(08-27-2015 01:37 PM)TeKERaider Wrote:  The first game of the the 2-2 you are citing with Vandy was already owed to us from the 3 we played prior. They backed out to play Michigan. We renegotiated adding two more @ Vandy for one more at MT. At best it's 2-5. The Minnesota and Miss State games are almost the exact same as this. 2-1 with one of the two being a paycheck game. No difference other than a slightly better opponent in Missouri. You're dreaming of you think we are getting 1-1 with an SEC. Even when we caught Ms State in a bind because of CMU dropping them we still ended up giving them a home game in 2012 and only played 5 games in the boro that year. Heck even Memphis got a 3-2.

Vandy's cancelled games more than a decade ago had nothing to do with this series. They didn't owe us anything, they exercised their buy out clause and we got paid and that UVA game in 2007 we didn't have to return was facilitated by ESPN for us letting Vandy out of a game so they could play at the Big House. The games Vandy backed out of were all scheduled to be played at Vandy, it wasn't until this new 4 year deal was announced that they had ever considered playing in Murfreesboro.

The Memphis series is hardly relevant, when we signed that we had been FBS for what? ~5 years and hadn't hosted a single P5 school yet, I believe Maryland had already signed, but not been played yet. If we ever renew with Memphis it will be an even swap or not at all.

2-1 is not the same thing as a 1-1 with an additional buy game announced later. If we're getting paid in the neighborhood of a traditional buy game for the 1 off AND getting a home game, how is that a 2-1? If you recall our series with GT weren't paid nearly as much combined between the two games.

I know you think you're educating me, but it would help to have accurate information.

(08-27-2015 01:58 PM)MTPiKapp Wrote:  

(08-27-2015 01:37 PM)TeKERaider Wrote:  The first game of the the 2-2 you are citing with Vandy was already owed to us from the 3 we played prior. They backed out to play Michigan. We renegotiated adding two more @ Vandy for one more at MT. At best it's 2-5. The Minnesota and Miss State games are almost the exact same as this. 2-1 with one of the two being a paycheck game. No difference other than a slightly better opponent in Missouri. You're dreaming of you think we are getting 1-1 with an SEC. Even when we caught Ms State in a bind because of CMU dropping them we still ended up giving them a home game in 2012 and only played 5 games in the boro that year. Heck even Memphis got a 3-2.

Vandy's cancelled games more than a decade ago had nothing to do with this series. They didn't owe us anything, they exercised their buy out clause and we got paid and that UVA game in 2T007 we didn't have to return was facilitated by ESPN for us letting Vandy out of a game so they could play at the Big House. The games Vandy backed out of were all scheduled to be played at Vandy, it wasn't until this new 4 year deal was announced that they had ever considered playing in Murfreesboro.

The Memphis series is hardly relevant, when we signed that we had been FBS for what? ~5 years and hadn't hosted a single P5 school yet, I believe Maryland had already signed, but not been played yet. If we ever renew with Memphis it will be an even swap or not at all.

2-1 is not the same thing as a 1-1 with an additional buy game announced later. If we're getting paid in the neighborhood of a traditional buy game for the 1 off AND getting a home game, how is that a 2-1? If you recall our series with GT weren't paid nearly as much combined between the two games.

I know you think you're educating me, but it would help to have accurate information.

We did not got paid. At the time all MT fans were critical of CM for not forcing them to pay the buy out and trusting them to reschedule. And sorry but your reference to a decade long time line is silly. They backed out of the game in 2006. We signed the new deal with them in 2008 with David Williams saying "I told everybody that would listen that we would reschedule the game." Two years is not exactly a decade. I have watched you on here enough to know you will go on and on and never admit you're wrong so I am done. You are by far the most knowledgeable MT poster in the land. I bow down to your expertise . CM should consult you in the future before making these mediocre deals.

(08-27-2015 02:56 PM)TeKERaider Wrote:  

(08-27-2015 01:58 PM)MTPiKapp Wrote:  

(08-27-2015 01:37 PM)TeKERaider Wrote:  The first game of the the 2-2 you are citing with Vandy was already owed to us from the 3 we played prior. They backed out to play Michigan. We renegotiated adding two more @ Vandy for one more at MT. At best it's 2-5. The Minnesota and Miss State games are almost the exact same as this. 2-1 with one of the two being a paycheck game. No difference other than a slightly better opponent in Missouri. You're dreaming of you think we are getting 1-1 with an SEC. Even when we caught Ms State in a bind because of CMU dropping them we still ended up giving them a home game in 2012 and only played 5 games in the boro that year. Heck even Memphis got a 3-2.

Vandy's cancelled games more than a decade ago had nothing to do with this series. They didn't owe us anything, they exercised their buy out clause and we got paid and that UVA game in 2T007 we didn't have to return was facilitated by ESPN for us letting Vandy out of a game so they could play at the Big House. The games Vandy backed out of were all scheduled to be played at Vandy, it wasn't until this new 4 year deal was announced that they had ever considered playing in Murfreesboro.

The Memphis series is hardly relevant, when we signed that we had been FBS for what? ~5 years and hadn't hosted a single P5 school yet, I believe Maryland had already signed, but not been played yet. If we ever renew with Memphis it will be an even swap or not at all.

2-1 is not the same thing as a 1-1 with an additional buy game announced later. If we're getting paid in the neighborhood of a traditional buy game for the 1 off AND getting a home game, how is that a 2-1? If you recall our series with GT weren't paid nearly as much combined between the two games.

