Cui Bono? (I would like to claim I know this phrase because of my knowledge of Latin or the law but it’s really because I like the movie “The Departed”.)

Does football get the money? General athletic department funds? Basketball?

Folks on this board seem enthusiastic about a second FBS game. I guess it wouldn’t have been scheduled without London’s support but to me it’s like one of MBB’s required money games: an almost certain loss for pay. And the wear and tear of a football game is much greater than a basketball game.

Yes, it is a second FBS game, but it’s one P-5 game and one G-5 game.

The first FBS game is against UVa. UVa usually does not physically crush us.

Also, any Tribe football schedule that includes UVa and ECU in the same year is a good schedule. Two very do-able road trips against two schools with whom there is good history.

If we’re moving to a scheduling philosophy of one P-5 and one G-5 school on the schedule in 12 game schedule years, I’m all for it.

I was primarily excited because we have 12 games now scheduled in a season where most teams in FCS are going to play 12. I have no expectations of what the season will bring as far as how the Tribe fares. I do think it will be interesting. There was an opportunity and the Tribe stepped in to a 2nd FBS payout. It remains to be seen whether it works out well for the Tribe in 2019, but if the team wins enough games in the conference and also wins its 2 home nonconference games, it would be in the conversation for a bid. While that might seem delusional thinking, successful programs always plan for success. The minimum number of wins for playoff consideration has been 7. I think 7-4 does not look better than 7-5 with 2 FBS games. If, you pull one upset, then maybe 6 FCS wins is enough. Obviously the worry is on the o and d lines where sometimes there is a significant disparity between FCS and FBS.

Nobody will know how to scheme for us unless they watch Howard film. We could surprise some folks.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

(02-01-2019 04:30 PM)Tribe32 Wrote:  Nobody will know how to scheme for us unless they watch Howard film. We could surprise some folks.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

I'm going to go out on a limb and assume our opponents will watch 2018 HU film.

Sent from my SM-G955U using Tapatalk

(02-01-2019 01:34 PM)nj alum Wrote:  Yes, it is a second FBS game, but it’s one P-5 game and one G-5 game.

The first FBS game is against UVa. UVa usually does not physically crush us.

Also, any Tribe football schedule that includes UVa and ECU in the same year is a good schedule. Two very do-able road trips against two schools with whom there is good history.

If we’re moving to a scheduling philosophy of one P-5 and one G-5 school on the schedule in 12 game schedule years, I’m all for it.

Amen. This is an excellent move.

(02-02-2019 01:10 AM)zablenoise Wrote:  

(02-01-2019 01:34 PM)nj alum Wrote:  If we’re moving to a scheduling philosophy of one P-5 and one G-5 school on the schedule in 12 game schedule years, I’m all for it.

Amen. This is an excellent move.

I seriously doubt that there is any new scheduling philosophy at play here. I think it is just as simple as that W&M needed a 12th game (and apparently Howard was not a viable option) and ECU needed a game (because Virginia Tech cancelled their game) and so the two sides got together. There were probably very few options left for either team (I heard Lehigh mentioned). Folks giving Huge a ton of credit for this are also being too generous, in my opinion. 98% of all other Athletic Directors got this done a year ago and the rest got it done months ago. She is just doing her job and was fortunate that a nice money game became available (and if I were to guess, I would guess that ECU initiated the conversation).

(02-02-2019 09:34 AM)Zorch Wrote:  

(02-02-2019 01:10 AM)zablenoise Wrote:  

(02-01-2019 01:34 PM)nj alum Wrote:  If we’re moving to a scheduling philosophy of one P-5 and one G-5 school on the schedule in 12 game schedule years, I’m all for it.

Amen. This is an excellent move.

I seriously doubt that there is any new scheduling philosophy at play here. I think it is just as simple as that W&M needed a 12th game (and apparently Howard was not a viable option) and ECU needed a game (because Virginia Tech cancelled their game) and so the two sides got together. There were probably very few options left for either team (I heard Lehigh mentioned). Folks giving Huge a ton of credit for this are also being too generous, in my opinion. 98% of all other Athletic Directors got this done a year ago and the rest got it done months ago. She is just doing her job and was fortunate that a nice money game became available (and if I were to guess, I would guess that ECU initiated the conversation).

