No, not at all. Ohio has been bowl eligible for 6 years in a row, and has been to 5 bowls. Besides the trips to various mostly fun places, they also get swag. It is a reasonable expectation that Ohio will continue to go to bowls, and that is a major selling point to recruits, certainly a stronger selling point than an individual money game would be.

Why would you not think bowl games would be a selling point to recruits? And, as for Bermuda in particular, why would recruits not want the possibility of a free trip to Bermuda in the middle of Winter? Sounds like fun to me.

I'm not just going by rankings, Tennessee would play better to Ohio fans I believe. And they're on the rise again. Go ahead to Manhattan, I like Knoxville.

I don't care about proximity to cater to 1,500 Ohio fans making a road trip. What I care about is playing a school that will finish in the Top 20 win or lose so it makes our schedule look good. With the future scheduling Schaus has penned for us a major bowl is out of the question. The major bowl will go to a school like Boise State willing to paint its turf blue and schedule up. As Boise proved last year getting pounded by 21 on the road at Ole Miss didn't hurt its major bowl chances. They still picked one up with 2 losses while Marshall had an undefeated regular season and wasn't on the radar for a major bowl. Obviously it will be harder for Ohio to get the required 6 or 7 wins to be bowl eligible playing a tougher schedule but at this point the program has been to enough bowl games that I will take a shot at a strong OOC for a greater reward. An OOC where if we go 10-2 we are in contention for a major bowl and 12-0 in contention for the 4 team playoff. Absolutely Ohio has to schedule up in the future.

You don't see Boise State trying to play USC or Notre Dame. Instead they go after Michigan State, Virginia Tech, Oklahoma State. They go after intriguing opponents that have upward momentum. USC or ND is what they used to call helmet games, meaning that you could spot those schools 21 point just because of the helmet. P.J. Fleck may talk about national ambitions for WMU but that school has far greater brand and location issues than Ohio. If it wasn't enough to be a mid major in a state with 2 Big Ten schools they also have to contend with CMU and EMU for brand awareness. The only mid major I remember playing USC and getting something out of it from a respect factor is Fresno State because of the open season in California recruiting. Its like the race to schedule Florida or Florida State for the smaller Florida schools to show they too can be a player. For WMU its a helmet game to play USC pure and simple.

Does Monroe have you on retainer, Uncle Wes? ;-) I simply don't agree with you. A perfect season next year gets OHIO into serious consideration for that bowl. Some prognosticators are saying U of M will be in the mix for the conference title next year. We have some home games coming up in the next few years with P5 schools. We are slowly upgrading the schedule. Frank is answer; he's not the problem.

Reading these posts really kind of make me laugh. There are so many inaccuracies such as us playing UMass next year . It's amazing. Comments like Boise not playing the helmet games is silly. They are playing FSU and Michigan state in the future. Marshall would have likely played in the access bowl last year if they hadn't stubbed their toe late in the season and they played no P5 schools last year. We play minnesota this year who finished ranked 25th last year. Talking about playing in a 4 team playoff game , while in the MAC, is so laughable.

Thanks for pulling this info. The fact that we have one recruit in the last three years from Nebraska, Penn. and WV is really surprising to me. I thought Solich still had ties to Nebraska contacts which would lead to more recruits. And the proximity of Penn. and WV to Athens I thought would be more attractive to some recruits (especially ones that fear that Athens is in the middle of nowhere).

Should we play UWash to help our BC pipeline to continue? ;-)

If I could make a list of how many things you don't understand in the power dynamic of college football I'd have a full novel. First I do not even care when we are playing UMass, the fact that we scheduled a 1 for 1 in the future with them shows we've given up on the national scene. Secondly there is a big difference between Michigan and Michigan State. Michigan is a cornerstone of college football. That is the one helmet you need to know. Michigan State is nothing in comparison but they are a Big Ten program on the rise playing great ball. Florida State some would consider helmet material but not all. Secondly OHIO can go as far as being the best team in the 6th best conference. That in some years has been Cincinnati, WVU, Utah or even Boise St. That school finishes somewhere around #3 or #4 in the country when undefeated. Playing a decent schedule. OHIO can do that with 3 strong non-conference opponents and a 9 game MAC football schedule playing WMU, Toledo and NIU more regularly. Everything isn't dictated by stadium size as you think. Kentucky football over Kansas State because UK has 70,000 seats. Its about buzz and momentum for schools that aren't blue bloods. Minnesota has some momentum but the Big Ten lags performance wise. If Minnesota finished in the Top 15 a few years in a row then they'll have something good going on there. Marshall should be avoided; too regional and negative connotations. You must understand the factors which make programs great to manipulate them to your advantage.

