T1B

Courtesy of Alabama Athletics
TUSCALOOSA, Ala. – The University of Alabama and Michigan State University have signed a contract for a home-and-home football series in 2016 and 2017. The two schools have never met on the gridiron and the first matchup is scheduled for September 3, 2016 in Bryant-Denny Stadium. Alabama will visit Spartan Stadium on September 2, 2017.
Alabama has a 13-9 record all-time against current Big Ten schools (8-5 vs. Penn State, 3-0 vs. Ohio State, 1-2 vs. Michigan, 1-0 vs. Illinois, 0-1 vs. Minnesota and 0-1 vs. Wisconsin).
The Crimson Tide has already agreed to play Penn State and Georgia Tech in home-and-home contracts. The Nittany Lions visit Tuscaloosa on September 11, 2010 and UA makes the trip to Happy Valley on September 10, 2011. Alabama hosts Georgia Tech on September 14, 2013 with the return to Atlanta set for September 13, 2014.

Yeah, Sam, it's a looooooong ways away, but still verrry cool especially since they've never played before. Hopefully by that time Dantonio is still around (not holding my breath as I think he'll be at OSU some day) and the program is a cut or two above. Bama @ PSU in a couple years will also be awesome. Those two unis on the field at the same time...that's classic stuff.

It almost doesn't even seem real.

they get 4 OOC games a seasom but are only willing to play a BCS Conf team in 1 of them and on the road in one every other year?

Baby steps, Toejam. At least they're willing to not only go on the road, but play on the road against a big time program away from the south like PSU. Going into Happey Valley is no easy task, regardless how good/bad PSU is.

teach your baby to step on a treadmill set at "Usain Bolt"

How many times (re: the above Bama vs. the Big 10 stat) has the Tide played Penn State as a member of the Big 10? I'm gonna guess zero.
the Oklahoma-Bama series in 02, 03 was a great one. Bama isn't the worst offender in the MG.

in fact, the Big XII has the least number of OOC games with BCS conferences this year. some pretty sad shizz. I'm looking at you former SWC schools and Bill Snyder.

SoCalTrjn wrote:teach your baby to step on a treadmill set at "Usain Bolt"

I'd love every program to have that mentality, but it isn't reasonable to expect it.

I can easily see Bama pay MSU to not play the game in EL. After all, South Western Central College of the Disabled will need a high-paying road game.

Seriously, though. I won't believe this shit until a bunch of shit-eating, junior-high degreeing tards step foot in EL.

I think it'll pan out, but Slick Nick will probably be coaching Alabama St by that point.

I know the date has already been set but man, I sure would like to see that game in EL take place in the bitter ice and cold. It'd be nice if the Big 10 could ever get the SEC in a late season game or a bowl game, in the upper midwest, in the snow.

Van wrote:I know the date has already been set but man, I sure would like to see that game in EL take place in the bitter ice and cold. It'd be nice if the Big 10 could ever get the SEC in a late season game or a bowl game, in the upper midwest, in the snow.

Still waiting for Auburn to pay a return visit to Washington State and since Wazuu went to Auburn in the first week of the year and dealt with the humidity, Auburn has to play on the Paloose in November, a week or so before Thanksgiving, and deal with the snow and 20 degree temps

That's what I'm saying.

Then again, USC also never has to travel to the upper midwest for cold weather OOC games or bowl games. They either play those teams early in the year, if it's back east, or it's a bowl game in some warm locale. In that sense, the Big 10 and the northeastern schools really do get screwed, annually. Some of these teams have been built for iffy weather; smashmouth football. They never get the advantage of hosting a cold weather bowl game, against a warm weather team.

That's one reason I respect Penn St. While OSU and Michigan both have losing bowl records, Penn St has always been a real tough out in bowl games. Of course most of their bowl games weren't Rose Bowls, which would've severely lessened their overall bowl record, but still, Penn St is always traveling to a warm weather site to play their bowl games.

Van wrote:That's what I'm saying.

Then again, USC also never has to travel to the upper midwest for cold weather OOC games or bowl games. They either play those teams early in the year, if it's back east, or it's a bowl game in some warm locale. In that sense, the Big 10 and the northeastern schools really do get screwed, annually. Some of these teams have been built for iffy weather; smashmouth football. They never get the advantage of hosting a cold weather bowl game, against a warm weather team.

That's one reason I respect Penn St. While OSU and Michigan both have losing bowl records, Penn St has always been a real tough out in bowl games. Of course most of their bowl games weren't Rose Bowls, which would've severely lessened their overall bowl record, but still, Penn St is always traveling to a warm weather site to play their bowl games.

Penn State's bowl history. Not saying that none of these sites can ever get cold, particularly in late December/early January, but there isn't what I would consider a per se cold weather site anywhere on that list. Matter of fact, there really is no such thing as a "cold weather" bowl game -- both the game in Detroit and the game in Toronto are played indoors.

Of course, Penn State is only a relatively recent member of the Big Ten, so the other major bowl games on that list can't be considered "inferior" to the Rose Bowl in any real sense, at least not prior to the early 90's. Moreover, several of those games, particularly, off the top of my head, the '78 Sugar Bowl, the '82 Sugar Bowl, the '85 Orange Bowl and the '86 Fiesta Bowl, all were de facto national championship games. Where the Rose Bowl can be a tougher game: if you draw USC or UCLA as an opponent, you're playing a de facto road game.

