HawkinGoferLand
Well-Known Member
yeah, that sucks and during our current Ferentz Down Cycle, the timing would be bad exposure. Although during a Ferentz Up Cycle, the exposure would be awesome.
Help me understand the $cheduing dilemma
- Thread starter STILLBUSTER
- Start date
yeah, that sucks and during our current Ferentz Down Cycle, the timing would be bad exposure. Although during a Ferentz Up Cycle, the exposure would be awesome.
HawkinGoferLand
Well-Known Member
something else, when we had Norm, give him the extra practice time like we had for bowl games and we could compete with anybody so a Kick-off game to start the season would be right in his wheel-house. Not sure if Phil has that mojo for bowl game prep as we having made one with him as DC...
HawkinGoferLand
Well-Known Member
no I didn't write this 
Neutral site college football games will be the wave of the future. | Sports
There was something I ran across earlier this weekend that I wanted to talk about. There’s been concern with several conferences upcoming 9 game conference schedules, that some teams will lose flexibility in scheduling OOC opponents. I believe most if not all major conferences will end up with this.
In particular in the ACC schools like Georgia Tech, Clemson and Florida State play in-state SEC rivals Georgia, South Carolina, and Florida every year. Stanford and USC have their rivalry with Notre Dame.
That is one those teams OOC games each year, and with a 9 game conference schedule it makes it very difficult to schedule additional quality opponents. I tried to come up with scenarios where teams like these could play other quality OOC teams in a home and home series. It just wasn’t happening. Most teams wanted to have a 7 game home schedule without taking a financial hit. Then I read this article from ESPN, that discusses the financial implications for the Chick Fil A preseason football games.
This line struck me…
“Based on their ticket sales, Auburn’s contract calls for a payment of $2.3 million, slightly more money than it made when it last hosted Clemson in Auburn.”
When Auburn hosted Clemson in 2010 there were over 87,000 fans in attendance. Now I was at the game Saturday evening with Clemson and Auburn, and it was sellout of better than 75,000 fans in Atlanta. The game was in prime time national TV on ESPN. The exposure and the buildup for both teams to the game made it one of the most highly anticipated of college football’s first weekend, and now you’re telling me the schools participating can make as much money if not more as hosting the same game?
You know what this tells me? You can have your cake and eat it too with the neutral site college games. Already this past weekend Atlanta, GA hosted Tennessee vs NC State, and Clemson vs Auburn. Dallas, Tx had Alabama vs Michigan. It’s the best of both worlds. You can play a marquee opponent, and not lose money. Yes 1 home game will be lost and I understand that. I would counter that with the national exposure gained. In addition, you aren’t going to do it every year. You can easily schedule a game like this once every 3 or 4 years. It’s a recruiting tool, and the advance scheduling will allow large portions of your fanbase to attend. That said I don’t expect fewer of these games, I expect more.
I predict other cities will take Atlanta’s lead in trying to bring an economic windfall to their city and schedule these neutral site games. Honestly I’m going to be pretty skeptical of any AD from a historically solid football school that says they can’t schedule quality out of conference games once every 3 or 4 years even with a 9 game conference schedule.
Neutral site college football games will be the wave of the future. | Sports
There was something I ran across earlier this weekend that I wanted to talk about. There’s been concern with several conferences upcoming 9 game conference schedules, that some teams will lose flexibility in scheduling OOC opponents. I believe most if not all major conferences will end up with this.
In particular in the ACC schools like Georgia Tech, Clemson and Florida State play in-state SEC rivals Georgia, South Carolina, and Florida every year. Stanford and USC have their rivalry with Notre Dame.
That is one those teams OOC games each year, and with a 9 game conference schedule it makes it very difficult to schedule additional quality opponents. I tried to come up with scenarios where teams like these could play other quality OOC teams in a home and home series. It just wasn’t happening. Most teams wanted to have a 7 game home schedule without taking a financial hit. Then I read this article from ESPN, that discusses the financial implications for the Chick Fil A preseason football games.
This line struck me…
“Based on their ticket sales, Auburn’s contract calls for a payment of $2.3 million, slightly more money than it made when it last hosted Clemson in Auburn.”
