I wrote a letter to D-Rad last week about scheduling (long)

Dec 12, 2013, 9:50 AM

I hate the fact that we play two cupcakes in addition to our already weak ACC schedule. It does nothing for our program, our players, or our fans. At BEST, it saves us a few bucks and helps guarantee we go to some garbage bowl game. At worst, it's a drag on the season, a glorified exhibition, where 50,000 fans go to pray our players don't get hurt. Enough. Let's schedule another REAL home-and-home like Georgia. Here's my letter:

Dear Dan,

I am writing this letter to urge you to take the necessary steps to strengthen our football schedule as soon as possible. Please understand that I am not suggesting a change in conference affiliation, but rather replacing one of our two paid FCS/mid-major FBS home games with a home-and-home arrangement from another BCS-conference opponent. I know that revenue is the primary reason we have two of these “paid” games on the schedule. However, I will address the financial concerns and provide several additional arguments for strengthening the schedule.

As you’re aware, a vocal segment of our fan base has been in favor of changing conferences. The primary frustration with the ACC has been in its strength as a football conference and, in regards to athletics, I think we can agree that the vast majority of our fans and alumni would consider Clemson to be a “Football First” school. On the field—and in the public’s eye—the ACC is an after-thought in football, trailing the four other major BCS conferences. Indeed, one of the biggest criticisms of Clemson this year is that our 10-2 record does not provide wins over a current Top 25 team. This is mainly due to the fact that the ACC provides very few for us to play. This season, unfortunately, was not an anomaly. Among all conferences, the ACC ranks 8th – dead last—in all-time BCS winning percentage (.187). Strengthening our schedule with another team from a BCS conference would not only improve our reputation as a program that schedules tough opponents, but it would improve our SOS as well heading into the new College Football Playoff.

When ESPN Gameday came to Clemson to kick off the season, Kirk Herbstreit commented on how special it was to be back on a college campus after continually opening the season at made-for-TV neutral –site locations, such as Atlanta, Arlington, and Dallas. Clemson/Georgia is one of the few traditional out-of-conference home-and-home arrangements left. Once a fixture of college football scheduling— and a great way to spice up the schedule for players and fans alike— the home-and-home is a dying breed. Like so much of college football, it has succumbed to the almighty dollar. Football programs, including ours, don’t want to sacrifice the revenue that comes with a 7th home game every year. So, instead of getting a big-name opponent at home or on the road, fans and players are stuck with another snoozer, where the game is decided before the schedule comes out. This forgettable match-up is always the same: The upper decks are half full, fans that actually show up are gone by halftime to tailgate, and the only mention of the game in the media is on the ticker at the bottom of ESPNews. Clemson fans around the country are forced to watching the game on their computer since the game isn’t televised on network TV or cable.

Conversely, arguably the two of the most exciting aspects of the college football season for fans are, one, seeing a big-name team that you never get to see your team play come to your home stadium and, two, making a road trip when it comes time to pay back the favor (or vice versa). College football fans—and Clemson fans in particular— love road trips, especially ones that involve going to new places and venues. Just ask the fans that made the trip to College Station a few years back. The 2004 A&M trip had been circled on the calendar for thousands of Clemson fans for years, and the opener against the Aggies the following year was one of the most anticipated in all of college football. That’s the kind of excitement that big home-and-homes bring to the table.

In regards to revenue: This year’s Georgia ticket was $75, while the SC State and Citadel tickets were just $35. So, with the Georgia game being a sell-out, that game yielded more in gate receipts than both the SC State and Citadel games combined (and that doesn’t even take into account the fact that the Citadel game was not a sell-out). Independent of other factors, gate receipts alone justify dropping one of the two FCS games. More revenue would come from hosting just one BCS opponent every other year than buying a game every year. In addition to the approximately $400k in additional revenue, Clemson would not be required to pay a team out. So, over a two-year span, that would save the program an additional $500k - $600k, if not more.

