything is fine. I skate out early and come home to this mess?

Here is my take:
Championship games screw with traditional rivalries, they just do. It is very hard to say that playing a 5-6 scUM team on the last week of the season will be the biggest game of the season to an 11-0 OSU team that has already clinched its division while they are looking at Nebraska/etc. in the championship game. It is just a fact of life, it will tarnish the effect of the game on the players first and then later to the fans. Championship games can also build rivalries (see FL vs. AL for a nice one that is brewing).

So what division you put the teams in really doesn't matter as you do the best you can to preserve the rivalry by ensuring that the teams play every year and at the same time. Does it matter if OSU plays scUM in back to back weeks, I really don't think so. If they play 2X so what, I would rather see OSU and scUM play 2X then see an unbalanced divisional set up like they had in the B12 for all those years, where they put UT and OU in the same division, turning the Red River Shoot out into a de Facto conference championship game played 5 weeks into the season.

Give me evenly distributed talent across the divisions, OSU vs. scUM every year at the same time, and I am happy.
Coming from a Wolverine, we're the football equivalent of a formerly abused wife of a meth addict who just remarried the safe nice guy. We're just glad we have someone who's aware that it's a rivalry and that tackling on defense is integral. Baby steps.

-Kingpin74
User avatar
furls
Buckeye Insider
 
Posts: 6424
Joined: Fri Jan 20, 2006 1:33 pm
Favorite Player: Chic Harley
Least Favorite Player: Desmond Howard

Re: Doesn't look good for preserving OSU-Michigan

Unread postby noles1 » Wed Aug 25, 2010 4:50 pm

Having went to OSU and the Game in both venues thus far in my short life, I can wholeheartedly say that moving The Game from the November date is beyond recourse.

Just plain stupid. Go to either venue during that time of the year and tell me otherwise.

Now, expansion, don't have a problem with it. UM and OSU in separate divisions I do have a problem with. Namely because it makes no sense, except pure greed. That's just my opinion. OU-Texas would be better at the end of the year but both schools have other "rivalry" games. So the comparison falls short when referenced against OSU-UM. Swerb's Iron Bowl or Army-Navy comparison is much more appropriate.

I didn't agree 2 years ago the 2 teams should play again. The Columbus setting and that game is suppose to settle it. Twice in the same season diminishes things a great deal in my eyes.
Playing here is the closest thing to heaven. Really, I mean it's amazing to be in a place where the fans truly cherish their football team and stick behind them win or lose. We players love them, too. I feel a sense of accomplishment playing here, we are a special breed of football players with a great opportunity." ~ tOSU LB Brian Rolle
User avatar
noles1
 
Posts: 2114
Joined: Fri Jun 01, 2007 2:32 pm
Location: Clarion, PA
Favorite Player: Jason Kipnis
Least Favorite Player: Mark May's Parents

Re: Doesn't look good for preserving OSU-Michigan

Unread postby fairvis » Wed Aug 25, 2010 5:18 pm

Furls, you have a good take on OU/Texas, and it is disappointing that essentially the Big XII South is locked up at the Texas State Fair. Pretty much whoever wins that game, we would know far in advance that they were probably going to be in the championship game.

But, with the game being the last game of the season, there would still be a certain energy about it- if it's 11-0 OSU against 11-0 UM going for the Big Ten East divisional championship, it would be huge. The loser would probably still get an at-large BCS bid (and if the winner screwed up in the championship, may have a backdoor into the national title game, see: Nebraska, 2001) but there would be a lot of importance on that last rivalry game.

If they changed the divisions, then the game would have to be moved in order to not face each other back to back. However, I think that this changes the idea of the "rivalry Saturday" and the entire idea of Michigan Week on campus. Can you imagine kids jumping into Mirror Lake in October, when it's actually not balls-cold and you don't have to be 12 beers in to survive? I don't want to see that happen.

I think part of the pageantry is that last game of the year matchup. It works for Florida/Florida State, Georgia/Georgia Tech, Alabama/Auburn, Cal/Stanford, Washington/Washington State, Oregon/Oregon State, and Army/Navy. Alabama/Auburn's the best example- while the divisional setup put Tennessee and Alabama in different divisions, that game was always played the third Saturday of October (and the Tennessee-Florida game was Third Saturday in September), so tradition was maintained.

