2011 Schedule

[SDSUAlum08]

Re: 2011 Schedule

Let's agree we disagree on this topic. I'm not going to start acting like Zooropa.

I was actually thinking you were Lakes

[JACKGUYII]

Re: 2011 Schedule

I was actually thinking you were Lakes

Now that was below the belt!

[tjbison]

Re: 2011 Schedule

Let's agree we disagree on this topic. I'm not going to start acting like Zooropa.

Good choice

[goon]

Re: 2011 Schedule

[QUOTE=jackmd;173602]You can't solve the issue with not being prepared for a game by playing a game.

We don't know that playing a game before Delaware wouldn't have resulted in losing that game because of poor preparation or underestimating them or field conditions or whatever. So, this argument that we would be more prepared for a more important game doesn't hold water for me. Its not the same as an exhibition game so the comparison to basketball doesn't work either.
QUOTE]

So the team was better off not playing anyone before they went to Delaware? I dont see how playing a team before would have hurt any. Maybe we wouldnt have won, but maybe they could have figured out more solutions to problems getting a game in before playing hard teams.

Playing a game against a lower team that does not count for overall record for playoffs, is exactly like playing a D-2 team in an exhbition game, in basketball It doesnt count but its good for the team.

I think the basketball team gets prepared playing cupcakes just to get some kinks out at game pace.

[goon]

Re: 2011 Schedule

[QUOTE=jackmd;173602]You can't solve the issue with not being prepared for a game by playing a game.

QUOTE]

that makes no sense what so ever. You cant solve issues that show up during a game, until you learn what issues you have from playing the game.

Practice is only so good, game speed and management are not able to be replicated in practice. AS far as I know, you prepare for your first game with practice, after that depending on what goes well or not, you correct those issues that arise to prevent them to be better prepared so it doesn't happen again. You don't keep practicing the same way if you keep losing the same way. Any changes might not show up first thing the next game, but making those corrections over the season as games play out should show where improvements were made from the first game.

[SoDakJack]

Re: 2011 Schedule

At least if a D2 team came in, could they be a national power? I am pretty sure that the Blue and Yellow scrimmage would be more fun to watch than any match-up against Augie/USF/Northern.

[SDSUAlum08]

Re: 2011 Schedule

At least if a D2 team came in, could they be a national power? I am pretty sure that the Blue and Yellow scrimmage would be more fun to watch than any match-up against Augie/USF/Northern.

No because then you're setting yourself up to potentially lose a game.

[mgbison]

Re: 2011 Schedule

Scheduling a d2 team is going in the opposite direction. I would rather get a lower level Mac, WAC or beatable fbs team. At least the victory would count towards something. Also, having 2 fbs games would probably get the fans more interested (if marketed correctly).

[Nidaros]

Re: 2011 Schedule

Scheduling a d2 team is going in the opposite direction. I would rather get a lower level Mac, WAC or beatable fbs team. At least the victory would count towards something. Also, having 2 fbs games would probably get the fans more interested (if marketed correctly).

How about that I agree with a Bison fan. I really do not see any potential in scheduling a D2 team like USF, NWMU or Duluth. As SDSUAlumo8, said we set our self up for a potential loss.

Trying to schedule up seems to have its advantages in terms of $$$. Rob Peterson does not have an easy job and my thanks and appreciation go out to him for all that he has done. We are not in the position yet were we can pick and choose and end up with 6 or more home games. Our program has yet to reach that point.

[HoboJack]

Re: 2011 Schedule

Playing lower levels makes no sense to me right now: Wins don't count to playoff eligibility, no chance to 'make-up' for the FBS game etc.

However, if we get our income per game up to the point that playing a lower level team @ home brings in as much or more money as the FBS gaurantee, and allows us to have a 6th or 7th home game to replace that FBS date, I would probably be OK with it.

I'm sure some would miss not having an FBS team on the schedule 'every' year, but if it means more home games, I would be OK with playing them every-other year.

[mitchellrabbit]

Re: 2011 Schedule

We are not DI in football so get over yourself.

We arent D2 in football. So what are we?

[SoDakJack]

Re: 2011 Schedule

We arent D2 in football. So what are we?

I saw the "We are not DI in football" quote perplexing as well. That one post completely negates anything of merit in the others.

[tjbison]

Re: 2011 Schedule

We arent D2 in football. So what are we?

must be DI.5

[rabidrabbit]

Re: 2011 Schedule

Scheduling a d2 team is going in the opposite direction. I would rather get a lower level Mac, WAC or beatable fbs team. At least the victory would count towards something. Also, having 2 fbs games would probably get the fans more interested (if marketed correctly).

No non-transitional FBS team has played at an FCS school. That isn't going to change. Therefore, another FBS game is another AWAY game. A wonderful situation is if can get a one-n-done with a Pioneer/NEC/OVC/Southland team, or a 2-fer-1 deal.

SDSU is a good team, in one of the 4 premier FCS conferences. Jacks keep playing the "name" schools (Del, Ga Southern, Poly, Montana, for example) and when Jacks have the 7 or 8 wins over such programs, plus top 3 in MVFC, they will be in.

'10 was a very unusual year for the MVFC. 6 of 9 teams were 4-4 in conference. The other 3, were 6-2, 5-3, 2-6. Can anyone say parity? Will there be such parity next year? IMHO yes.

[tjbison]

Re: 2011 Schedule

No non-transitional FBS team has played at an FCS school. That isn't going to change. Therefore, another FBS game is another AWAY game. A wonderful situation is if can get a one-n-done with a Pioneer/NEC/OVC/Southland team, or a 2-fer-1 deal.

SDSU is a good team, in one of the 4 premier FCS conferences. Jacks keep playing the "name" schools (Del, Ga Southern, Poly, Montana, for example) and when Jacks have the 7 or 8 wins over such programs, plus top 3 in MVFC, they will be in.

'10 was a very unusual year for the MVFC. 6 of 9 teams were 4-4 in conference. The other 3, were 6-2, 5-3, 2-6. Can anyone say parity? Will there be such parity next year? IMHO yes.

Yes they have and will, Ball St signed a home and home with Illinois St. I don't have the other teams now but FBS has played AT FCS before, its indeed rare but the lower FBS have and do occasionally do it