Is Rich Eisen right? Or is it arrogance?
Rich Eisen is a Michigan alum. Michigan is his team. He doesn't mince words about that. So he may be biased in this. But, he may not be. Have a listen, and see what you think:
TV ratings from last regular season appear to be saying the same thing, that Nationally speaking, Michigan is the big draw in the BIG10:
If some rivalries were re-aligned in the BIG10 I don't know If I would mind. Say if Michigan didn't play Michigan St every year any more, but just once in a while, I don't think it would matter to me. The Ohio St game, on the other hand, should never go away.
So what do you think, is he right, or is it arrogance?
I am particularly curious what the few Ohio St fans that comment on her have to say about Rich Eisen's view.
The top 12 most watched games, I assume that is regular season? If it included post season, I would guess Michigan played in four of the top seven.
Michigan played Iowa in the champ game. It does not specify whether the GA/BAMA game was the conference championship or the national title game. My guess is National title game. Either way this includes postseason.
It does not include the playoffs, otherwise Michigan vs. Georgia (16.5M) would be listed higher than Michigan - Iowa (11.6M).
Ok, That makes sense. Just exclusive of playoffs. 3 games are excluded, so the ga/Bama game is the SEC championship and obviously Iowa/mich is the BTCG. It really is incredible that UM/OSU drew the largest crowd. Simply incredible.
I think Conference Championships are considered part of the regular season. I think the post season is the Bowl Games.
Have been saying what Eisen just said for decades. I just don't have a radio/podcast show. M is the biggest game for EVERY B1G team each year. That is the game each team circles as their crown jewel if they can win it. Which means we get every teams best shot. Every. Year. Since I have been watching M football (76?). Of course they'd love to beat Ohio, but it just doesn't mean as much. And this fact drives Buckeye fans nuttier than they already were at birth.
Personally, I don't care if he is right or wrong or arrogant. I am all for at least one guy out there touting Michigan. ESPN trots out OSU players and fans. All they do is shit on Michigan every chance they get. I still remember the argument about Michigan's ranking last year in December.
So, my fandom and biased take is Rich is always right.
He’s right!
Say if Michigan didn't play Michigan St every year any more, but just once in a while, I don't think it would matter to me.
Screw that. Michigan needs to play MSU every year. That and the OSU game are always the two that I'm most anxious/fired up about. Sure, there've been too many losses to them recently and they always seem to benefit from shit calls, etc. but that just makes me more anxious to see us crush them the next year. It just wouldn't feel like a real season without them on the schedule.
Imagine some of the bullshit losses we've had to MSU recently, and then imagine one of those losses followed by 3 or 4 years of not getting the chance to play them again. Ugh. Insufferable.
To be fair I wouldn't mind losing the MSU game every year if it meant going 11-1 and beating OSU.
Amen. If given the option of reliving something equal to 2021 in any given season, I’d take it over the unknown (a chance to do better or worse) every time forever … even 30+ years from now as the MSU losses racked up and inevitably led to them overtaking us in the all-time record. Since we’d be dominating OSU and in or just outside the playoffs every year, it would be way less hard than normal to care about MSU.
Dingdingdingding. This is the right answer.
I’d happily lose to MSU a every year if it meant beating OSU. Beating MSU a will never, EVER be as important as beating OSU. Would I rather beat both of them? Of course, and this all is not to say that MSU a isn’t an important game. It’s probably the second most important game in any given year, unless you’ve got PSU, ND or some other top 5 team showing up across the field. But if I could only pick one, I’d pick OSU a hundred times out of a hundred.
OSU is the measuring stick. The definition of a successful season. MSU never has and will never be that.
You have multiple random "a"s in that paragraph. It's weird.
Eh. I'll take Door #3 and go 12-0.
I think MSU needs us MUCH more than we need them. So if we downgraded them to concentrate on some other rivals, that could be helpful. They never have more eyes on them than when they're playing us, and they know it. I'd be cool with it, and with revving up the rivalries with the likes of USC and UCLA. Especially if we end up in different divisions.
MSU needs Michigan more than we need them; absolutely. The rivalry should be played every year and it's a big TV draw such that both teams benefit.