I don't want Ohio State and Michigan to change divisions. However, I'd deal with it, as long as the Game was moved to some other time and stuck there (say, beginning of November, 3 weeks out). I don't want it moved out of November- that's what part of the game is about.
User avatar
fairvis
 
Posts: 879
Joined: Wed Jul 29, 2009 2:21 pm
Location: Manchester, UK
Favorite Player: Braxton Miller
Least Favorite Player: Joakim Noah

Re: Doesn't look good for preserving OSU-Michigan

Unread postby hermanfontenot » Wed Aug 25, 2010 6:05 pm

Ziner wrote:Maybe that is the funniest part then, because how could you possibly overlook that matching up OSU and UM in one game provides huge ratings. You dont think they thought about the possibility of twice a year? No one wants to watch a OSU/Iowa B10 Championship. They want OSU/UM. They did the entire expansion for money and they were going to leave that potential gold mine on the sidelines? Isn't really that shocking.


History shows that college football rematches almost never equal the first matchup in terms of importance, prestige or memorability. Everyone remembers Billy Cannon's Halloween run against Ole Miss:



No one remembers the rematch in the Sugar Bowl two months later.

Everyone remembers the Choke at Doak in 1994:



No one remembers the rematch in the Sugar Bowl a month later.

Not only are rematches overhyped, they're also unfair to the team that won the first time around. Just think about a potential Ohio State-Michigan rematch in the 2007 BCS title game. Had the teams played again after the Game, it would have meant that Ohio State would have had to beat Michigan twice to win the title- while Michigan only had to beat Ohio State once.

It's just ridiculous. It's also unnecessary. There is NO reason they HAVE to change ANYTHING.
User avatar
hermanfontenot
History Buff
 
Posts: 4117
Joined: Wed Feb 14, 2007 10:52 am
Location: NE Ohio
Favorite Player: Big Z
Least Favorite Player: Jose Mesa

Re: Doesn't look good for preserving OSU-Michigan

Unread postby hermanfontenot » Wed Aug 25, 2010 6:06 pm

noles1 wrote:OU-Texas would be better at the end of the year but both schools have other "rivalry" games.


OU and Texas have also spent most of their time in different conferences.
User avatar
hermanfontenot
History Buff
 
Posts: 4117
Joined: Wed Feb 14, 2007 10:52 am
Location: NE Ohio
Favorite Player: Big Z
Least Favorite Player: Jose Mesa

Re: Doesn't look good for preserving OSU-Michigan

Unread postby FUDU » Wed Aug 25, 2010 6:11 pm

Put me in the "this sucks but it will be OK as time goes on, b/c I think it would suck worse to play THE GAME two weeks in a row" camp.
Criminals in this town used to believe in things...honor, respect.
"I heard your dog is sick, so bought you this shovel"

2011 TCF Stratomatic Champ
User avatar
FUDU
 
Posts: 13356
Joined: Sat Feb 17, 2007 2:02 am
Favorite Player: Me
Least Favorite Player: You

Re: Doesn't look good for preserving OSU-Michigan

Unread postby hermanfontenot » Wed Aug 25, 2010 6:21 pm

FUDU wrote:Put me in the "this sucks but it will be OK as time goes on, b/c I think it would suck worse to play THE GAME two weeks in a row" camp.


You don't have to do either. Just put them in the same division. They play at the end of the regular season with the division title the tangible thing up for grabs.

Doesn't matter if it's the Rose Bowl, the East title, or an at-large bid to the Insight Bowl. THE GAME is what matters, always has been that way.
User avatar
hermanfontenot
History Buff
 
Posts: 4117
Joined: Wed Feb 14, 2007 10:52 am
Location: NE Ohio
Favorite Player: Big Z
Least Favorite Player: Jose Mesa

Re: Doesn't look good for preserving OSU-Michigan

Unread postby FUDU » Wed Aug 25, 2010 6:24 pm

true
Criminals in this town used to believe in things...honor, respect.
"I heard your dog is sick, so bought you this shovel"

2011 TCF Stratomatic Champ
User avatar
FUDU
 
Posts: 13356
Joined: Sat Feb 17, 2007 2:02 am
Favorite Player: Me
Least Favorite Player: You

Re: Doesn't look good for preserving OSU-Michigan

Unread postby furls » Wed Aug 25, 2010 7:22 pm

If they changed the divisions, then the game would have to be moved in order to not face each other back to back. However, I think that this changes the idea of the "rivalry Saturday" and the entire idea of Michigan Week on campus. Can you imagine kids jumping into Mirror Lake in October, when it's actually not balls-cold and you don't have to be 12 beers in to survive? I don't want to see that happen



I don't see why putting them in separate divisions determines when they play the game. They could be in different divisions and still play the last game of the year against each other. The only time that matters is when scUM and OSU would both be playing in the B10 Championship game, if they were both the best team's in the league. IF that were the case, it would make sense to make them play in the championship game because they are in fact the best teams in the league.

