Isn't this the argument for playing a real OOC?
- Thread starter Deer Head
- Start date
Why does going 6-6 and losing to tough marquee teams appeal some more than going 8-4 or 9-3 and getting the arbitrary ranking? The whole sport of college football is arbitrary, it's a beauty contest based on opinion polls, so why not desire a higher arbitrary ranking, because you can't win any title on the field after the conference championship game, so why not desire the # next to your team name?
pittdan77
Athletic Director
Some "fans" don't understand the dynamics of college football where perception matters for everything from attendance and TV exposure right down to recruiting. Like I said in my now controversial post above, it's tough to take someone seriously that doesn't understand any of that.
Some people laugh at my contention that Pitt Football is just TV ENTERTAINMENT, the funny part is that some of these same people are the ones that don't want to watch unless there are big name marquee opponents.
If you ask me, they care about the SHOW as much as I do. Just if you ask me, would I rather see a WIN over Albany or a loss to Bama, I'd rather see the win, wanting to see the loss means you want to see Bama, just like you'd like to see The Stones in concert, rather than Donny Iris
If you ask me, they care about the SHOW as much as I do. Just if you ask me, would I rather see a WIN over Albany or a loss to Bama, I'd rather see the win, wanting to see the loss means you want to see Bama, just like you'd like to see The Stones in concert, rather than Donny Iris
my issue with your opinion here is that you basically are counting it as a guaranteed loss, pitt playing a respectable P5 team. Your scenario is getting killed by Bama or beating Grambling. That's it, no other options.Some people laugh at my contention that Pitt Football is just TV ENTERTAINMENT, the funny part is that some of these same people are the ones that don't want to watch unless there are big name marquee opponents.
If you ask me, they care about the SHOW as much as I do. Just if you ask me, would I rather see a WIN over Albany or a loss to Bama, I'd rather see the win, wanting to see the loss means you want to see Bama, just like you'd like to see The Stones in concert, rather than Donny Iris
It's a terrible take. You know what is better than beating Albany? Beating a P5 or respectable non P5 team. It's possible, we can do it. Yes we can lose but I think enough of this program that beating a good P5 team is possible..
The probability of "getting killed by Bama or beating Grambling" is probably 90% or more.
well no one wants to play Bama, so that's a moot point. Ok state, UCF, Tennessee isn't the same as playing alabama..
A. Ranked teams' scores show up in the scrolls on sports channels. Visibility.
B. Ranked teams get better game time slots. More prime time and ABC/ESPN games...less noon and ACCN/ESPN3 games.
C. Ranked teams get better bowl slots, as bowls like to sell "marquee matchups".
D. Ranked teams are noticed more by recruits.
College football is 90% perception and 10% results. Perception matters. Being ranked leads to better perception.
Being ranked matters.
How long have you been watching college football? You don't understand by now how this game works?
In addition to my above post.
E. Ranked teams are more likely to get a chance to host College Gameday... which is a recruiting and PR boom for a program.
F. Ending the season ranked usually leads to beginning the next season ranked. Which helps tremendously with the preseason hype and ticket sales.
E. Ranked teams are more likely to get a chance to host College Gameday... which is a recruiting and PR boom for a program.
F. Ending the season ranked usually leads to beginning the next season ranked. Which helps tremendously with the preseason hype and ticket sales.
But who wants to see those teams? To me, seeing them is no more exciting than seeing Albany or YSU.
4 cupcakes is extreme. I think most are in agreement 1 from either PSU/WVU/ND and 3 cupcakes. Could include a P5 like Illinois or Rutgers in that 3 as well.
I like you pitt79, I really do. With that said, you saying you are just as excited to see YSU than a P5 team makes me think that you are justifiably insane. All respect intended of course..
NO ONE is as excited to see YSU or Albany as they are a OK state, Tenn, PSU, etc..it's just not possible..
