NCAA Football '11-'12

[Berkut]

Dumb, dumb decision.  I hate, hate, hate the fact that Michigan has abandoned its longstanding policy that it won't play Div-1AA schools.  They are playing Alabama at a neutral site in 2012; why not make that kind of game the new tradition?

The dominance of the SEC is going to force everyone to do their best to take on a SEC-like schedule. We are going to see more of this, not less.

Conference games are for establishing SoS, non-conference is for padding the W column, nothing more.

[grumbler]

Dumb, dumb decision.  I hate, hate, hate the fact that Michigan has abandoned its longstanding policy that it won't play Div-1AA schools.  They are playing Alabama at a neutral site in 2012; why not make that kind of game the new tradition?

The dominance of the SEC is going to force everyone to do their best to take on a SEC-like schedule. We are going to see more of this, not less.

Conference games are for establishing SoS, non-conference is for padding the W column, nothing more.

It should be possible to get the W without playing Div-1AA schools, no matter what the SEC does.  Michigan did play AUS in 2007 and Delaware State in 2009, but that was because 2007 was the first year of the new scheduling process and because Oregon State (IIRC) in 2009 couldn't find a way to make the scheduled game with Michigan work.  By February 2009, the Michigan schedule had to be finalized and only DSU would work.  This ASU thing in 2014 is deliberate.    At least in 2007 they scheduled the very best Div-1AA team they could find, ASU having won the 2005 and 2006 Div-1AA championships (as they would again in 2007).  Scheduling this game deliberately in 2014 is bad, dumb, and shameful.

[Eddie Teach]

The dominance of the SEC is going to force everyone to do their best to take on a SEC-like schedule. We are going to see more of this, not less.

Conference games are for establishing SoS, non-conference is for padding the W column, nothing more.

The dominance of the SEC means other conferences need to work harder to establish a strong strength of schedule. It should mean more rather than less incentive to schedule strong out of conference opponents.

Unless you're saying that they'll lose the tiebreakers with SEC teams anyway, in which case playing it safe may be the best bet.

[Berkut]

The dominance of the SEC is going to force everyone to do their best to take on a SEC-like schedule. We are going to see more of this, not less.

Conference games are for establishing SoS, non-conference is for padding the W column, nothing more.

The dominance of the SEC means other conferences need to work harder to establish a strong strength of schedule. It should mean more rather than less incentive to schedule strong out of conference opponents.

Unless you're saying that they'll lose the tiebreakers with SEC teams anyway, in which case playing it safe may be the best bet.

No, I am saying that the SEC "dominates" by playing embarssingly horrible OOC games, playing an extra OOC game, and padds their W/L as a result. This gets them "respect" so they get lots of cash and money, rankings, etc., etc. They win the college football meta-game by doing this better than everyone else, and so now everyone else is going to have to step up their meta-game as well.

Playing tough OOC games does not help, it is a foolish move in the college football meta-game. SoS comes from your conference games. It is how very average SEC teams make it to decent bowl games every year. They get 4 wins against Southeast Louisiana School of Agriculture and Law, then go 3-4 in conference, and people talk about how impressive the SEC is that their middle and lower end teams have 7 or 8 wins. And of course the top end teams crush these "decent" low end SEC teams, which makes THEIR SoS look that much better. And then the mid-ow teams share in their huge BCS bowl game payouts.

It is a formula that the SEC has worked to perfection over the last decade or so, and they will continue to dominate the college football meta game until the other conferences follow suit or force a change in how the game is played. The Big-10/Pac-10 has historically tried to keep the meta-game focused on the actual game, and tried to make it about winning good games rather than winning lots of games, but that has largely failed.

[Barrister]

So Michigan's AD has decided to schedule Appalachian State as the season opener in 2014.  After a series of pretty good moves, this one comes as a shocker.  While he argues (via twitter) that "the opportunity to play again is a good thing. I don't see how it could be a negative" the only conclusion one can draw is that he lived under a rock in 2007.

Who needs (besides Michigan's recruiting rivals) eight months of re-runs of the vids of ASU blocking the field goal for the win in between the end of the 2013 season and the 2014 kickoff?  Michigan doesn't need the revenge game (and if they did, they should have scheduled Toledo instead!  ) and cannot gain anything from beating ASU; ASU is Div-1AA, so is going to be a massive underdog no matter what.

