Penn State's "Traditionally" Weak Schedule
by swiggy04 on Jul 21, 2009 10:50 AM EDT
Email
PrintBSD - Bumped from the fanposts. swiggy04 defends Penn State against those who say we "traditionally" schedule weak teams.
Recently, we have heard more and more about Penn State and their absurd non-conference schedule this off-season. In fact, the criticism has been thrown around ad nauseum on other college football blogs, ESPN and even our own conference network’s website . Most Penn State fans will painfully admit that this season’s non-con schedule is weak and some, including myself, are borderline embarrassed. We have our explanations (not excuses) that we scheduled Syracuse well before they became awful, Alabama backed out, we tried to get a good team at the last minute, etc. However the fact remains the schedule is weak, and we admit and accept it for this season...
THIS season..
More and more, arguments are being made that Penn State has played a traditionally weak non-conference schedule. Mostly, the accusations are thrown in the comments section of various blogs around college football and ESPN. Pitt fans are happy to throw that statement out whenever Penn State’s potential in 2009 is brought up. But is it accurate?
Since 1993, when Penn State joined the Big Ten (and by definition began a non-conference schedule), they have played 16 different schools in BCS conferences. (Note: Teams listed below were members of a BCS conference at the time Penn State played them. I.E., I did not list Louisville (‘96 & ‘97) when they were in Conference USA, nor Temple in their post Big East capacity). Below is a list of how Penn State has fared against these teams, along with each team’s final record in parenthesis:
1993 (3-0) - USC (8-5) W, Rutgers (4-7) W, @Maryland (2-9) W
1994 (3-0) - #14 USC (8-3-1) W, Rutgers (5-5-1) W, @Temple (2-9) W
1995 (3-0) - Texas Tech (9-3) W, @Rutgers (4-7) W, Temple (1-10) W
1996 (2-0) - #7 USC (6-6) W, Temple (1-10) W
1997 (2-0) - Pittsburgh (6-6) W, Temple (3-8) W
1998 (1-0) - @Pittsburgh (2-9) W
1999 (3-0) - #4 Arizona (6-6) W, Pittsburgh (5-6) W, @#8 Miami (9-4) W
2000 (0-2) - #15 USC (5-7) L, @Pittsburgh (7-5) L
2001 (0-2) - #2 Miami (12-0) L, @Virginia (5-7) L
2002 (2-0) - #7 Nebraska (7-7) W, Virginia (9-5) W
2003 (1-2) - Boston College (8-5) L, @#18 Nebraska (10-3) L, Temple (1-11) W
2004 (0-1) - @Boston College (9-3) L
2005 (2-0) - South Florida (6-6) W, Cincinnati (4-7) W
2006 (0-1) - @#4 Notre Dame (10-3) L
2007 (1-0) - Notre Dame (3-9) W
2008 (2-0) - @Syracuse (3-9) W, Oregon State (9-4) W
Totals: Overall 25-8, Home 19-3, Road 6-5
5 Games: Temple (5-0)
4 Games: USC (3-1), Pitt (3-1)
3 Games: Rutgers (3-0)
2 Games: Miami(FL) (1-1), Virginia (1-1), Nebraska (1-1), Boston College (0-2), Notre Dame (1-1)
1 Game: Maryland (1-0), Texas Tech (1-0), Arizona (1-0), South Florida (1-0), Cincinnati (1-0), Syracuse (1-0), Oregon State (1-0).
Totals: Big East (15-4), Pac-10 (5-1). ACC (2-1), Big 12 (2-1), Independent (1-1)
There are the facts. 33 games against BCS opponents in 16 years, or an average of barely over 2 per year. More than half were against bowl eligible (6 win) teams. No one would argue they play the #1 toughest OOC schedule year in and year out (mainly due to many games against doormat teams in BCS conferences (see: Temple, Rutgers)) but there were more than a few "historical powerhouses" as well in USC, Nebraska, Notre Dame, and Miami (the 2001 team went on to win a national championship), and a few teams that, while not traditional powers, are not cellar-dwellers either in Boston College, Virginia, Pitt and South Florida. It could also be noted that, though not in a BCS conference, Penn State also scheduled Southern Miss in 1998 when they were a top 25 team.
By comparison, in that same span, reigning national champion Florida has played the following BCS, non conference teams: Florida State (7-7-1), and Miami(FL) (0-2). That’s it. For the sake of not being too cruel, they also scheduled Southern Miss three times (3-0). So, in their non conference schedule, they are 7-9-1 and have played a grand total of 2 teams out of conference (famously, none outside the state of Florida).
For fun (and since they appear to be the biggest supporter of the "PSU’s traditionally weak schedule" argument), I looked at Pitt’s OOC schedule, and they have scheduled a total of 11 teams in that same span: Notre Dame (3-7), Penn State (1-3), Ohio State (0-4), Texas (0-2), Washington State (1-0), North Carolina (0-2), Texas A&M (1-1), Nebraska (0-2), Virginia (1-1), Michigan State (0-2), and Iowa (1-0). That equals a total of 8-24 in OOC games, Big Ten (2-9), Independent (3-7), Big 12 (1-5), ACC (1-3) and Pac-10 (1-0). It’s a weak record, but to be fair they have played a few traditional powerhouses themselves in Texas, Ohio State, Notre Dame and Nebraska (and Penn State). They did manage to steer clear of Rutgers and Temple in OOC scheduling, which would be admirable, only those two were already on Pitt’s schedule as members of the Big East. Pitt was also 2-9 against the Big Ten, while Penn State sported a 7-4 record against the Big East (I removed Temple and Rutgers from the conversation for obvious reasons).
Further, looking at non BCS games, Penn State (13 non BCS schools) has played eight MAC schools (Akron, Bowling Green, Buffalo, Central Michigan, Kent State, Northern Illinois, Temple and Toledo), three C-USA schools (Central Florida, Louisville and Southern Miss), a Sun Belt team ( Florida International) and one school from the WAC (LA Tech). (Note: Pitt's non BCS schedule include seven MAC schools, five C-USA schools, a Sun Belt, Navy and pre Big East South Florida).
Finally, Penn State also gets its fair share of ribbing for scheduling FCS schools. A closer look reveals Penn State has played two FCS games since 1993 (‘08 Coastal Carolina, ‘06 Youngstown State). For comparison purposes, Ohio State has also played two (Youngstown State in ‘06 and ‘07), Alabama has played three (Western Carolina in ‘04 and ‘07, UT-Chattanooga in ‘94), and Florida has played four (The Citadel in ‘98 and ‘08, Florida A&M in ‘03, and ‘96 Georgia Southern).
Oh, and the Pitt Panthers? You know, the team who’s fans say they are sick of watching Penn State play high schools and women’s colleges? They’ve played FIVE FCS games (‘98 Villanova, ‘04 Furman, ‘05 Youngstown State, ‘06 Citadel and ‘07 Grambling State).
So what do you think? Is our non conference traditionally weak? I think, with evidence above, it may not be the toughest every year, I would certainly put those numbers up against at least 90% of other BCS schools.
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, quote, or video, please consider using fanshots instead. Thanks.
206 comments
|
10 recs |
Do you like this story?
Comments
Rec'd
Also, didn’t Pitt nearly lose to Villanova?
DO YOU HAVE PRIDE, DANNY?
by ReadingRambler on Jul 21, 2009 10:57 AM EDT reply actions
I don't remember the Villanova game
but they almost lost to Furman in 04. If I remember correctly, they had to come from behind to force overtime and that was probably Pitt’s best team in that span (they weren’t actually any good but they went to the BCS that year).
by Brett Brown on Jul 21, 2009 11:40 AM EDT up reply actions
Bear Bryant always said...
You play one for the polls and one for the bowls…
“Non-Confrence schedule” isn’t a thing. It’s a list of teams you play that aren’t in your league, if your league is tough who gives a shit who you play out of league.
Michigan sucking hurts us. One for the polls [Ohio State], one for the bowls [Michigan].
The focus on Penn State’s schedule is about the perception of a weak Big Ten, the whining about our out of league schedule is a symptom of the real problem. Michigan sucks.
It was Furman that Pitt almost lost to.
"I honestly think the "Spread HD" is going to work pretty well, and we’ll be just fine this year". - 8-27-2008
Alabama
I hope you are not using the “Alabama postponed our game” excuse to justify our craptastic 2009 schedule — they were originally scheduled for 2004-5 and were never schedule for 2009.
That said, the rest of the article is spot on and it inifuriates me to have people try to label PSU as “always” playing poor OOC schedules when the reality doesn’t support that at all.
lol
since when has reality mattered in college football or sports broadcasting?
by The JuggerNitt on Jul 21, 2009 12:46 PM EDT up reply actions
Good Post
Lot’s of good info.