I just don't want to see the game moved for something that might happen 4 out of every 19 seasons. Additionally, I don't want a calendar date on a rivalry to determine which team goes to which league. Personally, I think it is more important to split the divisions based on how good the teams (with a secondary look at geography where it makes sense and then go from there). I think what the B10 should do is split by who is good and who is not and make the last weekend of the season rivalry week (regardless of divisions). If it makes it so Nebraska and PSU or two other teams play in the championship game the next week, well then so be it. At least you can be rest assured that the two teams will want it, and both games should be played at a very high level.

My take on splits, start by ranking the teams (of course you could move a team up or down as required) into groups based on historic aptitude:

Contenders:
Ohio State
scUM
Nebraska
PSU

Middle of the pack:
Iowa
Wisconsin
MSU
Northwestern

Bottom of the Barrell:
Indiana
Illinois
Purdue
Minnesota

From there work it to make geographic sense (while putting 2 teams from each group gets you):

Div 1:
Ohio State
Penn State
MSU (I would consider putting MSU in other div with scUM)
Northwestern
Indiana
Purdue

Div 2:
scUM
Nebraska
Wisconsin
Iowa (would switch them with MSU to keep rivalry together)
Illinois
Minnesota

Just my take, do what you like with it.
Coming from a Wolverine, we're the football equivalent of a formerly abused wife of a meth addict who just remarried the safe nice guy. We're just glad we have someone who's aware that it's a rivalry and that tackling on defense is integral. Baby steps.

-Kingpin74
User avatar
furls
Buckeye Insider
 
Posts: 6424
Joined: Fri Jan 20, 2006 1:33 pm
Favorite Player: Chic Harley
Least Favorite Player: Desmond Howard

Re: Doesn't look good for preserving OSU-Michigan

Unread postby motherscratcher » Wed Aug 25, 2010 8:29 pm

My preferences:

1. Same division. Play the last game of the season, for all of the reasons already listed here. If it ain't broke, don't fix it.

2. Different divisions. Play at the end of the year. If they end up playing 2 weeks in a row on rare occasions, well...so be it. Shit happens.

3. Different divisions. Move to week 6/7. Just kill me now.


I have no idea how the assholes in charge can possibly think that moving the game is a good option.
According to my sources CDT farts in the tub and bites the bubbles.
User avatar
motherscratcher
Little Larry Sellers
 
Posts: 7748
Joined: Fri Aug 28, 2009 9:14 pm
Location: La La Land
Favorite Player: Ernie Camacho
Least Favorite Player: Jose Mesa

Re: Doesn't look good for preserving OSU-Michigan

Unread postby Triple-S » Wed Aug 25, 2010 8:39 pm

furls wrote:My take on splits, start by ranking the teams (of course you could move a team up or down as required) into groups based on historic aptitude:

Contenders:
Ohio State
scUM
Nebraska
PSU

Middle of the pack:
Iowa
Wisconsin
MSU
Purdue

Bottom of the Barrell:
Indiana
Illinois
Northwestern
Minnesota


Fixed it for you.

Purdue Boilermakers

All-Time Record

571–487–48 (.538)

Bowl Record

8–7–0 All-Time in Bowl Games

1932 National Champions!

Northwestern Wildcats

458–600–44 (.436)

1–7 All-Time in Bowl Games

A local sign was graffitied "Interstate 94, Northwestern 0". After the miraculous event of scoring first against Ohio State one year, fans ran onto the field and tore down the goalposts. They also tore down the goalposts to celebrate setting the record for most consecutive losses at 34, chanting "we're the worst".
Swerb wrote:Go start a blog if you want to tell the world your incomprehendible ramblings.


Cerebral_DownTime wrote:I have a big arm and can throw the ball pretty damn far...... maybe even over those moutains. The Browns should sign me, i'll let you all in locker room to drink beer. Then we can all go out the parking lot to watch me do motorcycle stunts.
User avatar
Triple-S
All-time leader in moral victories
 
Posts: 6374
Joined: Sat Aug 16, 2008 6:26 pm
Location: Kent-Green, Ohio
Favorite Player: Yuengling
Least Favorite Player: Nati Light.

Re: Doesn't look good for preserving OSU-Michigan

Unread postby danwismar » Wed Aug 25, 2010 9:07 pm

furls wrote:I don't see why putting them in separate divisions determines when they play the game. They could be in different divisions and still play the last game of the year against each other.