Dumb, dumb decision.  I hate, hate, hate the fact that Michigan has abandoned its longstanding policy that it won't play Div-1AA schools.  They are playing Alabama at a neutral site in 2012; why not make that kind of game the new tradition?

Maybe it's just me, but the idea of a Michigan - Appalachian State rematch sounds pretty good actually.  I mean - if you're going to schedule a cupcake, why not schedule a cupcake you have some history with.

[Berkut]

So Michigan's AD has decided to schedule Appalachian State as the season opener in 2014.  After a series of pretty good moves, this one comes as a shocker.  While he argues (via twitter) that "the opportunity to play again is a good thing. I don't see how it could be a negative" the only conclusion one can draw is that he lived under a rock in 2007.

Who needs (besides Michigan's recruiting rivals) eight months of re-runs of the vids of ASU blocking the field goal for the win in between the end of the 2013 season and the 2014 kickoff?  Michigan doesn't need the revenge game (and if they did, they should have scheduled Toledo instead!  ) and cannot gain anything from beating ASU; ASU is Div-1AA, so is going to be a massive underdog no matter what.

Dumb, dumb decision.  I hate, hate, hate the fact that Michigan has abandoned its longstanding policy that it won't play Div-1AA schools.  They are playing Alabama at a neutral site in 2012; why not make that kind of game the new tradition?

Maybe it's just me, but the idea of a Michigan - Appalachian State rematch sounds pretty good actually.  I mean - if you're going to schedule a cupcake, why not schedule a cupcake you have some history with.

I think grumbler is just annoyed they are scheduling a cupcake to begin with...

[Eddie Teach]

And of course, it's all the SEC's fault. 

[Berkut]

And of course, it's all the SEC's fault. 

What is the SEC's fault?

[Valmy]

And of course, it's all the SEC's fault. 

Nah not the entire SEC's...just Georgia's.

Anyway I feel your pain grumbles.  At least this year Texas has only one true creampuff: Rice.  BYU and UCLA are welcome changes from the crap the AD usually schedules.

[Valmy]

Hey MBM it is another edition of Mack on a Mobile:

http://a1135.g.akamai.net/f/1135/30255/1h/cchannel.download.akamai.com/30255/589/richmedia/mack_brown.mp3

[MadBurgerMaker]

Hey MBM it is another edition of Mack on a Mobile:

http://a1135.g.akamai.net/f/1135/30255/1h/cchannel.download.akamai.com/30255/589/richmedia/mack_brown.mp3

Ahaha The Greg Davis sideways pass academy

[grumbler]

Maybe it's just me, but the idea of a Michigan - Appalachian State rematch sounds pretty good actually.  I mean - if you're going to schedule a cupcake, why not schedule a cupcake you have some history with.

Because there is no upside to playing Div-1AA teams.  There is no "history" of Michigan playing ASU - they've only done that once.  Why not play Army, with whom they have an interesting past history:  Army is one of two teams they could schedule (Cornell not being willing to play Div 1A teams) that actually has a winning record against Michigan, with more than one game played (Army is 5-4 against the Wolverines), and is roughly the equivalent of a MAC team.  Army plays non-series games and has that date open.  Why not against Toledo, whom Michigan has played the once and lost to, in 2009?  They do the same, and have the date open.

Appalachian State makes no sense at all.  Playing Div-1AA teams makes no sense, unless in an emergency. 

[grumbler]

I think grumbler is just annoyed they are scheduling a cupcake to begin with...

A team that is that much of a cupcake, yes, though I understand how the coaches don't want to start off with too tough an opponent.  I personally preferred it when Michigan and Notre dame played the first game of the season against each other.  You always knew what the opener was to be, but neither team was fully ready, and only got fully ready as the game went on.

Starting against Alabama next year is that kind of game.

I also want the Big Ten-Pac Ten challenge to be resumed.  Both conferences have twelve teams now, and it seems a natural.  I know it costs another home game every other year, but it's worth it for the TV rights, I think.

[Eddie Teach]

What is the SEC's fault?

Michigan scheduling Appalachian St. I thought it was obvious from the context. 

[grumbler]

What is the SEC's fault?

Michigan scheduling Appalachian St. I thought it was obvious from the context. 

When Dave Brandon brings in a mascot (and I just feel that crapfest coming in my bones) it will be the SEC's fault, as well.