“If you can’t get into college go to Pitt.

If you can’t get into college go to Pitt.

If you can’t get into college,

Cause you really lack the knowledge,

if you can’t get into college go to Pitt.”

On November 6th, 1893, the Independent Western University of Pennsylvania stepped foot onto the grass of a brand new, five-hundred seat home called Beaver Field. Located in State College, it was home to the Pennsylvania Intercollegiate Football Association’s own Pennsylvania State College. The Western University of Pennsylvania would leave that day empty handed, getting shutout 32-0.

One hundred seventeen years later a lot has changed, but the two teams still play. The Western University of Pennsylvania is now the University of Pittsburgh, playing in the relatively young Big East. The Pennsylvania State College is now the Pennsylvania State University nestled in the Methuselah conference known as the Big Ten. Beaver Field became a place where the first atom was ever “seen” and the team moved to a stadium on the northeast side of campus that housed more than 192 times what Beaver Field did – and was preparing to undergo expansion to build on top of that. However, this time, as were 72 times previously, the game took place in Pittsburgh.

The game that day was played at Three Rivers Stadium, home to the Pirates and Steelers, and now home to the Pitt Panthers after their recent demolition of Pitt Stadium. The tail end of the four-game home-and-home series saw Penn State’s defeat for the first time in 11 years (the last three of the series were all won by Penn State) in the shape of a 12-0 shutout. Since that September 16th day in 2000, the two schools have not seen each other on the football field.

But 2016 brings a new year, and with it, a renewed rivalry of Penn State and Pitt. They will play for the first time in 16 years in another four-game home-and-home series through 2019. The first game will be held at Heinz Field on Saturday, September 10th and might not be the prettiest match, but it sure as hell will be fun. All of this, I’m sure, I don’t have to tell you.

However, as has been well-documented, it will not continue after that, and as revealed, it is Penn State’s fault. This isn’t the first time this has happened, but in terms of reasons why, it does not make much sense. Every Pitt coach who has been hired at Pitt since its realignment to the Big East (and there have been a lot) has platformed for their position and during their tenure that their biggest concern is getting the Pitt-Penn State rivalry back. It seems to be the only thing they care about…while the Penn State side – at least the administrative side – just wants to shrug them off.

When I first found this out in September with everyone else, I was confused.

REALLY confused.

Growing up Penn State, I dreamed of the days of playing Pitt, all the stories my parents and grandparents have told me. How leading up to the game, offices all over the state would be split. Where legends are made and some others are dethroned. It’s one of the oldest rivalries in the country that has since been forgotten by an entirely new generation of fans — nothing hurts my soul more than when a Penn State fan is confused at the thought of the University of Pittsburgh Panthers being Penn State’s rival, but they also didn’t have Penn State family. So maybe they’re not? Maybe Sandy was right in crossing them off our list?

Maybe, just maybe, they are not a true rival worthy of our time.

RIVALRY

But realistically, that can’t be it. As noted earlier, this series dates back to 1893. That year held the first “Iron Bowl.” The first “Clean, Old-fashioned Hate.” 1893 was a good year. To put some more perspective on it, Michigan-Ohio State, you know, “The Rivalry,” didn’t begin until four years later. It’s older than the best rivalry in all of college football, and arguably all of sports.

In the 123 years since then, the Nittany Lions have played the Panthers 96 times, and usually pretty consecutively. Save for the past sixteen years, and the six years prior to that when PSU stopped being an independent and became the eleventh Big Ten team, they played every year in the AP era (which is 1936, and should really only constitute actual championships). Before that, there was a gap from 1893-1896, 1896-1900, and 1931-1935. So this isn’t some rivalry that is sporadically played like the oldest in America (Michigan-Notre Dame, which Michigan leads 24-17-1 and has its own very heated connotations), this was a legitimate year-in and year-out blood bath that has had it fair share of importance.

Unlike some perceived rivalries, this series is actually close, with a 50-42-4 record in Penn State’s favor, and has meaning. Both teams have a long history of being ranked in the AP Top 25 during this series. Eleven of those times, both teams have been ranked in the top 25, including a stretch of ten games in a row from 1973-1982 – arguably the golden era of each program. They have met once while both being ranked in the Top 10, and two more times while both ranked in the Top Five. Seven times the winner has gone on to play in a national championship (1936, 1937, 1976, 1978, 1982, 1985, and 1986). Also, of the eighty years since the AP was instituted, there have been eight upsets by a lower or unranked opponent (including two ties) – three of them being top ten upsets, and one number one upset.

So there has been some weight to this in-state rivalry thing. During that time, hate has brewed among the two schools. Ask any adult who can remember when Mark Harmon was the sexiest man alive and they might tell you about offices divided during the week leading up. Trash cans being thrown at opposing fans in the stands. Wrapped students from the rival schools being passed around the student sections.

