It is interesting looking at 2024 and beyond

This forum is for Football related topics only. Other topics will be moved to the appropriate forum.
SLB
Posts: 8044
Joined: November 3rd, 2016, 8:47 pm
Has thanked: 391 times
Been thanked: 941 times

It is interesting looking at 2024 and beyond

Post by SLB » August 8th, 2022, 3:25 pm

It is clear outside the P5 opponent every year up to 2029 that the schedule is open which is interesting.



User avatar
BigBlueDart
Pick'em Champ - '17 FB Predict the Score
Posts: 8791
Joined: November 3rd, 2010, 7:57 am
Location: Syracuse, UT
Has thanked: 183 times
Been thanked: 728 times

Re: It is interesting looking at 2024 and beyond

Post by BigBlueDart » August 8th, 2022, 5:06 pm

We had BYU a lot (if not all) of those years until they dropped us (and a bunch of others). We'll almost certainly line up an FCS game each of those years in the non-conference. I would imagine that Hartwell is seeing the holes in our upcoming schedules and is working on filling those slots.



FromLItoLogan
Posts: 217
Joined: March 3rd, 2014, 7:52 pm
Location: Logan, Utah
Has thanked: 111 times
Been thanked: 75 times

Re: It is interesting looking at 2024 and beyond

Post by FromLItoLogan » August 8th, 2022, 5:31 pm

Sounds weird but and unlikely considering the schlacking we gave them last time but I'd love to put Stony Brook on the schedule again.



SwaggieAggie
Posts: 588
Joined: September 17th, 2019, 10:04 pm
Has thanked: 57 times
Been thanked: 303 times

Re: It is interesting looking at 2024 and beyond

Post by SwaggieAggie » August 8th, 2022, 5:48 pm

I would love to get some H:H’s with some low - mid-tier PAC-12 and Big 12 teams (ex: Oregon State, ASU, Arizona, Houston, K-State, Texas Tech, etc.). Add some variety instead of an FCS, UCONN/NMSU, and then an SEC money game like schedule.
These users thanked the author SwaggieAggie for the post (total 2):
apoaggies22



FromLItoLogan
Posts: 217
Joined: March 3rd, 2014, 7:52 pm
Location: Logan, Utah
Has thanked: 111 times
Been thanked: 75 times

Re: It is interesting looking at 2024 and beyond

Post by FromLItoLogan » August 8th, 2022, 6:24 pm

SwaggieAggie wrote:
August 8th, 2022, 5:48 pm
I would love to get some H:H’s with some low - mid-tier PAC-12 and Big 12 teams (ex: Oregon State, ASU, Arizona, Houston, K-State, Texas Tech, etc.). Add some variety instead of an FCS, UCONN/NMSU, and then an SEC money game like schedule.
I kinda doubt lower tier P5s are gonna schedule with us for the next little bit. We're too dangerous and could beat them.



Imakeitrain
Posts: 10725
Joined: March 11th, 2011, 9:12 pm
Has thanked: 448 times
Been thanked: 917 times

Re: It is interesting looking at 2024 and beyond

Post by Imakeitrain » August 8th, 2022, 7:08 pm

FromLItoLogan wrote:
August 8th, 2022, 6:24 pm
SwaggieAggie wrote:
August 8th, 2022, 5:48 pm
I would love to get some H:H’s with some low - mid-tier PAC-12 and Big 12 teams (ex: Oregon State, ASU, Arizona, Houston, K-State, Texas Tech, etc.). Add some variety instead of an FCS, UCONN/NMSU, and then an SEC money game like schedule.
I kinda doubt lower tier P5s are gonna schedule with us for the next little bit. We're too dangerous and could beat them.
It’s a double edged sword. I think if we can get a bit more success the risk reward to scheduling us can still be in our favor.

Beating a middle of the road mwc adds little to a P5 resume. Losing to a middle of the road mwc team wrecks them.

Beating a good mwc team is a valuable non conference win that won’t hurt them as much in a loss.

We just need to show consistency. If we are routinely battling for mwc championships going into week 11 or 12 we will be able to schedule many of the desired teams. If we have an 11 win season followed by a 6 win, 4 win 5 win and then another 11 win season we’re just a middle of the road inconsistent team.
These users thanked the author Imakeitrain for the post:
aggies22



User avatar
ViAggie
Posts: 19607
Joined: June 16th, 2011, 6:49 pm
Location: Temecula, California
Has thanked: 2876 times
Been thanked: 1399 times

Re: It is interesting looking at 2024 and beyond

Post by ViAggie » August 8th, 2022, 11:18 pm

AAC and CUSA schools


Just another day in the (Aggie) Brotherhood

FromLItoLogan
Posts: 217
Joined: March 3rd, 2014, 7:52 pm
Location: Logan, Utah
Has thanked: 111 times
Been thanked: 75 times

Re: It is interesting looking at 2024 and beyond

Post by FromLItoLogan » August 9th, 2022, 8:08 am

ViAggie wrote:
August 8th, 2022, 11:18 pm
AAC and CUSA schools
I would love to see Tulsa and UTEP be put on the schedule.



User avatar
AGGIEinIOWA
Posts: 2674
Joined: November 17th, 2010, 10:50 am
Has thanked: 7 times
Been thanked: 998 times

Re: It is interesting looking at 2024 and beyond

Post by AGGIEinIOWA » August 9th, 2022, 8:56 am

SMU, UTSA, Memphis, Marshall, ULa, WKU, UNT, No Ill,



aggies22
Aggie Insider, Pick'em Champ - '18 Kickoff, '19 Weekly
Posts: 14886
Joined: November 3rd, 2010, 8:17 pm
Location: Smithfield, Utah
Has thanked: 13781 times
Been thanked: 8540 times
Contact:

Re: It is interesting looking at 2024 and beyond

Post by aggies22 » August 9th, 2022, 10:13 am

FromLItoLogan wrote:
August 9th, 2022, 8:08 am
ViAggie wrote:
August 8th, 2022, 11:18 pm
AAC and CUSA schools
I would love to see Tulsa and UTEP be put on the schedule.
UTEP is about as useless as New Mexico State. I do like adding Tulsa though. I'm pretty sure Steve Farmer, Kendrick Shaver and Luke Wells are there.



slcagg
Posts: 11686
Joined: December 15th, 2010, 6:29 pm
Has thanked: 3264 times
Been thanked: 2713 times

Re: It is interesting looking at 2024 and beyond

Post by slcagg » August 9th, 2022, 10:45 am

ViAggie wrote:
August 8th, 2022, 11:18 pm
AAC and CUSA schools
We should be targeting the top g5 programs regardless of conference. For example I’d rather play app state than Tulane.