I have one gripe, not just for you, it just so happens to be the most recent example. We need to get the name “Pitt” out of our minds and mouths. They mean nothing. We are on a completely different level. All we do when we keep this up is legitimize the dialogue between the fan bases. Pitt fans have something to say? Cute.
We have so much to talk about within the team, and on the NATIONAL scene where we are a major player. I know I have repeated this rant, and I promise this is the last one. In doing so, I just urge you to consider my approach to the attempt at dragging us down to them. Cute. A promise is a promise, and this is the last time you will hear this rant or me address a question/concern regarding them at all.
/End Rant Forever
Using Pitt was two-fold
1) I needed a comparison team, and why not Pitt since they complain more than others about our annual schedule and
2) I figured it may help, in the event you run into a Pitt grad and they start spouting off about the schedule, that you have some numbers to shut them up.
………Of course, you could also just pay for the pizza and kick him off your porch. That would also suffice to shut him up.
by swiggy04 on Jul 21, 2009 12:11 PM EDT up reply actions 1 recs
+1
………Of course, you could also just pay for the pizza and kick him off your porch. That would also suffice to shut him up.
hilarious
by Brett Brown on Jul 21, 2009 12:23 PM EDT up reply actions
hey...
there was an tOSU grad that worked really hard on that pizza. geez.
We are not normal. We are legends.
by NittanyAlum02 on Jul 21, 2009 12:42 PM EDT up reply actions
and the scUM grad in the kitchen
worked hard on making that pizza pan spotless
by dawsonPSU10 on Jul 21, 2009 10:12 PM EDT up reply actions
Understand totally
It wasn’t meant to be a knock on your excellent post (as it may have come off). I apologize to you and this excellent quality post.
It seems like all the content lately comes back that way. I am partially just missing PSU football, and feel like it detracts from the quality discussions we usually have on actual PSU sports. The offseason is so effing long.
by PSUinBOSSton on Jul 21, 2009 12:44 PM EDT up reply actions
I agree, although the one argument I could make
is that if Pitt would be in exchange of a FCS opponent, it would be a marginal improvement. Yes, Pitt blows, not quite as bad as Syracuse has, but they are a FBS school none the less and would much rather see a FBS school vs. a FCS school on our schedule regardless of how good they are. Even those little things would help bump our SOS, no matter how small. But I’m in the “No FCS opponents” camp, even though pretty much every school does it.
by dawsonPSU10 on Jul 21, 2009 10:16 PM EDT up reply actions
Sure if we replaced a 1-AA team with Pitt (or any other BCS conference team, really) that would be a huge improvement. but that’s irrelevent to the discussion unless Pitt is willing to do a 1 and done deal (or multiple ones) to play in Happy Valley. And I think since they are vehemently opposed to playing 2 for 1 deals, that 1 and done deals would be out of the question.
when taking about replacing 1-AA teams, it only makes sense to consider other teams that would do 1 and done’s. And that means MAC/Sunbelt/WAC type teams. Who are generally just as uninspiring, but at potentially twice the cost or more.
Short Sighted Media
Yes, the schedule is so embarrassingly bad that it is hard to hear about. But the media is so short sighted that it’s only a 1 year thing.
They act every year, with every team like the schedule was made that very year with perfect knowledge of how every team will be. That’s just not how it works. It stinks to listen to, but as long as they are consistently short sighted, next year they will see an SEEEE EEEEE SPEEEEED team and suddenly we will have been playing with the big boys for our entire “history.”
It's true
By “traditionally” we mean, the last thing you saw on ESPN… I for one, can’t wait to hear about how it’s been more than a decade since we last beat a ZOMG ESS EEE CEEE team…
by ChrisHarrell's_stache05 on Jul 21, 2009 11:39 AM EDT up reply actions
Wait
That was a media joke, woops.
Sorry, this bar prep has fried the “social-type interactions” portion of my brain.
by PSUinBOSSton on Jul 21, 2009 11:42 AM EDT up reply actions
Haha
No worries… Though Mark May never saw that Outback Bowl, so I doubt it even really happened.
by ChrisHarrell's_stache05 on Jul 21, 2009 11:45 AM EDT up reply actions
He also never saw the 2005 Orange Bowl.
To Lou Holtz: “When was the last time that Penn State went to a BCS bowl game — and won?”
When can I go home?
Yeah well
PSU barely won merely both of those games
Bacon is almost as great as being a Penn Stater
Nice one swiggy!
One post, one front page bump.
It was the best of times, it was the blurst of times?!?! You stupid monkey!
by leeharvey418 on Jul 21, 2009 11:22 AM EDT up reply actions
Problem.
FCS schools are becoming a trend, not a rarity:
’06 Youngstown State
’08 Coastal Carolina
’09 Eastern Illinois
’10 Youngstown State
’11 Indiana State
This will continue to drag on any discussion about our schedule.
Easy: distract them
“Hey, did you know that Larry Bird played for Indiana State?!”
DO YOU HAVE PRIDE, DANNY?
by ReadingRambler on Jul 21, 2009 12:01 PM EDT up reply actions
Thinking the same thing
Yeah, PSU has only played three FCS schools in the past 15 years. But two of them were in the past three years. And we basically have one on the schedule every year from here out.
Mike
Black Shoe Diaries
Although
Not to make excuses, but everyone else pretty much has an FCS team on the schedule every year now.
by Brett Brown on Jul 21, 2009 12:33 PM EDT up reply actions
I read in some excellent magazine
that it was because it is getting difficult to schedule FBS teams to accept a deal that sends them to PSU without a return game.
I read that same great magazine
I recommend everyone buy it.
by The JuggerNitt on Jul 21, 2009 12:50 PM EDT up reply actions
You nailed it
The price of football is going up, people. It’s only going to get worse until there is some kind of paradigm shift.
Mike
Black Shoe Diaries
FCS schools are becoming a trend, not a rarity
True. And it’s true throughout BCS conference, in many cases even including two 1-AA teams for some schools.
This will continue to drag on any discussion about our schedule.
no, it really won’t be, not if we schedule ebtter good teams (like Alabama in 2010/11). Again, OOC schedules are considered good or bad on the basis of the good teams on the schedule, not the bad ones. No one would remotely complain about or mock an OOC schedule was featured Southern Cal, Florida, Coastal Carolina, and Indiana St — even though it would feature two 1-AA teams.
to be honest, I'd mock it
but just by wearing a Larry Bird wig
by The JuggerNitt on Jul 21, 2009 3:58 PM EDT up reply actions
penn state bashing
Those gators ,buckeyes,sooners,longhorns, crimson tide,tigers ,trojans really jack up their scehdules every year.Notre dame might be one team that plays a scehdule that no team can match.And remember we are PENN STATE……..
Notre Dame? Please...
SDSU – 2-10
Meatchicken – 3-9
MSU – 9-4
Purdue – 4-8
Stanford – 5-7
UNC – 8-5
Washington – 0-12
Pitt – 9-4
BC – 9-5
Navy – 8-5
Syracuse – 3-9
USC – 12-1
Hawaii – 7-7
So their opponents went a combined 79-85, or 73-79 against opponents other than Notre Dame.
I’ll grant you that there are some records there that you don’t count on year-in and year-out, but that would all come out in the wash… Playing the best Pac-10 school does nothing when you also play two of their doormats. At the end of the day, it’s still a sub-.500 group overall.
It was the best of times, it was the blurst of times?!?! You stupid monkey!
by leeharvey418 on Jul 21, 2009 12:51 PM EDT up reply actions
I think it is ridiculous when people talk about NDs great "OOC" schedule
they don’t have a friggen CONFERENCE, so how can they have a good OOC schedule?
We might as well be saying, “look at our great OOC schedule, we play OSU, Michigan (well, not relevant last year or this year), MSU, Purdue, Wisconsin, Iowa every year, plus another BCS conference team or 2”
Seriously, on ND’s “great schedule”, all of their impressive teams are all Big 10 teams, plus USC.
by The JuggerNitt on Jul 21, 2009 12:59 PM EDT up reply actions
Next year, it’s worse, isn’t it?
Penn Staters belong at Penn State. The problem with a lot of kids is they just don’t know they are Penn Staters yet. -jesse. @ BSD
by TheK-GunNeedsReloaded on Jul 22, 2009 2:00 AM EDT up reply actions
spelling
schedule that’s the way i usually spell it but i got tick off over cheap comments and comments from people with zero sports knowledge…….
.....huh?
Black Shoes. Basic Blues. No Name. All Game.
"Everyone has a plan, until they get punched in the mouth."
schedule
Why doesn’t/hasn’t PSU every scheduled a series with Va. Tech? Like a three game series – home, away and neutral at Heinz Field of the Linc?
by Esteban d' Amur on Jul 21, 2009 12:41 PM EDT reply actions
I think Virginia Tech football
has gone the way of Florida State… yeah, they’re there… it’s not really a incredibly relevant program anymore.
