In today's Democrat Coach BB said there's interest in Nuetral games with Big Time Programs.

[redeye]

I'd normally love the idea.  I'm sure these games have provided Alabama and LSU with some advantages since they've been playing them regularly.  However, we already play one of the toughest SEC schedules every year and adding one of the toughest OOC schedules doesn't seem like a great idea (note that the SOS of our SEC schedule has very little to do with our stature in the SEC and is mostly due to our poor luck in drawing great rotating opponents regularly.)  On average, we play the toughest SEC schedule in the conference, so I'm not sure I like the idea of playing one of the toughest OOC schedules, also.

edit: Also note that we have little room to improve our SOS with a better OOC game, because our SOS is already so high every year.  Just looked at the NCAA's SOS ranking and we finished 3rd in the nation last year, which isn't uncommon for us.

And Arkansas hasn't won a SEC title since they joined the conference. 
It's time to go big and pull out all the stops.

We we're playing USC and Texas, when other SEC teams were playing directional schools, so it has nothing to do with us not winning the SEC.

[Atlhogfan1]

I don't believe we have seen a significant boon in recruiting by playing in Dallas.  We signed 2 from the Metroplex last class and 2 from the Houston region.  Two from the Metroplex and 0 from elsewhere in Texas in the class before.  We have a brand in Texas.  Where our brand could be helped and where we are also trying to recruit is over here in the Southeast and along the Gulf Coast.  I agree there is some recruiting value in playing in Dallas and I'm not suggesting abandoning it entirely.  Perhaps work something out to play A&M once every 3 seasons or twice every 4 in Dallas.  Texas kids would get their guarantees of playing in the stadium once or twice and in Texas two or three times while at Arkansas.  Plus a game in Houston could be scheduled.  If A&M wants out of the series, then rotate through some other Texas teams willing or Ok St or one the Arizona's who like to recruit Texas. 

When the LR games end, and I don't entirely trust when that will be till I actually see the Hogs not play a game in WMS for a season or two, then the extra travel weekend could be applied to a different game. 

Late season Fay non conf games aren't good draws.  Openers or 2nd week games are.  These would be traded for the neutral site games.  I'm for neutral site games.  I'm not for making it harder than it already is on our teams by adding unnecessary travel.  We more than some other SEC programs need to schedule smartly. 

[aar0n]

I've always thought it would be a cool idea to have an early season mini-tournament as part of the OOC schedule for 4 mid-to-high level teams.  It would require 2 OOC games for each team to be used, early in the season when most teams typically play their OOC opponents.  Say Arkansas, TCU, A&M, and Baylor.  Instead of each team playing an OOC cupcake twice, 2 teams (say Arkansas vs. Baylor) play in the 1st game at Jerry World at 3pm one Saturday.  As soon as that game ends, plus about an hour, the 2 other teams play at Jerry World (A&M vs. TCU).  The following Saturday, the two winners of the first set of games play against eachother for the trophy of the "mini-tournament," let's call it the Old Southwest Classic.  The two losing teams from the previous Saturday play eachother for 3rd place earlier in the day. 

I think this would generate a lot of excitement, mix up the season a bit, and find good use for 2 of the 4 OOC games on each team's schedule.  Granted, it wouldn't be determined on the season schedule who each team would play the second week of the tournament, but you would know there will be a set game, a set time, a set place, and one of 3 opponents to be determined.  I can't see how there would be any logistical issues with that.  I think it would also generate local and national interest in the games and provide a big turnout.  Another option would be 2 teams from one conference vs. 2 teams from another and it could be billed as SEC vs. ____ . 

Our 2015 schedule would look like this:

Saturday 9/5/15 3:00pm - Arkansas vs. Baylor
(AT&T Stadium, Dallas) 1st Round Old Southwest Classic
(Takes the place of game against UTEP)

Saturday 9/12/15  1:30/8:00pm - Arkansas vs. TBD
(AT&T Stadium, Dallas) 2nd round Old Southwest Classic
(Takes the place of game against Toledo)


The Old Southwest Classic Tournament Schedule:

Saturday 9/5/15 -   
3:00pm Arkansas vs. Baylor
8:00pm Texas A&M vs. TCU


Saturday 9/12/15 - 
1:30pm  Loser 1 vs. Loser 2 (3rd place game)
8:00pm  Winner 1 vs. Winner 2 (O.S.C. Trophy game)

[hogblitz]

Most teams have 8 home games and 4 away. Currently,  we have only 7 home games.  So , now we potentially are only going to have 6!  Makes a lot of sense to me! Unreal!!!