User avatar
Full
Posts: 2174
Joined: April 27th, 2011, 11:07 am
Location: Davis County
Has thanked: 402 times
Been thanked: 227 times

Re: It is interesting looking at 2024 and beyond

Post by Full » August 9th, 2022, 12:36 pm

With BYU dropping us from future games it seems like a good time to reexamine the scheduling philosophy. I would love to see a move toward reducing these to every other year. The excitement of the season getting washed away annually with a loss, and usually a big loss. In 2019 the 6-42 loss to LSU, in 2018 31-38 loss to Michigan State, in 2017 10-59 loss to Wisconsin, in 2016 7-45 loss to USC, in 2015 17-31 loss to Washington, and in 2014 7-38 loss to Tennessee. Most of these games killed excitement in fringe fans. I’m not sure how beneficial these games have been, although I understand they helped pay the bills. I see all MW teams except San Diego State are playing some, so it looks like it’s required for the arms race. Last season didn’t have one and I didn’t miss it. As far as I can see it’s been about 5% of annual revenue, but it appears guarantees are getting smaller while other revenue has increased. I see Iowa in 2023, Mississippi State in 2024, Texas A&M in 2025, and in 2027 the first away game of the Oregon’s 2-1. With the separation between the SEC and Big Ten with the other “P5” schools maybe there is a case for finding a ACC, Big 12 or PAC-10 team. Go Aggies!



Coloraggie
Posts: 1830
Joined: November 5th, 2010, 10:09 am
Has thanked: 45 times
Been thanked: 215 times

Re: It is interesting looking at 2024 and beyond

Post by Coloraggie » August 9th, 2022, 1:33 pm

I'm not sure the Michigan State game killed excitement, i think it built excitement to say we competed with a top tier BIG team on the road. The blowouts probably killed excitement.

Unfortunately, these games are money games to pay the bills, not because we think we are competitive. Losing BYU on the schedule only makes the money situation worse so I don't see any way that we drop the money games anytime in the near future.
These users thanked the author Coloraggie for the post (total 2):
aggies22aggieborn



Intermeddler
Posts: 2611
Joined: January 20th, 2011, 7:35 pm
Location: North Salt Lake
Has thanked: 535 times
Been thanked: 573 times

Re: It is interesting looking at 2024 and beyond

Post by Intermeddler » August 9th, 2022, 2:20 pm

Full wrote:
August 9th, 2022, 12:36 pm
With BYU dropping us from future games it seems like a good time to reexamine the scheduling philosophy. I would love to see a move toward reducing these to every other year. The excitement of the season getting washed away annually with a loss, and usually a big loss. In 2019 the 6-42 loss to LSU, in 2018 31-38 loss to Michigan State, in 2017 10-59 loss to Wisconsin, in 2016 7-45 loss to USC, in 2015 17-31 loss to Washington, and in 2014 7-38 loss to Tennessee. Most of these games killed excitement in fringe fans. I’m not sure how beneficial these games have been, although I understand they helped pay the bills. I see all MW teams except San Diego State are playing some, so it looks like it’s required for the arms race. Last season didn’t have one and I didn’t miss it. As far as I can see it’s been about 5% of annual revenue, but it appears guarantees are getting smaller while other revenue has increased. I see Iowa in 2023, Mississippi State in 2024, Texas A&M in 2025, and in 2027 the first away game of the Oregon’s 2-1. With the separation between the SEC and Big Ten with the other “P5” schools maybe there is a case for finding a ACC, Big 12 or PAC-10 team. Go Aggies!
One of these is not like the others.
These users thanked the author Intermeddler for the post:
aggieborn



User avatar
Full
Posts: 2174
Joined: April 27th, 2011, 11:07 am
Location: Davis County
Has thanked: 402 times
Been thanked: 227 times

Re: It is interesting looking at 2024 and beyond

Post by Full » August 9th, 2022, 2:53 pm

Coloraggie wrote:
August 9th, 2022, 1:33 pm
I'm not sure the Michigan State game killed excitement, i think it built excitement to say we competed with a top tier BIG team on the road. The blowouts probably killed excitement.

Unfortunately, these games are money games to pay the bills, not because we think we are competitive. Losing BYU on the schedule only makes the money situation worse so I don't see any way that we drop the money games anytime in the near future.
Ok, even if it was a moral victory, a win over Northern Illinois instead of a loss to Michigan State and an 11-0 start vs 10-1 start is a lot more exciting. I’m not saying I don’t recognize the money, but only New Mexico, San Jose, Nevada and UNLV play guarantee games every year. It was 2009 when we began with the current philosophy, and things have changed since then.



aggies22
Aggie Insider, Pick'em Champ - '18 Kickoff, '19 Weekly
Posts: 14886
Joined: November 3rd, 2010, 8:17 pm
Location: Smithfield, Utah
Has thanked: 13781 times
Been thanked: 8540 times
Contact:

Re: It is interesting looking at 2024 and beyond

Post by aggies22 » August 9th, 2022, 3:42 pm

Full wrote:
August 9th, 2022, 2:53 pm
Coloraggie wrote:
August 9th, 2022, 1:33 pm
I'm not sure the Michigan State game killed excitement, i think it built excitement to say we competed with a top tier BIG team on the road. The blowouts probably killed excitement.