I have no idea if this represents a strategy or not but there are plenty of schools left trying to finalize their schedule. Campbell, who we moved, I believe, to find another pay day, still has 11 games.

(02-02-2019 11:08 AM)Tribe3455 Wrote:  

(02-02-2019 09:34 AM)Zorch Wrote:  

(02-02-2019 01:10 AM)zablenoise Wrote:  

(02-01-2019 01:34 PM)nj alum Wrote:  If we’re moving to a scheduling philosophy of one P-5 and one G-5 school on the schedule in 12 game schedule years, I’m all for it.

Amen. This is an excellent move.

I seriously doubt that there is any new scheduling philosophy at play here. I think it is just as simple as that W&M needed a 12th game (and apparently Howard was not a viable option) and ECU needed a game (because Virginia Tech cancelled their game) and so the two sides got together. There were probably very few options left for either team (I heard Lehigh mentioned). Folks giving Huge a ton of credit for this are also being too generous, in my opinion. 98% of all other Athletic Directors got this done a year ago and the rest got it done months ago. She is just doing her job and was fortunate that a nice money game became available (and if I were to guess, I would guess that ECU initiated the conversation).

I have no idea if this represents a strategy or not but there are plenty of schools left trying to finalize their schedule. Campbell, who we moved, I believe, to find another pay day, still has 11 games.

Campbell only needs that game because WE dropped them! It was known that we dropped them well before VT dropped ECU, so there seems to be no causality there. I think we dropped Campbell in order to add Howard but it didn't happen, for whatever reason.

(02-02-2019 11:47 AM)Zorch Wrote:  

(02-02-2019 11:08 AM)Tribe3455 Wrote:  

(02-02-2019 09:34 AM)Zorch Wrote:  

(02-02-2019 01:10 AM)zablenoise Wrote:  

(02-01-2019 01:34 PM)nj alum Wrote:  If we’re moving to a scheduling philosophy of one P-5 and one G-5 school on the schedule in 12 game schedule years, I’m all for it.

Amen. This is an excellent move.

I seriously doubt that there is any new scheduling philosophy at play here. I think it is just as simple as that W&M needed a 12th game (and apparently Howard was not a viable option) and ECU needed a game (because Virginia Tech cancelled their game) and so the two sides got together. There were probably very few options left for either team (I heard Lehigh mentioned). Folks giving Huge a ton of credit for this are also being too generous, in my opinion. 98% of all other Athletic Directors got this done a year ago and the rest got it done months ago. She is just doing her job and was fortunate that a nice money game became available (and if I were to guess, I would guess that ECU initiated the conversation).

I have no idea if this represents a strategy or not but there are plenty of schools left trying to finalize their schedule. Campbell, who we moved, I believe, to find another pay day, still has 11 games.

Campbell only needs that game because WE dropped them! It was known that we dropped them well before VT dropped ECU, so there seems to be no causality there. I think we dropped Campbell in order to add Howard but it didn't happen, for whatever reason.

You seem to be stuck on the we were trying to schedule Howard train but my point is I believe we dropped Campbell to get a pay day. Not to get ECU. That, as you correctly put, did drop into our lap.

(02-02-2019 12:13 PM)Tribe3455 Wrote:  

(02-02-2019 11:47 AM)Zorch Wrote:  

(02-02-2019 11:08 AM)Tribe3455 Wrote:  

(02-02-2019 09:34 AM)Zorch Wrote:  

(02-02-2019 01:10 AM)zablenoise Wrote:  Amen. This is an excellent move.

I seriously doubt that there is any new scheduling philosophy at play here. I think it is just as simple as that W&M needed a 12th game (and apparently Howard was not a viable option) and ECU needed a game (because Virginia Tech cancelled their game) and so the two sides got together. There were probably very few options left for either team (I heard Lehigh mentioned). Folks giving Huge a ton of credit for this are also being too generous, in my opinion. 98% of all other Athletic Directors got this done a year ago and the rest got it done months ago. She is just doing her job and was fortunate that a nice money game became available (and if I were to guess, I would guess that ECU initiated the conversation).

I have no idea if this represents a strategy or not but there are plenty of schools left trying to finalize their schedule. Campbell, who we moved, I believe, to find another pay day, still has 11 games.

Campbell only needs that game because WE dropped them! It was known that we dropped them well before VT dropped ECU, so there seems to be no causality there. I think we dropped Campbell in order to add Howard but it didn't happen, for whatever reason.

