MAC wants Michigan’s win overturned after reversing course on end of game controversy

Michigan wide receiver JJ Buchanan (6) catches a 47-yard touchdown on a Hail Mary against Western Michigan to win, 13-12, as time expires in the fourth quarter at Michigan Stadium in Ann Arbor on Saturday, Sept. 5, 2026. | USA TODAY Network via Reuters Co Just one full week of college football action is in the books, and one thing has become abundantly clear. This season, there will be lawyers. Beyond what is happening in the SEC between that conference and LSU — where the latest litigation includes a threat from the conference to kick the school out, citing a lack of institutional control — we have a development in the wake of Saturday night’s stunning ending between Michigan and Western Michigan. In a statement from Mid-American Conference commissioner Dr. Jon Steinbrecher, citing “further study and investigation,” the MAC has submitted “formal appeals to the NCAA FBS Oversight Committee and the College Football Playoff.” Specifically, the MAC asserts the following: After further study and investigation, it is now evident that replay protocol was not properly followed in determining whether time remained on the game clock at the conclusion of the Western Michigan vs. Michigan football game. The established replay protocol requires that the game clock displayed on the program feed be used in determining whether time remained. Instead, the Big Ten Conference replay crew relied upon the clock feed embedded within its replay system. As a result, one second was placed back on the game clock and an additional play was awarded. This was not a judgment regarding the proper amount of time to place on the clock. It was an error in the application of the established replay protocol governing this specific end-of-game timing situation. Had the protocol been properly followed and the program-feed clock been used, no additional play would have been awarded, and Western Michigan would have won the game, 12–7. Previously, the Big Ten released a statement supporting the decision to put one second back on the game clock, referencing “a side-by-side view of the play and the game clock, using a direct shot of the game clock in the stadium” that was used in reaching that decision to put one second back on the clock, allowing Michigan one last chance at converting a Hail Mary. Which they did. In a letter sent to the FBS Oversight Committee, Dr. Steinbrecher asserts on behalf of the conference that an improper protocol was followed, writing at length: Rather than relying upon the designated game clock displayed on the program feed, the Big Ten replay crew relied upon a separate clock embedded within its replay system. The two clock feeds were not synchronized. The game clock displayed on the program feed showed that the clock had expired. The clock embedded within the replay system, however, showed time remaining. Despite the protocol expressly requiring replay officials to rely solely upon the game clock displayed on the program feed, the replay crew utilized the unsynchronized replay-system clock and restored time to the game clock. That decision resulted in Michigan being awarded one additional play. On that play, Michigan scored a touchdown, changing the outcome of the game from a 12–7 Western Michigan victory to a 13–12 Michigan victory. This is not simply a disagreement over the proper amount of time to place on the clock, nor is it a judgment concerning an officiating call. It is a failure to follow an established and specific replay protocol designed expressly to govern end-of-half timing situations. The MAC Commissioner then asks that the Committee recognize Western Michigan as the “actual winner” of the game, 12-7, and that further action be taken to reflect that determination in “NCAA records, rankings, postseason consideration, and any other appropriate NCAA purposes.” A similar letter was sent to General Rich Clark, the Executive Director of the College Football Playoff. Over the weekend, Western Michigan President Russ Kavalhuna and head coach Lance Taylor appeared to accept the decision at a press conference. Kavalhuna stated that he did not “discern anything unfair or untoward” during the process, citing his background as a prosecutor. “I will say I’ve looked into this pretty closely, and I used to be a federal prosecutor. I don’t discern anything unfair or untoward in this process. Can the process be improved by having what the viewing public sees as the same as what the reviewing officials see? Maybe. Frankly, that’s not for me to decide. “Our students and our coach and our university live in a world where we don’t always get what we want. That’s an opportunity for us to show that, unlike what we see a lot in our society, where we point fingers at someone else and we say that what happened to us was bad because of someone else, even if it was, we know that those people exist in our lives, and we also know that the people we want on our teams and we want in our houses of worship and in our neighborhoods, they’re the kind of people who say, ‘Man, that really hurt, but we’re stronger together. We’re going to move forward. We can take this pain and use it to galvanize strength.” President Kavalhuna struck a different tone on Tuesday, calling the MAC’s actions “important.” “Some have read our actions as weak. However, supporting student-athletes and their growth during a time of adversity is strength. Being bitter doesn’t make you better and this should not be mistaken for weakness or agreement. We can show respect for the game while also asking serious questions; I’ve done both, and I’ll keep doing both.” Will this appeal be successful? While college football history is filled with controversial endings, changing the outcome of a game would be an “extraordinary” act, as noted by Dr. Steinbrecher: I recognize that the Oversight Committee does not ordinarily alter results recorded on the field. Nevertheless, the circumstances of this game are extraordinary. The final outcome was directly affected by a replay officiating error resulting from the failure to follow an established and specific protocol governing precisely this type of end-of-half timing situation. Happy college football season, folks.

Read it at SB Nation ↗

← Front page