Any possibility we could see another MSU vs Nike U matchup
- Thread starter Dinkle
- Start date
we play in the toughest division in all of college football. If we played four high school teams for non-conference and then went undefeated we would still be in the National Championship. Given the 12 game schedule I just don't understand adding a tough non-conference game. Sure it sounds fun for the fans, but I would rather go to Atlanta than play Oregon and then have to turn around and play LSU or Bama the next week.
along with a couple of others like Tennessee in the conference are going out and playing the Oregons, Penn States and other big non conference schools it kind of seems like the rest of the conference may eventually follow suit before long.
I guess you don't give a **** about building momentum as a program. You just want to be entertained. If you want to watch oregon beat someone's *** tune in on saturday nights about 9 p.m. I will never understand this mentality.
but besides that point... give me one good reason we should schedule a Penn State oran Oregon?
Tennessee, who hasn't been relavant in football but once in the past 7 years, scheduled Oregon. How'd that help them?
Alabama, who is good enough to play those types of games, scheduled Penn State. The difference here is that Alabama is a top 5 team and will continue to be so as long as Saban is there. They can get away with doing this. We can't.
LSU has Oregon this year. LSU is good enough to do this. We aren't. Personally, I think LSU screwed up with this game. They have a great shot at the national title this year. Scheduling Oregon gave them a HUGE hurdle to open the season. Bad move in my opinion.
Need more data? How did our Houston, GaTech, WVU scheduling go? We went 1-7 in 8 games against those guys. Was the national exposure worth the losses? Nope. Never will be. Nobody in this country will care about MSU football until we're 10-0 and have beaten Alabama in that same season (usually our 10th game). There's absolutely no reason for MSU to schedule a tough OOC game. We need to play a direction Louisiana, a SWAC school, Memphis/UAB/MTSU/Troy/USA etc for the foreseeable future. Why add another game to our schedule that could be a huge road block for an undefeated season? Why does it make sense? I can't think of one reason.
Tennessee, who hasn't been relavant in football but once in the past 7 years, scheduled Oregon. How'd that help them?
Alabama, who is good enough to play those types of games, scheduled Penn State. The difference here is that Alabama is a top 5 team and will continue to be so as long as Saban is there. They can get away with doing this. We can't.
LSU has Oregon this year. LSU is good enough to do this. We aren't. Personally, I think LSU screwed up with this game. They have a great shot at the national title this year. Scheduling Oregon gave them a HUGE hurdle to open the season. Bad move in my opinion.
Need more data? How did our Houston, GaTech, WVU scheduling go? We went 1-7 in 8 games against those guys. Was the national exposure worth the losses? Nope. Never will be. Nobody in this country will care about MSU football until we're 10-0 and have beaten Alabama in that same season (usually our 10th game). There's absolutely no reason for MSU to schedule a tough OOC game. We need to play a direction Louisiana, a SWAC school, Memphis/UAB/MTSU/Troy/USA etc for the foreseeable future. Why add another game to our schedule that could be a huge road block for an undefeated season? Why does it make sense? I can't think of one reason.
That's not really something I would want to see in the next couple of years, but if we build up momentum in the next couple of years it's not something I'd shy away from. As far as our previous scheduling, it made no sense for us to schedule those types of games because we weren't that good to begin with. As long as things progress as they are, I think eventually it wouldn't hurt.<div>
</div><div>To be honest, the only things I could see it helping is national image (if we win of course) and possibly with recruiting when kids see us playing top teams in other conferences as well as the SEC which would no doubt give us more time in the spot light.</div><div>
</div><div>I never said I think we should jump on this idea first chance we get. Just I wouldn't mind it.</div>
</div><div>To be honest, the only things I could see it helping is national image (if we win of course) and possibly with recruiting when kids see us playing top teams in other conferences as well as the SEC which would no doubt give us more time in the spot light.</div><div>
</div><div>I never said I think we should jump on this idea first chance we get. Just I wouldn't mind it.</div>
There is no incentive to play a tough non-conference game because even 1 loss is very detrimental your national titles hopes. With the Wetzel playoff (16 teams, 11 conference champions and 5 at large), the incentive is to play tougher non-conference games to improve your resume, because even if you lose, you can still get in by winning your conference.
