B1G SOS commitment....
- Thread starter Ten Thousan Marbles
- Start date
Yes, can the B1G roll out a code of conduct for officials? They surely need something.
I guess it's a good thing we have Pitt on the schedule or we'd be in violation of this for the next couple of seasons. I anxiously await our next scheduling announcement because right now there isn't a single non-conference game I'm excited about until 2020 against VT. So we can all look forward to that. We can no longer hide behind the sanctions as a reason for watered-down scheduling. For some reason I fear I'll be disappointed and we'll end up with a home and home against Syracuse or something.
Last edited:
App State is FBS now. And they are on our schedule in 2018. The prior year (2017) we face powerhouse Georgia State. I can hardly contain myself. I'm sure the attendance and excitement for those games will be unparalleled.
Speak for yourself. I've been waiting 15 years for a rematch with Pitt. It's not Alabama, but it's at least better than some of the crap schedules that Curley and Paterno would put together in the 00's.
App State is FBS now. And they are on our schedule in 2018. The prior year (2017) we face powerhouse Georgia State. I can hardly contain myself. I'm sure the attendance and excitement for those games will be unparalleled.
It's not like Illinois, Minnesota, Indiana, Purdue, Rutgers are much better. The big ten needs to ban almost half their own teams to be consistent.
I plan on buying my tickets through the NLC, although if I buy them online I probably will be just as likely to be next to another PSU fan as I am a Pitt one.
Delanay is 100% right on this. This is awesome for fans. You're paying $500 -- $1000 to go to the Beav for a game. No more Buffalos. The cupcake games cost the B10 too much in TV/sponsor revenue. Maybe the teams lose that 7th home game but the revenue model is different now anyway. Plus if you're scheduling a great opponent you make plenty of money sharing the gate at their stadium now.
Having a playoff (which will almost certainly become a bigger playoff eventually) means you can schedule that tough OOC opponent early, lose that game and still have a chance at the playoffs. The best teams will schedule tough now.
Having a playoff (which will almost certainly become a bigger playoff eventually) means you can schedule that tough OOC opponent early, lose that game and still have a chance at the playoffs. The best teams will schedule tough now.
The B1G's new policy will not change the way Penn State schedules opponents. The policy is NO FCS schools and 1 OOC game must be a Power 5 school. Penn State has always used this formula for scheduling. The FCS teams that may have showed up on the schedule happened because schools backed out and it was hard to get a FBS team to get on the schedule for a Penn State home game. Our OOC schedule this season is bad but that is a product of the sanctions and Rutgers had to be removed from our OOC schedule so Buffalo or San Diego St had to be added. If SDSU was the school, it was actually a good addition as they could cause some problems. ARMY would meet the SEC requirement of a Power 5 school .
The B1G needs to wake up with their new policy and 9 B1G games. They need to release the football schedules 8 years in advance maybe more. It appears that the B1G has released schedules up to and including 2019. Schools schedule more than 4 years in advance. When VT is on the schedule Penn State may only have 6 home games. The years that you only have 4 B1G home games means Penn State has to schedule all 3 OOC games as home games. Penn State has 3 open slots to schedule 2 games for 2019 and these games will be MAC level teams to get 7 home games. My biggest problem with the 9 B1G games is that this eliminated the chance to have one really good OOC game and one decent OOC game with 2 MAC level games. Coaches will want 2 pretty much guaranteed wins before conference schedule so I don't see one big name OOC with one decent OOC game and one MAC level game.
. The B1G needs to wake up with their new policy and 9 B1G games. They need to release the football schedules 8 years in advance maybe more. It appears that the B1G has released schedules up to and including 2019. Schools schedule more than 4 years in advance. When VT is on the schedule Penn State may only have 6 home games. The years that you only have 4 B1G home games means Penn State has to schedule all 3 OOC games as home games. Penn State has 3 open slots to schedule 2 games for 2019 and these games will be MAC level teams to get 7 home games. My biggest problem with the 9 B1G games is that this eliminated the chance to have one really good OOC game and one decent OOC game with 2 MAC level games. Coaches will want 2 pretty much guaranteed wins before conference schedule so I don't see one big name OOC with one decent OOC game and one MAC level game.
Are Akron, Kent State, and Appalachian State OK? They are already on the schedule.
This might be forced us into playing Pitt every year.
