BobcatAttack.com - For Fans of Ohio University Sports

Welcome Guest!
Create an Account

site search

about us

advertise with us

help

BobcatAttack.com Message Board

Ohio Football

Topic: LOVE theory and rationale...

Topic: LOVE theory and rationale...

Author

Message

Bobcat Love
General User

Member Since: 12/20/2004
Post Count: 1,193

Status: Offline

LOVE theory and rationale...

Posted: 7/28/2010 2:28:32 PM

I had an exchange with someone whose knowledge of Ohio Athletics I respect. Out of respect for that person, I will not share their side of the exchange, so some of this will be out of context for most of you. However, I think it's important to share my points, as they are relevant to this discussion.

The most ridiculous thing is the correlation between winning:scheduling that you have all been suckered into. To me, the 2 things are mutually exclusive, and the Season Ticket sales numbers will bear that out.

Seriously people...you don't have to SETTLE FOR MEDIOCRITY on every single issue that comes out of Richland. You're allowed to think big sometimes.

Anyways, here are my thoughts....

1. You're all nuts if you think that a consistent string of winning MAC seasons
will change a damn thing. I wholeheartedly believe our fans aren't driven by
winning MAC Division or Conference titles in football. They just don't care
about succeeding on a minor league level. There's a deeper desire to win on a
bigger stage that will ultimately translate to increased dollars in Schaus's
coffers if it can be accomplished. Perfect comparison...you play the MAC Title
Game vs. Central Michigan TWICE in a 70% empty Ford Field. The first time you
don't capitalize on the cache of winning your first MAC East Title, and the
second time you don't capitalize on the possibility of the potential of an 11
win season (MACC + Bowl Win). I'm as big a fan as anyone, and I didn't care one
bit to drive up there for MACC #2.However, you beat Georgetown on a National
Stage in the NCAA Tournament, lose to an Elite 8 Tennessee Team, and you have
select donors stepping forward to HELP PAY for John Groce's contract extension.
I know it's not apples to apples, but it illustrates my point.

2. The logistics of getting to Athens is not an issue. I refuse to believe that. If it's an issue,
I'd like to hear it from sources outside Ohio University. I simply don't believe
a flight and 90 minute drive would preclude teams from playing us. Further, if
logistics really is an issue - then we should do whatever possible to remove the
roadblocks. But again, I just don't believe that is an issue.

3. Trust me, nobody is over-valuing the Ohio Football brand. It's Food Club next
to Kraft, General Mills, and Kellogg's on the shelves. That doesn't change the
fact that if we are positioning ourselves as an FBS participant - the fan base
has every right to expect an FBS level of competition. Don't get me wrong, there
doesn't need to be a marquee opponent on the schedule every year like Toledo -
but you simply can't put out 6 years worth of schedules with not so much as a
glimmer of hope.

4. I know why Toledo is getting these games, but you simply can't continue to
use the "need to build a winning culture" as an excuse when lower rung MAC teams
are securing MUCH better Home OOC matchups. It's offensive to the people paying
the bills.

5. Dead serious, I believe 99% of the real fans would be happy to sacrifice the
6th home game (which is going to be perpetually terrible) to play an away money
game in a cool location...with the assurance that we would get a smattering of
good, Home OOC games in exchange for that. That's really where the problem lies,
is in this 6 home game philosophy - which is stupid as the day is long. There's
the solution to your money problem. If you can pocket another $400-$500k
guarantee - you take it and prop up your financials. You don't force a terrible,
6th home game on people for the sake of trying to win the MAC East. It's just
beyond dumb when you look at the big picture - because like I said - winning the
MAC or even a F-level Bowl Game just isn't the catalyst under the current
system.

6. You've had Virginia Tech and Northwestern committed to play at Peden and
we've had Connecticut, Iowa State, Minnesota, and Pitt actually play there. I
simply don't buy the excuse that Schaus and Frank can't secure these games. There's
either a lack of acumen, effort, or ability to get the job done in this
department....because their predecessors were able to bring in decent opponents.

The Season Ticket numbers will tell me everything I need to know this year. I
suspect we will see no increase or a tiny increase in new season ticket holders
which should support the argument that winning against the current, horrendous
schedule just doesn't mean as much as people think.

