2008 game: UT vs. OSU

[rocketfootball]

For what it's worth, Nick from Vandelaysports.com had this to say about the UT/OSU game stuff:

OSU wants to pay Toledo the same amount they gave in 1998 which was $375K - UT wants what was paid to San Diego State, which was $525K. To date, there is no agreement.

I trust Nick.

(Although, I think the deal was a little more complex than this; the last time the Aztecs played at Ohio Stadium, I thought it was originally planned at Qualcomm and moved back to Ohio in the interest of making more money. Couldn't this forthcoming game may be part of the same overall agreement, and not easily tied down to a figure like $525,000?).

Oklahoma paid Bowling Green $500,000 last year. I guess, on the surface, I'd be tempted to tell Ohio State to take a hike if they only offered $375,000 and play Oklahoma, even though I believe it is important for Bowling Green to play Ohio State every few years.

Two more thoughts:

San Diego State has to figure out a flight to Columbus, whereas all any of us MAC schools need to do is get a few buses. That could eat up $100,000 for San Diego State right there. (Or for Bowling Green, in, hypothetically, choosing to play Oklahoma instead of Ohio State for less)

On the other hand, from Ohio State's point of view, it's absurd to think it's worth spending $125,000 more just to fly San Diego State across the country.

I agree that SDSU has to fly and travel expenses for them are more, but that shouldn't matter to OSU. They should give similar payouts to everyone.

[jerzyboy247]

Who cares if UT plays Purdue, Pittsburgh, and Syracuse. All of these teams are not that great. I would not brag about playing Syracuse because they are terrible in football and Purdue and Pittsburgh are the teams that have once in a while decent seasons. Yeah Pittsburgh made the Fiesta Bowl last year but got destroyed by Urban Meyer's Utah squad. The Big East is a weak conference in football and if BG was in that conference then it would be BG in the Fiesta Bowl not Pittsburgh.

[UK Peregrine]

I believe it is important for Bowling Green to play Ohio State every few years.

That is of course when BG does finally knock OSU off, then I see this series as being important. But since you can't count on to many wins at Ohio Stadium and count on OSU even less to play away from home. I see no reason as to why this is such an important series anymore. It's not like BG has seen anymore fanfare from the a previous OSU games than what we obtained from a previous BCS opponents. I would have maybe agree with your statement 100% four years ago. But I think this sentiment is becoming less and less of a necessity for BG than it was just four year ago. BG has proven themselves to be a viable competitor for BCS teams. In fact, playing Wisconsin in Cleveland, means more to BG's program than any game in Coulmbus ever could. Against Wisconsin, we will be the only Ohio ball club and thus receive a great deal of support from Ohioans. Who knows, a win agains UW may in fact make BG the new darlings of Ohio football.

[BGDrew]

Debate the topic not the person...

[JoeFalcon]

Excellent advice.

Two reply's here, first to Schad:

I think it's fair to call the Toledo scheduling philosphy timid. Just because they are in a fiscal position to avoid so-called "money" games does not preclude them from playing upper-tier teams that would pose a challenge to their program and give their players a chance to compete against top level programs in major-league atmospheres and environments. As one of the top tier MAC teams, I'd even argue they are hurting the conference by not challenging top BCS teams when, on paper, they're in a position to at least compete with them.

I also wouldn't necessarily refer to them as "ass-kick" games for programs like BG and UT. Look at our game with Ohio State in 2003. Even the Oklahoma game last year, with a team that would go on to play for a national championship, was not decided until late in the game with the quarterback of the MAC school starting his very first game!

Amstutz and O'Brien can certainly use financial terms as cop-outs and excuses, but by doing so prove they are not serious about scheudling upper-tier teams that pose legitimate challenges to their program to potentially give them even greater national respect then they already possess. The sad thing is that the Minnesota and Kansas debacles last year probably scared them off from any legitimate non-conference oppostion in the future.

Next, to rocketfootball:

Despite being "stupid" by your standards, the fact remains that Penn State was a losing team the year you played them and Pitt was exposed as a mediocre team (4 additional losses) later in the season after you beat them in 2003. Close calls and would'ofs don't cut it. The fact Fresno State was a third place WAC team behind Boise (BG opponent) and UTEP remains unrefuted. Reaching back into 1997 with Purdue and well, well beyond that with the other teams you mentioned proves nothing as it relates to their present scheduling philosophy. Is O'Brien thinking, "Man, we couldn't get a 2 for 1 deal with Washington in the 1970's, why even bother now?" Excuses, excuses, excuses. Follow the lead of the MAC and play somone of significance.

