Pitt Fans are at it Again...
by Cpiritual27 on Oct 28, 2009 12:20 PM EDT
146 comments
If you're at all like me, then you've probably visited the Big Ten blog on ESPN from time to time. Personally, I think Rittenberg is a pretty fair writer, and doesn't inject any of his bias (Northwestern...hate hate hate!) into his writing. All in all, typically a good read.
I guess he's doing a new series where he and the bloggers from other conferences are comparing their teams, and the latest installment is...drumroll please...PSU vs Pitt!! You can check out the read here or here. It's a decent idea, and naturally, both writers came to the conclusion that such a game would end in a victory for the good guys.
But if you really want to get your money's worth out of this experience, I'd suggest you read the comments on both blogs, particularly the Big East side of it. Pitt fans couldn't be any more delusional if they tried.
So who do you think would win, and how much do you think we'd win by?
Thanks for the fanpost! Please do not post any content from a premium site that requires a subscription. Also, if you just want to share a link consider using fanshots instead. Thanks.
0 recs |
146 comments
| Add comment
Email
Print
Comments
Rittenburg is SUCH an Ohio State homer...
Aside from the chub that he gets writing anything OSU-related and the jabs about our schedule he’d put in just about every blog post for the first half of the season, yeah, he’s a pretty “fair writer.”
BTW, the comments/arguments from Pitt fans are LAUGHABLY bad.
by NoLimitLion1 on Oct 28, 2009 12:27 PM EDT reply actions 0 recs
Disagree
Just because he writes positive articles about teams when they’re playing well doesn’t mean that he’s a homer. And the articles that he wrote questioning why Ohio State gets treated differently than Oklahoma were in defense of the conference’s reputation. He’s written criticisms of the Buckeyes/Pryor following losses too.
He’s written plenty of positive articles about Penn State. Fan bases are too sensitive to perceived sleights toward their favorite team(s). Just because a writer points out a flaw doesn’t mean he “hates” the team. It’s the worst part about reading comments after stories online, the incessant whining about writers’ biases, real or unreal…
And in case you haven’t noticed, our schedule is completely jab-worthy.
by jtw126 on Oct 29, 2009 4:01 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
I watched their QB Stull in the Sun Bowl last year...
…someone had better send him some snapshots of the endzone, because he’ll never see it versus this PSU defense.
by ednax1 on Oct 28, 2009 12:27 PM EDT reply actions 0 recs
The Sun Bowl against Oregon State...
…where they lost in a joke of a game, 0-3…to the same Oregon State team that we absolutely throttled.
by NoLimitLion1 on Oct 28, 2009 12:39 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
BUT BUT BUT
THEY BARELY WON AGAINST IOWA, WHO BARELY BEAT US!!! PITT>>>>>>>PSU!!!!
by dawsonPSU10 on Oct 28, 2009 4:38 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
I attended the Pitt-Iowa game last year...
and Iowa seemed to control most of that game at the line of scrimmage. It just came down to Pitt getting touchdowns in the red zone, and Iowa turning it over one too many times and basically shutting themselves down in the red zone twice. Iowa was better then despite the huge 1-point victory Pitt fans love to point toward.
by jimbo2psu on Oct 29, 2009 8:55 AM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
I was at that game too
Christensen was HORRIBLE and they kept going between him and Stanzi. Stanzi wasn’t much better, but the constantl shuffling defintely resulted a lack of continuity. Stanzi had enough sense to get rid of the ball, though. Christensen was sacked a few times, if I recall correctly.
by Spats on Oct 29, 2009 10:29 AM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
Are you sure you were att Iowa-PITT...
not the game nobody remembers in Iowa City?
by bconway6 on Oct 29, 2009 1:27 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
Christensen was sacked 4 times and Stanzi was sacked twice.
You look atthe box score, and you wonder how the hell Pitt won that game. Not that Iowa was, exactly, lighting things up, but had they just given Greene the ball on EVERY play, they would have won. He had 147 yards on 23 carries.
Stull had 129 yards on 11 completions and McCoy didn’t even eke out 80 yards.
by Spats on Oct 29, 2009 1:53 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
more towards JIMBO...replace Iowa with PSU and it sounds too familiar.
and PSU Iowa seemed to control most of that game at the line of scrimmage. It just came down to NOT PSU Pitt getting touchdowns in the red zone, and PSU turning it over one too many times and basically shutting themselves down in the red zone twice. PSU Iowa was better then(Iowa) despite the huge 1-point victory Iowa Pitt fans love to point toward.
- Not to compare Iowa fans to Pitt fans, since well, they actually beat us this decade.
by bconway6 on Oct 30, 2009 3:24 AM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
I flip-flop over this series constantly...
On one hand, I’d like to play them and give them the beating they deserve. I’m sorry, but we just would not lose to that team with that coaching staff. Beating them would ensure that they have nothing left to talk about.
On the other hand, why bother? Show of hands…how many people here would rather play Pitt than ‘Bama? Right or wrong, our OOC schedule is what it is for a reason, and so long as we can keep scheduling at least one “marquee” game, I truthfully don’t care too much what the other three are. Pitt is NOT a marquee game.
"We heard all that talk all week about the SEC and their speed, but we knew personally that they weren't nearly as tough as us."
-Tony Hunt
by Cpiritual27 on Oct 28, 2009 12:32 PM EDT reply actions 0 recs
I agree about the Pitt vs. Bama game
but show of hands…how many people would rather play Temple, Eastern Illinois, Akron, et al or Pitt.
How could Nixon know so little about Watergate and so much about football ?
by psupride on Oct 28, 2009 12:40 PM EDT up reply actions 1 recs
Yeah yeah
But Pitt would replace an actual marquee team on the schedule. That’s my beef.
DO YOU HAVE PRIDE, DANNY?
by ReadingRambler on Oct 28, 2009 12:49 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
Exactly
I’d love to play ‘Bama and Pitt in the same season, I’m just accepting the limitations of our scheduling.
"We heard all that talk all week about the SEC and their speed, but we knew personally that they weren't nearly as tough as us."
-Tony Hunt
by Cpiritual27 on Oct 28, 2009 12:52 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
I feel like this has been gone over multiple times and I don't feel like beating a dead horse but....
Year A
4 Big Ten Games home
Marquee team home
1 MAC team home
1 FCS team home
4 Big Ten Games Away
Pitt Away
Year B
4 Big Ten Games home
1 Marquee team away
1 MAC team home
1 FCS team home
4 Big Ten Games Away
Pitt Home
That is 7 home games a year with a marquee game and an old rivalry. The only question I have is if there is something the Big Ten signed with the MAC that makes us play a certain amount of MAC games away.