Further, I'd argue the Pitt win in an otherwise bad football year did more for the program than either of
these cruddy MAC East Titles or marginal bowl bids. The fans want a National
Splash (Hire Solich = 6 times on National TV / Beat G'town = Donors pay the
freight)...not this garbage being forced on us.

I just don't think people get it and I'll tell anyone who will listen.

SBH
General User

Member Since: 12/20/2004
Post Count: 4,273

Status: Offline

RE: LOVE theory and rationale...

Posted: 7/28/2010 3:13:15 PM

Four faults in your analysis, at a minimum:

1. Lack of robust growth in season ticket base can be blamed as much on the economy as the schedule

2. I have heard/seen no evidence of large donations to "pay Groce's salary." Did The Love sign over his sales bonus to Jim Schaus last year?

3. Bringing Va. Tech, Northwestern, et. al., to Peden is a certain money-loser, something we simply cannot afford. We would be forced to discount prices to fill the stadium yet still face a sizable minimum outlay to the visiting team. I'd much rather minimize these financial disasters so we can position ourselves to (finally) build and maintain an IPF.

4. McDavis has no choice but to be very careful about further pissing off faculty. Money-losing home games against BCS schools as an attempt to "play with the big boys" is a sure way to do that. (I don't have a problem with adding another money game, but wish it could be later in the season due to injury concerns.)

Last Edited: 7/28/2010 3:16:00 PM by SBH

sargentfan
General User

Member Since: 3/16/2005
Post Count: 917

Status: Offline

RE: LOVE theory and rationale...

Posted: 7/28/2010 3:27:50 PM

1. I understand how you thinking winning consistently in the MAC won't change anything. It probably won't create the huge changes in regional and student involvement that many of us would like. But it would at the very least start to make gradual improvements in overall attendance and the stigma of OHIO athletics. Many small changes eventually make big changes, though I can understand why people would like faster progress and big games against BCS opponents do that faster.

2. It may not be a huge issue, but I bet the logistics would require teams to ask for more money from OHIO to cover costs. With our budget woes and lack of faculty and media support financially I can see how the administration would rather not create more costs.

3. Agreed, though your message on this point doesn't always sing through.

4. I argue that this point isn't so black and white. For a BCS team the reasons for traveling to a lower school is regional/national TV exposure, recruiting and the financial package. Unfortunately for us we aren't in a great High School recruit hot bed, so there is a minus. We can't yet guarantee TV exposure, unless the team we get is big enough to secure it on their own. And again with our budget and lack of faculty and media financial support we lack the necessary financial package. The hope is that by more building a program that consistently wins and wins titles that we enhance our leverage for television exposure and also bring in further revenue and donations. Because right now unlike our basketball team we don't have the tradition and alumni donor love at a high enough level. It also doesn't help that unlike basketball, alumni donations don't go as far since costs are greater due to size, thus basketball doesn't need alot of deep pockets, but just enough.

5. I agree, I would give up a 6th home game if it brought in money that would allow a better 6th game in other years.

6. I don't believe it has to do as much with staff, but with what I referenced in point 4.

I would be interested in knowing what season ticket numbers have been for the last 10 years. It would be interesting to see what the low, high, and median numbers. As well as the numbers in general for total tickets purchased in a season, because some seasons you will bring people back in with good results, but they just go ahead and pay for single game tickets the rest of the year.

TWT
General User

Member Since: 12/20/2004
Location: Alexandria, VA
Post Count: 5,191

Status: Offline

RE: LOVE theory and rationale...

Posted: 7/28/2010 3:50:19 PM

I agree 100% the lack of name opponents in Peden Stadium has to do with the scheduling philosophy out of Richland Avenue than either ineptness or refusal by the BCS programs. Schaus has stated that he wants to keep the schedules light until while the program is building a winning tradition. The focus on 6 home games is derived from ensuring season ticket holders will have at least 4 saturday game. In one of Frank's first years there was a season with only 2 saturday dates. We know we are going to lose at least 1 game a year to a weeknights so by having 6 it protects the season ticket holders.

