Let's Just Put Delaware State In The Big Ten
I hope Jim Delany was as horrified at this development as Indiana bloggers ("absolutely disgusted") and yrs truly were:
The November 20, 2010 game between Penn State and Indiana will switch locations from Indiana's campus in Bloomington, Indiana to [The Stadium Formerly Known As Jack Kent Cooke] in Landover, Maryland. [TSFKAJKC] is home of the NFL's Washington Redskins.
The stadium in question is about four hours from State College. It's eleven hours from Bloomington. Indiana just sold a home game for three million dollars. And Penn State got one for free.
This sort of thing has a long tradition in college football—Michigan State didn't play a home game in their series against Michigan until 1948 and didn't start equitable home and homes until a decade later—but died out at about the same time segregation did. And nobody wants to bring that back, hmmmm? [/sportstalkradio argument]
Let's stipulate that schools have the right to do whatever they want with their nonconference schedules. The effect on the rest of the conference is minimal there, mostly limited to "you scheduled who and they did what to you?" Feel free to insert your favorite recent humiliation there: The Horror, Iowa State, USC, Louisiana Tech, etc.
Once we start talking about conference schedules, though, people have a right to bitch. Every team is playing for a conference championship. The schedules need to be as equitable as possible. Yes, playing eight games against ten opponents naturally inserts some wobble in average schedule difficulty. Creating protected rivalries enhances that. (Would you rather be Michigan State (Penn State and Ohio State Michigan [ed: whoops lol] every year) or Purdue (Northwestern and Indiana).) But in both cases everyone has agreed to the potential imbalance and decided that the alternative—years without The Game or I-AA snackycakes—is worse.
Not so with Indiana's decision to sell a home game, which benefits exactly one team, has been approved by no one, and compromises the integrity of the league schedule. It also sets a dangerous precedent. No Big Ten team has been so craven since balanced schedules became commonplace. A rundown:
- Michigan State, Penn State, Iowa, and Minnesota have never scheduled a neutral site conference game.
- A few teams did so back in the stone age but not since. Michigan hasn't played a neutral site conference game since they lost to Northwestern 2-3 in 1925, and that was in Chicago. Illinois played home games against Ohio State in Cleveland in 1944 and 1942. Purdue did the same in 1943.
- A few teams have moved games to neutral sites without giving up at least the appearance of a home game. Indiana played a neutral site game against Penn State in 2000 and against Illinois in 1984, both in Indianapolis. (They did sell a home game to Northwestern, also in 1925. Northwestern won 25-0, their only win of the season.) Ohio State moved a 1991 home game against Northwestern to Cleveland. Northwestern has a fair number of games listed as "@ Chicago, IL," which Evanston is basically a part of.
- Aaaand there's one bizarre outlier I didn't remember: Wisconsin gave up a home game to play Michigan State in Tokyo in 1993.
That's it. No modern-era Big Ten team has ever agreed to move a conference game to a location almost three times closer to the road team than the "home" team. No one has ever moved a conference game out of state with the freakish exception of that Tokyo game. Even that game was a decidedly neutral site, which TSFKAJKC will most definitely not be in 2010.
The Big Ten should shoot this down, and do it soon. This is the I-A equivalent of forfeiting a conference game so you can get paid by Michigan. Insert some bylaw that says any attempt to move a conference home game out of state or to a point that's closer to the nominal road team than the home team must be approved by the league first, and look very sternly at the Indiana administration when you do.
The new Meadowlands Stadium is supposed to be open by the 2010 season. Would anyone raise an eyebrow if the game was to be played there? No. We'd talk about playing a game in the New York market and how it expands the footprint and gives out of market alums a chance to see conference teams.
So why is there a problem with a game being played in the National Capital Area? Washington DC is probably home to third largest Big Ten alumni base in the country and is a top 10 market. That it is closer to one school than the other is of no consequence... this will be spun as nothing more than a game in Washington for the benefit of the conference.
When your team is winning, be ready to be tough, because winning can make you soft. On the other hand, when your team is losing, stick by them. Keep believing. -- Bo Schembechler
200 linear feet of porn mags!
