<a href='http://www.kusports.com/news/football/story/113827' target='_blank'>http://www.kusports.com/news/football/story/113827</a>

I suppose it's good for a conference like the Big East. With only 7 conference games, I would imagine it's a struggle to find OOC opponents as it is.

Plus, if you add in the possibility of going to 12 regular season games...

Murph1 Wrote:<a href='http://www.kusports.com/news/football/story/113827' target='_blank'>http://www.kusports.com/news/football/story/113827</a>

I suppose it's good for a conference like the Big East. With only 7 conference games, I would imagine it's a struggle to find OOC opponents as it is.

Plus, if you add in the possibility of going to 12 regular season games...

Actually it will be bad for the Big East--we don't need an easy way out. All Big East schools need to schedule all Div 1A schools. Div1AA schools only hurt our SOS and god forbide if you lose like Rutgers did. Schedule a team like Arkansas State or Eastern Michigan if you have to over an A-10 school.

TexanMark Wrote:

Murph1 Wrote:<a href='http://www.kusports.com/news/football/story/113827' target='_blank'>http://www.kusports.com/news/football/story/113827</a>

I suppose it's good for a conference like the Big East. With only 7 conference games, I would imagine it's a struggle to find OOC opponents as it is.

Plus, if you add in the possibility of going to 12 regular season games...

Actually it will be bad for the Big East--we don't need an easy way out. All Big East schools need to schedule all Div 1A schools. Div1AA schools only hurt our SOS and god forbide if you lose like Rutgers did. Schedule a team like Arkansas State or Eastern Michigan if you have to over an A-10 school.

The problem is, even a school like Kansas in the Big 12 (according to the article) is having trouble finding 1-A opponents.

I don't like it either, but it may end up being a fact of life. We shall see.

Quote:Actually it will be bad for the Big East--we don't need an easy way out. All Big East schools need to schedule all Div 1A schools. Div1AA schools only hurt our SOS and god forbide if you lose like Rutgers did.

-- This quote is exhibit A as to why we need a football only member soon


Jackson

Jackson1011 Wrote:

Quote:Actually it will be bad for the Big East--we don't need an easy way out. All Big East schools need to schedule all Div 1A schools. Div1AA schools only hurt our SOS and god forbide if you lose like Rutgers did.

-- This quote is exhibit A as to why we need a football only member soon


Jackson

:wave:

This is ridiculous. Kansas and others like them are simply trying to pad their schedule in order to obtain the required number of wins to obtain bowl eligibility.

Their are numerous "non-BCS" Div. 1A schools that would love to schedule schools from the Big East, Big 10, Big 12, etc., especially on a home and home basis. But the big boys don't want to risk a loss. And there are several MAC, C-USA, Mountain West, and WAC schools that would love to schedule more "BCS" schools.

I am a fan of Bowling Green, and believe me we can't get any BCS schools to sign a home and home contract. The last one who did, Missouri, got knocked off by BG both at home and away.

If a "BCS" school plays a top "non-BCS" school, it is only at home and more often than not they prefer to play one of the weaker teams.

I hear your lament--due to smaller stadiums and reputations the MAC has to do 2 for 1s and 3 for 1s against the BCS schools. However, you can't expect a BCS school to willingly want to do a home n home with some of the MAC schools when they play in glorified HS stadiums.

Murph:

Don't buy that totally. Lots of BCS teams pad their schedules for the sake of getting Bowl qualified. UConn is currently doing this but they are smartly building up their rep and strength going against Div 1AAs and crappy Div 1A teams. If they are still doing that in 5-7 years then something is wrong.

Quote:Don't buy that totally. Lots of BCS teams pad their schedules for the sake of getting Bowl qualified. UConn is currently doing this but they are smartly building up their rep and strength going against Div 1AAs and crappy Div 1A teams. If they are still doing that in 5-7 years then something is wrong.

