Update on future non-conference opponents

Bleeding Orange · Post by **Bleeding Orange** » Tue Sep 11, 2007 1:34 pm

BGDrew wrote:Future schedules at Bowling Green are about as reliable as a $5 hooker.

Thats true. We never do know what we're going to find under the hood.

eRichFalcon · Post by **eRichFalcon** » Tue Sep 11, 2007 3:22 pm

BGDrew wrote:Future schedules at Bowling Green are about as reliable as a $5 hooker.

If I were in Vegas, I'd take the hooker, after the way things shaped up last offseason.

That said, hopefully an improved performance by us this year will help lead to our scheduling being less of a clusterf&*k.

hammb · Post by **hammb** » Tue Sep 11, 2007 4:26 pm

eRichFalcon wrote:
BGDrew wrote:Future schedules at Bowling Green are about as reliable as a $5 hooker.
If I were in Vegas, I'd take the hooker, after the way things shaped up last offseason.

That said, hopefully an improved performance by us this year will help lead to our scheduling being less of a clusterf&*k.

Have you ever SEEN a $5 hooker in Vegas?

Stay as far as way as freaking possible. If they were even remotely attractive (and STD-free) they'd be working at a legal brothel and charging 4 digit prices.

I've never felt compelled to uhhh...partake in the services of any hookers, but the ones I've seen in Vegas are especially awful...

eRichFalcon · Post by **eRichFalcon** » Tue Sep 11, 2007 6:02 pm

hammb wrote:
eRichFalcon wrote:
BGDrew wrote:Future schedules at Bowling Green are about as reliable as a $5 hooker.
If I were in Vegas, I'd take the hooker, after the way things shaped up last offseason.

That said, hopefully an improved performance by us this year will help lead to our scheduling being less of a clusterf&*k.
Have you ever SEEN a $5 hooker in Vegas?

Stay as far as way as freaking possible. If they were even remotely attractive (and STD-free) they'd be working at a legal brothel and charging 4 digit prices.

I've never felt compelled to uhhh...partake in the services of any hookers, but the ones I've seen in Vegas are especially awful...

HAHAHAHAHAHAHA.

I wasn't too clear....the Vegas remark was only to say that I would gamble on the quality $5 hooker over the predictability of our OOC scheduling.

I don't doubt you on Vegas hookers, but I will contend that in most cities $5 will do you better than hosting Western Kentucky instead of Boise State.

jpfalcon09 · Post by **jpfalcon09** » Tue Sep 11, 2007 6:38 pm

I guess the only consolation for playing WKU is that they aren't a FCS team anymore, so technically we can say we don't play any of those teams this year...I guess, lol.

BGSUFootballFan · Post by **BGSUFootballFan** » Tue Sep 11, 2007 9:44 pm

They beat somebody 87-0 last week. They better not be FCS!

bobio · Post by **bobio** » Tue Sep 11, 2007 10:26 pm

the Boise game makes no sense. Why would we go out there again without first playing them at home? They owe us. It can't be for the money. I doubt a Boise payout is any more than Marshall.

Flipper · Post by **Flipper** » Tue Sep 11, 2007 10:54 pm

The Boise situation has been discussed on here several times. Apparently, the MAC asked us and Boise to make changes to the original agreement to help the MAC complete the football scheuels of all conference members the past two seasons. The upshot of those accomodations is that Boise does not owe us a home game form the original agreement....both of our home games were in effect "traded". We still owe Boise the second road game though.

Apparently, an additional home and home agreement was reached last year that will eventually bring Boise here sometime down the orad...but we have togo back there again as well. So, whatt should have been a three for three is basically going to wind up being a one for three in their favor.

Of all the ridiculous shenaningans surrounding the football scheduling this year this one grinds me the most.. We wind up playing at Michigan State and Boston College for zip...zero...nada (other than a payday) and we sacrificed a home date with Boise State....the Gods of mid major football to do it.

Just thinking about it still pisses me off

Schadenfreude · Post by **Schadenfreude** » Tue Sep 11, 2007 11:20 pm

BGDrew wrote:Future schedules at Bowling Green are about as reliable as a $5 hooker.

But something recent, out of our SID's office, should be taken more seriously than nationalchamps.net.

Falconfreak90 · Post by **Falconfreak90** » Wed Sep 12, 2007 10:52 am

Flip's response is right on. It ticks me off as well. I have a ton of respect for Boise State but they should be playing at Perry Stadium once before we go back out there again. That is a long trip. 3 for 1 with a WAC school is no favor to BG. I hope we've seen the last of this "MAC brotherly love" helping all the other schools while we get screwed.