Has anyone even mentioned this as a way to "expand the footprint"? That's a secondary rationale to attempt to cover for what's really going on, which is painfully obvious. And besides, it isn't the B10 conference that initiated this change-of-venue (for the sake of expanding exposure, or whatever). It was the teams.
If the teams are initiating a neutral site game, pick a place that's actually neutral. Not someplace that's 75 miles from the PA border and 500+ miles from the Indiana state line.
The fact is, this is exactly what it looks like: a home game for Penn State.
Some have rightly pointed out that PSU will win this regardless of location. That fact (plus the money) is why they're gonna get away with this. What really matters, though, is that a B10 team basically forfeited a conference home game, turned into a home game for someone else, and did it all for money.
What's the limit to this precedent?
I never said it wasn't that, but the spin job here is impossibly easy. There's a reason every Big Ten AD plus Delany (!!) signed off on this. Again, would you have the same objections if the game where in New York?
When your team is winning, be ready to be tough, because winning can make you soft. On the other hand, when your team is losing, stick by them. Keep believing. -- Bo Schembechler
200 linear feet of porn mags!
(A) It's not in New York, so your point is an interesting speculation, but not the reality at hand.
(B) Nobody but you is spinning it as exposure-in-a-different-market ("expanding the footprint")
(C) Therefore, it's a shameless money grab by IU, which the entire B10 signed on for, including the commissioner.
(D) Thus, my objection.
And so as not to avoid your point about the Meadowlands entirely ... if the B10 approached the teams in question with the vision of a game in NY/NJ that expands the footprint of the B10 (or whatever), then that would be a great idea. You're right.
But that's not what's happening.
A hypothetical counterpoint to your hypothetical counterpoint: Let's say the CFL expands to Windsor, Ontario in 2011 and builds a kick-ass stadium there. Wisconsin is having a bad streak of seasons, not selling many tickets, sees a home game against Michigan that season, and proposes to move that game to Windsor. You know, to expand the footprint. Is that objectionable? I'm saying it is.
You're saying it's not.
A) Is Washington, DC not comparable as a neutral site to New York?
B) Yet.
C) Sure. But I doubt everyone would sign off on it if they saw no personal benefit.
You refuse to just answer the hypothetical because we both know a game in the New York area, despite being much closer to PSU, would be considered a neutral site regardless of who came up with the idea.
Distance is less important than culture. The game might be played at a site geographically close to Happy Valley, but the Washington, DC area is not Penn State mad... there's a close BCS team in Maryland. In fact, I'm willing to bet there are a crapload of Indiana natives and alums in the District. In this case culture > location.
Windsor, Ontario is so close to Ann Arbor that they literally get all the same TV channels over the air. Try harder.
When your team is winning, be ready to be tough, because winning can make you soft. On the other hand, when your team is losing, stick by them. Keep believing. -- Bo Schembechler
200 linear feet of porn mags!
A couple of points
According to Glass, in an interview with Adam Rittenberg, not only has the conference signed off on the game, but the other nine ADs have as well -- a week ago. Don't fool yourself. A game against Indiana is not going to give Penn State a leg up in the chase for the Big 10 title, regardless of where it's played, and the individual schools recognize that. The real harm here is the precedent that this sets.
But let's be honest. To liken what Glass did to what Delaware State did is short-sighted -- Indiana is still playing Penn State and taking away substantially more money that if it would have played Penn State in Bloomington. To put completely arbitrary limits on distance is laughable. It needs to be be an all-or-none scenario. Teams can raffle home games or they can't. Period.
Arbitrary limits, no. But a home game should be, you know, close to home for the home team. And it's reasonable that it should be at least closer to home than to the away team. That's not arbitrary.
The ADs signing off on this means money trumps fair play. I know that's not earth-shattering news to anyone. But, as noted before, there were 15 other NFL venues closer to Bloomington, IN. So this is what it looks like it is. Shameless money-grabbing. Great example you're setting for the youngsters.
I like the idea of the occasional neutral site game, specifically two instances:
-I think it would be fun to have UM v. MSU @ Ford Field once a decade or so. Set up specific section for each student section (right next to each other?) and it could be a fun experience.
-Any season that Michigan only plays MSU once in basketball, they should play at the Palace.
I realize this places us at an advantage since 90+ percent of Michigan residents who didn't go to MSU are Michigan fans (the 10% being family of MSU students/alum), but kvetching by the Spartys aside it would be pretty cool.
I'd prefer to see us play the directional schools at Ford Field in a sort of two for one deal.
When your team is winning, be ready to be tough, because winning can make you soft. On the other hand, when your team is losing, stick by them. Keep believing. -- Bo Schembechler
200 linear feet of porn mags!
This team is really just a embarrasment to the Big Ten in football.
INDIANAPOLIS has an NFL stadium closer to Bloomington
DETROIT has an NFL stadium closer to Bloomington
CINCINNATI has an NFL stadium closer to Bloomington
CLEVELAND has an NFL stadium closer to Bloomington
PITTSBURGH has an NFL stadium closer to Bloomington
BUFFALO has an NFL stadium closer to Bloomington
CHICAGO has an NFL stadium closer to Bloomington
ST.LOUIS has an NFL stadium closer to Bloomington
KANSAS CITY has an NFL stadium closer to Bloomington
GREEN BAY has an NFL stadium closer to Bloomington
MINNEAPOLIS has an NFL stadium closer to Bloomington
NASHVILLE has an NFL stadium closer to Bloomington
ATLANTA has an NFL stadium closer to Bloomington
CHARLOTTE has an NFL stadium closer to Bloomington
Yes, even BALTIMORE has an NFL stadium closer to Bloomington (by 4 miles)
That's 15 NFL Stadiums closer to Bloomington IN than FedEx Field in Landover MD.
Thanks to common sense and Google Maps, the preceding facts lead to an obvious question about scheduling this game in Landover MD ...
Why not play the game in Philadelphia?
Fed Ex Field seats many more than Philadelphia stadium and is closer to State College and much of the PSU fan base.
... and FWIW, the Toronto Argonauts and the Hamilton Tiger-Cats also have stadiums closer than Landover MD.
Go for the Grey Cup, eh!? *snap*
Stupid. But it's not like IU is going to win anyways.
It has nothing to do with winning or losing. It's the precedent they could set.
Michigan Wolverines: 874 wins, .740 winning percentage, 42 Big Ten Titles, 11 National Titles, 3 Heisman winners, and 150 consensus All-Americans
I believe M purchased the Northwestern home games twice in the 1980s, 1980 and 1984 as the game was played in Ann Arbor 79-81, and 83 and 84.
then. The series was off in 1973 and 1974. From 1975 (at UM) through 1984 (also at UM), UM was at home 7 times, NU 3 times.
But in 1980 UM played 4 home (NU, MSU, Ill, PU) and 4 away (Minn, IU, Wisc, OSU) conference games, not the 5-3 that you would expect. Same for the previous years 1975-1979. So I don't know how UM had 4 home/2 away games against NU but still have 4H and 4A every year during the same stretch.
But from 1981-1984, UM played 9 conference games each year, but only once (1981) did UM have 4 home games and 5 away; the other 3 times they had 5 home and 4 away. During this stretch, NU played 3 times at UM, once at NU, so UM must have "purchased" one of these games from NU.
But since it was a 5-4 (or 4-5) split for each of the 4 seasons, the effect is not as great as Brian is taking issue with, as PSU now has an effective 5-3 split.
Edit: I was wrong and can't count. In 1979 UM had 5 home conference games and 3 away games.
To level the playing field and to prevent windfalls from arrangements such as this one, why doesn't Indiana just eliminate its football program. Why doesn't Penn State eliminate its basketball program, or rejoin the A10.
Indiana obviously does not care about football and Penn State doesn't care about basketball. Why must we have a system where they're forced to maintain a farce program, but share in the hard earned proceeds from other conference schools? Yes even with the sharing they probably lose money on these sports, but the real victims here are the schools who must share the revenue their teams worked hard to obtain.
1) Penn St won more games than UMich in the Big Ten last year, they also won the NIT. They are a program on the rise. Regardless of attendance or interest from Penn St., of which there is some, and considering the size of campus, it will grow, Penn State's basketball program should not be eliminated.
2) The Big Ten is quite old, academically linked, and loyal.
3) Indiana is a soccer power, traditionally strong in tennis, baseball, and swimming.