Agreed. It's okay for either a start-up (5 to 10 years) or a rebuild (3 to 5 years) to schedule a 1-AA or if you have a team originally scheduled to play you pull out - but there simply is no need to do it on a year-in, year-out basis even with a 12-team schedule. Schedule mid-to-low level BCS teams, MAC teams, C-USA teams, Army, or Navy.

Cheers,
Neil

Syracuse fan – a measure of success for the season is participating in the post season. So getting to the post season is very important and making money, no return game for I-AA and even low to mid level I-A cost a lot of money without return game plus more donations from supporters. I understand you want respect by playing tough schedule but if they determine not to respect you they will find that excuse and with 85 scholarships is very hard to sustain long term success.

Quote:Syracuse fan – a measure of success for the season is participating in the post season. So getting to the post season is very important and making money, no return game for I-AA and even low to mid level I-A cost a lot of money without return game plus more donations from supporters. I understand you want respect by playing tough schedule but if they determine not to respect you they will find that excuse and with 85 scholarships is very hard to sustain long term success.

I think both Texan Mark and myself have no problem with UConn scheduling 1-AAs in this their formative years of D1-A. But if you continue to do so on a continual basis beyond 2010, then we'll see. Personally, I hope UConn becomes successful enough to eventually steer away from this type of scheduling and will compensate for the loss of an extra home game by expanding the stadium.

By the way, making a minor Bowl game does not make an institution money, but rather is a revenue loss. The only reason why SU will make money on going to the Champs Bowl this year is because we tied for first place and therefore get a percentage of the top three conference bowls.

What a minor bowl game gets you, is some recognition, not money.

Cheers,
Neil

It’s easier get more donation from fan with a winning season than stay at home at the end of season even with all that marquee games plus extra practice session is priceless.

SO#1 Wrote:It’s easier get more donation from fan with a winning season than stay at home at the end of season even with all that marquee games plus extra practice session is priceless.

Neil and I agree with you on that--but UConn should evolve away from a Rutgers like schedule. You should be able to use your mens and women's basketball teams to tempt some mid/upper BCS teams to visit Hartford with home n homes. If you are still playing the Liberty's in 2010 UConn has failed to elevate. In the Big East you are who you play.

TexanMark Wrote:

SO#1 Wrote:It’s easier get more donation from fan with a winning season than stay at home at the end of season even with all that marquee games plus extra practice session is priceless.&nbsp; &nbsp;

Neil and I agree with you on that--but UConn should evolve away from a Rutgers like schedule. You should be able to use your mens and women's basketball teams to tempt some mid/upper BCS teams to visit Hartford with home n homes. If you are still playing the Liberty's in 2010 UConn has failed to elevate. In the Big East you are who you play.

You mean you actually want UConn to succeed in football eventually? Well, now I know I'm not on the Syracuse Rivals' site. :D

Over there, they'd prefer it if we'd just slip into the ocean and join the City of Atlantis.

Murph1 Wrote:<a href='http://www.kusports.com/news/football/story/113827' target='_blank'>http://www.kusports.com/news/football/story/113827</a>

I suppose it's good for a conference like the Big East. With only 7 conference games, I would imagine it's a struggle to find OOC opponents as it is.

Plus, if you add in the possibility of going to 12 regular season games...

good for UK.

Quote:You mean you actually want UConn to succeed in football eventually? Well, now I know I'm not on the Syracuse Rivals' site.&nbsp;

Over there, they'd prefer it if we'd just slip into the ocean and join the City of Atlantis.

Actually, they simply wish some Huskies fans would slip into the ocean...

SU fans, myself included, can be very elitist at times but our motto says it all - "Respect the Past; Represent the Future".

In contrast to this, our new BE partner, USF, has a motto that says, "We Don't Follow Tradition, We Create It"

As I see it, UConn fans are caught betwixt and between. Your success in basketball has elevated you to the point where your program can now at least be mentioned with the great traditional powers of the past and has earned SU's respect, but like USF, your football program is still in its infancy.