Unfortunately, these games are money games to pay the bills, not because we think we are competitive. Losing BYU on the schedule only makes the money situation worse so I don't see any way that we drop the money games anytime in the near future.
Ok, even if it was a moral victory, a win over Northern Illinois instead of a loss to Michigan State and an 11-0 start vs 10-1 start is a lot more exciting. I’m not saying I don’t recognize the money, but only New Mexico, San Jose, Nevada and UNLV play guarantee games every year. It was 2009 when we began with the current philosophy, and things have changed since then.
If we don't want to play guarantee games, more season tickets need to be sold and total donations have to go WAY up.
Last edited by aggies22 on August 9th, 2022, 5:16 pm, edited 1 time in total.
These users thanked the author aggies22 for the post:
FromLItoLogan



Yossarian
Posts: 7986
Joined: November 14th, 2010, 11:56 pm
Has thanked: 247 times
Been thanked: 1819 times

Re: It is interesting looking at 2024 and beyond

Post by Yossarian » August 9th, 2022, 4:01 pm

Do the players look forward to playing the big time opponents in the storied venues? Does this factor in recruiting at all? I would guess they enjoy the opportunity to compete against top collegiate talent in the venues they see on TV growing up.


Eutaw St. Aggie

aggies22
Aggie Insider, Pick'em Champ - '18 Kickoff, '19 Weekly
Posts: 14886
Joined: November 3rd, 2010, 8:17 pm
Location: Smithfield, Utah
Has thanked: 13781 times
Been thanked: 8540 times
Contact:

Re: It is interesting looking at 2024 and beyond

Post by aggies22 » August 9th, 2022, 4:03 pm

Yossarian wrote:
August 9th, 2022, 4:01 pm
Do the players look forward to playing the big time opponents in the storied venues? Does this factor in recruiting at all? I would guess they enjoy the opportunity to compete against top collegiate talent in the venues they see on TV growing up.
I don't think it factors into recruiting much. BUT I know the players look forward to playing the big boys. You aren't a true competitor if you don't.



Aggie84025
Posts: 6189
Joined: September 12th, 2018, 2:01 pm
Has thanked: 829 times
Been thanked: 2403 times

Re: It is interesting looking at 2024 and beyond

Post by Aggie84025 » August 9th, 2022, 4:24 pm

aggies22 wrote:
August 9th, 2022, 3:42 pm
Full wrote:
August 9th, 2022, 2:53 pm
Coloraggie wrote:
August 9th, 2022, 1:33 pm
I'm not sure the Michigan State game killed excitement, i think it built excitement to say we competed with a top tier BIG team on the road. The blowouts probably killed excitement.

Unfortunately, these games are money games to pay the bills, not because we think we are competitive. Losing BYU on the schedule only makes the money situation worse so I don't see any way that we drop the money games anytime in the near future.
Ok, even if it was a moral victory, a win over Northern Illinois instead of a loss to Michigan State and an 11-0 start vs 10-1 start is a lot more exciting. I’m not saying I don’t recognize the money, but only New Mexico, San Jose, Nevada and UNLV play guarantee games every year. It was 2009 when we began with the current philosophy, and things have changed since then.
If we don't want to play guarantee games, then more season tickets need to be sold and total donations have to go WAY up.
This is the answer, we play big money games because the athletic department needs the money to stay afloat. I guarantee Hartwell would much rather not schedule them, but for now it is necessary.
These users thanked the author Aggie84025 for the post:
aggies22



User avatar
Full
Posts: 2174
Joined: April 27th, 2011, 11:07 am
Location: Davis County
Has thanked: 402 times
Been thanked: 227 times

Re: It is interesting looking at 2024 and beyond

Post by Full » August 9th, 2022, 4:31 pm

aggies22 wrote:
August 9th, 2022, 3:42 pm
Full wrote:
August 9th, 2022, 2:53 pm
Coloraggie wrote:
August 9th, 2022, 1:33 pm
I'm not sure the Michigan State game killed excitement, i think it built excitement to say we competed with a top tier BIG team on the road. The blowouts probably killed excitement.

Unfortunately, these games are money games to pay the bills, not because we think we are competitive. Losing BYU on the schedule only makes the money situation worse so I don't see any way that we drop the money games anytime in the near future.
Ok, even if it was a moral victory, a win over Northern Illinois instead of a loss to Michigan State and an 11-0 start vs 10-1 start is a lot more exciting. I’m not saying I don’t recognize the money, but only New Mexico, San Jose, Nevada and UNLV play guarantee games every year. It was 2009 when we began with the current philosophy, and things have changed since then.
If we don't want to play guarantee games, then more season tickets need to be sold and total donations have to go WAY up.
I wasn’t suggesting going from annual guarantee games to zero, but reducing the number. Possibly change to every third year don’t play one. Colorado State, Wyoming, Fresno, and Hawaii don’t play them every year. Further for the 2009-2010 season USU had $1.4 million in Ticket Sales compared to $2.6 in 2019-2020 (not much effect from Covid). Total revenues went from $19 million to $39 million. I read media rights are expected to go from $1.1 million to $4 million. I know my post on a message board won’t change anything, but it seems like conditions changed enough to look at the possibility. Also, 2021 was a season without a guarantee game. It must be possible.



aggies22
Aggie Insider, Pick'em Champ - '18 Kickoff, '19 Weekly
Posts: 14886
Joined: November 3rd, 2010, 8:17 pm
Location: Smithfield, Utah
Has thanked: 13781 times
Been thanked: 8540 times
Contact:

Re: It is interesting looking at 2024 and beyond

Post by aggies22 » August 9th, 2022, 4:33 pm

Full wrote:
August 9th, 2022, 4:31 pm
aggies22 wrote:
August 9th, 2022, 3:42 pm
Full wrote:
August 9th, 2022, 2:53 pm
Coloraggie wrote:
August 9th, 2022, 1:33 pm
I'm not sure the Michigan State game killed excitement, i think it built excitement to say we competed with a top tier BIG team on the road. The blowouts probably killed excitement.

