Moderators: peeker643, swerb, danwismar, furls
by danwismar » Wed Aug 25, 2010 1:49 pm
by noles1 » Wed Aug 25, 2010 2:07 pm

by swerb » Wed Aug 25, 2010 2:25 pm
by peeker643 » Wed Aug 25, 2010 2:38 pm
by Ziner » Wed Aug 25, 2010 2:43 pm

by danwismar » Wed Aug 25, 2010 3:14 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.
by Ziner » Wed Aug 25, 2010 3:22 pm
by aoxo1 » Wed Aug 25, 2010 3:36 pm
by JCoz » Wed Aug 25, 2010 3:47 pm
Ziner wrote: You get "The Game" and then you get another [Big ten] game that is even more important.

by JCoz » Wed Aug 25, 2010 3:50 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.
by JCoz » Wed Aug 25, 2010 3:53 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?
by Ziner » Wed Aug 25, 2010 4:01 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.
by danwismar » Wed Aug 25, 2010 4:13 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.
by danwismar » Wed Aug 25, 2010 4:17 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.
by Ziner » Wed Aug 25, 2010 4:23 pm
by JCoz » Wed Aug 25, 2010 4:31 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.
by danwismar » Wed Aug 25, 2010 4:38 pm
by JCoz » Wed Aug 25, 2010 4:43 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.
by JCoz » Wed Aug 25, 2010 4:46 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.
by Ziner » Wed Aug 25, 2010 4:51 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.
by danwismar » Wed Aug 25, 2010 4:54 pm
by JCoz » Wed Aug 25, 2010 4:58 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.
“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?
by JCoz » Wed Aug 25, 2010 5:03 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.
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.
by danwismar » Wed Aug 25, 2010 5:03 pm
by JCoz » Wed Aug 25, 2010 5:06 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.
by Ziner » Wed Aug 25, 2010 5:08 pm
by JCoz » Wed Aug 25, 2010 5:13 pm

by danwismar » Wed Aug 25, 2010 5:14 pm
Ziner wrote:if shit like this makes you sick to your stomach I cant imagine how you handle life in general.
by furls » Wed Aug 25, 2010 5:17 pm
by noles1 » Wed Aug 25, 2010 5:50 pm

by fairvis » Wed Aug 25, 2010 6:18 pm
by hermanfontenot » Wed Aug 25, 2010 7:05 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.

by hermanfontenot » Wed Aug 25, 2010 7:06 pm
noles1 wrote:OU-Texas would be better at the end of the year but both schools have other "rivalry" games.

by FUDU » Wed Aug 25, 2010 7:11 pm
by hermanfontenot » Wed Aug 25, 2010 7:21 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.

by FUDU » Wed Aug 25, 2010 7:24 pm
by furls » Wed Aug 25, 2010 8:22 pm
by motherscratcher » Wed Aug 25, 2010 9:29 pm
by Triple-S » Wed Aug 25, 2010 9:39 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
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.

by danwismar » Wed Aug 25, 2010 10:07 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.
by Cerebral_DownTime » Thu Aug 26, 2010 2:41 am
by JCoz » Thu Aug 26, 2010 8:57 am
by exiledbuckeye » Thu Aug 26, 2010 2:05 pm
by jb » Thu Aug 26, 2010 2:35 pm
by boilerdaveb » Thu Aug 26, 2010 3:03 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
by danwismar » Thu Aug 26, 2010 3:40 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?
by danwismar » Thu Aug 26, 2010 3:53 pm
by danwismar » Thu Aug 26, 2010 3:56 pm
by danwismar » Thu Aug 26, 2010 4:07 pm
by JCoz » Thu Aug 26, 2010 4:45 pm
Return to College Sports Arena
Users browsing this forum: gbot, psbot [Picsearch] and 3 guests
