Future OOC | Page 2 | The Boneyard

Future OOC

Status
Not open for further replies.
Please don't tell me Boise was 2-1. Do we have another game with them somewhere? Or is your 2018 wrong
 

Attachments

  • image.jpg
    image.jpg
    39.6 KB · Views: 42
I posted this on an OOC scheduling thread when I heard it about a year ago the reaction here was not good. I bring it up again because I heard it again two weeks ago.

Warde and Bates have talked about a 1-2-1 series. 1 @ Gillette (split gate), 1@ Chestnut Hill, 1 @Rent, 1@ Chestnut Hill.

OK, fire away.
 
I posted this on an OOC scheduling thread when I heard it about a year ago the reaction here was not good. I bring it up again because I heard it again two weeks ago.

Warde and Bates have talked about a 1-2-1 series. 1 @ Gillette (split gate), 1@ Chestnut Hill, 1 @Rent, 1@ Chestnut Hill.

OK, fire away.

I'd do it.
 
I posted this on an OOC scheduling thread when I heard it about a year ago the reaction here was not good. I bring it up again because I heard it again two weeks ago.

Warde and Bates have talked about a 1-2-1 series. 1 @ Gillette (split gate), 1@ Chestnut Hill, 1 @Rent, 1@ Chestnut Hill.

OK, fire away.
Well, it's a year later and it hasn't gotten done. I would also do it.
 
.-.
I vote no. It's BC for heaven sakes. Ask yourself would you do that deal with Wake Forest or Illinois? That is a comparable level here. That is basically the deal they gave UMass. We have zero need to play those guys. It would be nice but not worth setting a bad precedent. You do it for them and you will never get another 1-1 with Rutgers Syracuse or anyone.
 
I vote no. It's BC for heaven sakes. Ask yourself would you do that deal with Wake Forest or Illinois? That is a comparable level here. That is basically the deal they gave UMass. We have zero need to play those guys. It would be nice but not worth setting a bad precedent. You do it for them and you will never get another 1-1 with Rutgers Syracuse or anyone.

Don't agree with FS often but that proposed deal is nuts.
 
I vote no. We have zero need to play those guys.....not worth setting a bad precedent.
This reminds me of the hubris some of us were spouting about the ND series. We should have signed that deal. I understand the politicos got into the mix but we should have done it. And I would enthusiastically support this proposed arrangement. For obvious reasons that go far beyond the details of this proposal with BC, our football program needs exposure and a full stadium. Bring on some rivalry hoopla and excitement. Bring on BC. And if we happen to get invited to a P-5 during the duration of the deal there's always a way to renegotiate the venues with our Boston rivals. Just ask Tennessee.
 
This reminds me of the hubris some of us were spouting about the ND series. We should have signed that deal. I understand the politicos got into the mix but we should have done it. And I would enthusiastically support this proposed arrangement. For obvious reasons that go far beyond the details of this proposal with BC, our football program needs exposure and a full stadium. Bring on some rivalry hoopla and excitement. Bring on BC. And if we happen to get invited to a P-5 during the duration of the deal there's always a way to renegotiate the venues with our Boston rivals. Just ask Tennessee.
Our football program will get exposure and excitement if we win games. We have 1-1 series with UVA, IU, ILL, SU, Mizzou. Even BYU and BSU have more prestige than BC. Do NOT set the precedent than schools in the bottom half of the P5 can get 2-1's with us - it will severely hamper future scheduling efforts and diminish us in the conference realignment landscape.
 
.-.
Our football program will get exposure and excitement if we win games. We have 1-1 series with UVA, IU, ILL, SU, Mizzou. Even BYU and BSU have more prestige than BC. Do NOT set the precedent than schools in the bottom half of the P5 can get 2-1's with us - it will severely hamper future scheduling efforts and diminish us in the conference realignment landscape.
BC is NOT Notre Dame. They are a lower rung P5 program. We can and have gotten 1-1 with those teams and should not worry too much if BC won't do that deal. But we should not do 2-1 with them. All you guys willing to sign on for that seem to ignore the fact that so far mid-tier teams WILL come to the Rent. Even some better than mid tier will. It has nothing to do with hubris. It is about protecting the program. If we can get Syracuse UMass Rutgers Army on the schedule eventually we'll get BC too.
 
John Greene said:
I posted this on an OOC scheduling thread when I heard it about a year ago the reaction here was not good. I bring it up again because I heard it again two weeks ago.

Warde and Bates have talked about a 1-2-1 series. 1 @ Gillette (split gate), 1@ Chestnut Hill, 1 @Rent, 1@ Chestnut Hill.

OK, fire away.

Add one more at the Rent and it's a done deal.
 
Add one more at the Rent and it's a done deal.

That's how negotiating works huh? LOL.

I was very concerned about Warde Manuel when he first came on and our schedules were basically empty. Worried me that nothing seemed to be happening for a long time. He doesn't get nearly enough the credit he deserves for putting the schedules together he's been able to assemble - especially given the conference situation hell he stepped into with UCONN, and the completely empty schedules.

He's managed, somehow, to turn what was a very bad situation of negotiating contracts and position of strength or weakness in such engagements, into what is possibly the best realistically it can be, with scheduling. He's combined some lower rungs in the other conferences that we've been able to schedule before (i.e. Indiana opened up Rentschler field game play - we've had Virginia before too, etc.) for home and home, and he's scheduled well with northeast based 1-AA programs with some history, although insiginificant in attendance due to 1-AA classification in the past (URI, Maine - etc - but I remember beating the snot out of a RI team several years ago in Sept in front of a crowd at REntschler that was minimum 6x the attendance of SMU last season. We need to be balanced with landing now - Nonconference Syracuse, etc.

Landing a series that makes sense with both Boston College and University of New Jersey would be huge gets, and would make sense to be on the drawing board.

We got to start winning though, or no one other than the few dozen of us on this message board will care.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Forum statistics

Threads
168,363
Messages
4,567,866
Members
10,471
Latest member
EO2004


Top Bottom