[rocketfootball]

Who cares if UT plays Purdue, Pittsburgh, and Syracuse. All of these teams are not that great. I would not brag about playing Syracuse because they are terrible in football and Purdue and Pittsburgh are the teams that have once in a while decent seasons. Yeah Pittsburgh made the Fiesta Bowl last year but got destroyed by Urban Meyer's Utah squad. The Big East is a weak conference in football and if BG was in that conference then it would be BG in the Fiesta Bowl not Pittsburgh.

Hate to tell ya, but that thinking is very narrow-minded. You are essentially saying who cares that BG played Kansas, Missouri, Purdue, Northwestern, and Pittsburgh (a team that beat BG two years in a row).


You seem to forget that several schools have down years, and BG is no different. BG went through some tough times before Meyer came in and righted the ship, which Brandon has taken even further. You talk about BG going to the Big East and winning the conference and playing in the BCS bowl game, but it wasn't long ago that BG itself was getting drilled by South Florida and Pittsburgh.

They way I see it, BG is 0-2 lifetime against Pittsburgh (both losses in the last 6 years). BG is also 0-2 lifetime against West Virginia (1988 and 1991).


Don't get me wrong, I would love to see any MAC school play in a BCS bowl game and I would also love to see any MAC school win all of their OOC games. But don't talk about Purdue, Pittsburgh, and Syracuse being weak. At least Toledo managed to get a 2 for 1 deal with Purdue back in the 90's and again a 2 for 1 deal with Purdue starting with a game in Toledo in 2007. BG has signed 2 deals with Purdue over the years, and both times were just 1 game payouts on the road. If Purdue is so weak and Toledo's schedules suck so badly, why can't BG get Purdue to play a game in BG?


I apologize if this post offends any BG fans. It is not meant to put down BG at all, just to prove a point to a poster.

[rocketfootball]

Excellent advice.

Two reply's here, first to Schad:

I think it's fair to call the Toledo scheduling philosphy timid. Just because they are in a fiscal position to avoid so-called "money" games does not preclude them from playing upper-tier teams that would pose a challenge to their program and give their players a chance to compete against top level programs in major-league atmospheres and environments. As one of the top tier MAC teams, I'd even argue they are hurting the conference by not challenging top BCS teams when, on paper, they're in a position to at least compete with them.

I also wouldn't necessarily refer to them as "ass-kick" games for programs like BG and UT. Look at our game with Ohio State in 2003. Even the Oklahoma game last year, with a team that would go on to play for a national championship, was not decided until late in the game with the quarterback of the MAC school starting his very first game!

Amstutz and O'Brien can certainly use financial terms as cop-outs and excuses, but by doing so prove they are not serious about scheudling upper-tier teams that pose legitimate challenges to their program to potentially give them even greater national respect then they already possess. The sad thing is that the Minnesota and Kansas debacles last year probably scared them off from any legitimate non-conference oppostion in the future.

Next, to rocketfootball:

Despite being "stupid" by your standards, the fact remains that Penn State was a losing team the year you played them and Pitt was exposed as a mediocre team (4 additional losses) later in the season after you beat them in 2003. Close calls and would'ofs don't cut it. The fact Fresno State was a third place WAC team behind Boise (BG opponent) and UTEP remains unrefuted. Reaching back into 1997 with Purdue and well, well beyond that with the other teams you mentioned proves nothing as it relates to their present scheduling philosophy. Is O'Brien thinking, "Man, we couldn't get a 2 for 1 deal with Washington in the 1970's, why even bother now?" Excuses, excuses, excuses. Follow the lead of the MAC and play somone of significance.

Joefalcon, you might mean well but you are very wrong here. Just because Penn State had their first off-year the year Toledo played them does not mean that Toledo won't schedule top teams. Penn State was winning 10 and 11 games just a year or two before when the game was signed.

Pittsburgh might have lost 5 games in 2003, but that doesn't mean that Toledo's scheduling is timid.

Syracuse might not be good now, but when the 2 for 1 deal was scheduled they had Donavon McNabb and were a Top 15 program.

You mention Boise State as a BG opponent and the class of the WAC. Toledo also has a 1 for 1 deal with BSU for 2009 and 2010 with them coming to Toledo first. Miami has a similar deal with BSU for 2009 and 2010, but with Miami playing at Boise first.