I know you think you're educating me, but it would help to have accurate information.

We did not got paid. At the time all MT fans were critical of CM for not forcing them to pay the buy out and trusting them to reschedule. And sorry but your reference to a decade long time line is silly. They backed out of the game in 2006. We signed the new deal with them in 2008 with David Williams saying "I told everybody that would listen that we would reschedule the game." Two years is not exactly a decade. I have watched you on here enough to know you will go on and on and never admit you're wrong so I am done. You are by far the most knowledgeable MT poster in the land. I bow down to your expertise . CM should consult you in the future before making these mediocre deals.

Tell me what I'm wrong about. The 2007 home game against UVA was compensation, this is a new 4 year deal, neither of the previous cancellations were for games in Murfreesboro.

You can duck out trying to imply I'm wrong by saying I won't admit when I'm wrong, but I'm not wrong.

1-1 and a game with a high 6 figure paycheck is not the same as a 2-1.

At any rate, if it is indeed true that that's the case with this series, big paycheck next season and then swapping home games later, I don't have a problem with it, the only difference between this and Minnesota/Miss State would be in both of those cases, the paycheck game was announced a year or two later, whereas this series all 3 games were announced at once.

If it were a straight 2-1 like Maryland or Georgia Tech, I wouldn't be mad about it, just that we could have gotten a better deal, which we apparently did. Paycheck next year 1-1 down the road.

The article you quoted says the UVA game part of arrangement with the ACC and MAC because of Temple backing out and us going to NC State for only 150K.

The home meeting with Virginia is apparently part of the obvious upside after the Blue Raiders were scratched from Temple's 2005 football schedule, and North Carolina State, likewise, was dropped by the Owls.

MTSU will visit N.C. State Nov. 19 of the upcoming season, receiving only $150,000 for the trip. However, a visit to Murfreesboro from ACC power Virginia would certainly serve as compensation.
Massaro has also considered waiving the $100,000 buyout owed MTSU by Temple in exchange for a home-and-home basketball series with the Owls as part of the scheduling pact between the Blue Raiders, ACC and MAC


Can you find anything, anywhere to suggest that the UVA game was compensation for the Vandy game because your post is the first I have ever heard of it?

Another fun fact: the Virginia game was announced May of 2005. Vandy backed out of our game to play Michigan in Jan 2006. So not only is ESPN powerful enough to get Virginia to pay us a free home game for Vandy despite having no conference affiliation to either team, they are psychic and got them to do it a year in advance. So please tell me more about how you are not wrong about anything...

(08-27-2015 04:23 PM)TeKERaider Wrote:  Another fun fact: the Virginia game was announced May of 2005. Vandy backed out of our game to play Michigan in Jan 2006. So not only is ESPN powerful enough to get Virginia to pay us a free home game for Vandy despite having no conference affiliation to either team, they are psychic and got them to do it a year in advance. So please tell me more about how you are not wrong about anything...

You got me Teke, I had misremembered the details of the UVA deal(I am fairly certain ESPN had some had in facilitating the Vandy @ Michigan game, I suppose that's why I combined the two incidents with ESPN) that is still just a minor part of my greater point, the following still remains:

1) Neither of Vandy's canceled games were scheduled for Murfreesboro, that was new in this new 4 game deal. If you want to somehow backcount 1 or 2 of those games to previous series, it's not one of our home games, so did we get a 1-2?

2) A paycheck game and a 1-1 with the same school is not the same thing as a 2-1.

I couldn't find the financials for the GT series, but the payments were far less.

And again, like I said, if we are indeed getting a big paycheck next season and then a 1-1 down the road, it's all moot because that's a better deal than 2-1.

(08-27-2015 05:27 PM)MTPiKapp Wrote:  

(08-27-2015 04:23 PM)TeKERaider Wrote:  Another fun fact: the Virginia game was announced May of 2005. Vandy backed out of our game to play Michigan in Jan 2006. So not only is ESPN powerful enough to get Virginia to pay us a free home game for Vandy despite having no conference affiliation to either team, they are psychic and got them to do it a year in advance. So please tell me more about how you are not wrong about anything...

You got me Teke, I had misremembered the details of the UVA deal(I am fairly certain ESPN had some had in facilitating the Vandy @ Michigan game, I suppose that's why I combined the two incidents with ESPN) that is still just a minor part of my greater point, the following still remains:

1) Neither of Vandy's canceled games were scheduled for Murfreesboro, that was new in this new 4 game deal. If you want to somehow backcount 1 or 2 of those games to previous series, it's not one of our home games, so did we get a 1-2?

2) A paycheck game and a 1-1 with the same school is not the same thing as a 2-1.

I couldn't find the financials for the GT series, but the payments were far less.

And again, like I said, if we are indeed getting a big paycheck next season and then a 1-1 down the road, it's all moot because that's a better deal than 2-1.

Yeah the Vandy deal is a 2 for 2, not some weird combo of unfinished games from a few years back. They scrapped it then and made an entirely new deal with the two home games each. I remember talking to Whiteside (AD faculty rep) about it.

This is worthy of a thread? If we go around trumpeting every time a P5 agrees to play us, as if it's some honor bestowed upon a peasant by a king, it only makes us look that much worse.

(08-29-2015 11:07 PM)Volkmar Wrote:  This is worthy of a thread? If we go around trumpeting every time a P5 agrees to play us, as if it's some honor bestowed upon a peasant by a king, it only makes us look that much worse.

Um... Pretty much all new schedule agreements get threads.