BTW I disagree about revenues. There wasn't a lot of interest in some of the bad games when ticket prices were the same for all games, but now those games are the most affordable. $115 for Rutgers this year. Are you kidding me?
Lay off the Buffalos! Next thing you know you got PETA protests outside the stadium.
Just switch from the UB to Colorado and preserve the Buffalo.
The B1G's new policy will not change the way Penn State schedules opponents. The policy is NO FCS schools and 1 OOC game must be a Power 5 school. Penn State has always used this formula for scheduling. The FCS teams that may have showed up on the schedule happened because schools backed out and it was hard to get a FBS team to get on the schedule for a Penn State home game. Our OOC schedule this season is bad but that is a product of the sanctions and Rutgers had to be removed from our OOC schedule so Buffalo or San Diego St had to be added. If SDSU was the school, it was actually a good addition as they could cause some problems. ARMY would meet the SEC requirement of a Power 5 school
The B1G needs to wake up with their new policy and 9 B1G games. They need to release the football schedules 8 years in advance maybe more. It appears that the B1G has released schedules up to and including 2019. Schools schedule more than 4 years in advance. When VT is on the schedule Penn State may only have 6 home games. The years that you only have 4 B1G home games means Penn State has to schedule all 3 OOC games as home games. Penn State has 3 open slots to schedule 2 games for 2019 and these games will be MAC level teams to get 7 home games. My biggest problem with the 9 B1G games is that this eliminated the chance to have one really good OOC game and one decent OOC game with 2 MAC level games. Coaches will want 2 pretty much guaranteed wins before conference schedule so I don't see one big name OOC with one decent OOC game and one MAC level game.
The switch to a 9 game conference schedule is a mistake. Adding Indiana, Illinois, Minnesota, or Purdue as your 9th game isn't some great accomplishment. Would rather see 8 conference games and more flexibility (with higher standards) for OOC games.
Unfortunately it doesn't stop anyone from scheduling Western Kentucky or MTSU.
Doesn't do much other than eliminate Youngstown State.
Im stoked about the WVU series even though it's forever away but that oughtta be a good time.
Doesn't do much other than eliminate Youngstown State.
Im stoked about the WVU series even though it's forever away but that oughtta be a good time.
Why will PSU still need 7 home games every year when the B1G schools see their revenues jump at least 30-40% in the next contract?
1. Fans want 7 home games
2. They have to pay back $60 million they gave away
I recall Alabama asking out of a series against us because they were not very good at the time. Joe graciously let them off the hook and played them when we were not very good, funny don't you think? Point being it is hard to know if a future matchup will be against "quality" opponents. While it would be fun to schedule some "better" matches in our OOC schedule it is not critical. For example if we were to run the table and win all of our games we would be in the playoffs. Beat OSU and MSU on the road would make that happen. Our conference schedule, most years is pretty daunting - OSU, Michigan, MSU (and a Nebraska, Wisconsin in some years). Granted there are some easy ones (on paper). As for the SEC, look at their OOC ???? Their argument is their league is too difficult. Well "historically" the Big 10 is too difficult as well. True, in recent years, some of the great programs have struggled but the are ALL bouncing back (PSU, Michigan, Nebraska). Add to that the re-birth of MSU and the steadiness of Wisconsin.
In short, it is not necessary to play a BIG time OOC game. It would be fun though. Actually, playing PITT every year (after conference play, see: OSU/MIch) would be great fun as well.
A few reasons:
1.) All of our conference foes will see that same increase. If you haven't noticed, college football is an arms race and if you aren't racing, you aren't winning.
2.) Simple cost benefit. Do you think it's with sacrificing $8 million in PROFIT to have only 6 home games? The cost is $8 million, what's the benefit? Is that benefit worth it? I don't see it.
3.) The larger centre county region. PSU makes about $8 million per home game, but the region also benefits immensely. Again, whats the benefit and is that worth removing millions form the centre county economy just to play pitt?
The simple fact is that when you take Pitt out of the equation everything fits perfectly. PSU can schedule 2 low level FBS schools who do not require a return game and and a home game with a P5 team in years with only 4 conference home games. In years with 5 conference home games, PSU can schedule 2 low FBS teams and play the return game with the P5 team. Fans are happy because PSU gets to schedule home and homes with schools like Bama, ND, VT, etc again.
