no Boise State this season?

[TG1996]

So before I can even begin to start to feel bad for Ohio, if they wouldn’t keep backing out of these deals, they would have already had their schedule in place and it wouldn’t have had an impact on BG at all.

Apparently, Frank Solich has been lining up games on bar napkins again....

Even more reason to pull for a 72-21 repeat in Athens this fall.

[redskins4ever]

It was my understanding that OU was bought out of their contract with VT after VT saw what happened to Pitt... the 300K that they got for not having the game was suppose to help them land a 500K road game... 800K for one game isn't too shabby...

did anyone see that San Jose State lucked into get Stanford to come to their place, because Stanford didn't believe their stadium was going to be done on time?

[Schadenfreude]

Temple. Ick. I hope not.

[1987alum]

If it's Temple, I'm just gonna plain cry. As much as I think our schedule next year is really tough, I also think it's good for us. We need to be playing top notch competition, especially at home. Playing a weak school, in football tradition and current quality of competition, does nothing to generate local excitement for BG either.

Temple. Ick. I hope not.

I know I'm the unofficial Temple apologist, but let me make three points here.

1. I really doubt Temple will play at BG in 2006. Their schedule is already loaded with road games.

2. If they do come to The Doyt, they will not be the same team that afforded us two PlayStation-like victories. Don't forget, we won't be the same team that piled up those points, either.

3. Last year's Temple game was the biggest draw of the season. I know folks will jump on this and say "yeah, it was Homecoming" or "of course, it was the first home game." But the bottom line is, people came to a football game involving Temple. They didn't come to the Western Michigan game. They sure as heck didn't come to the Akron game. And fewer people turned out for the Toledo game - despite the fact that it's our rivalry game and despite the fact that the other team showed up in respectable numbers.

OK. End rant.

[Schadenfreude]

I know I'm the unofficial Temple apologist, but let me make three points here.

I'm a Temple apologist, too. I don't mind that they are joining the league. Pretty good move. Let's play 'em every year . That works for me.

But there are dozens and dozens of teams we have never played. This fall, any of them would be preferrable.

[1987alum]

I know I'm the unofficial Temple apologist, but let me make three points here.

I'm a Temple apologist, too. I don't mind that they are joining the league. Pretty good move. Let's play 'em every year . That works for me.

But there are dozens and dozens of teams we have never played. This fall, any of them would be preferrable.

That's a legitimate reason, IMO.

[Warthog]

I was looking at www.nationalchamps.net as they have 06 tentative schedules and teams with opening that I could see coming here are Rutgers, Syracuse, Houston, TCU, Wyoming, Florida Atlantic, North Texas, and Temple

FWIW, West Virginia, Minnesota, Oregon and Hawaii are also teams looking for one more game this year. Also, Boise already has Hawaii pencilled in for 9/23 now.

Of the teams you listed previously though, I think it can be narrowed done a bit. To accomodate playing league games mostly in Oct and Nov, I expect our non-conf game to be in Sept. FAU already has 4 away non-conf games scheduled, so I would throw them out. Of the teams you listed, here are the ones that have open dates in September that coincide with us: Syracuse 9/30, TCU 9/9 or 9/23, Wyoming 9/23 or 9/30, and North Texas 9/23 or 9/30. Syracuse already has 2 away non-conf games. TCU has 1 home and 2 away, Wymoning has 2 home and 1 away, and N. Tex has 1 home and 3 away.

Given all that, there is one obvious choice who our new opponent has to be: WYOMING. They should be willing to go on the road and we already have/had some kind of deal with them for a game. A return game next year at Wyoming would fit for us since we already have Boise and FIU at home in 2007. Problem is Wyoming already has 4 non-conf games for next season. But one of them is @ Ohio, so I could see part of the deal to get Wyoming to come here this season would be to let them host us in 2007 instead of traveling to Athens.

[BGSU33]

It was my understanding that OU was bought out of their contract with VT after VT saw what happened to Pitt... the 300K that they got for not having the game was suppose to help them land a 500K road game... 800K for one game isn't too shabby...

did anyone see that San Jose State lucked into get Stanford to come to their place, because Stanford didn't believe their stadium was going to be done on time?

Anyone who thinks Virginia Tech was backing out of having to go to Athens (as in Athens, Ohio, not Athens, Georgia) after OU beat Pitt is only kidding themselves. The Hokies agreed to a 2-for-1 with Ohio because it meant three wins for Tech and two home games in Blacksburg. What happened was Ohio started second guessing the deal after it played the first game in the series, a road game in Blacksburg, and accessed the remaining two games under contract and felt it would be a better situation for them to scrap the home game with VT in search of other non-conference games in order to one, help finance the ongoing renovations at Peden Stadium, and two, provide a less formidable opponent. Now they don’t currently have a big-time pay game on schedule yet, but they should get a somewhat decent payout for their road game at Missouri. Plus, they’ll be adding another decent pay game now, likely West Virginia or possibly Illinois. That will aid them better than having to provide a payout a guarantee to Virginia Tech for a home game. Funny enough, at one time, it was rumored that Ohio was going to try playing at a neutral site, even in Washington DC, for its proximity for a large neutral venue for the Hokies (not the Bobcats), in order to try and cash out a better gate receipt because it was an Ohio home game. It never got off the ground.

