Big 10/Pac 12 reach scheduling agreement that has all 12 teams playing in 2017

Donate To GopherHole
Love this idea. The more good matchups we have in the "preseason" the better I feel as a fan buying season tix.
 


Would prefer the Rose Bowl be kept sacred, would rather have the Gophers play a non-conference game at Farmer's Field then Pasadena. The Rose Bowl is the granddaddy of em all, not a warm up. Also I love the idea of scheduling agreement, ensures quality non-conference opposition while letting us schedule 9 conference games. I gotta say Delaney and Scott have been the smartest commissioners BY FAR during the expansion era, and this is the icing on the cake.

OSU, MSU, UCLA, UofA in Los Angeles at Staples in a mini-tourney? I'd watch it.
 

westcoastgopher11 said:
Would prefer the Rose Bowl be kept sacred, would rather have the Gophers play a non-conference game at Farmer's Field then Pasadena. The Rose Bowl is the granddaddy of em all, not a warm up. Also I love the idea of scheduling agreement, ensures quality non-conference opposition while letting us schedule 9 conference games. I gotta say Delaney and Scott have been the smartest commissioners BY FAR during the expansion era, and this is the icing on the cake.

OSU, MSU, UCLA, UofA in Los Angeles at Staples in a mini-tourney? I'd watch it.
Click to expand...
I thought the Big 12 commishes were pretty smart...................
 

westcoastgopher11 said:
Would prefer the Rose Bowl be kept sacred, would rather have the Gophers play a non-conference game at Farmer's Field then Pasadena. The Rose Bowl is the granddaddy of em all, not a warm up. Also I love the idea of scheduling agreement, ensures quality non-conference opposition while letting us schedule 9 conference games. I gotta say Delaney and Scott have been the smartest commissioners BY FAR during the expansion era, and this is the icing on the cake.

OSU, MSU, UCLA, UofA in Los Angeles at Staples in a mini-tourney? I'd watch it.
Click to expand...
Except the Rose Bowl is UCLA's home field. I'd rather play UCLA at their home field than at a pro stadium.
 


This is absolutely great news, love the idea, especially that it covers many sports. What's interesting is they can structure this partnership any way they want to as long as both leagues agree. A blank slate as one of them said.
 

Nokomis said:
Except the Rose Bowl is UCLA's home field. I'd rather play UCLA at their home field than at a pro stadium.
Click to expand...

I know its their home field, but why play a game at a random team's home field over a neutral venue? The reason they want to play the game there is because its the "Rose Bowl". Nebraska has a home and home with UCLA starting next year too I believe.
 


Formo said:
I especially enjoyed this article.

For the record, I thought I recall seeing something like this 'alliance' will pretty much lock out the idea of expanding the conference schedule to 9 games in football. And I gotta agree with Dpo.. Just more of a bonus, IMO.
Click to expand...

Question for you and dpo... you've probably already laid it out but why do you not want to go to 9 BT games?
 



The problem with 9 games in the possible loss of a home game and not having equal conference home and away games. Some can't sleep if things are not balanced.
 

I want the 8 game conference schedule retained. Hated the 9 game possibility since it was announced.

I consider it unfair to the teams with 5 road games, and it becomes a distinct disadvantage in scheduling non-conference games. If you are trying to schedule 3 NC home games and no NC road games, it can be a real problem some years.
 

mattw1067 said:
Question for you and dpo... you've probably already laid it out but why do you not want to go to 9 BT games?
Click to expand...

MaxyJR hit on one reason for it.

I like the non-conference season, when there are good/marquee matchups (MNvsUSC/Cal, tOSUvsMiami, scUMvsND, etc), but if we drop to 3 a year, I believe the marquee non-conference matchups are first to go.

And secondly, I wouldn't be so opposed to 9 B1G games if there was not agreement with the P12. But you add that agreement, and now you make things that much more complicated scheduling-wise, not to mention all but guarantee that the other 2 non-conference games are against FCS teams.
 

Well it can't be that hard if the Pac-12 can do it. If the B1G is the great academic institutions they claim to be, you would think they could come up with a solution given that we would have 5 years to do it!