When we scheduled WVU, G Tech and Houston, years in advance, every one of those programs were struggling. By the time it came to play each of them, they were top programs, WVU had one of its best teams in recent memory, Ga Tech was rambling over just about everybody, and Houston had a cat named Keenum.
You can schedule current weaker teams now but who will they become in 4 years when you play them? With a struggling program, as we are, its much safer to schedule the way we are until we can produce a team, year after year, that is a top 25 team. Once and if we start winning 9 games a season, then I say yes, schedule a big boy a season. Not right now though.
You can schedule current weaker teams now but who will they become in 4 years when you play them? With a struggling program, as we are, its much safer to schedule the way we are until we can produce a team, year after year, that is a top 25 team. Once and if we start winning 9 games a season, then I say yes, schedule a big boy a season. Not right now though.
I can gaurantee you that Southwestern Louisiana won't have a great team in 5 years. But I can't gaurantee that Virginia is still going to be ******... or Indiana... or Colorado... or Iowa State... or Baylor... No need to schedule a BCS team until we put a top 25 team out year-in and year-out for a few years.
The point I was making is that they have scheduled decent to good OOC teams like LSU and Alabama have been recently. Just last year they played Oregon, 08-09 they played UCLA, 06-07 they played Cal and 04-05 they played Notre Dame. Even though Cinci hasn't been that good ever since Brian Kelly left, the past couple of years they were a pretty good team although it was short lived. Hell, even Mid Tenn. was actually not a bad team the past 2 years if you remember correctly although I don't think they'll be worth anything going forward.
There's no reason to schedule top programs when you're selling out every game already. And as someone else stated, the next 4-5 years have already been scheduled. In 4-5 years it might be a good idea to schedule a tougher home and home since DWS should be expanded by then. Keep in mind you have scheduled two home games with USM and while they are by no means a top program, you could fill a 65k stadium easily playing those pyschos.
keep in mind, when we scheduled Houston, GT, and West Virginia they were not near the teams they were when we played them.
Houston- Case Keenum; led the NCAA in passing yards
GT- the year before we play them, they are last in their division in the ACC, the next year they won the ACC
West Virginia- well, they were playing in a BCS bowl and had one of the most electric backfields of the decade
Houston- Case Keenum; led the NCAA in passing yards
GT- the year before we play them, they are last in their division in the ACC, the next year they won the ACC
West Virginia- well, they were playing in a BCS bowl and had one of the most electric backfields of the decade
It isn't helping them win games, but by no means is that the reason why they're having issues now by any means. Going through 3 different coaches in a 3 year span, NCAA violations, and not keeping players out of jail has more to do with their current woes than their OOC scheduling. Like I said in a previous post, I was only pointing out that they along with other schools like Bama and LSU are taking steps in playing more quality teams in their OOC scheduling and that I think eventually more teams in the SEC will follow suit. As far as my stance on whether or not we should at this moment, I don't think we should right now, but as we build momentum and continue with it then I won't hold any qualms about it.
No, the scheduling isn't their downfall, but it isn't helping them either.
You know the saying - you're either getting better or worse. And early season loss to UCLA didn't help them. And by "didn't help", I mean they'd have been better off beating Directional State.
You know the saying - you're either getting better or worse. And early season loss to UCLA didn't help them. And by "didn't help", I mean they'd have been better off beating Directional State.
But that's just the gamble that they were taking. I'm sure when they made their OOC schedules, they thought that they would still be as competitive as they had been years prior, but all of the recent off and on field issues probably took a lot of their program by surprise. Just like the argument about certain BCS schools may become a juggernaut for the season you play them, there's also the chance that you could take a step back as well.<div>
</div><div>Out of the 3 schools I mentioned, Tenn. is the main one that this practice hasn't helped by any means.</div>
</div><div>Out of the 3 schools I mentioned, Tenn. is the main one that this practice hasn't helped by any means.</div>