Possible rivalry teams for Penn State

by zenosdweller on Apr 3, 2008 2:47 PM EDT

I was at the 1981 48-14 game (I'll never forget Mark Robinson running back a pic with one shoe on), and the 24-7 loss at three rivers stadium in 1976 (where Franco Harris refused my autograph request outside the press box after the game (very traumatic for an 8 year old kid) plus three or four other pitt away games, so let me clue you in on one fact that hasn't changed.

Pitt fans, football players, coaches and students are not of the same class as Penn State.

Pitt Stadium was horrendous, nearly as bad as Archbald stadium was for Syracuse before they stopped being the redmen and moved to the Carrier Dome.

Just because they have new digs doesn't make them any less reprehensible. Think about walking through Oakland (downtown Pittsburgh area) after a game.

The point being, Pitt does not deserve the bounce they would get from being on the same television screen as my beloved Nittany Lions.

I feel the same way about Pitt that Chet Parlavecchio did about them. Look it up if you need to know.

Anyway, there are only five programs that deserve a shot at rival status:

Alabama. Joe is still trying to get over the top with Guman, and that program, broken as it is, has got history with us.
Nebraska. Tom Osbourne is the only reason their 1994 team was gifted the Championship, but at least he had the good sense to admit it.
Notre Dame. Charlie Weis is a moron but if we pound on those guys long enough maybe we'll get a lifetime NBC contract too.
Florida State. We'll call it the geezer bowl. First one who's coach dies wins. Just kidding.
Kentucky, Vanderbilt, Auburn, or any of the other SEC pansies that Florida and LSU regularly stomp on and then claim greatness. We'll call it the "We Can Beat Up on Second Rate and Academically Questionable Teams as Well Bowl."

Poll

Which team should be our real rival?

0 recs | Comment 46 comments

Story-email Email Printer Print

Comments

Alabama

This would be worth it.

For the Glory National Champions 1982, 1986, 1994,

by jesse. on Apr 3, 2008 2:51 PM EDT 0 recs

Rivals

I'd be all for getting after Alabama. Only issue being their long-standing rivalry with Auburn.

I'm still in favor of a Virginia Tech scrum.

Luring recruits with my new "Posting HD" scheme since '08.

by 06Lion on Apr 3, 2008 3:04 PM EDT 0 recs

I wouldn't

question Vanderbilt or Kentucky's academic status...Those are two rather decent schools academically, as is Florida....Just being the devil's advocate here...

by carolinaeasy on Apr 3, 2008 3:36 PM EDT 0 recs

I dug this up once

for an argument with Eric Watters, Atlanta GA but never used it. It is a comparison of Big Ten versus SEC schools rankings per US News & World Report

Northwestern 14
Vanderbilt 19
Michigan 25
Wisconsin 38
Illinois 38
Penn State 48
Florida 49
Ohio State 57
Georgia 59
Purdue 64
Iowa 64
Minnesota 71
Michigan State 71
Indiana 75
Alabama 91
Auburn 96
Tennessee 96
South Carolina 112
Kentucky 122
Arkansas 124

Ole Miss, LSU and Mississippi State apparently have coloring sections on their applications, and were not ranked.

For the Glory National Champions 1982, 1986, 1994,

by jesse. on Apr 3, 2008 3:51 PM EDT up 0 recs

I Don't........

know what you would have used that on Jesse as I have never heralded the SEC as a conference on par with the Big 10 academically. I might have been talking about UGA and UF as examples of schools that are right there with PSU in terms of overall academic excellence, but you would never hear me talking about UT or Alabama or South Carolina, etc.

Eric Watters Atlanta, Ga.

by ech2os on Apr 4, 2008 11:47 AM EDT up 0 recs

I don't remember either

I think it was part of a discussion about the relative merits of parks and rec. degree from Penn State versus from some other SEC school. I believe my point at the time was that some people might prefer to play at Penn State versus other schools because of the academic superiority of northern schools. The list was never directly relevant to the discussion, but I looked it up just in case.

I wasn't trying to pick a fight.

For the Glory National Champions 1982, 1986, 1994,

by jesse. on Apr 4, 2008 12:12 PM EDT up 0 recs

lol.

Just in case. You sound like me.

