zoogs
Assistant Coach
At first, I figured 'What the heck, totally trivial issue. It's not like they aren't going to play anymore.'
When the Oklahoma-Texas comparison struck me is when I changed my mind on this. Stewart Mandel had a piece I just read that sums up my feelings exactly.
If OSU and Michigan meet every year in a cross divisional rivalry, then every year is like one of those situations. The game's importance is dictated primarily by the strength of the two teams (isn't that true fro any game?) than by the historical rivalry. If both or even one of the teams are down, the only thing that'll prop up that matchup is nostalgia.
I mean, people will live with it. But I can understand why Michigan and Ohio State fans are upset.
When the Oklahoma-Texas comparison struck me is when I changed my mind on this. Stewart Mandel had a piece I just read that sums up my feelings exactly.
Mich-OSU should not play for the divisional crown? Sounds like the same sad reasoning that split up OU and Nebraska. Fans will live with it, but it's not ideal. We'd become the Texas to Michigan's Oklahoma. Sure in 2000, 2001, and again in 2009 (three times in a DECADE!), when it looked like NU-OU would play together twice (it never came to fruition), it was neat. But in none of those games did the matchup have the luster of the NU-OU rivalry of old, or even the Red River rivalry. '00 and '01 were big games only because the teams were ranked 1-2 in each case.Change was inevitable when the Big Ten opted to expand, and I fully expected some rivalries to be altered or severed. But Ohio State-Michigan? Are you kidding me? It's been played the last week of the season all but once since 1935, and it's the league's single most important franchise. You would think conference leaders would go to any length to protect it. Unfortunately, based on Michigan AD Dave Brandon's recent comments, it appears at least one decision-maker thinks he'd be enhancing the rivalry by putting the two in separate divisions, because, "one of the best things that could happen in a given season, in my opinion, is the opportunity to play Ohio State twice."
If we know anything, it's that Jim Delany doesn't do anything unless he sees a potential windfall in it. The league is going to be signing a separate TV deal for the title game, and perhaps he's eyeing some sort of "premium clause" that allows for a spike in rights fees in a year when those two meet. Because there's no question an Ohio State-Michigan championship game would be one of the most coveted properties in sports television. Delany even suggested to ESPN.com on Tuesday: "You could make a good argument that Michigan and Ohio State should never really be playing for a divisional crown. If they're going to play, play for the right to go to the Rose Bowl."
Fair enough, commish, but if you haven't noticed, Switzerland is closer to Pasadena right now than Michigan. Even when the Wolverines do get it going again, they're going to be in a division with at least two other regular contenders (perhaps Penn State and Wisconsin) that will likely prevent any one team from reaching the title game annually. In the years OSU and Michigan don't play for the Rose Bowl -- i.e., most of them -- shouldn't they at least play for something more than a run-of-the-mill conference win? The ACC tried this same thing with Miami and Florida State. Five years later, they've yet to meet in a title game.
Meanwhile, in the Big 12, the Oklahoma-Texas Red River rivalry has seen a huge national resurgence over the past decade, not just because the teams are strong, but because there are tangible stakes: pole position in the Big 12 South. If placed in opposite divisions, Ohio State and Michigan would be playing for much the same stakes -- only they'd be doing so against Penn State or Nebraska instead.
Sometimes leaders make decisions without properly thinking through the issues. This one sounds like a case of over-thinking. Do the right thing, Mr. Delany, Mr. Brandon and Mr. Smith, lest the ghosts of Woody and Bo haunt you in your sleep.
Read more: http://sportsillustrated.cnn.com/2010/writers/stewart_mandel/08/24/cfb.mailbag/index.html?eref=sihp#ixzz0xfaPhYEt
If OSU and Michigan meet every year in a cross divisional rivalry, then every year is like one of those situations. The game's importance is dictated primarily by the strength of the two teams (isn't that true fro any game?) than by the historical rivalry. If both or even one of the teams are down, the only thing that'll prop up that matchup is nostalgia.
I mean, people will live with it. But I can understand why Michigan and Ohio State fans are upset.
Last edited by a moderator: