Arrington: PSU-Pitt series "I love it .... a beautiful thing"

[pandaczar12]

I'm done repeating that we have teams that we want to beat... in fact, there is no one else that I would rather beat than the Buckeyes... but to suggest that they are our rivals... well I guess to some extent they are the way we used to have rivalries against WVU and Syracuse. The truth was that everyone knows that they consider Michigan as there number one rival. We used to have a rival and whether you admit it, understand it, or acknowledge it... it was Pitt. Rutgers & Maryland would like to elevate our game to be that type of rivalry, but I just don't see it happening anytime soon.


I can live with what you are saying as far as scheduling a decent team... however, as an old timer... I miss having a true rival... I doubt very much that either Rutgers or Maryland will ever turn into the rivalry that we used to have with Pitt. I grew up with it and for most years it was something to look forward to at the end of the season. As I stated earlier, unless you went to school before 1986, you probably have no appreciation for the series. The 1981 game (48-14) is still one of my all time favorites. I'm sorry but I would much rather play Pitt than a San Diego State, Temple, etc. I don't care who is the better team! Just like Georgia plays Georgia Tech every year... playing Pitt and beating them would mean a lot more to me than playing one of the other duds that we seem to be scheduling.

Playing Pitt ensures that Penn State's schedule will always suck. If PSU was locked in to 9 conference games, and 1 game with Pitt, that only leaves 2 OOC games each year. You can be sure that they will be TERRIBLE opponents. Considering that Pitt is already a terrible opponent, we will never see a good OOC game again.

Rival is such a misused term. Technically every team PSU plays is a rival.

Gotta love this crap. "If you don't agree with me, you don't understand college football." I don't agree with you, you arrogant ass.

Joe Paterno, the greatest football coach ever, apparently didn't understand college football.

 

[BobPSU92]

Anyone who truly understands college football agrees with Lavar on this.

Duh.

 

[BobPSU92]

Guys, it comes down to what Penn State is currently doing with its non-conference schedule (Army, Temple, and the like) and what it should do going forward, in alignment with its goals. What's done is done. The question is what should Penn State do going forward to achieve its goals? Obviously, playing pitt every year doesn't fit.

 

[SR108]

In 2016, our conference schedule has Maryland, Purdue, a fading Iowa, Indiana and Rutgers. Bottom feeders all. There will also be Minnesota who may or may not be able to keep up their success of an amazing record of 2 years in a row of winning records. A non-conference schedule of Temple, Kent St and Pitt, of which Temple will probably be the best of the three teams because the only two playmakers on Pitt will most likely be gone to the NFL. So, our hopes of not being laughed at by the selection committee ride on OSU, MSU and the hope that Michigan can also turn it around.

2017 may or may not be better for conference scheduling in that we swap out Purdue and Minnesota for Nebraska and Northwestern, but not by much. And our OOC schedule actually gets worse in that we trade Temple and Kent St for Akron and Georgia State, two of the worst G5 teams.

2018 Wisky and Illinois replace Nebraska and NW, but we still keep Iowa for the third year in a row. But Wisky will at least give us a decent team from the West. Appalachian St and Kent St join Pitt in OOC.

Every year we play at least 3 stiffs in our division and 3 teams in the significantly weaker west division. The strength of the B1G being enough to make the playoffs is a fallacy to bolster weak arguments. OOC scheduling counts. Just ask Baylor.

If any team in the east division goes undefeated, I have no doubt they will make the playoff, regardless of their OOC,

 

[anon_is9z1n0h3zblb]

If any team in the east division goes undefeated, I have no doubt they will make the playoff, regardless of their OOC,

I have no doubt that only one team in the College Football Playoff last year was undefeated going in, which is an indisputable fact. And, since we're throwing around opinions with absolutely no evidence to back them up, I have also no doubt that if Baylor had played and beaten North Carolina last year, instead of Northwestern State, that they would have made the playoff over an undefeated Florida State.

 

[grg78]

The 2017 Michigan-Florida game is neutral site in Jerrah World by invitation only. I think PSU would accept a one-and-done $6mm payout, but nobody has offered.

Maybe, some on this site have argued against giving up a gimme home game for one of these neutral site games. Not sure if that's relevant to the argument that scheduling Pitt is preventing us from having a better OOC schedule which many posters here also argue.

If OSU can play ND and Texas in the same year, Michigan can play VT and UWash and MSU can play ND and BYU in the same year, what prevents PSU from scheduling Pitt and LSU/Okla St/Stanford/etc. in the same year.

 

[anon_is9z1n0h3zblb]

Maybe, some on this site have argued against giving up a gimme home game for one of these neutral site games. Not sure if that's relevant to the argument that scheduling Pitt is preventing us from having a better OOC schedule which many posters here also argue.

If OSU can play ND and Texas in the same year, Michigan can play VT and UWash and MSU can play ND and BYU in the same year, what prevents PSU from scheduling Pitt and LSU/Okla St/Stanford/etc. in the same year.

