Big Ten & Pac-12 reach long-term scheduling deal
by JazzyUte on Dec 28, 2011 1:43 PM MST
in Football
Email
PrintTwo of the most storied athletic conferences in college football history have agreed to a partnership that could radically change college athletics as we know it.
While details aren't clear yet, this move helps grow each conference without the difficulty of true expansion. The partnership will allow both conferences to be run independently, while also influencing the overall scheduling process in the future.
It means that it's possible Urban Meyer and his Ohio State Buckeyes take on Kyle Whittingham's Utah Utes.
It also means Utah's out of conference schedule could dramatically change in the coming years - influencing games with Utah State and, of course, BYU.
We'll know the extent of those changes when further details are released.
56 comments
|
0 recs |
Do you like this story?
Comments
One more benefit from being in the Pac-12!!!
Playing Big 10 schools on a yearly basis. SWEET!!!! Whatever the sport.
Oh and can you say ‘Ta-Ta, TDS. We can’t fit you in this year, we’re up against Michigan.’
The thought of this kind of competition coming to RES on a regular basis is just too cool.
What is best in life? To crush your enemies, see them driven before you, and to hear the lamentation of their women. - Conan the Barbarian
See, I don't think we need to get rid of the BYU game...
For your OOC-schedule I believe the general rule is to have one cupcake, one medium-tier team and one marquee opponent. Whomever we get from the B1G will be our marquee game (except when we draw Indiana or something), the TDS is our medium-tiered team, and USU can be our cupcake. However, the Aggies might not be at cupcake-level status for long (I guess you could make the argument they aren’t cupcakes already what with making a bowl and everything). I guess then you could have two middle-tier OOC opponents and the annual marquee match-up against somebody from the B1G. I don’t know, I just like the idea of playing both of the in-state FBS schools on an annual or semi-annual basis. Regardless, I am really looking forward to playing teams like Wisconsin or Ohio St. every year.
I don't think we'll ever get rid of BYU...
I just don’t think we’ll see them on the schedule every single year.
But I agree, I am excited to see what the schedules can come up with!
I've gotten the impression
That teams will ramp up their B1G scheduling as much as they can, gradually building to a full 12-team slate in 2017. I wouldn’t be surprised at all if we filled one of our open slots next year with a B1G team.
by Joseph Silverzweig on Dec 28, 2011 2:51 PM MST up reply actions
I'm sure that's what will happen. I wonder what'll happen with Utah-Wisconsin...
Wisconsin has had a rule that they won’t schedule teams with Indian mascots. Obviously that is void in bowl games and conference games (Illinois, cough), but it’s a rule that has, theoretically, anyway, kept them from ever playing Utah (well since the rule was established, as the teams did play in the 80s.
I know Wisconsin doesn’t play the Sioux anymore because they have an Indian mascot and they won’t schedule non-conference games against those teams.
Hopefully...
they waive that, taking into account this is effectively a conference scheduled game, if not an actual “conference game.”
Part of the appeal of this is “everyone playing everyone,” I wouldn’t want to see certain teams make exceptions. Because if Wisconsin misses Utah for what amounts to political reasons, why couldn’t Ohio State miss Utah for political reasons. Why couldn’t Ohio State decide to miss everyone except USC, UCLA, Washington and Oregon for “political reasons?”
OMG NOOOO!!!!!
Not that Red Hawks is bad, but I rout for the UTES!!!!!
As long as the Ute Tribe is ok with it. Nuts to changing.
What is best in life? To crush your enemies, see them driven before you, and to hear the lamentation of their women. - Conan the Barbarian
They pull that one and we should reciprocate ...
I think that we should not play teams that disparage Mustelidae (otters, weasels, badgers). Those poor animals have been subject to scorn and persecution over the years.
"It's a damn poor mind that can only think of one way to spell a word" - Andrew Jackson
Gophers fan here...