[Kevin]

Lets don't play any games in Fayetteville. 

[Mike Irwin]

Most teams have 8 home games and 4 away. Currently,  we have only 7 home games.  So , now we potentially are only going to have 6!  Makes a lot of sense to me! Unreal!!!

Welcome to the new world of college football. Do you play Middle Tennessee in front of 50,000 in LR or Florida State in front of 65,000 at Sun Life Stadium in Miami?

[ricepig]

Welcome to the new world of college football. Do you play Middle Tennessee in front of 50,000 in LR or Florida State in front of 65,000 at Sun Life Stadium in Miami?

Well, they'll all be FSU fans, so, depending on the paycheck, I'll play at home.

[LZH]

Welcome to the new world of college football. Do you play Middle Tennessee in front of 50,000 in LR or Florida State in front of 65,000 at Sun Life Stadium in Miami?

I'd be there.

[Mike Irwin]

Well, they'll all be FSU fans, so, depending on the paycheck, I'll play at home.

A game like that is not about who is there. It's about who is watching on TV,

[hogblitz]

Mike.....are there any teams out there with only 6 home games?  Honestly, I cannot think of a single one?  Maybe a mid major somewhere?

[Paul]

How about playing Nebraska in Miami?   Virginia Tech in New Orleans?

no offense but what do we have to gain by playing them?  They're both programs trending down & we're trending up.  Let's aim higher

[ZERO]

no offense but what do we have to gain by playing them?  They're both programs trending down & we're trending up.  Let's aim higher

Many people on here will tell you that you have it ass-backwards. The question is, playing in the SEC, what do we have to gain by adding another national championship competitor to the schedule? We're not Cincinnati or UCF. Our SoS will never be a determining factor by season's end, so we don't need to beef it up any more to ensure we're represented if we end up going 11-1.

Virginia Tech and Miami are still considered major programs. Miami was a bonafide dynasty at one point, and V-Tech competed for a BCS NC.

[Hawghiggs]

  I've always liked the idea of playing programs that we should beat. I would just tweak what we have been doing. Instead of playing Texas state lets play New Mexico or Wyoming. Instead of trying to schedule a Florida state or Clemson. Lets try and schedule teams like Boston College or Georgia Tech. We can strengthen our program without hurting ourselves and still increase our national perception.

[Paul]

Many people on here will tell you that you have it ass-backwards. The question is, playing in the SEC, what do we have to gain by adding another national championship competitor to the schedule? We're not Cincinnati or UCF. Our SoS will never be a determining factor by season's end, so we don't need to beef it up any more to ensure we're represented if we end up going 11-1.

Virginia Tech and Miami are still considered major programs. Miami was a bonafide dynasty at one point, and V-Tech competed for a BCS NC.

he was suggesting we play VaTech & Nebraska. My contention is if we are to play P5 teams, make it the best teams, not programs that have more to gain by playing us than we have playing them.  We're already scheduled to play TCU & Michigan in the next few years. 

[ZERO]

I understand what you were saying. I was saying many on here think that's a bad way of looking at it. We already play many of the best teams, we stand to lose more by scheduling a risky opponent.

[jrmemphishog]

Nc state in Atlanta?
Miami in Atlanta?
Baylor in New Orleans?
Nebraska in Kansas City?
Virginia tech in Orlando?
Clemson in jacksonville?

Just some random thoughts

[LvilleHog]

I would like to see Arkansas play Louisville in Nashville. Just so we can beat what's that coaches name. Also recruiting student athletes is only one goal but recruiting students in itself is important for the UA. For the university to grow, we have build our brand and I think our football team is a great way to do it.

[hoghiker]

Nc state in Atlanta?
Miami in Atlanta?
Baylor in New Orleans?
Nebraska in Kansas City?
Virginia tech in Orlando?
Clemson in jacksonville?

Just some random thoughts

I get these games for  exposure, I guess, but I'm not getting what is in it for the fans. Hog fans. My team, my school angle. Not sure becoming an itinerant
football game is what college sports is about. I'd rather rent a win than a stadium 400 miles from Hogville.