The ONLY way sacrificing a 7th home game makes sense is if the Pitt game is worth that much and I hate to tell you, it's not. I respect that for some percentage of the PSU fnbase it feels that way, but no logical person would value it that much and no fiscally responsible business person would ever even consider it.
If PSU costs itself a playoff appearance with its ridiculous insistence on seven home games no matter how crappy the competition (and I believe that will happen at least once, if not more), then I'd say this is a horrible policy for the program in the long run. In theory PSU would take another look at this, especially if revenue is jumping overall. However, I have serious doubts that anyone making those decisions has any vision or is enough of a leader to think beyond the end of their nose. I am slightly more optimistic now that we have Barbour, because she came from a place that is probably less inclined to stick its head in the sand and cling to the way they did things yesterday. However, it is a lot of inertia to overcome and nothing will change. Now we just wait for some day when we get left out of the playoffs, and wait for the message boards to erupt that we were "robbed," all the while ignoring that we opened the season with three home games against Old Dominion, Eastern Michigan, and Buffalo. (And probably at some point five years prior to that turned down a home and away with a major conference opponent in order to preserve the sacred seventh home game.)
Excepting that our Big Ten brethren will be doing the same thing....for the same reason. At least the good teams who draw well will. And it's unlikely given the new insistence on one top OOC opponent that we will be facing a home schedule as you note.
first off...The simple fact is that with 9 conference games and one required P5 game, PSU will be playing 10 games against P5 opponents including OSU, UM, MSU every year along with Nebraska, Iowa, and or Wisky, etc most years. In addition, PSU will play and beat the best team from the west division if they are seeking a playoff spot. PSU will control their own destiny EVERY SINGLE YEAR with such a schedule and the SoS for such will be on par with others. An undefeated PSU team with wins over OSU, MSU, UM, 6 other BT teams, and the west division champion isn;t going to be left out. That's 11 P5 games, more than PSU has had scheduled in the past. If PSU loses a game, that's on them.
Second, your hypothetical is not only ridiculous, but completely uninformed. Buffalo, Old Dominion, and Eastern Michigan won't happen BECAUSE IT CAN'T. the BigTen rules state that at least one game much be against a P5 conference team. If you are going to join the discussion so passionately, please try to at least educate yourself on the basic facts first.
Third, this is something that people fail to understand. The 9th conference game and the additional P5 game requirement is going to INCREASE PSU's SoS compared to what it was in the past. Adding the 9th conference game replaces one of the 4 OOC games we've seen in the past. Because it can't replace the the P5 OOC game and the other new rule that prevents us from scheduling an FCS school, it's actually going to replace the FCS opponent we've seen on the schedule or a non-P5 team like Akron, Kent St, UMass, etc.
At the end of the day, the 4 OOC games we have been used to are going to be 1 BigTen team, One other P5 team, and 2 MAC level teams. That's the same or stronger than PSU's schedule has been. Look at PSU's 2010 schedule when we played Bama. Hard schedule right? Kent, Youngstown, and Temple were the other 3 schools, but now that won't be possible. Replace one of those 3 with a BigTen west school and the schedule gets harder. Playing 7 home games a year in NO WAY impacts that. PSU can still schedule Bama, VT, Oklahoma, Oregon, or whomever the hell they want in addition to the other 10 P5 games they will play if they are in the hunt for a playoff spot. Frankly, you don't have a clue what you are talking about.
Last edited:
Not only is it unlikely, it's impossible. There are only 3 OOC games starting next year and one MUST, per conference rules, be a P5 team. He listed 3 non-P5 teams.... it's pretty clear he doesn't understand the basic parameters here.
You're definitely right about Barbour. Putting your employer in hock for 100 years is not "the way they did things yesterday."
Wonder if the Georgia State game is payback for us being able to use their facilities for a campApp State is FBS now. And they are on our schedule in 2018. The prior year (2017) we face powerhouse Georgia State. I can hardly contain myself. I'm sure the attendance and excitement for those games will be unparalleled.
I'd like to see PSU play Pitt every year. It'll be a fun game. Until I see PSU scheduling the Bamas and Georgias of the world again, then I'm not going to sweat who we 'could' be playing each year instead of Pitt. If it's between a rotation of BC, UVA, Cuse, and WVU as our P5 opponent vs. just playing Pitt each year, I'd take Pitt every single time.
Well, to each his own. I frankly would rather have an annual kidney stone, than play Pitt every year.
