Big Ten to no longer schedule FCS opponents

[M Club]

Oh look, Lefty's suddenly all socialist about the things that matter to him.

[Mace]

UNI scheduling Division I schools helps keep their athletic department afloat and I don't think that's a bad thing. They've played Iowa, Wisconsin, Iowa State, and Kansas over the past several years and are always competitive, having beaten Iowa State and Kansas on occasion. Iowa had to block two FG attempts in the final seconds to win a game a few years ago and ultimately ended up in Orange Bowl that year. They also gave Wisconsin all they wanted this year. It's hardly a cupcake game. The football money also helps them to compete in basketball and they've made their appearances in the Big Dance over the past few years....beating Kansas a few short years ago.

Year in, year out, UNI puts a better team on the field than most of the MAC schools that Iowa schedules, and I'd rather pay to watch an Iowa-UNI game than Iowa-Northern Illinois. The matchup with UNI has some appeal to all Iowans, at both Iowa and Iowa State, and they know they're in for a fight when they play them. I understand the reasoning for getting these schools off the schedule, but it's going to come at a cost to a lot of smaller universities, which I think is wrong.

[Screw_Michigan]

I understand the reasoning for getting these schools off the schedule, but it's going to come at a cost to a lot of smaller universities, which I think is wrong.

The MAC and Sun Belt seem pretty positioned to make more money off this. Get rid of half their competition for the paycheck games, they can charge more. scUM and other elitest schools won't let the MAC disappear, just the 1-AA schools.

Though I do agree with you Mace on why this doesn't pass the smell test. Just more of the haves not wanting to share with the "have-nots."

[Mace]

I agree with you on both counts, S_M. The MAC and Sun Belt will both benefit from this decision and the big dogs will still schedule their cupcake games, and with bigger paydays. In the case of UNI, both Iowa and Iowa State were happy to pay out the money to their in-state little brother, and UNI always entered those games thinking they could and would win.....and sometimes they did. It was an in-state rivalry game for UNI and their players always played with a chip on their shoulders for having not been recruited by the two bigger schools. I doubt that UNI is unique in that respect. Personally, I'll miss seeing those matchups. I know there's not any national appeal to them but there's a lot of in-state appeal and, when they play Iowa or Iowa State a close game, it increases attendance at UNI home games for the remainder of the season.

[M Club]

I understand the reasoning for getting these schools off the schedule, but it's going to come at a cost to a lot of smaller universities, which I think is wrong.

The MAC and Sun Belt seem pretty positioned to make more money off this. Get rid of half their competition for the paycheck games, they can charge more. scUM and other elitest schools won't let the MAC disappear, just the 1-AA schools.

Though I do agree with you Mace on why this doesn't pass the smell test. Just more of the haves not wanting to share with the "have-nots."

Which is fine. If the big boys truly had their own way there'd be a 16-game schedule, 12 of those home games, in which case UNI, UNNI, and UNNNI could all move up to D1. There's a pecking order, and just as one could say some D-1AA teams are better than MAC/Sun Belt teams, so are some MAC/Sun Belt teams better than some BCS teams. But who gives a fuck since a line has to be drawn somewhere, and I'd personally like to see it drawn somewhere that removes incentives for rando schools none of us have ever heard of until our team scheduled them to move up to D-1 for the sole purpose of losing games.

[Mace]

Until this becomes an NCAA rule, it will only pertain to the B1G, so the playing field won't be level nationally, only in the B1G conference. UNI will continue to schedule Big 12 schools and will open with Iowa State in 2013. They played Wisconsin and Iowa in 2012, losing 26-21 to the Badgers and 27-16 to Iowa. Can't speak for Wisconsin, but I'm sure Iowa will continue to schedule MAC and Sun Belt teams for OOC games.....and hopefully scheduling MAC teams they can beat.

I look for the B1G to go to a 10 game conference schedule once all of the realignment is finished, so there will only be two OOC games on the schedule, with Iowa State being one for Iowa.

[Mace]

No surprise that you would be opposed to both. All conference schools getting an equal share of the TV revenue is only fair if you want to have a conference where every school is considered an equal partner in the relationship. Allowing a school who has more success to receive a bigger portion of the pie than those having less success only creates a bigger gap in talent levels and is not good for the conference, imo.

[Left Seater]

Allowing a school who has more success to receive a bigger portion of the pie than those having less success only creates a bigger gap in talent levels and is not good for the conference, imo.