Most Memorable Bobcat Events Attended
2010 97-83 win over Georgetown in NCAA 1st round
2012 45-13 victory over ULM in the Independence Bowl
2015 34-3 drubbing of Miami @ Peden front of 25,086

Pete Chouteau
General User

Member Since: 11/17/2004
Location: You Can't See Me
Post Count: 1,660

Status: Offline

RE: LOVE theory and rationale...

Posted: 7/28/2010 5:18:53 PM

LOVE,

You're quite likable when you drop the bombast.

Flomo-genized
General User

Member Since: 12/20/2004
Post Count: 574

Status: Offline

RE: LOVE theory and rationale...

Posted: 7/28/2010 5:25:09 PM

SBH wrote:

3. Bringing Va. Tech, Northwestern, et. al., to Peden is a certain money-loser, something we simply cannot afford. We would be forced to discount prices to fill the stadium yet still face a sizable minimum outlay to the visiting team. I'd much rather minimize these financial disasters so we can position ourselves to (finally) build and maintain an IPF.

While I agree that these games are presently money-losers, the fact of the matter is that Ohio's entire athletics endeavor is currently a net money-loser. Therefore, the issue is simply deciding how to prioritize the financial losses. Given that student fees constitute a significant portion of the Athletic Department's budget, an argument can be made that scheduling compelling, entertaining matchups for the students provides a much more reasonable basis for losing money on athletics than does building an IPF which will do little to improve our standing in the Division I food chain.

In my mind, the biggest problem we face is reconciling the disconnect between the fact that an overwhelming majority of Ohio alumni share a great affinity for the university in general, but yet are largely disinterested in Ohio athletics. With respect to the football program, some of that disconnect is undoubtedly due to the fact that we were the worst program in the country for nearly a quarter of a century. But I think the problem goes beyond that, as the basketball program has been relatively and consistently successful during that same period, without drawing the type of support one would expect for an alumni population with an affinity as strong as ours for the university.

Ultimately, the most important thing that the athletic department can do to ensure its long-term viability is to instill current students with a sense that Ohio athletics are worth following after they leave Athens. As clichéd as it may be, the current student body are the future of the university. While reengaging with existing alumni is also important, connecting with alumni that rarely return to Athens, and are infrequently able to watch our teams play on television, is a difficult task. Today's students provide a much more easily reached audience (although I realize that they are not completely captive given the many competing forms of entertainment today).

So how do we do a better job of ensuring that today's students will continue to remain loyal (i.e. contributing) fans of Ohio athletics? While winning will certainly help instill a lasting sense of enthusiasm for Ohio athletics, I think that the Love is closer to the mark than many are willing to admit in Point One of his treatise when he argues that people simply don't care much about winning the Mid American Conference. Winning your conference is only a significant accomplishment when you play in what is viewed to be a competitive league, and unfortunately the MAC is a second-rate conference. Therefore, if you really want to grab the attention of current students (and alumni for that matter), you need to play - and defeat - quality OOC competition. And to really reach the current student body in significant numbers, some of those games need to be at home.

The current football scheduling strategy thus strikes me as being penny-wise and pound-foolish. While we avoid losing money on home games with lower-level BCS opponents, we also lose any opportunity to instill excitement for Ohio athletics with students (and alumni). I recognize that the budget situation is difficult at present, but the lost opportunity costs that we are incurring every year we fail to engage the students with Ohio athletics are also quite significant. Perhaps we simply can't afford to provide a more attractive schedule than the status quo, but in that case I wonder when will anything ever change, and thus what exactly is the point of this whole Division I football exercise?

Last Edited: 7/28/2010 5:45:21 PM by Flomo-genized

OhioCatFan
General User

Member Since: 12/20/2004
Location: Athens, OH
Post Count: 14,763

Status: Offline

RE: LOVE theory and rationale...

Posted: 7/28/2010 7:55:26 PM

I agree with your general thesis, Flomo. The key quote for me was: "Pennywise and pound foolish." A corollary would be “The most powerful force in the universe is compound interest.” The quote is from Albert Einstein, and in the context used here, it means invest a little today for much bigger returns in the future.

Last Edited: 7/28/2010 7:56:12 PM by OhioCatFan

The only BLSS Certified Hypocrite on BA

"It is better to be an optimist and be proven a fool than to be a pessimist and be proven right."