When Auburn hosted Clemson in 2010 there were over 87,000 fans in attendance. Now I was at the game Saturday evening with Clemson and Auburn, and it was sellout of better than 75,000 fans in Atlanta. The game was in prime time national TV on ESPN. The exposure and the buildup for both teams to the game made it one of the most highly anticipated of college football’s first weekend, and now you’re telling me the schools participating can make as much money if not more as hosting the same game?
You know what this tells me? You can have your cake and eat it too with the neutral site college games. Already this past weekend Atlanta, GA hosted Tennessee vs NC State, and Clemson vs Auburn. Dallas, Tx had Alabama vs Michigan. It’s the best of both worlds. You can play a marquee opponent, and not lose money. Yes 1 home game will be lost and I understand that. I would counter that with the national exposure gained. In addition, you aren’t going to do it every year. You can easily schedule a game like this once every 3 or 4 years. It’s a recruiting tool, and the advance scheduling will allow large portions of your fanbase to attend. That said I don’t expect fewer of these games, I expect more.
I predict other cities will take Atlanta’s lead in trying to bring an economic windfall to their city and schedule these neutral site games. Honestly I’m going to be pretty skeptical of any AD from a historically solid football school that says they can’t schedule quality out of conference games once every 3 or 4 years even with a 9 game conference schedule.
HawkinGoferLand
Well-Known Member
http://www.jsonline.com/sports/badg...4-vs-lsu-in-houston-b9922018z1-209442781.html
So Alvarez is widely respected among his peers and beloved at Wisconsin. He is scheduling neutral site games for 2014, 2015 and likely 2016 or 2017.....hmmmm.
In 2014 Wisc plays LSU @ Houston, and hosts South Florida
2015 Alabama @ TX, host Wash St
In 2016 Wisc plays @ VT and likely vs LSU @ Lambeau (4 B1G home games so 5 overall?)
2017 @ BYU, @ USF, and home vs VT (5 B1G home games so 6 overall)
2018 @ WSU and home vs BYU (only 4 B1G home games, so 6 overall)
So Alvarez is widely respected among his peers and beloved at Wisconsin. He is scheduling neutral site games for 2014, 2015 and likely 2016 or 2017.....hmmmm.
In 2014 Wisc plays LSU @ Houston, and hosts South Florida
2015 Alabama @ TX, host Wash St
In 2016 Wisc plays @ VT and likely vs LSU @ Lambeau (4 B1G home games so 5 overall?)
2017 @ BYU, @ USF, and home vs VT (5 B1G home games so 6 overall)
2018 @ WSU and home vs BYU (only 4 B1G home games, so 6 overall)
Last edited:
deanvogs
Well-Known Member
HIGL you make some great financial points, as I didn't realize these neutral site games paid out so much. I think you are stretching on the recruiting impact. Having a winning program that is contending the the BIG CCG is a better recruiting tool, than playing some neutral site game against X, Y, or Z.
hawkeyebob62
Well-Known Member
Maybe, maybe not. Imagine a neutral-site game against ND in Chicago. It's like getting 1000 "unofficial" visits if you play it right. B1G CCG? Pretty much limited to TV exposure given time of year.
HawkinGoferLand
Well-Known Member
Check out Cal's schedule for this year - 11 BCS Opponents.... They play 9 Pac-12 conference games, which the B1G will go to in 2015, PLUS 2 BCS non-conference games! Only Portland St is not from a BCS conference. 7 Home game schedule...The Bears got Balls.
August 31st - Northwestern Wildcats
September 7th - Portland State Vikings
September 14th - Ohio State Buckeyes
September 21st - BYE
September 28th - @ Oregon Ducks
October 5th - Washington State Cougars
October 12th - @ UCLA Bruins
October 19th - Oregon St. Beavers
October 26th - @ Washington Huskies
November 2nd - Arizona Wildcats
November 9th - USC Trojans
November 16th - @ Colorado Buffaloes
November 23rd - @ Stanford Cardinal
August 31st - Northwestern Wildcats
September 7th - Portland State Vikings
September 14th - Ohio State Buckeyes
September 21st - BYE
September 28th - @ Oregon Ducks
October 5th - Washington State Cougars
October 12th - @ UCLA Bruins
October 19th - Oregon St. Beavers
October 26th - @ Washington Huskies
November 2nd - Arizona Wildcats
November 9th - USC Trojans
November 16th - @ Colorado Buffaloes
November 23rd - @ Stanford Cardinal
Last edited:
HawkinGoferLand
Well-Known Member
Ferentz: Hard to envision not playing ISU - Big Ten Blog - ESPN
From Article:
Like most of its Big Ten brethren, Iowa wants/needs to play seven home games per season to meet its athletic budget. Since Iowa State is a rotating home-and-home series, it's tough for Iowa to add a second marquee non-league opponent.