How could Nixon know so little about Watergate and so much about football ?
by psupride on Oct 28, 2009 1:52 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
Two things
Yes, every Big Ten team has to give a MAC team a home game in exchance for the Big Ten getting some manner of scheduling prefrence.
How do we get to play 8 home games under your theory. We need seven, we like eight.
Beat Northwestern.
by jesse. on Oct 28, 2009 2:08 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
how to get to 8 home games
Not sure of all the details but what is the rule about Hawaii and getting the extra game? schedule them one year and we could get an extra home game.
Tim Curly I’m expecting a call to discuss my employment offer.
Also I don;t know how we need 7+ games. If I’m not mistaken weren’t we operating in the 90s with 6 home games?
How could Nixon know so little about Watergate and so much about football ?
by psupride on Oct 28, 2009 2:24 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
We operated with less money
Beat Northwestern.
by jesse. on Oct 28, 2009 2:29 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
If I’m not mistaken weren’t we operating in the 90s with 6 home games?
So, did most every team. And it’s an arms race and since our peer institutions are all scheduling 7 (or 8) home games, we need to as well simply to keep pace.
by Laaaaazzz on Oct 29, 2009 10:58 AM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
Shouldn't we
be pretty flush with cash right now? With 2 recent BCS games and a couple of extra games from the NIT?
by Joe 96alum on Oct 29, 2009 11:02 AM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
The last numbers I saw (from 2008, I think) have us 4th in the Big Ten in Athletic Department revenues, far behind Ohio State and somewhat behind Michigan and Wisconsin. We definitely need to keep scheduling 7 (or more) home games a year to keep up.
And the extra basketball games and NIT don’t do much of anything to help our revenues. Selling a crapload of season tickets to basketball this season might help, though I’m dubious that would happen.
by Laaaaazzz on Oct 29, 2009 11:30 AM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
Pitt not a marquee game = +1
Also, they don’t have much to “talk about.” They know that they’re inferior. The Big East is weaker than the Big 10. Penn State has far more traditions. Penn State has DOMINATED the series over the past several decades. Penn State is a much better school…Jeez do I need to continue?
by NoLimitLion1 on Oct 28, 2009 12:43 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
"They know that they’re inferior"
actually the problem is that they don’t know they are inferior. They actually say “we beat Iowa last year” and actually use that as a point in the argument. It’s just silly.
"It was an attrition football game and you know we like that."
by showtime on Oct 28, 2009 10:52 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
Pitt is at least as good of a game
as Syracuse has been. I say we get them on the schedule as a home-and-home. Just try it once.
by jimbo2psu on Oct 29, 2009 8:58 AM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
It was tried, but they wanted a long term deal. Now, perhaps at the present time, they might be more open to a shorter series, but who knows if the schools even ever talk about it.
The ADs of PSU and Pitt must talk to each other some time since other sports play against each other.
by Laaaaazzz on Oct 29, 2009 10:59 AM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
It's home and home, forever, or nothing.
What would the point be in playing twice every ten years. It would make this nonsense worse, not better.
Beat Northwestern.
by jesse. on Oct 29, 2009 11:20 AM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
Not to mention
on top of being an awful team with an awful fan base, Pitt was selling their home Penn State game tickets only as a package deal, lumped in with like Pitt-Rutgers and Pitt-Syracuse. Needless to say, those games were gigantic in ticket sales, for a change.
Deus nobiscum, quis contra?
by chocochuck02 on Oct 29, 2009 11:27 AM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
I’m cool with nothing then. Better than limiting our scheduling flexibility by playing Pitt every year.
YMMV.
by Laaaaazzz on Oct 29, 2009 11:31 AM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
No kidding.
How does that solve our problem of playing subpar teams? Don’t try to tell me Pitt is going to be good on a consistent basis. Besides, Cinncinatti is going to shred them hardcore.
Deus nobiscum, quis contra?
by chocochuck02 on Oct 29, 2009 11:35 AM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
I flip-flop too, but...
…hanging 52 points on them would shut them up for another decade. You don’t hear Maryland begging to play us anymore, do you?
by ednax1 on Oct 28, 2009 12:40 PM EDT reply actions 0 recs
I see Pitt is 15th in the BCS standings.
Good for them. Guess how many times they’ve been in the Top 15 in the final BCS standings?
Hint: Take the BCS Conference teams that have never finished in the top 15 of the final BCS standings Quiz! You’ll see half the Big East there.
by Cairo on Oct 28, 2009 12:54 PM EDT reply actions 0 recs
Jebus
Those comments are a real Algonquin Round Table. They are also a perfect illustration of why these two teams should never play again. We bring out the worst in each other, and we all wind up looking a bunch of tools.
Beat Northwestern.
by jesse. on Oct 28, 2009 1:02 PM EDT reply actions 0 recs
I would rather
play Pitt than Alabama because of the tradition. My dad and uncle attened Pitt, and at one time had season tickets to Pitt, I’ve been to about 20 – 25 Pitt games in my life (including the 12-0 game). There’s no tradition with ‘Bama, just 30-year old memories, and maybe the thought we’ll do another home-and-home with them in 25 years. But there’s also no reason we can’t play both in the same season other than Penn State’s self-imposed limitations.
Claiming the Big Ten is better than the Big East is very dubious right now. I’ve been watching college football since the mid-80’s and off of the top of my head I can’t think of a worse conference performance in bowls than last year’s 1-6 mark by the Big Ten. And you can’t claim a 14-point loss is a better performance than a 3-point loss unless you’re hung up on the aesthetics of 3-0.
by Joe 96alum on Oct 28, 2009 1:07 PM EDT reply actions 0 recs
Wait, what? Seriously?
Pitt lost to an Oregon State team that we destroyed by more than 5 touchdowns. We lost by 14 to a USC team that may have been all around the best team in the country and would have beaten Pitt by 40.
DO YOU HAVE PRIDE, DANNY?
by ReadingRambler on Oct 28, 2009 1:10 PM EDT up reply actions 2 recs
And people tend to forget that the Big 10 has had two BCS representatives for the last several years. So, while conferences like the Big East and ACC are sending their top team ONLY to a BCS game, the Big 10 is sending two.