[MuskogeeHogFan]

I get these games for  exposure, I guess, but I'm not getting what is in it for the fans. Hog fans. My team, my school angle. Not sure becoming an itinerant
football game is what college sports is about. I'd rather rent a win than a stadium 400 miles from Hogville.

Hogville is omnipresent.

[LRRandy]

Nc state in Atlanta?
Miami in Atlanta?
Baylor in New Orleans?
Nebraska in Kansas City?
Virginia tech in Orlando?
Clemson in jacksonville?

Just some random thoughts

there are only a few season opening neutral site games. Outside of Atlanta and Dallas I can't think of any other cities hosting such games.

[MuskogeeHogFan]

there are only a few season opening neutral site games. Outside of Atlanta and Dallas I can't think of any other cities hosting such games.

You start out with N. Carolina vs. S. Carolina which is supposed to be a "neutral" site but it is in Charlotte.

Louisville and Auburn meet in the Georgia Dome.

Arizona State and A&M play in NRG Stadium in Houston

Bowling Green and Tennessee at LP Field in Nashville

Wisconsin and Alabama at AT&T Stadium in Dallas

Some neutral, some not so neutral even though not "home" stadiums.

But I wouldn't be surprised if we saw more games of the "kick off classic" emerge.

[LRRandy]

You start out with N. Carolina vs. S. Carolina which is supposed to be a "neutral" site but it is in Charlotte.

Louisville and Auburn meet in the Georgia Dome.

Arizona State and A&M play in NRG Stadium in Houston

Bowling Green and Tennessee at LP Field in Nashville

Wisconsin and Alabama at AT&T Stadium in Dallas

Some neutral, some not so neutral even though not "home" stadiums.

But I wouldn't be surprised if we saw more games of the "kick off classic" emerge.

I like the opening kick off classic big matchups. Opening season bowl games, if you will. Those games helps take the sting out of the long off season and are more of a reward for us fans than an FCS yawner.

[bphi11ips]

You're already giving up a home game a season to LR.

This is an absolutely insulting crock.  You should be ashamed to have wrtten this.

[Paul]

I understand what you were saying. I was saying many on here think that's a bad way of looking at it. We already play many of the best teams, we stand to lose more by scheduling a risky opponent.

I tend to agree with them. Our SOS is top 5 this year with our relatively weak OOC schedule.  Having said that, as we build depth I wouldn't mind a marquis neutral site game every couple of years

[ZERO]

This is an absolutely insulting crock.  You should be ashamed to have wrtten this.

Please tell me we're not getting into this again. If it's not giving up a home game, then why is WMS on a contract that's about to expire? If Little Rock was a home game, it wouldn't be standing on its last leg right about now.

[go hogues]

Let's do a one and done with Hawaii at their place.

[hogcard1964]

The A&M game is Dallas is here to stay. The recruiting advantage is obvious.

It's also obvious to me where Bielema is going with the idea of playing a power conference opponent at a neutral site. It would be a replacement for the one game a year in LR.

The truth is non conference games in Fayetteville are a horrible draw. So you minimize the problem by going with a big game at a neutral site. You're already giving up a home game a season to LR. All you do is transfer it to a national stage with a name opponent.

Agree

...and if true, I hope we schedule something with a semi-mediocre program.  Playing where we are (SEC West), we don't need anymore OOC killer opponents.

I'd be content with an OK light, North Carolina or Illinois type of team.

[nwahogfan1]

I would like the hogs to keep playing one game in Little Rock and Dallas. But I wouldn't mind playing someone else in St. Louis. Someone like Iowa or Iowa St. might be fun for a change.

I don't think the crowd would be near as much in Arkansas favor if it was in St Louis.  We have a ton of fans living in the DFW metro area and not so many in St Louis.  So if we want to keep the fans excited then Dallas is much better IMO.

[nwahogfan1]

Irwin made this a GSD with a rediculously disengenuous, absurd statement. It's one thing for one of the legions of Hogville numbskulls to say something like that.  Quite another for a 40 year veteran Arkansas sports journalist.

Should the Razorbacks play an annual Power 5 OOC game on a nuetral field?  Good question subject to debate.

Should the Razorbacks stop playing games in Little Rock for a variety of reasons? Should they continue for a variety of reasons?  Good questions subject to debate.

Is Little Rock a home game?  Ask Les Miles or Lou Holtz or John McKay or Emory Bellard or Darrell Royal.  Ask Jay Beckett or Jake Beckett.  Ask Frank Broyles.