Better matchups, playing conference opponent more frequently and a BCS match up with the Pac 12 would be great.

Sure it might mean more losses and less chance to play for the National Title but I couldn't care less (is that proper use dpo) if we ever play for the BCS/National title, I just want the Rose Bowl before I die. Thankfully I'm only 31 and hopefully there are many more years of Gopher football in my future.
 




Tim Riggins said:
Well it can't be that hard if the Pac-12 can do it. If the B1G is the great academic institutions they claim to be, you would think they could come up with a solution given that we would have 5 years to do it!

Better matchups, playing conference opponent more frequently and a BCS match up with the Pac 12 would be great.

Sure it might mean more losses and less chance to play for the National Title but I couldn't care less (is that proper use dpo) if we ever play for the BCS/National title, I just want the Rose Bowl before I die. Thankfully I'm only 31 and hopefully there are many more years of Gopher football in my future.
Click to expand...

Unfortunately, the Pac 12 CAN'T do it. Colorado played 8 road games this year. Cal and WSU played 7 road games this year. Arizona, OSU, Utah and UCLA, 6. Only the other 5 teams got 7 home games. And this with everyone getting an open date but Colorado. Massive schedule fail.
 

I would argue that the number of road games a team plays is less important than the number of home games. Colorado had 5 which is an epic fail on their part no matter how you slice it. The remaining teams had 6 home games, some of those they elected to move those off campus, a la Indiana playing a home game in DC.

I agree that is not the best scenario but those AD's need to work a little harder. My guess is that with the short notice in going to 9 conference games, it made it difficult or expensive to switch the schedule. It isn't that hard when the majority of the SEC plays all 4 non-con games at home.
 


MaxyJR1 said:
Link to blog with suggested, fun match-ups.
Click to expand...

Man, Brian Bennett really sucks as a writer. How anyone employs him for that job (let alone "the Worldwide Leader") is beyond me. I really enjoyed the Big Ten blog when it was just Rittenberg, as he has a ton of experience in the conference and actually is a good writer. Whenever I see that the byline says "Brian Bennett", I think to myself "this entry is probably going to suck". Whenever I read the posting without first looking at the author, if the article sucks, I go back to look at the author and it's Bennett and not Rittenberg 9 times out of 10. Bennett tries to be Shecky Greene and fails miserably, his predictions suck, and his glaring lack of knowledge about the history/traditions/ethos of the Big Ten is evident. Other than that, he's great! They should've left him in the Big East where he belongs. And is there really that much news to cover that Rittenberg couldn't do it by himself? Oh no, I have to type up 3-4 blog entries per day! I might get cramps in my hands!
 

dpodoll68 said:
Man, Brian Bennett really sucks as a writer. How anyone employs him for that job (let alone "the Worldwide Leader") is beyond me. I really enjoyed the Big Ten blog when it was just Rittenberg, as he has a ton of experience in the conference and actually is a good writer. Whenever I see that the byline says "Brian Bennett", I think to myself "this entry is probably going to suck". Whenever I read the posting without first looking at the author, if the article sucks, I go back to look at the author and it's Bennett and not Rittenberg 9 times out of 10. Bennett tries to be Shecky Greene and fails miserably, his predictions suck, and his glaring lack of knowledge about the history/traditions/ethos of the Big Ten is evident. Other than that, he's great! They should've left him in the Big East where he belongs. And is there really that much news to cover that Rittenberg couldn't do it by himself? Oh no, I have to type up 3-4 blog entries per day! I might get cramps in my hands!
Click to expand...

I happened to go straight from your comments to the B1G blog on ESPN and ran into this un-funny, non-creative, piece of crap. I got half way through it, had a little dpodoll with fairy wings land on my shoulder, remind me to look at the author - and sure enough... Bennett.

http://espn.go.com/blog/bigten/post/_/id/42387/fun-with-potential-pac-12b1g-matchups
 

Nokomis said:
Except the Rose Bowl is UCLA's home field. I'd rather play UCLA at their home field than at a pro stadium.
Click to expand...

Not me. I just don't want to see the Gophers play in the RB until it's THE ROSE BOWL. Seeing it with only 65K there would make it feel cheap. Would likely feel differently had I already tasted the forbidden fruit so so speak.
 