I always go to see Pitt and my peeps at my tailgate parties. Outside of maybe ND, WVU and Penn State, I honestly don't care who the opponent is. I saw Oklahoma State last year, wasn't "excited" to see them and it was a terrible experience, went away depressed, I had more fun seeing them beat YSU once.
as weird as this will sound, we need more fans with this attitude (yeah, me agreeing with 79, go figure). I was talking to our intern from Pitt and asked if he was going to the opener against Albany, and he said nah, it's just Albany he would be at the PSU game though. We need more fans who want to go who want to see Pitt play no matter who is the opponent.
You are missing the point. There's no advantage to playing more difficult games. I realize that a 8-1 or better Pitt team will be playing in perceived big games because they will be ranked. That gets national TV, bigger crowds and the attention of perspective recruits- More than playing an OkieSt in September.
I go to every game for one reason; to watch Pitt. That's it. Miami, Vtech, YSU, Albany, it doesn't matter who they are playing because I'm a fan of Pitt not who they are playing.
When they're playing a P5 school, the game is on ESPN/ESPN2/ESPNU and often in a 3:30 or prime time slot.
When they're playing a FCS school, the game is almost always at noon and only on ESPN3/WatchESPN App.
That matters. You need a balance. Two P5 games and Two G5/FCS games is not bad. As long as one of the P5s is a Illinois/Rutgers type - that's perfect. In years when Clemson/FSU on schedule, go with one P5 and three G5/FCS.
LOL! Good luck finding them. And while you're at it, please advise Lyke to revise future scheduling because I think she didn't get the message.
Last edited:
Part of that is "the experience", I don't go to every game, AS YOU KNOW
, however I have friends who go every game for years on end, they have their traditions their tailgate, they aren't just going for the game alone, it's a social event, they have FUN. It's sad that the powers that be try to curb drinking or tailgating, I'd be willing to bet HALF or even more of the people who go to Pitt or Steelers games would stop going if they banned tailgating or drinking in the parking lots.Since this thread is so persistent... can I ask an open question... just how much superhero ability does everyone here think that a Pitt athletic director has in scheduling?
All of you who keep posting "PSU and 3 punching bags" over and over and over, have you not noticed that we are likely not going to see PSU scheduled again in most of our lifetimes?
And for the others that, in reality, we are more the punching bags as far as scheduling? And the G5 schools hold the upper hand?
Do you really just think that it's a hardass philosophy of ... 6 Pitt ADs (counting interims) that we occasionally end up with some years of difficult schedules? The school so disinterested in all other things related to football, yet deeply engages painstaking effort in purposefully finding the most excruciating opponents possible ... for what end, who could say...? You don't think they're not just putting out a hailing frequency to fill a gap, and inking the first school that calls back willing to fill the opening (and not demanding $500K to do so)? Cuz that's sure more likely.
All of you who keep posting "PSU and 3 punching bags" over and over and over, have you not noticed that we are likely not going to see PSU scheduled again in most of our lifetimes?
And for the others that, in reality, we are more the punching bags as far as scheduling? And the G5 schools hold the upper hand?
Do you really just think that it's a hardass philosophy of ... 6 Pitt ADs (counting interims) that we occasionally end up with some years of difficult schedules? The school so disinterested in all other things related to football, yet deeply engages painstaking effort in purposefully finding the most excruciating opponents possible ... for what end, who could say...? You don't think they're not just putting out a hailing frequency to fill a gap, and inking the first school that calls back willing to fill the opening (and not demanding $500K to do so)? Cuz that's sure more likely.
And you on the other hand, act like you have to be a superhero to do it. You act like we don't have an easy schedule because we are too poor to do it? What do you base that on, you're insinuation that it's really hard and expensive to create an easy schedule?
From 2016:
Louisville will host Charlotte (for $600,000), Iowa will host Miami of Ohio (for $1 million) and Florida will host UMass (for $1.25 million), among scores of other games. The next week, Western Kentucky will earn $1.3 million to visit Alabama.
...
Payment to road team Ticket Revenue Attendance
Kent State $850,000 $5,354,488 104,404
Virginia Tech $350,000 $9,434,863 107,517
The Buckeyes made $4.1 million more for a 2014 home game against Virginia Tech than they did against Kent State, a fourfold increase in the difference over similar games four years prior.
