Out of Town Scoreboard

Some thoughts on other games over the weekend:

-Why on earth would Ohio State schedule Navy the week before USC, without a tune-up game in between? Perhaps it will work to their benefit this week, but my guess it will just beat them up for the big game this week. I wouldn't be surprised to see a repeat of last years USC domination.
-Ron Zook seems to have returned Illinois to the level they were at before he got there: wildly inconsistent and terribly disappointing on a regular basis. Missouri was supposed to be rebuilding this year, with only four starters back on defense, and a new skill position players on offense. The Illini made them look like national championship contenders.
-Maybe Dan Hawkins should consider coaching the intramural team.
-I wonder if Keith Nichol is kicking himself now. With Bradford's injury, he could be starting for a top five team now, instead of being a backup on a mid-level Big Ten team.
-Georgia's loss and LSU struggle against a team that was 0-12 last year illustrates why I've always felt the SEC "dominance" is overrated. Accumulated miles have a huge effect on college teams, and SEC teams rarely travel outside of their conference footprint.
-FBS teams went 34-3 against FCS teams this weekend. 2 of the 3 losses came from ACC teams. Duke lost to Richmond, the defending FCS national champion, and Virginia lost to William & mary, who was 7-4 last year. If Al Groh's job wasn't in danger before, it probably is now. With the Miami / FSU game to come tomorrow, the ACC is 4-6 on the opening weekend. Looks like another year of somewhat mediocre football from the nation's best basketball league.
-Watching the Tulsa / Tulane game Friday night (yes, I'm an addict), it occurred to me that a 2 for 1 scheduling deal with Tulane wouldn't be the worst thing for Michigan's future schedules. Tulane would be a step up from FCS teams, they only draw a few thousand fans to their home games in the Superdome, and Michigan fans might be able to fill many of those empty seats. Besides, I know someone who could get me tickets to that game ;-)

UConn?!?

This is a horrible, horrible scheduling development. We have contracted for a home and home with UConn. This is the "big name" opponent we were lining up for the 2010 opener. Uconn, who has played only 107 games in I-A (FBS) and is 54-53 in those games. UConn, who just moved up to I-A in 2000 and who as recently as 1999 was playing Ivy and Patriot League opponents. UConn, whose new stadium has a capacity of 40,000. UConn, who has an alltime record of 7-20 against Delaware and 8-19 against Holy Cross. UConn, whose most common opponents all time are UMass, Maine, New Hampshire, Rhode Island, and Yale.

UConn is not a "major" college football program. They are barely above a MAC team prestige wise. There is absolutely no upside to Michigan to playing such a team, and there is no reason why we should be doing a home and home with this team, especially considering what we supposedly have passed on before. This matchup won't be a game of the week, and will barely get any mention on the college football shows. Especially galling about this development is that we are probably giving up several million dollars of revenue to play a game at UConn.

We should be playing a top ten non-conference team every year. Since Notre Dame has not been that type of program in the last 15 years or so, we should be looking to play teams like Texas, LSU, Georgia, Florida,Oklahoma, and the like. If we don't want to schedule tough games like that along with Notre Dame, with should look at programs like Virginia Tech, Auburn, or any of the various Pac Ten teams we have played in the past (Cal, UCLA, Stanford, Washington, Oregon).

Ideally, I'd like to see us play Notre Dame at home one year, in South Bend the next year, and then take a two year break, where we can schedule a home and home with an elite team such as those listed above. We could then add lower level BCS teams, as additional games in years when we don't have big home games.

Huh?

ESPN and other sources are reporting that Michigan and Notre Dame have agreed to a 20 year extension of their rivalry from 2011 through 2031. Just a little over a week ago, Notre Dame athletic director told an Alabama newspaper that Notre Dame was going to take a break from Michigan while he was talking about a possible Alabama-Notre Dame series. A few days later Bill Martin told the Detroit News that Michigan and Notre Dame were exploring the idea of "taking a break". Martin wanted to switch the years that Notre Dame was in Ann Arbor, so that Michigan could alternate OSU and ND away years. Doing so, however would mean that ND would play USC and UM away in the same year, and they didn't wanted to do that.
So now, after ND announced a new series with Oklahoma, this news comes out.

What gives? Was this all just a negotiating ploy? If so, by which side? There seemed to be pretty positive reaction from the Internet fan bases of each school to the idea of taking a break. Were these comments from both sides just a test to see how the fans would react? Was there some pressure brought by big donors to keep the series? Has the home-home, away-away problem with the other big rivalry games been solved? Where does this leave the possibility of other big time opponents? Are the Irish still going to take a break in the MSU series?

Personally, I'm a little disappointed. When it looked like the series might take a hiatus, there were a lot of possible opponents floated around message boards and sports talk radio (Texas, Georgia, Tennessee, Miami to name a few). I hope this doesn't mean we are stuck with ND, a lower level BCS team and two MAC teams every year. I want to see some other big timers coming to A2.

Just a thought: No word on if ND will play two straight games at UM or vice versa, but perhaps they agreed to do that in exchange for Michigan playing this game in October or November in a few years to help ND balance their schedule.