What's the solution for Iowa? The program undoubtedly faces a dilemma, but a two-year break with Iowa State now and then wouldn't be the end of the world. Iowa would be free to schedule a series against a marquee major-conference foe or perhaps a one-time, neutral-site game like Wisconsin-Alabama.
I also wonder whether Iowa could play 11 major-conference teams in a season from time to time. Would a schedule featuring five Big Ten home games, Iowa State on the road and a decent major-conference team at a Kinnick Stadium be too much? Not really.
Ferentz is right that the Iowa-Iowa State game resonates within the state. But it shouldn't restrict Iowa and its fans from bigger and better opportunities elsewhere.
-------------------------------------------------
I agree with Mr Rittenberg. Some creative scheduling is in order such as adding a 2nd non-conf BCS game once every 3-4 years or even temporary interruption of ISU series such as play every other year or play 3 out of 4 years or something.
From Article:
Like most of its Big Ten brethren, Iowa wants/needs to play seven home games per season to meet its athletic budget. Since Iowa State is a rotating home-and-home series, it's tough for Iowa to add a second marquee non-league opponent.
What's the solution for Iowa? The program undoubtedly faces a dilemma, but a two-year break with Iowa State now and then wouldn't be the end of the world. Iowa would be free to schedule a series against a marquee major-conference foe or perhaps a one-time, neutral-site game like Wisconsin-Alabama.
I also wonder whether Iowa could play 11 major-conference teams in a season from time to time. Would a schedule featuring five Big Ten home games, Iowa State on the road and a decent major-conference team at a Kinnick Stadium be too much? Not really.
Ferentz is right that the Iowa-Iowa State game resonates within the state. But it shouldn't restrict Iowa and its fans from bigger and better opportunities elsewhere.
-------------------------------------------------
I agree with Mr Rittenberg. Some creative scheduling is in order such as adding a 2nd non-conf BCS game once every 3-4 years or even temporary interruption of ISU series such as play every other year or play 3 out of 4 years or something.
Eda
Well-Known Member
HIGL, I found the information you brought in interesting. I still don't think a program has to go out and schedule a heavy weight at a neutral site to score recruits.
IMO, the way we are doing it now is working pretty well. A decent schedule, in areas we recruit.
I'm also a fan if playing ISU, and don't necessarily like not playing them every year.
IMO, the way we are doing it now is working pretty well. A decent schedule, in areas we recruit.
I'm also a fan if playing ISU, and don't necessarily like not playing them every year.
HawkinGoferLand
Well-Known Member
ShadasRevenge
Well-Known Member
With the league going to a nine game schedule in two years, what is the incentive for Iowa to play a 2nd non-con game against BCS-level competition? Until and unless the league decides to go to a 13 game schedule, the Iowa/ISU game kind of hamstrings both schools as far as scheduling goes in the non-conference. There isn't any incentive for Iowa to play a 2nd BCS non-con game, so there isn't any reason to schedule one.
You're not going to see teams from the B12 (or at least ISU) schedule 2 BCS non-con games, you sure as hell aren't going to see it from the SEC, so why should Iowa do it?
You're not going to see teams from the B12 (or at least ISU) schedule 2 BCS non-con games, you sure as hell aren't going to see it from the SEC, so why should Iowa do it?
HawkinGoferLand
Well-Known Member
I will refer you to the rest of the thread as to why, but in summary Recruiting, National Exposure and positive buzz within and outside the program. Even the best team in CFB (Alabama) sees it as a recruiting and exposure ploy (see quote from Bama AD quoting Saban). Alvarez is no dummy and he's scheduling neutral site games....
Eda
Well-Known Member
I believe we'd still be able to get in those areas thru conference play. Ohio, Pennsylvania, Chicago/Illinois, Jersey, Baltimore/DC, etc. it just wouldn't be as heavy as it is now (with OOC games vs Pitt, Ball St, etc).
ShadasRevenge
Well-Known Member
Alabama is still only playing 9 BCS games a year, since the SEC has an 8-game league schedule.