Note: My avatar is the national colors of the 78th Ohio Veteran Volunteer Infantry, which are now preserved in a climate controlled vault at the Ohio History Connection. Learn more about the old 78th at: http://www.78ohio.org

Bobcat Love
General User

Member Since: 12/20/2004
Post Count: 1,193

Status: Offline

RE: LOVE theory and rationale...

Posted: 7/28/2010 9:39:11 PM

SBH wrote:

2. I have heard/seen no evidence of large donations to "pay Groce's salary." Did The Love sign over his sales bonus to Jim Schaus last year?

This was actually revealed stealth-ily on this very site....but revealed nonetheless.

Monroe Slavin
General User

Member Since: 12/20/2004
Location: Oxnard, CA
Post Count: 9,121

Status: Offline

RE: LOVE theory and rationale...

Posted: 7/28/2010 9:40:14 PM

Love--You may be right that consistent winning seasons won't change things. But when have we had those? The 2006 recent MAC East title winner was a total surprise/hot at the end thing that few knew about. Last year, was almost the same thing--won big at the end. So, in both years there was not the whole season ride. We should have that this year and next. Let's see what happens. Recruiting already seems more robust this year. Maybe this will all lead to upscheduling.

The logistics of getting into Athens combined with the lack of TV and recruiting exposure and the lack of much money for coming to Athens have got to be factors. Like you, I can't prove it. But common sense weighs toward my opinion on this one.

You say that you know why Toledo is getting such as Miami. Well, why..what's the answer?

You're 100% correct in saying that we should drop a 6th homer and replace with a money game. At this point, anyway.

Wait a minute--VTech and Northwestern were committed to play at Peden but didn't. My understanding is that we gave up these games for $$$ reasons. Well, that should tell you something...about what we need, about what it takes to get teams here...

Yes, the Pitt on ESPN game was helpful. Let's see how a nationally ranked team stokes the long term fires.

Where's the band?!
WHERE"S THE BAND?!

DesignspiritUSA.com
The Pets On The Go Collection of pet gear travel bags
The Holiday Tote Bigg Bagg Collection--over-sized, reversible, extra pockets; now love carrying packages as much as you love shopping!

Voice of Reason
General User

Member Since: 7/28/2010
Post Count: 249

Status: Offline

RE: LOVE theory and rationale...

Posted: 7/28/2010 11:56:18 PM

Alright, I am a first time contributor to BobcatAttack, but have been an active follower for a long time. I have just grown tired of this idea that we need to play BCS conference schools in order to grow our season ticket base. Yes, playing those schools would probably increase season ticket holders each year we had the games, but it wouldn't build a loyal season ticket base. The second we didn't have a few of the big names coming into Peden, all those new season ticket holders would dissapear because they aren't TRUE fans. Those arguing for these money games and extra games to be played against BCS schools are simply confused about what comes first, the chicken or the egg. You don't build a schedule with marquee games to bring in fans or season ticket holders, you build a program that is positioned to compete for a MAC Championship and Bowl Game every year. With the consistency comes new fans and season ticket holders. You can't build a fan base or program by going out and getting stomped by BCS programs, suffering injuries all over the field because of a grueling schedule, and missing out on Bowl Games because you played an extra money game "for the fans". I know we are all still high off the Pitt upset, but since 1999 our record against BCS programs is 4-22 with a scoring difference of 748-345. How is losing 45-0 to Va Tech, 31-6 to Missouri, or 24-7 to Rutgers going to help anything. Toledo may have Miami, but they probably gave up the pay day in its entirety to get the Home and Home.

The best way for Ohio to build a program is to limit the big name games to 1 each year. Get the pay day, take a shot at a giant, stay healthy for the MAC season and compete for a championship and a bowl game. You do that every year and all of a sudden you are winning recruiting battles over all the other MAC schools, improving the quality of athletes you are signing, building depth, and building a program! When you have the higher quality athletes and depth, then you go out and schedule an extra big name. You schedule that big name because you can compete and not because you want to sell more season tickets. You build a program to increase season ticket holders not increase season ticket holders to build a program.

Based on our success of late, I think I am going to give Jim Schaus the nod over BobcatLove!

