For those who want to continue to play Pitt, how about this?

[fairgambit]

Have the AD's agree to play annually starting in 2025, or whenever. Then, starting with the last game of the current series in 2019, the winner of that game gets the next game at home. If we win in 2019, we play 2025 at home. If we win in 2025, we get 2026 at home. If Pitt wins in 2019, they get 2025 at home. You keep winning, you keep getting home games. Make the game result actually mean something.

 

[ClarkstonMark]

nice fantasy but college sports don't work that way

 

[anon_xdc8rmuek44eq]

Have the AD's agree to play annually starting in 2025, or whenever. Then, starting with the last game of the current series in 2019, the winner of that game gets the next game at home. If we win in 2019, we play 2025 at home. If we win in 2025, we get 2026 at home. If Pitt wins in 2019, they get 2025 at home. You keep winning, you keep getting home games. Make the game result actually mean something.

Is this even a real sticking point? I have to believe Pitt would go all in for a 3:1 if we wanted. I believe the fans/alums would rather not be bothered with a MAC+ team - especially one with *that* fan base.

 

[fairgambit]

nice fantasy but college sports don't work that way

That's what they said about instant replay not long ago.

 

[jerseylion109]

this is not a good idea.

 

[pandaczar12]

The last game will be #100, that's enough.

 

[The Song Remains the Same]

Have the AD's agree to play annually starting in 2025, or whenever. Then, starting with the last game of the current series in 2019, the winner of that game gets the next game at home. If we win in 2019, we play 2025 at home. If we win in 2025, we get 2026 at home. If Pitt wins in 2019, they get 2025 at home. You keep winning, you keep getting home games. Make the game result actually mean something.

No way Narduzzi agrees to this unless you throw a key chain into the deal.

 

[ClarkstonMark]

Is this even a real sticking point? I have to believe Pitt would go all in for a 3:1 if we wanted. I believe the fans/alums would rather not be bothered with a MAC+ team - especially one with *that* fan base.

you really think Pitt would go for 3:1? Man, I highly doubt that

 

[psuro]

How about....no.

Unless the NCAA increases the max number of regular season games to 13, or the Big Ten decides to go back to an 8 game conference schedule I see no reason to lose one available scheduling slot, on an annual basis, to Pitt.

 

[fairgambit]

How about....no.
Unless the NCAA increases the max number of regular season games to 13, or the Big Ten decides to go back to an 8 game conference schedule I see no reason to lose one available scheduling slot, on an annual basis, to Pitt.

I absolutely agree. I never want to play them again, but if our AD decides otherwise, let's have the result mean something.

 

[anon_xdc8rmuek44eq]

you really think Pitt would go for 3:1? Man, I highly doubt that

Why not? Will be a guaranteed sell out for them. How many of those do they get in a year? And we know we are always their Super Bowl - how can you pass up a chance to play that every year, even if you have to play most of those games away?

 

[ClarkstonMark]

Why not? Will be a guaranteed sell out for them. How many of those do they get in a year? And we know we are always their Super Bowl - how can you pass up a chance to play that every year, even if you have to play most of those games away?

pride and it weakens their brand (pains me and I almost lol at saying that, but it is true)
P5 teams don't do 3:1 contracts

 

[anon_xdc8rmuek44eq]

pride and it weakens their brand (pains me and I almost lol at saying that, but it is true)
P5 teams don't do 3:1 contracts

They have no leverage here. If they want the game, they'll bend the knee.

 

[psuro]

I absolutely agree. I never want to play them again, but if our AD decides otherwise, let's have the result mean something.

If our AD agrees to play them again, then I will summon Bob to stoke the flames of her hot seat. And by the by, I think it was her predecessor(s) that agreed to this game many years ago.

 

[Obliviax]

Why not? Will be a guaranteed sell out for them. How many of those do they get in a year? And we know we are always their Super Bowl - how can you pass up a chance to play that every year, even if you have to play most of those games away?

There was some misinformation about Joe not wanting to play Pitt earlier in a different thread. This is tangentially related so thought I'd chime in. Joe and the AD didn't want to play Pitt in Pitt because of the rev loss. We offered them something like a three year deal, two of those at the Beav. Something like that, perhaps not the detail, but something uneven. Pitt turned it down.

This is similar in that we lose revenue for most venues unless you are talking about the mega majors (ND, OK, FL, FSU, AL, Auburn, etc). For example, the game in 2016 drew 68,000. Saturday had 109,000. At $75 a seat, that is a loss of over $3,075,000. That doesn't include parking, food and souvenir sales etc. You are talking about a $5m difference. That pays off somewhere between 2 and 5 alleged victims.