[For others it can be even steeper] Few teams are capable of filling out their stadiums no matter who they play.
Those are just anectdotal examples, doesn't mean we can't find cheaper games, let's play Duquesne and RMU every year. And why can Louisville do it and not Pitt?
Any example is anecdotal here. If you want to send a FOIA to every school in the country to find the exact average amount of money you lose by buying an extra FCS game, go for it.
As for Louisville, their non conference schedule this year is Alabama, Kentucky, Western Kentucky, and Indiana State. Two P5 opponents, both nationally ranked SEC teams. Last year they had both Purdue and Kentucky. in 2016 they had Houston, Kentucky, Marshall, and Charlotte. In 2015 they had Auburn, Kentucky, Houston, and Samford
Those are decent schedules. What are you getting at there?
OK, lets just toughen up the OOC it builds character and we can test ourselves against the best, and go 6-6 every year just like always, don't even try to make it easier, an easy schedule will cost eleventy bazillion rubles and only 6000 fans will show up and then leave after singing Sweet Caroline. Yes, we know, we can't even afford that! lol.
^I know your talking points, you know mine. I honestly don't get what you are saying about Louisville though.
Louisville was mentioned above as paying $600000 for a game, so I said, if they can do it, I'm sure Pitt can too.
Gotcha. We might have done that with Albany this year, I have no clue how much that cost. It's a little less severe for us because our ticket price is low because we have more seats than fans in the stadium. OH NO, BACK TO TARP DEBATES
Two irrefutable facts:
1. Pitt is not rich
2 Pitt really doesn't put that much effort into football in any aspect, including this one
3. Hence, cheapest and easiest options are regularly chosen
It's not my choice that that operate that way, either. But how they choose to handle things
I'd take 8-4 over 6-6 even if it lead to a worse bowl.
Bizarre that anyone could argue that finishing 6-6 playing a tough schedule is better than 8-4.
Right now if we lose to Clemson and fall to 7-6, I want a crappy bowl, with a weak opponent so we maximize the chance at 8-6, after all they did this year it would suck for the final count to end up 7-7.
I Don't understand why people did not like this years schedule. Pitt will always try to schedule PSU/WVU/ND, so for the most part we will be playing 1 of them in any given year. We usually play those teams well. UCF, well who knows where they came from, but another year thats the same as playing a (Houston, Cincinnati, memphis type). The conference that Pitt is in is weak, and I'm not talking about the coastal, I'm talking about the whole ACC. In my opinion, Pitt should be considered at least the 4th best team in the ACC year in and year out. That being said they should be scheduling teams like MSU, Iowa, Okie St. Why not them losing all "difficult" OOC games didn't hurt them at all. They still won the coastal. Pitt needs to stop having an inferiority complex, they should be able to compete for the ACC every year.
Actually, as of right now, Syracuse is 9-3 and ranked 18, with a lot of other 3 loss teams ranked ahead of the Cuse.
Pretty sure anyone could argue that. Syracuse. Scheduled western Michigan, Wagner and a really bad UConn team for ooc. Starting the year 4-0, then going 5-3 the rest of way losing to ND.
I doubt anyone here could argue if we had Wagner and uconn instead of ups and ucf that we would also be the same 9-3 now, ranked 20th and have far more fan and recruit perception.
As for the payouts, teams pay big payouts because they have a fan base that will go to games. This is more chicken and the egg which is what Pitt79 is saying and I feel weird for agreeing with almost everything he is saying in this thread. I also, as a fan am just as pumped seeing ysu play Pitt as I am ucf playing Pitt. I want my team to win, bottom line. Look at another thread to see how many people are saying they aren’t going to Charlotte because they don’t want to spend 200 bucks to see Pitt lose. The only time you will is if you are winning and have hope you will win.
I’ve said this many times. No one will remember we had the 3rd hardest schedule or we had key injuries or refs screwed us out of wins. They only care we went 5-7 or 6-6 years down the road.