But about the San Jose/Stanford game, yes, I did see that the Spartans got a home game out of that deal. But Stanford and San Jose State pretty much have been playing each other every year anyway, so it’s not a big surprise to see them go to San Jose. They actually played there a few years ago, and in fact, San Jose State won like four consecutive games against the Cardinal in the late 1990’s and Stanford was looking to possible stop playing them. There’s a thread on here at AZZ about that Stanford Stadium renovation. It’s amazing, Stanford is building an entirely new stadium on the same site as the old one in one off-season. I’ve never seen or heard of that happening before. When I was at Virginia, we did an endzone renovation/addition and it took two years. That was just one endzone, they are doing an entire stadium from scratch! They are doing construction nearly around the clock and it’s amazing to think they’re going to have a new stadium in place in less than one year.

[1987alum]

Given all that, there is one obvious choice who our new opponent has to be: WYOMING.

I knew we could count on you, Warthog! Your are the official AZZ.com schedule guru!

[Schadenfreude]

Given all that, there is one obvious choice who our new opponent has to be: WYOMING.

That would be cool. I'd really thrill to that.

[rocketfootball]

3. Last year's Temple game was the biggest draw of the season. I know folks will jump on this and say "yeah, it was Homecoming" or "of course, it was the first home game." But the bottom line is, people came to a football game involving Temple. They didn't come to the Western Michigan game. They sure as heck didn't come to the Akron game. And fewer people turned out for the Toledo game - despite the fact that it's our rivalry game and despite the fact that the other team showed up in respectable numbers.

OK. End rant.

Wow. You actually had more people at the Temple game? I know it was darn cold for the UT/BGSU game, I was there and tailgated for several hours before the game and even a little after it, but it is just hard to believe that you would have more fans for Temple than your big rival. If I remember correctly, it was a pretty good crowd for the UT/BGSU game.

[transfer2BGSU]

This should make the coaches happy in some way.

I heard there was a lot of grumbling on our staff having to play Wisconsin, BSU, and OSU in one season. Although I thought it to be a great schedule (after all, if you want to be considered a big boy, you have to play the big boys).

[svillefalcon]

Temple. Ick. I hope not.

yeah temple wouldnt be good for our strength of schedule by any stretch, but seeing anothe 70-7 (score of last year vs. temple) romp an the schedule would def help the confidence of the team. After losing all the players weve lost this offseason to the draft and graduation.

[svillefalcon]

3. Last year's Temple game was the biggest draw of the season. I know folks will jump on this and say "yeah, it was Homecoming" or "of course, it was the first home game." But the bottom line is, people came to a football game involving Temple. They didn't come to the Western Michigan game. They sure as heck didn't come to the Akron game. And fewer people turned out for the Toledo game - despite the fact that it's our rivalry game and despite the fact that the other team showed up in respectable numbers.

OK. End rant.

Wow. You actually had more people at the Temple game? I know it was darn cold for the UT/BGSU game, I was there and tailgated for several hours before the game and even a little after it, but it is just hard to believe that you would have more fans for Temple than your big rival. If I remember correctly, it was a pretty good crowd for the UT/BGSU game.

it was a good crowd but i dont think it was sold out. The Temple game if i believe was sold-out or very very close, but it was teh first home game of the season and the weather was b-e-a-utiful. The toledo game was cold, wet, and also keep this in mind. the UT game was the night a lot of students went home for thanksgiving break.

[Jacobs4Heisman]

3. Last year's Temple game was the biggest draw of the season. I know folks will jump on this and say "yeah, it was Homecoming" or "of course, it was the first home game." But the bottom line is, people came to a football game involving Temple. They didn't come to the Western Michigan game. They sure as heck didn't come to the Akron game. And fewer people turned out for the Toledo game - despite the fact that it's our rivalry game and despite the fact that the other team showed up in respectable numbers.

OK. End rant.

Wow. You actually had more people at the Temple game? I know it was darn cold for the UT/BGSU game, I was there and tailgated for several hours before the game and even a little after it, but it is just hard to believe that you would have more fans for Temple than your big rival. If I remember correctly, it was a pretty good crowd for the UT/BGSU game.

Temple = 19462

Toledo = 17438


Sometimes I hate our fan base.