That's a pretty good idea, but the contracts shouldn't be written too far into the future to allow for flexibility if other attractive options arise. Nine conference games wreaks havoc with scheduling, but Mr. Big Stuff Delany became the Stay-Puft Marshmallow when Fox got in his grill.
Pitt's new AD's 1st phone call to Barbour?
- Thread starter PSUEngineerx2
- Start date
That's a pretty good idea, but the contracts shouldn't be written too far into the future to allow for flexibility if other attractive options arise. Nine conference games wreaks havoc with scheduling, but Mr. Big Stuff Delany became the Stay-Puft Marshmallow when Fox got in his grill.
Pitt wants to play us for one reason: money. If play them 2 and 1, that is still one sellout that they would otherwise not get, plus the visitors' take from a sold out Beaver Stadium would also be significant. It's still win/win for them, but their pride gets in the way.
Yeah, but I think the landscape is changing soon so P5 teams only play each other. We can hope.
Oh okay. I had no idea what 1966 meant. Exactly, but the 80s feel just as far gone as the 60s, the 40s, or the 20s to me. Sorry, but neither of our schools have been relevant in modern college football. So the 23-7-1 means little to my generation.
I'd be cool with this as some sort of series with all teams involved. Not that interested in Temple but it makes it 4 teams.
Would you want to have to go the other teams field 2 for 1? Sure it's about money. Isn't that why Penn State wants a two for one? I realize other than Pitt joining the Big Ten this won't be a yearly thing. Money is a powerful influence.
Pitt vs Penn State will ways draw a huge crowd. A much better non conference opponent than the current schedule provides.
They find a way to have the two rivals play every year even though they don't compete in the same conference. It's not impossible, just tough. Love to see it.
It was a great rivalry game that only needs to start again. The disdain for each others fan base alone calls for this game to be played.
Think their fans are happy about that? That game was played for eons. What a shame.
I am from eastern PA and all my buddies would rather have Pitt on the schedule than half the Big Ten teams. You can't speak for everybody. You might be correct as a whole (debatable) but don't think for a moment there are not supporters in all parts of the state of Pennsylvania for a game with Pitt. Plenty of PSU fans 50yo or better that know the rivalry and younger fans who have never seen Penn St. play a rivalry game or for that matter play a game against a historic rival would love to see a yearly contest.Well, with all respect, I'll defer to the PSU AD in terms of financial need rather than the 'gut feeling' of a Pitt fan.
While PSU makes more in the big ten- it's expenses have increased as well (sending swimming and track etc to Minneapolis and Lincoln). Not to mention the general yearly increases in expenses. The AThletic department is in the red for the first time in forever- so don't expect PSU to be giving away money to schedule Pitt.
If the finances get back to normal and it's possible to pay the bills with 6 home games- then great. But until then there's only 1 home-away OOC game and most would rather see VA Tech, LSU etc than Pitt. I'm not trying to be insulting but it's just the way it is.
I think there's 2 very different outlooks on this game. If you're from western pa (including Pitt fans) it's considered a big enough deal to want to play. If you're from central or eastern PA (where most in PA live)- it's not seen as anything special at all.
Septa, do you consider Illinois-Ohio State to be a great rivalry??? NO ONE does. Yet, Illinois has beaten Ohio State 11 of their past 30 games. Pitt beat Penn State 7 of their past 31 games. #Perspective
I think many would rather see Pitt than half of the big ten teams. I agree completely but that's not the point since the big ten games aren't going anywhere (unfortunately).
The issue is do you want the only home/away series every year to be only Pitt (Pitt, Akron, Eastern Michigan OOC schedule) or do you want it rotated with other schools like Alabama, Notre Dame etc? That's the bottom line here.
You're a p5 school that is playing AT Akron next season and played at Ohio ( I think it was in 2007). If MAC teams can demand and get home games from you then your program is in no position to dictate terms to PSU. Remember in the world of college football pitt is the prostitute not the John.
This is the type of arrogance
And I respect that opinion. If you guys can really schedule the likes of Alabama and Notre Dame, good for you. I doubt you'll be able to do that consistently, but that's not what this conversation has centered around. Maybe someday soon the landscape will change with how teams schedule or what PSU says it can afford.
Pitt has more history and potential than plenty of schools that are in P5 conferences. To the posters who act like PSU is on some high level, ask yourself what people know about your school in recent history. You're not going to like the answer.
To the people who have been respectful and at least listened to my points, you're the reason I want this game to play. I enjoy having football discussions with adults who support other teams. It's not a rivalry built on hatred. At least not for me. I have a lot of PSU friends and the fall would be better if we played. I don't care if wealthy administrators make more money or my athletic department's bottom like looks better. I get nothing out of an extra home game if it means we play at PSU because then I get to go to an away game.
