------------------ very dumb scheduling for a team trying to compete in the SEC West. Throw away whether this game, long term, will harm the UofA.
We play every SEC West team every year. The toughest half of the toughest conference in America. We play Mizzou and a rotating member from the East which means about half of the time that team (Florida, Georgia, improving Tennessee, etc.) is as good as any in the West. We are mandated to have one non-conference game with another P-5 team which means that game is home and away since no P-5 team will just play us at our home. This year that means we are going to Notre Dame like last year we went to Colorado State. So we need generic “rent-a-win” teams who will play us at home (for ticket sale revenue) for a few hundred thousand dollars to increase our chances of getting bowl eligible. We do not need to make one of those “rent-a-wins” into a crazed, foaming at the mouth, (for them) rivalry game, thus increasing the potential for upset and making it even harder (it is already hard enough for reasons cited above) than it has to be to get bowl eligible. It is just a dumb scheduling move no matter how much it might entertain bored sports writers, a small minority of Hog fans, general sports fans, Hog-haters, or the few ASU fans in the state. Just dumb to even consider it for each year!
I don’t think they need to hold a slot open for an in-state team each year, but I don’t see the risk in putting an in-state school on the schedule on occasion versus an out-of-state rent a win.
I could live with once every five years, but every year is just dumb.
Generally agree with that, occasionally and spread over more than one in-state school.
Agree if it has to be done once every 5 years with an in state school. Beat the brakes off ASWho as well.
Obviously an occasional game is less of a problem than an annual or even frequent (1x every 3 years or so) game. However, if you think this will be occasional, you’re not paying attention. For whatever reason, HY has decided he’s gonna let every school in the state become a competitor of the UA in every sport. That’s contrary to Barnhill’s & Broyles’s (& Long’s) well considered policy that lasted nearly 80 years.
Hogmodo’s analysis of what’s going to happen any year we play ASU is correct. We’ll get their best shot. It’s not a game we can take as lightly as we would against a ULM or some such team. (I know what we’ve done the past two years, but I hope we haven’t gotten to the point where we accept THAT as standard.) We can’t even “win” if we beat ASU by 2 TD’s or less. Just a no-win.
This is correct. I have heard that it is very possible for future schedules to include at least 2 instate games a year, and perhaps 3. Great cost savings. Easier travel. More media interest.
We are going to get to the point where SEC play is irrelevant. It’s all about who can win the instate games. That’s going to be the real goal.
Is HY on vacation?
I emailed him regarding my disagreement with the new policy and he hasn’t responded. (I was polite and direct).
I cannot see how what you ( or HY) are suggesting is even remotely possible. Maybe more so in sports with lots of games; certainly not in football.
I really don’t see UofA playing 2-3 instate programs a year very soon if at all. Just not any prestige in that on a national level. 1 instate game will be the max for a long time to come, and that shouldn’t be every year.
This would be the time of year when some are on vacation – and perhaps the person who responds to the AD’s email in dictation. I’m doubtful that he would answer emails directly. I do not think Frank Broyles answered emails directly. And, I bet he didn’t on a subject like this. I am guessing that the emails do get to his desk in some sort of printed fashion.
But as far as the ADs to take vacation right now, it’s doubtful. Where would they go?
I disagree. There appears to be more interest from this than in scheduling others. I don’t think that there is any concern about any possible ramifications about strength of scheduling either. And, even if it does it’s no big deal. It’s obvious that this policy change is the most important thing to HY.
It’s obvious that the ASU AD (more so than UCA) has successfully moved HY. And, he has had help from the media. And, obviously the UA BOT is fully on board as well.
I also think we are headed to home and home series with ASU in football. This will allow talk of stadium expansion in Jonesboro to start. There will be no need to spend money on WMS. Since there is historical precedent of the state building ASU athletic facilities, that’s where the money will come from to do it. Then the lack of seating in Jonesboro won’t be an issue to playing there.
You can bet ASU will tap students & the taxpayers for almost all it’s expansions, etc. They have one very wealthy donor, Johnny Alison. I have no idea how much he gives them, but I doubt it’s enough to pay for everything they’d want (even when combined with any other donations.) Their ticket sales have always been abysmal. Their annual ticket revenues from football are less than ours for one game in WMS. Most of their football revenue comes from money games. Plus, they charge students about $12-15 per semester hour for “tickets” to sporting events. A captive audience.
It’s well known ASU doesn’t have the private resources to expand the stadium or other facilities.
Part of the goal of ASU officials has been to get UA to play so that they can then use that as a vehicle to improve their facilities. Then they can start the process politically of getting state money to upgrade ASU’s stadium.
ASU’s long term goal has been to achieve a P5 conference. They are in the process of redoing the Walnut Ridge airport which will allow jets in and out of NEA. They also knew that the single thing they had to have was instate competition. They do need to take some market share of the fans away from UA. With the initiation of instate play they finally can start to achieve that especially in East Arkansas.
This will start the erosion of statewide support for the UA. It’s obvious that is no longer an objective of the current UA administration. It remains to be seen how fast that erosion occurs. If UA continues to flounder in SEC play in football, and ASU can win a game (which many think is likely) it will happen quickly.
For who? Why do we care about “easier travel” for who ever we play???
If that is ever correct (and I don’t think it will be) then we won’t get to stay in the SEC and frankly, we shouldn’t. If we are worried about being the “State of Arkansas Champion” and not worried about the SEC, that is a total joke of a program. We won’t have fans, will have maybe 25,000 average.
Jets can land at WR as it is now. I don’t think the 400k grant last summer is doing enough to land charters and such.
I really don’t disagree with that at all. But, there is more interest from the Arkansas media, in my opinion, in an Arkansas-ASU matchup than Arkansas-Notre Dame. And, I mean that seriously.
I’m not sure what the rationale behind instate competition is from HY’s perspective about strengthening Arkansas’s position within the SEC. I’m of the opinion he thinks that the UA program is at no risk of losing any support.
If he is wrong, and if it weakens to any degree Arkansas’s ability to compete within the SEC from a fundraising or fan support standpoint then I will be interested in hearing how the change in policy helped the UA program.