Unfortunately, these games are money games to pay the bills, not because we think we are competitive. Losing BYU on the schedule only makes the money situation worse so I don't see any way that we drop the money games anytime in the near future.
Ok, even if it was a moral victory, a win over Northern Illinois instead of a loss to Michigan State and an 11-0 start vs 10-1 start is a lot more exciting. I’m not saying I don’t recognize the money, but only New Mexico, San Jose, Nevada and UNLV play guarantee games every year. It was 2009 when we began with the current philosophy, and things have changed since then.
If we don't want to play guarantee games, then more season tickets need to be sold and total donations have to go WAY up.
I wasn’t suggesting going from annual guarantee games to zero, but reducing the number. Possibly change to every third year don’t play one. Colorado State, Wyoming, Fresno, and Hawaii don’t play them every year. Further for the 2009-2010 season USU had $1.4 million in Ticket Sales compared to $2.6 in 2019-2020 (not much effect from Covid). Total revenues went from $19 million to $39 million. I read media rights are expected to go from $1.1 million to $4 million. I know my post on a message board won’t change anything, but it seems like conditions changed enough to look at the possibility. Also, 2021 was a season without a guarantee game. It must be possible.
I'm not 100% certain but I would imagine we scored some cash from Washington State.



User avatar
GeoAg
Moderator
Posts: 7914
Joined: November 3rd, 2010, 1:09 am
Has thanked: 176 times
Been thanked: 941 times

Re: It is interesting looking at 2024 and beyond

Post by GeoAg » August 9th, 2022, 4:40 pm

Full wrote:
August 9th, 2022, 4:31 pm
aggies22 wrote:
August 9th, 2022, 3:42 pm
Full wrote:
August 9th, 2022, 2:53 pm
Coloraggie wrote:
August 9th, 2022, 1:33 pm
I'm not sure the Michigan State game killed excitement, i think it built excitement to say we competed with a top tier BIG team on the road. The blowouts probably killed excitement.

Unfortunately, these games are money games to pay the bills, not because we think we are competitive. Losing BYU on the schedule only makes the money situation worse so I don't see any way that we drop the money games anytime in the near future.
Ok, even if it was a moral victory, a win over Northern Illinois instead of a loss to Michigan State and an 11-0 start vs 10-1 start is a lot more exciting. I’m not saying I don’t recognize the money, but only New Mexico, San Jose, Nevada and UNLV play guarantee games every year. It was 2009 when we began with the current philosophy, and things have changed since then.
If we don't want to play guarantee games, then more season tickets need to be sold and total donations have to go WAY up.
I wasn’t suggesting going from annual guarantee games to zero, but reducing the number. Possibly change to every third year don’t play one. Colorado State, Wyoming, Fresno, and Hawaii don’t play them every year. Further for the 2009-2010 season USU had $1.4 million in Ticket Sales compared to $2.6 in 2019-2020 (not much effect from Covid). Total revenues went from $19 million to $39 million. I read media rights are expected to go from $1.1 million to $4 million. I know my post on a message board won’t change anything, but it seems like conditions changed enough to look at the possibility. Also, 2021 was a season without a guarantee game. It must be possible.
It isn't possible to balance the budget and not play the guarantee. Every year we balance close to zero WITH a guarantee game. Washington State better have paid us, but they may not have since COVID was out of their control. Even with that costs are going up and our revenues don't put us ahead. We are catching up.

I think the guarantee games are a must. The one change I would like to see is more against the middle and lower tier teams instead of the likes of LSU and Alabama. I like Michigan State and look forward to Iowa next year. No problem with playing those at all.
These users thanked the author GeoAg for the post (total 2):
slcaggaggies22


"You guys have sacrificed in ways you've never sacrificed before. You've given more. You expect more...Tonight is our opportunity to write the story of who this family, who this program, who this team will be" -Coach Blake Anderson

swordsman1989
Posts: 1457
Joined: December 26th, 2010, 8:43 am
Location: Copenhagen, Denmark
Has thanked: 9 times
Been thanked: 388 times

Re: It is interesting looking at 2024 and beyond

Post by swordsman1989 » August 10th, 2022, 7:22 am

Yossarian wrote:
August 9th, 2022, 4:01 pm
Do the players look forward to playing the big time opponents in the storied venues? Does this factor in recruiting at all? I would guess they enjoy the opportunity to compete against top collegiate talent in the venues they see on TV growing up.
When my cousin was playing for USU in the early 1990s, he said the players loved those games. He was there in 1991, when the Aggies played at both Nebraska and Oklahoma back to back, and considered that a big highlight of his football days.
These users thanked the author swordsman1989 for the post (total 2):
aggies22FloridaAggie13



FloridaAggie13
Posts: 18158
Joined: August 22nd, 2011, 2:18 pm
Has thanked: 3646 times
Been thanked: 1326 times

Re: It is interesting looking at 2024 and beyond

Post by FloridaAggie13 » August 10th, 2022, 8:00 am

We've always played money games as long as I can remember; this didn't just start in 2009. As Swordsman mentioned, we played OU and Nebraska back-to-back in '91 and that was when they were both elite schools. In prior years, we played USC when they had Junior Seau, Illinois with Jeff George, Nebraska again. We played and beat Kansas State in '92.

In fact, I'd argue our show against OU in 2010, Auburn 2011 and Wisconsin 2012, was the perfect barometer of measuring our improvement as a team because we were in a position to win all three late in the game. They were no longer simple body bag games for the $1m payout to keep the program solvent. The 2018 MSU game was similar. Coming off three consecutive poor seasons, it gave fans hope the program had turned around again when we went on the road and played them tight to the final drive.
These users thanked the author FloridaAggie13 for the post:
aggies22



User avatar
GeoAg
Moderator
Posts: 7914
Joined: November 3rd, 2010, 1:09 am
Has thanked: 176 times
Been thanked: 941 times

Re: It is interesting looking at 2024 and beyond

Post by GeoAg » August 10th, 2022, 8:19 am

FloridaAggie13 wrote:
August 10th, 2022, 8:00 am
We've always played money games as long as I can remember; this didn't just start in 2009. As Swordsman mentioned, we played OU and Nebraska back-to-back in '91 and that was when they were both elite schools. In prior years, we played USC when they had Junior Seau, Illinois with Jeff George, Nebraska again. We played and beat Kansas State in '92.