You seem to be stuck on the we were trying to schedule Howard train but my point is I believe we dropped Campbell to get a pay day. Not to get ECU. That, as you correctly put, did drop into our lap.

Okay, but if we dropped Campbell to get a pay game then why did we reschedule that game for a later year (2-3 years from now)? We would have just dropped them, period, and probably would go on and drop them from the future schedules too. No, this pay game (ECU or otherwise) truly just fell into place.

(02-02-2019 03:53 PM)Zorch Wrote:  

(02-02-2019 12:13 PM)Tribe3455 Wrote:  

(02-02-2019 11:47 AM)Zorch Wrote:  

(02-02-2019 11:08 AM)Tribe3455 Wrote:  

(02-02-2019 09:34 AM)Zorch Wrote:  I seriously doubt that there is any new scheduling philosophy at play here. I think it is just as simple as that W&M needed a 12th game (and apparently Howard was not a viable option) and ECU needed a game (because Virginia Tech cancelled their game) and so the two sides got together. There were probably very few options left for either team (I heard Lehigh mentioned). Folks giving Huge a ton of credit for this are also being too generous, in my opinion. 98% of all other Athletic Directors got this done a year ago and the rest got it done months ago. She is just doing her job and was fortunate that a nice money game became available (and if I were to guess, I would guess that ECU initiated the conversation).

I have no idea if this represents a strategy or not but there are plenty of schools left trying to finalize their schedule. Campbell, who we moved, I believe, to find another pay day, still has 11 games.

Campbell only needs that game because WE dropped them! It was known that we dropped them well before VT dropped ECU, so there seems to be no causality there. I think we dropped Campbell in order to add Howard but it didn't happen, for whatever reason.

You seem to be stuck on the we were trying to schedule Howard train but my point is I believe we dropped Campbell to get a pay day. Not to get ECU. That, as you correctly put, did drop into our lap.

Okay, but if we dropped Campbell to get a pay game then why did we reschedule that game for a later year (2-3 years from now)? We would have just dropped them, period, and probably would go on and drop them from the future schedules too. No, this pay game (ECU or otherwise) truly just fell into place.

Because it only makes sense to play two fbs games when we get 12 games. That doesn’t happen again until 2024. So it actually does make sense to keep them on the schedule. You can try and make this seem all without direction but I think otherwise. Lucky with ecu but other than that it looks like a plan to me.

(02-03-2019 12:25 AM)Tribe3455 Wrote:  

(02-02-2019 03:53 PM)Zorch Wrote:  

(02-02-2019 12:13 PM)Tribe3455 Wrote:  

(02-02-2019 11:47 AM)Zorch Wrote:  

(02-02-2019 11:08 AM)Tribe3455 Wrote:  I have no idea if this represents a strategy or not but there are plenty of schools left trying to finalize their schedule. Campbell, who we moved, I believe, to find another pay day, still has 11 games.

Campbell only needs that game because WE dropped them! It was known that we dropped them well before VT dropped ECU, so there seems to be no causality there. I think we dropped Campbell in order to add Howard but it didn't happen, for whatever reason.

You seem to be stuck on the we were trying to schedule Howard train but my point is I believe we dropped Campbell to get a pay day. Not to get ECU. That, as you correctly put, did drop into our lap.

Okay, but if we dropped Campbell to get a pay game then why did we reschedule that game for a later year (2-3 years from now)? We would have just dropped them, period, and probably would go on and drop them from the future schedules too. No, this pay game (ECU or otherwise) truly just fell into place.

Because it only makes sense to play two fbs games when we get 12 games. That doesn’t happen again until 2024. So it actually does make sense to keep them on the schedule. You can try and make this seem all without direction but I think otherwise. Lucky with ecu but other than that it looks like a plan to me.

It only makes sense to play 2 FBS games if all you are interested in is the money. If you are actually interested in winning and making the FCS playoffs then it doesn't make any sense at all. That is especially true in years with 12 games because while we are trying to get into the playoffs with probably about 7 wins, other teams are scheduling smarter to win 8 games and get in the playoffs ahead of us. One of the Daily Press writers said it very well in 2008 (when we played 11 and finished 7-4 and Maine played 12 and finished 8-4): "on what planet does 8 wins not look better than 7 wins". Well, by playing 2 FBS we are not doing ourselves any favors and have a lot lower chance to get 8 wins.