When your most heralded weapon is special teams, you’ve got a problem.
I've got to disagree...
as much as I hate me some Hokies, they’ve been a consistent top 25 team the last 15 years+.
They are Top 5 preseason this year. If anything, I would knock thier history. Horrible Win/Loss vs. top 5 opponents and 0-1 in MNC.
They do have a snooze worthy offense (duly noted by their fans), and as you mentioned – their ST are their strongest team, but Bud Foster is a great defensive coach and their D is always highly rated.
Also, except for a few Vick’s in the road, they’ve been pretty clean as well.
I feel dirty and hate myself for putting this in print.
One man doing the work of 100's for the good of 1000's
lol@ Heinz Field or the Linc being "neutral"
just like the Rose Bowl is “neutral” for USC.
The Meadowlands could work, maybe.
by The JuggerNitt on Jul 21, 2009 12:51 PM EDT up reply actions
Va. Tech
You’d be surprised at the amount of Va. Tech alums in the philly and ‘burgh areas. Yes, Va. Tech isn’t the cream of the crop, but LSU got a ton of mileage out of beating them.
by Esteban d' Amur on Jul 21, 2009 1:00 PM EDT up reply actions
Oh, I'd believe they have decent representation.
Just like PSU has decent representation in the Chicago area, but I wouldn’t call an at Illinois or Northwestern game a “neutral site”. (Well maybe Northwestern, but we do basically have as many fans there as they do).
by The JuggerNitt on Jul 21, 2009 1:02 PM EDT up reply actions
I'm with you
Va Tech is a pretty big school and has a distinct regional presence in southern VA. There are heaps of alums all along the East Coast, and their fans are pretty cool, in my personal experience. Although Beamer’s been there about 20 years, the strength of their program is far newer than FSU’s. The first game I went to at Lane Stadium was against Miami around ’92 and Va Tech sucked so much, we were able to jump the freakin fence to get into the game unpunished.
They’re well-coached, they win a lot of games and their fanbase is sizable and fanatic. I think they’re relevant and would very much enjoy a matchup with them.
"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
They also compete with PSU
for a lot of recruits.
I agree it would be a great series to schedule. Since their fans accuse Penn State of dodging them, I would look forward to shedding that label.
One man doing the work of 100's for the good of 1000's
I was thinking of that
though that would probably be more VT biased (but probably no more than the Meadowlands would be PSU biased).
by The JuggerNitt on Jul 21, 2009 1:00 PM EDT up reply actions
Va Tech
Why doesn’t/hasn’t PSU every scheduled a series with Va. Tech? Like a three game series – home, away and neutral at Heinz Field of the Linc?
I’d have no problems scheduling Va Tech, but why would we do such a weird three game arrangement? Just do a regular two game home and home. If you want to do a one time neutral site game (like in 2013 when we have an away game to give) you can do something at Giants Stadium/FedEx/the Linc/whatever if you can arrange it.
Though I’d rather see a more intersectional opponent for a one off like someone from the SEC/Big 12/Pac-10 if we go that way. Not that Virginia isn’t kind of in a different part of the country, but it’s relatively close to PSU and we already have UVa on the schedule.
I wouldn't mind a four game series to be honest
They’re usually a halfway decent team every year, and I think, like someone mentioned above, it would allow us to get a bit more exposure to compete with recruits in VA. Travel expenses would be lower for both of the teams (hell we could probably just use buses instead of planes). And most importantly it would be a good, exciting game, that would also help our SOS. I’m honestly surprised the AD hasn’t looked into this more. Cue the e-mail bombing of Curley….now. But in all seriousness, is there a reason why this wouldn’t work?
by dawsonPSU10 on Jul 21, 2009 10:29 PM EDT up reply actions
Recent History
Sorry but I think the more recent history suggests that Penn State has been “traditionally” scheduling weak OOC opponents. You go back to 1993 for this study, but instead go back to 2005 and look at who we’ve played:
2005: South Florida & Cincinnati
2006: Notre Dame
2007: Notre Dame
2008: Syracuse & Oregon State
Notre Dame loses some of its luster because they sucked in 2007. And great we scheduled the Irish in 2006, but we got our asses kicked so that does little to help our prestige. For as good as Oregon State game looked by the end of last year the fact is at the time the game was played they didn’t look like an impressive opponent. They were coming off an embarassing loss to Stanford and played like shit against PSU plus it was a school with no significant history of doing much of anything. USF may have been a bowl team in 2005, but they were 6-6 so who cares.
And the year is significant because 2005 is the season that PSU turned their program around and they started getting positive national media attention again. Prior to then (2000-2004 anyway) no one cared about PSUs OOC opponents at the end of the season because the Lions weren’t nationally ranked and thus you didn’t have to compare strength of schedule with other teams they were competing with for a BCS spot or MNC spots for.
The point is Penn State hasn’t won a significant OOC game since Nebraska in 2002 and even then that Cornhusker team faced significant senior turnover from the great team they had the year before and finished 7-7. The last real impressive OOC win by PSU is a decade ago against Miami. What PSU lacks is an OOC game with major hype going into it and the two teams back it up by playing good throughout the season. The Alabama game next year would appear to solve this, but we’ll see how this season goes first.
And yes I understand the AD can’t predict the future about who is going to be a national power when putting together a schedule 6 years in advance, but he should know that Cincinnati, USF or Temple (and probably Notre Dame) aren’t going to be among the top teams in college football.
by catesinator on Jul 21, 2009 1:03 PM EDT reply actions 1 recs
Bingo
You can’t blame the AD that Notre Dame ends up being a 4 win team (any more than you can blame an AD who scheduled Washington last year and got an 0-12 team). However, you can blame the AD for not playing a second BCS opponent in 2006 & 2007. That includes one year where the team didn’t have a single OOC road game. That’s pathetic.
The Rivalry, Esq.
The quintessential Big Ten smoking room.
by Bama Hawkeye on Jul 21, 2009 1:10 PM EDT up reply actions
Road game?
We had an OOC road game in both 2006 and 2007 — in 2006, we played at Notre Dame, in 2007 we played at Temple. Now, I know playing “at” Temple isn’t a road game in the sense of fan support and difficulty, but it is in the most important component of revenue (i.e. we had 7 home games both those years, so no way would we have replaced one of our home games with an away game in either).
Schedule
Part of the problem is that PSU doesn’t have a rival in on the east coast/northeast that is on its level. Pitt was there for a time in the 70’s and 80’s, but geographically, there are no other non-conference powers in the area. Syracuse stinks, B.C. is a decent program, but not sexy. Maryland during its best years is an 8 win team. West Virginia is very good, but not great.
by Esteban d' Amur on Jul 21, 2009 1:10 PM EDT up reply actions
Back to Virginia Tech...
hey would be a good one to schedule.
One man doing the work of 100's for the good of 1000's
if you are going to look at OUR recent history
then you need to look at all the other teams (or at least other powerhouse’s) history. There are generally only a handful of “premier” non-con games every year for a reason. Not too many powerhouses schedule other powerhouses EVERY year, and sometimes when that year comes, the powerhouse isn’t a powerhouse anymore. Also, most top programs schedule the mid-low BCS teams of other conferences, just like we do. Cincinnati, USF, and Temple are to us what Charleston Southern, Troy, and Florida International are to Florida, or what Louisiana Monroe, Wyoming, UTEP, and UCF are to Texas.
Also, I find it amusing that you say look at 2005 on since that’s when we’ve become relevant again, but we were also pretty relevant from 1993-1999. Why can’t we include those years? I guess because they aren’t recent history? Well ok, then.
2005-2008
Penn State has played
BCS: 6
non-BCS: 7
1-AA: 2
Alabama has played
BCS: 4
non-BCS: 10
1-AA: 1
Florida has played
BCS: 6
non-BCS: 7
1-AA: 2
Texas has played
BCS: 3
non-BCS: 11
1-AA: 1
and just to keep things consistent (sorry PSUinBoston)
Pitt has played (and keep in mind they only have 7 conference games, so need to “make up” one BCS game, over 4 years, that’s 4 “extra” non-con BCS games)
BCS: 9 (or 5+4)
non-BCS: 8
1-AA: 3
And before anyone starts saying "well Penn State’s non-con BCS games are against bad teams, they’re no worse than most of the ones on the other’s schedules, which mostly consist of middle/bottom dwellers, with the exception of the Florida-FSU games, and the Texas-OSU game (and I suppose you could try to claim Alabama’s Clemson game last year, but Clemson wound up sucking…somehow Alabama didn’t lose any credit for that one ,though).
Well, then surely they have really good non-BCS teams on their schedule. Not really. Most of those teams are ~ MAC quality, and Western Kentucky appears quite a few times.