Fresno State might have finished behind Boise State last year, but everyone is pretty much figuring them to be a Top 15-20 team this year.

Toledo recently signed a new deal with Purdue that call for the first game to be played in Toledo in 2007. Purdue has not had a losing season since 1996 and they are expected to have a shot at the Big Ten title this year, even though they are not the favorite.

It is true that the last time we played Ohio State was in 1998 and the last #1 ranked teams before that was Washington in 1991 and Miami Fl in 1987.

Now let's look at BG's scheduling. You played at Oklahoma last year and at Ohio State the year before. Does that mean that BG is way ahead of Toledo is scheduling the big boys? Sure, you have Wisconsin, but they can't really be considered much different than Purdue or Pittsburgh. Wisconsin has won 24 games in the last three years compared to 23 wins for Purdue in that same span. Big difference, huh?

I am glad that BG has been able to play Michigan (2000), OSU (2003), and Oklahoma (2004)..........but don't tell me that Toledo's scheduling is hurting the conference.

And to say that Toledo's losses to Minnesota and Kansas have scared Toledo off from scheduling anyone decent is ridiculous. Toledo signed the Purdue deal in October of last season, after the Minnesota and Kansas games were a month old. Purdue is definitely better than Kansas and probably better than Minnesota. Purdue did win the last meeting between the two schools, 28-15. Toledo also got the Fresno State deal after those Minny and Kansas games last year, as the FSU deal was signed in the offseason. Fresno State is no slouch and you know it! Neither is Boise State and Toledo just signed a home and home with them about 2 months ago. From what I hear Toledo is currently working on a deal with a good BCS school for a 2 for 1, meaning they will be coming to Toledo for one of the games.


I understand that Toledo and BG are rivals and it is hard to say anything good about the other, but don't say stuff that makes you look foolish just because you hate the other school.

[1987alum]

This thread really got derailed.

I'll say this - I don't think Toledo's scheduling hurts the MAC one single, solitary bit. The fact that they are able to get someone like Purdue to actually play AT the Glass Bowl is actually a positive, IMO.

I also add that I think it's important for BG to play Ohio State every few years.

1) the money doesn't hurt
2) I think it's important for us to show that we can go toe-to-toe with them (like we did in 2003) and are not a D-III team as some folks suppose. The day will come when these games will be a toss up and I truly cannot wait for the day the Falcons come out on top.

[Falconfreak90]

Who cares if UT plays Purdue, Pittsburgh, and Syracuse. All of these teams are not that great. I would not brag about playing Syracuse because they are terrible in football and Purdue and Pittsburgh are the teams that have once in a while decent seasons. Yeah Pittsburgh made the Fiesta Bowl last year but got destroyed by Urban Meyer's Utah squad. The Big East is a weak conference in football and if BG was in that conference then it would be BG in the Fiesta Bowl not Pittsburgh.

Hate to tell ya, but that thinking is very narrow-minded. You are essentially saying who cares that BG played Kansas, Missouri, Purdue, Northwestern, and Pittsburgh (a team that beat BG two years in a row).


You seem to forget that several schools have down years, and BG is no different. BG went through some tough times before Meyer came in and righted the ship, which Brandon has taken even further. You talk about BG going to the Big East and winning the conference and playing in the BCS bowl game, but it wasn't long ago that BG itself was getting drilled by South Florida and Pittsburgh.

They way I see it, BG is 0-2 lifetime against Pittsburgh (both losses in the last 6 years). BG is also 0-2 lifetime against West Virginia (1988 and 1991).


Don't get me wrong, I would love to see any MAC school play in a BCS bowl game and I would also love to see any MAC school win all of their OOC games. But don't talk about Purdue, Pittsburgh, and Syracuse being weak. At least Toledo managed to get a 2 for 1 deal with Purdue back in the 90's and again a 2 for 1 deal with Purdue starting with a game in Toledo in 2007. BG has signed 2 deals with Purdue over the years, and both times were just 1 game payouts on the road. If Purdue is so weak and Toledo's schedules suck so badly, why can't BG get Purdue to play a game in BG?


I apologize if this post offends any BG fans. It is not meant to put down BG at all, just to prove a point to a poster.

I agree with you, rf. I don't see how any BG fan can put down Purdue as an opponent. What does that say for our win over the Boilers in 2003?

Purdue, Pitt, Syracuse....all BCS teams. Whenever a MAC school plays any BCS team, always root for the MAC. Purdue is a legit Big 10 title contender almost every year these days. BG is, however, 2-0 lifetime vs Syracuse...both games at Syracuse and both were blowout wins for the Falcons (41-14 and 22-7).

