Pitt: We Will No Longer Do Home & Home With G5 Schools

[zls44]

http://sports.yahoo.com/blogs/ncaaf...d-games-at-non-power-5-schools-185528391.html

“We will not continue to play home-and-home with Group of Five schools,” Barnes said on The Fan Morning Show via CBS Pittsburgh. “We will play them at our place as part of our scheduling plan. We will not play home-and-home.”

The stance means the Panthers will likely be disposing of a road trip to Marshall in 2020 and a game against Cincinnati in 2024. But hey, who knows about the Cincinnati game. Maybe the Bearcats will be in a Power Five conference by then. Or maybe we won't even have the Power Five and Group of Five designations for college conferences at that point.

 

[pj]

In other words, "we want to fill out our non-conference schedule with FCS schools."

 

[BoatShow]

Probably tired of losing to them

 

[Ha Who]

Pitt will still not be it

 

[Fishy]

Here's how that works....

If you're a G5 school, do not take Pitt's phone calls.

Good luck scheduling, kids.

 

[Rocktheworld]

Am I the only one who finds it odd that schools are scheduling games NINE years in advance?

 

[Dooley]

I can't see many G5 schools all too excited to go play at Pitt either. I guess their schedule will be filled with FCS and the true bottom feeders of the Sun Belt/CUSA. That won't help their already sagging ticket sales.

 

[Point6]

I totally get it. What respectable member of a P5 conference would schedule a home and home series with an inherently inferior team from the unwashed G5? P5 members are better than that. Geez, its not like P5 members were just handed their elite status. Membership had to be negotiated.

 

[Da_Aisijimo_Gou]

Am I the only one who finds it odd that schools are scheduling games NINE years in advance?

Perhaps it's odd to some, but it's not unusual.

 

[The Viking]

Don't they mean Group of 4? Cuz we're in the Power 6.

Bad math by Pitt.

 

[TRest]

Pitt was one of the old BE teams I could never give a crap about when they came to town.

 

[Waquoit]

Who the hell is Pitt?

 

[DarthGrumpy]

Well, only having to play ACC teams going forward should help improve Pitt's record going forward.

 

[nelsonmuntz]

Here's how that works....

If you're a G5 school, do not take Pitt's phone calls.

Good luck scheduling, kids.

Pitt is going to pay a fortune to buy home games. Most P5 conferences have either forbid FCS games of strongly frown on them because of the damage they do to a conference Strength of Schedule. Given Pitt's attendance, I am surprised they are doing this. I am also surprised that Pitt would announce this. Good luck negotiating guarantee game fees when they have announced there are certain games they won't play.

 

[pj]

Well, only having to play ACC teams going forward should help improve Pitt's record going forward.

I wonder if ESPN has told the ACC that they need more home games if they are to get a network. ESPN owns their out of conference as well as in-conference home games and if they go from 6 to 7 or 8 home games per year, ESPN's inventory of ACC games rises 17% to 33%.

If a school like Pitt has to spend $4 mn a year to buy 2 extra home games, it basically transforms an overpaid ACC (getting $17 mn a year from ESPN for 6 football games per school, almost $3 mn per football game) to a fairly paid ACC (getting $13 mn per year after guarantee game payouts in exchange for giving ESPN 8 games per year, $1.6 mn per football game.)

If an ACCN is conditional on this, and teams like Pitt can't schedule guarantee games, then it may just be the case that a network is out of reach.

If the strategy does work, then we'll see a pattern of G5 playing road guarantee games with the P5 and getting home games back through guarantee games with lower-level G5s and FCS schools. Which would suck for G5 home attendance and TV rights values.

 

[DarthGrumpy]

I wonder if ESPN has told the ACC that they need more home games if they are to get a network. ESPN owns their out of conference as well as in-conference home games and if they go from 6 to 7 or 8 home games per year, ESPN's inventory of ACC games rises 17% to 33%.

If a school like Pitt has to spend $4 mn a year to buy 2 extra home games, it basically transforms an overpaid ACC (getting $17 mn a year from ESPN for 6 football games per school, almost $3 mn per football game) to a fairly paid ACC (getting $13 mn per year after guarantee game payouts in exchange for giving ESPN 8 games per year, $1.6 mn per football game.)

If an ACCN is conditional on this, and teams like Pitt can't schedule guarantee games, then it may just be the case that a network is out of reach.

If the strategy does work, then we'll see a pattern of G5 playing road guarantee games with the P5 and getting home games back through guarantee games with lower-level G5s and FCS schools. Which would suck for G5 home attendance and TV rights values.

And such an agreement shows the difference between the ACC and the B1G and could be used as a lure to move one of the two ACC VA teams to the B1G.

