How much would you estimate it costs Penn State's program if .....let's say they beat Bowling Green.....and don't get into the playoff due to a weak schedule.......since we are talking about money.
SIAP- Futures schedule announced
- Thread starter PSU95alum
- Start date
So ....you are saying strength of schedule does not factor in to who is voted in to the playoff?
In hard dollars, nothing, since all post-season football revenue is pooled by the Big Ten and split evenly among the member schools.
Once, the series with Pitt is over, PSU will have a schedule that, in concept, is similar to most top programs, subject to the vagaries of its opponents that year.
Awesome. We're joining the Mountain West Conference!!!
We're not playing the good MWC teams, mind you. We're not even playing the average MWC teams. We're playing the dregs. In games not played against each other, Nevada & SJSU were a combined 4-19 in 2017. WOW!
We're not playing the good MWC teams, mind you. We're not even playing the average MWC teams. We're playing the dregs. In games not played against each other, Nevada & SJSU were a combined 4-19 in 2017. WOW!
Sure it does, but most of it comes from the conference schedule. Bama played a bad FSU team and three tomato cans. Oklahoma, OSU and two tomato cans.
Clemson and Georgia are in a different situation because each has an OOC rivalry game. They also each only have eight conference games. Of the remaining three, both scheduled a marquee game (Auburn and ND respectively) and two tomato cans.
Not if you win. Go 12-0 and strength of schedule means squat. Go 11-1 in the Big 10 and it still means squat. Play three tough OOC games, lose one and then lose one in conference and you’re out of the playoffs.
Lining up 2 garbage MWC teams among our OOC games is pathetic. It just is.
Our peers (U-M/Wisky/OSU):
(1) are playing high-profile neutral site OOC games (vs. Florida, Alabama, TCU),
(2) have better OOC home-and-homes (LSU, Notre Dame, Oklahoma), and
(3) their buy games are better than ours.
How the hell do we trail them in all 3 metrics?
Cincinnati, Navy, SMU, Tulsa and UCF aren't typically National Title contenders, but they are typically higher-tier teams in a halfway decent conference (American). U-M and OSU are able to get those guys into town for buy games. Meanwhile, our "best" buy games are Nevada and San Jose State, literally 2 of the 3 worst teams in a conference (Mountain West) that is inferior to the American!
Forgive me, I just want to see somewhat compelling football games every once in awhile in the OOC. We don't deliver very often there. Even Virginia Tech. They're good but hardly consistently elite - 1 10 win season in their last 6.
Last edited:
Baylor made the mistake of having an OOC of three tomato cans, that was it. I mean, who plays Buffalo at Buffalo?
I understand the strategy that you and Art put forth.
Did you want Baylor to "just snap their fingers" to make a better game happen?
A. PSU doesn't get to choose whether it can play a neutral site game;
B. Once the mistake of the Pitt Series is over with, PSU's future OOC schedules will look similar to the others. Michigan is an occasional outlier in that some years they manage two schedule two marquee OOC games. They also have larger benefactors than PSU does.
C. What the fvck is a "buy" game?
Now go back to fvcking yourself.
That's not snapping fingers, That's just a lazy, incompetent, or stupid athletic director. No team gets paid $4mm-$6mm to play at Buffalo.
Art ....you and AWS......seem to have the opinion that Penn State is following the strategy of other big dogs in scheduling. You also both project that this is the correct path. I respect your opinions. You both have facts to back you up. That does not mean that there won't come a day that PSU's scheduling keeps them out of the National Playoff. When that day happens .........all the tomato can victories.....and dollars in the bank will not make me feel better.
There are not many options for OOC games. I believe Franklin puts us in a positive perspective to play for a national title.
The only positive way to appeal to both sides is to create a power rivalry such as Miami, Georgia, or Notre Dame, schools that have a history with us. The problem with that is even if you play a name school they can beat you when they are having a bad year.
Schools like Arizona, Georgia Tech, and Oregon St. are examples why power schools don't want to play PSU, and on the other end Tennessee, Texas, and USC losses didn't help PSU's remaining season.
You can't have it all, the fear factor works both ways.
The only positive way to appeal to both sides is to create a power rivalry such as Miami, Georgia, or Notre Dame, schools that have a history with us. The problem with that is even if you play a name school they can beat you when they are having a bad year.
Schools like Arizona, Georgia Tech, and Oregon St. are examples why power schools don't want to play PSU, and on the other end Tennessee, Texas, and USC losses didn't help PSU's remaining season.
You can't have it all, the fear factor works both ways.
"Buy game" = home game that we get in exchange for paying opponent $, not a home-and-home.
I'm sure you've heard the phrase --- or maybe I'm using it incorrectly. If I am, I eagerly anticipate your lecture, similar to your (incorrect) lecture about Nielsen ratings last week.
