We should schedule Ohio State for 2016.

[coastratdog]

My reasons why.
1. Nothing To lose. We beat them and up the ranks we shoot. We lose and at least or RPI doesn't take a hit.
2. Huge TV exposure. Mullen vs His old boss. Remember Mullen is 1 & 0 vs butt head.
3. Won't cost us an arm and leg. Should get a home and away game.

Others I'd like to see. USCWest, Miami (need FLORIDA recruiting), Michigan rematch.

[Dawg61]

No we shouldn't.

[EdDawg]

Mullen is 1-1 v. Meyer. Lost his first year here to Florida although Banks did have 2 pick 6's so.... Moral Victory?

[BeardoMSU]

1. Uh...no.
2. Dan is 1-1 against Urban. Lost at home in 2009 (ala Tebow), won in Gainesville 2010.
3. Uh...no again. That would be 2 losses in a row.

You wan't to play USC, Miami and Michigan?

[smootness]

Why would we ever be concerned with our RPI in football? Do they even bother calculating it? This would not be a good idea.

[Quaoarsking]

If we think we're going to be a legitimate SEC contender in 2016, it's something to think about. But if not, no, it's a bad idea.

[Dawg61]

Ohio State wouldn't schedule us anyways. Talk about a stupid idea for MSU it's even worse of an idea for them. Nice troll job if that's what your intentions were. Haha

[BulldogBear]

Ohio State wouldn't schedule us anyways. Talk about a stupid idea for MSU it's even worse of an idea for them. Nice troll job if that's what your intentions were. Haha

They might schedule us....in Columbus. They would never come to Starkville in my opinion. This is a can of worms I hope we haven't opened with this new scheduling ruleset. I don't like that our conference has put it's members in a position where other schools have power over us because we need the game more than them. I could see a lot of road trips in the future trying to fulfill this rule.

[PassInterference]

They might schedule us....in Columbus. They would never come to Starkville in my opinion. This is a can of worms I hope we haven't opened with this new scheduling ruleset. I don't like that our conference has put it's members in a position where other schools have power over us because we need the game more than them. I could see a lot of road trips in the future trying to fulfill this rule.


No way this isn't a mutually agreed upon thing between the conferences. It is also a show of power, taking games away from the little conferences that the Big 5 conferences want to separate from.

This puts the SEC at no disadvantage. The OSU's of the world hold no leverage on MSU because our commishes all agreed to make this happen.

[BulldogBear]

No way this isn't a mutually agreed upon thing between the conferences. It is also a show of power, taking games away from the little conferences that the Big 5 conferences want to separate from.

This puts the SEC at no disadvantage. The OSU's of the world hold no leverage on MSU because our commishes all agreed to make this happen.

I hope that it correct. I still think it could be a precursor to going to 9 conf games. This may become universal amongst Big Fivers.

[Todd4State]

No way this isn't a mutually agreed upon thing between the conferences. It is also a show of power, taking games away from the little conferences that the Big 5 conferences want to separate from.

This puts the SEC at no disadvantage. The OSU's of the world hold no leverage on MSU because our commishes all agreed to make this happen.

To me, on the surface this just looks like another dumb LT idea.

[Todd4State]

They might schedule us....in Columbus. They would never come to Starkville in my opinion. This is a can of worms I hope we haven't opened with this new scheduling ruleset. I don't like that our conference has put it's members in a position where other schools have power over us because we need the game more than them. I could see a lot of road trips in the future trying to fulfill this rule.

Get ready to go to Tucson, Ames, and Chestnut Hill. I think after a bunch of SEC schools end up paying about 4-5 million to do a home and home with someone like Rutgers they will end up changing this idea. LT has basically sent the rest of the big five a message that they can take as much money from the SEC as they want.

You might see some more kickoff classics like what we did last year. Which was basically us and Oklahoma State playing in a half full NFL stadium.

[HereComesTheSpiral]

Get ready to go to Tucson, Ames, and Chestnut Hill. I think after a bunch of SEC schools end up paying about 4-5 million to do a home and home with someone like Rutgers they will end up changing this idea. LT has basically sent the rest of the big five a message that they can take as much money from the SEC as they want.

You might see some more kickoff classics like what we did last year. Which was basically us and Oklahoma State playing in a half full NFL stadium.

I thought you didnt pay out for home and home series

[BulldogBear]

I thought you didnt pay out for home and home series

Not generally but you can actually work out whatever contract you want to. It's a business deal. Because we have to have this game, it gives the other Big Fivers the ability to BS their way into deals that are not helpful to the SEC school such as:

(1) Road game only. Essentially the reverse of what we do with small schools. They'd pay us a cut to come play at their place. Why not, we're making their fans pay a premium to watch a game.