That has ripple effects. Now the third place team is playing in the Big10 Bowl tie-in that the 2nd place team would have, otherwise, played in, 4th for third, and so forth.
by Spats on Oct 28, 2009 1:33 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
On top of that
the Big East has a much easier bowl line up
Big East’s bowl line up:
Virginia Tech
Oregon State
Buffalo
N.C. State
Memphis
North Carolina
based on how good I think the teams were, if we had matched up our best with their best bowl opponent and so forth:
PSU vs. Virginia Tech
Ohio State vs. Oregon State
Michigan State vs. 8-4 North Carolina
Iowa vs. 8-5 Buffalo
Northwestern vs. 6-6 N.C. State
Minnesota vs. 6-6 Memphis
I think the Big Ten goes undefeated with that line up, easily. Whereas the Big East went 4-2 with losses to Virginia Tech and Oregon State by Cinci and Pitt respectively.
by PSUisMyHeart on Oct 28, 2009 3:35 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
There’s no tradition with ‘Bama, just 30-year old memories RIght, and how old are the memories in the Pitt series? 1982 was 27 years ago too.
Claiming the Big Ten is better than the Big East is very dubious right now. Yeah, in football, and right now. The Big Ten is a superior league to the Big East in every respect other than certain sports, some years.
The options available are to play them on a home and home basis, forever. Or never again. I don’t see how Pitt earns a favored status by calling us names. It’s juvenile.
Times change, constant rehash of Pitt/Penn State is just living in the past.
Beat Northwestern.
by jesse. on Oct 28, 2009 1:19 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
Are you kidding?
In the Sun Bowl Pitt struggled for four hours and couldn’t even manage to creep close enough to hit a field goal.
by ednax1 on Oct 28, 2009 1:25 PM EDT up reply actions 1 recs
Maybe it was because I grew up outside of PA
I couldn’t care less about Pitt. Joining the Big Ten was the best thing for the Nittany Lions—it allowed PSU to grow from a regionally admired program to the nationally prominent force that they are now. Yes, I would prefer to play Pitt over a MAC school, but I don’t have any more regard or desire to have them as an opponent than, say, North Carolina State.
by Cairo on Oct 28, 2009 1:20 PM EDT reply actions 0 recs
"joining the big ten was the best thing for the Nittany Lions"
overall athletic dept? yes. best thing that ever happened to PSU football? no. I completely disagree.
I wasn’t around back then, but I believe PSU football had as much, maybe more, national relevance in the 70’s and 80’s than in the 90’s and current decade.
by hbeach08 on Oct 28, 2009 1:28 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
And how would we have fared outside of the Big Ten?
The Big Ten was certainly better in the 1990s than the Big East. We would have been far less nationally relevant.
And the Dark Years would have been a whole lot darker if we were losing to Maryland and Rutgers instead of Purdue and Wisconsin.
DO YOU HAVE PRIDE, DANNY?
by ReadingRambler on Oct 28, 2009 1:54 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
I don't think we'd have had any losing seasons
Had we been in the Big East though
Beat Northwestern.
by jesse. on Oct 28, 2009 2:06 PM EDT up reply actions 1 recs
I'm not comparing our decision to join the Big Ten...
…to potentially having joined the Big East. I’m comparing it to remaining independent. As an independent, none of the revenue sharing happens. As you know jNW profits when Ohio State plays in the Fiesta Bowl. This year, and maybe last year aside, I am of the opinion that the Big Ten provides a much tougher road to a 10 win season as opposed to being independent and sprinkling in service academy / Rutgers / Maryland in mid-November. Notre Dame has a pretty good deal if they get 10 wins. And to the comment below about perennially being in the top ten….by my count we have finished top ten 5 times in the last 19 years as opposed to 12 times in the 70’s and 80’s.
by hbeach08 on Oct 28, 2009 2:12 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
We never could have reamined independent
DO YOU HAVE PRIDE, DANNY?
by ReadingRambler on Oct 28, 2009 2:13 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
I'll take your word for it...
….but I stand by my statement that joining the Big Ten was NOT the best thing to ever happen to PSU football.
I simply don’t know about the pressure we were under to joining a conference at that time. If the administration felt like our back was against the wall and we would slip away into oblivion if we didn’t join, then I guess the Big Ten was the only choice.
by hbeach08 on Oct 28, 2009 2:17 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
If Penn State had joined the Big East
in 1982, we still would have joined the Big Ten in 1992.
Beat Northwestern.
by jesse. on Oct 28, 2009 2:23 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
and don't get me wrong....
…I love the fact that we are in the Big Ten…I love the brand of football and the tradition of the conference.
by hbeach08 on Oct 28, 2009 2:27 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
Closing the gap...
…right, that is what they call it. We are a perenial top 10 team and just because Pitt has started to venture into the top 25, I guess that is closing the gap.
Something about the current 2010 recruiting class might offer some insight on closing the gap.
WE ARE.......PENN STATE!
by Nick7 on Oct 28, 2009 1:25 PM EDT reply actions 0 recs
Take emotion out of it.
Do you think Ohio State would play Pitt home and home forever? Of course not.
Why? Because the economics don’t support it.
They would get a home and home once every 15 years, or a deal similar to the one Temple gets. Just change the names of the teams, and you see how completely silly Pitt’s demands are from a purely economic standpoint.
I get how this seems condesending and/or insulting to Pitt fans. To an extent it is, but that’s the deal. You don’t sacrifice millions of dollars because some folks on a message board tease you a little.
Beat Northwestern.
by jesse. on Oct 28, 2009 1:34 PM EDT reply actions 2 recs
One other thing
I get why Pitt doesn’t want to play on Penn State’s terms. I don’t blame them in the slightest.
Why I don’t get is why we can’t all just say; “hey, it was fun while it lasted” and move on.
Beat Northwestern.
by jesse. on Oct 28, 2009 1:38 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
"While it lasted"
spans like 100 years. Some of care would rather see a traditional rivalry with good football than a constant stream of games vs. Youngstown St. and Eastern Illinois.
by Joe 96alum on Oct 28, 2009 7:38 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
It wasn't "good football"
For most of the Paterno era, Pitt was crappy outside of a couple of games.
DO YOU HAVE PRIDE, DANNY?
by ReadingRambler on Oct 28, 2009 8:04 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
Seriously
look at the record, it looks closer than it is, until you look at Paterno’s record in the modern era:
All-time: PSU 50-42-4
Under Paterno: 23-7-1
The rivalry is dead. I wish we had a blood rival like Pitt used to be, but Paterno dominated the old rivals to the point where they stopped being “rivals” and fell into mediocrity. We’re starting to get to that point with tOSU as a rival, especially with the whole Pryor thing. Sure it’s doesn’t have the 100 year history that we have with Pitt, but we hate them, no? (fun fact though: we first played Ohio State in 1912 and killed them 37-0, but the pussies forfeited before the game was over because we hit them too hard, so we’re coming up on the 100th anniversary of that game)
by dawsonPSU10 on Oct 28, 2009 10:50 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
Gawd
I didn’t know the record was that bad.
