This is Byrne's post about future OOC football schedules...period*

[was21]

<font color="#660000">There has been a lot of discussion lately about future football schedules and the possible opponents that might comprise them. As we have said before, we have several goals in building future football schedules. </font></p>

<font color="#660000">First and foremost, we want to schedule opponents that will give our football team the best opportunity to have a successful season and qualify for a post-season bowl game. Second, it is our goal to have seven home football games each year, and we are on pace to do that every season until at least 2017, except for 2011. And third, we want to schedule opponents that make financial sense for us to play. Non-Bowl Championship Series schools are demanding $1 million, and that is something is difficult for us to do.</font></p>

<font color="#660000">For instance, we recently signed a contract with South Alabama that meets those criteria. The three-game series (2012, 2014, 2016) makes financial sense for us, and it is an area we recruit heavily. It will give us two home games (2012 and '16) against a non-conference opponent.</font></p>

<font color="#660000">We appreciate everyone's passion in regard to our future football schedules.</font></p>

 

[was21]

be honest about it.

 

[Xartox]

To say otherwise just simply shows that you're scared of losing to USM... Which to be honest, I think most MSU fans are.

 

[was21]

to count....sorry.

 

[DancingRabbit]

then I would say it meets the criteria. I'm not that crazy about picking up another rivalry game but in the current landscape of scheduling it seems hard to argue against a 2/1 with them.

 

[Maroon Eagle]

1. MSU has a large alumni base in the Hattiesburg-Laurel area--- not to mention that a game in Hattiesburg would attract alums who live in the Gulf Coast.
2. USM has more fans than South Alabama. I think they'll fill up the stadium a bit more than would the Jaguars.
3. Two 2009 Dandy Dozen players at Oak Grove HS and another at Perry Central that I can recall off the top of my head-- the area's definitely a place where talented student-athletes reside.
4. USM is the alma mater of the presumptive future governor of Mississippi.

 

[was21]

asdf

 

[Maroon Eagle]

5. USM won't be an easy win but considering that MSU has, in the past & future, played C-USA institutions, it is a university in that conference and thus fits your first point-- that USM is a non-BCS conference team and gives MSU a decent chance to have a successful season-- if MSU has a team borderline bowl worthy.

6. Bear in mind that the sixth (seventh?) team from the SEC is selected to play the CUSA champion in the Liberty Bowl. If MSU can't beat a CUSA team on the road, it doesn't deserve to go bowling.

 

[was21]

based on the three criteria: (1) We want virtual certainty that we will win the game; (2) We want 7 home games; (3) We want to be on the larger end of the money.

 

[Maroon Eagle]

Regarding your simplified interpretation, I think that you can generally fulfill 2 out of 3 criteria. While there are going to be enough instances of schools holding out for home-and-homes or wanting more money for road games, seven home games per year is very doable but there will be juggling.

Fulfillment of your criterium 1 depends in large part on what our talent level and coaching will be like in the future.

 

[VinceVega70]

Criterium 1 is a certain win? Well, I would not characterize Georgia Tech, Houston, Tulane, Memphis, or Louisiana Tech as certain wins, would you? Does Southern Miss not belong in that list? So in order to meet criterium 1 (as you summarize it to be), we have to play D-2 schools or pitiful D-1 schools which all, by the way, want a million to come to campus for a one-and-done. And Byrne has already suggested we can't afford that. SOOOO, that's one less way that Southern fails to fall in with our other OOC opponents. The bottom line is that those who oppose this just like to look down at Southern the same way we get looked down upon by so many "big" schools. Make them feel they aren't as good. That's the reason not to play them. And also, because folks think we'll lose too many of those games. Those are shoddy reasons IMO. I will stand on the side of what's best for our school, and that's playing quality regional games with natural rivals. Southern Miss is an obvious choice, period.

 

[Maroon Eagle]

That being said, I think he would have scheduled all but the Georgia Tech games because I think those games would have been the best opportunities for MSU to borrow from the original post in this thread.

Was21 admits simplifying the criteria, so I let his interpretation of 'best opportunity' equal 'virtual certainty' slide. When it comes to MSU football though, positive virtual certainties are historically rare.

 

[TBonewannabe]

I think the sticking point in the past was USM was wanting 1 for 1 and wanting to split the gate. We cannot pay like Bama and just have them come there every year. We are not going to make less money off our OOC just because its USM.

 

[vorticityDawg]

nm

 

[Maroon Eagle]

...it does seem like we've gone in circles when it comes to talking about football scheduling.

 

[AssEndDawg]

Probably. I don't think USM is a easy win like some people do because it will be a HUGE game for their team and not so much for ours. I think USM would agree to a 2 for 1 because they know in their heart of hearts we will never, ever give them a 1 for 1 with gate split. If they hold out for that then in no way does it meet our needs.

All that being said, I still don't think we will schedule them. The worst thing you can do is divide your fan base. If you do something that everyone hates but needs to be done you will take heat but they will get over it (i.e. Ole Miss getting rid of Col. Reb). If you do something everyone likes you get nicknamed the Ninja. If you do something no one cares about well then no one cares. But, if you do something that divides the fan base it becomes a fire that doesn't go out. It starts consuming more and more fuel until eventually it kills off what you are trying to accomplish.

Byrne strikes me as a bright guy. There is absolutely nothing to be gained from grabbing this "third rail" of MSU sports. Maybe he meets his scheduling criteria but then he starts a fight within the fan base. Can you even imagine what happens if we lose to USM? Half the people who supported it will turn against him and the people against it originally will crucify him. In my opinion the absolute stupidest thing a AD can do is divide the fan base on a issue. We have way too much time to spend discussing every little thing to throw this crap into the mix and having it take on a life of it's own. For God's sake look how much time the mere rumor eats up. I'll take a home-and-home with Tulane over a 2 for 1 with USM any day of the week.

 

[msudawg12]

1. It does give us a chance to win the "majority" of the time.
2. It definitely will fit cash-wise. Hell, they'd probably play for free to get that chance.