Back to the original topic, kudos to Michigan State for getting the deal done. I only wish 'Bama had waited until Swarbrick was AD before contacting ND.

That's true, come to think of it. ND would be the natural choice, for any SEC or Big XII looking to sow some "big OOC game" wild oats. ND's phone ought to be ringing off the hook.

If the ND homer boards are to be believed, White turned down home-and-home offers from Alabama, Georgia and Florida. He also turned down a home-and-home offer from Minnesota, I suspect for different reasons, although that series would have included the dedication game at Minnesota's new stadium. He did get Oklahoma on the schedule for 2012 and 2013, I believe, although in fairness, at the time he thought he wasn't going to be able to renew the Michigan series.

Thank God he's gone. Unfortunately, it didn't happen quickly enough.

In Bowl games teams are there in the Bowls city for a week or more and there really isnt a home game feel for either team, especially the larger bowls where there is a week of things going on and the team is in a hotel the whole time. It's not like the team flew 2-3000 miles within 24 hours of kick off and have 2 sections of fans in the stands. I have been to USC Bowl games in Pasadena and Miami and both cities the opponent had more fans in the stands and more in the parking lots than USC did.

It's not like the team flew 2-3000 miles within 24 hours of kick off

:swoon:
-m2

SoCalTrjn wrote:they get 4 OOC games a seasom but are only willing to play a BCS Conf team in 1 of them and on the road in one every other year?

the D1-AA schools should throw at bama's head.

M Club wrote:

SoCalTrjn wrote:they get 4 OOC games a seasom but are only willing to play a BCS Conf team in 1 of them and on the road in one every other year?

the D1-AA schools should throw at bama's head.

or blow out the knees of their star players for having the lack of balls that leads them to play 1-AA teams

SoCalTrjn wrote:In Bowl games teams are there in the Bowls city for a week or more and there really isnt a home game feel for either team, especially the larger bowls where there is a week of things going on and the team is in a hotel the whole time. It's not like the team flew 2-3000 miles within 24 hours of kick off and have 2 sections of fans in the stands.

I'll agree that bowl games have a different feel, particularly the major ones, but that doesn't mean that location can't confer a home-field advantage. Half of the bowls played last year had a team whose campus is located within 300 miles of the bowl game site. http://www.theoneboard.com/board/viewto ... es#p568206

The teams might be staying in hotels, even when playing relatively close to home, but remember, most bowl games are played during a break in the school period, and I believe it's customary to shut the entire campus down for that break period, at least it was at ND.

I have been to USC Bowl games in Pasadena and Miami and both cities the opponent had more fans in the stands and more in the parking lots than USC did.

At least with respect to the bowl game in Pasadena, that might say more about USC fan than about anything else.

At least with respect to the bowl game in Pasadena, that might say more about USC fan than about anything else.

Ya, that's what I'm thinking.

Which game was it, Toejam?

Terry in Crapchester wrote:If the ND homer boards are to be believed, White turned down home-and-home offers from Alabama, Georgia and Florida.

Not sure about Alabama or Georgia, but Florida wouldn't be in for that type of game since they don't travel outside of the state for OOC games. I believe the last time UF did that was in like 1980 when they went to Syracuse.

USC certainly had more fans in the stadium for this most recent Penn St Rose Bowl. The stadium is supposed to be split 50/50 but watching on tv one could see that it clearly wasn't. More than half the stadium was red. It was closer to 60/40, USC.

For other Rose Bowls, though, yep, it was 50/50.

There is no doubt LSU has somewhat of a home field advantage when teams have to come to the French Quarter to play them in the Superdome. That crowd is very much an LSU crowd and the stadium is always very pro LSU.

USC's advantage in the Rose Bowl isn't nearly as pronounced. For one thing, USC's fans live in the city. They're not going to get involved in all the sightseeing crap. What do they care? For another, that city is L.A. It's not exactly Small Town, USA. It's a giant sprawl. People in L.A. simply don't go to Pasadena, unless it's for business, or a football game. You're just not going to see much in the way of USC Fan hanging out in Pasadena. Lastly, the game is played in the stadium of USC's arch rival. USC has made a habit of playing in Rose Bowls, but they sure don't consider that field to be "home." It's where the fucking Bruins play.

Overall, though, yeah, USC's players are sleeping in their own beds for the Rose Bowl. It's less of a weird "road game" experience for them than it is for their opponent.

At least I think they sleep in their own beds for those two weeks. I don't believe Pete holes them up in some hotel, leading up to the game. I could be wrong there...

It's not just the lack of travel, but the sense of familiarity/comfort in playing there. They'll have that advantage over anyone they play. Always have, always will. They play there frequently and on bowl day I doubt it matters much to the players that it's the home base of their "rival" whom they kick the crap out of every year.

Agreed. They definitely have an advantage playing there.

Van wrote:Agreed. They definitely have an advantage playing there.

That's fine. It simply makes defeating them there more of a challenge. There is too much weakness and deflection in CFB these days...teams should embrace situations where they are presented with long odds. The art is in the challenge.

Damn, it's a good album, man.