menu
Logo
99+
Bobcat Attack Menu
Logo
99+
Ohio Football Topic
Topic: Payouts
Page: 2 of 2
mail
person
Bobcat Love's Sense of Shame
5/27/2025 3:49 PM
OUs LONG Driver wrote:expand_more
Is there any data out there that says injuries are lopsided when the G5 plays the P4 or when FCS plays G5 or P4? I don't really buy it but have seen that repeatedly referenced as a negative of playing "up".
Chat GPT:

While specific, detailed data on injury rates in college football specifically comparing Power Four (P4) vs. Group of Five (G5) and FCS vs. G5/P4 is limited, here's what can be gathered:

1. General Trends in College Football Injuries:
Concussions: Concussions are a major concern, and their incidence often correlates with the overall injury rate.

2. Limited Evidence on P4 vs. G5/FCS:
Anecdotal Evidence: While there's no definitive data, some anecdotal evidence suggests that FCS teams may experience more injuries and soreness after playing FBS (Football Bowl Subdivision, which includes both G5 and P4) schools. This could be attributed to potential differences in player size, strength, and overall program resources.
No Indication of Higher Catastrophic Injuries: It's important to note that there's no evidence suggesting a higher rate of season-ending, career-ending, or catastrophic injuries in FCS teams playing against FBS opponents.

3. Factors that Could Influence Injury Disparities:
Player Size and Strength: P4 programs generally have access to a higher caliber of recruits and more resources for strength and conditioning, potentially leading to a difference in player size and strength compared to G5 and FCS teams. This could impact the severity of collisions and subsequent injury risk.
Training Regimens: Differences in training facilities, coaching staff, and strength & conditioning programs between P4 and G5/FCS could contribute to variations in injury rates.
Fatigue and Recovery: G5 and FCS teams might face greater challenges in managing player fatigue and ensuring adequate recovery due to factors like travel schedules and limited resources.
Game Schedule and Frequency: P4 teams often have more high-profile, nationally televised games, potentially increasing exposure and overall injury risk, while G5 and FCS schedules may include a higher proportion of "payday games" against P4 opponents, potentially exposing them to more intense competition and increased injury risk.

Conclusion:
While conclusive data specifically comparing injury rates based on conference affiliations (P4, G5, FCS) is limited, existing evidence points to general trends in college football injuries. Differences in resources, player development, and game intensity might contribute to potential disparities in injury rates across these conferences, but more specific research is needed to confirm this.
So...antecdotal evidence being random message board posters claiming this is an issue when no one can prove it.
Yep. The extent to which a handful of people will go to criticize the AD is hilarious. We're coming off our first ever MAC Championship, and a program whose best ever wins are against a mediocre Pitt team (as voted by BA.com) or post death penalty Penn State gets three cracks at P5 teams in a few months. Exactly one year since NIU near a team that played for a championship.

And the stance here is that we shouldn't want to play those games because big, bad P5 teams will hurt us, and that if we do deign play as illustrious a team as Rutgers, we should remember that they're our betters and it's only for the money.

