…..I liked rammer 101’s comment. Even though I personally liked Hamrick, it is difficult to be on that job 10 years and still be effective. It was time for new blood, and I am optimistic Spears will elevate our athletics program @ MU…
Future schedules
- Thread starter The Real SamC
- Start date
Wasn't criticizing Doc nor anything re: your post per se. Merely comparing relative success between Doc and Danny during their MU tenures!! That is all.
Yes, GHMY, and with the with the continuing shuffling/remaking of the "Power" Conferences, opportunities for schools like MU will no doubt get harder to land a game with a Power opponent. Big 12 currently plays NINE conference foes, meaning only 3 OOC games (and one of them almost always is with a FCS foe at home). Believe Big 10 teams also play 9 conference games a season. More power leagues increase the number of Conference games they play every season, means a decline in the number of OOC games they play annually.
I don't normally talk to the dead, as Bleeds just murdered you, but...
Funny how you talk about MU "needing to be more flexible in scheduling" when they actually decided to make P5's play in Huntington and not do the usual, "Well, we'll play at your stadium and allow you to buy us out return game."
That's kind of what flexible scheduling is...and what did it do?
Insisting a G5 program play 1:1 with a P5, who will generate local interest and bring a solid crowd from their school too.
Also, hosting a P5 increased MU's TV presence, in a horrible TV setup to begin with.
Hamrick actually got MU on TV more with P5's in Huntington than our TV deal did...let that sink in.
It's almost as if Hamrick cared about, not just the program, but the bump in the local economy for the weekend of the game.
In fact, that was a major reason for such a method of scheduling.
But of course, dopey fools like yourself have grasped this aspect of scheduling, and with contracts written and signed, are to be honored.
Those OOC games are also going to be against former conference rivals. Because nothing screams "rivalry" like leaving a conference you have history with for more money in one you don't.
My question is, the P5's are gonna need cheap wins, do they extend the season to allow FCS teams to play?
It's time that Marshall be more concerned in getting better and soundly beating those within their own conference than worrying about playing some P5 team that are trying to use the G5 as recovery games and steppingstones to improve their ESPN rankings.
If a P5 wants to play Marshall, fine, let them seriously pay us for that right and improve Marshall's bottom line.
It's "show me money" time.... 💰💵🤑
If a P5 wants to play Marshall, fine, let them seriously pay us for that right and improve Marshall's bottom line.
It's "show me money" time.... 💰💵🤑
Or even easier, just amend/bend the rules to allow a win against a FCS team to count towards bowl eligibility. Currently, I believe a FBS team that finishes 6-6 in regular season game is not supposed to be eligible for a bowl if one of those 6 wins is against a FCS opponent. But we all know the P5s can do whatever in the hell that they want to do. Been like that for some time now, despite the pretense and hypocrisy otherwise!!
Like I said, I wasn't sure. Maybe one win over an FCS opponent allows a FBS school to be bowl eligible with a 6-6 record. Then again, with the asinine number of meaningless bowls currently, perhaps there is a "waiver" provision that allows even a 5-7 team to get into a bowl, which means playing in a bowl is becoming more irrelevant with each passing season.
The rules are clear. 6-6 is bowl eligible, with one I-AA win counting. MU must go 7-5 to get in this year, and unless Navy is replaced by a I-A, next year. Both will be very tall orders.
If there are remaining bowl slots after all 6-6 or better teams have been placed, 5-7 teams go in order of grade point average.
As to the too many bowls garbage, try this site:
https://www.remotes.com/Default.asp
If you don't want to watch, change the channel.
Sorry, SAMC, but anyone with any of a life doesn't dwell on TV or other "remotes" and probably won't watch 20% of all the bowl games, if that!
Then why do you care how many bowls there are? Teams get a nice reward for a nice season. Fans get another game to watch, or perhaps attend. ESPN gets some filler programming. Doesn’t hurt anyone.
I get real tired of the “too many bowls” garbage. Don’t watch.
...and degenerate gamblers like myself get one more shot at getting even!
One thing right SAM. Its essentially just for ESPN and their programing. Not so much the schools and the players. 120 or so D1 programs and maybe 30 to 40 teams play in post season bowls everyone is pretty sure they will be watching some quality teams and quality football. If MU can make it fairly regularly to post season bowls in such a set up, it establishes that we are in a rather elite category, football wise. But add another 30 teams or so and you are entering the bottom half of D1 football, perhaps "rewarding" a few 5-7 teams for their "outstanding" seasons!. Diluting the whole Bowl process and "dumbing down" the whole Bowl system, only for more ESPN programing. Leading to many bowls with meaningless, drek matchups, producing drek football games, and, apparently, watched by many with "drek for brains"!!
You're barking up the wrong tree in your first sentence.
Winning within the conference is Huff's job.
Making money for the program is on the AD in your latter point.
Since this is about scheduling, Spears is the focus on this and it'll be interesting to see who he can get.
I would argue it does. The argument could be made that the new system causes teams to relax and hang their hats on mediocre seasons. Like Doc did. You know one of the things that made Marshall so good in the 90s and early 00s. In the I-AA days we had to win to advance and in the MAC if you wanted a bowl game you had to win the conference. I do believe there should have been a bowl for the each division champ, but now that 5-6 teams get bowl games in every conference there really isn't that drive to survive element.
Teams that lose as much as they win do not deserve post season play. It's especially bad when you have 5-7 teams getting in bowls to fill slots.
At this late hour, replacing Navy with a quality opponent will be tough. We'll likely have to go on the road for that. jmho
I won't hold it against Spears, or any AD, for a sudden change. It does suck and we could schedule a better opponent and remove an FCS school later on.
I do recall some MU twitter handle posted a list of available games at a later date (I'm not even sure if it was because of Navy, but probably) and it had well over a dozen teams and plenty of good name P5 programs (Auburn was listed at the time).
This would be a good way to see how connected Spears is and while its certainly not a make or break move for me, if he does schedule someone decent, it certainly bolsters confidence.
“Wagner was previously scheduled to play a road contest at the Toledo Rockets on Sept. 9, 2023. The status of that game was not mentioned in Wagner’s release, but it will likely not be played in 2023 because the Seahawks have a full non-conference schedule. Wagner is also slated to host Columbia and play at Fordham and Kent State to go along with seven Northeast Conference games next season.”
Sounds like Toledo will be available.
Sounds like Toledo will be available.
Think about it this way. In 1998 Miami went 10-1 and did not go to a bowl. Their only loss came to us who also went 10-1. If I am not mistaken there was a chance if we dont score on the last play of the game against Western Mich the 99 team might have been staying home, since only the champ got the bid from the MAC. Granted we probably have too many now but in my world I would rather have too many than not enough.
