FC/OT: Scott Paterno has a solution to our lack of a protected rivalry….
- Thread starter Midnighter
- Start date
You must have missed that last week.
B1G 2024-2025 schedule model and opponents will be announced tomorrow - Page 3 - On3
And of course Gene Smith has to be involved. Let me guess, PSU on the road for the first 3 conference games?
Well I am a fan and grew up loving that game more than any, I don't care about the business aspect of it, I don't watch for that reason. The only one's getting hurt by not playing the game are the fans.
Seems our philosophy is to have one P5 that is home and home and two non-P5 that don’t require a return visit. I don’t think there would be any problem if Pitt took one of the non-P5 spots. Because of money, that won’t change.
For the P5 spot, I think using Pitt every year would get stale quickly. I think most would rather see teams rotate on/off whether it’s an old Eastern ‘rival’ or a team outside our region. Look at the past two seasons, playing Auburn creates more of a buzz than beating Pitt.
I understand all the pro and con arguments but I'm on still the fence with the Pitt debate. The closest final game analogy I can think of with one team being a stronger program in a better conference and the other team being a distant second in its own state is Georgia vs. Georgia Tech. (An no, I'm not saying the current state of the PSU program is on par with UGA.) Georgia Tech is 6-24 in its last 30 games with Georgia. Pitt is 8-21-1 in its last 30 games with Penn State. The national perception and records indicate Penn State and Georgia are the better programs compared to those respective in-state opponents. An occasional win by the historically weaker school won't change that.
If you play an opponent annually or almost annually, there will be times when you get beat. One of these years Rutgers will beat us causing some PSU fans to go berserk. You can't be afraid of competition even if the game means more to your opponent than it means to you. Come ready to play. That's what it's all about.
All in all I'd rather play Pitt on Thanksgiving weekend than Michigan State. That said, it'd funny if the ACC fell apart and Pitt was left without a seat at the table. They could join the PSAC and play their games down the street at Gesling Stadium. Pitt is used to paying stadium rent and I'm sure CMU would be a great landlord.
If you play an opponent annually or almost annually, there will be times when you get beat. One of these years Rutgers will beat us causing some PSU fans to go berserk. You can't be afraid of competition even if the game means more to your opponent than it means to you. Come ready to play. That's what it's all about.
All in all I'd rather play Pitt on Thanksgiving weekend than Michigan State. That said, it'd funny if the ACC fell apart and Pitt was left without a seat at the table. They could join the PSAC and play their games down the street at Gesling Stadium. Pitt is used to paying stadium rent and I'm sure CMU would be a great landlord.
That's not a bad perspective. But as long as the Big Ten has a nine game conference schedule, PSU will be limited to one home-and-home non-conference pairing. It simply needs the money. So it comes down to whether that match-up is with ASWP on an annual basis or a variety of other opponents.
I think people are putting too much thought into it. PSU's budget allows for one marquee home/home series at a time. They don't want to lock themselves in with Pitt. Can they change the budget to allow it? Sure. I'm confident somebody has done the math and has decided against it.
As far as the protected rival goes, I'm confident PSU had a say in that decision and most likely the BIG gave them exactly what they wanted.
As far as the protected rival goes, I'm confident PSU had a say in that decision and most likely the BIG gave them exactly what they wanted.
Agree on the financial aspects. Otherwise, my guess is that PSU wanted OSU as a protected game and OSU said no and it went no further.
That's plausible, which from an OSU perspective, that's why we're getting rid of divisions.
How many home games does pitt owe us? If pitt agrees to even it out and give us another 15 home games on top because we’re the big dog, then fine, reinstate the annual game. Oh, and then end it after the 15 additional PSU home games.
Let me know when pitt accepts their place.
Let me know when pitt accepts their place.
If the B1G adds more teams, there may not be a need to play any OOC games anyway.
Entirely possible and even plausible. I also think it's likely that Rutgers and Maryland requested PSU as a permanent game and PSU declined to lock in either.
Kraft approaching other schools about protected rivalries probably went like this:
Rutger and Maryland played each other nine times before joining the Big Ten, the most recent in 2007 and 2009. Prior to that, the last time they played was in 1942. Can't have a rivalry more intense than that!
PSU, rutgres, and maryland should have a three-way. Remember, we aren’t on an island now.
Pitt would have to play at Penn State about 50 straight times to even out the series (that is if you count games at Belefonte as PSU home game).
He is entitled to his opinion. I happen to disagree...but it's not like stupid **** isn't tossed around here every day.
Beating Pitt- which I would expect 9 times out of ten- does nothing for us, because they are only Pitt.