In fact, I'd argue our show against OU in 2010, Auburn 2011 and Wisconsin 2012, was the perfect barometer of measuring our improvement as a team because we were in a position to win all three late in the game. They were no longer simple body bag games for the $1m payout to keep the program solvent. The 2018 MSU game was similar. Coming off three consecutive poor seasons, it gave fans hope the program had turned around again when we went on the road and played them tight to the final drive.
We routinely played 2 money games a year prior to joining the WAC. I like having 1 a year. I hope it continues.
These users thanked the author GeoAg for the post:
FloridaAggie13


"You guys have sacrificed in ways you've never sacrificed before. You've given more. You expect more...Tonight is our opportunity to write the story of who this family, who this program, who this team will be" -Coach Blake Anderson

FloridaAggie13
Posts: 18158
Joined: August 22nd, 2011, 2:18 pm
Has thanked: 3646 times
Been thanked: 1326 times

Re: It is interesting looking at 2024 and beyond

Post by FloridaAggie13 » August 10th, 2022, 8:51 am

GeoAg wrote:
August 10th, 2022, 8:19 am
FloridaAggie13 wrote:
August 10th, 2022, 8:00 am
We've always played money games as long as I can remember; this didn't just start in 2009. As Swordsman mentioned, we played OU and Nebraska back-to-back in '91 and that was when they were both elite schools. In prior years, we played USC when they had Junior Seau, Illinois with Jeff George, Nebraska again. We played and beat Kansas State in '92.

In fact, I'd argue our show against OU in 2010, Auburn 2011 and Wisconsin 2012, was the perfect barometer of measuring our improvement as a team because we were in a position to win all three late in the game. They were no longer simple body bag games for the $1m payout to keep the program solvent. The 2018 MSU game was similar. Coming off three consecutive poor seasons, it gave fans hope the program had turned around again when we went on the road and played them tight to the final drive.
We routinely played 2 money games a year prior to joining the WAC. I like having 1 a year. I hope it continues.
I agree. I don't see the need for two. I really enjoy playing the big boys, especially when we have a good team. I like to see how we compare when we are at our best.
These users thanked the author FloridaAggie13 for the post:
aggies22



aggies22
Aggie Insider, Pick'em Champ - '18 Kickoff, '19 Weekly
Posts: 14886
Joined: November 3rd, 2010, 8:17 pm
Location: Smithfield, Utah
Has thanked: 13781 times
Been thanked: 8540 times
Contact:

Re: It is interesting looking at 2024 and beyond

Post by aggies22 » August 10th, 2022, 9:04 am

FloridaAggie13 wrote:
August 10th, 2022, 8:00 am
We've always played money games as long as I can remember; this didn't just start in 2009. As Swordsman mentioned, we played OU and Nebraska back-to-back in '91 and that was when they were both elite schools. In prior years, we played USC when they had Junior Seau, Illinois with Jeff George, Nebraska again. We played and beat Kansas State in '92.

In fact, I'd argue our show against OU in 2010, Auburn 2011 and Wisconsin 2012, was the perfect barometer of measuring our improvement as a team because we were in a position to win all three late in the game. They were no longer simple body bag games for the $1m payout to keep the program solvent. The 2018 MSU game was similar. Coming off three consecutive poor seasons, it gave fans hope the program had turned around again when we went on the road and played them tight to the final drive.
We did well against Texas A&M in 2009 as well.
These users thanked the author aggies22 for the post:
FloridaAggie13



FloridaAggie13
Posts: 18158
Joined: August 22nd, 2011, 2:18 pm
Has thanked: 3646 times
Been thanked: 1326 times

Re: It is interesting looking at 2024 and beyond

Post by FloridaAggie13 » August 10th, 2022, 9:09 am

aggies22 wrote:
August 10th, 2022, 9:04 am
FloridaAggie13 wrote:
August 10th, 2022, 8:00 am
We've always played money games as long as I can remember; this didn't just start in 2009. As Swordsman mentioned, we played OU and Nebraska back-to-back in '91 and that was when they were both elite schools. In prior years, we played USC when they had Junior Seau, Illinois with Jeff George, Nebraska again. We played and beat Kansas State in '92.

In fact, I'd argue our show against OU in 2010, Auburn 2011 and Wisconsin 2012, was the perfect barometer of measuring our improvement as a team because we were in a position to win all three late in the game. They were no longer simple body bag games for the $1m payout to keep the program solvent. The 2018 MSU game was similar. Coming off three consecutive poor seasons, it gave fans hope the program had turned around again when we went on the road and played them tight to the final drive.
We did well against Texas A&M in 2009 as well.
That's right, we only lost by seven. That was the beginning of the trend upward where GA 1.0 was teaching the players it wasn't enough just to show up.



NavyBlueAggie
Posts: 2763
Joined: November 5th, 2010, 9:28 am
Has thanked: 336 times
Been thanked: 570 times

Re: It is interesting looking at 2024 and beyond

Post by NavyBlueAggie » August 10th, 2022, 2:08 pm

aggies22 wrote:
August 9th, 2022, 3:42 pm
Full wrote:
August 9th, 2022, 2:53 pm
Coloraggie wrote:
August 9th, 2022, 1:33 pm
I'm not sure the Michigan State game killed excitement, i think it built excitement to say we competed with a top tier BIG team on the road. The blowouts probably killed excitement.

Unfortunately, these games are money games to pay the bills, not because we think we are competitive. Losing BYU on the schedule only makes the money situation worse so I don't see any way that we drop the money games anytime in the near future.
Ok, even if it was a moral victory, a win over Northern Illinois instead of a loss to Michigan State and an 11-0 start vs 10-1 start is a lot more exciting. I’m not saying I don’t recognize the money, but only New Mexico, San Jose, Nevada and UNLV play guarantee games every year. It was 2009 when we began with the current philosophy, and things have changed since then.
If we don't want to play guarantee games, more season tickets need to be sold and total donations have to go WAY up.