Anyway, the following is a fact. We have TWO (one, fine, but two?) OOC games now scheduled in 2020 against teams:
(1) that won 3 or less games in 2017,
(2) while playing in a low-tier conference (MWC), and
(3) are both further away from State College, PA than Caracas, Venezuela (e.g., these foes have absolutely zero regional appeal).
That 2020 schedule is on the heels of scheduling both Idaho & Buffalo in 2019. That's an FCS team and an average-at-best MAC team.
Both Buffalo and Moscow, Idaho ARE closer to State College, PA than Caracas, however. Those two schools do have that going for them.
Scheduling does have a bearing on selection for the playoff, but it's more the conference schedule that a school can't control rather than its OOC. An even with the OOC, who can predict how good the opposition will be? I'm going to guess that Bama didn't think that FSU would be a .500 team this past season (I'm not sure that they looked much past the $5mm they received for playing the game). . For whatever reason Bama made it to the playoffs, it wan't its OOC schedule. If anything, this past season demonstrated, that losses were a primary factor. The tougher the OOC schedule, the more likely a(nother) loss.
No, I've never heard the phrase "buy game" so you can go back to fvcking yourself.
I'm going to further disseminate your stupidity? Sorry, you do quite an adequate job of that yourself. One of the few, I'm told, shithead.
I’m not sure what people want the schedule to look like. Yes we play Nevada and San Jose State that year, but we also play Va Tech, who will likely be a top 10 team at that point. We also play Michigan, Ohio State, Michigan State, Nebraska (with Scott Frost), NW, and Iowa. If that’s not a good enough resume, then we need to get out of the Big 10 apparently. Any team would lose at least one of those games and now some posters want there to be one or two more tough games. I’m not sure I understand the logic.
That is for two reasons. The Big 12 was very weak that year and had no Chanpionship game. That is what really hurt them.
Did it stop Bama last year...or Washington the year before that?
I would take Colorado State and Fresno State in a second.
Those schools also played real games unlike us. Alabama played FSU. Georgia played ND & Geogia Tech. Oklahoma and Ohio State played each other
If we played "legit top 10 team on paper" and Colorado State + a MAC school I wouldn't complain. If we're going to play Va Tech, BGSU & Nevada I'm not happy. You can be happy with it but not everyone is going to be
Ohio State and it didn’t even take three tough OOC games, it only took one loss to one tough OOC team. Two losses have tossed everyone out.
Ummm--you said 3 tough OOC games and lose one which would mean 2 quality wins which they didn't get...try again
I also said two losses would knock anyone out. With our conference schedule plus three tough OOC games, no way we don’t lose two games (as would anyone).
You can thank Fester for scheduling ASWP home-and-home. At least Barbour is fixing that mistake.
Alabama pays Fresno and CSU $1.4mm and $1.5mm respectively. PSU pays its tomato cans half that. The difference covers the cost of two or three of the ten sports in which PSU fields teams and Alabama doesn't. The difference between what Saban makes and what Franklin gets paid covers most of the rest.
We will be paying Nevada $1.45MM and San Jose State $1.5MM.
Inflation is a thing, of course, 2020 dollars aren't 2017 dollars. But our paydays to these garbage MWC teams aren't too far off what Alabama paid their MWC opponents. Their MWC opponents were actually somewhat decent football teams, as well (for instance, they weren't a combined 4-19 in 2017 in games not played against each other).
http://www.rgj.com/story/sports/col...-1-45-million-play-penn-state-2020/333842002/
http://www.fbschedules.com/2018/02/san-jose-state-penn-state-2020/
Okay but I was replying to 3 tough OOC games. I assure you if Penn State (or anyone else) beat Oklahoma & USC but lost to Alabama then went 8-1 in conference play but was left out a of thee title game they'd be rewarded for the schedule. Assuming that loss isn't to a Rutgers or Maryland which it couldn't be with the tiebreaker rules.
This is a great schedule. I'd take it all day. It's the best you're going to get when you need 7 home games.
Not based on the playoff rules that have been in place....two losses and you’re out. And any team that would schedule USC, Oklahoma and Bama OOC would have to be considered idiots especially with our Big 10 schedule.
Two losses without enough quality wins to make up for it or bad losses and you're out. That's what we've learned. You can't get blown out by Iowa or Michigan when you lose 2 games.
Yes, scheduling Bama, USC & Oklahoma would be insane but I don't think anyone's legitimately asking for that. All we have to do is schedule better MWC teams. 1 legit opponent (not Pitt) from a power 5 or ND, one quality team from CUSA/AAC/MWC and then throw in a MAC team or Army. That's reasonable. Nevada and SJSU aren't cutting it IMO
Similar threads