Funny thing about that though is that was the thing Nebraska wanted at the start of the Big XII. Then they got their panties in a wad when that exact thing happened.

[Mace]

Allowing a school who has more success to receive a bigger portion of the pie than those having less success only creates a bigger gap in talent levels and is not good for the conference, imo.

Funny thing about that though is that was the thing Nebraska wanted at the start of the Big XII. Then they got their panties in a wad when that exact thing happened.

Equal shares is what they've got now in the B1G.

[Left Seater]

Exactly. They didn't want equal shares when they were the top dog, but as soon as there is a new top dog they want equal shares.

In other words we should get more when we can, but never less than anyone else.

[Mace]

Exactly. They didn't want equal shares when they were the top dog, but as soon as there is a new top dog they want equal shares.

In other words we should get more when we can, but never less than anyone else.

They're stuck with equal shares in the B1G, and I don't see that changing. Their attitude might change if they ever become the "top dog" in the B1G, but I don't think that's going to happen anytime soon.

[Mace]

TV money should be divided up with the teams from the largest TV markets and the highest TV ratings getting a share of the money that is equal to what they earned. Thats how capitalism works. If one entity earns it and it is taken away and given to an entity that does not, that's socialism and owebama has shown that socialism fails

Tell that to the small market professional teams, dumbass. The entire conference/league benefits when the playing field is somewhat leveled by giving equal shares to each of its members. The larger markets still benefit by keeping all of their ticket revenue/donations/etc. Are saying that Northwestern should receive a bigger piece of the B1G pie because they're located in the largest TV market in the conference? And that Nebraska should get a smaller share because of their geography and their small TV market?

You might want to study up a bit on "socialism" too, dumbfuck, because, while Obama is undoubtedly a "liberal", he's no socialist.

Giving equal shares of TV revenue to each conference school makes perfect sense if you want to create and maintain a healthy conference, as opposed to a school like Texas dictating the terms in the Big 12 and the "haves" raking in the money while the "have nots" die on the vine.

[Mace]

so the kansas city royals deserve part of what new york yankees make from the yess network?

I also said to base it on market size and viewer ratings, if more people watch nebraska games than northwestern games, then nebraska would have earned more and would deserve more.

In order for one team to get what they do not earn, another team must earn it and not get it. You think that is a good idea? fuckin taker, earn your way or die on the vine

Not gonna happen in the B1G conference.....nor should it. Maintaining a competitive balance in the league is good for all of the schools. Your "winner take all" philosophy would only destroy that.

[Screw_Michigan]

the big 10+2 is socialist, got it

Shit stomped any 12 year olds lately, cunt?

[Killian]

TV money should be divided up with the teams from the largest TV markets and the highest TV ratings getting a share of the money that is equal to what they earned. Thats how capitalism works. If one entity earns it and it is taken away and given to an entity that does not, that's socialism and owebama has shown that socialism fails

If you are talking about USC, why don't they break away from the Pac12 and create their own television network (Texas) or broker their own television contract (Notre Dame)? That way, they get to keep all of the money for themselves.

[Killian]

In my opinion, this shoots a lot of holes in the “Hey, we were dropped by X University and had to scramble to find a game” bullshit argument. Here’s a novel idea; how about if a team backs out of a game with you, you pull up the schedule and look for any number of other FBS teams that have a game against an FCS team that week.

This is absolutely shameful:

Paul Myerberg ‏@PaulMyerberg
19 tms will play only FBS foes in '13: FAU, Hawaii, Mia OH, UM, UNM, UNT, ND, OU, PSU, Rice, USM, Stan, UT, Tulsa, UCF, UCLA, SC, UTEP, UTSA

Notably:
No SEC teams
No ACC teams
2 Big-10 teams
2 Big-12 teams
3 Pac-12 teams
I don't even know who's in the Big East anymore so I'm not going to guess...

EDIT:
Paul Myerberg ‏@PaulMyerberg
Re: 19 teams scheduled to play only FBS teams. RT @bcfremeau Down from 23 teams last year. 27 in 2011. 36 in 2010. Sigh.

[Van]

In my opinion, this shoots a lot of holes in the “Hey, we were dropped by X University and had to scramble to find a game” bullshit argument. Here’s a novel idea; how about if a team backs out of a game with you, you pull up the schedule and look for any number of other FBS teams that have a game against an FCS team that week.