The method for increasing donations, ticket sales, private and corporate revenue (Donations) has always been available. Seems to me the obvious solution is to methodically and professionally work the Wasatch Front. Money and people, graduates and alumni with means and influence [ /b]



SwaggieAggie
Posts: 588
Joined: September 17th, 2019, 10:04 pm
Has thanked: 57 times
Been thanked: 303 times

Re: It is interesting looking at 2024 and beyond

Post by SwaggieAggie » August 10th, 2022, 3:35 pm

Intermeddler wrote:
August 9th, 2022, 2:20 pm
Full wrote:
August 9th, 2022, 12:36 pm
With BYU dropping us from future games it seems like a good time to reexamine the scheduling philosophy. I would love to see a move toward reducing these to every other year. The excitement of the season getting washed away annually with a loss, and usually a big loss. In 2019 the 6-42 loss to LSU, in 2018 31-38 loss to Michigan State, in 2017 10-59 loss to Wisconsin, in 2016 7-45 loss to USC, in 2015 17-31 loss to Washington, and in 2014 7-38 loss to Tennessee. Most of these games killed excitement in fringe fans. I’m not sure how beneficial these games have been, although I understand they helped pay the bills. I see all MW teams except San Diego State are playing some, so it looks like it’s required for the arms race. Last season didn’t have one and I didn’t miss it. As far as I can see it’s been about 5% of annual revenue, but it appears guarantees are getting smaller while other revenue has increased. I see Iowa in 2023, Mississippi State in 2024, Texas A&M in 2025, and in 2027 the first away game of the Oregon’s 2-1. With the separation between the SEC and Big Ten with the other “P5” schools maybe there is a case for finding a ACC, Big 12 or PAC-10 team. Go Aggies!
One of these is not like the others.
Oh yes. Not trying to celebrate a moral victory by any means, but Michigan State was an exciting game from start to finish. It was pretty clear from one week one that this team was going to be a conference contender.
These users thanked the author SwaggieAggie for the post:
Intermeddler



SwaggieAggie
Posts: 588
Joined: September 17th, 2019, 10:04 pm
Has thanked: 57 times
Been thanked: 303 times

Re: It is interesting looking at 2024 and beyond

Post by SwaggieAggie » August 10th, 2022, 3:42 pm

GeoAg wrote:
August 9th, 2022, 4:40 pm
Full wrote:
August 9th, 2022, 4:31 pm
aggies22 wrote:
August 9th, 2022, 3:42 pm
Full wrote:
August 9th, 2022, 2:53 pm
Coloraggie wrote:
August 9th, 2022, 1:33 pm
I'm not sure the Michigan State game killed excitement, i think it built excitement to say we competed with a top tier BIG team on the road. The blowouts probably killed excitement.

Unfortunately, these games are money games to pay the bills, not because we think we are competitive. Losing BYU on the schedule only makes the money situation worse so I don't see any way that we drop the money games anytime in the near future.
Ok, even if it was a moral victory, a win over Northern Illinois instead of a loss to Michigan State and an 11-0 start vs 10-1 start is a lot more exciting. I’m not saying I don’t recognize the money, but only New Mexico, San Jose, Nevada and UNLV play guarantee games every year. It was 2009 when we began with the current philosophy, and things have changed since then.
If we don't want to play guarantee games, then more season tickets need to be sold and total donations have to go WAY up.
I wasn’t suggesting going from annual guarantee games to zero, but reducing the number. Possibly change to every third year don’t play one. Colorado State, Wyoming, Fresno, and Hawaii don’t play them every year. Further for the 2009-2010 season USU had $1.4 million in Ticket Sales compared to $2.6 in 2019-2020 (not much effect from Covid). Total revenues went from $19 million to $39 million. I read media rights are expected to go from $1.1 million to $4 million. I know my post on a message board won’t change anything, but it seems like conditions changed enough to look at the possibility. Also, 2021 was a season without a guarantee game. It must be possible.
It isn't possible to balance the budget and not play the guarantee. Every year we balance close to zero WITH a guarantee game. Washington State better have paid us, but they may not have since COVID was out of their control. Even with that costs are going up and our revenues don't put us ahead. We are catching up.

I think the guarantee games are a must. The one change I would like to see is more against the middle and lower tier teams instead of the likes of LSU and Alabama. I like Michigan State and look forward to Iowa next year. No problem with playing those at all.
THIS. Exactly how I feel. I do enjoy the P5 games in September, just wish it was more matchups like that. Preferably Pac-12 and Big 12 teams, but I'm cool with teams like Iowa.

Alabama wins it's playoff games by 30+ points. And those are top 4 teams.. This Aggie team could very well be a 10-win and top 25 team again and repeat as conference champions, but yet we have to see them lose by 45 on week 1. That kinda sucks as a fan. But hey, $1.9 million is $1.9 million. I'd take that check too if I was Hartwell so I get it.
These users thanked the author SwaggieAggie for the post:
2004AG



User avatar
2004AG
Posts: 10260
Joined: November 16th, 2010, 11:42 am
Has thanked: 399 times
Been thanked: 941 times

Re: It is interesting looking at 2024 and beyond

Post by 2004AG » August 10th, 2022, 3:52 pm

SwaggieAggie wrote:
August 10th, 2022, 3:42 pm
GeoAg wrote:
August 9th, 2022, 4:40 pm
Full wrote:
August 9th, 2022, 4:31 pm
aggies22 wrote:
August 9th, 2022, 3:42 pm
Full wrote:
August 9th, 2022, 2:53 pm
Coloraggie wrote:
August 9th, 2022, 1:33 pm
I'm not sure the Michigan State game killed excitement, i think it built excitement to say we competed with a top tier BIG team on the road. The blowouts probably killed excitement.