So are Michigan State and Oklahoma State. I wish my school was as successful as those two in recent history. I'm sure you wish your school was.
actually its meaning is very significant. It is part of PSU putting 100K seated fans in Beaver Stadium as opposed to an alternative of Pitt like 10K.
As most have said, PSU does not need Pitt. Pitt needs PSU. Way back before all the conferences assembled, Joe tried to start the Eastern Conference. Pitt and several others said FU Joe. I bet they wish they had done it now. Pitt, Syracuse, BC will never be major players again in college football. Maryland and Rutgers lucked out getting in the Big Ten. I think West Virginia is gonna struggle to ever dominate again as well.
Have to disagree with you that the primary thing that makes a great rivalry is the number of wins against one another -- typically it is the proximity of the two schools and the fact that the games are close and hard fought regardless if one team is significantly better in any given year or one of the teams has a large advantage in the wins column against the other. The "Iron Bowl" being a great example - universally considered one of the best rivalries in football and has been for decades. During Bear Bryant's tenure (1958-1982), Alabama was 19-6 against Auburn and yet it was one of the televised and highly marketed annual rivalry games (ditto PSU-Pitt) in the era when very few games were televised prior to cable television. Again, Auburn was 19-6 in their prior 25 games against Bama in 1982 but the Iron Bowl was considered the country's premier rivalry game at the time and was marketed as such by ABC. Texas-aTm another good example - Texas was 24-7 during this time frame (1950-1980), but it was still considered a big rivalry game by both sides.
In truth, Pitt doesn't need Penn State as we haven't been on their schedule since 2000 and they've managed to maintain their level of mediocrity in the weak Big Least and now in the ACC. It certainly benefits Pitt more financially to play Penn State than vice versa.
I find it funny how Pitt fans like to say they won in 2000 and supposedly there's a poster of that game in Pitt's weight room. Funny how they don't mention Penn State won the previous seven games between the schools prior to that game.
I find it funny how Pitt fans like to say they won in 2000 and supposedly there's a poster of that game in Pitt's weight room. Funny how they don't mention Penn State won the previous seven games between the schools prior to that game.
Huh? No, I'm saying that YOUR "standard" of what makes a rivalry is wrong and absurd unless of course you want to claim that the Iron Bowl and Texas-aTm aren't legit classic rivalries???
Pitt doesn't need PSU. It'd be fun to play though. The Eastern conference isn't as simple as you make it out to be. I don't want to be in the Big Ten playing state schools in states with declining population. Other than OSU and Michigan, the Big Ten is full of schools that think they're more important nationally. Plus, trips to Miami, Boston, North Carolina, and Atlanta are more appealing to me than Big Ten road trips. Despite proximity, Pitt and PSU are very different schools and fit in their respective conferences well.
WVU was more nationally relevant than PSU in the last 15 years and that was playing in the Big East. The difference between PSU and WVU/Pitt is that PSU thinks it's at a much higher level than the other two with no stats to back it up.
Really? Top 10 in all-time wins:
- Michigan (915)
- ND (882)
- Texas (881)
- Nebraska (874)
- Ohio State (863)
- Alabama and Oklahoma (850)
- see above
- PSU (847)
- Tennesse (811)
- Southern Cal (805)
1 Oklahoma 570
2 Nebraska 554
3 Ohio State 541
4 Penn State 534
5 Texas 531
6 Alabama 527
7 Southern Cal 507
8 Michigan 505
9 Tennessee 501
10t Florida State 496
10t Florida 46
Top 10 in wins last 50 years:
1 Nebraska 470
2 Oklahoma 444
3 Ohio State 438
4 Penn State 430
5 Michigan 424
6 Alabama 420
7 Florida State 415
8 Texas 414
9 Georgia 410
10 Southern Cal 407
Gee, looks to me like the stats say that PSU is solidly within the top 10 programs all-time and consistently top-5 in the "modern era" since 1950 and over the last 5 decades. What I don't see is WVU or ASWP - so much for your no stats to back up PSU's having a much higher national profile than WVU or ASWP....LMFAO.
1950 was a long time ago. How about since 2000? Or the beginning of the BCS. Using those stats but getting butthurt when Pitt fans cite national titles from the 30s is so ironic. Ask around what college football people think of PSU football.
You really are some kind of dip$hit -- I listed the last 50 years as well which doesn't go back to 1950 moron. How about we look at the last 25 years (that goes back to 1990 for a mental midget such as yourself):
1 Florida State 240
2t Nebraska 239
2t Florida 239
4 Ohio State 237
5 Oklahoma 222
6t Virginia Tech 220
6t Texas 220
8 Miami-Florida 219
9 Oregon 217
10 Georgia 216
11 Michigan 212
12t Penn State 210 (97 losses & 0 ties)
12t Tennessee 210 (100 losses & 2 ties)
.
