Any hope of a regular season game with Utah?

[montana_cat]

I have great respect for that program and its fans They do things the right way as opposed to the football factories.

Couldn’t we set up a two-game matchup in the future? A game in Evanston and one in Salt Lake City.

I have some bias in this, what with family in Salt Lake City and our home in Billings. I can almost guarantee my wife and I will drive our motor home to SLC for the game there should it materialize.

 

[zeek55]

It's a possibility in the future to "re-live this duo of bowl matchups".

In the near future, probably not given we're still very much focused on just playing our academic counterparts as the major non-conference tilt, especially with schedules getting more difficult in the Big Ten starting next year.

Not anything imminent but I could see it eventually.

 

[Purple Pile Driver]

I have great respect for that program and its fans They do things the right way as opposed to the football factories.

Couldn’t we set up a two-game matchup in the future? A game in Evanston and one in Salt Lake City.

I have some bias in this, what with family in Salt Lake City and our home in Billings. I can almost guarantee my wife and I will drive our motor home to SLC for the game there should it materialize.

Honest question, what is the major difference in their approach than the football factories? Didn’t the entire team receive a pick up tuck in a NIL deal this year? How is their APR? I seem to recall a death of a player ( can’t remember why) and some other legal issues.

 

[Sheffielder]

We have two decisive wins over them in the past five years. We have absolutely nothing to gain by replaying this team in the next decade. Would much rather get back to booking regular series vs. academic peers like Standford, Vandy...could add Tulane and Rice to that...significant recruiting benefits in great destination cities.

 

[zeek55]

We have two decisive wins over them in the past five years. We have absolutely nothing to gain by replaying this team in the next decade. Would much rather get back to booking regular series vs. academic peers like Standford, Vandy...could add Tulane and Rice to that...significant recruiting benefits in great destination cities.

That's pretty much the scheduling philosphy for sure: academic institutions in big markets where we want to play; Rice and Duke are great examples, Stanford and Tulane as well.

And I agree, we just got 2 quality wins off of them in bowl games, no real reason to play them again in the short term.

As a 20 or 25 year anniversary of the games? In 2038 or 2043? Sure, fine schedule a pair of games, but I agree, we won both and we don't need a trilogy game in the near term.

 

[its_the_sauce]

I'm still wet from our last regular season game with them.

 

[gocatsgo2003]

I have great respect for that program and its fans They do things the right way as opposed to the football factories.

Couldn’t we set up a two-game matchup in the future? A game in Evanston and one in Salt Lake City.

I have some bias in this, what with family in Salt Lake City and our home in Billings. I can almost guarantee my wife and I will drive our motor home to SLC for the game there should it materialize.

Why would we want to do that?

Unless you’re a national championship contender trying to up your strength of schedule/”good wins,” the primary goal in non-conference scheduling should be as many likely wins as possible.

 

[NJCat]

Why would we want to do that?

Unless you’re a national championship contender trying to up your strength of schedule/”good wins,” the primary goal in non-conference scheduling should be as many likely wins as possible.

I guess the AD didn't get that memo. Scheduling South Dakota State University to open the new Ryan Field in 2026 is not by any means a "likely win".......

 

[gocatsgo2003]

I guess the AD didn't get that memo. Scheduling South Dakota State University to open the new Ryan Field in 2026 is not by any means a "likely win".......

I agree. That’s terrible scheduling. If we are going to schedule FCS, then it should be (I) a team within easy driving distance and (II) a likely win.

 

[FeralFelidae]

I wouldn't mind a series with BYU.

 

[wicker]

I wouldn't mind a series with BYU.

You can play them twice in the same day

 

[BosCat]

booking regular series vs. academic peers like Standford, Vandy...

And may I objectively/no bias at all add BC

BTW -- too early to plan for NO meet up in 2025?

 

[Sheffielder]

And may I objectively/no bias at all add BC

BTW -- too early to plan for NO meet up in 2025?

totally agree on BC...for us to have regular season home/homes taking us to Bay Area, Nashville, Boston, New Orleans every September...love it.

 

[montana_cat]

OK. You big city guys in Chicago and on either coast win. Despite all the rich folks moving to Montana (thanks in part to that bleepin' piece of BS on TV called "Yellowstone"; that AIN'T the real Montana this native has known for 70-plus years), plane fare out of here is damned expensive. Except if you fly out of Bozeman, which even locals say is (pick a number, mine is 40) miles from Montana.

Great to play our academic peers but I'd like a little Rocky Mountain rivalry thrown in, too. The Arizona schools, Air Force, BYU and Utah. I give ...

 

[phatcat]

Unpopular opinion, like most of what I say on here. I'm in favor of an 11 or 12 game conference schedule. I am entirely sick of playing meaningless games against Puke and Miami Hydroxide. Do you know we've played Puke more than Penn State? Ridiculous.

 

[montana_cat]

With you on Puke/Duke. I respect them in hoops but can’t say the same in football.

 

[zeek55]

Unpopular opinion, like most of what I say on here. I'm in favor of an 11 or 12 game conference schedule. I am entirely sick of playing meaningless games against Puke and Miami Hydroxide. Do you know we've played Puke more than Penn State? Ridiculous.

Given our new conference mates, I think having 2 "gimmes" (yes I know they've been anything but in recent past) and a "winnable" (yes I know we've lost to Duke 5 straight times) academic opponent *should* be a recipe for success with us taking 2 or 3 wins in most years out of those 3 games and then just needing 3 more for bowl eligibility.