(2) 2 for 1 or even 3 for 1. One game in Starkville, 2-3 in Chestnut Hill. Can we say no?

(3) Deal like we have with USM. Sure, it's home and home but we will be putting the fans in their normally empty stadium. I don't know details but I am sure we are getting some kind of take from the Hattiesburg gate that they agreed to make the deal happen. Otherwise there's no reason for us to play them down there which is why we didn't play them for a quarter century.

[HereComesTheSpiral]

Not generally but you can actually work out whatever contract you want to. It's a business deal. Because we have to have this game, it gives the other Big Fivers the ability to BS their way into deals that are not helpful to the SEC school such as:

(1) Road game only. Essentially the reverse of what we do with small schools. They'd pay us a cut to come play at their place. Why not, we're making their fans pay a premium to watch a game.

(2) 2 for 1 or even 3 for 1. One game in Starkville, 2-3 in Chestnut Hill. Can we say no?

(3) Deal like we have with USM. Sure, it's home and home but we will be putting the fans in their normally empty stadium. I don't know details but I am sure we are getting some kind of take from the Hattiesburg gate that they agreed to make the deal happen. Otherwise there's no reason for us to play them down there which is why we didn't play them for a quarter century.

Thanks for the explanation

[smootness]

Not generally but you can actually work out whatever contract you want to. It's a business deal. Because we have to have this game, it gives the other Big Fivers the ability to BS their way into deals that are not helpful to the SEC school such as:

(1) Road game only. Essentially the reverse of what we do with small schools. They'd pay us a cut to come play at their place. Why not, we're making their fans pay a premium to watch a game.

(2) 2 for 1 or even 3 for 1. One game in Starkville, 2-3 in Chestnut Hill. Can we say no?

(3) Deal like we have with USM. Sure, it's home and home but we will be putting the fans in their normally empty stadium. I don't know details but I am sure we are getting some kind of take from the Hattiesburg gate that they agreed to make the deal happen. Otherwise there's no reason for us to play them down there which is why we didn't play them for a quarter century.

Were this to happen, the SEC ADs would unanimously vote to remove the OOC opponent requirement.

We're also ignoring the fact that some of these schools may want an SEC opponent, especially one seen by many as a lesser SEC program. It may have been that we didn't want to schedule these games in the past, and we now may be able to say, 'Here's what School A is offering, what are you offering?'

[rabbitthedawg]

Why not...playing Ohio State is no different than playing LSU, Auburn, Alabama, etc. Look what Clemson did to them in the Orange Bowl! Love a home and home with them!! Can you imagine those Yankees tailgating in the Junction and hearing 50000 cowbells. Think of the hype!

[coastratdog]

remember kicking texas' ass Jackie's first year? We got instant credibility by playing that game. We should go out and do the same.

[Outside Dawg]

Bonner has an article outlining some possibilities for 2016.

http://www.clarionledger.com/story/sports/college/mississippi-state/2014/04/29/bonner-msu-small-windwo-add-marquee-game/8445419/

[scottycameron]

remember kicking texas' ass Jackie's first year? We got instant credibility by playing that game. We should go out and do the same.

Sure, it would be great, but no way Ohio St. would schedule us. There needs to be mutual interest, not just from one side. If you could schedule whoever you wanted we'd schedule Ohio St, Notre Dame, USC, and Texas every year. It doesn't work like that.

[codeDawg]

Why not...playing Ohio State is no different than playing LSU, Auburn, Alabama, etc. Look what Clemson did to them in the Orange Bowl! Love a home and home with them!! Can you imagine those Yankees tailgating in the Junction and hearing 50000 cowbells. Think of the hype!

Yup. It is no different except that loss may be the one that keeps us out of a higher bowl, or a bowl all together. Winning that game is "fun" but does not elivate our bowl status at all. High risk, low reward.

[BulldogBear]

Bonner has an article outlining some possibilities for 2016.

http://www.clarionledger.com/story/sports/college/mississippi-state/2014/04/29/bonner-msu-small-windwo-add-marquee-game/8445419/

Still too early?

#mediafail

[dickiedawg]

Sure, it would be great, but no way Ohio St. would schedule us. There needs to be mutual interest, not just from one side. If you could schedule whoever you wanted we'd schedule Ohio St, Notre Dame, USC, and Texas every year. It doesn't work like that.

Uh, no we wouldn't.

