Page 21 of 26

Re: Official Future Scheduling Thread

PostPosted: Fri Aug 23, 2019 7:08 pm
by BostonCollege1
Logitano {l Wrote}:Army is good now but will they be in 2023 and/or 2028? Odds are low.

Columbus day weekend is a good weekend to take a boat up the Hudson to visit West Point.

Halloween at the Rent I will pass on that.

Fordham law grads need to unite to get Fordham on the schedule. BC/FLS grads alone sell out Alumni! Let's make this happen. :ace


Odds are low, but you're assuming that our coach in those years won't give us a 2012 Spaz-like performance. Either way, that's a great road trip and a respectable team to have on the schedule. We should be playing them more often. I'd like to see Navy and Air Force on the schedule on occasion, too.

If we're going to play an FCS school, HC is better than most other options. Have them, Maine, UNH, URI, Villanova and Fordham in a rotation. Add UMass when they drop back down. If these teams only play us every 6-7 years, it could be a draw for their fans.

I hope UConn drops football completely before we play those games. Zero desire to see them.

Re: Official Future Scheduling Thread

PostPosted: Tue Aug 27, 2019 1:07 pm
by eepstein0
1-for-1 series with Cincinnati 2026-2027

Re: Official Future Scheduling Thread

PostPosted: Tue Aug 27, 2019 1:18 pm
by DomingoOrtiz
eepstein0 {l Wrote}:1-for-1 series with Cincinnati 2026-2027


Cincinnati (like Purdue, Kansas & Missouri) is exactly the kind of team we should never be playing!

Re: Official Future Scheduling Thread

PostPosted: Tue Aug 27, 2019 1:43 pm
by eepstein0
DomingoOrtiz {l Wrote}:
eepstein0 {l Wrote}:1-for-1 series with Cincinnati 2026-2027


Cincinnati (like Purdue, Kansas & Missouri) is exactly the kind of team we should never be playing!


I agree with those 3. Cincinnati is fine from a recruiting perspective.

Re: Official Future Scheduling Thread

PostPosted: Tue Aug 27, 2019 2:39 pm
by Los
DomingoOrtiz {l Wrote}:
eepstein0 {l Wrote}:1-for-1 series with Cincinnati 2026-2027


Cincinnati (like Purdue, Kansas & Missouri) is exactly the kind of team we should never be playing!

I'm fine with this game. There's a ton of Catholic high schools in the area, so it makes sense from a recruiting perspective.

I don't get the reluctance to play the others though. We need to be playing MORE P5 schools, especially those we have a solid shot of beating, like those three.

Re: Official Future Scheduling Thread

PostPosted: Tue Aug 27, 2019 7:58 pm
by flyingelvii
We should be playing P5 schools that make strategic sense. Cincy does. USC does. We get recruits from there. I don't think we've ever gotten anyone from Kansas. I imagine we've only gotten a small handful from Indiana and Missouri, if any.

Re: Official Future Scheduling Thread

PostPosted: Wed Aug 28, 2019 12:01 pm
by Los
Scheduling is not solely about recruiting. It's more about creating exciting matchups for the fans, TV, networking between AD's, etc...

E.g. if we could get a basketball home and home out of this football series with Kansas then sign me up.

Re: Official Future Scheduling Thread

PostPosted: Wed Aug 28, 2019 1:59 pm
by flyingelvii
What has been remotely exciting about Kansas, Missouri, and Purdue over the last decade outside of a couple of random Missouri years before they became an also ran again? Nobody wants to go to Lawrence, West Lafayette, or Columbia. TV stations don't care since none of those schools have rabid fan bases that drive ratings. I don't particularly care about AD networking. If a basketball thing was announced with the football game I could maybe get on board but even then it's still a stupid idea because one football game drives a shitload more revenue and exposure than one basketball game, especially against a doormat of a program like BC.