Losing to Pitt would ruin a season- because they are only Pitt.
It's the ultimate lose/lose.
Losing to Pitt would ruin a season- because they are only Pitt.
It's the ultimate lose/lose.
The mention of Pitt as our traditional rival gets everyone upset. For that reason alone, we should play them. We f’in hate them. Nothing stirs our fan base’s emotions more than a final game against the Panthers - a Thanksgiving Weekend backyard brawl. I don’t know about the financial implications of this game - I’ll leave that to others to work out if they can. For restoring a “traditional” rivalry game, Pitt is the only true candidate. Sh1tt on Pitt!
If we need a Big10 rival for scheduling purposes, I vote for Rutgers. Why? Because they stink, and beating them is fun. Their team stinks, their fans stink, their FU Penn State cheer stinks, well their pizza is pretty good….and their cheerleaders are Jersey girls.
If we need a Big10 rival for scheduling purposes, I vote for Rutgers. Why? Because they stink, and beating them is fun. Their team stinks, their fans stink, their FU Penn State cheer stinks, well their pizza is pretty good….and their cheerleaders are Jersey girls.
Attachments
-
IMG_0147.jpeg
Last edited:
No thanks. A home and home with Pitt + 9 conference games means never playing another meaningful opponent ever again. I'd much rather rotate games against teams like WVU and Auburn than play Pitt every year. I'm fine with Pitt being in that rotation every once in a while, maybe 2 out of every 10 years or something like that. And if Pitt agrees to a payoff game in Beaver Stadium without a return trip I'd be fine with that too, but they won't because P5 teams don't agree to those terms. Of course if I have to choose between Pitt and the creampuffs on our schedule after the WVU series then I'd take Pitt, but that's not my preference.
The lack of a protected rival is a nothing burger. The Big 10 is still likely to make us play 2 of OSU, UM and USC every year so it's not really a big deal. The networks will still insist that we play the big boys since it brings ratings and the conference will ensure that PSU plays just as many games against the big boys as the other big boys do, so that nobody can ***** about giving a program an unfair advantage to making the playoffs. With no protected games we'll rotate through the conference opponents more than other team, which is a good thing. For example, we've rarely played Nebraska since they joined, and with no rivalry game we get more opportunities to play everyone.
The lack of a protected rival is a nothing burger. The Big 10 is still likely to make us play 2 of OSU, UM and USC every year so it's not really a big deal. The networks will still insist that we play the big boys since it brings ratings and the conference will ensure that PSU plays just as many games against the big boys as the other big boys do, so that nobody can ***** about giving a program an unfair advantage to making the playoffs. With no protected games we'll rotate through the conference opponents more than other team, which is a good thing. For example, we've rarely played Nebraska since they joined, and with no rivalry game we get more opportunities to play everyone.
Last edited:
UM, MSU,OSU,USC, WISCONSIN, IOWA, UCLA are all meaningful opponents. We’ll have no shortage of good competition within the B10.
Of course, but non conference matchups with other big programs are great for the sport. Not so great for helping a playoff resume though, because it increases the odds of getting a loss, which is likely why we don't have any big matchups on the horizon.
It's hard to believe this is even a topic of discussion after all of the anticipation, excitement, and publicity surrounding the home and home with Auburn, as well as previous ones with the likes of Alabama and USC. There is no way on God's green earth that an annual Pitt game makes sense alongside a 9 game conference schedule
well, the Big Ten now has trojans
This is one of those solution to a problem that does not exist thread.
Next.
Next.
Oh, the irony of Scott’s position here given that it was his father who effectively put an end to the annual game as punishment for PItt not supporting his Eastern Conference concept. Yes, PSU joining the Big Ten played a role as well, but that ship had already sailed.
Yep, stuck in a conference where we were never wanted, screwed more times than one can count and 30yrs later and still don't have a rivalry with anyone. We can only hope that Land Grant game will finally take off
, maybe UCLA will really piss us off and we can all jump in the car and drive for days to watch that slobber knocker.
Unfortunately playing Pitt is not viewed as a better game by those who make the decisions about who goes to the playoffs. PSU gains nothing by playing them, so we might as well switch teams up every year or two.
There are now multiple generations of PSU fans that don't view Pitt as a big deal. I'm in that group. Pitt hasn't been consistently relevant on the national stage since Dan Marino. I have almost no interest. I'd rather see more home and homes against the likes of Auburn. My wish list includes Texas, A&M, VT, LSU to name a few.
But playing our biggest historical rival gains us nothing, so why should we do it?
Get unlimited access today.