Minnesota has the same rule. That said, I would expect this to be a non-issue given that it is a conference wide thing and the support the Ute tribe has for the school. Otherwise you’re already running into a problem with 1/6 of the B1G teams (possibly more, wouldn’t be surprised if other schools had the same rule in the B1G).
In the meantime, I can’t wait until this gets going. Utah has been on my list of places I want the Gophers to play.
Utah is exempt
If you dig down a bit, the Utes are exempt from the policy since the Ute Tribe has endorsed the use of the name and logo. http://www.lssaa.wisc.edu/aisas/policy07.html. Further, it also seems that the Utes would be exempt if the conference is scheduling the game as part of a conference agreement.
by Ute in the Lou on Dec 28, 2011 3:21 PM MST up reply actions
No big deal.
Interestingly enough, I happened to be in the natural history museum of the Smithsoneum recently and there was a display about American Indians and the use of tribe names as sports mascots. I paid particular attention because a beer koozie with a Utah drum and feather logo was prominently displayed. However, there was no mention of the fact that it has been endorsed by the Ute tribe.
by Ute in the Lou on Dec 28, 2011 3:26 PM MST up reply actions
The full slate begins in 2017
Other games may begin sooner. 2017 was probably the first date they could guarantee everyone having an open non-conference slot to fit a game in.
From the latest Ted Miller blog post on ESPN.com:
Things won’t really get rolling with a full schedule between the conferences until 2017 because many teams have already done significant future nonconference scheduling. But you could notice an uptick in the number of Big Ten and Pac-12 football games as soon as 2013.
This gives me hope we can drop TDS all the sooner.
Or at least set them up in a rotation with Utah State. And I think we need a 2 for 1 from them now that we are really big time.
What is best in life? To crush your enemies, see them driven before you, and to hear the lamentation of their women. - Conan the Barbarian
no 2 for 1s with BYU and no dropping.
I hate the TDS as much as anyone but that’s just asinine. they are our rivals not some little program to disrespect and look down our noses at until we’ve beaten them during the season. I don’t want to see this rivalry ruined in such a way.
by khaostheory117 on Dec 28, 2011 7:27 PM MST up reply actions 1 recs
Well said.
Anyone who says “drop TDS” obviously didn’t live through decades of getting beat down by them. An opportunity to beat BYU every year is a great treat. I, for one, would hate to see it go. (It’s hard enough seeing the game played outside of the month of Nov.)
That is a compelling reason to keep them on the schedule
A nice long series of games like this year or ’08 or ’04 does make keeping them around as a kind of warm up game seem more attractive.
But aren’t you just enjoying the anguish that some of the more whiny Y fans are going through at the though of Big 10 teams in Rice-Eccles? And regardless of who we start with, even Indiana is 100x the program that most if TDS’s schedule consists of.
What is best in life? To crush your enemies, see them driven before you, and to hear the lamentation of their women. Especially BYU. - Conan the Barbarian (ok, maybe he didn't say the BYU part)
As a midwest transplant...
I couldn’t be happier about this. More marque matchups, and I might even get to catch a game in person every once in a while.
I would love...
To watch my Utes take on Hawkeyes at Kinnick Stadium! This is an awesome deal.
by notblue19 on Dec 28, 2011 3:47 PM MST via mobile reply actions
The real benefit will be
Big 10 teams visiting Salt Lake City, Corvallis, Pullman, Eugene, and Tucson. Places that have been very hard to lure those teams into.
Andy Wooldridge, andy_wooldridge@yahoo.com
BuildingTheDam.Com
Go Beavs!
Will be a big boon
For the national championship race. An undefeated or 1-loss team from either conference will have a much improved resume.
by Joseph Silverzweig on Dec 28, 2011 5:14 PM MST up reply actions
I wonder if they are gong to spread these games out throughout the season...
Or if they will play them all on the same weekend in some “Epic Conference Showdown!” I’m actually not sure which scenario I would prefer.