.
.
27t West Virginia 188 (115 losses & 2 ties)
.
.
.
66 Pittsburgh 144 (155 losses & 1 tie)
Gee, looks like your claims about there being no stats proving PSU has been consistently better and among the best in the country all-time, since 1950, over the last 50 years and over the last 25 years are wrong, wrong, wrong and wrong.....
Bushwood, when you have a series that's 19 wins versus 6 losses, that's dominance no matter how you define it, hardly the "country's premier rivalry game" as you wrote above as believed by the word of television marketing. Twenty four wins versus seven losses is even greater dominance.
Those same television market people would tell you what a great rivalry Navy-Notre Dame was during the period when Notre Dame won 43 CONSECUTIVE games in the series.
A rivalry of any worth has competitive balance. I would hope you can understand that concept.
Those same television market people would tell you what a great rivalry Navy-Notre Dame was during the period when Notre Dame won 43 CONSECUTIVE games in the series.
A rivalry of any worth has competitive balance. I would hope you can understand that concept.
I gotta say- you were fine throughout the conversation until you started to lean back on some of the nonsense from the Pitt board. You act like psu can't schedule good teams yet I've listed for you Bama, Notre Dame, Oregon St, Virginia the past few years on top of WVU and Virginia Tech already scheduled in the future and hopefully LSU (in discussions). The bottom line is play Pitt only every year or go for the variety of scheduling others. Pitt doesn't win that choice.
Then, of all teams, a Pitt fan questions Penn State's relevance since 2000? Even with the dark years of the early 2000s and the recent sanction years- Penn State has been ranked 6 times (3 in the top 10- #3, #8, #8). Pitt has been ranked a grand total of 3 times since 2000 (highest #15). You couldn't choose a worse time in the history of the school to count PSU's record and yet they still double Pitt.
Seriously, with all respect, talking football with opposing fans is great but leave the panther lair nonsense on that board.
Last edited:
If you say so, I guess the fact that tO$U is 12-3 versus over Michigan the past 15 years means they are no longer rivals??? Ummm, no sorry but rivalries are about the history of the two rivals and the fact that their games are hard fought and generally close regardless of who is supposed to win or lose.
Oregon State and Virginia, really? Neither of those games is more exciting for PSU fans. Virginia is worse for SoS. Oregon State is pretty comparable to Pitt depending on the year. Alabama was scheduled when they were down, but you got lucky there. WVU and VT are fun, logical games. I just don't agree with your "bottom line." You're more worried about how much money your athletic department makes (which is perfectly fine). I'd rather see traditional rivals (PSU, WVU, and ND) AND fun OOC games (Iowa, Okie St, Utah).
Total wins since 2000
PSU = 115
Pitt = 107
Times ranked to end the season
PSU = 5
Pitt = 3
PSU's final rankings have definitely been better and the highs have been higher. But, it's not this huge difference that you think it's been. You guys have all the resources to win and win big. You're not alone there. There are plenty of schools that recruit well, have great gameday atmospheres, and have money flowing out their ears that still can't find the right coach.
Like I said earlier, it seems like you want something different for your program than I want for mine. I don't want to play PSU for money. I want to because it's fun to watch. I couldn't care less if Pitt has to pull from the general fund to pay for athletics. An extra home game means nothing to me especially if it means away games at rivals.
What was the record in the previous 31 games. Was Pitt clamoring to end the series then? Maybe you could use some perspective. Is Michigan vs Ohio St. still a rivalry even though one team is dominating? How About Army vs Navy? Did the Alabama vs Auburn game cease to be a rivalry when Alabama won ten in a row before Bo Jackson enrolled at Auburn? Maybe your the one that could use a little perspective.
Last edited:
None of those games other than Texas vs A&M was ever a real rivalry. Big time red herring. I
[Q understand theUOTE="cpn1sgm, post: 257382, member: 6830"]As most have said, PSU does not need Pitt. Pitt needs PSU. Way back before all the conferences assembled, Joe tried to start the Eastern Conference. Pitt and several others said FU Joe. I bet they wish they had done it now. Pitt, Syracuse, BC will never be major players again in college football. Maryland and Rutgers lucked out getting in the Big Ten. I think West Virginia is gonna struggle to ever dominate again as well.[/QUOTE]
Pitt is surviving without PSU. I I can't understand how people think Pitt needs PSU. We have not won a NC in thirty years and have been to 2 BCS bowl games since the inception of that system.
Pitt is surviving without PSU. I I can't understand how people think Pitt needs PSU. We have not won a NC in thirty years and have been to 2 BCS bowl games since the inception of that system.
