ODU Scheduling

letsgiveacheer · August 7, 2015

ODU just signed a home and home series with UNC. According to the article, UVa proposed a 1 and 2 series with them but ODU rejected this, insisting on a home and home contract.

For a school that is just starting out in FBS football, they are doing pretty well in the scheduling department!

http://hamptonroads.com/2015/08/north-carolina-odu-sign-football-deal-brings-tar-heels-norfolk-2017

KRAM1 · August 7, 2015

ODU just signed a home and home series with UNC. According to the article, UVa proposed a 1 and 2 series with them but ODU rejected this, insisting on a home and home contract.
For a school that is just starting out in FBS football, they are doing pretty well in the scheduling department!
http://hamptonroads.com/2015/08/north-carolina-odu-sign-football-deal-brings-tar-heels-norfolk-2017

Yes, and those schools are right around the corner from Norfolk. And, did you see the rest of the ODU scheduling? Lots of home game "patty cakes" from lower divisions as well that UNT90 and others would blast the AD for scheduling. So, props for the UNC game at home...and I think a VA Tech deal as well...but lots of "patty cakes" filling in the ODU schedule as well.

Me, if I were an ODU fan, I would not like to get my butt whipped big time at home just to say..."Gee, look, we scheduled UNC at home". Home wins are more important to me than getting to say my AD scheduled a butt whipping for us. Give me Navy, Air Force, Army, etc. They bring great crowds, the games are exciting affairs filled with pageantry (hint to SilverEagle) and the home team has a shot at a win.

But, that's just my opinion. Those that advocate for a butt whipping at an Apogee stadium filled with opposing team fans with higher premium ticket and parking pricing press on. Opinions all around.

Ben Gooding · August 7, 2015

UNC is nothing close to a guranteed lose. This is football we're talking about. They are the epitome of inconsistency.

The difference between us and ODU, KRAM, is that all we have are the patty cakes as you referred to them as. They are bringing in a decent (at best) program into their house with a legitimate chance for a W. We aren't. They have a horrid stadium to top this all off. Kudos to them and their AD. With the dropping of FCS games negotiations like this are going to become more and more common while we're sitting on our hands until 2020. Best case scenario for us will be for our AD taking one of the FCS powerhouses off the schedule and open up the strong possibility of getting a decent 1&1 into Apogee. We keep 400k in our pocket, double our game revenue (possibly) triple and undoubtedly have a sellout while absorbing the POSSIBILITY of taking a bad loss in our stadium. To me, it's a win-win.

Mean Green 93-98 · August 7, 2015

Rather than impressing me with how good they are at scheduling, all this does is further reinforce how terrible we have become at it.

Withers940 · August 7, 2015

I think we could be able to get a Home and Home with Oklahoma State, Tulsa, Blinn College, NCTC

DallasGreen · August 7, 2015

It is hard to schedule anything other than mid majors and FCS with our pitiful attendance. Guarantees for a one and one with a P5 would break the bank. Now if we had the funds from a decent student athletic fee like other comparable universities with whom we are asked to compete then you have a whole different situation.

KRAM1 · August 7, 2015

It is hard to schedule anything other than mid majors and FCS with our pitiful attendance. Guarantees for a one and one with a P5 would break the bank. Now if we had the funds from a decent student athletic fee like other comparable universities with whom we are asked to compete then you have a whole different situation.

Or fans who cared enough to buy season or single game tickets and show up instead of just talk a good game, and frats and sororities who saw it as an obligation, not just a great Saturday being Mean Green, like we used to, to attend home games in force, and a super active Letterman's Association who put together a must attend game day event for Lettermen making it a must attend to support the current team and players, or Alums who cared enough to come fill the Game Day Pavilion before games, or a local community that realized how much of its bread is buttered by the economic engine that is UNT and would show up on game days in force, etc., etc. I really do not see how raising the student fee would work to increase attendance levels. We need more folks who, just like you DallasGreen, care and who understand why it is important to fill Apogee for every home game.

I am open to hearing how raising the student fee helps any of the issues I mention above relating to attendance. Now, I certainly understand what increased revenues from the increased fee could do for the overall athletic program, but I am puzzled on how it might help increase attendance.

Mean Green 93-98 · August 7, 2015

It is hard to schedule anything other than mid majors and FCS with our pitiful attendance. Guarantees for a one and one with a P5 would break the bank. Now if we had the funds from a decent student athletic fee like other comparable universities with whom we are asked to compete then you have a whole different situation.

I'm not sure where you're getting the idea that a one-on-one with a P5 would "break the bank."

Old Dominion's stadium has a capacity of just over 20k. If we get a comparably local P5 team into Apogee (Texas Tech, OSU, Arkansas), you can rest assured we'll at least approach 30k in attendance. We'd obviously make more on that one game than ODU will on theirs.