Bam.

[Left Seater]

In my opinion, this shoots a lot of holes in the “Hey, we were dropped by X University and had to scramble to find a game” bullshit argument. Here’s a novel idea; how about if a team backs out of a game with you, you pull up the schedule and look for any number of other FBS teams that have a game against an FCS team that week.

That sounds all well and good, but seriously how do you make that work logistically? Again let's go back to the Florida State v West Virginia Game of last season. On Feb 4th 2012, FSU was officially notified in writing that WVU was not going to show up for the scheduled Sept 8th 2012 game. 7 months before kickoff.

So let's say FSU looks at the schedule of all other FBS schools on Feb 5th to see who is playing an FCS team on the weekend of Sept 8th. They will find 27 FBS teams playing games vs FCS teams. Only 24 of those 27 work because 3 are ACC schools. Since FSU is losing a home game they are going to want a home game. However, it turns out none of the FBS teams are playing road games against FCS teams.

Further the FSU v WVU game was the marquee game for the weekend of Sept 8. It would have been between two top 10 teams. The only other way to get that same type of game would be to have OU come in since OU was playing Florida A&M that weekend. But how in the hell is FSU going to convince OU to give up a home game and instead travel to play at FSU? Money? Ok, maybe, but that is going to prolly be in the $10 million range. Florida A&M is going to also need money as they lost a game.

No way in hell FSU pays all of that to replace WVU. In fact the burden shouldn't be on FSU at all. WVU is the one who backed out of the game to have a bye and then play a home game the following week against James Madison.

Your beef shouldn't be with the schools getting dropped, it is with the schools doing the dropping. WVU canceling the game isn't a bullshit excuse, it is fact.

[Mace]

Lefty gets it. Teams who pull out of a contract should have to pay a huge amount of money for breaking the contract, as it will cost the other school a great deal of money to pull in another school to play. Killian's over simplified solution for the given scenario does not take into account the difficulty and huge expense for rescheduling the games. There's much more involved that going to the computer to see who's playing an FCS school on a particular weekend.

Iowa is contracted to play Northern Iowa in the fall of 2014 and, imo, Iowa, or the B1G (since they came up with the rule), should have to pay UNI what they should have received for playing Iowa.

[Killian]

They could play an ACC team as an out of conference opponent, unless their league explicitly doesn’t allow it.

As far as giving up a home game, perhaps they are. Or perhaps the AD’s can schedule a home in home with the other team and instead of scheduling with the 8-4 model, they have to go to a 7-5 model. If the AD’s don’t want to do that, schedule two “neutral” site games and split the gate.

In 2004, Notre Dame wanted a game before UofM. They convinced BYU to move games from the middle of the schedule to the beginning. The deal was that they also had to schedule SDSU along with some monetary compensation to one or both of the schools. Or in October 2009 when they needed an opponent for the next season, they got Western Michigan. Is Notre Dame the only program with the juice to pull that off?

And sure, most teams want the home game. But wouldn’t you think that a mid level program that is looking to get into Florida for recruiting reasons might want to schedule that game? A team like Minnesota, Indiana, Cal, WSU or Colorado? Or a team that wants to take a step from mid tier to top tier would schedule that game, like Rutgers or TCU? Or what about a team recent to 1A looking to get some sort of exposure, the type of exposure that a regional ESPN game may generate, like UTSA or South Alabama? How about a team that is just struggling through FBS and could use a big payday like Buffalo? There are any number of teams that FSU could have lobbed a call to and worked something out.

Yes, the teams doing the dropping should get shit as well but I’m not inclined to shrug my shoulders at FSU’s logic of “them’s the breaks” and just go on my way.

As for the Iowa v. UNI game, Iowa has over a year to find another opponent and cancel that game. Why should UNI get a dime? Because they agreed to be the lamb in this clusterfuck? Why can’t Iowa inform them now, 19-20 months ahead of the scheduled game and let UNI figure it out for themselves?

[Mace]

As for the Iowa v. UNI game, Iowa has over a year to find another opponent and cancel that game. Why should UNI get a dime? Because they agreed to be the lamb in this clusterfuck? Why can’t Iowa inform them now, 19-20 months ahead of the scheduled game and let UNI figure it out for themselves?

I don't know the wording in their game contract, but a contract is a contract, and an entity who breaks the contract is, or should be, subject to penalties. UNI already "figured out for themselves" that getting a big payday and having an opportunity to knock off a B1G team was good for their football program and their athletic department.

