MGoBlue

I seriously doubt Texas would get the shaft if Texas went 12-0, very seriously. I mean ffs ND has a clause in the BcS. Oklahoma may get shafted but probably not Texas, I know I'm contradicting my last post a little, but the more I think about it the more I doubt a 1 loss Big10/pac12 team gets in over Texas.

Just out of curiosity, how much did this boards traffic go up leading up to and during the move to the Big10?

The only way that happens is if the Big10 keeps doing well in bowl games, one year of good games does not erase the past few years. I think the addition of Nebraska only helps, and if Michigan ever comes back then yes, a one loss Big10 team would carry a lot of weight.

I would agree with that list, Penn State and osu are interchangeable on any given day though.

Really? Did we hire another coach before or after RR and I missed it?

Just wait. This time Les Miles will be interviewed in secret. And you know they want him and he wants them. We don't want Les, really we don't. Jim Harbaugh, yes.

Yep you said it right their. Michigan will never get back to national power if RichRod is still their. They shouldve won 9 games last year. That's just silly, with a freshman who try's to make more out of what's there at the helm against the best defensive conference in the nation...9 wins? I think not. I think RichRod will bring, and has started to bring, a great offence to Michigan. But we'll need a good, doesn't have to be great, but good defense. Which we just don't have right now, and I'm not sure RR will ever get the chance. I'm not a RR supporter, I'm a Michigan supporter, which means I'm for what's best. I think RR deserved time to get things going, and I think he has gotten a raw deal while he's been in Ann Arbor. But at the end of the day I want a winning team, and if that means putting a more traditional Michigan coach in, then so be it. I just don't want to go through what ND has. /I miss John Cooper

Beaver stadium actually seats more than Michigan right now, due to construction.

An interesting point about the Rotunda, the flowers, they're painted Maize and Blue. I've always wondered why they would chose not one, but both of our colors.

Wow, the combined Big10 seats over 100,000 more people than all of the Big12 did, minus Nebraska, if included in the Big12 group and not in the Big10 there are still 27,125 more seats in Big10 stadiums. Hope you none of you have agoraphobia.

I'm really wanting to visit minny's stadium as well, looks really nice.

screw this. Those 10 Big10 titles, there ours, all of em.

LOL i've been LOVING Michigan's misfortune lately. But serious question to you, do you think Rich Rod's gotta go? I've never seen in him what optimistic Michigan fans had seen from the get go. His offensive schemes only work in the Big East and he had Pat White to thank for that. Coaches no defense too This is 'the year', and by that I mean if he doesn't produce this year, consider him gone. But saying his offence doesn't work is very incorrect, we were third in the Big10 in scoring, fourth in rushing, passing was weak, but we used freshmen. Three of our games were very close loses, one in OT to sparty. I think the offence will be much improved with returning QB's/wideouts/line, but the D, that's where the question is. Hopefully having the same D cord for the second straight year will help, but we'll see. But my wants are easy, at least an 7-8 win season, obviously a bowl, a win over 2 of our big 4 (osu, MSU, Penn, ND), and beating the teams we should (ie Illinois/Purdue/Indiana). But I will say I would take a 6 - 6 season and only one win over our big four, I'll let you guess which one that would be.... If he doesn't do that, then I want him gone. I don't want to go through what ND has with Ty, then Charlie, and now Kelly, and what's to say Kelly's gonna work? I don't think I could take a decade of sucking, mediocrity was bad enough. http://web1.ncaa.org/football/exec/rankingSummary?org=418&year=2009&week=19

I miss being good and arrogant :'(

http://sportsillustrated.cnn.com/2010/writers/andy_staples/06/15/texas-expansion/index.html

Isn't the Big 10 more interested in schools that have tons of rich tradition, like Nebraska. Based on that, I'd say anyone but Notre Dame is going to have any extremely hard time getting all the votes they need to enter the conference. And in spite of the great markets they'd have with Rutgers, Pitt or Maryland, those Big 10 head honchos are quite stringent from what I've heard & read. They won't be passing out approval la-dee-dah. I'm not saying a 16-team conference won't happen. I just think it's much less likely...unless the Big 10 makes a point of progressing to that. They'll be the ones to decide; no one else is going to sway them (eg. the decision to add Nebraska was the Big 10's idea, no one else). No, well sorta, the B10 wants a few things; on the field importance not being the highest priority all the time. The B10 wants a school to either; a) enlarge the btn footprint and a AAU member (Rutgers), B) enlarge the btn footprint by being a national draw and a AAU member (you), or c) be ND, which while not a AAU member, it is a very good school for under grad work. But make no mistake, the BTN and that AAU membership trump on the field work. Unless you ND.

Wow, that's just lame. Makes me wish the B10 finished the job on the Big12.

Depends, there is no deal yet in the new Big12 (just listened to the presser at Texas) so nothing is firm there, and I would imagine it depends on how much money Nebraska brings to the Big10.

The rest of the Big12 might be happy, but Texas is pissed.

Well, now you're about to make 22mil, 3mil shy of what Texas might make, and your academics rating just went up. Hate Texas all you want but the rest of the big12 is jealous, I'm betting.

Right now, I see Nebraska being behind OSU, and grouped with Iowa maybe wisky, but above the rest right now.

I've only ever been to one OSU game. When UCLA came to town back in the late 90s. I wasn't flaming. I was hoping that you caught the jist of my humor. Lol I did, I was just playing with you. The flaming coment was for my coment about the 97' game that was not. It's all in good fun. Well then, let's have some fun, shall we? 1. During 93-97 Husker football lost only 3 games. 2. During the sames time frame played for 4 National Championships and won 3 (one shared of course). 3. In 97, the year in question, we played a MUCH stronger opponent in Tenn. than you did in Wash. St. We freaking clobbered them and you barely won and in contreversial fashion. 4. Sure you won the Big Ten that year, but overall the Big 10 had a horrible Bowl record that year. They weren't the strongest conference that year. 5. Ok, WE GOT THE SEARS TROPHY!!! You can have that wooden piece of crap AP one. 6. Considering Nebraska's crazy dominance during that time frame a VERY strong argument can be made that the only reason you got to share the title is because you couldn't play us. The only reason our schedule was easier was because we had two Big12 teams on it

This has been a great week hasn't it! I don't know about y'all but my work has suffered greatly since all this started, throw in the goodness that was the USC sanctions and I can't think of a better off season, and it's not over yet!

I've only ever been to one OSU game. When UCLA came to town back in the late 90s. I wasn't flaming. I was hoping that you caught the jist of my humor. Lol I did, I was just playing with you. The flaming coment was for my coment about the 97' game that was not. It's all in good fun.

Sorry, I'm used to not being allotted enough tickets from certain teams that shall remain nameless, but their initials are osu... But seriously, the 97' national championship was ours. The flaming can proceed.