So please, please tell me how our OOC schedule in general (we’ve all already admitted/stated that 2009 is terrible, and an abberation) is any worse than any of these schools. I didn’t bother to list out the names, but feel free to go and look (http://www.jhowell.net/cf/scores/byName.htm), and there’s nothing there that can convince me that we are in any significant way worse than them, especially when you factor in the uncertainty of future opponents when you schedule them, and that most of their “impressive” teams have been mediocre Florida States and Clemsons, or a team that PSU plays every year (OSU).
I’m sure you can find some team out there with a killer conference & OOC schedule for some subset of years, but they’re the exception, not the rule. And yes, the main reason we are dogged for our OOC schedule is because people perceive the Big-10 to be weak (which it may very well be…not really our fault, and not something we could have predicted more than 2 years back)
by The JuggerNitt on Jul 21, 2009 1:41 PM EDT up reply actions 1 recs
The Differences
1993-1999 isn’t included because this is before Penn State’s football program went down this shitter. Between 2000-2004 Penn State continued scheduling the same high quality opponents (Miami, USC, Nebraska, Virginia). There is a definite downturn in the quality of opposition starting in 2005. The public perception is that Penn State and Joe Paterno, faced with bowlless seasons 4 out of 5 years began scheduling cupcake OOC opponents to pad their overall win totals so they could ensure bowl appearances. Instead of risking going 2-2 in OOC games and then facing the gauntlet of what, at the time, was a much tougher Big Ten and risking a losing record and the lack of money from a bowl game, PSU has tried to ensure at least a 3-1 record OOC before beginning conference play.
Sorry to say, but yes 1993-1999 is ancient history in college football. There’s a reason Kerry Collins is considered older than dirt in the NFL. 2005 is recent history and is a significant year because it is when PSU came back as a program.
A key difference between PSU and the schools you have mentioned is that PSU is still trying to reestablish itself after the shittiness of the 2000-2004 seasons. Penn State still lacks a true high profile win since it became good again in ’05. The two wins over Ohio State get a collective yawn from the national media and public. The Florida State Orange Bowl victory gets a yawn because FSU was lightly regarded entering that game. Had VT done what they were supposed to do in the ACC Champ game and PSU beat them it might be a different story since VT was a better team that year. Texas A&M, Tennessee and Oregon State, while all solid teams are not marquee victories.
I find it more important to compare PSUs OOC schedule with their Big Ten rival. From 2005-2009 Ohio State has played Texas twice and USC twice. This is who PSU is competing with year after year for the Big Ten title and who PSU is going to be compared to. Spare me the numbers comparison of BCS and FCS conference opponents between OSU and PSU while you’re at it. Those 4 games OSU has scheduled trump anything PSU has put on their schedule in the past 5 seasons and make anyone look past Troy, Youngstown State and Ohio on OSUs schedule.
In the end we all know what the real difference is between PSUs OOC schedule and the schools you listed. Nothing. Fair or not the real difference are their conference schedules. The Big Ten is perceived as weak and the SEC and Big 12 are considered superior conferences. PSUs OOC schedule wouldn’t matter if this was any year prior to 2006. No one points out the OOC schedules of Alabama, Texas or Florida because they have to go through the gauntlet of SEC and Big 12 conference play. Prior to 2006 if PSU had Eastern Illinois, Akron, Temple and Syracuse on the schedule people would applaud them for trying to prepare themselves for the Big Ten conference gauntlet. Everyone is well aware of this.
There is a definite downturn in the quality of opposition starting in 2005.
I think that’s true and valid. But your conclusion is incorrect. Since 2005, there is a downtown in the quality of opposition in PSU’s non-conference schedule… because instead of playing multiple good teams every year, we changed to a philosophy of playing only one (and maybe 2) good teams each year just like a typical BCS conference team.
I can’t emphasize this enough. PSU has gone from being a teams that schedules better than most BCS conference teams to one that schedules around the same as other BCS conference teams — one decent team, a bunch of patsies. In 2009, this is backfiring since our OOC schedule has ended up being particularly weak, thanks to Syracuse sucking and our inability to upgrade it. But — as is the whole point of the original article — that’s a fluke and atypical. It’s not “business as usual” for PSU.
The FCS schools have
started showing up on the schedule when the 12th game was added. Instead of being a rivalry game as envisioned, it turned into a money game.
One man doing the work of 100's for the good of 1000's
Who envised the 12th game as a “rivalry game”? Maybe some overly optimistic fans, but it was obvious from the start that the 12th game was added strictly for the purpose of increasing revenues and you increased revenues with home guarantee games, not home/away series.
Also, the increase in 1-AA games can also be tied to the NCAA changing the rule on how those games can count for bowl eligibility (now, one such win can count per year as opposed to one win once within a 4 year period).
I wish they'd just make them not count for bowl eligibility ever
and a team can take the risk of missing a bowl for the payout of a FCS school. Of course that would pretty much just make only the top schools in the country willing to schedule FCS schools, but hey, an exhibition is an exhibition (and that’s what all but 1 or 2 OOC games are anyway every year).
by The JuggerNitt on Jul 22, 2009 11:50 AM EDT up reply actions
Appalachian State?
You actually would want that to not affect bowl eligibility?
I’m kidding, but yeah I agree with your point.
Well, I think the idea would be that a 1-AA win would not count towards the 6 wins needed to be eligible for a bowl berth. Obviously, a loss would also not count.
I think it would be a good change and would probably cut down somewhat on the number of 1-AA games (though probably not from a school like PSU which would feel comfortable making a bowl without needed the 1-AA win to count). But it would be virtually impossible to get the NCAA — or more specifically the powerful money schools who control 1-A football — to agree to it.
I can't back up my memory
with any proof, so I must have read it on Pennlive.com.
Anything I did find pointed to the 12th game being added for revenue as you suggested.
One man doing the work of 100's for the good of 1000's
So you're ignoring all the bowls?
Also, I think you’re being a little one-dimensional in your hindsight. You’ve conceded that the AD can’t predict a team’s cachet when he schedules them 4-6 years out. So how about this theory:
The new conference affiliation is going along swimmingly in the 90’s. PSU is highly relevant in the national picture, and everyone wants to play us. We just keep crapping the bed near the end of every season from 95 on. Then 2000 and 2001 happen. 2002 isn’t so bad, but then 2003 and 2004 happen. Maybe other AD’s became concerned and didn’t want to schedule PSU b/c they knew blogging would be huge in a few years, and people would be complaining that a win over PSU wasn’t “significant” (your word). So here we are 4-6 years later, bogged down by our past reputation. Maybe 4-6 years from now we won’t have to play any FCS teams, and our OOC can go back to being: 1 good team (currently Texas, Alabama, LSU, VT, USC…) plus one not-too-sucky team (e.g. Pitt, Rutgers?, USF…) and 2 mid-majors (Temple and someone else from the midwest).
Also, any time you can get a 1 and 1 with ND, you take it and run! Those 2 games should never ever ever be held against Curley.
Bacon is almost as great as being a Penn Stater
I'm fairly new to all of this scheduling talk, being relatively young
but is there a reason we don’t continue that bout with ND? Are they any more of rivals to MSU or scUM? We’ve played them historically pretty well, and it would be a huge draw to keep some sort of series alive with them (even though, obviously they still suck, and might slightly improve, but so long as Fat Charlie is there they’ll blow). With the ND bias, it would be a bigger boost to SOS than and FCS opponent.
by dawsonPSU10 on Jul 21, 2009 10:34 PM EDT up reply actions
I don't know the answer to your question
(Perhaps ND thinks three Big Ten teams is enough?)
But I would kill to play them every year.
DO YOU HAVE PRIDE, DANNY?
by ReadingRambler on Jul 21, 2009 11:55 PM EDT up reply actions
Same here
I almost don’t care if they suck, if we get to destroy Domers yearly, I would jump at the chance, especially in place of a sucky FCS school.
lol, remember Mike’s post after the ND game with the ND fan reactions to being in our stadium? I don’t remember the link, but they made us sound like we’re a bunch of neanderthals.
I don't remember that
But I do remember NDJerry.
DO YOU HAVE PRIDE, DANNY?
by ReadingRambler on Jul 22, 2009 10:27 AM EDT up reply actions
There was a letter to the Collegian
From some woman who claimed to have taken her kids into the Student Section to watch that game.
I’ve always believed that the reason they put all the students in one place is so normal people don’t have to watch the game with them. If you go there of your own accord you are on your own.
"I honestly think the "Spread HD" is going to work pretty well, and we’ll be just fine this year". - 8-27-2008
That was the only game in my life
Where I regretted how awful and drunk I was at Beaver Stadium. I was a hot mess. Not mean or anything, just out of hand.
--
Order your copy of "We Are Penn State", like, now. One team, 128 pages.
by Run Up The Score on Jul 22, 2009 2:22 PM EDT up reply actions
That sounds like BS to me.
How or why do you take however many kids plus yourself into the students section for a game. I realize you could scalp it, but I would think the people at the student section gate would turn them away without a student ID.