[Political Hack]

unless oure playing for a BCS playoff spot, it's stupid to schedule these kickoff games and risk a bowl birth for a little exposure. last year's kick off game cost us our QB, an OL, and our only returning starter at DB. And it damn near cost us a bowl game.

[thunderclap]

I wish somebody would hide LT.

[Political Hack]

I wish somebody would hide LT.

hahaha. People have no clue how much it's going to help when he retires. Not only in the SEC office, but for those he's protecting in Starkville still. When the foot comes off the throat, I really don't think there's a limit to what Dan Mullen can accomplish at State. Should be fun to watch from afar...

[thunderclap]

hahaha. People have no clue how much it's going to help when he retires. Not only in the SEC office, but for those he's protecting in Starkville still. When the foot comes off the throat, I really don't think there's a limit to what Dan Mullen can accomplish at State. Should be fun to watch from afar...

I guarandamntee you he'll be one of those sumbitches who works until he's about 96.

[drunkernhelldawg]

Why not...playing Ohio State is no different than playing LSU, Auburn, Alabama, etc. Look what Clemson did to them in the Orange Bowl! Love a home and home with them!! Can you imagine those Yankees tailgating in the Junction and hearing 50000 cowbells. Think of the hype!

It would be an absolute coup for us to get a home and home with Ohio State. That would elevate our program way the hell more than a 6-6 record. It'd be a hundred times better for our program than playing USM, which is still a head scratcher to me. The only reason I can think of that we agreed to resume playing USM is that somebody needs to make some politician happy. It sure as hell ain't doing us any good.

But playing The Ohio State University, that's something that'd be worth doing.

Going 6-6 again? Not all that great imo.

[sandwolf]

Sure, it would be great, but no way Ohio St. would schedule us. There needs to be mutual interest, not just from one side. If you could schedule whoever you wanted we'd schedule Ohio St, Notre Dame, USC, and Texas every year. It doesn't work like that.

Wait, what? We absolutely would not do that. Hell, Alabama wouldn't do that.

[FISHDAWG]

it's not like Ohio St. has a very good record against the SEC anyway

[smootness]

It would be an absolute coup for us to get a home and home with Ohio State. That would elevate our program way the hell more than a 6-6 record. It'd be a hundred times better for our program than playing USM, which is still a head scratcher to me.

I disagree, unless they were ranked high and we beat them. Do you think it would be a huge coup for Kentucky to play Ohio State? I don't, I think the majority of the country wouldn't care about that game.

[drunkernhelldawg]

I disagree, unless they were ranked high and we beat them. Do you think it would be a huge coup for Kentucky to play Ohio State? I don't, I think the majority of the country wouldn't care about that game.

I'd like to think we're at a higher level than Kentucky. We also have a relationship with OSU in that we absolutely waxed their number one rival a few years ago. Kentucky has not performed a comparable feat. Every year we play LSU, Alabama, etc. Many times we have a chance to win these games. Sometimes we do win. If not playing tough games is just a way to protect a 6-6 record, then I say screw that. 6-6 year after year is no better than running in place for us. That's why I think that scheduling better, more interesting games is a winner for us.
And what are your thoughts on the USM game? What are we getting out of that? Why are we doing it?

[sandwolf]

I'd like to think we're at a higher level than Kentucky. We also have a relationship with OSU in that we absolutely waxed their number one rival a few years ago. Kentucky has not performed a comparable feat. Every year we play LSU, Alabama, etc. Many times we have a chance to win these games. Sometimes we do win. If not playing tough games is just a way to protect a 6-6 record, then I say screw that. 6-6 year after year is no better than running in place for us. That's why I think that scheduling better, more interesting games is a winner for us.
And what are your thoughts on the USM game? What are we getting out of that? Why are we doing it?

I won't disagree that 6-6 is running in place for us, but I would argue that 5-7 or 4-8 is taking a step in the wrong direction. Not only does a losing record make it much harder to sell the program to recruits, but you also lose out on that extra month of practice time. Not to mention the fact that we already have multiple opportunities to knock off elite teams every year.......so I just don't see what is gained by adding another power to the schedule.

[codeDawg]

It would be an absolute coup for us to get a home and home with Ohio State. That would elevate our program way the hell more than a 6-6 record. It'd be a hundred times better for our program than playing USM, which is still a head scratcher to me. The only reason I can think of that we agreed to resume playing USM is that somebody needs to make some politician happy. It sure as hell ain't doing us any good.

But playing The Ohio State University, that's something that'd be worth doing.

Going 6-6 again? Not all that great imo.

The most likely outcome if playing tOSU is a loss. There is a chance we could win in a very good year, but we likely lose.

A win against USM > a loss against tOSU