Eric Watters Atlanta, Ga.

by ech2os on Apr 4, 2008 2:48 PM EDT up 0 recs

Florida and Kentucky

Be careful about putting them in the same academic class as Vandy!

I thought only safeties played 15 yards off the ball?

by pic15 on Apr 3, 2008 4:55 PM EDT up 0 recs

Well I stand corrected on Kentucky...

But Florida is only ranked 1 spot behind PSU...kinda burst our bubble there doesn't it?

by carolinaeasy on Apr 4, 2008 9:02 AM EDT up 0 recs

Why?

Florida can't be a good school too?

If you think about it, there have to be at least a thousand colleges in the country, being ranked 48th out of all of them would put is in the top one half of one percent of all of them.

I think that's pretty impressive.

For the Glory National Champions 1982, 1986, 1994,

by jesse. on Apr 4, 2008 9:47 AM EDT up 0 recs

48-14

ten minutes well spent

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2ulj5NSiaD8

For the Glory National Champions 1982, 1986, 1994,

by jesse. on Apr 3, 2008 3:39 PM EDT 0 recs

traditional rivals?

i wouldn't mind seeing a long series with some of the old-school traditional rivals like syracuse (i know we have 2 coming), or west virginia. i know the temple series was renewed, but when it comes down to it, means essentially nothing. also, i know its not really feasible (or is it) i wouldnt mind seeing a BigTen/pac10, acc, sec, big XII conference challege ala basketball. that would put the "who's better" arguement to bed

For the glory

by lionalum05 on Apr 3, 2008 6:28 PM EDT 0 recs

I think a Big Ten/Pac-10 agreement would be great

Have each team (except the one that finishes in last place and/or opts out of the agreement) play against TWO teams from the other conference.

May no act of ours bring shame

by Sacked on Apr 3, 2008 8:24 PM EDT up 0 recs

a big ten, pac ten challenge would be cool

this could also work as a replacement for the Rose Bowl tie-ins if college football ever gets a playoff.

by rmcmillen50 on Apr 3, 2008 8:36 PM EDT up 0 recs

You really

need to lose the arrogance in regard to Pitt. In terms of won-loss record, Penn St. has only been marginally better than Pitt during this decade.

The problem with the proposed rivalries is that none of that has the remotest chance of happening. There's 4 non-conference games every year, make Pitt one of them and be done with it.

by Joe 96alum on Apr 3, 2008 9:39 PM EDT 0 recs

Pitt's success

In terms of won-loss record, Penn St. has only been marginally better than Pitt during this decade

This is true, except that this has been Penn State's worst eight year stretch since the Truman Administration, and it has been Pitt's best since the 1970's. So if you start counting in 2000 the very beginning of the worst period of the Paterno era, and carry it through to today, Penn State is only a little better than Pitt. If you run the numbers honestly though, say a ten year calculation, or a twenty year calculation, or even a five year calculation. Penn State is a lot better than Pitt.

For the Glory National Champions 1982, 1986, 1994,

by jesse. on Apr 4, 2008 9:16 AM EDT up 0 recs

I am

seriously tired of comments like this:

"Pitt fans, football players, coaches and students are not of the same class as Penn State."

Like there's no such thing as drunken lout Penn St. fan. And singing "We don't know the g--damn words" at games is real classy, isn't it?

I know plenty of Pitt graduates who are good people. Lose the snottiness already.

by Joe 96alum on Apr 3, 2008 10:04 PM EDT 0 recs

Whats with the Pitt lovin!?

Theres no room for that here!

by phil18989 on Apr 3, 2008 10:46 PM EDT up 0 recs

What about

the in conference rival? We need to decide on that one as well, is it Michigan or is it Ohio State? There are so many things about both that I absolutely hate I really cannot decide.

by phil18989 on Apr 3, 2008 10:49 PM EDT 0 recs

i think...

the poll on the main page somewhat answers that question. i happen to agree with the poll. I think osu is our biggest rival currently because:

proximity
recuiting battles (see: trinity high school this year where mike yancich (LB) is coming to PSU, while andrew sweat(LB) is going to osu)
we are more competive with osu than u.m.
we play them every year (at least i'm pretty sure, correct me if i'm wrong), while we don't play michigan every year.
sweater vests suck
the games between us recently have meant a lot and been "big". proof? gameday has come to our last 3 meetings

by rmcmillen50 on Apr 3, 2008 11:16 PM EDT up 0 recs

We do not play OSU any more than we play Michigan

it all depends on the Big Ten Rotation, in which you let a team off of the schedule for two years. I really wish they would eliminate that and have each team play 10 conference games, but that doesn't happen... instead we get marginal games to fill the schedule...

by carolinaeasy on Apr 4, 2008 9:06 AM EDT up 0 recs

We play Ohio State every year

They one of our two designated rivals, along with Michigan State. Michigan does rotate off the schedlue, but Ohio State does not.