Edited August 7, 2015 by Mean Green 93-98

Cougar King · August 7, 2015

UNC put 80 points on ODU last year and had a running clock in the 4th quarter. Definitely a guaranteed L for them.

UNTexas · August 7, 2015

I'm not sure where you're getting the idea that a one-on-one with a P5 would "break the bank."
Old Dominion's stadium has a capacity of just over 20k. If we get a comparably local P5 team into Apogee (Texas Tech, OSU, Arkansas), you can rest assured we'll at least approach 30k in attendance. We'd obviously make more on that one game than ODU will on theirs.

IF is the giant word. I think we are more likely to get a home and home with Portland State because our scheduling is so bad.

Ben Gooding · August 7, 2015

IF is the giant word. I think we are more likely to get a home and home with Portland State because our scheduling is so bad.

And why is that? Why does our scheduling suck? Firings need to take place, but that isn't news to anyone that 1. Pays attention and 2. Gives a damn.

UNT90 · August 8, 2015

It's all about negotiating ability. It's something this AD clearly lacks (along with the ability to hire effective coaches in the big 3 sports).

All the BS arguments in an attempt to protect the AD are really just comical at this point.

Other schools in our own conference get it done. We don't. Plain and simple.

untjim1995 · August 10, 2015

It's all about negotiating ability. It's something this AD clearly lacks (along with the ability to hire effective coaches in the big 3 sports).

All the BS arguments in an attempt to protect the AD are really just comical at this point.

Other schools in our own conference get it done. We don't. Plain and simple.

Because we don't want to get it done. RV prefers whore games at colossal P5 giants to pay for the department. They are easy to schedule and he knows that those money games are going to eventually end when the P5s decide to stop scheduling G5s anymore. The BOR is fine with that approach because it keeps us in budget, which is all that matters.

RV will be here until he wants to retire or dies. And I have absolutely no doubt that the athletic complex will be called the Rick Villareal Athletic Offices, which will be perfect to look over the Darrell Dickey Practice Fields. It is just how it works around here, year after year, decade after decade...

DallasGreen · August 10, 2015

Or fans who cared enough to buy season or single game tickets and show up instead of just talk a good game, and frats and sororities who saw it as an obligation, not just a great Saturday being Mean Green, like we used to, to attend home games in force, and a super active Letterman's Association who put together a must attend game day event for Lettermen making it a must attend to support the current team and players, or Alums who cared enough to come fill the Game Day Pavilion before games, or a local community that realized how much of its bread is buttered by the economic engine that is UNT and would show up on game days in force, etc., etc. I really do not see how raising the student fee would work to increase attendance levels. We need more folks who, just like you DallasGreen, care and who understand why it is important to fill Apogee for every home game.
I am open to hearing how raising the student fee helps any of the issues I mention above relating to attendance. Now, I certainly understand what increased revenues from the increased fee could do for the overall athletic program, but I am puzzled on how it might help increase attendance.

The main point is that it would give seed money for broader advertising, increased travel for coaches to recruit, and funds for the new student athlete stipend (which I as you feel is an entitlement issue which the P5 forced). These all indirectly influence attendance by putting a better product on the field. Everyone sees what we paid Idaho for a home opener. Guarantees for a P5 would make that look paltry in comparison. All such a fee increase would do is keep us in a competitive postion with what our peers in this state (with who we are asked to compete) are charging now and have been for several years.

UNTFan23 · August 10, 2015

The main point is that it would give seed money for broader advertising, increased travel for coaches to recruit, and funds for the new student athlete stipend (which I as you feel is an entitlement issue which the P5 forced). These all indirectly influence attendance by putting a better product on the field. Everyone sees what we paid Idaho for a home opener. Guarantees for a P5 would make that look paltry in comparison. All such a fee increase would do is keep us in a competitive postion with what our peers in this state (with who we are asked to compete) are charging now and have been for several years.

If we raise the fees for students it is only fair we raise prices for season tickets and single game GA tickets.

untjim1995 · August 10, 2015

If we raise the fees for students it is only fair we raise prices for season tickets and single game GA tickets.

I completely agree...That way, both groups have to pony up to help the situation. I'll say it until I'm blue in the face, but hosting FCS games right now does absolutely nothing to help the program. We play a team that isn't going to bring anyone to the game, the competition doesn't help you with any FBS opponent, and frankly, the game is only helpful for teams with difficult conference schedules. Granted, our CUSA schedule isn't easy to us right now, but to the rest of the college football world, playing a game against a lot of CUSA teams is not looked at as being tough competition, as Marshall saw last year.