They aren't going anywhere in any sport, and they shouldn't.
Will do absolutely nothing. But they'll do it immediately.
That being said, it is what it is.
WTF? Hackles are raised and locked. Ridiculous.
Wanting something to be true does not make it true.
In the late 70s, early 80s Northwestern sold some of its home games to Michigan. M played NU at home 79 through 81 and 83 and 84 before dropping off the schedule for 2 years.
it appears that 1979 was the only game that was sold, resulting in a 5th home Big Ten game. In the other years you cite, Michigan played 4 away games in conference. The benefit of having a fifth conference home game is real. There is no real benefit of playing one of your 4 conference home games against NU (during the late 70's early 80's as NU was possibly the worst college football team in history at that moment in history).
Go Blue!! Viva La Revolucion!!
www.wolverineliberationarmy.com
Play in Ireland once? I suppose playing at third site could be fun or beneficial for the sport, school and players, but selling a game just for money is sort of weak.
On the other hand maybe UM will try to rent out the big house? Oh wait - haven't we had some div III playoff games at the Big House? Maybe not the same... but still...
Notre Dame isn't in a conference, so the whole validity of "keeping a balance in the conference schedule" argument goes out the window with them. So basically, the irish can play where ever they want, because they're an OOC game for every one they play. What IU is doing here is vastly different. Its a conference game.
Brewer, Wolverine
Notre Dame playing in Ireland makes historical sense though -- they long enjoyed massive fan support in the American Irish community from way back in the day, and hell, Irish is their nickname. I mean, if Florida wanted to play a game in Jortsistan, it'd be hard to fault them either.
Oh, that's an equals sign. I thought something had been redacted.
Road Games is another blog
If IU keeps doing things like this they are going to find themselves in last place in the Big 10 year after year....
This is going to hamper the rebuilding project they have been so diligently working on since 1994.
Way to show everyone that you've given up ... completely
Class of '97: 4 Years -- 4 Four-loss seasons
There is no way anyone in the football program at IU would have agreed to this. Build a nice new stadium expansion, then have only three Big Ten home games in 2010?
Crimson Quarry makes the point that, in the last four games in this series, IU's margin of defeat in Happy Valley was 36 points. In Bloomington it was less than 5 points. For Michigan, this essentially guarantees a win for a conference contender. If Penn State finishes a game above Michigan in 2010 because of a victory over Indiana, and thereby gets to a better bowl, bear this in mind.
This is exactly the kind of "selling out" I hate, whether for cash or for success. There is a right way and a wrong way to do things, and this is def. the "wrong way."
One question: could this have any impact on the two teams actual record in 2010? My guess is "no," but I'm not sure. Were a team that actually could conceivably beat PSU in a home game to do this, it would be much worse.
I've drank the koolaid, I'm all in, win or lose, with RR. Even with 6 or 7 straight losses in the Big 10.
Living in DC since 1997 I am surrounded by PSU fans. Redskin fans complain that Fedex is like a steelers home game. It will be way worse for IU. I guess I will don my red cap (oh wait I don't own anything red) and go support IU.
"Experience is the name we give our mistakes" Wilde
seriously.
Obviously this is a patently ridiculous move by IU, but not quite as bad as what Delaware State did. IU just did something that other teams have already done, and took it to a little bit more of an extreme. DSU essentially told their conference to fuck off, that they'd rather sell out for a few hundred thousand bucks than play a conference game and if they have to take an automatic loss, so be it.
Both are saying money is more important than the competition, but IU merely gave up a competitive advantage. DSU flat didn't care what happened to their actual tangible for-real record as long as they got paid for it.
Blogging the once-resurgent Virginia Cavaliers at http://fromoldvirginia.blogspot.com.
And if you can blame PSU for their part in the IU game thing, I guess Michigan should look in the mirror about paying DSU to give their conference the bird.
"Integrity can only get you so far." - My little brother, the State grad.
Agreed. It doesn't give me a warm-fuzzy about the way the admin is handling things. Obviously they had to know about DSU's conference schedule, and they likely cajoled DSU into playing the game anyway. I don't like anything about that game, other than that we'll probably get a win.
Blogging the once-resurgent Virginia Cavaliers at http://fromoldvirginia.blogspot.com.