For the Glory National Champions 1982, 1986, 1994,

by jesse. on Apr 4, 2008 9:09 AM EDT up 0 recs

You're right....

tUoOS, along with MSU, is protected on our Big 10 schedule. Which is interesting considering we play Minnesota for the "Paul Bunyan's Old Brown Oaken Bucket/Jug" or whatever trophy that is and they rotate in and out of our schedule. (note: I had to look it up b/c I forgot - It's the Governor's Victory Bell)

I'm in agreement though, that at the moment, tUoOS is our biggest rival (whether they acknowledge us or not).

by Screen Name 20 on Apr 4, 2008 9:06 AM EDT up 0 recs

im not so sure

why you're so certain penn state would've beaten kentucky, auburn or vandy.

kentucky beat the national champions and auburn was one play away from a win. vandy played better than they were given credit.

not saying it wouldn't happen but i think your statement was pretty ridiculous

by jochexum on Apr 4, 2008 12:14 AM EDT 0 recs

What is the big deal about a rival

I mean seriously people...yeah it would be fun to beat up on Pitt year in and year out so I could tell my buddies to blow it out thier ass when they start talking...but come on this whole "we need a rival" thing is pretty trivial...WE ARE PENN STATE...we will play hard nose football against any oppenent willing to play us and I don't really feel the need for self glorification against a school year in and year out...I mean really what is the purpose so that when we have an 8-4 season we can say "atleast we beat these guys" so F-ing what...When I look at this team I say they played hard every game, they left it all on the field and that's all you can ask for, yeah mistakes will happen and sometimes a better team will win but I don't need a rival to promote this team...Seriously why limit yourself to playing the same teams for years and years and years, maybe rivals were good back when there were say 20 teams playing college football and there was something worth bragging about but now there are hundreds and most of them are pretty darn good and worth playing against...when you keep playing and beating the same teams again it gets pretty stale and you wonder where the challenge is...I say instead of trying to find a rival we try to schedule tougher teams than these fluff oppenents at the begining of the year...Ohhh but the team needs a few games to get into the season you say, bullshit, if this team is as good as we want it to be we need to play the toughest teams we can year in and year out and then we can say "who's next"...We Are Penn State and we play ASS KICKEN football...I say lets make ever GD team in this country our rival and challenge them to beat us...I miss the idependent days when we could schedule who we want when we want where we want...I look forward to this season and hope for the best

by Lion Alum on Apr 4, 2008 8:52 AM EDT 0 recs

I think you're right

If Penn State were winning more Big Ten games, there would be no clamoring for Pitt. Playing Pitt is not about playing a more competitive schedule; it's about nostalgia for a time when we played a schedule we dominated year in and year out.

So what if we beat Pitt last year instead of Notre Dame, or even Fla. International, we'd still have gone 9-4 and played in the Alamo Bowl. This "huge rivalry game" would have been of no consequence whatsoever.

For the Glory National Champions 1982, 1986, 1994,

by jesse. on Apr 4, 2008 9:08 AM EDT up 0 recs

I think a rivalry game is good for PSU...

Because it brings you national attention that you don't get against weak out of conference games...

Your point about "WE ARE PENN STATE" doesn't sell to the rest of the country...So how can you sell to the rest of the country? With national attention from an out of confernece rival...

by carolinaeasy on Apr 4, 2008 9:11 AM EDT up 0 recs

Try to understand

We are not playing Coastal Carolina instead of Pitt. If we played Pitt every year, we'd still play weak out of conference games. Everybody plays weak out of conference games. Everybody. The economic reality is we must have 7 or 8 home games every year.

