DCF is the big winner - just hit the nail on the head.

Take Group of 5 Teams off your schedule = Ohio State can plan to go on the road for at least 2 more P5 away games each year. Loss of revenue for Columbus, Ohio State, the Athletic Department, etc.

Ohio State does not want to have to add games at Baylor and at Colorado instead of bringing in Ohio and Youngstown State.

If Cromer didn't want to work at Ohio State (or fill in the other P5) so badly - she would have already taken the necessary steps to fulfill her fidicuiary responsibility. Lori Gonzalez, as her direct Supervisor, is driving the getaway car for Gene Smith and Ross Bjork.

It's sad and it's pathetic. As long as we hire carpetbaggers who continually glaze the Power 5 - we are going to get what we deserve.

There is no question that TOSU can afford to pay more than what the original contract suggests. Secondly it is a crying shame that Ohio University agreed to play in Columbus and at Rutgers and play West Virginia in three consecutive games. The West Virginia game is not a so called money game where Ohio University will make a huge amount of dollars. Even if Ohio traveled to Morgantown in 2025, that would be three consecutive power four games. Absolutely ridiculous!! In no scenario should Ohio be playing three power four schools in consecutive weeks.

And that's generally been the formula at Ohio, just not every single year.

Jesus.

Yes DFC that is usually the schedule plan but in 2024 the Bobcats are playing two power four teams. It looks like in the near future the one power four and one FCS, with two group of five schools has been scrapped. This is not good.

The leverage here probably being that they'd have to pay both Ohio and YSU if they wanted to break the contract. I have no idea what goes into that or how much they have to pay if they break it, but that's my guess.

150 Julie Cromer's who want to work at Power 5 schools and won't make a move to create an equal playing field until they are held accountable and sued for breach of fiduciary responsibility. Youngstown, Toledo, BG, Akron, etc should be holding out for the same $5 Million. A home win is worth way more than $1.9 Million to Ohio State. They've already lubed up the Group of 5 with the CFP payout proportions, now we are straight bent over to take it from them again with these ridiculously low buy-game amounts. Do some work Cromer and Gonzalez.

Keep preaching it Bobcat Love. Keep it coming! What you say is absolutely true.

What do you think we should be asking for? Do we have comps to justify what we're asking?

What do we say when they say it's their fans and their tv contracts that drive the revenue for this game?

What about the fallout for ADs and programs that get a reputation for trying to renegotiate contracts at the 11th hour?

This is just not how anything works LOL

Anyway... UK paid $750K to Akron last season. They're paying $550K for a return game in 2026.

I do enjoy watching you talk to yourself across multiple names raging against various athletic directors like a scorned former employee though.

The idea that they could get more, just by crying, is flat-out hilarious.

The poorly negotiated contract you don't even know the details to, was to secure the home game in Athens first, which as I'm sure you know since you're deeply ingrained in the innner workings of the athletic department tend to be an away game first and a home game later, that often never materializes.

We sign home and home contracts with G5 schools all the time. We almost always have one pay-out game with a P5 and one pay-in game with an FCS and two home and home contracts, usually with G5s, as part of our non-conference. We recently scheduled Kansas, Iowa State, and Syracuse as home and home series instead of G5s. How does that hurt us financially? We get more exposure on TV and bigger home crowds than playing a G5. Otherwise it is the same.

Why don't we do that every year? Most P5s aren't willing. Their home crowds are big enough to justify paying G5 teams to get a extra home game. That works for us in getting paid to. But I am 100% positive that the athletic department would rather have a home and home with a P5 than a G5. There is no way that Syracuse is going to pay us to play a home and home with them when just about all G5s would love to have the home and home that we got from them for no extra money. And if is in lieu of a G5 home and home series it is financially helpful. Of course, we might be able to fund the athletic department better in the short run by playing more than one pay-out game INSTEAD of having two home and home series as part if the schedule each year, some MAC schools often do, but only having 2 or 3 Saturday home games impacts the goals of the department negatively in other ways.

If we demand more, what do you all think our FCS schools will demand. It’s all relative. But you don’t think there is not a chain or database which tracks these contracts?