Someone who is working in the Pittsburgh Pirates' front office must be moonlighting at IU, because both organizations keep making inexplicable decisions that kneecap their teams' chances to succeed.
Wow, as if Penn State's schedule wasn't already as soft as possible. Karma now deems us to beat them in Ann Arbor.
This isn't until 2010. Penn State has a real OOC game starting in 2010, where they play @Alabama.
In 1996, Maryland played its conference home game against Florida State in Miami. They were trounced 48 - 10. Florida State went undefeated that year until losing to National Champion Florida in a rematch of their regular season finale.
that game only drew about 31,000 in Miami. Not sure who ended up losing $$ on it, Maryland, FSU or Pro Player Stadium.
I don't know how PSU could be held blameless in this whole mess. If IU suggested it, they could have turned it down. If PSU suggested, for shame that IU accepted it.
How much money would be in it for IU to have to accept the game out there? I'd have to imagine IU gets to treat it like the home game, and keep the gate, doling out the $400k typical road team haul.
Hopefully the outcry is loud enough for the tin ear of Delaney to respond...
Larry
I'm not a doctor, but I play one on TV
a typical IU home game makes $1 million. They were offered $3 million by FedEx Field.
I recall that game.
Badgers had sucked for years. Then, ironically, in 1993 they became awesome and won the Big 10.
The game in Toyko actually clinched their first Rose Bowl bid and league title in almost three decades.
Nice freaking timing Badgers. I doubt IU will face the same dilemma a year from now.
The Winter Olympics at www.justcoverblog.com
God Bless Your Cotton Pickin' Maize & Blue Hearts
I don't know, have you seen the movie Hoosiers? Anything can happen in Indiana
"I think you are my favorite poster. The polar bear avatar definitely helps." - ShockFX
HONEST EPINION: 2010 comes down to this
1) Beat Purdue
2) Beat Illinois
3) Beat Michigan State
You cant run the Picket Fence with a football.
Besides, Jimmy Chitwood is not walking through that door!
The Winter Olympics at www.justcoverblog.com
God Bless Your Cotton Pickin' Maize & Blue Hearts
"Anthony Thompson is not walking through that door! Antwan Randle-El is not walking through that door! Um, uh, Adewale Ogunleye is not walking through that door! And uh, um... ah fuck it, we've run out of players anyone's heard of."
I cant hear you Brian.
As an IU alum, I am too busy counting greenbacks this morning. We need to pay for a basketball resurrection, after all, so moving a game in a non revenue sport is not that big of a deal. Especially for three mill!
Also: What division of the newly aligned Big 10 will Delaware State play in? Hopefully the Hoosiers.
The Winter Olympics at www.justcoverblog.com
God Bless Your Cotton Pickin' Maize & Blue Hearts
Can I ask you how you think IU fans will react to this? I assume that IU doesn't have the football fan base that Michigan has, but isn't there a group of people who buy tickets and support the team year after year? Wont those fans feel that thay are being pissed on by their own AD?
"Integrity can only get you so far." - My little brother, the State grad.
Wow, this is a very bizarre turn of events. I'm interested to hear Jamiemac's take on this. Anyway, I totally agree that this should not be something that occurs frequently (or even sparingly, for that matter). This is the type of thing that a league commissioner exists for. Squash this type of thing now before it becomes as rampant as scheduling FCS teams.
Also, I wonder what the attendance of an MSU-Wisconsin game in Tokyo could be. Those teams don't have a lot of fans outside of their own states, let alone continents.
"I think you are my favorite poster. The polar bear avatar definitely helps." - ShockFX
HONEST EPINION: 2010 comes down to this
1) Beat Purdue
2) Beat Illinois
3) Beat Michigan State
Such a huge difference between Indiana putting a game in Indianapolis (which is still IU territory, big time) or Northwestern possibly moving a conference game to Wrigley (an easy El ride from campus and no more likely to be loaded with Illinois/Michigan/Wisconsin/etc fans than the games in Evanston already are), and moving one that far away to an area closer to your opponent. Delany has to veto this. Unbelievable.
Oh, and MSU doesn't have protected games against OSU, it's with us, obviously. OSU is off their schedule this year I believe.