Thanks for the comments.

Don't know why that you're so hung up on the Kansas State thing. Bill Snyder has done amazing things there, and I think that he is probably 1 of the top coaches of the past 30 years, but he's 75 years old and when he leaves again the program will sink back into mediocrity or worse like it did the first time he left.

As for those people not calling Florida State a helmet team, we need to get them to a doctor quick.

Things go in cycles. It's true that Michigan is one of the top football programs by almost any measure, but its been down for the greater part of a decade (73-53 last 10 years), MSU has been 84-45 during those years. I just don't think it's a "big deal" which one of those two you play. They're both top 25 programs and MSU is the one with the BUZZ right now. You're also quick to dismiss Tennessee (historically one of the top 10 teams win wise) as not a top opponent because of their record (mosty due to coaching issues since Fullmer left), while giving Michigan a pass. Tennessee is a "blue blood", by almost any measure.


I haven't heard about the 9 game MAC schedule, when is that going to happen?

And you must be one of the "no to Marshall" guys. IMHO, I think that they are nationally known a lot more than Texas State, New Mexico State and even Colorado State who you propose we play in a good schedule. I just disagree with the logic of that strategy on many levels.

I'm not sure where I said that "everything" is dictated by stadium size,but I do believe that having a 70,000 seat stadium and filling it tells me a lot about the national relevance and fan base of that school.

As I've said before, I don't see even an undefeated MAC school ever making it to the current playoff system of 4 teams. SOS is just going to kill any MAC school. I think the new P5 setup is eventually going to eliminate any chance of a G5 school ever being a national champ.

You also mention that the new academic center and weight room upgrades are somehow going to help us become more relevant nationally. We can't even keep up with Marshall. While those additions will be nice, we are playing catch up in almost all areas. We are still saddled with one of the smallest and certainly the most antiquated stadium in the country and that ain't going to change anytime soon as far as I can tell. I think whatever we do to Peden, is "feeding oats to a dead horse". Yes, playing at Peden will affect who will come here to play on a 1 and 1 basis. It also tells the world that we are "small time" when it comes to national relevance.

Considering where we've come from, we've made great strides making Ohio football something worth following, not just because it's our school, but because they win and they're fun to watch (most of the time, anyway). I must say that the win at Penn State made up for a lot of bad losses, but that's just me. I just have no illusions of somehow becoming a top 4 ranked program. But, I'm in for the ride where ever it takes us the next 10 years or whatever I have remaining. See you in Moscow.

In a 4 team playoff, there isn't even enough room for all the P5 conferences, much less a team from G5. If TCU couldn't get in, even an undefeated MAC team won't get in. Even the best of the Marshall teams of the 90's were never ranked in the Top 4.

My perspective is similar to colobobcat66. Try to continuously improve, one step at a time, but never forget to have fun, and to enjoy the good times because times won't always be good. It's fine to wish for greater things, but never forget to be thankful for the present as well. Setting unrealistic goals as your only goals only assures unhappiness.

If the opportunity should come along to move up a conference, say to the AAC, weigh the pluses and minuses, and consider it, but in the meantime, keep beating Miami, and hopefully win the MACC a few times, and continue to enhance the reputation of Ohio University.

I disagree on some of your other points made but don't want to cover old ground. On the idea though our facilities are antiquated for the MAC that is a bobcatattack perpetrated myth. The school is in the Top 3 of the MAC in the following categories; IPF, Weight Room, Meeting Rooms, Locker Room, Press Box, Premium Seating. Overall OHIO is probably #1 in the MAC and in at least the Top 15 of G5 schools. The program is adding to that a very nice academic center, a redo of the weight room and a players lounge where the current academic room is in the tower. The stands and the bathrooms of Peden aren't in great condition but that is fan problem not a recruiting problem. Capacity is small but the trend in the sport at most schools is smaller capacities and more premium seating. While as I've said we've got a chance to get to #4 I don't think its worth making a 100 million dollar investment on a new football stadium. I'm fine with continuing to feed Oats at 1 million or so at a time to make incremental improvements.