GoCats105
General User

Member Since: 1/31/2006
Location: Seattle, WA
Post Count: 7,446

Status: Offline

RE: LOVE theory and rationale...

Posted: 7/29/2010 12:03:39 AM

Flomo-genized wrote:

SBH wrote:

Nice post Flomo.

I especially agree with trying to win over the current student body in the athletic s arena, because when they graduate, they are going to be the ones who saw winning teams in Athens. Young professionals between 23-35 are a lot easier to ask for donations from in my mind, rather than the 35-55 crowd. They have dispensible income, and with people getting married and having children at later ages (from what I see, not statistically), they want to spend their money on things that they enjoy rather than what they have to. Hopefully these new crop of graduates love Ohio Athletics as much as we all do and are willing to give back to keep the winning tradition alive.

Monroe Slavin
General User

Member Since: 12/20/2004
Location: Oxnard, CA
Post Count: 9,121

Status: Offline

RE: LOVE theory and rationale...

Posted: 7/29/2010 3:14:09 AM

Welcome aboard, VoR. Nice first post.

I agree; we're more likely to build an avid fan base and a talented team by going, say, 11-2 than we are by aspiring up to teams that may be too much better than us....Though I think few teams are in that latter category.

What we have going seems to be working. Save for question marks at running back and outside linebacker, we are well on track for this year. And look at the already committed recruits--quality and much earlier than in prior years. Fans will follow this year's team and talk about the prospects for coming years, talk about who's returning and what the recruits will add. It's about to get very interesting.

I'm thinkin' the Love will like what he sees.

ytownbobcat
General User

Member Since: 8/7/2006
Post Count: 1,253

Status: Offline

RE: LOVE theory and rationale...

Posted: 7/29/2010 7:56:57 AM

This athletic administration is committing to creating a winning environment. Whether you agree or not doesn't change anything. It is their plan for elevating interest and attendance in the program.

Flomo-genized
General User

Member Since: 12/20/2004
Post Count: 574

Status: Offline

RE: LOVE theory and rationale...

Posted: 7/29/2010 8:22:11 AM

A long-term, fan base-building strategy that depends on continuous 11-2 type seasons is a risky gamble, seeing as how in the entire history of our program we can probably count the number of such seasons on one hand. Even then, you won't make significant inroads with students and alumni who come to Ohio having been brainwashed by ESPN into believing that anything outside the BCS conferences is effectively little league.

There is a reason why even when we were routinely winning 19-20 games per year in basketball our attendance was dropping, with most alumni only getting excited about the team when we advanced to the NCAA tournament. It's because the MAC means little to nothing to the casual fan. I just don't see a string of 8-4 / 9-3 type seasons against the current schedules, with an occassional win in the Pizza Bowl (a much more likely outcome than back-to-back-to-back 10+ win seasons), significantly expanding the donating fan base.

In response to the claim that our program hasn't developed to the point that we can play more than one BCS program per year, I would say it depends on what type of BCS programs you are scheduling. There is a middle ground between playing a murderous schedule against top BCS programs, and what we are currently doing. This team should be able to beat second-tier BCS programs at home; otherwise, you are admitting that we really are just building a crappy program only capable of beating up on third-rate competition. Adding a home and home series with the Syracuses, Northwesterns, or Marylands of the world will not handicap our ability to build a program, competitively speaking.

Last Edited: 7/29/2010 8:26:34 AM by Flomo-genized

UpSan Bobcat
General User

Member Since: 8/30/2005
Location: Upper Sandusky, OH
Post Count: 3,812

Status: Offline

RE: LOVE theory and rationale...

Posted: 7/29/2010 9:42:05 AM

I think the reason we don't see an effort to get BCS schools at home more often is because the cost is greater than the reward.

I think we all know we are going to take a financial hit to get those schools to play at Peden Stadium. What benefit do we get? Not much. The last two BCS schools to come to Ohio didn't seem to draw much additional interest from fans. If not for the cheap tickets, how much would attendance have gone up? Maybe 2,000 over the average attendance.

I realize we're looking for even bigger programs than Pitt (when they were down) and UConn, but I'm not sure Peden would sell out for a team like Miami (FL) unless tickets were reduced. And I certainly don't think we'd gain more than a handful of extra season ticket holders by having a team like that on the schedule.