I remember
I was OK with it. You knew that the precious Notre Dame fans would always take the holier-than-thou approach, so I was totally OK with our fans being terrible. If they believed they were so much classier, well why not traumatize their whole fanbase?
I know this is a terrible way of thinking, and it doesn’t and shouldn’t happen with other schools. It’s just something about the squad from Roman Catholic Disney World…
by ChrisHarrell's_stache05 on Jul 22, 2009 10:57 AM EDT up reply actions
It's never OK to go over the line with opposing fans
Sure yelling stuff at them and taunting them is pretty minor, but trying to start a fight or just plain following them to harass them is a completely different story. But my main point was they completely blew our fans actions towards them out of proportion. They made us sound like we were a bunch of lawless heathens with no sense of decency.
I don't recall seeing anything out of hand
except for some tshirts that were demoralizing to CW
"If you let the men in you've got to let the women in. I don't want a bunch of women walking around in my locker room when guys take showers". Joe Paterno
Weis deserves any mocking t-shirt thrown at him
I didn’t see things get out of hand either, I just mean where people are physically harassing other teams’ fans, which is rare, but that’s what I meant.
and after 5 mocking T-shirts are thrown at him
he can stitch them together and make one that fits
by The JuggerNitt on Jul 23, 2009 11:49 AM EDT up reply actions
My personal fav was
a little kid wearing a 5XL shirt that said “I stole Charlie Weis’s shirt” and another saying charlie weis ate my sandwich
Black Shoes. Basic Blues. No Name. All Game.
"Everyone has a plan, until they get punched in the mouth."
The Charlie Weis Ate My Sandwich was my second fave, after They Have Jesus, we have JoePa
Also, someone had a big oil painting of Jesus, with JoePa’s face painted on to it.
"If you let the men in you've got to let the women in. I don't want a bunch of women walking around in my locker room when guys take showers". Joe Paterno
My favorite shirt actually wasn't a ND shirt, but it made me laugh
“You can’t spell C_ck_ _cker without OSU”
I was in South Bend (sadly) in 2006 and it was not the experience I thought it would be. They were kicking ass and it was kind of flat excpet for the students doing that jig every 5 seconds. Between jigs, they SAT DOWN!
They just don’t know how to handle a real, rowdy excited crowd
"If you let the men in you've got to let the women in. I don't want a bunch of women walking around in my locker room when guys take showers". Joe Paterno
Sat down?
Pussies! I shouldn’t be surprised, but show a little pride in your school and stand god dammit!
ND isn't really a historic rival of ours
while we did play them every year from 1981-1992, when we joined the Big 10 we couldn’t really keep up the yearly “rivalry”, and before 1981 we only played them once (1976) since the 20’s. Interestingly enough, Michigan started their “series” with them only 3 years earlier (1978), and have played them nearly every year since. Before that, though, they hadn’t played since the 40s. Michigan State actually has a longer rivalry with them, having played them nearly every year since 1948, but they’re only the second longest rivalry of Big 10 teams with Notre Dame, with in-state rival Purdue being longer.
In order of teams that regularly play (based on games played) Notre Dame:
Navy 82
USC 80
Purdue 77
MSU 66
Pitt 61
Army 49
Northwestern (not since 1995, though) 45
Ga Tech 34
Michigan 30
and all the way down at #16 is PSU with 19 games
So yeah, to basically answer your question, while we did have a rivalry series in the 80s with them (when we were 2 of the last major independants), we are hardly their rivals in the traditional sense (but judging by the 2006-2007 series, both fanbases had ample dislike for each other)
Here’s an interesting recap I found by BSD from a few years ago that I just happened to read a couple days ago
http://www.blackshoediaries.com/2007/7/11/13927/1290:
by The JuggerNitt on Jul 22, 2009 12:06 PM EDT up reply actions
Wow...
Notre Dame has played Pitt sixty one times, and the meteorite has yet to win a game.
It was the best of times, it was the blurst of times?!?! You stupid monkey!
by leeharvey418 on Jul 22, 2009 12:39 PM EDT up reply actions
Just means the odds are starting to really favor the meteorite
"In the beginning the Universe was created.
This has made a lot of people very angry and been widely regarded as a bad move."
Here Here, Swiggy
I (and plenty others) have been saying the same thing for a while. Yes, the 2009 schedule is embarassing. Not much we can do about that now. But where anyone got the idea that this is a regular thing, I have no idea. I know we don’t play the toughest OOC (or overall) schedule, but in general we are hardly a bottom feeder. Especially with the 1-AA argument, there are only like 5 teams in all of the BCS conferences who have NEVER scheduled a 1-AA team. Kudos to them, but that doesn’t make PSU any worse than all the other BCS schools. And the complete ignoral of Texas Tech’s TWO 1-AA teams in ONE YEAR last year…WTF was that all about?
And then if you just look at ANY OTHER TIMEFRAME our OOC looks quite respectable. But no, I guess if you do something once, even though the rest of history doesn’t support it, it is still somehow true. Just like Penn State is a bad team and won’t have any winning seasons again, just because of 4 years during 2000-2004.
As Jesse points out, though, the reason our OOC schedule is getting harped on is because the Big 10 looks weak, so we are expected to go OOC to get the “tough” games. But then how the heck does anyone expect a team to know years in advance that their conference was going to look weak? Heck, up until Dec 2006/Jan 2007 the Big 10 looked like the premier conference in the nation, with the #1 and #2 ranked teams in the country. Then Michigan had to go and blow their load, and OSU began their yearly embarassment of the Big 10.
I'm wondering how much longer until football ...
… but fortunately Sean Lee said he would get back to me with the answer tomorrow.
"I want to eat some dessert." - Brandon Ware
by The Man with One Black Shoe on Jul 21, 2009 1:39 PM EDT reply actions
So, I've calculated the schedules of the big boys
2006-2010 schedules for the schools with the largest stadia (100,000+ capacity).
Team||Home Games||FBS Non-BCS Home Games||FCS Home Games||Road Games
Penn St*……..36………..9………………….4………..4-Notre Dame, Temple, Syracuse, Alabama
Michigan*……37………..9………………….3………..3-Notre Dame (3 times)
Ohio St#…….36………..13…………………2………..3-Texas, Washington, USC
Tennessee…36………..12………………..1………..4-Memphis (2 times), Cal, UCLA
Texas**……..33………..10………………..1………..5-Rice (2 times), UTEP, UCF, Wyoming
* does not include one 2010 game TBA
# does not include neutral site game at Cleveland
** does not include 5 neutral site games at Dallas (Red River Rivalry)
Some thoughts:
- Comparing non-BCS schools is not the same. A home game against Utah or TCU is not the same as a game against Ball State or Toledo (unless you’re Michigan).
- Michigan’s schedules the most home games, and they only travel on the road for their game against Notre Dame. I think that gets them a free pass every year.
- Ohio State’s 13 non-con FBS games is high, but they have not shied away from competitive games on the road.
- Tennessee has a pair of “road” games at Memphis, but at least choose FBS schools over FCS schools. They’ve also played on the west coast twice along with Ohio State.
- Texas has a deceptively weak schedule. With three “road” games in Texas and the 5 neutral site games in Dallas, they have 41 games in their home state. I would imagine Baylor would also have a heady contingent of Longhorn fans. I also am intrigued by the “reverse Snyder” of playing lesser opponents on the road. As a result, they are the only school without a marquee matchup on the road from 2006-2010.
After looking at it, Penn State is doing what everyone else is doing in their league. There is one major difference in that they are habitually scheduling FCS opponents—at least twice as many FCS opponents as everyone but Michigan, but without the annual matchup against Notre Dame to bolster the apparent strength of their schedule. If they cut out the directional Montanas from their schedule and put in non-BCS schools, they wouldn’t draw half of the heat from journalists and fans.
by Cairo on Jul 21, 2009 1:49 PM EDT reply actions 2 recs
You got a Rec
Just for using ‘stadia’ as the plural of ‘stadium’.
It was the best of times, it was the blurst of times?!?! You stupid monkey!
by leeharvey418 on Jul 21, 2009 2:13 PM EDT up reply actions 1 recs
You got a Rec
For thinking like I’m thinking. This Kool-Aid must be flowin like a river.
"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
Then why didn't you rec Cairo's post as well?
DO YOU HAVE PRIDE, DANNY?
by ReadingRambler on Jul 21, 2009 5:34 PM EDT up reply actions
Denise Richards Colon It's Complicated
I’m too much my own dude? Being on here is about as communist as I’m willing to get? I’ve already blown enough smoke up Cairo’s arse?
Here’s the thing: I too enjoyed ‘stadia.’ But leeharvey beat me to the post commending its use. I was mentally crafting my own appreciative rec post mere seconds before noticing his. If I, even then, proceed with original intent, it comes out as unoriginal—and I’m just another lemming in the cacophony. And I think you know by now that jtothetot is no motherphuquing lemming.