DO YOU HAVE PRIDE, DANNY?
by ReadingRambler on Oct 28, 2009 11:07 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
You mean all-time record?
Yeah it surprised me too that it was that close. I got the info from the wiki page here.
It started out well for us, then they pwned us for about 25 years in the teens to late 30s. Then they were pretty even through the 40s and 50s. After 1958 it was pretty much EPIC PWNAGE for us from there on out.
The strangest part is from 1903 to 1966 the game was played in Pittsburgh 56 out of 60 times, and go figure thats when the longest losing streak for us came.
And get this: of the 96 total meetings by Pitt and Penn State:
72 were played in Pittsburgh, only 22 were played in State College, and 2 times they played in Bellefonte, but I guess we got the last laugh since we still lead the series.
That’s 75% of the series played on a hostile field.
by dawsonPSU10 on Oct 29, 2009 1:45 AM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
If I'm not mistaken
I have read that Penn Stat didn’t mind traveling to Pittsburgh for greater exposure. Beaver Stadium used to be Beaver Field, on the west side of campus.
by Joe 96alum on Oct 29, 2009 8:25 AM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
You would think that Pitt would return the favor and now play an unbalanced schedule at PSU, since playing against PSU gives them more exposure nowadays.
Of course, for Pitt fans “tradition” is only important in the general sense when talking about playing the “rivalry” every year. When it comes to recognizing that the “tradition” is that the series has always been scheduled in order to accomodate the team in the power position, they put their fingers in their ears.
by Laaaaazzz on Oct 29, 2009 11:03 AM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
Would Pitt tradition
be their last Final Four was in 1941? Thirteen years before the Nits last?
Deus nobiscum, quis contra?
by chocochuck02 on Oct 29, 2009 11:31 AM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
Actually, Penn State did want to play most of the games in Pittsburgh
1). Beaver Field was not a “great big stadium”. Pitt Stadium at that time was the “Cat’s meow” in on-campus stadiums
2). Traveling to Penn State from the Burgh in those days was a four hour ordeal. Had to go through then God awful Tyrone and it’s papermill. Smelled like sewage.
3). My dad and I attended many Pitt-Penn State games in the early 60’s and they were always on Thanksgiving or the Saturday after. PSU Students were on a break.
So, it “just made sense” in those days
Perfection is not attainable, but if we chase perfection we can catch excellence.
Vince Lombardi
by PaJoe on Oct 29, 2009 5:14 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
And it "just makes sense" in these days
to play more games at Beaver Stadium. Larger stadium = more attendance. More fans = more attendance. Travelling from the eastern part of the state to Pittsburgh is a lot longer than travelling from Pittsburgh to PSU.
Also “Traveling to Penn State from the Burgh in those days was a four hour ordeal.”
I’d imagine the trip to the Burgh from Penn State was also then a four hour ordeal. So Penn State put themselves at a disadvantage in order to placate the team with the dominant position at the time.
But I guess now that the situation is reversed it is completely inconceivable to play more games at PSU than at Pitt.
by The JuggerNitt on Oct 29, 2009 5:24 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
You are right
the trip from State College to the Burgh was also an ordeal.
We’re comparing apples to oranges when we look at the series from 1900 – 1960 or so as to what it would be today. Back then, college football wasn’t the “big thing” that it is now. People didn’t make it an all day deal with tailgaiting, etc. It just made sense to those in “power” back then to play in Pittsburgh. It is water over the dam.
As stated man times, Pitt needs PSU on the schedule much more than we need them. They need us to sell out the stadium, not only for our game but as a package with 1-2 of the lesser atractive games to assure that these games sell.
Other than both schools being from PA. it makes little sense for us to play them. Doesn’t give us any value financially.
I, however, am in Joe96alum’s corner. I wish we still played them, but it would take a long time for the series to regain any relevance, if ever.
Perfection is not attainable, but if we chase perfection we can catch excellence.
Vince Lombardi
by PaJoe on Oct 29, 2009 5:43 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
Exactly
Just like PSU show benefit in playing games at Pittsburgh every year for a variety of reasons, it’s perfectly reasonable that Pitt could see the benefit of playing an unbalanced schedule in order to schedule a long term series with PSU. As you say “it just makes sense”.
by Laaaaazzz on Oct 29, 2009 6:56 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
Except
The only real plus for pitt taking the 2-1 is getting their fan base fired up to play PSU again.
On the other hand, it would yield PSU a great recruiting tactic in wpa, as taking a 2-1 is seen as a slap to their program.
During the 1900-1960, there were far more benefits to PSU playing in pittsburgh. Then playing at PSU today for Pitt. Pitt today is able to get 1-1 with the same roster as PSU. ND, Nebraska, other B10 teams..
by JayNoGet21 on Oct 31, 2009 1:10 AM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
You are failing to see the point
Pit will not replace Youngstown St or E Illinois. They will replace Bama, Miami, Nebraska, so on.
Black Shoes. Basic Blues. No Name. All Game.
"Everyone has a plan, until they get punched in the mouth."
by Roland86 on Oct 28, 2009 8:10 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
What I see
since Pitt left the schedule is more MAC and FCS.
by Joe 96alum on Oct 28, 2009 9:23 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
What you are seeing is a 12th game which is a de facto 1 and done home game. Every school is doing this (did you miss Pitt playign Yougstown St this season?).
More cupcakes on the schedule has nothing to do with playing or not playing Pitt.
by Laaaaazzz on Oct 29, 2009 11:04 AM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
Pitt...YAWN
"Every player we have, someone—maybe a parent, a grandparent, someone—poured their life and soul into that young man. They are handing that young man off to us. They are giving us their treasure, and it's our job to make sure we give them back that young man intact and ready to face the world." - Joe Paterno
by Horse N Buggy on Oct 28, 2009 1:44 PM EDT reply actions 0 recs
Change the record please
We should play Pitt, crappy schedule, BCS sucks, OMG SEC, Nintendo 12, Big Ten should add ND, should we have joined the big east?, co champions?
College football is worse than even politics when it comes to talking points. It is so boring and annoying and bleh.