Maybe then it’s that heat that they’re trying to avoid? It brewed into profanity where piss-yellow “Eat Shit Pitt” pins, vandalizing school property, and old Penn State chants (which have evolved into more heinous chants, like Pitt chanting “Penn State Fucks Kids” over the Zombie Nation’s Kernkraft 4000). Maybe it’s trying to fizzle out the problem by killing it all together, but that can never happen even when you’re in two different conferences.

THE CROSS-CONFERENCE CONUNDRUM

You might say to yourself, “Rivalries usually stem from being in the same conference, because conferences usually align with the same geographical area meaning schools have a history of territorial boundaries for who’s the best, both in the state, region, and recruiting.”

And the answer is, “Well, kind of.”

Yes, unless you’re UConn-UCF, some of the great rivalries come from territorial boundaries which eventually put them in the same conference. The B1G has Wisconsin-Minnesota, Michigan-Michigan State, Michigan-Ohio State. The SEC has Alabama-Auburn, Alabama-LSU, Florida-Georgia. The ACC has Miami-Florida State. The Pac-12 has USC-UCLA, Cal-Stanford. The Big-12 has Texas-Oklahoma, Oklahoma-Oklahoma State. Those are just a few examples, but my point is that those are some of the biggest rivalries you think of in college football automatically, and they’re in conference and very close. Seeing as how prior to their conference separations, both The Panthers and Nittany Lions were technically in the same conference (they were independents) they are also separated by less than 150 miles.

You would never guess that though, because as I mentioned earlier, there’s an entirely new generation of Staters who have no inclination of the Penn State-Pitt hate. They think it’s some myth made up by Pitt students because they haven’t had competitive football in quite some time. Which is arguably true.

The thought process here might be that we are in THE Big Ten now. We’re upper echelon, we should be focusing on our competition and since 1993, we have. The biggest game every year for Penn State is Ohio State (the two have played each other every year since joining, and that has its share of major moments. OSU leads 17-13) and Michigan (Michigan leads 11-7 and this too has created its fair share of heartbreaks and nine year win-streaks), but these two teams, while accepting the Penn State competition, view us the same way we perceive Maryland and Rutgers. While we are a much more reputable football win than either of those schools, they still bat away the idea of us being “rivals” almost as if we were a flying gnat trying to land in the eye of their school.

On the other side of the spectrum, there’s Pittsburgh. They left for the Big East in 1991, which allegedly turned Joe Pa off from wanting to schedule them because they turned down the offer to create a “Beast in the East” conference (Penn State was actually denied from the Big East because while they needed football programs, the basketball team traditionally was horrendous and kept them out the league, which lead to joining the Big Ten). In the beginning, it looked good for Pitt in terms of establishing legitimacy. Miami joined, and they were one of the most storied programs in the NCAA, and would go on to win a few national championships under the Big East title. Frank Beamer’s Hokies also made the conference look good, making it to a championship with Mike Vick in 1999. But then the shift happened.

After the 2004 season, VT and Miami left to join the ACC (The Virginia governor actually pressured UVA to push for Tech instead of Syracuse, who planned to make the jump in 2003 and worked), and Boston College not too long after in 2005. Therefore the Big East, which still somehow had a BCS bid, looked like it would be a two team conference between Pitt and West Virginia every year in the legendary “Backyard Brawl.” But it wasn’t.

Since 2004, where there was a four-way tie for first between Pitt, West Virginia, Syracuse, and Boston College (Pitt was the chosen representative and proceeded to get smashed by the first non-BCS representative in a BCS bowl – Urban Meyer’s Utah Utes) only West Virginia would win multiple Big East titles, meaning that Pitt lost out to powerhouses such as Louisville, UConn, Cincinnati, and Rutgers. The conference wasn’t as strong as it once was and after the Mountaineers jumped ship for the Big XII in 2011, Pittsburgh and Syracuse followed suit by joining the ACC. I’m sure it had to do with automatic bowl bids, better competition, and how it made sense because they are major basketball schools, but I also assume the larger reason was monetary expenses.

However, while the ACC is a Power Five conference, the ACC still says “basketball,” while the football-side is traditionally a two team conference consisting of Florida State and Clemson (the two have combined for twenty-nine of the conferences championships since 1953, and will likely be tied at 15 apiece after this season. Maryland has the third highest at nine). So in terms of Strength of Schedule, it must be hard to appeal to the Playoff committee when locked into a not-so-hot football conference.