Also, Notre Dame must be freaking out since a lot the mainstays on their schedule (Michigan-Sparty-USC-Stanford) now have one more OOC game spoken for and might be less willing to schedule the Domers (well, I doubt SC would drop them, but you never know…)
I expect they will have to be sprinkled through September,
given other scheduling challenges that won’t be anywhere near equal across 24 different schools.
I do expect a push to capture, for example, Labor Day weekend, with at least several big games.
Andy Wooldridge, andy_wooldridge@yahoo.com
BuildingTheDam.Com
Go Beavs!
Don't forget Purdue
Notre Dame has five regular games against Pac-12 and Big 10 schools.
But, according to the Delaney conversation with the ESPN Big 10 blogger, the Big 10 is going to stick with their 8 game conference schedule, meaning that they’d still have four non-conference games. Michigan, Sparty and Purdue should all be able to easily keep their Notre Dame game. Not so sure about USC & Stanford, as that would drop them to 1 open game a year, but I doubt they’d drop them, that game is a ratings and cash cow for both those schools.
Yes, that makes sense...
But it’s just that every now and then I see Meecheegan commenters say that they don’t need to play ND every year. Why they would think that is beyond me, but there are also a lot of Utes who seem all too ready to jettison the TDS rivalry.
Never stop playing a team
If it sells out a stadium. Why drop TDS? I love that game. Everyone loves that game. Even the national media is beginning to love that game.
by Joseph Silverzweig on Dec 28, 2011 5:16 PM MST up reply actions
I'm honestly disgusted by all the people who want to jettison the TDS rivalry
its part of why I’m a Ute fan, there is nothing that compares to the feeling of playing the zoobs. I never want to lose that, I never want anything to change it.
by khaostheory117 on Dec 28, 2011 7:30 PM MST up reply actions
No one cares any more
TDS is not in the same league, figuratively or literally. In a short period of time, they will benefit more from the game than Utah will, meaning they will benefit from a win over Utah. The Pac-12 is the future, TDS is the past.
Go Cuse. Go Utes. Go Kings (hockey version). Go Panthers (hockey version). Go Marlins. Go Dodgers. I despise the NFL and NBA, so don't bore me.
by LeftCoastMan on Dec 28, 2011 7:41 PM MST up reply actions
I care...
But I think you’re detached from the rivalry because you don’t live in Utah. Locally, it’s still a big deal. Fans get into it. It certainly is one of the more active periods of the year on my blog.
Unless BYU goes the way of Utah State (read: not competitive), I don’t foresee how the rivalry can die. It might be scaled back, with games coming every other year, or every other year, but when you’ve got two good teams only 40 miles apart, it’s hard to not have them play at least a few times every decade.
Florida State and Florida used to avoid Miami
Tradition sucks. The future is the only thing that matters.
Go Cuse. Go Utes. Go Kings (hockey version). Go Panthers (hockey version). Go Marlins. Go Dodgers. I despise the NFL and NBA, so don't bore me.
by LeftCoastMan on Dec 28, 2011 7:53 PM MST up reply actions
dude you make me sick. tradition is everything in college sports.
no fan should ever spew that vile that you just unleashed from your mind. its that attitude that will destroy college sports.
by khaostheory117 on Dec 28, 2011 8:29 PM MST up reply actions
Florida still avoids Miami
They’ve only played four times in the past 20 years or so, and two of those matchups were in years they didn’t play in the regular season but ended up drawing each other in the Sugar Bowl (‘01) and the Peach Bowl (’04).
In fact, the Florida Cup can’t be given out unless FSU wins against both teams or 2013, when there’s the next scheduled UM-UF regular season game.
** Rule of Tree ** Pounding the Rock ** Battle of Cali ** Fear the Fin ** Athletics Nation ** Niners Nation **
That's the problem, though...
Florida already plays an established and successful instate rival from a different conference yearly. Miami would be Utah State in this scenario, though a much more successful version of the Aggies here.
If Utah drops BYU and picks up a series with USU instead (who the Utes haven’t lost to since ’97 and only twice since ’88), it would be pretty chickenshit on their part – to put it bluntly.
