2019 OOC

[Quack 12]

Actually, the FCS team wins every time. Money is a big consideration for FCS teams, and many of those programs couldn't survive without playing body-bag road games. 

[Scscsc89]

Cut these games out, get better games, more money & subsidize these programs NOT to play them.

 

[Quack 12]

1 hour ago, Scscsc89 said:

Cut these games out, get better games, more money & subsidize these programs NOT to play them.

That's a very altruistic idea, but 'Bama isn't going to give the Citadel a red cent if they aren't assured an almost certain "W." 

 

[Scscsc89]

Yeah I don’t think Bama is the biggest problem here

altruism has nothing to do with it.  Those programs can wither & die for all I care — I just want better football games

[Quack 12]

I didn't say Alabama was the biggest problem, but they're certainly one of the most obvious symptoms. There are only a handful of P5 schools that would have a legitimate chance against 'Bama, yet the Tide play three or four games against G5 or FCS schools every year. I can appreciate USC, and UCLA and the B1G not playing FCS schools, but that's not a reasonable expectation for most Pac-12 teams  - especially when most of the rest of the P5 schools are doing it -  and that has nothing to do with competing for a playoff spot.

The B1G can make its no-FCS rule because there 48 G-5 schools east of Colorado. There are but 12 in the west.

Which is Western Michigan more likely to do:

Schedule a game at the Big House - a 2-hour bus ride - for a $1.8M payout.

or

Schedule at game a Reser Stadium for $400K, less airfare, hotel - and a 90 minute bus ride. That's never gonna happen on a consistent basis.

If you want a closed system, you have one. It's called the NFL. 

 

[Scscsc89]

Why can’t I have two?  

It’d more efficient, entertaining, competitive & we know there’s more than enough $ for it.

[PAC MAN]

Got the Norte Dame games on and that's it for this year's OOC schedule.

As for playing FCS schools, I'd prefer the MWC schools over playing FCS schools.  But some FCS schools are better than some G5 programs and CU is playing North Dakota State in 2024 so I don't have an issue with that.  CU is still scheduling the likes of Northern Colorado and Colgate in future years.  That's three FCS schools scheduled through 2030 so that isn't too bad IMO.

Playing demanding OOC scheduling could be good for recruiting purposes and I imagine CU will see an uptick in that given the schedules that CU will be playing in the 2020s.

[PAC MAN]

CBS Sports...puke!

 

[PAC MAN]

Utah @ BYU on ESPN

UCLA @ Cinncinnati on ESPN too.

Kent State @ ASU....only ASU diehards will be watching that game.

[Scscsc89]

 

[PAC MAN]

I'm not sure you could fault WSU for scheduling UNCO...that school hasn't done as good at the FCS level compared to their D2 days.  The reason why they are FCS is that there are quite a few D2 schools in Colorado and UNCO wanted to stick out as that niche D1 school on Colorado.  They'll take any money tossed at them.  If this game is cancelled, will WSU pay UNCO like Florida did last year in a similar fashion?

[Scscsc89]

Did the Australia kickoff game go away?   Did it last 2 seasons?

[Mano]

Hearing rumors that Clancy Pendegast may be getting fired. Any validity to this?

[EastCoastFan]

13 minutes ago, Mano said:

Hearing rumors that Clancy Pendegast may be getting fired. Any validity to this?

Would not be surprising with the allegations that he was involved with paying students to fraudulently handle the academic requirements of two graduate assistants.

[PapaG]

On ‎5‎/‎24‎/‎2019 at 2:07 PM, Scscsc89 said:

Yeah I don’t think Bama is the biggest problem here

altruism has nothing to do with it.  Those programs can wither & die for all I care — I just want better football games

So you're all for cutting thousands of scholarships for FCS football players because your school is too proud to play them for some arrogant reason when USC can't even make a fucking bowl game and apparently can't recruit anymore, either?  Seems rather elitist but then again it is USC.

[PapaG]

6 hours ago, Downthefield said:

Would not be surprising with the allegations that he was involved with paying students to fraudulently handle the academic requirements of two graduate assistants.

Hey but at least USC doesn't play FCS teams so they have that going for them.

[Scscsc89]

2 hours ago, PapaG said:

So you're all for cutting thousands of scholarships for FCS football players because your school is too proud to play them for some arrogant reason when USC can't even make a fucking bowl game and apparently can't recruit anymore, either?  Seems rather elitist but then again it is USC.

.

No — I guess I wasn’t clear enough the first time I explained it so I’ll go slower this time:

I am all for getting rid of P5 vs. FCS games because I think they are unfair, boring & a waste of very scarce yet important scheduling slots that should be used to field more interesting, competitive games and help better determine playoff contenders.  (ie make it a better sport.)

Since I know you are very concerned with FCS scholarships, I explained above that these more interesting games would generate better media rights & ticket sales.  A fraction of these new funds could be set aside to still subsidize the FCS programs if you wish.

i also don’t believe that Major League Baseball teams should play minor league teams in games that count during the regular season.  Does that make me elitist?   Guilty, I guess.

[KUGRDON]

I get what you’re saying SC.  However, There is no way in hell P5 teams are going to set a side part of the ticket sales for FCS schools.  In fact, the trend is for the elite schools to get an ever increasing piece of the pie even with respect to other people at schools.  the more interesting games that you see evolving will not yield any more monetary benefit to P5 schools than the current arrangement.  That is why the current system exists.

College Football is professional in all respects but player pay.  Whatever yields the most money is what will happen. More money for athletic directors and coaches is the priority.  Money for facilities is a function of getting more money for the coaches and ADs.

Just my take.

[EastCoastFan]

1 hour ago, KUGRDON said:

College Football is professional in all respects but player pay.  Whatever yields the most money is what will happen. More money for athletic directors and coaches is the priority.  Money for facilities is a function of getting more money for the coaches and ADs.

You are right.  The $$$'s rule.  The sport is being driven by the elite part of the SEC (this doesn't include schools like Missouri, or Vandy), along with a few power teams of the Big Ten (most particularly, Ohio State, Michigan, Penn State, and Wisconsin), and a couple of others (e.g., Clemson, Texas, Oklahoma, and Notre Dame.)  Everybody else tries to keep up in a chase that is never-ending.  The Pac-12 is on the edge of this circus, with Oregon, USC, and Washington the ones really trying to stay in the game, but a step behind; the same can be said for North Carolina, Florida State, etc. of the ACC.

We're at a point where the "haves" keep pressing the accelerator so nobody can catch up.  So Bama and Clemson can stay a few steps ahead of LSU and Miami, so Ohio State can be a notch above Michigan State.  Nobody in the serious power group or those trying to gain admittance is going to give a sh!t about G5 let alone FCS.  We're watching CVS and Walgreens taking over the little drug stores, Amazon wiping out Sears and Penneys, Netflix crushing Blockbuster.  Larry Scott's challenge isn't to help Cal Poly, it's to stay somewhat in the game with the Power Teams and Power Leagues of the Power Five.

[Scscsc89]

Of course it’s money driven.

Everyone makes more money here, even with money set aside for FCS. That’s the point.