The problem is most people really don't care who Ohio plays. I'd love to see a team like Miami come to Peden. I'd probably go out of my way to go to that game. I just don't think that many other people would.

Flomo-genized
General User

Member Since: 12/20/2004
Post Count: 574

Status: Offline

RE: LOVE theory and rationale...

Posted: 7/29/2010 9:59:58 AM

I don't believe that we lose any more money hosting a BCS program than we will hosting games against the middling teams we have currently scheduled, and may in fact lose less, at least with respect to the home game itself.

There are two ways to schedule home games: 1) a buy game, and 2) a home-and-home series. In the buy game scenario, you are simply paying a team a guaranteed sum of money to come to your stadium, without offering a return trip to theirs. While our buy games have typically come against lower level FCS opponents, which are much cheaper than those against non-BCS FBS or upper level FCS opponents, we are still likely paying out somewhere in the $200K neighborhood for Wofford, Coastal Carolina, etc.

In the home-and-home series scenario, you typically don't pay your opposition much more than their travel expenses for the home game. Thus, the home game itself isn't costing significantly more - and in many cases may cost less - than a game against a FCS also ran. The problem with home-and-home series, though, is that you also do not receive much more than expenses when traveling to the opposition's stadium, and in some cases may have to make multiple trips in order to get a single home game. So the real cost of a BCS home game is the revenue we lose by sacrificing a potential guaranteed, one-time purchased road game.

Admittedly, that lost revenue can be significant, as guaranteed games against top BCS programs have recently surpassed the $1 million mark. However, the current administration seems to be perfectly content to give up potential guarantee games in exchange for home-and-homes with the likes of North Texas, Louisiana-Lafayette, etc. There is simply no economic advantage, as far as I can tell, to scheduling 1-for-1s versus those types of schools in lieu of 1-for-1s against regional BCS programs (and in fact such games may actually be economically disadvantageous given the increased travel costs for games against Texas and Louisiana opposition).

So the only reasons that I can come up with for why we aren't replacing lower level FBS home-and-home series with lower-level BCS home-and-home series is either 1) no one is willing to enter a 1-for-1 with us, or 2) we intentionally want to schedule weaker competition. Given the number of MAC programs that are able to schedule 1-for-1s with BCS programs, I'm skeptical that option #1 is the correct answer, although I acknowledge I'm not close enough to the process to know for certain. That leaves us with option #2 being most likely, which might be a defensible scheduling strategy for years 1-4 of a rebuilding process, but not years 6-12 in my opinion.

Last Edited: 7/29/2010 10:22:20 AM by Flomo-genized

Monroe Slavin
General User

Member Since: 12/20/2004
Location: Oxnard, CA
Post Count: 9,121

Status: Offline

RE: LOVE theory and rationale...

Posted: 7/29/2010 10:58:49 AM

The basic assumption that we can get some of the desired schools to Athens is questionable. Whether it's a question of money or lack of exposure (no major TV coverage or prospective recruits in SE Ohio) or whatever, some of you seem to take for granted that we can get 'em to come to town. I'm not so sure.

Flomo-genized
General User

Member Since: 12/20/2004
Post Count: 574

Status: Offline

RE: LOVE theory and rationale...

Posted: 7/29/2010 11:07:14 AM

Why were we able to get BCS teams to agree to come to Athens before (Minnesota, Iowa State, Va Tech, etc.), but not now? What's changed? Yes, we are better now than we were competitively, but that alone can't explain it, as other top MAC teams are able to schedule quality home games against BCS competition.

Why then can other MAC programs get quality teams to come visit them, but we can't? What do Oxford, Toledo, Buffalo, or Mt. Pleasant offer that Athens does not? I just don't see it.I can understand not wanting to do 2-for-1s or 3-for-1s with BCS teams. I can also understand not wanting to host teams like Va Tech which we are highly unlikely to beat even at home, or scheduling 3 or 4 BCS games in a year. But I don't understand why other MAC programs are able to get home games against bottom-level, beatable BCS programs on a 1-for-1 basis, and yet we elect to schedule series against the likes of North Texas (which is no guaranteed win as last year nearly showed) instead of a Syracuse or Iowa State type program.