It has to be draining to be the once-power school known as Pitt to have a weak schedule every year in which you can’t really dominate yourself. So I’d assume you’d love to reach out to former foes and try to schedule them. Especially if that foe now plays in arguably the best power conference in the country.

So you may ask yourself, “If the days of Joe Pa’s hate are gone, and we still only have a four-game series, then it must be really hard to schedule cross conference games.”

The answer is, “Not really, at least theoretically.”

Jim Delany, the Big Ten Commissioner, actually enacted a football act called “SOS-1910” meaning every Big Ten school will play against nine B1G teams (six of which are in their division, 3 from the other side) at least one against a Power Five conference (which would be the Big XII, Pac-12, SEC, or the ACC), and no FCS teams (thank the based God-win). This is meant to enable the Strength of Schedule aspect that the playoff committee takes into consideration, and which kept TCU and Baylor out of the playoffs in 2014. Seeing as how this was just enacted, it means that Pitt fulfills this need, and could for years. And while you might want to not have the same game fulfill that need every year, consider the fact that those total only ten games of the twelve-game season (there are thirteen weeks, but one of them is a bye). This means that there are two more open spots to put whoever you want in those – which ultimately would be some cupcake MAC team and or Temple.

Aside from the newly enacted law, cross-conference rivalries are pretty traditional. I get that when Penn State and Pitt played each other, they were both independents, as were what seemed to be a majority of collegiate football programs, but let’s look at another independent. USC-Notre Dame’s battle for the Jeweled Shillelagh dates back to 1926 and has been played every year since. It’s one of the fiercest and most memorable in college football. It might be unfair to use this game as an example because Notre Dame is an independent, meaning that all of their games are technically cross-conference, but scheduling the likes of USC can’t be easy.

In that case, let me present the Red River Rivalry of Texas and Oklahoma. While they play in the same conference now, before the 1996 dissolution of the Southwest, the two were in separate conferences (Big 8 and Southwest) and also played just about every year since 1900. Again, this is one of the most highly touted games in all of college football.

Of course, there’s Florida-Florida State, SEC versus the ACC. Although only instituted in 1958, the in-state rivals have found a way to play each other every single year since. They even played each other twice in the Sugar Bowl, one of which was for a National Championship.

If some Clean, Old Fashioned Hate is more your thing, another in-state cross conference rival of Georgia (SEC) and Georgia Tech (ACC) has been going on since 1893. Clemson-South Carolina, an SEC-ACC rivalry that has been played every year since 1896 and was realistically fueled by a Hatin’ Ass Spurrier. Even Iowa and Iowa State (Big Ten against Big XII) revamped their rivalry in 1977 after stopping in 1934 because they know how important it was to the fan base.

So a yearly match between cross-conference opponents is not out of the norm. In fact, it seems to be looked forward to all year. It’s the game circled on calendars that teams play for. So maybe it’s the monetary expense?

FINANCIAL

But that surely can’t be it either. Penn State has ranked as high as number three on Forbes’ list of most valuable college football programs in recent years, but has since fallen. In 2014 it dropped to number twelve, behind Texas, Notre Dame, a handful of SEC teams, and Michigan and Ohio State. This list comes from the expense reports that every NCAA team has to report annually to the NCAA.

In recent years there has been a decline in attendance and ticket sales which could be a cause of this. In 2011, the last time Penn State was ranked, they had an average attendance of 101,325 per game and stadium capacity is at 106,572. The only two games that went over were against Alabama (of course) and Nebraska – which was packed because it was the first home game after everything that happened in November 2011. That makes sense.

Then the decline really began, and this can be attributed to a lot of things. First and foremost, the Sandusky events and sanctions aftermath. The winter of 2012 led to a Bill O’Brien hiring, while the summer led to all of the sanctions. This could be the main reason numbers dramatically declined from 101,325 per game to 96,729 per game. Many fans thought there would be no point in coming if there was nothing to play for and only having one sellout game in Ohio State. This dramatic decline led to a raise in ticket prices as well as parking passes, which isn’t an uncommon practice to cover the costs (although lower prices are usually applied to attract more people). While Penn State still has one of the most loyal fan bases who will come out to games no matter what situation the team is in, prices always matter, which led to less renewed tickets and less attendance. This of course means less money not only through ticket sales, but merchandise and concessions as well.

The next season was much of the same with a lower average attendance of 96,587 per game, and one sellout in the four-overtime Homecoming Whitehouse classic against Michigan. Then B.O.B. left, and Franklin was brought in. And then the sanctions were repealed. And then, among the raise in prices, the attendance rose as well which could probably be contributed to the fact of playing in the post-season with some semblance of seniority on the team.