.
mail
TWT
5/27/2025 6:08 PM
When a G5 team did win against the P4 the excuse by the commentators was always that such and such G5 team was able to play that P4 team early. There is an element of surprise playing anyone early because scouting is less refined on the opponnent. Injuries tend to mount as the season progresses and depth questions rear in second half of the seasons. With a month to prep for Rutgers and 9 days to prep for West Virginia I think we'll be fine. One of the programs strengths anyways has been the ability to maintain composure with depth as the season progresses in recent years. The OSU game is low risk high reward situation if the Cats can play relatively well in Columbus. The schedule is perfectly designed for a CFP run if the team defeats Rutgers and/or WVU.
mail
person
colobobcat66
5/27/2025 11:02 PM
TWT wrote:expand_more
When a G5 team did win against the P4 the excuse by the commentators was always that such and such G5 team was able to play that P4 team early. There is an element of surprise playing anyone early because scouting is less refined on the opponnent. Injuries tend to mount as the season progresses and depth questions rear in second half of the seasons. With a month to prep for Rutgers and 9 days to prep for West Virginia I think we'll be fine. One of the programs strengths anyways has been the ability to maintain composure with depth as the season progresses in recent years. The OSU game is low risk high reward situation if the Cats can play relatively well in Columbus. The schedule is perfectly designed for a CFP run if the team defeats Rutgers and/or WVU.
Not likely at all with 2 OOC losses, and they would have to make the OSU game closer than everybody thinks it will be and not lose again and run up big scores in the MAC. The MAC is so weak that they won’t get any credit for even running the table there.
Last Edited: 5/28/2025 10:14:23 AM by colobobcat66
mail
person
Kevin Finnegan
5/28/2025 11:16 AM
BobcatBurner wrote:expand_more
This absurd football schedule in 2025 is crazy. Sure, the Bobcats bring in $1.9 million from TOSU and slightly over a million from Rutgers. However, they are playing WVU for a total of $1 million for a three year (2-1)series. That deal is a slap in the face when WVU paid Towson $500,000 in 2022 for a home game. Terrible deal! No way should Ohio be facing two Big Ten and a Big 12 teams in consecutive weeks to open up the season. Does this administration ask the mens basketball program to play 75% of non conference games vs power four schools? We all know that doesn't happen. If Texas Tech and Boston College were paying basketball schools $115 K a few years ago, then Ohio can find plenty of schools to fork out that type of cash to help pay the athletic departments bills.
By all means we should complain about hosting a Power 4 team and having thousands of their fans pay season ticket prices for a single game. There's just no upside, which is why Bobcat1996 should stay away from Peden that day.
E WVU is paying Ohio a total of one million dollars for a three game series. They paid Towson 500 K for one game a few seasons ago. Not a good business deal for Ohio.
no, it's a million for one game, plus a home/home washout.
This is a better way to look at it than I previously thought of. An even more reasonable deal. 1 million is a little under market value, but will be cancelled out by short travel, etc.
DFC and BobcatBurner, I'd actually say it's a pretty good deal. Think of it this way. Our home and home with WVU are not two equal values. We are less appealing, which is the reason we cannot pay schools $1 million or anywhere near to that to have them come to us.

So, let's assume our value of a home game is 1/2 of what WVU's is, though that's likely even an extreme. They average around 51,500 fans a game. We average around 20,000 at best. Our tickets are much cheaper, and likely the concessions are as well. But, still, let's go with the fact that an OHIO home game has 1/2 the value of a WVU home game.

That would mean that a home and home with WVU is hurting their bottom line significantly. They're better off with two buy games. But, to make it likely that they would come to us, we offered them two home games to our one. That, in and of itself, feels like a pretty even trade. Having WVU at our stadium this year is going to be a massive boost to our local economy and will help season ticket sales. But, we didn't just get a 2-for-1. We got a 2-for-1, bringing a marquee school to our campus AND got them to pay us $1 million in the deal. I'd say that the negotiations on that deal were pretty impressive.
Last Edited: 5/28/2025 11:16:51 AM by Kevin Finnegan
mail
M.D.W.S.T
5/28/2025 11:57 AM
OUs LONG Driver wrote:expand_more
Is there any data out there that says injuries are lopsided when the G5 plays the P4 or when FCS plays G5 or P4? I don't really buy it but have seen that repeatedly referenced as a negative of playing "up".
Chat GPT:

While specific, detailed data on injury rates in college football specifically comparing Power Four (P4) vs. Group of Five (G5) and FCS vs. G5/P4 is limited, here's what can be gathered:

1. General Trends in College Football Injuries:
Concussions: Concussions are a major concern, and their incidence often correlates with the overall injury rate.

2. Limited Evidence on P4 vs. G5/FCS:
Anecdotal Evidence: While there's no definitive data, some anecdotal evidence suggests that FCS teams may experience more injuries and soreness after playing FBS (Football Bowl Subdivision, which includes both G5 and P4) schools. This could be attributed to potential differences in player size, strength, and overall program resources.
No Indication of Higher Catastrophic Injuries: It's important to note that there's no evidence suggesting a higher rate of season-ending, career-ending, or catastrophic injuries in FCS teams playing against FBS opponents.