Last Edited: 7/29/2010 11:13:14 AM by Flomo-genized

Bobcat Love
General User

Member Since: 12/20/2004
Post Count: 1,193

Status: Offline

RE: LOVE theory and rationale...

Posted: 7/29/2010 11:09:37 AM

People are smart enough to recognize 10-2 vs. Wofford, Louisiana-Lafayette, and an atrocious MAC schedule is smoke and mirrors.

I'm telling you, wins don't mean jack in the current environment unless you load your schedule with powers and run the table. You are seeing it firsthand. Peden will be no different this year then it was in year's past.

Secondarily, what the hell happens when the team doesn't win against this horrible schedule? I would argue you will start to lose people like myself who don't want to watch a crappy team play a crappy schedule. At least redeem yourself with a semi-interesting slate.

All this current garbage will do, is continue to result in more Little Caesars Pizza Bowl bids that have no payout and give us horrible opponents where nobody will show up or watch on TV, and where ESPN will provide us with more "Worst Bowl Game Ever" rankings. I really don't want that.

Bobcat321
General User

Member Since: 12/20/2004
Post Count: 31

Status: Offline

RE: LOVE theory and rationale...

Posted: 7/29/2010 12:51:19 PM

I've typed and retyped a post 20 times and still can't articulate my thoughts.

Simply put, I agree with Love. I want to see at least 2 OOC games against "big names" and I don't care if they're away. Drop the 6th home game to make it happen. Two chances for Ohio to get a win and generate real buzz is huge. Plus you can pocket some more coin.

colobobcat66
General User

Member Since: 9/1/2006
Location: Watching the bobcats run outside my window., CO
Post Count: 4,548

Status: Offline

RE: LOVE theory and rationale...

Posted: 7/29/2010 1:22:38 PM

Bobcat Love wrote:

Biggest problem-"run the table"-not going to happen based on reality. Even with the schedule we had last year, I think wins against Central and Marshall would have been huge wins for the program and would have had a large impact on this season's interest. Win 10-11 games with our schedules and let's see what happens.

A question-Has Miami getting beat to death with their recent tough schedules helped their fan base or support? (Clue-check out their attendence)
Getting the crap beat out of you might be semi-interesting to some, but I'd rather build a program differently.

Regarding your second comment about what happens when they don't win against a crappy schedule-it's fairly obvious that if they can't win against a crappy schedule that they are not going to win against a strong schedule. I fail to see how we come out ahead by getting beat up by a "semi- interesting schedule". No strong reason I see to go asking for a losing or .500 season. I like to think we have a chance against a team and are not just doing it for the money every time.

Also, I would prefer to not call Ohio teams crappy because they don't win every game. The recent 4-8 season was due mostly to a reported 18 season ending injuries to a program that didn't have the depth it needed. Were they a crappy team to you?

Flomo-genized
General User

Member Since: 12/20/2004
Post Count: 574

Status: Offline

RE: LOVE theory and rationale...

Posted: 7/29/2010 1:34:13 PM

Again, there is a big difference between playing a murderous schedule in which we "get the crap beaten out of us," and adding an occassional home game against a lower-level BCS team. I don't think anyone is saying that we should take on a Miami-type schedule where we are playing 3 or 4 road games against BCS teams every year. Rather, the argument is that we should occassionally be replacing a home game against Norfolk State or North Texas with a game against someone like Syracuse or Northwestern. I can't believe that such change would really destroy any hopes of building a long-term, winning program.

Even if you can't get a 1-for-1 with a BCS team, I have to believe we could at least get a 2-for-1. Who wouldn't trade the Eastern Illinois home game, and Idaho home-and-road series for a 2-for-1 with a Syracuse or Vanderbilt? Financially it's going to be a wash, but yet offers a much more compelling schedule to both die-hard and casual fans.

colobobcat66
General User

Member Since: 9/1/2006
Location: Watching the bobcats run outside my window., CO
Post Count: 4,548

Status: Offline

RE: LOVE theory and rationale...