Maybe you've been to Zero games at WMS.  The last time Arkansas played a significant game against a major opponent was LSU in 2010.  You can thank the nuetral crowd in Little Rock for carrying the Hogs that day to the Sugar Bowl.

Stick to the subject rather than pee down the legs of generations of loyal fans and donors.

Great fans in LR but today we lose several million dollars when ever we play there plus it hurts in recruiting because they do not get to see our beautiful facilities in Fayetteville.  We spent Millions to renovate all of our Football facilities in Fayetteville so our fans can be comfortable and we can impress our football players and recruits so why go to LR and play in a stadium that needs so many repairs it is not SEC quality anymore? 

If we play a neutral site game that gives us national exposure,  helps us recruit and brings in more money then go for it.  If not then WHY?   I think we will be smart about it. 

LR games are just about over now.  I have gone to many myself starting in the early 70s when I was at SCA and loved them.    Sad to many of us old timers who live in the past but OVER.

[bphi11ips]

Great fans in LR but today we lose several million dollars when ever we play there plus it hurts in recruiting because they do not get to see our beautiful facilities in Fayetteville.  We spent Millions to renovate our HOME field in Fayetteville so we could impress fans, our football players and recruits so why go to LR and play in a stadium that needs so many repairs it is not SEC quality anymore? 

If we play a neutral site game that gives us national exposure,  helps us recruit and brings in more money then go for it.  If not then WHY?   I think we will be smart about it. 

LR games are just about over now.  I have gone to many myself and loved them.    Sad to many of us old timers who live in the past but OVER.

Let's say you are correct on all fronts.  That has nothing to do with whether Little Rock is a home game.  That is the only question I addressed.

[psooie]

Texas A&M does't want to play the game in Dallas. When the contract is up in 10 years, the game is going back to campus. I think it would be great to move the game to campus right now and play a non-conferene game in Dallas. IF you play Texas Tech, Baylor, TCU, Texas, ND, OU, Oklahoma State or any name school in Dallas, you get the same benefit as playing Texas A&M. Now to play a game in Dallas and than other neutral site is pretty dumb. What's the point of fixing up your stadium if you don't use it. Also, don't bring up BS numbers about making money in a dallas game .THe economic impact of a game on campus is much more than neutral site games.

[nwahogfan1]

  I've always liked the idea of playing programs that we should beat. I would just tweak what we have been doing. Instead of playing Texas state lets play New Mexico or Wyoming. Instead of trying to schedule a Florida state or Clemson. Lets try and schedule teams like Boston College or Georgia Tech. We can strengthen our program without hurting ourselves and still increase our national perception.

Boston College and Georgia Tech are very good ACC schools and much better than you think they are. What is our advantage playing them?  Remember Rutgers?  How did that work for us?

[nwahogfan1]

Texas A&M does't want to play the game in Dallas. When the contract is up in 10 years, the game is going back to campus. I think it would be great to move the game to campus right now and play a non-conferene game in Dallas. IF you play Texas Tech, Baylor, TCU, Texas, ND, OU, Oklahoma State or any name school in Dallas, you get the same benefit as playing Texas A&M. Now to play a game in Dallas and than other neutral site is pretty dumb. What's the point of fixing up your stadium if you don't use it. Also, don't bring up BS numbers about making money in a dallas game .THe economic impact of a game on campus is much more than neutral site games.

I agree.  I say play a team from Texas either in Dallas or Houston that makes us money and gives us more Texas recruiting exposure.  TT, Houston, SMU are good but very beatable teams that come to mind.  Now I don't know how excited the fan base will be in traveling to watch those games but maybe we have enough fans at those venues to counteract the fans who do not wish to travel.

[DeltaBoy]

The game went back to Dallas because he Jones wouldn't let the teams out of the contract, not because we preferred it. 

I don't blame Jerry a bit he got to pay for that place.

I happy we are trying to expand their footprint around the Nation.

[Torqued pork]

A game like that is not about who is there. It's about who is watching on TV,

Everyone knows college football is big business with tv being a huge part, but when tv dictates the location of  even regular season games with no consideration given to fans, college football should end the crap about the games being all about the student-athletes and the fans.

[EastexHawg]

I would like the hogs to keep playing one game in Little Rock and Dallas. But I wouldn't mind playing someone else in St. Louis. Someone like Iowa or Iowa St. might be fun for a change.