Except for BSD. Where I’m too country I’ll follow all yous around til the cows come home.
"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 Jul 22, 2009 7:35 AM EDT up reply actions 1 recs
Blowing snoke up Cairo's ass...
…does not sound hot.
DO YOU HAVE PRIDE, DANNY?
by ReadingRambler on Jul 22, 2009 10:29 AM EDT up reply actions
I don't know
Smoke not so much. But snoke….as always, rambler, you keep me guessing.
"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
I am trying to not care about this anymore.
Me, you, the players, etc have no control over it. Tim Curley and every other AD is going to do what they do.
All we can do is hope the players do well enough to win all the games on their schedule. People are going to hate on PSU, we are going to defend PSU. Wash, rinse, repeat.
People are going to take stats and circumstances and spin them around to help make their case. It goes both ways, it always will.
God damn, that Alabama series can’t get here quick enough. A) I want to see it and B) Hopefully people will just shut up.
Side Thought: Is it not entirely possible that the “weak” schedules the mid-part of this decade were a result of trying to claw out of the dark ages? I’ll admit the early/mid 00’s had some not too good schedules and maybe that was so we could win some games and return to prominence.
Black Shoes. Basic Blues. No Name. All Game.
"Everyone has a plan, until they get punched in the mouth."
Fran ganter
I notice most people are saying Curley is the guy doing the scheduling, but it’s fran ganter. And really it’s just as much about joepa not caring about who we schedule.
by speedomike on Jul 21, 2009 9:52 PM EDT via mobile reply actions
And really it’s just as much about joepa not caring about who we schedule.
True.
Afterall, what is the quintessential JoePa phrase?
“Ah, you know, Eastern Illinois is darn good football team. I’m telling you that right now. They do a lot of different things that are hard to stop. It’s going to be a great football game on Saturday.”
DO YOU HAVE PRIDE, DANNY?
by ReadingRambler on Jul 21, 2009 10:24 PM EDT up reply actions 1 recs
Pitt also has more flexibility
They play fewer conference games than we do. Therefore, more chances to play OOC games.
by Tailgate Shogun on Jul 21, 2009 11:54 PM EDT reply actions
And, let’s face it, I don’t think many teams shiver in fear about a trip to Heinz Stadium. Happy Valley is slightly more intimidating, I would imagine. It would help their flexibility, I’d think.
Penn Staters belong at Penn State. The problem with a lot of kids is they just don’t know they are Penn Staters yet. -jesse. @ BSD
by TheK-GunNeedsReloaded on Jul 22, 2009 2:04 AM EDT up reply actions
Ha! I first read 'they play fewer conference games....'
as ‘they play flower conference games…’ which is also kinda true.
"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
Never hurts to stop
and smell the roses. However, if you choose to tiptoe through the tulips, you’re on your own.
One man doing the work of 100's for the good of 1000's
Not that there's anything wrong with that?
This place is pretty tolerant of most demographics…except of Gays. Kinda follows in the neanderthal American Football model I guess. But it also correlates with some mainstream pop culture humor, so I don’t really know. Not taking a big stand here, just exhibiting a little perspicacity.
And in any case, I appreciated your literary turns of phrase.
"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
I don't know
I remember someone on here commending John Amachei for the stand he made.
It just doesn’t seem to be a topic that comes up a lot.
DO YOU HAVE PRIDE, DANNY?
by ReadingRambler on Jul 22, 2009 11:18 AM EDT up reply actions
Ahhh, forgot about that
Good point.
"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
I don't recall this place ever being intolerant of gays
perhaps Gays, though, but that’s just cuz that family is a bunch of jackasses.
by The JuggerNitt on Jul 22, 2009 12:12 PM EDT up reply actions
I don't know
I got 17 returned results on a search for ‘No Homo’, a phrase commonly used here as humor, but likely not very welcoming to our gay & lesbian friends. Searching on ‘gay’ returns far more results and although a number of them refer to Gay Dolphin Sex, many of those comments might make BSD feel exclusionary or uncomfortable.
I’m only musing and not pointing fingers. Hell, many of my posts of pics of scantily clad women could likely have made some more family-oriented folks less than comfortable. All in all this is a wonderfully tolerant place. Just kinda typing out loud. You know, cuz it’s the offseason.
"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
C'mon
We let SweepTheLeg post here, and he has gay sex with dolphins every night of the week.
We’re very welcoming (no homo!).
by Tailgate Shogun on Jul 22, 2009 6:36 PM EDT up reply actions
Umm
if it’s with dolphins, how can it be gay? Unless STL is a dolphin and I didn’t know it.
by PSUinBOSSton on Jul 22, 2009 9:31 PM EDT up reply actions
If the dolphin is a
dude, wouldn’t the action be considered gay even if it is bestial?
One man doing the work of 100's for the good of 1000's
We really need some news, a new recruit or something
if we’re down to debating whether sex with male animals is considered gay or not.
Pitt has as good of a chance of smelling the roses (at least the one’s I’m thinking of) as I do of marrying Kelly Clarkson
Penn Staters belong at Penn State. The problem with a lot of kids is they just don’t know they are Penn Staters yet. -jesse. @ BSD
by TheK-GunNeedsReloaded on Jul 22, 2009 7:16 PM EDT up reply actions
That's how high
you’re aiming these days? Kelly Clarkson? Oooookay.
Of course I’ve also received hate mail for questioning the love fest with that muppet from the food network.
One man doing the work of 100's for the good of 1000's
and you deserved every letter!!!
there’s a muppet on the food network? Is it the Cookie Monster?
by The JuggerNitt on Jul 23, 2009 4:42 PM EDT up reply actions
I agree...
So explain how this one is stretching her 15 minutes into years.
One man doing the work of 100's for the good of 1000's
She's Bubbly!
…of course, so is diarrhea.
It was the best of times, it was the blurst of times?!?! You stupid monkey!
by leeharvey418 on Jul 24, 2009 7:12 AM EDT up reply actions
hate, hate, hate, hate, hate
EVO?
"If you let the men in you've got to let the women in. I don't want a bunch of women walking around in my locker room when guys take showers". Joe Paterno
gimme a break...man up and admit it is flat out weak
no defending it. Curley (JoePa’s choice for AD) doesn’t care so long as the stadium is a sellout and there is a payday for PSU and, oh yeah, a nice easy win. what they fail to recognize is how it tarnishes our image, puts fans on the defensive, is cheating ticket buyers and actually working against them ever winning another national championship with a schedule like that.
wow, it is like people don't actually read before commenting
Perhaps what BSD needs is to implement some sort of reading comprehension quiz that a user has to take before being allowed to comment.
Such as fill in the blank.
Most Penn State fans will painfully admit that this season’s non-con schedule is 1)____ and some, including myself, are borderline 2)__________. We have our explanations (not excuses) that we scheduled Syracuse well before they became awful, Alabama backed out, we tried to get a good team at the last minute, etc. However the fact remains the schedule is 3)____, and we admit and accept it for this season…THIS SEASON.
(1) Did swiggy04 say:
A) strong
B) respectable
C) excellent
D) weak
(2) Did swiggy04 say:
A) proud
B) excited
C) embarassed
D) retarded (note, user, this isn’t a question specifically directed towards you, no matter how appropriate this selection may be)
(3) Did swiggy04 say:
A) weak
B) ham sandwich
C) strong
D) spectacular
If you miss any questions, you will not be able to post or comment again for 4 hours.
by The JuggerNitt on Jul 22, 2009 12:20 PM EDT up reply actions
1) C) excellent
2) B) excited
3) B) ham sandwich
Correct?
DO YOU HAVE PRIDE, DANNY?
by ReadingRambler on Jul 22, 2009 12:27 PM EDT up reply actions 1 recs
wow, I just bought BSD a 4 hour break from Rambler ;-)
by The JuggerNitt on Jul 22, 2009 1:01 PM EDT up reply actions
Yeah, lets see how well THAT works out for you :)
"In the beginning the Universe was created.
This has made a lot of people very angry and been widely regarded as a bad move."
FAIL
You can’t make me go away.
DO YOU HAVE PRIDE, DANNY?
by ReadingRambler on Jul 22, 2009 1:35 PM EDT up reply actions
Barely like herpes.
Penn Staters belong at Penn State. The problem with a lot of kids is they just don’t know they are Penn Staters yet. -jesse. @ BSD
by TheK-GunNeedsReloaded on Jul 22, 2009 7:17 PM EDT up reply actions
No, you have it wrong
It should be “Barely almost like herpes”.