I need new blood. I actually am an avid history buff and love rehashing old memories, but not every damn week or two. I could give a damn if we ever play Pitt again, if we do great, if we don’t? that is great too. This is a fine topic to discuss again if there are ever any new revelations, but there won’t be for awhile so we need to let it go and Hate on jNW.
Black Shoes. Basic Blues. No Name. All Game.
"Everyone has a plan, until they get punched in the mouth."
by Roland86 on Oct 28, 2009 1:45 PM EDT reply actions 0 recs
If it’s so boring and annoying then why don’t you start a new interesting topic?
by catesinator on Oct 28, 2009 4:09 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
If i had enough new ideas I would start a blog or at least post some sweet fanposts, but alas
I am not a very capable writer.
Also, I would suppose that things I find interesting and neat are things that bore/are ridiculous to most people.
Black Shoes. Basic Blues. No Name. All Game.
"Everyone has a plan, until they get punched in the mouth."
by Roland86 on Oct 28, 2009 8:17 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
Like????
"Every player we have, someone—maybe a parent, a grandparent, someone—poured their life and soul into that young man. They are handing that young man off to us. They are giving us their treasure, and it's our job to make sure we give them back that young man intact and ready to face the world." - Joe Paterno
by Horse N Buggy on Oct 29, 2009 1:38 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
geek response:
Writing PowerShell/T-SQL code to calculate subnets!
by nylyst on Oct 29, 2009 8:38 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
Outside of actual current football stuff?
I really like historical stuff, and analyzing trends in things to try to predict what will happen. Not that I am necessarily good at it, but I like learning about it. I am a fairly big fan of lists of things. Just compiling a bunch of stuff and looking at it. Also, I like hearing about new and innovative approaches to problems. I don’t usually have too many great Ideas, but I love when people have creative ideas instead of spewing the same garbage and rhetoric we always hear.
Black Shoes. Basic Blues. No Name. All Game.
"Everyone has a plan, until they get punched in the mouth."
by Roland86 on Oct 30, 2009 2:21 AM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
“I love when people have creative ideas instead of spewing the same garbage and rhetoric we always hear.”
So you must get tired of reading the mainstream media sports pages!
"The sea was angry that day, my friends." G. Costanza
by NJ lion on Oct 30, 2009 11:38 AM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
I've changed my mind on this one.
A few years ago, I was solidly in the “play Pitt every year” camp. I went to law school in Pittsburgh, and know how much animosity there is between PSU and Pitt fans out there. But the rest of the state just doesn’t care. There’s a group of people inside a 60 mile radius of Pittsburgh who want to see this happen, but it’s over. The rest of the state doesn’t care. The rest of PSU’s fanbase doesn’t care. Practically everyone under 35 years old doesn’t care.
I’m over it. Let ‘em wallow in their crap conference and rented stadium without us throwing them a financial and emotional lifeline just to satisfy a slight itch of nostalgia. If the Big Ten wants to bring them in as the 12th conference member, we’ll deal with it.
Twitter: @scrappled
"When it’s third-and-10, you can take the milk drinkers and I’ll take the whiskey drinkers every time" - Max McGee
by Run Up The Score on Oct 28, 2009 1:48 PM EDT reply actions 2 recs
I like to just agree with them.
I tell my brother-in-law (an avid Pitt fan), “Hell yes, we’re afraid. We don’t want to lose 12-0 again!” I think they hate the sarcasm more than the truth.
by Spats on Oct 28, 2009 3:43 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
I like your idea
And make it sound like it’s some big secret that got leaked out of the athletic dept. And the more the Pitt guy gets mad, the thicker you lay on the sarcasm of how right they are. It’s like Jim dealing with Dwight Schrute – classic stuff.
"The sea was angry that day, my friends." G. Costanza
by NJ lion on Oct 28, 2009 4:39 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
Exactly!
“BEARS! BEETS! BATTLESTAR GALLACTICA!”
by Spats on Oct 29, 2009 8:01 AM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
Question-
Which bear is the best bear?
"I thought the kid we were using had the potential to be a good quarterback, and I blew that one." - Joseph V. Paterno
by leeharvey418 on Oct 29, 2009 11:29 AM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
Lucky gun, fake fifth, 8XY bitch
Daryll Clark, The Penn State Football Story Is...
by letsgopsu on Oct 29, 2009 12:21 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
Of course if you have alumni parents like I do
you were raised hearing the stories of pwning Pitt, especially 48-14 (my dad was there for that game, he was going to Pitt for his MBA in the early 80s), I try to jab at my best friend from HS who went to Pitt, but he doesn’t get it. I’ve asked him about it, and he says, “we’ve got the ‘Backyard Brawl’”.
I was raised disliking Pitt, not really hate, like I’m sure my parents felt at the height of the rivalry. In fact my first PSU game was the 1997 opener against Pitt where we crushed them 34-17. Granted, if we played Pitt, I’d dredge up some hate to honor the old rivalry, but for most part PSU students don’t understand it. The rivalry is dead.
by dawsonPSU10 on Oct 28, 2009 4:57 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
I think your view
is the minority. Most people would like to see this game on a regular basis.
by Joe 96alum on Oct 28, 2009 7:32 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
Is this just a personal opinion or do you have something with which to back this up?
DO YOU HAVE PRIDE, DANNY?
by ReadingRambler on Oct 28, 2009 7:37 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
Of course it's
my opinion. Based on my conversations with people and what I read on message boards. And the fact that Pitt keeps coming up on this blog and in articles like the one mentioned in the original post.
by Joe 96alum on Oct 28, 2009 7:42 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
Umm
Just because Pitt is mentioned doesn’t mean anyone wants to play them.
DO YOU HAVE PRIDE, DANNY?
by ReadingRambler on Oct 28, 2009 8:04 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
The ESPN writers
write about things that they think people will be interested in. If the #15 BCS team in question would have been Syracuse or Rutgers no article would have been written.
by Joe 96alum on Oct 28, 2009 9:25 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
are you really that interested in a Cinci vs Iowa matchup?
that’s how pretty much everyone else feels about the Penn State vs Pitt matchup
by The JuggerNitt on Oct 29, 2009 3:09 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
I don't know
I think Cincinnati and Ohio State would be appointment television this year. Even if most years is sucked.
Beat Northwestern.
by jesse. on Oct 29, 2009 3:18 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
it wasn't Cinci and OSU
it was Cinci and Iowa http://espn.go.com/blog/bigeast/post/_/id/4411/blogger-debate-iowa-vs-cincinnati
The ESPN writers wrote about that. They seem to be going top to bottom, Big 10 vs Big East. Next installment I’m assuming will be Ohio State vs West Virginia.
