Warrior General Games

Schools don't want to play Boise anymore than Boise wants to play on the road only. Boise needs to man up and take these deals of 2 away, 1 home. It's the only way the money hungry big dogs will do it. So Boise needs to bite the bullet if they want to be considered in title talks. I get it. I'm still butt hurt for them not getting to play a big school in a bowl and having to play another small school like Utah..

Originally posted by kadafitcd
Schools don't want to play Boise anymore than Boise wants to play on the road only. Boise needs to man up and take these deals of 2 away, 1 home. It's the only way the money hungry big dogs will do it. So Boise needs to bite the bullet if they want to be considered in title talks. I get it. I'm still butt hurt for them not getting to play a big school in a bowl and having to play another small school like Utah..
It's fine to wish that they were playing a BCS conference opponent, but again, the BCS didn't pick their opponent. It's also disappointing because Boise State is much, much better than Utah.

yah, I personally agree that it's a terrible match up for Boise as it proves nothing for them. Would have much rather seen them play Alabama or something.

Originally posted by jdbolick

No one will agree to a "home and home" with Boise, but plenty of teams would accept the Broncos coming to play them or at a neutral site.

yeah that sounds fair

Originally posted by misterbing
yeah that sounds fair

Maybe Ohio State should split gate revenue with Boise for a home-home, right? I mean ... the Horseshoe only holds about 70K more than the Smurf Turf. Major universities within the BCS rely on the football program to fund all the other non-revenue sports (read: women's gymnastics and other assorted crap). Playing Boise for lulz doesn't hit the radar of shit to do for an athletic director. Making money is crucial.

right, obviously the only solution is to punish the smaller school

Originally posted by misterbing
right, obviously the only solution is to punish the smaller school

how are they being punished?

please explain

Originally posted by ddingo
Maybe Ohio State should split gate revenue with Boise for a home-home, right? I mean ... the Horseshoe only holds about 70K more than the Smurf Turf. Major universities within the BCS rely on the football program to fund all the other non-revenue sports (read: women's gymnastics and other assorted crap). Playing Boise for lulz doesn't hit the radar of shit to do for an athletic director. Making money is crucial.

as a former women's gymnastics star, i take offense.

Originally posted by misterbing
right, obviously the only solution is to punish the smaller school

The only "punishment" is playing an extra game away. Typically the bigger school pays out well over $1 mil to get the 2 home games. Both schools end up making more cash that way.

Once Boise completes it's stadium expansion to where it has over 50K seats with some of those being luxury suites so they can generate more home game revenue, they will probably get more teams willing to do home & home. The problem is, it's still going to be mostly Pac-10 and Big-12 schools, and when it is teams from other conferences it's not likely to be the power teams with stadiums that hold over 90,000 fans, the tickets cost $70 per game, and good season tickets require a donation to the athletic fund of over $10K/year just to be on the list that gets you a shot at buying them.

i know this may get complicated so i will use emoticons as a visual aid:

boise state compiles a good record on the schedule they have -

boise state gets shit on by the "college football powers that be" because they decree their schedule to be too easy -

boise state wants some respect/credibility in da BCS system -

boise state tries to improve the "strength" of their schedule by reaching out to larger schools -

larger schools won't agree to schedule boise state unless the agreement hilariously favors their side both competitively and financially -

boise state can't "improve" their schedule -

boise state compiles a good record on the schedule they have - THE CIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIRCLE OF LIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIFE

Originally posted by misterbing
i

larger schools won't agree to schedule boise state unless the agreement hilariously favors their side both competitively and financially



Like I said in previous post (which TBF you probably hadn't read yet) the double home game for the larger school typically benefits both programs financially.

it has nothing to do with football

For example why would Ohio State travel to Idaho and take at least a 50% revenue cut?

I could see Boise State setting up a game at a neutral site but there are no decent stadiums anywhere close.

I am pretty sure Ohio State had a home and home set up with TCU with their home game at Dallas stadium but they backed out.

Ohio State plays teams like Miami FL, Texas, USC because those programs generate money.

It's all wrong. No one will play Boise St because quite simply, they are SCARED that a small school from the WAC would whoop their ass.

It's pretty simple really. Not sure why you guys are even talking about it. It's been happening for the past 4 years.

Originally posted by Otega
It's all wrong. No one will play Boise St because quite simply, they are SCARED that a small school from the WAC would whoop their ass.

It's pretty simple really. Not sure why you guys are even talking about it. It's been happening for the past 4 years.

Yeah because College Football has EVERYTHING to do with which team is better coached and more athletic, and absolutely NOTHING to do with money.

Boise State would be exposed playing in a decent conference. I'm not saying the Broncos aren't a good football team, they clearly are, but in any decent conference they'd lose 3+ games a season, minimum.

well, i was going to post about how college football blows, but looks like you guys have it covered.