Playing Iowa State would be fun?  My Fun-O-Meter must be broken.

Whenever I read these threads the one thing most of the posts have in common is that our fans are trying to figure out the one team that is just barely above Samford status...but so weak that they wouldn't have any chance of beating us.

To me true competition involves two people or teams who each have a realistic chance at winning.  I want to see two heavyweights matched up, not a heavyweight and a flyweight.  A 225 pound man beating the snot out of a 110 pounder is about as interesting as a blood blister.

[SooiecidetillNuttgone]

I've always thought it would be a cool idea to have an early season mini-tournament as part of the OOC schedule for 4 mid-to-high level teams.  It would require 2 OOC games for each team to be used, early in the season when most teams typically play their OOC opponents.  Say Arkansas, TCU, A&M, and Baylor.  Instead of each team playing an OOC cupcake twice, 2 teams (say Arkansas vs. Baylor) play in the 1st game at Jerry World at 3pm one Saturday.  As soon as that game ends, plus about an hour, the 2 other teams play at Jerry World (A&M vs. TCU).  The following Saturday, the two winners of the first set of games play against eachother for the trophy of the "mini-tournament," let's call it the Old Southwest Classic.  The two losing teams from the previous Saturday play eachother for 3rd place earlier in the day. 

I think this would generate a lot of excitement, mix up the season a bit, and find good use for 2 of the 4 OOC games on each team's schedule.  Granted, it wouldn't be determined on the season schedule who each team would play the second week of the tournament, but you would know there will be a set game, a set time, a set place, and one of 3 opponents to be determined.  I can't see how there would be any logistical issues with that.  I think it would also generate local and national interest in the games and provide a big turnout.  Another option would be 2 teams from one conference vs. 2 teams from another and it could be billed as SEC vs. ____ . 

Our 2015 schedule would look like this:

Saturday 9/5/15 3:00pm - Arkansas vs. Baylor
(AT&T Stadium, Dallas) 1st Round Old Southwest Classic
(Takes the place of game against UTEP)

Saturday 9/12/15  1:30/8:00pm - Arkansas vs. TBD
(AT&T Stadium, Dallas) 2nd round Old Southwest Classic
(Takes the place of game against Toledo)


The Old Southwest Classic Tournament Schedule:

Saturday 9/5/15 -   
3:00pm Arkansas vs. Baylor
8:00pm Texas A&M vs. TCU


Saturday 9/12/15 - 
1:30pm  Loser 1 vs. Loser 2 (3rd place game)
8:00pm  Winner 1 vs. Winner 2 (O.S.C. Trophy game)

I like this idea a lot.

[Mike Irwin]

Everyone knows college football is big business with tv being a huge part, but when tv dictates the location of  even regular season games with no consideration given to fans, college football should end the crap about the games being all about the student-athletes and the fans.

It is about the fans. The fans watching on TV. Student athletes? Not so much.

[Mike Irwin]

Irwin made this a GSD with a rediculously disengenuous, absurd statement. It's one thing for one of the legions of Hogville numbskulls to say something like that.  Quite another for a 40 year veteran Arkansas sports journalist.

Should the Razorbacks play an annual Power 5 OOC game on a nuetral field?  Good question subject to debate.

Should the Razorbacks stop playing games in Little Rock for a variety of reasons? Should they continue for a variety of reasons?  Good questions subject to debate.

Is Little Rock a home game?  Ask Les Miles or Lou Holtz or John McKay or Emory Bellard or Darrell Royal.  Ask Jay Beckett or Jake Beckett.  Ask Frank Broyles.

Maybe you've been to Zero games at WMS.  The last time Arkansas played a significant game against a major opponent was LSU in 2010.  You can thank the nuetral crowd in Little Rock for carrying the Hogs that day to the Sugar Bowl.

Stick to the subject rather than pee down the legs of generations of loyal fans and donors.

You need to calm down. There was nothing disingenuous about what I posted and it had zip to do with the GSD. It's a fact that the contract with WMS is about to run out. They're already playing one game away from Fayetteville every year. The only thing that makes sense about this non conference neutral site stuff is exchanging the LR game for it.

I have been going to WMS since 1975 and for the record I have consistently stated here and elsewhere that phasing out WMS is a mistake. I have complimented the crowds there many, many times both here, on the radio and on TV.