It’d be like Florida dropping FSU and picking up FIU as their rival.
ESPN reports Scott as saying...
They’d be played out over three or four weeks (presumably in Sept). I think it would be great fun to have them played on the same weekend – although that won’t happen for television reasons. Too many good match ups hitting at the same time.
"It's a damn poor mind that can only think of one way to spell a word" - Andrew Jackson
Weeks 2,3,4 most likely per ESPN
Opening week is a possibility for individual games but it seems like that’s not what they’re going for. Neither the Pac nor the B1G like to have mid-season OOC games, so that seems unlikely unless there’s some weird scheduling problems.
Science is the belief in the ignorance of experts. - R. Feynman
That's interesting
If Scott maintains his rule of only playing non-conference games during the first three weeks (games) of the season, then its entirely possible that some teams will have their bye week in early September and then forced to play 9, 10, or 11 games in a row without a break.
** Rule of Tree ** Pounding the Rock ** Battle of Cali ** Fear the Fin ** Athletics Nation ** Niners Nation **
Academics too
Setting aside great football (and hopefully, one day, in the future, great basketball), remember, almost every institution in the Big Ten and Pac-12 are elite universities. Whatever the reason, I love that Utah will be discussed in the same breath as Michigan or Northwestern.
Utah has moved up to the elite both athletically and academically. This will have returns over long-run. More money coming to the school in everything from t-shirts to endowments. It means not only elite athletes coming to the school, but more enrollment from top flight students at both the undergraduate and graduate levels.
This makes me giddy.
I wonder how the insignificant little university in Happy Valley feels about this? Oh, wait, it’s a non-research university with a laughingstock science studies who is “independent.”
Go Cuse. Go Utes. Go Kings (hockey version). Go Panthers (hockey version). Go Marlins. Go Dodgers. I despise the NFL and NBA, so don't bore me.
It's funny for someone who supposedly doesn't care about TDS...
.. And thinks they are in the past, you sure seem to feel the need to take shots at them. Especially on a topic that they weren’t involved in with this post.
And it’s that exact same mentality that proves, people do care, and this is still a rivalry.
I wish the SEC would do something like this.
It’s a really cool idea. However, we would get paired with the ACC and that would suck. I’d like to play a difference conference more.
by Bisquick_in_da_MGM on Dec 29, 2011 8:30 AM MST reply actions
See, I used to think that the rivalry was what made me a Ute fan.
Then I decided that I wanted to be a fan of the Utes. My reason for that should have nothing to do with the tds. I would still be a Ute fan if the tds didn’t exist and still love Utah just as much. Sure, the rivalry is great, but I’m a Ute fan because I love Utah, not because I hate the tds. So if the rivalry died, that would be a bummer, but I would get over it. Why should we feel that we need to bring by-who along with us in where Utah is heading? Last I checked, we’re UTE fans. Not just rivalry fans.
by Oregon Ute on Dec 29, 2011 9:45 AM MST via Android app reply actions
You make an interesting point...
However, let’s look at how fans of other teams identify themselves. Are Michigan fans really just solely fans of Michigan or is there also some part of them that exists to hate the “Suckeyes.” How about an Alabama fan? Does s/he only love the Crimson Tide, or is there also a slice of that Bama fan’s soul devoted to despising the “Barners?” There’s an old t-shirt that reads “My two favorite teams are the Utes and whoever is playing BYU.” That still mostly holds true for me because my fanaticism for the Utes is a yin-yang thing. First and foremost is my love of my alma mater, but then there’s that tiny little dot in the middle which is an unbridled, burning dislike of the Zoobs. Those two emotions are inextricably linked. So while we may pull away from the TDS academically, athletically, etc. I will always enjoy watching my team stomp the fuck out of their team on the field as often as possible.
by kadoogan on Dec 29, 2011 10:18 AM MST up reply actions 2 recs
And I second that last emotion.