Re: Official Future Scheduling Thread

PostPosted: Wed Aug 28, 2019 2:59 pm
by MilitantEagle
Not to mention we already had a home and home with KU basketball about 10 years ago. It didn’t generate that much excitement and as you could probably guess there were more KU fans than BC fans at Conte. It was during break.

Re: Official Future Scheduling Thread

PostPosted: Mon Sep 09, 2019 3:15 pm
by DomingoOrtiz
Tom Dooder {l Wrote}:It's Kansas.

2019 @ BC

2020 @ KU

This would be great for bball but just awful for football. This is supposed to bring in more season ticket holders?


Better than Purdue & Missouri anyway.

Re: Official Future Scheduling Thread

PostPosted: Mon Sep 09, 2019 6:38 pm
by eepstein0
DomingoOrtiz {l Wrote}:
Tom Dooder {l Wrote}:It's Kansas.

2019 @ BC

2020 @ KU

This would be great for bball but just awful for football. This is supposed to bring in more season ticket holders?


Better than Purdue & Missouri anyway.


I’d way rather play Purdue or Missouri than Kansas.

Re: Official Future Scheduling Thread

PostPosted: Mon Sep 09, 2019 10:31 pm
by BostonCollege1
flyingelvii {l Wrote}:What has been remotely exciting about Kansas, Missouri, and Purdue over the last decade outside of a couple of random Missouri years before they became an also ran again? Nobody wants to go to Lawrence, West Lafayette, or Columbia. TV stations don't care since none of those schools have rabid fan bases that drive ratings. I don't particularly care about AD networking. If a basketball thing was announced with the football game I could maybe get on board but even then it's still a stupid idea because one football game drives a shitload more revenue and exposure than one basketball game, especially against a doormat of a program like BC.


The away game vs. Missouri will be held at Arrowhead, IIRC. That's a trip I would make.

Re: Official Future Scheduling Thread

PostPosted: Tue Sep 10, 2019 12:49 pm
by DomingoOrtiz
eepstein0 {l Wrote}:
DomingoOrtiz {l Wrote}:
Tom Dooder {l Wrote}:It's Kansas.

2019 @ BC

2020 @ KU

This would be great for bball but just awful for football. This is supposed to bring in more season ticket holders?


Better than Purdue & Missouri anyway.


I’d way rather play Purdue or Missouri than Kansas.


Why? If we are going to play a game against a team that nobody cares about, it better be an easy win.

Re: Official Future Scheduling Thread

PostPosted: Tue Sep 10, 2019 7:55 pm
by eepstein0
DomingoOrtiz {l Wrote}:
eepstein0 {l Wrote}:
DomingoOrtiz {l Wrote}:
Tom Dooder {l Wrote}:It's Kansas.

2019 @ BC

2020 @ KU

This would be great for bball but just awful for football. This is supposed to bring in more season ticket holders?


Better than Purdue & Missouri anyway.


I’d way rather play Purdue or Missouri than Kansas.


Why? If we are going to play a game against a team that nobody cares about, it better be an easy win.


Purdue and Missouri are at least respectable football programs

Re: Official Future Scheduling Thread

PostPosted: Tue Sep 10, 2019 9:28 pm
by twballgame9
You guys are distinguishing apples from apples.

Re: Official Future Scheduling Thread

PostPosted: Wed Sep 11, 2019 7:46 am
by BC923
Missouri in KC is a decent away trip. KC is a fine place to spend a weekend as far as SEC schools go, they’re usually pretty good, i don’t really see the problem with this one.

Re: Official Future Scheduling Thread

PostPosted: Tue Oct 01, 2019 3:24 pm
by claver2010
2022 was finished off by adding Maine:

2022:
Rutgres
Maine
@uconn
@ND

surprised to be playing 2 fcs teams in 1 year

Re: Official Future Scheduling Thread

PostPosted: Thu Oct 03, 2019 9:38 am
by BostonCollege1
claver2010 {l Wrote}:2022 was finished off by adding Maine:

2022:
Rutgres
Maine
@uconn
@ND

surprised to be playing 2 fcs teams in 1 year


Who goes back to 1-AA first, UConn or UMass?