Joe says “if the #15 BCS team in question would have been Syracuse or Rutgers no article would have been written” when actually, according to the debate they’re having, it actually would have been written. This wasn’t a “why is there no PSU vs Pitt matchup, let’s pretend what would happen if there was” article, it was a “let’s compare the Big 10 to the Big East” series.
by The JuggerNitt on Oct 29, 2009 3:25 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
Regardless
The relevant analogy in this discussion is Ohio State versus Cincinnati.
Beat Northwestern.
by jesse. on Oct 29, 2009 5:07 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
I mean perhaps, but no
since the only reason I brought it up was this comment:
The ESPN writers write about things that they think people will be interested in. If the #15 BCS team in question would have been Syracuse or Rutgers no article would have been written.
And since the writers already wrote about Iowa vs Cinci (hence my sarcastic “are you really interested in an Iowa vs Cinci matchup?”) and are seemingly just going down the list, then yes, they would have written the article if the Big East’s next team was Syracuse or Rutgers. They aren’t writing because people care about the interesting matchup, or if they are, they’re going about it in a convoluted way just to bring up the PSU Pitt rivalry and potential matchup in the BCS.
Of course I could be completely wrong and misunderstanding what Rittenberg is doing, but still the relevant analogy in this discussio is Iowa vs Cincinnati, since that’s what they actually did write about.
I do understand that in a pure “intrastate rivalry” aspect OSU vs Cinci is more appropriate, but this specific sub-thread was what the media was writing about, and PaJoe using that to justify that the PSU Pitt rivalry is relevant.
by The JuggerNitt on Oct 29, 2009 5:30 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
I think that
This post is generating intrest not because of the Rittenberg post compating the Big Ten to the Big East, but because it coincidently compared Penn State to Pitt. There wouldn’t be 110 posts and counting had we been compared to South Florida.
The thrust of the conversation has been about whether or not to renew the rivalry. I think comparing Ohio State and Cincinnati is a much more relevant analogy in the discussion the board is having.
Beat Northwestern.
by jesse. on Oct 30, 2009 8:46 AM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
Disagree
The people who want to play Pitt mention it all the time.
The people (like myself) who don’t really care one way or another about playing Pitt don’t general speak up. Why would they? They are apathetic.
I suspect that most PSU fans would be fine with playing Pitt, but it doesn’t really concern them one way or another. Especially among the younger crowd who hate tOSU and UM far more than Pitt.
by Laaaaazzz on Oct 29, 2009 11:12 AM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
I am on the apathetic team
I dont really care one way or the other who we play. Whoever we are playing I will HATE HATE HATE HATE HATE. If that HATE happens to be toward Pitt so be it. If not, oh well I will HATE someone else.
"Wherever you go, Penn State will go with you. You are now a part of her. Her image will be cast in your image. Your reputation will become her reputation."
by noodlebucket on Oct 29, 2009 6:21 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
Yeah, I'm trying to cut back on derisive commenting
And reminding myself I can return to lurking when a thread is disinteresting to me, but I agree with you here, and the whole Pitt thing gets a big ‘Yawn’ from me.
"For me the game wasn’t grounded in reality. It was about the uniform you put on that turned you into a warrior. It was about the mythology of the battle, the victory, the defeat, the struggle." - Mike Reid, PSU '69
by jtothep on Oct 29, 2009 7:59 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
...but why Jtot....
divisive writing is the second best thing to over-abundant commenting.
regardless of the relevance of the PSU -pitt. ‘rivalry’
by bconway6 on Oct 30, 2009 3:48 AM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
I really think that you're just downright out of line here,
baconway. You’re going about things all wrong. Your outlook is myopic and you’re failing to acknowledge even the basest of Reason’s fundamental maxims. You probably wrote that just to be able to say that you did, hiding an otherwise grumpy opinion on the student attendance this year. Next, you’ll be complaining about referee performance or the perpetual anti-big ten bias by the MSM, even tho the dodds/schlabachs/platschkes/fordes of the world are already widely disrespected in blogistan, when really all you truly want for christmas is for ruts to write more.
"For me the game wasn’t grounded in reality. It was about the uniform you put on that turned you into a warrior. It was about the mythology of the battle, the victory, the defeat, the struggle." - Mike Reid, PSU '69
by jtothep on Oct 30, 2009 5:58 AM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
You forgot to call him a kool-aide drinking homer
Beat Northwestern.
by jesse. on Oct 30, 2009 8:47 AM EDT up reply actions 1 recs
Super homer
DO YOU HAVE PRIDE, DANNY?
by ReadingRambler on Oct 30, 2009 9:31 AM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
shite
I knew I was retiring derision for a good reason: I’m not even good at it.
"For me the game wasn’t grounded in reality. It was about the uniform you put on that turned you into a warrior. It was about the mythology of the battle, the victory, the defeat, the struggle." - Mike Reid, PSU '69
by jtothep on Oct 30, 2009 12:02 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
that's kinda flawed logic
since it is really “the squeaky wheel gets the grease”. For every 1 person you see complaining about it on the internet there may indeed be 10, or even 100 people NOT posting or complaining about it, but there are thousands to millions of people who just don’t care.
by The JuggerNitt on Oct 29, 2009 3:11 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
Jeff Knox
This a very bad idea for him to return to Pittsburgh. He was involved in a lot of shady stuff here long before going to Central Catholic. Someone should give this kid better advice. He won’t last a season.
by pittsburghpromise on Oct 28, 2009 4:54 PM EDT reply actions 0 recs
Pitt is the only shot we have at a vibrant intrastate rivalry
Something I believe to be good for the health of the sport in the state as a whole. The Owls are incompetent. Pitt might be able to at least keep it interesting. Further, I think having the Nittany Lions in Heinz Field every other year, preferably on a Saturday night, would be good for recruiting in WPIAL territory.
"Never mistake motion for action." - Ernest Hemingway
by SubLime on Oct 28, 2009 8:38 PM EDT reply actions 0 recs
FIXED
Pitt is the only shot wehavehad at a vibrant intrastate rivalry
Their consistent mediocrity and both school’s stubbornness doomed that, however.
by dawsonPSU10 on Oct 28, 2009 10:58 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
Shot is the key term
A dynamic series is by no means a cinch.
"Never mistake motion for action." - Ernest Hemingway
by SubLime on Oct 29, 2009 8:10 AM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
Not a big recruiting guy...
but didnt we just post multitudes of pictures and things of the “Wanshache Wall” this spring? Point being that we aren’t having trouble recruiting in WPIAL territory as it is.
by bconway6 on Oct 29, 2009 12:07 AM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
I don't mean to suggest that we are having trouble
I just think we could OWN it.