If you want to have more USC and UCLA in the mix, then have Rutgers, MD, Purdue, NW and IL drop off to once every 5 or 6 years. I could see that working out better for Michigan. As it turns out, many of those teams I mention are not played every year so make sure it stays that way. The Little Brown Jug game is not played every year.
I know I'm the only one on this but I don't care about how often we play anyone anymore. The days of college football that we love have been fading for years and is pretty much gone. Rivalries barely exists anymore. And before you say " OSU vs Michigan is the best rivalry" this hasn't been a rivalry in over 25 years. One win doesn't change that. Plus the 2 programs aren't in the same league anymore.
Michigan vs Ohio St is going to stay. It's not just the M and OSU areas that watch it. It's the highest rated regular season game. It is a centerpiece in tv contracts. So it's staying.
Other rivals are open season. The M vs MSU game is not always rated that high as last year. The reason they were so high last season is because it had huge playoff implications. But that's not always going to happen. If MSU was replaced by USC the ratings would be higher year by year. Lincoln Riley would hold the promise of a better team year by year than that Michigan St guy.
It looks like Notre Dame will be joining the BIG10. Making match ups with them could make most BIG10 rivalries disposable--at least as far as tv ratings go.
The only rivalry I personally care about in the BIG10 is M vs OSU. If Michigan's only tough games, their only "rivalries", all year were USC and Ohio St, with occasionally playing MSU, PSU, Wisconsin, and Iowa, I would be completely fine with it.
And I'm not expecting BIG10 suits to be prioritizing rivalry games when they sit down with FOX, ESPN, and the like.
I think the important part for Michigan regarding what Eisen stated about scheduling is fact. Michigan USC/UCLA would be a huge draw for TV for a lot of reasons and it would be hard to resist putting them on the schedule every year. This is actually bad for Michigan's championship aspirations in my opinion. Hopefully we don't have a retread of when Michigan had to play Wisconsin all the time while Ohio State is playing Purdue, is all I'm saying.
I definitely want to see us play UCLA all the time. Those games will be big on TV, it increases our CA exposure for recruiting and I think we will regularly win. USC delivers all that exposure but with, in my view, much more risk that we lose more than if we’d played Generic Big Ten team. That said, Riley’s USC is very much TBD.
Lincoln Riley took his DC with him to USC. So it might be the same ole same ole.
@Gobgoblue hits it on the head.
The arrogance thing is getting all the attention, but the scheduling issue is the real question. If you’re the B1G, how do you work it? How many protected rivalries do you do, and to what degree do you engineer matchups for TV’s benefit?
The M-MSU dynamic becomes problematic because of this. I totally get the people who say it should absolutely be protected, but assuming the B1G eliminates the divisions, we might be about to enter a world where U-M is playing OSU and USC while MSU isn’t playing either. That makes for a pretty distorted conference title race. It’s one thing for Wisconsin to benefit from the divisional imbalance, but quite another for your in-state rival to have a built-in leg up.
But OSU loses quite often to Purdue and rarely to Wisconsin.
It is a strange world.
what can I say, when the bat signal goes up does batman ever NOT answer the call? So here's my 2c:
He's right. That guys brings up the oaken bucket. What, was the brass spitoon out for a polish? was the Illibuck getting a new coat of varnish? Floyd of rosedale getting his prostate checked?
What, have you never heard of them? not shocked b/c if you don't live in those states, no one cares. As soon as the UCS/UCLA news hit, I thought, man, Michigan and OSU will not be playing a lot of road games in the midwest any more. Why? b/c you know they are going to want to send one of them to each coast every year. Lock it in now: M @ UCLA and @ Maryland in even years. @ USC and @ Rutgers in odd years. OSU will have the inverse schedule. Those games get alums in the east engaged and buzz in top recruiting metro areas. Lock in OSU, MSU and PSU of course with 1-2 of them on the road in any given year and Michigan going to Minn to win the jug or to Chambana to give the Illini the red ass will be happening once a decade at most.
User name checks out!!!
No respect for the Bits of Broken Chair?
In my opinion, MSU is not a rivalry. I put OSU, ND and even PSU ahead of MSU. The only reason MSU is a "thing" is the proximity. The "locals" who have no ties to either school get a chance to chime in.
