Appalachian State and Louisiana State announced they will open the 2008 season with a game in Baton Rouge. While a matchup of defending national champions in I-A and I-AA appears to have a certain sex appeal and everybody and their sister are saying what a great thing this is, we beg to differ.This is another case of a big-time player (LSU) taking advantage of the system and scheduling an automatic victory. Bottom line: Teams from I-A should not be playing I-AA teams. If they do, it should not count.
LSU is not alone. Texas Tech had an opening on the same day (Aug. 30). The Red Raiders went ahead and scheduled dreaded Eastern Washington, another I-AA team. Shame, shame, shame!
And to think we could have opened the season with an Eastern Washington-Appalachian State matchup. Almost as good as Texas Tech-LSU.
15 comments:
Texas Tech wussed out. That is the real story here. LSU offered 1 million for home and home on ESPN. ESPN was even putting up money for the matchup and the Red Raiders backed out giving LSU no choice but to take Appalachian State as their opponent.
do it again Mountaineers!!! (App ST for all you whiners thinking i'm talking bout WVagina!)
To be (somewhat) fair, Texas Tech did have a contract with Tulsa and Tulsa backed out. Which is why Texas Tech had an opening to begin with.
The truth is, when wins and losses are what gives a coach job security and all the money, who can blame any coach for scheduling automatic wins?
Boz,
Yet again your obsession with WVU. We are flattered by your need to bring us up!!!
just to point out, in the Big Ten, if two teams are tied with a rose bowl/bcs birth on the line, one of the tiebreakers is who played the fewest i-aa teams.
i agree this is a total joke.
Why would Tech be willing to schedule LSU if they think they can win a BCS bid this year? A loss to LSU on ESPN doesn't strengthen that effort -
The scheduling issue is a by-product of a broken BCS system - it's not Tech or LSU's fault that scheduling happens like this...
And I want to see a link provided my Mr. "Anonymous" who claims LSU offered a million bucks for a home and home - Tech's side of the story is that LSU would only commit to a LSU home game - and was unwilling to come to Lubbock.
An "automatic victory" you say? Ask Lloyd Carr how that worked out for him last season. If wins against FCS schools should not count for FBS programs, should losing to one count twice?
LSU should beat either team easily, but Appalachian State will give the Tigers a better game than Texas Tech would have anyway.
Thanks for calling that guy out Bond. LSU wanted 1 game in Baton Rouge...not a home and home. AFTER talks broke down, they floated the rumor that they would've return to Lubbock in 2010 or 2011 but that wasn't a part of the talks. Additionaly, anon has no idea what he's talking about. LSU would've played a Saturday night game on CBS and NOT ESPN if was against Tech.
Poor Brian has no idea what he's talking about...but that's ok. He (along with many others) will learn in 2008! :)
Is scheduling a D-1 opponent any more of an advantage than playing in a BCS conference that doesn't have a championship game?
If LSU wins the SEC West again this year, it will very likely have to play a top 10 opponent.
Meanwhile, Ohio State and USC are sitting at home.
Until there are some minimum standards for BCS conferences, they is little reason to criticize anyone's schedule.
Floridan,
Nobody forced the SEC to expand the league and create a championship game. They did that out of their own greed.
The SEC and the Big 12 and others that expanded need to stop using the excuse that they have to play a championship game. Stop the whining.
Stop playing teams like McDermot State and North Baton Rouge City College. Then you can complain about the champ game. Then you can shrink your league back to 10 or 11 teams and stop playing a champ game. You whiners.
What about last year when LSU was playing VaTech while USC and OSU were playing Youngstown and Idaho? No one was giving those teams that much flack, esp USC, bc they are media darlings.
The bottom line here is that LSU UPGRADED their schedule. They were going to play North Texas, but they moved that and now they are playing App State.
I don't think any knowledgeable football fan could say that App State isn't better than North Texas.
In 2005 actually App State held LSU to the fewest points they scored ALL YEAR
From Appfan blog:
"Let’s step into the WayBack Machine and visit the 2005 LSU schedule, which ended at a stellar 11-2. The Tigers won four games by 30 or more points - at Mississippi (33 pts), at Mississippi State (30), vs. North Texas (53) and in a bowl game against no. 17 Miami (37).
Meanwhile, lil ‘ol future 3-time national champion App State only lost to LSU by 24. A shutout yes, but a Tiger offense averaging 33 points a game was limited to 14 in the first half. The other 10 came in the fourth. Noe that LSU scored more points against Georgia, Tennessee and Arizona State - all ranked - than it did against a “shameful” 63-scholarship I-AA App State."
I-AA/FCS teams beat I-A/FBS 15% of the time while in bball, teams from the "mid & low majors" beat the 8 power/money conferences only 10% of the time. What's the difference? People love the underdogs in bball, but make idiotic statements like this blogger's about football.
USC plays Notre Dame every year. Ues, ND sucks now but of course that has not always been so. The other non-conference game is also always against a tough team or BCS team. Nebraska, Colorado, Ohio State next year. Then the third non-conf. team is a lesser team as it should be, such as Idaho.
USC consistently plays one of the toughest schedules in the nation. And they don't schedule 1-AA teams like McWhatever State.
One thing to remember about that 2005 App - LSU game... App pulled their starters out in the 4th quarter. They were olny trailing 10-0 but had a conference game against Furman the next week. That game would likely decide their conf. championship. 14 of LSU's 24 points came against lowly App. States 2nd string...
Post a Comment