 

[uconnell]

Pitt was one of the old BE teams I could never give a crap about when they came to town.

Lol. So true. Both men and women's teams.

 

[uconnell]

Another thought, my son reminded me that the most drunks thrown out of the Rent were Pitt fans. I think they hold the record. Rutgers was second if the cops/security could catch them.

 

[DudeOfCT]

Pitt is going to pay a fortune to buy home games. Most P5 conferences have either forbid FCS games of strongly frown on them because of the damage they do to a conference Strength of Schedule. Given Pitt's attendance, I am surprised they are doing this. I am also surprised that Pitt would announce this. Good luck negotiating guarantee game fees when they have announced there are certain games they won't play.

Maybe they think they will be treated like a G5 team when it comes to playoff consideration and they need to play up, rather than down.

 

[Drew]

I wonder if ESPN has told the ACC that they need more home games if they are to get a network. ESPN owns their out of conference as well as in-conference home games and if they go from 6 to 7 or 8 home games per year, ESPN's inventory of ACC games rises 17% to 33%.

If a school like Pitt has to spend $4 mn a year to buy 2 extra home games, it basically transforms an overpaid ACC (getting $17 mn a year from ESPN for 6 football games per school, almost $3 mn per football game) to a fairly paid ACC (getting $13 mn per year after guarantee game payouts in exchange for giving ESPN 8 games per year, $1.6 mn per football game.)

If an ACCN is conditional on this, and teams like Pitt can't schedule guarantee games, then it may just be the case that a network is out of reach.

If the strategy does work, then we'll see a pattern of G5 playing road guarantee games with the P5 and getting home games back through guarantee games with lower-level G5s and FCS schools. Which would suck for G5 home attendance and TV rights values.

This is why the B1G went 9 game conference schedule. Better matchups/inventory for B1G Network

 

[Sea Goat]

the unaccomplished bastards!

 

[Kolumbo]

I actually think it may not be that difficult for Pitt to find some takers. You got your Toledos and Temples who would be more than ecstatic to grab a P5 road win. They would have to be late schedule adds though so these G5 teams can strike while they are hot.

 

[noeynox]

I actually think it may not be that difficult for Pitt to find some takers. You got your Toledos and Temples who would be more than ecstatic to grab a P5 road win. They would have to be late schedule adds though so these G5 teams can strike while they are hot.

I doubt AAC Schools would agree to this unless it is an Alabama or Ohio State program. Pitt? Yeah right. That sounds like an excuse to not give Temple a home game.

 

[Chin Diesel]

Pitt is going to pay a fortune to buy home games. Most P5 conferences have either forbid FCS games of strongly frown on them because of the damage they do to a conference Strength of Schedule. Given Pitt's attendance, I am surprised they are doing this. I am also surprised that Pitt would announce this. Good luck negotiating guarantee game fees when they have announced there are certain games they won't play.

I tend to agree about giving up that negotiating power. Every school knows Pitt has severely restricted the list of OOC opponents based on that strategy.

 

[Kolumbo]

I doubt AAC Schools would agree to this unless it is an Alabama or Ohio State program. Pitt? Yeah right. That sounds like an excuse to not give Temple a home game.

True. Maybe MAC members would see it as a nice recruiting trip.

 

[gioff23]

Anyone here looking to schedule home-and-home's w/MAC, CUSA types? I am all in on BYU, Boise, Army and a few others, but let's be honest, who of us wants to see a return of the home-and-homes with Buffalo or Ohio or WMU? I hate Pitt because they have our seat in the ACC (not Ville), but do you blame them for saying we ain't going to Bowling Green or Old Dominion to play games?

 

[itgoeslike]

Pitt was one of the old BE teams I could never give a crap about when they came to town.

Clearly many PITT alum feel the same way about PITT. . .

There are currently (4) G5 teams ranked ahead of a PITT team that is considerably better than any team they've fielded for quite awhile. On Saturday, they were a field goal away from having a few more G5 teams move ahead of them. History tells us that they will eventually choke. Since 1937 PITT has 1 won National Championship, in all sports, both men and women. No wonder they feel like they are elite.

 

[NYUConn]

I doubt AAC Schools would agree to this unless it is an Alabama or Ohio State program. Pitt? Yeah right. That sounds like an excuse to not give Temple a home game.

Why would Temple schedule down?

 

[nelsonmuntz]

True. Maybe MAC members would see it as a nice recruiting trip.

MAC members are looking for the highest bidder, and Pitt isn't it. I have no idea who Pitt thinks will play them for less than $2MM a game.

 

[hexlub]

They have a right. I mean they've won like 75 fake national titles, right?