I would put MSU in the same rotation as Minny, NW or Illinois.
This take is ridiculous. Penn State is not a rival, there's no history or bad blood between the schools or states. There is with OSU, MSU, ND, and Minnesota.
What bad blood is there with Minnesota? We are 76-25 all time against them with most of Minnesota's wins coming before 1970. The Little Brown Jug has damn near been a permanent fixture in Ann Arbor over the last five decades. I have never sensed any bad blood between the two schools.
The key word was “or”. We have a history with Minnesota that is 130 years old. We’ve played for the little brown jug for 120 years. Penn State…eh we’ve played a few exciting games against them on occasion over the last 30 years or so, but it’s certainly not historic.
You don't remember that game from nineteen dickety eight when those dandies from the Minny Apple showed up in their raccoon coats and stole our ukuleles?
Look up how the Little Brown Jug originated…
Then, after the whole water bottle debacle, in 1915 Minnesota coach "Cholera Lou" Kaminsky refused to take the field because Michigan's water boy looked "too Irish"
You’d be ignoring a lot of history and if the sight of PJ Fleck doesn’t get your blood boiling I’m not sure what will.
I'm guessing you live out of state.
M/MSU should be played every year. You did notice it was on the list of top-viewed games? That's the only reason needed.
MSU has earned the right to be properly hated as a rival.
M/MSU is a rivalry, but may not be as well recognized nationally as M/ND. M/OSU is at its own tier. I am not sure M/PSU is a rivalry, but sure it will be well watched nationally because the history of the programs.
It’s a rivalry from the PSU perspective because a lot of folks thought it would run roughshod over the B1G. Since joining it is 10-15 vs UM, including a 9 game losing streak from 11/8/1997 - 9/22/2007… toss in Judgment Day and I understand why PSU hates us😂
That 9 game stretch was sweet. "We Own Penn St." chants were always fun.
I think M/MSU has nearly reached the Iron Bowl level nationally. While most people nationally don't have a rooting interest it is two programs that usually field good teams with a lot of bad blood and storylines. If you're looking for a national television game to tune into out of region M/MSU offers a lot more intrigue and entertainment value than most any game you'll find on a given week.
Michigan Rivalries in order of importance IMHO
OSU
MSU
ND
MN (mainly because of the trophy.)
Wisc (last 20 years)
PSU (they are a historic program and in our division realistically ahead of MN)
NW/Purdue/Iowa/IN
IL
Nebraska b/c of 97
USC or any Florida school.
I remember Seth one time talking about in the 50s and 60s, MSU was our biggest rival and the biggest game on the schedule. And that it wasn’t until Bo that Ohio State became our biggest rival. So youre wrong
Well, we need to beat OSU more...
It sure as hell feels like Rich Eisen is right. And that is without my maize and blue colored glasses on. Everyone wants a piece of Michigan because we have a huge following and consistently good TV ratings and we are USUALLY good and sometimes great (not often enough for my liking).
OSU and MSU go without saying. Michigan is certainly both schools' main rival. I'd argue that PSU hates Michigan a tad more than OSU and most of their fans would say Michigan is a bigger rival.
Rich neglected to mention that Wisconsin's main rival is hyped up to be Minnesota. I say bullshit and I agree with Rich here, Wisconsin and its fanbase very likely hates Michigan much more. Same with Minnesota where we play against them for the Little Brown Jug every year. Minnesota wants to take a larger chunk out of Michigan than Wisconsin.
Iowa? There is history there with Hayden Fry and Bo and the games have certainly been intense since Harbaugh arrived. Perhaps Wisconsin is a bigger game for Iowa than Michigan because it's usually down to those two for the B1G West.
Now with USC joining the conference, that is another rival, albeit in Rose Bowl games only. UCLA...meh I don't know about that one. Not enough history yet.
Agreed. With the conference expanding, the non-conf schedule will be shrinking and M won't have many 4-game seasons like this one anymore. TV execs will want to maximize their investment with as many marquee games as possible to keep viewership up.
M really needs to keep recruiting at a high level to stay at a highly competitive level, a lot of people will be watching.
Gopher fans care far more about Wisconsin and Iowa then Michigan. The ax and Floyd are much more important then the jug.