If this is truly the new Huge plan for 12 game seasons then I think it is stupid. Some say drop down to the Patriot League. I say that if you really don't want to win/go to FCS playoffs (and this plan would demonstrate that they don't) then why not just drop down to Div. III, or drop football altogether (and route the money to basketball and all the competitive non-revenue sports)?

Stop the somewhat ludicrous carping...this was a very good addition by Samantha that everyone was crying for last fall. It will have little effect on our playoff chances if we lose, would help our chances if we somehow win, garner additional funds for the program, bring back an old rivalry for a day, and is an FBS game we actually have a slim chance to win!

Zorch, you have a baked in assumption that we'll lose every time we play a FBS team. What if we win won or both? That should give us a benefit in the eyes of the voters at the end of the season.

(02-03-2019 07:12 AM)Tribe32 Wrote:  Zorch, you have a baked in assumption that we'll lose every time we play a FBS team. What if we win won or both? That should give us a benefit in the eyes of the voters at the end of the season.

That feels like a pretty safe assumption, no?

Until we see next years team, how would we know?


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

(02-03-2019 12:44 AM)Zorch Wrote:  

(02-03-2019 12:25 AM)Tribe3455 Wrote:  

(02-02-2019 03:53 PM)Zorch Wrote:  

(02-02-2019 12:13 PM)Tribe3455 Wrote:  

(02-02-2019 11:47 AM)Zorch Wrote:  Campbell only needs that game because WE dropped them! It was known that we dropped them well before VT dropped ECU, so there seems to be no causality there. I think we dropped Campbell in order to add Howard but it didn't happen, for whatever reason.

You seem to be stuck on the we were trying to schedule Howard train but my point is I believe we dropped Campbell to get a pay day. Not to get ECU. That, as you correctly put, did drop into our lap.

Okay, but if we dropped Campbell to get a pay game then why did we reschedule that game for a later year (2-3 years from now)? We would have just dropped them, period, and probably would go on and drop them from the future schedules too. No, this pay game (ECU or otherwise) truly just fell into place.

Because it only makes sense to play two fbs games when we get 12 games. That doesn’t happen again until 2024. So it actually does make sense to keep them on the schedule. You can try and make this seem all without direction but I think otherwise. Lucky with ecu but other than that it looks like a plan to me.

It only makes sense to play 2 FBS games if all you are interested in is the money. If you are actually interested in winning and making the FCS playoffs then it doesn't make any sense at all.

Playoffs? Playoffs!?



W&M has made the playoffs once the last 9 seasons. By expected winning percentage based on points scored and allowed they were a 1.7 win team last year replacing not only the entire coaching staff but the one consistent weapon they had on offense.

(02-03-2019 08:18 AM)LeadBolt Wrote:  Until we see next years team, how would we know?


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

I don't know that if I hit myself in the face with a hammer today it will hurt a lot, but I know that it's hurt a whole lot almost every time I've done it. I'm going to play the odds and not hit myself in the face with a hammer.

(02-03-2019 06:55 AM)bubbadog57 Wrote:  Stop the somewhat ludicrous carping...this was a very good addition by Samantha that everyone was crying for last fall. It will have little effect on our playoff chances if we lose, would help our chances if we somehow win, garner additional funds for the program, bring back an old rivalry for a day, and is an FBS game we actually have a slim chance to win!

You totally missed the point. The ECU game is a done deal. I was "carping" on whether or not it is smart to always schedule 2 FBS games in 12-game seasons (as Tribe3455 implied would be the new normal). As far as having 2 FBS losses having little effect on our playoff chances --- I suggest you go back and research what happened to Austin Peay at the end of the 2017 season (even more tragic for them because they had been so historically bad before and, since then, have lost that coach; they might never get that close again).

I won't bother to spout the statistics on W&M's winning percentage against FBS teams. I'm sure that it is no better than 2 wins per decade and is probably closer to averaging 1 win per decade. Woo hoo, great when it happens but almost always it doesn't.

Rocco: the points I made about the playoffs apply any year. Tribe3455 said that the next 12 game season is in 2024. I hope we are scheduling more smartly by then. London will either have us as playoff regulars by then or he himself should be gone.