3. Factors that Could Influence Injury Disparities:
Player Size and Strength: P4 programs generally have access to a higher caliber of recruits and more resources for strength and conditioning, potentially leading to a difference in player size and strength compared to G5 and FCS teams. This could impact the severity of collisions and subsequent injury risk.
Training Regimens: Differences in training facilities, coaching staff, and strength & conditioning programs between P4 and G5/FCS could contribute to variations in injury rates.
Fatigue and Recovery: G5 and FCS teams might face greater challenges in managing player fatigue and ensuring adequate recovery due to factors like travel schedules and limited resources.
Game Schedule and Frequency: P4 teams often have more high-profile, nationally televised games, potentially increasing exposure and overall injury risk, while G5 and FCS schedules may include a higher proportion of "payday games" against P4 opponents, potentially exposing them to more intense competition and increased injury risk.

Conclusion:
While conclusive data specifically comparing injury rates based on conference affiliations (P4, G5, FCS) is limited, existing evidence points to general trends in college football injuries. Differences in resources, player development, and game intensity might contribute to potential disparities in injury rates across these conferences, but more specific research is needed to confirm this.
So...antecdotal evidence being random message board posters claiming this is an issue when no one can prove it.
Well, I don't think anyone has thought to compile and track that data, but anecdotally... I think it would seem likely that when 'weaker' teams are facing a team full of first round draft picks the higher likihood of injury would be present, especially as the game goes on and the team wears out. Ohio State's 2nd string is all 5-stars trying to prove they belong who will come out firing on all cylinders fully rested, where OU will have all their starters in the 3rd and 4th quarters who are clearly more tired after getting banged around by bigger, faster, stronger guys.

I dont know that it's an "issue", but it is a fair concern.

Do I think data is present to suggest our DB's will be more likely to suffer an injury chasing around Jeremiah Smith all day? No. Do I think they are indeed more likely to be far more exhausted and the risk of injury rises... yes. Clearly.
Last Edited: 5/28/2025 11:58:51 AM by M.D.W.S.T
mail
person
Bobcat Love's Sense of Shame
5/28/2025 1:52 PM
It feels to me like there's a pretty weird disconnect between folks who think that G5 should get (at least) one autobid to the college football playoffs and folks who think that our team isn't physically capable of playing multiple P5 teams in a row without risking injury.

We're either playing at the same level as them or not, right?
mail
person
OUs LONG Driver
5/28/2025 1:59 PM
M.D.W.S.T wrote:expand_more
Is there any data out there that says injuries are lopsided when the G5 plays the P4 or when FCS plays G5 or P4? I don't really buy it but have seen that repeatedly referenced as a negative of playing "up".
Chat GPT:

While specific, detailed data on injury rates in college football specifically comparing Power Four (P4) vs. Group of Five (G5) and FCS vs. G5/P4 is limited, here's what can be gathered:

1. General Trends in College Football Injuries:
Concussions: Concussions are a major concern, and their incidence often correlates with the overall injury rate.

2. Limited Evidence on P4 vs. G5/FCS:
Anecdotal Evidence: While there's no definitive data, some anecdotal evidence suggests that FCS teams may experience more injuries and soreness after playing FBS (Football Bowl Subdivision, which includes both G5 and P4) schools. This could be attributed to potential differences in player size, strength, and overall program resources.
No Indication of Higher Catastrophic Injuries: It's important to note that there's no evidence suggesting a higher rate of season-ending, career-ending, or catastrophic injuries in FCS teams playing against FBS opponents.

