2007 Schedule update...
...or lack thereof. So far, the only things we know are that the EMU game will be moved into the Oct. 6 spot, leaving the bye week on the first week of the season. Who is going to fill in that spot? Not Vanderbilt. Thus far, nothing official has been stated since the Vanderbilt attempt was apparently quashed, though the rumor is Stanford might fit that spot (keep in mind Jim Harbaugh is their new HC).
Who would I like to see fill that spot? So glad you asked. Since Bill Martin has deluded himself into thinking that Michigan needs eight home games to not go bankrupt (we just barely survived this year, of course), it will have to be someone who won't require a straight up home-and-home. Let's ignore the fact that a big-time opponent would deserve a night game in AA (another thing Martin refuses to do, though we won't get into that), and bring in more money than your standard MAC-level opponent, on top of getting more exposure (national TV, etc.), to follow the framework that Mr. Martin has so graciously provided us. He probably wouldn't go for a 2-for-1 setup either, but for the purpose of argument, I'll allow it.
Among teams that wouldn't require a straight-up home & home are mid-to-lower-level BCS conference teams (not as far as rank in their conference, but overall "prestige" to cop a term from EA Sports), or non-BCS opponents. I'd prefer the best choices among this pool.
Wishlist:
1) Rutgers - Team on the rise, probable 2-for-1.
2) South Carolina - SEC team, beatable but decent, 2-for-1.
3) Boise State - They'll be good again, 2-for-1.
4) Clemson - Good for most of last year, likely 2-for-1.
5) Cincinnati - Could be much better with Kelly, we could beat him twice in a row. Money transaction.
6) Stanford - Harbaugh, etc. Probably money transaction only.
7) TCU - decent team, bowl winners in '06, money transaction.
8) San Jose State - Good team, up-and-coming, money transaction.
Allow me to cry while I realize that we will probably play a MAC team, and probably not even a good one.
Who would I like to see fill that spot? So glad you asked. Since Bill Martin has deluded himself into thinking that Michigan needs eight home games to not go bankrupt (we just barely survived this year, of course), it will have to be someone who won't require a straight up home-and-home. Let's ignore the fact that a big-time opponent would deserve a night game in AA (another thing Martin refuses to do, though we won't get into that), and bring in more money than your standard MAC-level opponent, on top of getting more exposure (national TV, etc.), to follow the framework that Mr. Martin has so graciously provided us. He probably wouldn't go for a 2-for-1 setup either, but for the purpose of argument, I'll allow it.
Among teams that wouldn't require a straight-up home & home are mid-to-lower-level BCS conference teams (not as far as rank in their conference, but overall "prestige" to cop a term from EA Sports), or non-BCS opponents. I'd prefer the best choices among this pool.
Wishlist:
1) Rutgers - Team on the rise, probable 2-for-1.
2) South Carolina - SEC team, beatable but decent, 2-for-1.
3) Boise State - They'll be good again, 2-for-1.
4) Clemson - Good for most of last year, likely 2-for-1.
5) Cincinnati - Could be much better with Kelly, we could beat him twice in a row. Money transaction.
6) Stanford - Harbaugh, etc. Probably money transaction only.
7) TCU - decent team, bowl winners in '06, money transaction.
8) San Jose State - Good team, up-and-coming, money transaction.
Allow me to cry while I realize that we will probably play a MAC team, and probably not even a good one.
This entry was posted by Tim, on
Tuesday, January 30, 2007.
You can leave your response.