Because were moving to a 9 game conference schedule? Most of those games were scheduled prior to a 9 game schedule. If you look at the future schedules for those teams, only Michigan has a number of away games scheduled for the years where they have 4 home conference games and they seem to be doing that on purpose to have 8 home games when they get 5 conference home games. It's an odd scheduling philosophy, but I guess they feel it gives then an advantage during those years.

The only other exceptions in the teams you listed is OSU has an away at ND in 2023 and MSU has an away game at Miami in 2021. Although OSU/ND is after the 9 game conference schedule was announced, MSU/Miami was before.

 

[Art]

Maybe, some on this site have argued against giving up a gimme home game for one of these neutral site games. Not sure if that's relevant to the argument that scheduling Pitt is preventing us from having a better OOC schedule which many posters here also argue.

If OSU can play ND and Texas in the same year, Michigan can play VT and UWash and MSU can play ND and BYU in the same year, what prevents PSU from scheduling Pitt and LSU/Okla St/Stanford/etc. in the same year.

I haven't read where anyone has argued against taking a $6mm payout for a neutral site game. That's better than a home game for PSU's finances, albeit not for those of State College businesses. But, I will reiterate, it's not like Barbour can call up Jerrah and say "Put Penn State down for a dozen of those."

The athletic programs at both Ohio State and Michigan are both heavily endowed on an operating basis, which gives them financial flexibility that I don't think PSU has. Further, those OOC opponents you cited are, with the exception of MSU in 2016 (and MSU doesn't play the return game with BYU until 2020), all beyond 2020. PSU hasn't scheduled more than one game in any season beyond 2020. We'll see what sort of scheduling magic Barbour can concoct, since she'll undoubtedly have PSU's finance in ship shape by then.

One thing you will notice is that none of the schools you mentioned have anything longer than a two-game deal with any non-conference opponent. That helps a lot in putting together a top-notch OOC schedule.....unless, of course, you're going to argue that ASWP is of the same caliber as TCU, VT, ND, Texas, Oklahoma, et al,

 

[SR108]

"I have no doubt that only one team in the College Football Playoff last year was undefeated going in, which is an indisputable fact."

Correct, and one of the one loss teams was Ohio State, which also won the Big Championship game which launched them into the playoffs. So there is a good chance that a one loss Big Ten champ will make the four teams on most years. The league is getting better, I'm not quite sure what your point is. Perhaps the big 12 should have their own playoff game.

 

[anon_is9z1n0h3zblb]

My point is that it is rare for a team to go undefeated, so teams should have a strong OOC schedule to counter a possible conference loss. You original point seemed to be that winning the B1G every year, going undefeated in conference play, is a relatively simple task so we should not worry about a strong OOC schedule. If that wasn't your original point, them what did you mean by "If any team in the east division goes undefeated, I have no doubt they will make the playoff, regardless of their OOC"?

 

[SR108]

My point is that it is rare for a team to go undefeated, so teams should have a strong OOC schedule to counter a possible conference loss. You original point seemed to be that winning the B1G every year, going undefeated in conference play, is a relatively simple task so we should not worry about a strong OOC schedule. If that wasn't your original point, them what did you mean by "If any team in the east division goes undefeated, I have no doubt they will make the playoff, regardless of their OOC"?

I think my point was pretty clear, The Big Ten is getting better. The East has four teams ranked in or close to the top ten in recruiting, and the league has two teams ranked in the top ten and three in the top twenty in pre-season polls. I personally would love to see PSU play at least one quality OOC opponent every year, (and Pitt does not qualify). I think it would help recruiting nationally. However, I'm not so sure that it is entirely necessary in order to make the four team playoff. Having to play OSU, Michigan and MSU every year means we will have at least an above average strength of schedule. When we start playing 9 conference games, chances are that we will have to play at least one game against a quality opponent from the west as well. Ohio State made the playoffs last year with a loss to Virginia Tech after winning the east and blowing out Wisconsin in the championship game. If we can get to the point where we can win the east and win a Big Championship game, we will make the four team playoffs most years with or without a quality OOC opponent.

 

[anon_is9z1n0h3zblb]

So we both agree that Pitt sucks as an OOC opponent and should not be on the schedule because they, as an opponent, do nothing to help our strength of schedule. End of discussion then as far as I'm concerned.

 

[SR108]

So we both agree that Pitt sucks as an OOC opponent and should not be on the schedule because they, as an opponent, do nothing to help our strength of schedule. End of discussion then as far as I'm concerned.

Definitely agree that Pitt sucks.

 

[Marshall30]

So we both agree that Pitt sucks as an OOC opponent and should not be on the schedule because they, as an opponent, do nothing to help our strength of schedule. End of discussion then as far as I'm concerned.

That sums it up.

 

[lein]

PSU does not play Temple after the 2016 season. With a nine game conference schedule going forward, playing any team long-term (longer than four years) is simply imprudent.

And Temple will play 2 or 3 at PSU for each game at Philly.