At least we'll finally get 6 home games in 2009. I heard Joe Pa last night in response to his cupcake non conf sked of FIU, Buffalo and Temple. "We can't have less than 7 home games!" Of course not, Joe. You get 107,000 people every game. The money the BCS leagues make in comparison to mid majors is sickening. I love Joe Pa but that statement ticked me off.

1987alum · Post by **1987alum** » Wed Sep 12, 2007 11:02 am

Falconfreak90 wrote:I heard Joe Pa last night in response to his cupcake non conf sked of FIU, Buffalo and Temple. "We can't have less than 7 home games!" Of course not, Joe. You get 107,000 people every game. The money the BCS leagues make in comparison to mid majors is sickening. I love Joe Pa but that statement ticked me off.

But you can't blame him ... or Tressel or Carr, etc. They have an advantage and they are using it. If BG could ring up 7 home games and bring in that much money, there wouldn't be a moment's hesitation.

Falconfreak90 · Post by **Falconfreak90** » Wed Sep 12, 2007 11:17 am

1987alum wrote:
Falconfreak90 wrote:I heard Joe Pa last night in response to his cupcake non conf sked of FIU, Buffalo and Temple. "We can't have less than 7 home games!" Of course not, Joe. You get 107,000 people every game. The money the BCS leagues make in comparison to mid majors is sickening. I love Joe Pa but that statement ticked me off.
But you can't blame him ... or Tressel or Carr, etc. They have an advantage and they are using it. If BG could ring up 7 home games and bring in that much money, there wouldn't be a moment's hesitation.

Totally understandable, 87. But that still doesn't make it right. The mid major conferences are still part of the NCAA and to favor certain schools over others isn't fair. But then again, life ain't fair.

eRichFalcon · Post by **eRichFalcon** » Wed Sep 12, 2007 12:00 pm

Flipper wrote:Apparently, an additional home and home agreement was reached last year that will eventually bring Boise here sometime down the orad...but we have togo back there again as well. So, whatt should have been a three for three is basically going to wind up being a one for three in their favor.

What sucks even more than the 3 for one instead of straight home and home series, is that we lost the opportunity to play Boise while they're hot.

They've already lost a game this year, and the most exciting part of their team (Ian Johnson) will be gone long before they travel to the Doyt. The magic will be gone for them, and for us the opportunity to help the always important attendance figures will be diminished greatly.

mjmorefield · Post by **mjmorefield** » Wed Sep 12, 2007 12:42 pm

1987alum wrote:
Falconfreak90 wrote:I heard Joe Pa last night in response to his cupcake non conf sked of FIU, Buffalo and Temple. "We can't have less than 7 home games!" Of course not, Joe. You get 107,000 people every game. The money the BCS leagues make in comparison to mid majors is sickening. I love Joe Pa but that statement ticked me off.
But you can't blame him ... or Tressel or Carr, etc. They have an advantage and they are using it. If BG could ring up 7 home games and bring in that much money, there wouldn't be a moment's hesitation.

Carr won't have to worry about Michigan schedules very much longer.

CapitalFalcon · Post by **CapitalFalcon** » Wed Sep 12, 2007 2:36 pm

eRichFalcon wrote:
Flipper wrote:Apparently, an additional home and home agreement was reached last year that will eventually bring Boise here sometime down the orad...but we have togo back there again as well. So, whatt should have been a three for three is basically going to wind up being a one for three in their favor.
What sucks even more than the 3 for one instead of straight home and home series, is that we lost the opportunity to play Boise while they're hot.

They've already lost a game this year, and the most exciting part of their team (Ian Johnson) will be gone long before they travel to the Doyt. The magic will be gone for them, and for us the opportunity to help the always important attendance figures will be diminished greatly.

And that's just it...As much as we B**ch and moan about the BCS not giving us mid-majors respect, that statement is exactly why. For the most part, any time a mid-major gets hot, it for a fleeting moment in time. We all gasp at Michigan being 0-2. That team hasn't been 0-2 in what, three or four decades?!?!?!

No question there are hurdles Mid-majors have...But we can't even sell-out the 5 games we do have at home (in a 30,000 capacity stadium), let alone 7, AND TICKETS ARE FREE for the entire student body! If we were selling out every home game and the Doyt was as electric as I experienced when GameDay was here, every weekend, then we have the right to complain about respect, and Mid-majors being over looked. So how do you get there? You win. You win, and win, and win. Every season BG needs to be expected to have a winning season. I am hoping last year was an anomaly. But you want butts in the seats? You want respect? You want people to quit wearing OSU and Michigan garb on campus? You want esprit de corps? You win.

Like George C. Scott as Patton said, "Americans love a winner and will not tolerate a loser."