Tim Riggins said:
Well it can't be that hard if the Pac-12 can do it. If the B1G is the great academic institutions they claim to be, you would think they could come up with a solution given that we would have 5 years to do it!
Click to expand...
It made sense for the Pac-10 because it gave them a true champion. It started to make less sense once they expanded. They haven't gotten away from it yet but I wouldn't be surprised if they do.

Tim Riggins said:
I would argue that the number of road games a team plays is less important than the number of home games.
Click to expand...
Agreed, but then you are really making an argument to get away from a nine game schedule unless you're ok with the non-con home slate turning into an extra creamy and soft cupcake fest.

Tim Riggins said:
I agree that is not the best scenario but those AD's need to work a little harder.
Click to expand...
AD's won't work a little harder, they'll just schedule worse home games to guarantee the money they make from the home gate. And since teams keep asking for bigger guarantees the quality of opponent will just go down. Schools like OSU can avoid this if they want. Schools like MN who depend on every cent of revenue can't.
 

dpodoll68 said:
Whenever I read the posting without first looking at the author, if the article sucks, I go back to look at the author and it's Bennett and not Rittenberg 9 times out of 10. Bennett tries to be Shecky Greene and fails miserably, his predictions suck, and his glaring lack of knowledge about the history/traditions/ethos of the Big Ten is evident.
Click to expand...
Ha ha...I've been doing the same all season. I don't dislike him as much as you, but anytime I've had cause to question the quality/accuracy/B1G knowledge of a post I've not been surprised to see Bennett's byline.
 

dpodoll68 said:
Man, Brian Bennett really sucks as a writer. How anyone employs him for that job (let alone "the Worldwide Leader") is beyond me. I really enjoyed the Big Ten blog when it was just Rittenberg, as he has a ton of experience in the conference and actually is a good writer. Whenever I see that the byline says "Brian Bennett", I think to myself "this entry is probably going to suck". Whenever I read the posting without first looking at the author, if the article sucks, I go back to look at the author and it's Bennett and not Rittenberg 9 times out of 10. Bennett tries to be Shecky Greene and fails miserably, his predictions suck, and his glaring lack of knowledge about the history/traditions/ethos of the Big Ten is evident. Other than that, he's great! They should've left him in the Big East where he belongs. And is there really that much news to cover that Rittenberg couldn't do it by himself? Oh no, I have to type up 3-4 blog entries per day! I might get cramps in my hands!
Click to expand...
+1
 

GoAUpher said:
Not me. I just don't want to see the Gophers play in the RB until it's THE ROSE BOWL. Seeing it with only 65K there would make it feel cheap. Would likely feel differently had I already tasted the forbidden fruit so so speak.
Click to expand...
Playing a Pac-12 team at a neutral site would also feel cheap. I hope they keep these true home-and-home series with few neutral site games.
 

Nokomis said:
Playing a Pac-12 team at a neutral site would also feel cheap.
Click to expand...
Certainly. But in this case I'd made an exception. It's not like playing UCLA in the Rose Bowl gives you the opportunity to experience the campus atmosphere or something. Westwood is 20+ miles away from Pasadena. In the end, it's essentially a "neutral site" game anyway, only with crappier stadium facilities and no good way to see in-stadium replays. Those are things that you don't notice as much if it's The Grandaddy, but would be more glaring if it's just a non-con game.
 

GoAUpher said:
Certainly. But in this case I'd made an exception. It's not like playing UCLA in the Rose Bowl gives you the opportunity to experience the campus atmosphere or something. Westwood is 20+ miles away from Pasadena. In the end, it's essentially a "neutral site" game anyway, only with crappier stadium facilities and no good way to see in-stadium replays. Those are things that you don't notice as much if it's The Grandaddy, but would be more glaring if it's just a non-con game.
Click to expand...

A million times this. There's a reason why they moved the Cotton Bowl to the new Dallas Cowboys stadium. The Red River Rivalry still plays at the Texas State Fairgrounds because of the tradition, not the amenities. Without the atmosphere its just a "meh" experience for a college game.
 

You must log in or register to reply here.



Top Bottom