 

[LionDeNittany]

Have the AD's agree to play annually starting in 2025, or whenever. Then, starting with the last game of the current series in 2019, the winner of that game gets the next game at home. If we win in 2019, we play 2025 at home. If we win in 2025, we get 2026 at home. If Pitt wins in 2019, they get 2025 at home. You keep winning, you keep getting home games. Make the game result actually mean something.

Yet another post about a team noone here seems to care about.

LdN

 

[LemonEars]

How about this -- Penn State and Pitt have played 98 times. 23 times the game was played in State College and 75 times in Pittsburgh. Thus, Pitt owes us 52 home games. Let's continue the series starting in 2020. We will play in State College every year until 2072 and then after that alternate between State College and Pittsburgh. Let's make this fair.

 

[Grass]

I'll take Pitt over Akron or Georgia State any day of the week. I was way more excited for the game this past Saturday then I was for the Akron game. Just being honest.

 

[fairgambit]

Yet another post about a team noone here seems to care about.

LdN

I agree there are too many Pitt posts for no good reason, but I see no problem with them the week before, and the week after, the game. I would feel the same about any opponent.

 

[The Song Remains the Same]

There was some misinformation about Joe not wanting to play Pitt earlier in a different thread. This is tangentially related so thought I'd chime in. Joe and the AD didn't want to play Pitt in Pitt because of the rev loss. We offered them something like a three year deal, two of those at the Beav. Something like that, perhaps not the detail, but something uneven. Pitt turned it down.

This is similar in that we lose revenue for most venues unless you are talking about the mega majors (ND, OK, FL, FSU, AL, Auburn, etc). For example, the game in 2016 drew 68,000. Saturday had 109,000. At $75 a seat, that is a loss of over $3,075,000. That doesn't include parking, food and souvenir sales etc. You are talking about a $5m difference. That pays off somewhere between 2 and 5 alleged victims.

Or about 12 more Assistant Athletic Directors.

 

[Ski]

Have the AD's agree to play annually starting in 2025, or whenever. Then, starting with the last game of the current series in 2019, the winner of that game gets the next game at home. If we win in 2019, we play 2025 at home. If we win in 2025, we get 2026 at home. If Pitt wins in 2019, they get 2025 at home. You keep winning, you keep getting home games. Make the game result actually mean something.

Only if the winner also gets to keep the unicorn.

There are a bunch of rea$on$ P$U would never go for that deal. Bring on Akron.

 

[psuro]

How about this -- Penn State and Pitt have played 98 times. 23 times the game was played in State College and 75 times in Pittsburgh. Thus, Pitt owes us 52 home games. Let's continue the series starting in 2020. We will play in State College every year until 2072 and then after that alternate between State College and Pittsburgh. Let's make this fair.

 

[Pardlion]

Have the AD's agree to play annually starting in 2025, or whenever. Then, starting with the last game of the current series in 2019, the winner of that game gets the next game at home. If we win in 2019, we play 2025 at home. If we win in 2025, we get 2026 at home. If Pitt wins in 2019, they get 2025 at home. You keep winning, you keep getting home games. Make the game result actually mean something.

How about if Pitt just plays Temple every year? We can even loan them the Beav to play their game.

 

[BobPSU92]

How about this? How about we toss the people who want Penn State to play pitt off a cliff?

 

[BobPSU92]

How about if Pitt just plays Temple every year? We can even loan them the Beav to play their game.

What?! They'll never get the stench out.

 

[Ranger Dan]

My preference for scheduling Pitt in the future is as only a home game for Penn State, just like Temple or Akron. If we want to play a P5 in a home and home (and I encourage that), then it should be from outside of the Big Ten footprint and specifically outside of PA. I imagine that Akron charges less for their pay for play games ( than what SD St. charges, for example) because their travel expenses are less and they are more likely of getting recruiting benefit, so I would support paying Pitt as much as we do Akron or Temple, but not more.

An alternative suggestion is that we alternate between a Penn State home game and a neutral game in Pittsburgh.

 

[LionDeNittany]

I agree there are too many Pitt posts for no good reason, but I see no problem with them the week before, and the week after, the game. I would feel the same about any opponent.

Cool so where are your posts about Georgia State and their fans?