Unfortunately, these games are money games to pay the bills, not because we think we are competitive. Losing BYU on the schedule only makes the money situation worse so I don't see any way that we drop the money games anytime in the near future.
Ok, even if it was a moral victory, a win over Northern Illinois instead of a loss to Michigan State and an 11-0 start vs 10-1 start is a lot more exciting. I’m not saying I don’t recognize the money, but only New Mexico, San Jose, Nevada and UNLV play guarantee games every year. It was 2009 when we began with the current philosophy, and things have changed since then.
If we don't want to play guarantee games, then more season tickets need to be sold and total donations have to go WAY up.
I wasn’t suggesting going from annual guarantee games to zero, but reducing the number. Possibly change to every third year don’t play one. Colorado State, Wyoming, Fresno, and Hawaii don’t play them every year. Further for the 2009-2010 season USU had $1.4 million in Ticket Sales compared to $2.6 in 2019-2020 (not much effect from Covid). Total revenues went from $19 million to $39 million. I read media rights are expected to go from $1.1 million to $4 million. I know my post on a message board won’t change anything, but it seems like conditions changed enough to look at the possibility. Also, 2021 was a season without a guarantee game. It must be possible.
It isn't possible to balance the budget and not play the guarantee. Every year we balance close to zero WITH a guarantee game. Washington State better have paid us, but they may not have since COVID was out of their control. Even with that costs are going up and our revenues don't put us ahead. We are catching up.

I think the guarantee games are a must. The one change I would like to see is more against the middle and lower tier teams instead of the likes of LSU and Alabama. I like Michigan State and look forward to Iowa next year. No problem with playing those at all.
THIS. Exactly how I feel. I do enjoy the P5 games in September, just wish it was more matchups like that. Preferably Pac-12 and Big 12 teams, but I'm cool with teams like Iowa.

Alabama wins it's playoff games by 30+ points. And those are top 4 teams.. This Aggie team could very well be a 10-win and top 25 team again and repeat as conference champions, but yet we have to see them lose by 45 on week 1. That kinda sucks as a fan. But hey, $1.9 million is $1.9 million. I'd take that check too if I was Hartwell so I get it.
Yeah, that's been my complaint. Alabama beats other SEC teams by 30-40 points. Schedule anybody but Alabama.



slcagg
Posts: 11686
Joined: December 15th, 2010, 6:29 pm
Has thanked: 3264 times
Been thanked: 2713 times

Re: It is interesting looking at 2024 and beyond

Post by slcagg » August 10th, 2022, 4:48 pm

2004AG wrote:
August 10th, 2022, 3:52 pm
SwaggieAggie wrote:
August 10th, 2022, 3:42 pm
GeoAg wrote:
August 9th, 2022, 4:40 pm
Full wrote:
August 9th, 2022, 4:31 pm
aggies22 wrote:
August 9th, 2022, 3:42 pm
Full wrote:
August 9th, 2022, 2:53 pm
Coloraggie wrote:
August 9th, 2022, 1:33 pm
I'm not sure the Michigan State game killed excitement, i think it built excitement to say we competed with a top tier BIG team on the road. The blowouts probably killed excitement.

Unfortunately, these games are money games to pay the bills, not because we think we are competitive. Losing BYU on the schedule only makes the money situation worse so I don't see any way that we drop the money games anytime in the near future.
Ok, even if it was a moral victory, a win over Northern Illinois instead of a loss to Michigan State and an 11-0 start vs 10-1 start is a lot more exciting. I’m not saying I don’t recognize the money, but only New Mexico, San Jose, Nevada and UNLV play guarantee games every year. It was 2009 when we began with the current philosophy, and things have changed since then.
If we don't want to play guarantee games, then more season tickets need to be sold and total donations have to go WAY up.
I wasn’t suggesting going from annual guarantee games to zero, but reducing the number. Possibly change to every third year don’t play one. Colorado State, Wyoming, Fresno, and Hawaii don’t play them every year. Further for the 2009-2010 season USU had $1.4 million in Ticket Sales compared to $2.6 in 2019-2020 (not much effect from Covid). Total revenues went from $19 million to $39 million. I read media rights are expected to go from $1.1 million to $4 million. I know my post on a message board won’t change anything, but it seems like conditions changed enough to look at the possibility. Also, 2021 was a season without a guarantee game. It must be possible.
It isn't possible to balance the budget and not play the guarantee. Every year we balance close to zero WITH a guarantee game. Washington State better have paid us, but they may not have since COVID was out of their control. Even with that costs are going up and our revenues don't put us ahead. We are catching up.

I think the guarantee games are a must. The one change I would like to see is more against the middle and lower tier teams instead of the likes of LSU and Alabama. I like Michigan State and look forward to Iowa next year. No problem with playing those at all.
THIS. Exactly how I feel. I do enjoy the P5 games in September, just wish it was more matchups like that. Preferably Pac-12 and Big 12 teams, but I'm cool with teams like Iowa.

Alabama wins it's playoff games by 30+ points. And those are top 4 teams.. This Aggie team could very well be a 10-win and top 25 team again and repeat as conference champions, but yet we have to see them lose by 45 on week 1. That kinda sucks as a fan. But hey, $1.9 million is $1.9 million. I'd take that check too if I was Hartwell so I get it.
Yeah, that's been my complaint. Alabama beats other SEC teams by 30-40 points. Schedule anybody but Alabama.
Well said by my fellow president of the Nick saban fan club



User avatar
2004AG
Posts: 10260
Joined: November 16th, 2010, 11:42 am
Has thanked: 399 times
Been thanked: 941 times

Re: It is interesting looking at 2024 and beyond

Post by 2004AG » August 10th, 2022, 4:56 pm

slcagg wrote:
August 10th, 2022, 4:48 pm
2004AG wrote:
August 10th, 2022, 3:52 pm
SwaggieAggie wrote:
August 10th, 2022, 3:42 pm
GeoAg wrote:
August 9th, 2022, 4:40 pm
Full wrote:
August 9th, 2022, 4:31 pm
aggies22 wrote:
August 9th, 2022, 3:42 pm
Full wrote:
August 9th, 2022, 2:53 pm
Coloraggie wrote:
August 9th, 2022, 1:33 pm
I'm not sure the Michigan State game killed excitement, i think it built excitement to say we competed with a top tier BIG team on the road. The blowouts probably killed excitement.