What I posted had nothing to do with any of that. I can read tea leaves and the tea leaves say WMS is going away no matter what I think or want.

 

[BorderPatrol]

Irwin made this a GSD with a rediculously disengenuous, absurd statement. It's one thing for one of the legions of Hogville numbskulls to say something like that.  Quite another for a 40 year veteran Arkansas sports journalist.

Should the Razorbacks play an annual Power 5 OOC game on a nuetral field?  Good question subject to debate.

Should the Razorbacks stop playing games in Little Rock for a variety of reasons? Should they continue for a variety of reasons?  Good questions subject to debate.

Is Little Rock a home game?  Ask Les Miles or Lou Holtz or John McKay or Emory Bellard or Darrell Royal.  Ask Jay Beckett or Jake Beckett.  Ask Frank Broyles.

Maybe you've been to Zero games at WMS.  The last time Arkansas played a significant game against a major opponent was LSU in 2010.  You can thank the nuetral crowd in Little Rock for carrying the Hogs that day to the Sugar Bowl.

Stick to the subject rather than pee down the legs of generations of loyal fans and donors.

Overreact much?

bp

[bphi11ips]

You need to calm down. There was nothing disingenuous about what I posted and it had zip to do with the GSD. It's a fact that the contract with WMS is about to run out. They're already playing one game away from Fayetteville every year. The only thing that makes sense about this non conference neutral site stuff is exchanging the LR game for it.

I have been going to WMS since 1975 and for the record I have consistently stated here and elsewhere that phasing out WMS is a mistake. I have complimented the crowds there many, many times both here, on the radio and on TV.

What I posted had nothing to do with any of that. I can read tea leaves and the tea leaves say WMS is going away no matter what I think or want.

 

I don't need to calm down.  You're a Texas native whose first game in Little Rock was in 1975, ironically enough one of the loudest and greatest games ever played there.  You should know better than to baldly state that Little Rock is not a home game. You were wrong to do so and should acknowledge it.

I said nothing about whether games should or should not be played in Little Rock.  Nothing about the quality of the stadium or the crowds.  No hint of GSD.  Either Little Rock is a home game or it isn't.  Which is it? 

[bphi11ips]

Overreact much?

bp

No.

[Mike Irwin]

I don't need to calm down.  You're a Texas native whose first game in Little Rock was in 1975, ironically enough one of the loudest and greatest games ever played there.  You should know better than to baldly state that Little Rock is not a home game. You were wrong to do so and should acknowledge it.

I said nothing about whether games should or should not be played in Little Rock.  Nothing about the quality of the stadium or the crowds.  No hint of GSD.  Either Little Rock is a home game or it isn't.  Which is it?

The "home game" reference in the post you're mad about was simply a way of stating that the LR game is not played in Fayetteville therefore if they take that game and make it at a neutral site they haven't given up another Fayetteville game. There was no insult intended.

[hogblitz]

mike.....  It is a home game that will be given up though.  That would be 6 home games and 6 games out of state. 

[Inhogswetrust]

Let me see if I've got this correct:

Play one mid major OOC game a year in LR and have to pay to play OR play one P5 conference OOC game year elsewhere in a nice stadium somewhere and maybe get paid to do so......................It's a no brainer.

[Mike Irwin]

mike.....  It is a home game that will be given up though.  That would be 6 home games and 6 games out of state.

It's much harder to get direct information out of people at the BAC these days but it's pretty obvious that that they've decided they no longer want to play a reduced revenue game in central Arkansas.

Until a few years ago you still had enough of a homefield advantage at WMS to justify the revenue reduction. However losing SEC games to Mississippi State and Georgia the last two years apparently convinced somebody on the Hill that for the remainder of the contract they should schedule teams in LR that they're pretty much assured of beating.

Central Arkansas hates these type games and it's not hard to understand why. Who is going to get all lathered up on the golf course to go watch Middle Tennessee State? They're not even selling these type games out.

Guess what? Games like that don't draw much better in Fayetteville and if Long decides not to renew the WMS contract then he gives that game back to Fayetteville. So what's the solution? Make that game a big one that is either home and home (Michigan) or the neutral site game that Bielema mentioned.

All of this brings up the odd nature of Razorback football with relation to it's population base. Tuscaloosa is just a short drive down the Interstate from Birmingham, the biggest population base in the state. How far is Baton Rouge from New Orleans? Knoxville from Nashville?