Posted: 7/29/2010 2:19:36 PM

Flomo-genized wrote:

Flomo, I'm really addressing more the BL comments than the more credible ones voiced by others. I tend to agree with you a lot more than BL who thinks we should only play the best schools at home-see list. A lower tier BCS school with a 1 for 1 or 1 for 2 makes some sense, but does it from a monetary sense where we would like Toledo break even on the series from a payout basis? I don't know how a 4-5 year break from BCS schools playing in Athens is something to lose so much sleep over. And as has been said many times, schedules can change during that time.

I'm not so sure about Syracuse (the bottom of the Big East) or Vanderbuilt (the bottom of the SEC) being a lot more compelling than all the others on our schedules. Cuse has been the laughing stock of that conference for years. So much is in perception-Idaho could very well be higher ranked than either of those and still not be appreciated by the public. We have succumbed to glorifying the famous in sports like so much else in life.

An aside, it wasn't so long ago that fans were clamouring for 6 home games so we could play a few on a Saturday like God intended football to be played and have some fans there. Now everyone wants more road games-it's hard to keep up.

Oh, by the way Syracuse was 4-8 last year and Vanderbilt was 2-10. That may not get the base too excited. But maybe it would.

Last Edited: 7/29/2010 5:31:13 PM by colobobcat66

TWT
General User

Member Since: 12/20/2004
Location: Alexandria, VA
Post Count: 5,191

Status: Offline

RE: LOVE theory and rationale...

Posted: 7/29/2010 8:41:38 PM

If I can restate the objective of Ohio Football for the university; 1. To provide locals and students with entertainment, 2. To provide a boost to the Athens-Ohio University economy. 3. To provide a point of pride for alumni. Objective #3 is maximized by playing/beating big name opponents and playing on TV which is largely at odds with objective #1 and #2 to support the local economy so a balance has to be struck. Loading up on money games at cool places will make alumni go nuts but dry up the local fanbase with only 5 home games (probably only 3 on a saturday). Who wants to buy season tickets with only 2 home Saturday dates? Weeknight games are exactly why my parents dropped season tickets 2 seasons ago. Six home games is key in the midweek era. We don't need to play the BCS to get on TV anymore as the MAC has an extensive television package. The only reason I see to have an Ohio State or Penn State type school on the schedule is to give the team a good chance if they go undefeated to play in a BCS bowl. Give the team a chance to finish in the top 5. That I can agree with. Some of the BCS names mentioned on here like Syracuse and Northwestern are not going to travel to Peden Stadium. A service academy would be more of a boost and that is the type of game we could market in Columbus. A schedule with Penn State, Marshall, Navy and a CAA type program would be pretty strong every year when its all said and done. Realistically, this is going to be a 7-8 win program so I do think that a long term schedule of playing 6 games and bringing in a school every year with a traveling fanbase is about the best we can do. Give some order to the schedule and make being a fan fun.

Most Memorable Bobcat Events Attended
2010 97-83 win over Georgetown in NCAA 1st round
2012 45-13 victory over ULM in the Independence Bowl
2015 34-3 drubbing of Miami @ Peden front of 25,086

OhioCatFan
General User

Member Since: 12/20/2004
Location: Athens, OH
Post Count: 14,763

Status: Offline

RE: LOVE theory and rationale...

Posted: 7/29/2010 9:05:56 PM

Wes wrote:

. . . Some of the BCS names mentioned on here like Syracuse and Northwestern are not going to travel to Peden Stadium. . .

Hmm . . . yeah right! Northwestern signed a 1-1 with us in recent memory, which WE abrogated. Syracuse has signed a 1-1 with Oxford Tech and, I believe Toledo. Where do you come up with this stuff? Usually I like what you have to say, Wes, but I think in this thread you are stretching things to make a point. Having a 1-1 with the Orange is not mutually exclusive with having a 1-1 with Navy. I'd be in favor of both, and as I stated previously I would probably go to both the home and the away Navy game.

Showing Replies:	1 - 25 of 45 Posts
Jump to Page:	1 \| 2 Next >

View Other 'Ohio Football' Topics

There are 219 Active Visitors on BobcatAttack.com

216 Guests
3 Registered Users:
	Andrew Ruck, shabamon, NashvilleKat

There are no other users looking at this page.