A home and home series in perpetuity with Pitt means less national games. Pitt is not a national game. If you want to build a national program you have to schedule nationally, you play teams from other regions, not a second tier local "rival" in an area you already recruit well. You play; Alabama, Nebraska, Notre Dame, Virginia and yes, even Syracuse.

For the Glory National Champions 1982, 1986, 1994,

by jesse. on Apr 4, 2008 9:23 AM EDT up 0 recs

We can still accomplish 7 home games....

By scheduling two cupcakes, Pitt (a 25-50 team) and a top-tier team (a 1-25 team)...as long as we alternate the home-and-away's for the latter two teams. This gives us 3 OOC games, with good competition, and 4 in-conference games. In some years we can even substitute a UVA or Kentucky in there for the top-tier teams.

by Screen Name 20 on Apr 4, 2008 9:36 AM EDT up 0 recs

What is.........

your true aversion to playing Pitt ? I haven't heard a good reason to not play them yet from anyone in the anti-Pitt crowd.

I am confused by your we are not playing Coastal Carolina instead of Pitt comment. Isn't that exactly what Penn State is doing ? If you have 4 games and 4 of them are cupcakes that draws the ire of every season ticket holder because they are literally glorfied scrimmages with regular season ticket prices.......how is playing 1 of the 4 against Pitt a bad thing ?

Eric Watters Atlanta, Ga.

by ech2os on Apr 4, 2008 11:52 AM EDT up 0 recs

What's your concrete argument for playing Pitt?

I haven't read any of those yet

by PSU Nick on Apr 4, 2008 12:08 PM EDT up 0 recs

Don't answer......

a question with a question :) If you don't appreciate rivalries than you don't and there is nothing I can say to persuade you. This is kind of like proving a negative.

Or.......like trying to explain to somebody why it is or isn't rude to wear a hat indoors. You either think it is based on your appreciation for manners and how you were raied or you do not. I don't see any reason to not play Pitt given the ridiculous OOC schedule PSU plays. In state matchups like this one are great. Like somebody else said......it is turns out that we mop the floor with them, then fine....we are doing that anyways with teams we have no history at all with. Why not add them to the schedule ? Who wants to see Coastal Carolina ?

Eric Watters Atlanta, Ga.

by ech2os on Apr 4, 2008 12:32 PM EDT up 0 recs

It wasn't a choice between Coastal Car. & Pitt

Stop trying to make that argument. Frankly, I like a rivalry, but Pitt isn't ours. So let's look at other ways to approach the question. Geographically, Rutgers benefits us more than playing Pitt, as does West Virginia. For people that like to talk about the traditional matchup - Rutgers, West Virginia, Boston College, Virginia, Maryland, Texas, USC, Notre Dame, Georgia Tech and Miami all benefit us more. I would look at Texas Tech, Virginia Tech, Nebraska, Clemson, South Florida or any SEC school over Pitt. For all intents and purposes look at Florida State as our "rival" for the Bowden-JoePa angle, put them on the schedule. If you want to do something more intriguing, schedule Fresno State. The point is all these games would have a bigger exposure than playing Pitt would and expand fan base instead of pander to a small minority.

by PSU Nick on Apr 4, 2008 1:00 PM EDT up 0 recs

I somewhat agree with......

what you said. I could care less about ever watching Penn State play Rutgers, BC, UVA, or Mayrland. The other schools I would really enjoy. However, those other schools are never going to schedule enought recurring games with PSU to develop a rivalry. Pitt would, so I think you just schedule Pitt.

Eric Watters Atlanta, Ga.

by ech2os on Apr 4, 2008 1:12 PM EDT up 0 recs

BC every year

I would love it if we played BC every year since I live in Massachusetts. We actually match up with them pretty well. Both schools do well academically & try to do things the right way.

by Elihu on Apr 4, 2008 1:23 PM EDT up 0 recs

Costal Carolina versus Pitt

No, it's not what we're doing at all. C.C. is playing a one and done suicide game at Beaver Stadium. Pitt is welcome to the same deal whenever they want it. South Florida and Cincinnati, both Big East Schools, took the same deal. Oregon State took it this year. Pitt's better than Oregon State?

Penn State is playing a lopsided home and home with Temple, Pitt can have that deal whenever they want too. Pitt does, and always will, play a lopsided home and home series with Notre Dame, they aren't above 3 for 2, they are only above 3 for 2 when it concerns Penn State.