It's somewhat ironic that we've had some of our best seasons with baffling/maddening losses (especially in hindsight) all the way back to Barnett. We've put together 8-10 win seasons despite some "dropped" wins.

It's just one of those things where the culture works in improving after losses and we've faced some of these teams at the worst possible times in terms of injury returns; hopefully Braun can put an end to that and just take these easy wins because realistically we're going to see some of the toughest schedules we've seen in a long time now that the Big Ten West is gone.

We still need to hope that our down years are closer to 6 wins than 0-3 in the future so it makes it easier to spring back up to challenge for 8-10 wins and keep fans in the seats and recruiting stable.

Especially with salary/payments for players out of conference revenue coming up; the Big Ten is going to become a professionalized league where a half the league are football factories with huge budgets for paying players and the other half are going to still have bigger fanbases than us (hopefully boosters can neutralize the financial impact once the stadium is finished).

 

[FanatiCat]

Whittingham probably wants nothing to do with scheduling NU at any point in the future.

 

[montana_cat]

Honest question, what is the major difference in their approach than the football factories? Didn’t the entire team receive a pick up tuck in a NIL deal this year? How is their APR? I seem to recall a death of a player ( can’t remember why) and some other legal issues.

Missed that. Here's the story:

https://kslsports.com/505679/utah-football-receives-2024-ram-trucks-in-nil-deal/

 

[montana_cat]

And how will NU respond to this and similar NIL deals in the Big Ten while retaining its integrity?

 

[zeek55]

And how will NU respond to this and similar NIL deals in the Big Ten while retaining its integrity?

Well we'll have $80-100 million conference distributions of which a significant chunk will go to players.

At some point, I'd imagine our donors will feel comfortable matching the chunk going to players and amplifying it; it'll be school sponsored so that may remove any issue that donors have trusting middle men.

We're fortunate to be in a Power 2 conference; have to use that financial edge to make a difference when courts or the NCAA mandates that a portion of the budget has to go to players.

Let's just say it's 30% of conference distributions, well then we start with $25-30 million per year for players; take a school like Duke or Wake Forest and they'd be starting with a half that.

We have to make that huge financial edge count.

 

[Sheffielder]

Well we'll have $80-100 million conference distributions of which a significant chunk will go to players.

At some point, I'd imagine our donors will feel comfortable matching the chunk going to players and amplifying it; it'll be school sponsored so that may remove any issue that donors have trusting middle men.

We're fortunate to be in a Power 2 conference; have to use that financial edge to make a difference when courts or the NCAA mandates that a portion of the budget has to go to players.

Let's just say it's 30% of conference distributions, well then we start with $25-30 million per year for players; take a school like Duke or Wake Forest and they'd be starting with a half that.

We have to make that huge financial edge count.

As the sport evolves, I'd like to see revenue sharing be the way players get paid, on the books and with full transparency. I'd be fine with there being some inequity between schools based on revenue generated, even though this wouldn't work to NU's benefit.

It feels weird and dirty paying players under the current NIL model, and weird/dirty for programs to expect fans to cover this in the first place while the schools themselves only facilitate who's doing the paying, how much, etc. I've also always hated the adversarial element of having third parties paying the players and then turning on the players if/when they don't fulfill expectations. A revenue sharing model means everyone is getting paid from the same pot of gold.

Of course there will always be $100 handshakes and ways boosters find to make their programs the most desirable, but a rev sharing model at least turns down the heat many programs are now putting on fans to pony up more on top of the price of tickets, parking, and mandatory "donations."

 

[rmndcat]

OK. You big city guys in Chicago and on either coast win. Despite all the rich folks moving to Montana (thanks in part to that bleepin' piece of BS on TV called "Yellowstone"; that AIN'T the real Montana this native has known for 70-plus years), plane fare out of here is damned expensive. Except if you fly out of Bozeman, which even locals say is (pick a number, mine is 40) miles from Montana.

Great to play our academic peers but I'd like a little Rocky Mountain rivalry thrown in, too. The Arizona schools, Air Force, BYU and Utah. I give ...

Is Seattle a longer haul than SLC? The UW game would maybe be an option next season.

 

[montana_cat]

Twice as far away. Salt Lake City is a comfortable one-day drive, even in our small motor home, from Billings. Last experience driving in the Seattle area made me vow never to come back with a car or RV. Going from a northern suburb down to Vancouver, we got caught in the worst traffic jam I've ever experienced. When I was a kid, we used to go to Seattle regularly to visit relatives. Due to tech firms (Microsoft, Amazon, etc.) and the congestion that has brought, Seattle is not the delightful place I remember. I much prefer Salt Lake City. Still pretty livable and more family there nowadays.

 

[EagerFan]

As the sport evolves, I'd like to see revenue sharing be the way players get paid, on the books and with full transparency. I'd be fine with there being some inequity between schools based on revenue generated, even though this wouldn't work to NU's benefit.

It feels weird and dirty paying players under the current NIL model, and weird/dirty for programs to expect fans to cover this in the first place while the schools themselves only facilitate who's doing the paying, how much, etc. I've also always hated the adversarial element of having third parties paying the players and then turning on the players if/when they don't fulfill expectations. A revenue sharing model means everyone is getting paid from the same pot of gold.

Of course there will always be $100 handshakes and ways boosters find to make their programs the most desirable, but a rev sharing model at least turns down the heat many programs are now putting on fans to pony up more on top of the price of tickets, parking, and mandatory "donations."

Sure, but I suspect that simply paying players will be an existential threat to the multi-billion dollar revenue-generating NCAA non-profit organization that is predicated on the illusion of the humble, non-professional, student athlete.