Unfortunately, these games are money games to pay the bills, not because we think we are competitive. Losing BYU on the schedule only makes the money situation worse so I don't see any way that we drop the money games anytime in the near future.
Ok, even if it was a moral victory, a win over Northern Illinois instead of a loss to Michigan State and an 11-0 start vs 10-1 start is a lot more exciting. I’m not saying I don’t recognize the money, but only New Mexico, San Jose, Nevada and UNLV play guarantee games every year. It was 2009 when we began with the current philosophy, and things have changed since then.
If we don't want to play guarantee games, then more season tickets need to be sold and total donations have to go WAY up.
I wasn’t suggesting going from annual guarantee games to zero, but reducing the number. Possibly change to every third year don’t play one. Colorado State, Wyoming, Fresno, and Hawaii don’t play them every year. Further for the 2009-2010 season USU had $1.4 million in Ticket Sales compared to $2.6 in 2019-2020 (not much effect from Covid). Total revenues went from $19 million to $39 million. I read media rights are expected to go from $1.1 million to $4 million. I know my post on a message board won’t change anything, but it seems like conditions changed enough to look at the possibility. Also, 2021 was a season without a guarantee game. It must be possible.
It isn't possible to balance the budget and not play the guarantee. Every year we balance close to zero WITH a guarantee game. Washington State better have paid us, but they may not have since COVID was out of their control. Even with that costs are going up and our revenues don't put us ahead. We are catching up.

I think the guarantee games are a must. The one change I would like to see is more against the middle and lower tier teams instead of the likes of LSU and Alabama. I like Michigan State and look forward to Iowa next year. No problem with playing those at all.
THIS. Exactly how I feel. I do enjoy the P5 games in September, just wish it was more matchups like that. Preferably Pac-12 and Big 12 teams, but I'm cool with teams like Iowa.

Alabama wins it's playoff games by 30+ points. And those are top 4 teams.. This Aggie team could very well be a 10-win and top 25 team again and repeat as conference champions, but yet we have to see them lose by 45 on week 1. That kinda sucks as a fan. But hey, $1.9 million is $1.9 million. I'd take that check too if I was Hartwell so I get it.
Yeah, that's been my complaint. Alabama beats other SEC teams by 30-40 points. Schedule anybody but Alabama.
Well said by my fellow president of the Nick saban fan club
You'll be happy to know I will be in attendance at the Alabama game. My arm was twisted, and I'm not happy about it, but I will be there.
These users thanked the author 2004AG for the post:
aggies22



slcagg
Posts: 11686
Joined: December 15th, 2010, 6:29 pm
Has thanked: 3264 times
Been thanked: 2713 times

Re: It is interesting looking at 2024 and beyond

Post by slcagg » August 10th, 2022, 5:44 pm

2004AG wrote:
August 10th, 2022, 4:56 pm
slcagg wrote:
August 10th, 2022, 4:48 pm
2004AG wrote:
August 10th, 2022, 3:52 pm
SwaggieAggie wrote:
August 10th, 2022, 3:42 pm
GeoAg wrote:
August 9th, 2022, 4:40 pm
Full wrote:
August 9th, 2022, 4:31 pm
aggies22 wrote:
August 9th, 2022, 3:42 pm
Full wrote:
August 9th, 2022, 2:53 pm
Coloraggie wrote:
August 9th, 2022, 1:33 pm
I'm not sure the Michigan State game killed excitement, i think it built excitement to say we competed with a top tier BIG team on the road. The blowouts probably killed excitement.

Unfortunately, these games are money games to pay the bills, not because we think we are competitive. Losing BYU on the schedule only makes the money situation worse so I don't see any way that we drop the money games anytime in the near future.
Ok, even if it was a moral victory, a win over Northern Illinois instead of a loss to Michigan State and an 11-0 start vs 10-1 start is a lot more exciting. I’m not saying I don’t recognize the money, but only New Mexico, San Jose, Nevada and UNLV play guarantee games every year. It was 2009 when we began with the current philosophy, and things have changed since then.
If we don't want to play guarantee games, then more season tickets need to be sold and total donations have to go WAY up.
I wasn’t suggesting going from annual guarantee games to zero, but reducing the number. Possibly change to every third year don’t play one. Colorado State, Wyoming, Fresno, and Hawaii don’t play them every year. Further for the 2009-2010 season USU had $1.4 million in Ticket Sales compared to $2.6 in 2019-2020 (not much effect from Covid). Total revenues went from $19 million to $39 million. I read media rights are expected to go from $1.1 million to $4 million. I know my post on a message board won’t change anything, but it seems like conditions changed enough to look at the possibility. Also, 2021 was a season without a guarantee game. It must be possible.
It isn't possible to balance the budget and not play the guarantee. Every year we balance close to zero WITH a guarantee game. Washington State better have paid us, but they may not have since COVID was out of their control. Even with that costs are going up and our revenues don't put us ahead. We are catching up.

I think the guarantee games are a must. The one change I would like to see is more against the middle and lower tier teams instead of the likes of LSU and Alabama. I like Michigan State and look forward to Iowa next year. No problem with playing those at all.
THIS. Exactly how I feel. I do enjoy the P5 games in September, just wish it was more matchups like that. Preferably Pac-12 and Big 12 teams, but I'm cool with teams like Iowa.

Alabama wins it's playoff games by 30+ points. And those are top 4 teams.. This Aggie team could very well be a 10-win and top 25 team again and repeat as conference champions, but yet we have to see them lose by 45 on week 1. That kinda sucks as a fan. But hey, $1.9 million is $1.9 million. I'd take that check too if I was Hartwell so I get it.
Yeah, that's been my complaint. Alabama beats other SEC teams by 30-40 points. Schedule anybody but Alabama.
Well said by my fellow president of the Nick saban fan club
You'll be happy to know I will be in attendance at the Alabama game. My arm was twisted, and I'm not happy about it, but I will be there.
Why would you not be happy?

Btw make sure to get some dreamland bbq. You’ll thank me later.



Post Reply Previous topicNext topic