LdN

 

[CF LION]

Put our old eastern foes on a rotation. They each get to come see us twice a decade - Pitt, Syracuse, Temple, BC and WVU. No return visits. One MAC-ish team at home each year. A home and home setup with other P5 teams - at PSU on the years when we only have 4 home B10 games, travel to their place in the years when we have 5.

That completes gives us 7 home games every year in a 12 game schedule.

 

[fairgambit]

Cool so where are your posts about Georgia State and their fans?

LdN

Actually, I just posted one in the Has Penn State ever played a "smaller program" like GASt at night? thread.
Let me add that I did not say such posts were required the week before and after a game. Only that they were appropriate.

 

[psudsl08]

Pitt fans were all about seeing PSU get the death penalty back in 2012. They didn't care about what was "good for PA football fans." Now, PSU and Pitt are supposed to play every year because it's good for PA football fans.

I want PSU to do what is best for PSU moving forward. Monetarily, we know that will involve scheduling two easy home wins. With one game left, schedule a major power (Alabama, Oklahoma), a game that will garner national attention (ND) or a regional top 25 program like VA Tech. These games create a national buzz and will allow PSU to build on its recruiting.

Until proven otherwise, Pitt will continue to be a program capable of winning the occasional big game, but that finds a way to finish unranked with 4-6 losses. Don't see how this helps PSU.

 

[Pardlion]

What?! They'll never get the stench out.

Good point. No one likes a stinky Beav.

 

[LionDeNittany]

Actually, I just posted one in the Has Penn State ever played a "smaller program" like GASt at night? thread.
Let me add that I did not say such posts were required the week before and after a game. Only that they were appropriate.

Here's the thing IMO, there is a small contingent of fans who don't want to play Pitt. But they are very vocal.

I think most casual fans are happy playing Pitt.

LdN

 

[joeparules]

Put our old eastern foes on a rotation. They each get to come see us twice a decade - Pitt, Syracuse, Temple, BC and WVU. No return visits. One MAC-ish team at home each year. A home and home setup with other P5 teams - at PSU on the years when we only have 4 home B10 games, travel to their place in the years when we have 5.

That completes gives us 7 home games every year in a 12 game schedule.

You mean the Syracuse that just lost to Middle Tennessee? I much prefer Temple only because their fans are so entertaining. The young Temple fan behind me to his buddy last year towards the end of the first half ... "Hey, if we hold them here we get the ball back with two time-outs and the two-minute warning!"

 

[fairgambit]

Here's the thing IMO, there is a small contingent of fans who don't want to play Pitt. But they are very vocal.

I think most casual fans are happy playing Pitt.

LdN

I thing you are wrong, but no one really knows. I would like to see a poll of all season ticket holders. Send them a questionnaire with their tickets and ask them who they would like to see on the schedule. The results might be very interesting.

 

[Obliviax]

I have nothing to add to this thread, just wanted to post this gif I found.

 

[john4psu]

You think the officiating is bad now? What will it be like when literally millions of dollars rides on a local official's call that could determine who gets to host the next game?

 

[MtNittany]

You mean Akron, right?

 

[Whaaaaaaaany]

How 'bout we create a branch campus team....let them play Pitt every year

 

[SR108]

Have the AD's agree to play annually starting in 2025, or whenever. Then, starting with the last game of the current series in 2019, the winner of that game gets the next game at home. If we win in 2019, we play 2025 at home. If we win in 2025, we get 2026 at home. If Pitt wins in 2019, they get 2025 at home. You keep winning, you keep getting home games. Make the game result actually mean something.

No real good reason to play Pitt that I can see at this point, none. And I used to think the game should be played every year.

 

[LafayetteBear]

Yet another post about a team noone here seems to care about.

LdN

The sheer volume of posts here about Pitt, and the fact that a number of posters admit to going over to the Lair regularly to monitor board traffic there, suggests something different to me.

I just don't see PSU developing an in conference rivalry like UCLA-USC, Alabama-Auburn, Michigan-Ohio State, or even Cal-Stanford, as things presently stand. A three way rivalry with Michigan and Ohio State? Maybe, but that seems awkward. Michigan State? No. Maybe Rutgers at some future date if they improve their program a whole lot, but I'm not betting on that.

It is telling that PSU has played Pitt something like 98 times. Is that merely a consequence of the fact that both schools are located in the same state? Not sure I'm buying that.

The only thing preventing it from being a rivalry in the truest sense is that the teams do not play in the same conference, and Pitt simply does not have and will not have a football program with the national stature of Penn State.