Unfortunately, its hard for SU fans to take UConn football seriously at this time. It simply hasn't been earned. And Husky fans can point to our current mediocrity, but virtually all programs go through a period like this - it doesn't change the fact that for almost two decades we were a near-elite program - outside of PSU, I doubt any northeastern program will ever be 'elite', but we are (and I'm sure UConn and Pitt and even the departed BC) going to give it a try. We just needed a change in leadership to help get the ship back on the right track.

Cheers,
Neil

omnicarrier Wrote:

Quote:You mean you actually want UConn to succeed in football eventually? Well, now I know I'm not on the Syracuse Rivals' site. 

Over there, they'd prefer it if we'd just slip into the ocean and join the City of Atlantis.

Actually, they simply wish some Huskies fans would slip into the ocean...

SU fans, myself included, can be very elitist at times but our motto says it all - "Respect the Past; Represent the Future".

In contrast to this, our new BE partner, USF, has a motto that says, "We Don't Follow Tradition, We Create It"

As I see it, UConn fans are caught betwixt and between. Your success in basketball has elevated you to the point where your program can now at least be mentioned with the great traditional powers of the past and has earned SU's respect, but like USF, your football program is still in its infancy.

Unfortunately, its hard for SU fans to take UConn football seriously at this time. It simply hasn't been earned. And Husky fans can point to our current mediocrity, but virtually all programs go through a period like this - it doesn't change the fact that for almost two decades we were a near-elite program - outside of PSU, I doubt any northeastern program will ever be 'elite', but we are (and I'm sure UConn and Pitt and even the departed BC) going to give it a try. We just needed a change in leadership to help get the ship back on the right track.

Cheers,
Neil

All good and well, but in regards to Syracuse Rivals', if I should cross paths with someone such as ArchboldZak someday and I happen to have a pipewrench in my hand...well... :down: :wwf:

All in good fun, of course.

From what I understand, many schools are in favor of this because this give teams an extra home game, meaning more revenues/profits. It will be harder for the Big East, especially starting in 06 when we will play a 12 game schedule. It could be possible, if we don't add another member, that some BE teams could face 2 or 3 D-1AA schools. I don't like this at all. Talk about losing respect. Schools like Kansas want to do this because they are looking for the one extra pad game and don't want to be forced into home and home (i.e. Kansas State vs. Marshall) and a chance to lose to a non-BCS school. I don't expect a majority of BCS teams to go out and schedule D-1AA opponents because at some schools such as USF, if you schedule anyone outside of FAMU, it will hurt your attendance. Fans don't want to see schedules filled with D-1AA teams, well, at least I don't. Right now, some BE teams will only have 3 conference home games next year, THREE, so I can understand the need for an extra home game, but not by the D-1AA model, but by the expansion model for football only membership.

USFBullSpit Wrote:From what I understand, many schools are in favor of this because this give teams an extra home game, meaning more revenues/profits. It will be harder for the Big East, especially starting in 06 when we will play a 12 game schedule. It could be possible, if we don't add another member, that some BE teams could face 2 or 3 D-1AA schools. I don't like this at all. Talk about losing respect. Schools like Kansas want to do this because they are looking for the one extra pad game and don't want to be forced into home and home (i.e. Kansas State vs. Marshall) and a chance to lose to a non-BCS school. I don't expect a majority of BCS teams to go out and schedule D-1AA opponents because at some schools such as USF, if you schedule anyone outside of FAMU, it will hurt your attendance. Fans don't want to see schedules filled with D-1AA teams, well, at least I don't. Right now, some BE teams will only have 3 conference home games next year, THREE, so I can understand the need for an extra home game, but not by the D-1AA model, but by the expansion model for football only membership.

Your school is in worse shape than UConn for attracting mid/upper BCS teams into a home n home. You can't package FB/BB as easily as UConn. However, your AD should work to create a slot the last weekend of November or the first weekend of December to play an established northern BCS team every year down in Tampa. Look to get the return date up north in the early season.