The attendance rose to 101,622 per game and Penn State had another sellout in the two-overtime classic against Ohio State and three more 100,000 plus games in Maryland, Temple, and Northwestern. This increase could be attributed to Penn State’s renewed ability of post-season opportunity, and more people wanted to be there as witnesses.

However, among all of that Penn State has still not made as much as it could have. Yes, a $37,746,551 profit off a $68,047,543 revenue season is not bad. Most programs would kill people for that. Hell, they’d love to have an average attendance of JUST 96,587. In fact they’d love to have an average attendance of the small crowds (by Penn State standards) pulled in against the Indiana States and Eastern Michigans. But this is Penn State standards, and those small crowds are killing us in more than one way.

These cupcake teams get paid out of Penn State’s pocket to come to State College and play the Nittany Lions. PSU pays for their travel (usually because the smaller teams can’t afford major trips) to get beat and make them look better on paper, which doesn’t always happen. Penn State playing lower opponents is nothing new, nor is it different from any other major FBS team. but the amount of lower level competition over the past few years has been questionable, even the higher-level teams have really been lower-level talent. That could coincide with the belief that we might not have been that competitive from 2012-2014 given everything that happened, so we should play down. But that’s just speculation on my part because games tend to be scheduled farther in advance. The point I’m trying to make with all of this is that playing Pitt is incredibly cost effective.

One-hundred thirty nine miles through US-22 and I-99 separate Heinz Field and Beaver Stadium. A two hour and thirty-two minute trip. A more than reasonable travel cost.

You want to reach a Penn State fan base? There’s just as many Penn State fans there as there are Steelers fans in Pittsburgh.

You want to play in a major NFL stadium without having to pay for it? Forget Temple, you have Pitt.

What’s the best way to sell tickets to games? Sorry Sandy Barbour, but it’s through rivalries. As I pointed out, the past five years have had sellouts with perceived rivals Ohio State, Michigan, and old foe Alabama, all who have rabid fans that travel, just like Pitt (albeit not as recently). Regardless, Penn State fans show up for these games, no matter how good, bad, or terribly average either team is — because it’s a rivalry. Could you imagine having a guaranteed sellout twice every two years? That would be cool.

If more tickets are sold, and they’re guaranteed to be overpriced, then you could in theory drop the season ticket prices down – even if you still do “sellout” – drawing in more of a crowd who would want to come to the games, have the PSU experience, and buy more shit for you.

What’s a great way to cut down on operational costs? Cut the cupcakes. I’m sure that our rivalries with Akron, Kent State, and the Directional Michigans are all very important, but realistically, can cut a sizable chunk of the $1,550,000 cost it takes to bring them in while also playing to our benefit with our strength of schedule.

And yes, playing Pitt could jeopardize our hold on WPIAL recruits if we were to lose. With the addition of the 4-3 wizard Narduzzi, whom Pitt wrangled from B1G powerhouse Michigan State, the Panthers have been keeping a lot of their western PA products. However, it has the potential to defer so many more recruits from Pitt if we do beat them.

The final concern may be an all around tougher schedule, causing a tougher path to six wins. For the Power Five conferences, six wins a year will almost certainly guarantee a bowl game. If a school makes a bowl game, then that school will get a payout appearance from the bowl, plus more if they win. Therefore, having a tougher schedule can endanger the six wins, and risk the reward of a bowl game.

But as we have seen last year and so far this year, a bigger risk can payoff. The selection committees take strength of schedule heavily into consideration when making their decisions. It’s most likely the main reason SOS-1910 is in effect. It’s why TCU and Baylor were left off the playoff marquee last year, it’s why several undefeated teams aren’t in the committee’s Top Four right now, and it could also be why Penn State didn’t play for a National Championship in 1968 and 1973. Yes, there may be the risk of not getting our bowl payout (regardless of the getting a bowl payout from one of the most profitable conferences in the nation), but whatever bowl game we secure in the future will be better than the one we would get from playing lesser opponents. It might even put us in better standing with the playoff committee, which in itself has an amazing amount of potential benefits for the university itself.

I get that there are a variety of decisions to make here. I get that Sandy Barbour is not the only one calling the shots. I get that it may be hard to coordinate.

It sure as shit is not a hard decision to make though.

Quite literally every sign points to yes. We should play Pitt every year. History points to it, other schools have similar systems, and fiscally it’s irresponsible not to. Ms. Barbour, you can say you love college football all you want, but not acknowledging rivalries as a driving force? Well you’re just wrong. In fact no team in the BCS era has won a national championship without going through a major rival first (Bama’s true rival is Auburn). This arguably sets each team up for success because they can beat their toughest emotional opponent. But hey, if you still don’t think that listening to the players — who make the game — or the fans — who make your job as cushy as it is — need to be listened to, maybe you should reevaluate priorities.