[Killian]

And I’m assuming that the lawyers for Iowa have limited their exposure in case they need or want to cancel that game.

[Truman]

Iowa is contracted to play Northern Iowa in the fall of 2014 and, imo, Iowa, or the B1G (since they came up with the rule), should have to pay UNI what they should have received for playing Iowa.

Help me out here, Mace... Thought I read somewhere that the Iowa Lege had some kinda law or resolution or something that encouraged one of the in-state big brothers to schedule the Panthers each year. At least, it applies to basketball, right? What I DO know is that neither the Hawkeyes or 'Clones want anything to do with UNI as Iowa and ISU are usually in for a WAR when they play that school.

I know Missouri State has been lobbying the General Assembly for years for such an opportunity ever since its SMS days, while Mizzou will barely even acknowledge that school's existence. Hell, KU only plays K-State because they have to, and roundball-wise, Wichita State might as well be in Bartlesville for all the Jayhawks care...

[Left Seater]

The point you are missing here Killian is that this was 7 months before kickoff. In order for FSU to get a FBS team they would have to have multiple other broken contracts. Is FSU supposed to pay for all of those?

I am sure UTSA would love the exposure of playing FSU, but they already had games scheduled. They don't have the money to be breaking contracts. Hell they practice at the local HS stadium. Unlikely that playing FSU gets them on ESPN. Sunshine network, maybe. Pay per view, prolly.

Indiana was playing in Gillette stadium against a new MAC team that weekend.

Bottom line is this is only an issue because WVU decided an off week and a home game vs JMU was better than a road game at FSU.

[Killian]

And Lefty, you're cherry picking one game. The one game where you could possibly excuse an FBS team for scheduling an FCS team.

However, I gave you at least one instance where a team on short notice rescheduled a team by promising a game against the team that was affected. So could they not schedule one FBS team in 2012 and then another in 2018?

Did the other 26 teams playing FCS teams have a team drop them 7 months prior to kickoff? Did the FSU AD even try to get creative when trying to replace this game, or did he simply dial up a local FCS team and throw money their way?

[Mace]

Iowa is contracted to play Northern Iowa in the fall of 2014 and, imo, Iowa, or the B1G (since they came up with the rule), should have to pay UNI what they should have received for playing Iowa.

Help me out here, Mace... Thought I read somewhere that the Iowa Lege had some kinda law or resolution or something that encouraged one of the in-state big brothers to schedule the Panthers each year. At least, it applies to basketball, right? What I DO know is that neither the Hawkeyes or 'Clones want anything to do with UNI as Iowa and ISU are usually in for a WAR when they play that school.

I know Missouri State has been lobbying the General Assembly for years for such an opportunity ever since its SMS days, while Mizzou will barely even acknowledge that school's existence. Hell, KU only plays K-State because they have to, and roundball-wise, Wichita State might as well be in Bartlesville for all the Jayhawks care...

I don't recall if they actually passed legislation, or if they just discussed it, but I think it only applies to basketball. They started a "Classic" this year that will be held annually in Des Moines at Wells Fargo Arena that will feature a doubleheader with all four schools (Iowa, ISU, UNI, Drake) playing on one night and rotating the opponents each year. UNI is always dangerous in basketball and, as Iowa found out a few years ago, you don't ever want to play them on their home court. And, yes, it's always a war when UNI takes the football field against Iowa or Iowa State. ISU is stuck with them next year, and not Iowa. I see that Missouri State is on Iowa's future football schedule. How is Paul Lusk doing down there with the basketball team?

[Truman]

Well, Mace, other than both coaches being Gene Keady disciples, you'd be hard-pressed to compare Paul Lusk with Cuonzo Martin - or even Steve Alford for that matter.

Under Lusk, the Bears are just awful, and it doesn't look like anybody down there even really cares anymore. And that's sad. While it would be easy to suggest that the program really hasn't peed a drop since Spoon patrolled the sidelines (Alford's Sweet 16 run was an anomaly), Martin's two 20+ win seasons appeared to have SMS, errr... Missouri State ready to make a run. Instead, Cuonzo parlayed his success into a BCS job at Tennessee - despite the Bears getting jobbed out Tournament appearances his last two years - and the program has yet to recover. One more season like this one for Lusk, and he's gonzo.