There is obviously more to the financial side of the argument. I understand that the expenses associated with taking a football team on the road are a heavy financial burden. However, there are also significant costs associated with playing host as well, including additional law enforcement, additional restroom facilities, clean-up, etc. Now, while the money saved from hosting one game does not off-set the expense of going on the road one more time, when you take into account the additional revenue generated at the gate as well as the money saved from two years’ cost of buying a home opponent, I’d imagine the total financial loss would be negligible, at worst.

The exposure that comes with another big game on the schedule is invaluable as well. It means more media coverage throughout the week and on gameday. This is an advantage not just in football recruiting, but for the admissions office and for Clemson’s national perception. It also means the possibility of another nationally televised game (versus ESPN3), and another opportunity to host ESPN Gameday. While it may be difficult to attach a dollar figure to this exposure, it certainly pays dividends in the long-run.

One of the ways Bobby Bowden built Florida State into a national power was by playing anyone, anywhere, at any time. FSU quickly built a reputation as a school that schedules tough and isn’t afraid to go on the road to play a football game. The Seminoles were talented enough to win a lot of those games and it helped put them on the map. Some of those games, including the famous 1988 “Puntrooskie” game, came against Clemson. It’s a game we’d just as soon forget, but without it, we wouldn’t have gotten our revenge in Tallahassee the very next year. I don’t think our fans that made the trip down for that game would trade the experience for anything.

Like Bowden at FSU in the early ‘80s, I think Dabo has gotten the program to a place where we need to take the next step. As a program, our primary goal should not be just to get bowl eligible anymore—we’ll accomplish that on an annual basis—our goal should be to be become an annual Top 10 power, and you do that by playing the best teams in the country. In short, if Clemson wants to be considered a member of the nation’s elite, we need to step up our scheduling. As it stands now, I’m happy we have one big out-of-conference game other than the South Carolina game. We finish the two-game arrangement with Georgia next year and then we host Notre Dame in 2015. That is great. Our fans and players, I’m sure, are excited for both of those games. So why not add another one as soon as the schedule permits, so that we have one at home and one on the road every year?

In terms of our football, the ACC, while a great conference, is doing a disservice to our national aspirations. The best way to negate this is to drop one of paid-for home games against an FCS or mid-major FBS school, and replace it with a game that our players, fans, and the media care about. We can afford it, our players and fans would more than welcome it, and this change well prepares us for the upcoming playoff system.

I hope you will consider this suggestion. Thank you for your time. Go Tigers!

flag link

military_tech

thumb_down

thumb_up

I wrote a letter to D-Rad last week about scheduling (long)

Good letter.

Thanks

Of course if you had then he may not have taken

True***

He probably didn't anyway. He is paid to do what is best

Re: He probably didn't anyway. He is paid to do what is best

are you cool with just 6 home games a year instead of 7?

100%

I'd would be ok with taking away a cupcake game

Also, remember...

I get that people might say they

Re: Also, remember...

Re: Also, remember...

Thought he addressed that issue in the above letter...***

I'm sure the local economy will not like this AT ALL

I broke it all down a couple years ago, but it is almost a

Re: I'm sure the local economy will not like this AT ALL

I also don't consider it Clemson football's priority

You forget, these internet scheduling gurus have no clue.

I address the revenue concerns

Didn't we drop a big game when Swoffy said we'd have

Re: Didn't we drop a big game when Swoffy said we'd have

Ah, I don't pay much attention to future schedules, it's

Do you understand the financial

Did you read the above letter?

Difference is not...

I wish we would bring back Oklahoma State

I would love a Home & Home with Arizona State...

they have 60,000 students isn't that wild?

I agree! No more cupcakes....

Re: I wrote a letter to D-Rad last week about scheduling (long)

Didn't we play Georgia this season?***

Re: I wrote a letter to D-Rad last week about scheduling (long)

TigerBoard POTD