"Never mistake motion for action." - Ernest Hemingway
by SubLime on Oct 29, 2009 8:12 AM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
Recruiting the WPIAL
may not be a problem right now, but we’re in a unique recruiting position because of JoePa and who he is in the year 2009. Once he’s out of the picture, we’re going to lose some of that. At that point it will help the team to show up in Pittsburgh occasionally.
by Joe 96alum on Oct 29, 2009 8:29 AM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
False
We do well in the WPIAL because of Bradley.
DO YOU HAVE PRIDE, DANNY?
by ReadingRambler on Oct 29, 2009 10:21 AM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
Bradley does well
but there’s still a JoePa factor wherever we go.
by Joe 96alum on Oct 29, 2009 11:03 AM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
My point still stands
We do well in WPA because the kids connect with Scrap. JoePa doesn’t even travel anymore, does he?
DO YOU HAVE PRIDE, DANNY?
by ReadingRambler on Oct 29, 2009 11:06 AM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
JoePa
went to Rochester HS to seal the deal with Derek Moye.
http://www.pittsburghlive.com:8005/x/pittsburghtrib/sports/highschool/s_490369.html
I know Moye says in there he had his mind made up but it can’t hurt when he shows up at a high school.
by Joe 96alum on Oct 29, 2009 11:27 AM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
When was the last time we played a game in Maryland? 1994? We seem to be doing just fine recruiting there.
I think the “play games in a location for recruiting purposes” is completely overblown. Players go to a school because the school wins, has a national rep, has good facilities, they like the campus, etc. The school playing the occasional game near their high school has got to be extremely far down on the list of things that motivate someone to pick a particular college.
by Laaaaazzz on Oct 29, 2009 11:15 AM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
I think that's a much older school of thought
back when the sport wasn’t so publicized, and people couldn’t see all games on tv, it was probably more important. But as you said, it’s pretty overblown now.
by PSUisMyHeart on Oct 29, 2009 1:18 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
Hey, Coach Wannstedt!
You might be playing Big Brother up north in the post season! Better power up that brain of yours!
by Mr. Rosewater on Oct 29, 2009 1:40 AM EDT reply actions 0 recs
This is just priceless...
A decade with no Pitt-Penn State game has damaged both programs.
Honestly, cite an example of how has it has “damaged” Penn State?
Recruiting in Western PA still seems OK (see Diffenbach, Rickets, Paul Jones, Paul Posluszny, Sean Lee, AQ Shipley, Justin King….etc.)
Since the series was discontinued, we’ve had 2 Big 10 titles since 2005 and are in the midst of competing for a third.
5 bowl games, (2 of which were BCS bowl games).
Where’s the damage? People on message boards now tell us we’re scared. I guess that’s what he’s talking about.
It’s just funny that this conversation ONLY comes up when Pitt realizes some semblance of success.
by Spats on Oct 29, 2009 11:22 AM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
The damage
this year is no sellouts for OOC games and less exposure on TV, with games buried at noon on the Big 10 network, or ESPN classic.
by Joe 96alum on Oct 29, 2009 11:31 AM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
How much exposure do you think other programs have? We’ve been on ABC and ESPN a ton this season.
by Laaaaazzz on Oct 29, 2009 11:32 AM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
And we'd still be contractually obligated to play (what is it 4?) 4 games on the Big 10 network.
Outside of Western PA, the Pitt/Penn State “rivalry” just doesn’t have any spark. Do you watch the Civl War in Oregon? Or the Apple Bowl (or whatever they call it). I just don’t see it getting any more exposure than a game against Rutgers or Syracuse. People just don’t care about it. The only time this conversation comes up is when Pitt enjoys a few wins that they consider “marquee” or “benchmark” and they want to use Penn State as their measuring stick. Hell, maybe we should just accept it as a compliment.
by Spats on Oct 29, 2009 12:01 PM EDT up reply actions 1 recs
Someday they'll win ten games again..
Someday.
Deus nobiscum, quis contra?
by chocochuck02 on Oct 29, 2009 12:22 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
yes I do...
watch those games…but I literally watch college football from 9 am (west coast) til midnight.
by hbeach08 on Oct 29, 2009 12:32 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
but...but...even if we don't bring in a national audience
this would definitely bring in the thriving Pitt audience (cue yellow out picture).
by The JuggerNitt on Oct 29, 2009 3:15 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
To summarize
my thoughts and answer the original question, if Pitt and Penn State played this year it would be a tough one-score game that probably would be lost by the team that committed more turnovers. Like a lot of college games. Any rational personal can see that Penn State, football wise, has more tradition, a better fan base, and generally is in better shape. But that doesn’t mean we shouldn’t play Pitt (or insult them with ridiculous 2-for-1 offers), they’re the only realistic option for beefing up the OOC schedule so that we can get September games that prepare us to play Iowa. I can’t bring myself to look down my nose at any college program given our experience with the Dark Years and long losing streaks to some teams.
by Joe 96alum on Oct 29, 2009 8:36 AM EDT reply actions 0 recs
But that doesn’t mean we shouldn’t play Pitt (or insult them with ridiculous 2-for-1 offers)
Why is it ridiculous? We played them in Pittsburgh 28 straight times and 54 out of 58 games. Why isn’t turnabout fair play?
I’m not saying that Pitt “owes” PSU extra home games as a makeup or anything but this “rivalry” was never about a fair balance between home games, why should PSU bow down to Pitt’s demands now? The dominant team has always had more home games.
That said, I think a 3 for 2 type arrange is probably pretty fair for both sides.
they’re the only realistic option for beefing up the OOC schedule so that we can get September games that prepare us to play Iowa
That’s silly. There’s literally dozens of programs that could be added to our schedule to “beef it up” if that was our primary concern. But the fact remains that we have a goal to have a certian number of home games, so that adding Pitt to schedule doesn’t mean you are replacing a cupcake — it means you are replacing a “good” team (like Alabama). Does it really matter if it is Rutgers or if it is Pitt that we are playing in Sept when it comes to preparing for conference play?
by Laaaaazzz on Oct 29, 2009 11:22 AM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
And my thoughts....
Pitt and Penn State haven’t played each other in a decade. Almost 3 sets of classes have gone to PSU and graduated and never seen a Pitt-PSU game. Unless you are living in the WPA area or are about 50 years old Pitt is no different than West Virginia or Rutgers. They are not the ONLY realistic option for beefing up the OOC schedule. Games against Alabama, WVU, Nebraska, Miami, Boston College, Virginia Tech are all teams we either played in the past, are playing in the future or geographically would work and would do just the same while also providing way better national exposure than what amount to a dormant regional rivalry.