Re: Official Future Scheduling Thread

PostPosted: Thu Oct 03, 2019 9:43 am
by Los
BostonCollege1 {l Wrote}:Who goes back to 1-AA first, UConn or UMass?

They should have a game each year to determine promotion to or relegation from FBS, kind of like a European soccer league.

Re: Official Future Scheduling Thread

PostPosted: Thu Oct 03, 2019 12:54 pm
by HJS
Los {l Wrote}:
BostonCollege1 {l Wrote}:Who goes back to 1-AA first, UConn or UMass?

They should have a game each year to determine promotion to or relegation from FBS, kind of like a European soccer league.

The answer to the originally posed question is BC.

If the California law is successful in court (something I doubt), there is a likelihood that schools like BC (who have the slightest hint of academic integrity) would opt for amateurism over being a hosting site for minor league sports.

Re: Official Future Scheduling Thread

PostPosted: Thu Oct 03, 2019 12:58 pm
by claver2010
HJS {l Wrote}:
Los {l Wrote}:
BostonCollege1 {l Wrote}:Who goes back to 1-AA first, UConn or UMass?

They should have a game each year to determine promotion to or relegation from FBS, kind of like a European soccer league.

The answer to the originally posed question is BC.

If the California law is successful in court (something I doubt), there is a likelihood that schools like BC (who have the slightest hint of academic integrity) would opt for amateurism over being a hosting site for minor league sports.


this isn't pay for play. bc in all their cheapness wouldn't lose anything $ wise (unless our donors redirect their FF $ to individual players opposed to donating but i don't think our fanbase cares that much)

maybe we can have some GASSON LEVEL DONORS get some 5* to be EO's official spokesman.

Re: Official Future Scheduling Thread

PostPosted: Mon Oct 28, 2019 8:41 pm
by BostonCollege1
Is our 2021 game @ UMass going to be played in Amherst, or at Gillette?

Guesses on who our 4th OOC opponent will be that year?

Re: Official Future Scheduling Thread

PostPosted: Wed Nov 13, 2019 8:47 am
by claver2010
not sure how much longer umass will be around, shaughnessy had an article on how terrible they are with quotes from ad

“I don’t like to be 40-point underdogs and obviously it’s not good for the brand,’’ Meehan said. “The question is, can this program be turned around? We were 38½-point underdogs at West Point.

“It was great to be at West Point and it’s obviously a great environment. Especially on Veterans Day weekend. It was a very moving experience before the game. And then the game started . . . ”

Are you guys exploring the idea of killing the program altogether, I wondered?

“I think the athletic director and the chancellor evaluate all of their programs every year,” said Meehan. “Ultimately the decision will be made on the campus.’’

So eliminating football is on the table?

“We have a football team at Amherst and they’re playing at some very prestigious places around the country and I want to be as supportive as I can,’’ said Meehan. “We have a very good athletic director at UMass-Amherst. I think the athletic director does a good job and I think all colleges and universities are evaluating their programs and I think there will continue to be an evaluation.

“It’s never a good situation to lose by the margins that we are losing by. It’s never a good situation to be 40-point underdogs.



https://www.bostonglobe.com/sports/coll ... story.html

Re: Official Future Scheduling Thread

PostPosted: Wed Nov 13, 2019 8:52 am
by Logitano
claver2010 {l Wrote}:not sure how much longer umass will be around, shaughnessy had an article on how terrible they are with quotes from ad

“I don’t like to be 40-point underdogs and obviously it’s not good for the brand,’’ Meehan said. “The question is, can this program be turned around? We were 38½-point underdogs at West Point.

“It was great to be at West Point and it’s obviously a great environment. Especially on Veterans Day weekend. It was a very moving experience before the game. And then the game started . . . ”

Are you guys exploring the idea of killing the program altogether, I wondered?