Like it or not, Penn State is committed to playing no less than 7 home games and playing 8 every other year with the 12 game schedule. That's the deal, it's not going to change. Pitt wants, and will only agree to, a complete renewal of the rivalry. That is, home and home, forever. But Michigan and Notre Dame! I hear ya, Pitt ain't Notre Dame.

Accepting Pitt's terms eliminates the rotating home and home series' with intersectional opponents. I know, I get it, you think it doesn't have to, but practically, that's the trade off for the renewal of the Pitt rivalry. It's A or B. The fun blog discussion is B would work if we did X. But you choices are A or B. If you like B that's a fair opinion, I prefer A.

For the Glory National Champions 1982, 1986, 1994,

by jesse. on Apr 4, 2008 12:43 PM EDT up 0 recs

I guess....

my opinion is that if you aren't going to schedule exciting intersectional opponents then give the fans Pitt. UVA doesn't do anything for me. Alabama and Nebraska obviously do. But I guess if the real issue here is not wanting to do a 3 for 2 then given the circumstances I would say the ball is in Pitt's court on this one. I would also suggest that if Pitt aint Notre Dame I would say neither is PSU when it comes right down to it.

Eric Watters Atlanta, Ga.

by ech2os on Apr 4, 2008 1:07 PM EDT up 0 recs

UVA may not interest you

but it's where a hell of a lot of good recruits come from

by PSU Nick on Apr 4, 2008 1:17 PM EDT up 0 recs

I understand your point.

As a point of reference, the Pittsburgh area has produced 1 less top 100 recruit over the last 3 years than the entire state of Virginia.

We can debate the pros and cons of putting Pitt on the schedule year in and year out all day long. And I am sure there are a lot of good reasons to NOT schedule them. However, I guess I tend to try and use both my head and my gut when making decisions. My head says don't schedule them, my gut says otherwise.

I think it kind of blows that we actually have to ask who our rival should be. Kind of like giving yourself nickname.

Eric Watters Atlanta, Ga.

by ech2os on Apr 4, 2008 1:37 PM EDT up 0 recs

Putting Pitt on schedule doesn't

bring more exposure to us for those recruits in western PA, because Penn State games are already on the TV and radio there anyway. As opposed to playing teams from outside of our immediate area that expands coverage of Penn State to areas that might not have seen us otherwise. The world is bigger than western PA, I know because you and I don't live there.

by PSU Nick on Apr 4, 2008 2:16 PM EDT up 0 recs

But

What happens if Pitt starts winning games again? Now Pennsylvania becomes a recruiting battleground between us and them. Beating down the local competition would go a long way toward suring up the State.

Mike
Black Shoe Diaries

Hail to the Lion!

by BSD on Apr 4, 2008 3:27 PM EDT up 0 recs

But what if Temple starts winning lots of games?

Rutgers has already been winning games the last couple years, moreso than Pitt.

by PSU Nick on Apr 4, 2008 4:19 PM EDT up 0 recs

Rutgers

Which is why we're losing ground in NJ.

I'm more concerned about Pitt getting better than Temple b/c

A. Pitt has more of a tradition which helps recruiting

B. There is more talent in western PA than eastern.

Mike
Black Shoe Diaries

Hail to the Lion!

by BSD on Apr 4, 2008 4:41 PM EDT up 0 recs

Most of these problems fix themselves

if we take of business with the schedule we have, particularly Ohio State and Michigan

by PSU Nick on Apr 4, 2008 4:53 PM EDT up 0 recs

Easy Wins

I'm not among those who think Pitt would be an easy win. Quite the contrary, it's almost always a pain in the ass win. The problem is that it hasn't been a good win since maybe 1982, and it's been a bad loss a couple of times since then.

Pitt's "wall around Allegheny County" is about as useful as building a castle to defend agaisnst stealth bombers. It's the right plan 20 years too late.

The future of college football recruiting isn't in western Pennsylvania. Further, it's not like we don't recruit well in Western Pa. I think that it's more important for us to get national exposure.

For the Glory National Champions 1982, 1986, 1994,

by jesse. on Apr 4, 2008 3:44 PM EDT up 0 recs