I’m from WPA and would love to see PSU lay the smack down on Pitt. But I just don’t care anymore. IMO PSU can do much better with it’s one marquee OOC game than a series with Pitt. I love the fact we’re playing Alabama the next two seasons. I would love to see us play any of the teams I mentioned above again.
As for how a game between them might play out, the scenario you describe above probably isn’t too far fetched, a one score game. From a talent perspective PSU is better IMO but anything can happen in a football game. I do think it is worth mentioning that PSU has historically come ready to play for its bowl games over the years while Dave Wandstedt’s teams have historically crapped the bed in big games.
by catesinator on Oct 29, 2009 9:36 AM EDT reply actions 0 recs
Bingo
Unless you are living in the WPA area or are about 50 years old Pitt is no different than West Virginia or Rutgers.
Exactly. Pitt, WVU, Rutgers, Syracuse, BC, Maryland, whatever…. they are all the same team to me. Why should Pitt be treated as something special. Because of a political border? So what?
I like the idea of playing eastern teams, but I’d much rather see us rotate and play a wide variety of eastern opponents than play Pitt every year. That’s boring.
by Laaaaazzz on Oct 29, 2009 11:24 AM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
Would you be bored
if it was the Labor Day night game instead of Miami-FSU?
by Joe 96alum on Oct 29, 2009 11:38 AM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
I’d be bored with playing Pitt every year because they are a consistently mediocre team. Occasionally they can be good, but they just aren’t an interesting opponent. Playing them occasionally would actually be cool because they’d be a different team on the schedule and variety is fun.
If we wanted to schedule a long term series with an OOC team, I’d hope it’s an elite name team — someone like Notre Dame or Alabama, etc. Not a middling team like Pitt.
Pitt is completely indistinguishable from Rutgers, WVU, BC, Maryland and the like to me. How is Pitt any different? And how would playing a game in an odd time like Labor Day make Pitt better or more interesting?
by Laaaaazzz on Oct 29, 2009 11:50 AM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
Variety is the spice of life
Since we have to play 8 Big10 games a year (out of a pool of 10 teams), 2/3 of our schedule remains basically the same year after year after year. The other 4 games should be played against as many (good or halfway decent) different teams as possible. It’s kinda like the bowl games – the chance to see some dcent ooc games. It’s why the Temple series should end – boring and one-sided. I look forward to some of these 2 games series we have coming up. I think a multi-year series against Pitt would get real old, especially after we win all of them.
"The sea was angry that day, my friends." G. Costanza
by NJ lion on Oct 29, 2009 2:49 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
We are required to play a MAC team...
see Temple. (thanks B10 contracts). It may as well be Temple as any other MAC team(…is Temple < C, Michigan? maybe, but maybe not…tough poo)
Welcome to a major football conference. Pain In The ass panThers are asking for a 1-1 series. thats ridiculous at this point. We will get along just fine without an occasional 8 win big east team without hi-cupping. Not playing pitt only plisses off 50 year old alumni and Mark May, nobody else cares weather we play Pitt, Cincinnati, Temple, Penn. Same crap no big deal.
by bconway6 on Oct 30, 2009 4:05 AM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
That is something that I never understood
Why would teh big ten agree to that contract? What is in it for them?
How could Nixon know so little about Watergate and so much about football ?
by psupride on Oct 30, 2009 11:08 AM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
Cheap money-making home game every year guaranteed
"In the beginning the Universe was created.
This has made a lot of people very angry and been widely regarded as a bad move."
by IcersGuy on Oct 30, 2009 11:24 AM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
Right
One off home games with MAC schools are getting pretty expensive. So in order to ensure that the Big Ten continues to get first crack at them, we cut a deal that everybody has to give the MAC a home game, in exchange for two or three return trips.
You’ll find that across the bottom of the league, this was happening already, but by having Penn State, Ohio State and Michigan do it, it reduced the costs for everybody else.
Ohio State was able to move their game to Toledo, Penn State got to play in Philly. I assume that Michigan State and Michigan will play their games in Detroit, but does anyone know what the arangements are?
Beat Northwestern.
by jesse. on Oct 30, 2009 11:47 AM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
my favorite was when we moved that game with that MAC team
you know, the one from Indiana (I forget the exact school) over to FedEx Field in Washington.
Man that must be a pretty crappy MAC team to move their home game out of state into the other team’s back yard.
by The JuggerNitt on Oct 30, 2009 1:10 PM EDT up reply actions 1 recs
You're not getting
a wide variety of Eastern opponents, but rather a wide variety of E. Illinois and Youngstown State. We have Alabama and whole lot of nothing else on the OOC for the next few years.
by Joe 96alum on Oct 29, 2009 11:34 AM EDT reply actions 0 recs
Right, potentially this years national champions.
And I’m pretty sure Miami is in the mix down the road. Anyone anywhere doesn’t work anymore. Look what its done for Fresno State.
Deus nobiscum, quis contra?
by chocochuck02 on Oct 29, 2009 11:39 AM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
For the zillionth time, you wouldn’t be repalcing Eastern Illinois or Youngstown St on the schedule if you played Pitt. Not unless Pitt is willing to take a 1 and done payday game at Happy Valley.
If we schedule Pitt, it would be instead of a different team who is demandind a home and away series (like Alabama or Rutgers , etc.).
Citing the choice of “would you rather play Pitt or Eastern Illinois?” is a complete straw man because that option isn’t on the table.
by Laaaaazzz on Oct 29, 2009 11:52 AM EDT up reply actions 1 recs
I'd wager that
Eastern Illinois and Youngstown State actually are a pretty wide variety of eastern opponents. Besides, if you wanted OMG east coast football, then damn Pitt for backing out of the eastern conference.
Deus nobiscum, quis contra?
by chocochuck02 on Oct 29, 2009 11:55 AM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
Exactly!
And does anyone remember what the terms of revenue sharing of the eastern conference were? I heard they were great for all teams when it came to FB revenue sharing.
by JayNoGet21 on Oct 31, 2009 12:52 AM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
Join the community and dive in!
Secondary Sidebar
FanPosts
Community blog posts and discussion.
Certain photos copyright © 2009 by Associated Press or Getty Images. Any commercial use or distribution without the express written consent of Associated Press and Getty Images is strictly prohibited.