3. Factors that Could Influence Injury Disparities:
Player Size and Strength: P4 programs generally have access to a higher caliber of recruits and more resources for strength and conditioning, potentially leading to a difference in player size and strength compared to G5 and FCS teams. This could impact the severity of collisions and subsequent injury risk.
Training Regimens: Differences in training facilities, coaching staff, and strength & conditioning programs between P4 and G5/FCS could contribute to variations in injury rates.
Fatigue and Recovery: G5 and FCS teams might face greater challenges in managing player fatigue and ensuring adequate recovery due to factors like travel schedules and limited resources.
Game Schedule and Frequency: P4 teams often have more high-profile, nationally televised games, potentially increasing exposure and overall injury risk, while G5 and FCS schedules may include a higher proportion of "payday games" against P4 opponents, potentially exposing them to more intense competition and increased injury risk.

Conclusion:
While conclusive data specifically comparing injury rates based on conference affiliations (P4, G5, FCS) is limited, existing evidence points to general trends in college football injuries. Differences in resources, player development, and game intensity might contribute to potential disparities in injury rates across these conferences, but more specific research is needed to confirm this.
So...antecdotal evidence being random message board posters claiming this is an issue when no one can prove it.
Well, I don't think anyone has thought to compile and track that data, but anecdotally... I think it would seem likely that when 'weaker' teams are facing a team full of first round draft picks the higher likihood of injury would be present, especially as the game goes on and the team wears out. Ohio State's 2nd string is all 5-stars trying to prove they belong who will come out firing on all cylinders fully rested, where OU will have all their starters in the 3rd and 4th quarters who are clearly more tired after getting banged around by bigger, faster, stronger guys.

I dont know that it's an "issue", but it is a fair concern.

Do I think data is present to suggest our DB's will be more likely to suffer an injury chasing around Jeremiah Smith all day? No. Do I think they are indeed more likely to be far more exhausted and the risk of injury rises... yes. Clearly.
I track and agree in principle. It's hard for me to quantify the difference as substantial enough to matter though. It's not 30 year old grown men playing 15 year old kids. It's guys that maybe have 0.1 faster 40, and squat 20 more lbs. The game is also about skill not just strength/speed. I think (without firm evidence of course) that on average at the FBS level that the % difference in speed/strength is not very wide.

On the point of being tired going against someone fresh I agree, however, if we're running out our 1st team in the 4th quarter when getting lapped by one of these teams I'd be disappointed in the staff. Managing these situations and getting the 2nd and 3rd team guys experience is just as important for us as it is the team winning. There's a threshold of trying to win the game because it's reasonable and a point where you pivot to the next game/rest of season. That point in the game comes at a somewhat similar place for both teams. Here's to hoping we don't reach that point in our OOC schedule!
mail
person
L.C.
5/28/2025 2:24 PM
Deciduous Forest Cat wrote:expand_more
no, it's a million for one game, plus a home/home washout.

I hadn't thought of it that way, but that's a pretty reasonable deal.
mail
person
L.C.
5/28/2025 2:27 PM
Bobcat Love's Sense of Shame wrote:expand_more
Knorr played two P5 teams every year, including baback-to-back multiple times. In Solich's first year, we played 3 in a row -- likely a Knorr schedule.

They also payed a 5 game home schedule most years. Do people want to go back to that? This schedule, while difficult, does have 6 home games.
mail
person
Bobcat Love's Sense of Shame
5/28/2025 3:06 PM
L.C. wrote:expand_more
Knorr played two P5 teams every year, including baback-to-back multiple times. In Solich's first year, we played 3 in a row -- likely a Knorr schedule.

They also payed a 5 game home schedule most years. Do people want to go back to that? This schedule, while difficult, does have 6 home games.
I have no problem with our schedule this year. I like it, in fact. I think playing games fans care about is a good strategy.

I mentioned Knorr's scheduling because the poster I was replying to said Knorr didn't believe in playing that many P5s.
Showing Messages: 26 - 35 of 35
reply
vertical_align_top
vertical_align_center
vertical_align_bottom
add_comment
chevron_backward
MAC News Links



extra small (< 576px)
small (>= 576px)
medium (>= 768px)
large (>= 992px)
x-large (>= 1200px)
xx-large (>= 1400px)