We don't have to bring in a P5 team, but there are plenty of MWC, AAC, and MAC teams to schedule a series with, not including BYU, yet we have gotten Texas Southern, South Alabama, Idaho, Nicholls State, Portland State, Incarnate Word, Lamar, and Abilene Christian as OOC games scheduled at Apogee, to match up with our "premier" matchups with SMU and Army. Fouts, in its current condition, would host all of those teams today very easily. If I were a student or recent alum that voted for Apogee or now pay the fee for it, I'd be so mad that we built this great new stadium to play WORSE competition than when we played games at the old toilet bowl across the highway. Since Apogee has been built, Texas State has played Texas Tech at their place, UTSA has played Oklahoma State, Arizona, and New Mexico at their place, and UTEP has played Oklahoma at their place. If the AD here is so short-sighted that he won't schedule better, then its supposed to be the jobs of the administration and BOR above him to correct it.

Army of Dad · August 10, 2015

If we raise the fees for students it is only fair we raise prices for season tickets and single game GA tickets.

Demand is lower than supply and your answer would be to raise prices?

Ben Gooding · August 10, 2015

I completely agree...That way, both groups have to pony up to help the situation. I'll say it until I'm blue in the face, but hosting FCS games right now does absolutely nothing to help the program. We play a team that isn't going to bring anyone to the game, the competition doesn't help you with any FBS opponent, and frankly, the game is only helpful for teams with difficult conference schedules. Granted, our CUSA schedule isn't easy to us right now, but to the rest of the college football world, playing a game against a lot of CUSA teams is not looked at as being tough competition, as Marshall saw last year.
We don't have to bring in a P5 team, but there are plenty of MWC, AAC, and MAC teams to schedule a series with, not including BYU, yet we have gotten Texas Southern, South Alabama, Idaho, Nicholls State, Portland State, Incarnate Word, Lamar, and Abilene Christian as OOC games scheduled at Apogee, to match up with our "premier" matchups with SMU and Army. Fouts, in its current condition, would host all of those teams today very easily. If I were a student or recent alum that voted for Apogee or now pay the fee for it, I'd be so mad that we built this great new stadium to play WORSE competition than when we played games at the old toilet bowl across the highway. Since Apogee has been built, Texas State has played Texas Tech at their place, UTSA has played Oklahoma State, Arizona, and New Mexico at their place, and UTEP has played Oklahoma at their place. If the AD here is so short-sighted that he won't schedule better, then its supposed to be the jobs of the administration and BOR above him to correct it.

UTEP also hosted Tech last year and almost pulled the W.

UNTFan23 · August 10, 2015

Demand is lower than supply and your answer would be to raise prices?

And raising fees for students, who have the least amount of money available to give, is the answer?

Army of Dad · August 10, 2015

And raising fees for students, who have the least amount of money available to give, is the answer?

Growing the MGC would be a better answer than either raising prices or fees. I believe @Cerebus provided some evidence about how well the Athletic Department has done in that regard.

None of that changes my puzzlement toward raising prices when the stadium is only 1/2 to 2/3 full on any given game day. Men's basketball is maybe 15-20% full so I really don't see how raising prices there is the answer either.

untjim1995 · August 10, 2015

Growing the MGC would be a better answer than either raising prices or fees. I believe @Cerebus provided some evidence about how well the Athletic Department has done in that regard.
None of that changes my puzzlement toward raising prices when the stadium is only 1/2 to 2/3 full on any given game day. Men's basketball is maybe 15-20% full so I really don't see how raising prices there is the answer either.

So the question becomes essentially about revenue producing results or results producing revenue. The results, while usually pitiful, don't do it, obviously. But even when we have a good year or years in hoops or football, just as we saw after winning the HoD Bowl, the needle still doesn't get moved here, as we saw season tickets actually drop after that.

The extra funding, to me, would help ensure that bad hires get fired quicker, while also rewarding good seasons with bonuses and reasonable extensions (not like Mac's 5-year extension after finally having one good season that now handcuffs again). Right now, that is the single biggest problem we face--we get a hire that doesn't produce winning results, yet we won't buy them out until they are deemed affordable. If--and its a big if-- the university raised the student fee up to $15 an hour, for example, when UTSA and Texas State get the full $20, and actually used it to help buyout the Benford's, Dodge's, Trilli's, etc...you could see a much better feeling amongst the prospective fanbase that we are serious about winning. Almost everyone can see that all we are serious about at the moment (and for the last several decades) is being the best value we can be to get more students up here. That's why you haven't seen any MGC growth--most of these people (like 98%) feel like they are not getting their money's worth out of the program or worse, couldn't care less about it or the school itself. Its gotten better, school-spirit wise, in the last 10 years, but we are not going to feel any goodwill from that financially for decades ahead, if ever. But if you fire people who aren't doing their job and hire people who have name recognition as actual college head coaches, you can attract some attention from folks who might see that new hire and give us a shot. Sure, if we go back to losing 79-10 to OU or losing to Alabama-Huntsville in basketball and keep losing in the first years of these coaches, you'll blow your chance probably for good. But if after 2-3 years of not getting it done, there is literally no chance of getting anyone to buy into Year 4 of said coaches seasons, so you lose money on that, too. That's where a higher revenue stream from a completely legal student fee could be much more helpful than it is today here.