Arkansas is a different animal. The population of NWA is growing but the fact is there are not enough people living there to consistently fill up RRS. So the U of A will continue to need fans to come in from central Arkansas and other parts of the state. But how many times a year are those folks willing to travel?

The fact is eight home games a year will not work for this program. Before NWA began to grow three games was about the limit for Fayetteville which is why much of the time Frank scheduled four for LR and that was back in the days when only 11 games were played.

With LR about to be out of the picture seven games is a stretch for Fayetteville even with the increased population. Six is better. So I can see why they like the Jerry World game and why Bielema is high on a neutral site game.

College Football is in beginnings of a radical change. In five or six years it will be all TV ratings of big games on TV. That's where you'll get the exposure you need for recruiting and a big chunk of the money to run your program.

No the live gate is not going away. But if a school like Arkansas can average 70,000 for six games, play a conference game in a big time venue like Cowboys Stadium and add quality nonconference game at an NFL stadium located in a targeted recruiting
area, then that's where we're headed IMO.

[ricepig]

There are only so many "kickoff" type classics. I see this type of game replacing the TCU/Michigan game, I'm not sure it will be both a home/home and kickoff game. It will be interesting to see what our schedule looks like in the future.

[bphi11ips]

The "home game" reference in the post you're mad about was simply a way of stating that the LR game is not played in Fayetteville therefore if they take that game and make it at a neutral site they haven't given up another Fayetteville game. There was no insult intended.

Words matter when written by a journalist.  Thank you for the clarification.

[SooiecidetillNuttgone]

I don't need to calm down.  You're a Texas native whose first game in Little Rock was in 1975, ironically enough one of the loudest and greatest games ever played there.  You should know better than to baldly state that Little Rock is not a home game. You were wrong to do so and should acknowledge it.

I said nothing about whether games should or should not be played in Little Rock.  Nothing about the quality of the stadium or the crowds.  No hint of GSD.  Either Little Rock is a home game or it isn't.  Which is it? 

[EastexHawg]

It's much harder to get direct information out of people at the BAC these days but it's pretty obvious that that they've decided they no longer want to play a reduced revenue game in central Arkansas.

Until a few years ago you still had enough of a homefield advantage at WMS to justify the revenue reduction. However losing SEC games to Mississippi State and Georgia the last two years apparently convinced somebody on the Hill that for the remainder of the contract they should schedule teams in LR that they're pretty much assured of beating.

Central Arkansas hates these type games and it's not hard to understand why. Who is going to get all lathered up on the golf course to go watch Middle Tennessee State? They're not even selling these type games out.

Guess what? Games like that don't draw much better in Fayetteville and if Long decides not to renew the WMS contract then he gives that game back to Fayetteville. So what's the solution? Make that game a big one that is either home and home (Michigan) or the neutral site game that Bielema mentioned.

All of this brings up the odd nature of Razorback football with relation to it's population base. Tuscaloosa is just a short drive down the Interstate from Birmingham, the biggest population base in the state. How far is Baton Rouge from New Orleans? Knoxville from Nashville?

Arkansas is a different animal. The population of NWA is growing but the fact is there are not enough people living there to consistently fill up RRS. So the U of A will continue to need fans to come in from central Arkansas and other parts of the state. But how many times a year are those folks willing to travel?

The fact is eight home games a year will not work for this program. Before NWA began to grow three games was about the limit for Fayetteville which is why much of the time Frank scheduled four for LR and that was back in the days when only 11 games were played.

With LR about to be out of the picture seven games is a stretch for Fayetteville even with the increased population. Six is better. So I can see why they like the Jerry World game and why Bielema is high on a neutral site game.

College Football is in beginnings of a radical change. In five or six years it will be all TV ratings of big games on TV. That's where you'll get the exposure you need for recruiting and a big chunk of the money to run your program.

No the live gate is not going away. But if a school like Arkansas can average 70,000 for six games, play a conference game in a big time venue like Cowboys Stadium and add quality nonconference game at an NFL stadium located in a targeted recruiting
area, then that's where we're headed IMO.

This all makes sense. Plus, if the playoff field ever expands to the point that all major conference champions are in regardless of record there will be more incentive to play games that draw well, both at the gate and on TV.  There will be less incentive to play rent a wins designed to eliminate the risk of losing.  Goodbye, Tennessee Tech..hello Virginia Tech or Texas.