I don't see why either, Furls, but the Big Ten people have already said they won't let this happen...because they don't want to run the risk of having two teams play in consecutive weeks. They will insist on at least the last two weeks of the regular season...and maybe the last three...being divisional games. Now, no one has heard this from Jim Delany's lips, but that's the word coming out of Chicago.
"I believe it is the nature of the human species to reject what is true but unpleasant and to embrace what is obviously false but comforting." H.L. Mencken

Dan's OSU Links - http://bit.ly/1o9DwFo
danwismar
 
Posts: 2550
Joined: Fri Apr 25, 2008 4:05 pm

Re: Doesn't look good for preserving OSU-Michigan

Unread postby Cerebral_DownTime » Thu Aug 26, 2010 1:41 am

The reason why the date is so important is because it's the LAST FUCKING GAME. The whole season is a build up to that game. Playing any other team as the last game of the B10 season is like getting only clothes for Christmas when you're a kid.

It's important to us and people don't get why....

It's tradition, don't fuck with it.
"Our name is Legion, for we are many."
User avatar
Cerebral_DownTime
Go f#%k yourself
 
Posts: 14422
Joined: Mon Nov 05, 2007 3:31 am
Location: Galloway Ohio
Favorite Player: Fenrir
Least Favorite Player: Walt Flannigan's dog

Re: Doesn't look good for preserving OSU-Michigan

Unread postby JCoz » Thu Aug 26, 2010 7:57 am

Also overlooked because it's less important than the tradition of the game, moving the game to any other spot sets up a classic let down game for the bucks every season.

The energy and emotion of this game takes it's toll, as will be seen if they choose to move it.
User avatar
JCoz
Donnie, you're out of your element
 
Posts: 4158
Joined: Thu Oct 04, 2007 11:57 am
Favorite Player: Competency
Least Favorite Player: Gene Smith

Re: Doesn't look good for preserving OSU-Michigan

Unread postby exiledbuckeye » Thu Aug 26, 2010 1:05 pm

I lived in Michigan for 5+ years in the late 90s/early 2000s, back when Michigan had been beating the shit out of Ohio State for many years running, until right after JT got hired. Guess who scUM fans considered their biggest rival? Michigan State. I wore my Ohio State shit around Ann Arbor all of the time and never once got any kind of reaction from Michigan fans. I go back now wearing Ohio State gear and get all kinds of shit from them.

You move The Game, I guarantee this happens again.
User avatar
exiledbuckeye
 
Posts: 1561
Joined: Wed Aug 22, 2007 8:12 pm
Location: Michigan
Favorite Player: OSU
Least Favorite Player: scUM

Re: Doesn't look good for preserving OSU-Michigan

Unread postby jb » Thu Aug 26, 2010 1:35 pm

Hypothetically, once Dick Rod is run an dthey get a new AD and a real Michigan man as a FB coach, like harbaugh, could both schools get together and be like "F the Conference' ?

And schedule this as a regular season game every year like how ND v UM and ND v SC and UT v OU (before they were in conference) used to be in terms of hype/relevance?

Then just play 3 more in state MAC cupcakes?

If The Game is Gameworthy, it would technically be a non-conference game not counting in league play standings an dthey could meet again later in the season for the marbles, and if not then it it the end of the world if not the lst game in a non-descript year?

Not plan A for me, but not a bad plan B if you ask me. Depends on the sze of the 2 schools' AD's. I mean, what is the Big 10 going to do to them power-wise? Excommunicate them?
jb
 
Posts: 17730
Joined: Thu Feb 02, 2006 7:08 pm
Location: Defend Youngstown
Favorite Player: Daddy Rich / Carwa$h
Least Favorite Player: Hines Ward

Re: Doesn't look good for preserving OSU-Michigan

Unread postby boilerdaveb » Thu Aug 26, 2010 2:03 pm

Purdue Boilermakers

All-Time Record

571–487–48 (.538)

Bowl Record

8–7–0 All-Time in Bowl Games

1932 National Champions!

Northwestern Wildcats

458–600–44 (.436)

1–7 All-Time in Bowl Games


Umm...I about choked on that one. I'm as big a Boiler homer as they come...but I would look up that "National Champion" stat again. I mean, they won the "mythical" NCAA basketball title in 1932, but not the football title. Only thing I could find was UM in 1931, 1932, and 1933. USC were "Co" champs in 1932. But I agree in this mythical B10 ranking system, they should be higher...if it mattered.
boilerdaveb
 
Posts: 34
Joined: Tue Jul 08, 2008 2:04 pm
Location: Grove City OH
Favorite Player: Melvin Levett
Least Favorite Player: The Big Ticket

Re: Doesn't look good for preserving OSU-Michigan

Unread postby danwismar » Thu Aug 26, 2010 2:40 pm

jb wrote:Hypothetically, once Dick Rod is run an dthey get a new AD and a real Michigan man as a FB coach, like harbaugh, could both schools get together and be like "F the Conference' ?