DO YOU HAVE PRIDE, DANNY?
by ReadingRambler on Jul 22, 2009 7:35 PM EDT up reply actions
As has been noted
the OOC has definitely taken a turn for the worse since 2005. We need to bolster the OOC because mediocrity is not new to the Big 10, they had two decades of it before we joined in 1993. Michigan, Wisconsin, and Purdue all appear to be headed for extended multi-year slumps. As it stands now, even if DC17 & Co. run the table this year, they won’t get a shot at the BCS title unless all of the other big-name candidates have at least two losses. The simplest (and most realistic and readily available) way to start fixing the OOC is to replace the parade of Eastern Illinois and Youngstown St. with an annual game against Pitt. Some have mentioned VaTech, but once Beamer’s gone there’s no telling if they’ll be any better than Pitt or any of the other eastern schools.
Really?
You think Pitt solves the schedule problem? I think Alabama solves it, and no less than five years sooner than Pitt could.
"I honestly think the "Spread HD" is going to work pretty well, and we’ll be just fine this year". - 8-27-2008
I'm not
comparing Pitt to Alabama, but to Akron and Eastern Illinois.
That's silly
Because Pitt won’t accept the same scheduling deal as Akron or Eastern Illinois (1 and done) but would only settle for the same type of deal as Alabama (balanced home/away). So, when talking about “replacing” a team with Pitt, you have to consider one that would be scheduled in the same fashion.
As it stands now, even if DC17 & Co. run the table this year, they won’t get a shot at the BCS title unless all of the other big-name candidates have at least two losses.
False. I don’t care how low the Big Ten’s reputation is, if there are two undefeated teams left, and one of them is Penn State, we will play for the national title. The pollsters aren’t willing to take the risk.
The simplest (and most realistic and readily available) way to start fixing the OOC is to replace the parade of Eastern Illinois and Youngstown St. with an annual game against Pitt.
What jesse. said. If we schedule Pitt, you can say good bye to other quality OOC opponents. No thanks.
DO YOU HAVE PRIDE, DANNY?
by ReadingRambler on Jul 23, 2009 2:49 PM EDT up reply actions
As it stands now, even if DC17 & Co. run the table this year, they won’t get a shot at the BCS title unless all of the other big-name candidates have at least two losses.
I’ll just pile on because this is an absurd statement. You can blame the schedule for an undefeated PSU being left out in favor of 2 undefeated schools from other conferences, but there is essentially no chance that an undefeated school from a BCS conference would be bypassed by a team with 1 or more losses from any other conference, no matter how strongly said conference is viewed. It’s just not going to happen and it would buck decades upon decades of college football tradition.
Furthermore, I’m skeptical that adding an elite type team to our schedule would overcome the stink of the Big Ten or surpass the hype of the SEC/Big 12/USC at this point anyway. And adding a mediocre program like Pitt wouldn’t do crap.
The simplest (and most realistic and readily available) way to start fixing the OOC is to replace the parade of Eastern Illinois and Youngstown St. with an annual game against Pitt.
How is that simple? Is Pitt willing to play in Beaver Stadium every year? Cuz that’s the only way they’ll be replacing these 1 and done teams.
And if we are talking about upgrading our schedule to make it more nationally respected, wouldn’t it make to start with an actual nationally recognized and elite program, not an also ran like Pitt?
The desire
to schedule “elite” teams constantly is a pipe dream. These games against ’Bama and ND are boutique games that come around every 20 years or so.
That's not even close to true
"I honestly think the "Spread HD" is going to work pretty well, and we’ll be just fine this year". - 8-27-2008
that’s silly. It may be difficult to schedule elite teams, but it’s certianly not impossible. Especially if we are only talking 1 per year, so all you have to find is a single team 5 times a decade who can match up to your schedule.
I think most people would be reasonably happy with the type of scheduling tOSU has been doing in recent years and in the near future with one elite(-ish) team each season and a bunch of crap otherwise.
4 OOC games
you have Pitt, and elite team, and two powder puffs. Three home games there + four conference home games to get seven, and thus avoid years like this when your OOC is fluff and the conference is down at the same time.
Ummm
2.5 home games, as opposed to 3.5 if Pitt and the elite team are home and homes. No thanks, no value in this game. Too many other PSU sports programs need the revenue from 7.5 home game minimums.
by PSUinBOSSton on Jul 23, 2009 4:58 PM EDT up reply actions
Huh?
Two home-one-and-dones, plus one or the other of Pitt/marquee game, would give you three non-conference home games a year.
Of course I believe the powers that be are insisting that we need to average over seven home games a year, so that may be the flaw here.
It was the best of times, it was the blurst of times?!?! You stupid monkey!
by leeharvey418 on Jul 24, 2009 7:17 AM EDT up reply actions
Right
3.0 per year. But 3 home one and dones and one marquee gives you 3.5. An extra half game per year is many many many millions in revenue for sports.
by PSUinBOSSton on Jul 24, 2009 12:50 PM EDT up reply actions
Seriously, though...
The standard line on this has always been that Pitt refuses to do anything other than a one for one for financial reasons… How much can they make off of putting 10-15,000 butts in the stands at Heinz Field? Because I’ve got to imagine they can make at least as much coming to State College as they could by scheduling a JV team at home. Or do they sell ticket packages a la Temple where to see the one big game a year you have to buy tickets to two craptastic games?
It was the best of times, it was the blurst of times?!?! You stupid monkey!
by leeharvey418 on Jul 24, 2009 1:07 PM EDT up reply actions
Awesome...
You want to be taken seriously as a nationally relevant team, yet you have to resort to stupid tricks to sell out your rented stadium.
Pitt-thetic.
It was the best of times, it was the blurst of times?!?! You stupid monkey!
by leeharvey418 on Jul 24, 2009 3:20 PM EDT up reply actions
Road game.
There’s some rumor about us playing a game at Yankee Stadium in the near future. I dont believe it unless it is an “away” game. Even then, it’s a believe-it-when-I-see-it situation.
I would put these odds on the opponent if it were to happen:
Army – 60%
Non-BCS school – 25%
BCS school – 15%
Army has three games
at Yankee Stadium where they are the home team. One against Notre Dame, one against Rutgers, and the other remains up for grabs. So I think that it would be 100% Army, but only a 50/50 shot at it.
"I honestly think the "Spread HD" is going to work pretty well, and we’ll be just fine this year". - 8-27-2008
Technically
If you want to be technical, Notre Dame is the home team at Yankees Stadium next season and Army is the visitor. Army is the host against Rutgers, Air Force and BC though.
Were we to schedule a game at Yankees Stadium (or at new Giants Stadium which as also been rumored) in the near future, it would almost certainly be in 2013 which interesting is the one year that Army does not have a game scheduled yet for Yankees Stadium.
I thought
Maybe our away game at Rutgers could be moved there? still a “home” game for them, I think they would like it?
Black Shoes. Basic Blues. No Name. All Game.
"Everyone has a plan, until they get punched in the mouth."
In December
Penn St. is 12-0, Texas is 12-1 and Florida is 12-1. Who’s going to play for the BCS title?
Not Penn State.
I'll take that bet against you
just because I, like everyone else here, thinks that the voters aren’t THAT crazy to jump an undefeated BCS team.
Besides, if I lose the bet, and PSU (or some other weakly considered Big 10 team) goes undefeated and misses out on the MNC game, I would put good money on the BCS in this form not lasting past the current contract, and we might finally get a playoff. Especially if PSU (or other wcBTt) wins big in the Rose Bowl.
by The JuggerNitt on Jul 23, 2009 4:47 PM EDT up reply actions
Love to take that because I’d guarantee PSU would be in the championship game (I mean, unless this is a trick question and USC is 12-0 and LSU is 13-0 in addition or something).
yeah
not happening. There will be lots of lip service (OMG PSU NOO!!!!) in the media, and no action.
by PSUinBOSSton on Jul 23, 2009 4:56 PM EDT up reply actions
Yep, yep
Remember when they we’re going to have a rematch between UM and OSU in ’06. Yeah, no.
DO YOU HAVE PRIDE, DANNY?
by ReadingRambler on Jul 23, 2009 5:39 PM EDT up reply actions
I fail to see
what’s so great about Florida’s schedule that if they had one loss theyd be in national championship over an undefeated team. Just cause they play in a conference championship game?
At any rate, speculation about this in July is absurd to begin with. Suppose Ohio State beats USC and we beat Ohio State by 20? Suppose Michigan State somehow goes undefeated and we beat them in the last game of the year? Suppose we beat every team we play by three touchdowns (a la ‘94)? Then does our schedule matter? Probably not. Suppose Florida’s loss is to Florida International? Suppose Texas loses to UTEP? Suppose both of their losses are in the conference championship game? That changes around your vague statement that an undefeated PSU gets jumped by one loss Texas and Florida
The point is, to speculate whether we will play for a national title if undefeated at this point in the year is an exercise in futility. Look at all the variables. If we manage to find ourself in the enviable position of 12-0 at year’s end, and Texas and Florida have one loss going into their conference championship, then you may speculate away.