No apology necessary.

[JoeFalcon]

rocketfootball, I'm not exactly worried about "looking foolish," and with your handle, I'd reason a guess you carry some "hate" for the Bowling Green State University football program yourself, so stop tyring to come across as a reasonable, detached observer with no intention to push your own agenda of UT propaganda.

You have failed to refute any of my origina points, and I stand by each of them. You have, however, added examples from the 1980's and early 1990's that have no bearing on the current scheduling philosophy. I'll concede that Penn State was thought of in a different light in 2000 than they are today, but that was still 5 years ago.

You also refer to Syracuse scheduled when they had Donovan McNabb. Did it ever occur to the crack UT staffers that he might actually leave SU at some point? Miraculously, Toledo lost to a McNabb-less 6-6 SU team 34-7 in 2003.

You also gloat about scheduling Purdue in 2007 when they are coming off their worst season since Tiller took over the program.

Take a look at your non-conference road record of recent years and you'll see that you've been beaten and beaten badly by middling BCS teams which directly explains the hesitancy on the part of O'Brien and Amstutz to play national, Top 10 caliber teams. I know, I know, it's all just hateful foolishness like any critique of UT is in your mind.

[Schadenfreude]

rocketfootball, I'm not exactly worried about "looking foolish," and with your handle, I'd reason a guess you carry some "hate" for the Bowling Green State University football program yourself, so stop tyring to come across as a reasonable, detached observer with no intention to push your own agenda of UT propaganda.

Rocketfootball has a good head on his shoulders. I know him well, virtually.

In my opinion, the reason he is coming across as a reasonable detached observer is that he is reasonable and capable of looking at things in a detached manner.

[JoeFalcon]

Right, calling me stupid is the mark of a true Lincoln-Douglas afficionado.

You may carry on your virtual relationship without me as I have nothing more to add to this thread and have wasted enough time already trying to convince people whose minds are already made up.

[UK Peregrine]

I also add that I think it's important for BG to play Ohio State every few years.

1) the money doesn't hurt
2) I think it's important for us to show that we can go toe-to-toe with them (like we did in 2003) and are not a D-III team as some folks suppose. The day will come when these games will be a toss up and I truly cannot wait for the day the Falcons come out on top.

I still don't buy an OSU game being that important to BG anymore. The same desired effect can be achieved by playing very similar teams. We have alreday demonstrated we can go toe-to-toe with OSU, OU, and Purdue. And the money factor is not really a factor for playing OSU. Money can come from anywhere as we saw from Oklahoma's payday and what Auburn was willing to pay us.

Plus, beating a Michigan, Iowa, Tennessee, Wisconsin or Notre Dame would have a very similar regional effect as beating an OSU. Heck, now that I think of it, beating a ND could arguably be better for BG than defeating any of the aforementioned programs. For some reason ND is still widely-respected as a football program and they have NBC all to themsleves for nationally televised games. The entire nation would see us beat them and not just some regional ABC coverage audience like we had against OU and OSU. Schedule ND ASAP!

[rocketfootball]

Sorry you feel that way joefalcon.

Purdue may have had an off season last year, but many expect them to battle for the Big Ten title this year.

Just because Donovan McNabb was leaving Syracuse did not mean they would fall. They went to bowl games in 6 of 7 years and don't tell me McNabb was the QB there for those 7 years. They have played in the Fiesta Bowl, Orange Bowl, Sugar Bowl, or Gator Bowl 6 times in the last 20 years. How many schools can say that?



I might hate BG when it comes to competition against Toledo, but I respect Bowling Green. That is one thing about the UT/BG rivalry that makes it special. Even though everyone doesn't feel that way, many fans respect the other school. I cheer for BG in all of their OOC games.

Finally, this is Bowling Green's message board and I am a guest on your board. If I want to say something bad about BG I will do it on a Toledo board or a MAC in general board, not the Bowling Green message board. It is kind of a respect thing. You don't want Toledo fans coming over here talking smack about BG and we don't want BG fans coming over to the UT board and talking smack about us. The way I see it, if you can't say something good or be reasonable, then don't go to the other school's board.


One last thing, you talk about Penn State and Syracuse and whoever basically sucking........you do know that most schools go through cycles, right? You do know that BG and Toledo have both had their share of cycles where they had bad teams in the past, right? Remember that what comes around, goes around.

[mk455]

i don't respect toledo