What is best in life? To crush your enemies, see them driven before you, and to hear the lamentation of their women. Especially BYU. - Conan the Barbarian (ok, maybe he didn't say the BYU part)
Sure
If the Cougars stop scheduling games with us, we’ll still be Ute fans. However, like you said, it would be a bummer if we stopped playing them. So why should we stop playing them?
The rivalry doesn’t make me a Ute fan, but it’s a game that I look forward to every year, regardless of how good or bad our team is. It’s a chance to redeem a lost season or put the button on top of a great one. It sells out the stadium, gets national press, and will be on national TV a lot more with the new BYU/ESPN deal.
I get why we would talk about not needing BYU. It’s fun to be the undisputed ‘big brother’ in the state. That said, the rivalry as it exists today is good for Utah, and gets better for Utah the larger the gap between the two teams grows. I can’t see any reason for wanting to drop them than spite.
by Joseph Silverzweig on Dec 29, 2011 10:27 AM MST up reply actions
Having an instate rival is the best
It really is great to have a natural instate rival.Auburn vs. Alabama, Flordia vs. FSU, Georgia vs. Ga. Tech and Clemson vs. S.C. are fun games in those states. Also, it’s more fun when you beat your instate rival alot. What makes it so great is that your co-workers, good friends, or family memebers might be for the other team. It’s not the same when your rival is from another state. That’s just plain hate. I would find a place for them and enjoy beating the all the time.
by Bisquick_in_da_MGM on Dec 29, 2011 11:14 AM MST up reply actions 1 recs
My concern is the following
Let’s say there are no pac12-big10 football games until the 2017 season. If we play a new team every year, we may not see the likes of Michigan and Ohio State for another 8-12 years after. Why? They will schedule the “sexiest” matchups at the beginning for ratings, interest etc. All the pac-12 schools will want to play the OSU, Michigan, Nebraska, etc. And programs like Oregon, USC, UCLA, Washington will get first dibs. I imagine the first year looking something like this:
Oregon-OSU
Oregon St-Purdue
USC-Michigan
UCLA- Wisconsin
ASU-MSU
AZ- Northwestern
Washington- Penn St
Wazzu- Minnesota
Stanford- Nebraska
Cal- Iowa
Colorado-Illinois
Utah- Indiana
Essentially due to our national appeal ‘which in relation to other Pac12 schools is small’, I would expect us to matched against the likes of IU, NW, and Minnesota for the first few years, unless some equitable rotation were set up.
Thats why it is so important for the Utes to be very competitve in the conference these next 5 years so that we do become a sexy matchup.
by PanchoUte on Dec 29, 2011 1:48 PM MST via mobile reply actions
It wouldn't be a new team every year.
It’s supposed to be a series of Home-Home-Neutral games. So it’ll be a setup of a series of three.
I believe it was said that how they determine the matchups will be based on teams' performances in previous years
So if we’re playing at a really high level when they put these matchups together we’ll get matched up against a big 10 team playing at a high level
by khaostheory117 on Dec 29, 2011 5:31 PM MST up reply actions
Here's the quote that makes me think that. specifically the part where it says competitive equity
“We haven’t involved television and I don’t expect we would,” Delany said. “We may ask an opinion, but like the ACC-Big Ten Challenge, television is integral to putting that together. … Most importantly, it will be home-away-neutral, and I think there will be movement of games and opponents. But the notion of competitive equity would probably be the No. 1 aspect.”
by khaostheory117 on Dec 29, 2011 5:45 PM MST up reply actions
Thanks for the correction
So it looks like we would see Indiana or similar for the first 5-6 years, and not see Ohio State or similar in 10 Plus years in a worst-case scenario.
Comments For This Post Are Closed
Secondary Sidebar
User Tools
- Urban Meyer
"Wow. Wow. Wow."
- Daryl Johnston after Utah took a 21-0 lead on Alabama in the 2009 Sugar Bowl
Related FanPosts on Block U
Related FanShots on Block U
FanPosts
Community blog posts and discussion.