“I think the athletic director and the chancellor evaluate all of their programs every year,” said Meehan. “Ultimately the decision will be made on the campus.’’

So eliminating football is on the table?

“We have a football team at Amherst and they’re playing at some very prestigious places around the country and I want to be as supportive as I can,’’ said Meehan. “We have a very good athletic director at UMass-Amherst. I think the athletic director does a good job and I think all colleges and universities are evaluating their programs and I think there will continue to be an evaluation.

“It’s never a good situation to lose by the margins that we are losing by. It’s never a good situation to be 40-point underdogs.



https://www.bostonglobe.com/sports/coll ... story.html


The AD was quoted after the game as saying dropping football down to fcs or all together is not on the table. :ace

Re: Official Future Scheduling Thread

PostPosted: Fri Dec 20, 2019 2:13 pm
by xu9697
Hopefully Hafley can get involved in cleaning up the 2021 and 2023 OOC schedules. Playing no Power 5s in 2023 (Hafley year 4) would be a shame. 2022 should be solid with Rutgers PROBABLY improving some/Hafley vs. Schiano to open the season.

2021
09/11 - at UMass
09/18 - at Temple
09/25 - Missouri

2022
09/03 - Rutgers
09/17 - Maine
10/29 - at UConn
TBA - at Notre Dame

2023
09/02 - Northern Illinois
09/09 - Holy Cross
10/07 - at Army
10/28 - UConn

https://fbschedules.com/ncaa/boston-college/

Re: Official Future Scheduling Thread

PostPosted: Fri Dec 20, 2019 8:21 pm
by BostonCollege1
xu9697 {l Wrote}:Hopefully Hafley can get involved in cleaning up the 2021 and 2023 OOC schedules. Playing no Power 5s in 2023 (Hafley year 4) would be a shame. 2022 should be solid with Rutgers PROBABLY improving some/Hafley vs. Schiano to open the season.

2021
09/11 - at UMass
09/18 - at Temple
09/25 - Missouri

2022
09/03 - Rutgers
09/17 - Maine
10/29 - at UConn
TBA - at Notre Dame

2023
09/02 - Northern Illinois
09/09 - Holy Cross
10/07 - at Army
10/28 - UConn

https://fbschedules.com/ncaa/boston-college/


According to that website, TCU, Maryland, Miss. State, Tenn., Houston and UCF have openings in 2021, as does Miami, if we wanted a non-conference game against them. Of the above, Maryland would be the most likely, but we'll probably end up playing an AAC, MAC or C-USA team.

Re: Official Future Scheduling Thread

PostPosted: Fri Dec 20, 2019 9:01 pm
by Oliver Closeoff
I think every ACC team must play one P5 each year, so the 2023 schedule should change. :popcorn

Re: Official Future Scheduling Thread

PostPosted: Sat Dec 21, 2019 9:22 pm
by BostonCollege1
Oliver Closeoff {l Wrote}:I think every ACC team must play one P5 each year, so the 2023 schedule should change. :popcorn


Army counts as one, IIRC.

Re: Official Future Scheduling Thread

PostPosted: Sun Dec 22, 2019 9:13 am
by Oliver Closeoff
This is from wikipedia

Starting with the 2017 season, ACC members will be required to play at least one non-conference game each season against a team in the "Power 5" conferences. Games against Notre Dame also meet the requirement. In January 2015, the conference announced that games against another FBS independent, BYU, would also count toward the requirement.[73]

Re: Official Future Scheduling Thread

PostPosted: Sun Dec 22, 2019 12:30 pm
by BostonCollege1
Oliver Closeoff {l Wrote}:This is from wikipedia

Starting with the 2017 season, ACC members will be required to play at least one non-conference game each season against a team in the "Power 5" conferences. Games against Notre Dame also meet the requirement. In January 2015, the conference announced that games against another FBS independent, BYU, would also count toward the requirement.[73]


Thanks for the correction. Interesting that the B1G and SEC include Army, but the ACC does not.

So, what game gets moved?