Right....
Tim Tebow could be geting stabbed by a hooker as we speak, and we won’t find out about it for another hour or two. Things change.
"I honestly think the "Spread HD" is going to work pretty well, and we’ll be just fine this year". - 8-27-2008
or maybe she's just washing his feet
by The JuggerNitt on Jul 24, 2009 12:10 PM EDT up reply actions
Saw that coming
DO YOU HAVE PRIDE, DANNY?
by ReadingRambler on Jul 24, 2009 12:20 PM EDT up reply actions
or he could be STABBING
the hooker. Imagine the controversy that would cause?
by PSUinBOSSton on Jul 24, 2009 12:51 PM EDT up reply actions
ESPN Injury Update
Tim Tebow – out for season [crucifixtion]
"I honestly think the "Spread HD" is going to work pretty well, and we’ll be just fine this year". - 8-27-2008
by jesse. on Jul 24, 2009 12:59 PM EDT up reply actions 2 recs
Pfft...
He’ll be back up and ready to play in two days… Three, tops.
It was the best of times, it was the blurst of times?!?! You stupid monkey!
by leeharvey418 on Jul 24, 2009 1:01 PM EDT up reply actions 1 recs
That's just wrong
DO YOU HAVE PRIDE, DANNY?
by ReadingRambler on Jul 24, 2009 1:05 PM EDT up reply actions
Hey
I don’t care how good you are, it’s hard to play with holes in your hands. Just ask Tony Johnson.
"I honestly think the "Spread HD" is going to work pretty well, and we’ll be just fine this year". - 8-27-2008
by jesse. on Jul 24, 2009 1:26 PM EDT up reply actions 2 recs
I thought it was a cracker...
"In the beginning the Universe was created.
This has made a lot of people very angry and been widely regarded as a bad move."
Doubt it
Although there is reason to be nervous – I went to the Colley rankings (the only computer that I could find that allows you to add and remove games and see their effect on the season) and tried switching the result of Iowa-PSU and removing the bowl games for the top teams … and PSU was sitting in fourth behind Florida, Texas, and Oklahoma.
That said, in the polls PSU would almost certainly be a near-unanimous #1 (the opinion of the Big Ten may not be good, but it’s not that bad), so a computer ranking of #4 (assuming Colley is reasonably reflective of the others as well) would not be likely to be catastrophic. It would be hard (but not quite impossible) for two teams to get ahead – if we assume PSU is a unanimous #1 and averages #4 in the computers, it’s impossible (a team’s average vote in the polls could not be worse than 2.5 to tie PSU, and that’s if they are a unanimous #1 in the computers). In fact, at a #4 computer ranking across the board, an average vote of 1.25 in both polls should guarantee it, and I can’t imagine the only BCS unbeaten would get less than 75% of the first-place votes (although if some nutjob voted them third or fourth, that would reduce the number of second-place votes that would put them in potential danger).
Perhaps
they wouldn’t jump the 12-0 team. But in that scenario, if those two teams have just won their conference championships,and their one loss is a single-score loss to one of their ranked conference opponents, I for one will be very nervous. I think you may be underestimating just how low national opinion is of the Big 10.
And I think you strongly overestimate the stupidity/crazyness of the voters. Not everyone is from the Big 12 and the SEC. The other conferences understand the dangerous precedent that would be set by what you describe.
DO YOU HAVE PRIDE, DANNY?
by ReadingRambler on Jul 23, 2009 5:40 PM EDT up reply actions
Yeah
the Big 10 poll voters really helped us out in 1994. Just sayin’.
I don’t see what that has to do with what I said.
DO YOU HAVE PRIDE, DANNY?
by ReadingRambler on Jul 23, 2009 9:45 PM EDT up reply actions
1994 doesn’t apply at all here.
DO YOU HAVE PRIDE, DANNY?
by ReadingRambler on Jul 23, 2009 9:45 PM EDT up reply actions
My point is
that I don’t think we can count on any benefit of the doubt from voters this year.
Your point is
Because there were two major undefeated teams ranked #1 and #2 in 1994, a major* undefeated team will be ranked #3 behind two one-loss teams?
Huh?
that wasn't "benefit of the doubt" in 1994
If Nebraska had 1 loss, this statement would be applicable. Nebraska was undefeated, though. Voters (as a whole) voting for one undefeated team over another is very common. Voters (As a whole) voting for major teams with 1 loss over major teams with 0 losses is unheard of.
Not saying it can’t happen, but the odds are VERY against it.
by The JuggerNitt on Jul 24, 2009 12:12 PM EDT up reply actions
After the Utah debacle last year
the voters and the BCS system have to be EXTREMELY careful as to how much bias against a certain conference they can show. They already pissed off a lot of people in Utah and Texas last year (and I’ll include not moving up us after TT beat UT for my own self-pity and sadness). Last year showed the country that while you might get a #1, #2 championship game, the rating system for the BCS is flawed. If they want to keep the BCS alive, they’d be smart and try not to piss any more people off, or the disgruntled, chanting, pitchfork, torch carrying Playoff mob is only going to get louder and gain more support.
No kidding
If an unbeaten BCS-conference team gets jumped by a one-loss team, that will be the immediate end of the BCS. And I don’t mean “let the contract expire and do something else then”, either (that might be happening anyway thinks to the Utah debacle) – the Big Ten would walk out immediately, and I’d be surprised if at least the ACC and Big East (whose reputations are just as bad as, if not worse than, the Big Ten’s) didn’t jump ship as well.
What if
our signature win is an 8-3 victory over tOSU created by four safeties committed by Pryor fumbling the ball out of the back of the end zone. Just sayin’.
;)
If that Ohio State team is undefeated it would still be a good win.
DO YOU HAVE PRIDE, DANNY?
by ReadingRambler on Jul 23, 2009 11:27 PM EDT up reply actions
Doesn't matter
To the computers, a win is a win. To the voters, that may not be true, but a zero in the loss column forgives a lot of ugly wins.
Curse you, Indiana
DO YOU HAVE PRIDE, DANNY?
by ReadingRambler on Jul 26, 2009 1:05 PM EDT up reply actions
ESPN
ESPN had a pair of articles about a year or so ago where they went back over the past 10 years or so and ranked the top 10 and bottom 10 schools according to their OOC schedules. PSU was #9 or 10 in the top 10. The bottom 10 was littered with SEC schools.
Everyone schedules cupcakes, it’s a fact of life. You need to gave 7-8 home games so the athletic department can fill the coffers to support the non-revenue producing programs (which is just about everything but men’s football and basketball). But PSU has always tried to schedule at least one top-25 caliber OOC game since joining the Big10, anything else would sacrifice revenue.
Hopefully soon the Basketball program's fanbase will grow
and they will make substantially more money, and we’ll have more flexibility in scheduling, or maybe expand our varsity teams some.
It might be
are you listening Talor Battle’s half brother and future recruits? I think Talor may be gone before the program really can take off. I think this year might be disappointing(not in the long run, only short term) unless DJ, and Brooks step up. I think Andrew Jones will be great though. I do honestly believe though that Battle will go down as “the man” in PSU b-ball history, I just love the kid to death. Looking way ahead, I hope he gets a fair shot in the Association. That would also do wonders for our program, “Look- we can put players in the NBA”
I want to talk more about basketball now.
Black Shoes. Basic Blues. No Name. All Game.
"Everyone has a plan, until they get punched in the mouth."
That would be great if he got there.
I think he has a decent chance. He’s still got two more years to improve himself, and he’s a tough worker. I also think he needs to produce in the NBA for it to be truly effective. We’ve had five players play in the NBA since 91’ but none who’ve gotten famous through in game production. Also, as you mentioned them, Buie and our new recruits like My name is Sasa, Frazier, and Edwards will be big in deciding where our future goes. If we can get a couple of them to the NBA, it’ll stop being like we put one there once in a blue moon but can actually do it consistently which would be huge! Don’t want to get ahead of myself but I cannot wait for the future.
by PSUisMyHeart on Jul 24, 2009 3:37 AM EDT up reply actions
I think Battle will(barring catastrophe) get to the pros.
I mean Claxton-catastrophe. Geary was a projected late 1st-2nd round pick before he was injured his senior year. I nearly cried at the game, he was such a great player that got overlooked because he was at PSU.
On top of his talent, Battle has that certain swagger or “it” factor than can attract a lot of attention to himself. That is quite important in Basketball where there are a thousand guys gunning for 60 draft slots.
Black Shoes. Basic Blues. No Name. All Game.
"Everyone has a plan, until they get punched in the mouth."
Comments For This Post Are Closed
Secondary Sidebar
User Tools
FanPosts
Community blog posts and discussion.
Recommended FanPosts
Recent FanPosts
SHOP THE BLACK SHOE DIARIES STORE
Certain photos copyright © 2012 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.