And schedule this as a regular season game every year like how ND v UM and ND v SC and UT v OU (before they were in conference) used to be in terms of hype/relevance?

Then just play 3 more in state MAC cupcakes?

If The Game is Gameworthy, it would technically be a non-conference game not counting in league play standings an dthey could meet again later in the season for the marbles, and if not then it it the end of the world if not the lst game in a non-descript year?

Not plan A for me, but not a bad plan B if you ask me. Depends on the sze of the 2 schools' AD's. I mean, what is the Big 10 going to do to them power-wise? Excommunicate them?


credit for thinking (way) outside the box.
"I believe it is the nature of the human species to reject what is true but unpleasant and to embrace what is obviously false but comforting." H.L. Mencken

Dan's OSU Links - http://bit.ly/1o9DwFo
danwismar
 
Posts: 2550
Joined: Fri Apr 25, 2008 4:05 pm

Re: Doesn't look good for preserving OSU-Michigan

Unread postby danwismar » Thu Aug 26, 2010 2:53 pm

BTW, Michigan has a brand new A.D.(2009) - David Brandon, ex-CEO of Dominos

saw this tweet yesterday from an OSU guy:

Soon after Michigan AD David Brandon left as CEO of Domino's Pizza, they admitted their product was total shit & changed it. Just saying.
"I believe it is the nature of the human species to reject what is true but unpleasant and to embrace what is obviously false but comforting." H.L. Mencken

Dan's OSU Links - http://bit.ly/1o9DwFo
danwismar
 
Posts: 2550
Joined: Fri Apr 25, 2008 4:05 pm

Re: Doesn't look good for preserving OSU-Michigan

Unread postby danwismar » Thu Aug 26, 2010 2:56 pm

Tweeted by Doug L. at PD:

Just got off quick call with Ohio State prez Dr. Gordon Gee. Asked if possible that Ohio State-Michigan could remain final reg season game...

...Dr. Gee "The answer is yes, there is possibility Nothing has been put on paper and voted on so until that takes place, all things are poss."
"I believe it is the nature of the human species to reject what is true but unpleasant and to embrace what is obviously false but comforting." H.L. Mencken

Dan's OSU Links - http://bit.ly/1o9DwFo
danwismar
 
Posts: 2550
Joined: Fri Apr 25, 2008 4:05 pm

Re: Doesn't look good for preserving OSU-Michigan

Unread postby danwismar » Thu Aug 26, 2010 3:07 pm

At the risk of being overly dramatic and excessively whiny, I submit the following from collegefootballtalk.com:

http://bit.ly/a63BSb


"Big Ten hellbent on taking $tupidity and greed to the next level"

Be warned, Big Ten: you move The Game, you will rip the heart and suck the soul out of the single greatest property the conference owns. And for what, a few more advertising dollars every few years when they do happen to stumble into a title showdown? One that will, incidentally, likely be contested in a sterile, domed, neutral location as opposed to yet another reason that The Game is what it is -- The Big House and The Shoe.

The shame in all of this is not the fact that it's nearly a done deal; the shame is the fact that it's being considered at all.
"I believe it is the nature of the human species to reject what is true but unpleasant and to embrace what is obviously false but comforting." H.L. Mencken

Dan's OSU Links - http://bit.ly/1o9DwFo
danwismar
 
Posts: 2550
Joined: Fri Apr 25, 2008 4:05 pm

Re: Doesn't look good for preserving OSU-Michigan

Unread postby JCoz » Thu Aug 26, 2010 3:45 pm

Anyone vehemently opposed to this please sign this petition! You don't have to donate after you send, just skip it.

http://www.ipetitions.com/petition/ohio_state_vs_michigan/
User avatar
JCoz
Donnie, you're out of your element
 
Posts: 4158
Joined: Thu Oct 04, 2007 11:57 am
Favorite Player: Competency
Least Favorite Player: Gene Smith

Next

Return to College Sports Arena

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 1 guest

Who is online

In total there is 1 user online :: 0 registered, 0 hidden and 1 guest (based on users active over the past 5 minutes)
Most users ever online was 181 on Sat Feb 16, 2013 4:50 pm

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 1 guest