Nebraska (wants) to play Tenn-Chattanooga this weekend; (B1G says no)

Submitted by fishgoblue1 on October 29th, 2020 at 10:42 AM

Interesting. 

 

https://247sports.com/college/nebraska/Article/Reports-of-Nebraska-football-looking-to-play-a-rescheduled-game-on-Saturday-seeks-Big-Ten-approval-153810633/

WorldwideTJRob

October 29th, 2020 at 11:19 AM ^

The whole purpose of playing a conference only schedule is to mitigate contact with schools outside the B1G imprint. It’s the reason the Gavitt Games(Hoops contest between B1G/Big East) were canceled. So yes if OSU tried this it would get denied too. Difference is OSU would probably contact the league office beforehand and not announce they’re scheduling a game before doing so. Nebraska continues being the village idiot of the conference at every turn.

WolvinLA2

October 29th, 2020 at 11:53 AM ^

I actually doubt the Big Ten would make an exception for OSU anyway. How would a situation like this make a better case for the playoff? You're either going to schedule a gimme which isn't going to help your case anyway, or you're going to schedule a real team which is just another opportunity to lose (especially when you're finding out about that opponent less than a week beforehand). Added to the additional infection risk and looking hypocritical, I can't imagine the Big Ten going for that.

rc15

October 29th, 2020 at 10:57 AM ^

Good.

This is SO stupid. What was the point of only playing a conference only schedule? Because the B10 can put the same requirements/policies on every team to keep the entire conference safe.

Now Nebraska wants to play a team that doesn't follow those same policies and put their team at risk. Why would Nebraska even want to do this? Why would you want to put your team at risk for a game that doesn't matter? And potentially end up having players miss games for games that do matter

Blau

October 29th, 2020 at 11:14 AM ^

Duh - Nebraska has to play a shitty version of football because they and their coach have an unquenchable competitive spirit. Doesn't matter if it shows up on the field or not (it doesn't), they will take on anyone, anywhere (shouldn't). Even though they didn't play too bad against OSU, I really didn't see a way they were going to compete in the B1G West pre-covid schedule shutdown. 

Scut Farkus is steering directly into the iceberg, let's hope he sinks.

Mitch Cumstein

October 29th, 2020 at 11:51 AM ^

I think this is obviously why the B10 said no, and completely agree with the decision.

I do wonder if we get to like week 5 and 2 B1G games are in question Bc of 2 teams positivity rate (1 team for each game), if they wouldn’t allow the two healthy teams to adapt schedule and play each other. 

Blau

October 29th, 2020 at 10:55 AM ^

It would be absolutely hilarious if Nebraska went out of their way to schedule a last minute creampuff and lost.

Oh please let it be so.

lilpenny1316

October 29th, 2020 at 11:00 AM ^

I think it's BS that you can tell Nebraska they can't play an OOC game. Either make Wisconsin forfeit since they chose not to play or let Nebraska get this game in. If the Chattanooga kids undergo the same testing as Nebraska, why not let them get the game in on Sunday or Monday?

NittanyFan

October 29th, 2020 at 11:08 AM ^

I agree with you --- this seems mostly like its the B1G being a bunch of authoritarians.

It's doesn't really seem to be about (1) science (if UTC all tests negative, is a game going to be a super-spreader event?) or (2) letting UNL, in a season where they have less games than usual scheduled anyway, get another opportunity to play.

I think we're in the minority on this board in this opinion though.  The "ha ha, let's stick it to Nebraska and Scott Frost!!!" mindset is fairly strong here.

Ultimately, this is really Wisconsin's fault.  UW is pretty protected by the B1G offices, however.

azee2890

October 29th, 2020 at 11:39 AM ^

Technically speaking, Wisconsin all tested negative before their game too. Look what happened. The BIG 10 would need to trust that UTC has been following as strict of a protocol for their players as the other conference schools have (except Wisconsin). I would not trust UTC players (most of whom are student-athletes *emphasis on student first* to be taking the same level of precaution as BIG 10 players. 

NittanyFan

October 29th, 2020 at 2:58 PM ^

At this point, we have about 2 months of data points across professional, college and high school football.

Have there been any instances where 2 teams played, and an outbreak on one team led to an outbreak on the other team?

As far as I know, I think the answer is no.

So even if UTC didn't have the same testing protocols as the B1G, I think the risk of UNL suffering an outbreak because of such is minimal, if not zero.

1VaBlue1

October 29th, 2020 at 11:37 AM ^

I didn't realize they had reached the threshold limit for cancelling the game, so cancelling is fine.  However, I do believe the B1G should've said 'No' and assigned them a forfeit loss for backing out of the game before they hit that threshold.  I mean, can PSU back out because they lost their top 2 RB's?  That isn't really any different from UW losing QB's and a coach to C-19...

1VaBlue1

October 29th, 2020 at 11:55 AM ^

Correct.  There is nothing wrong with giving notice that the game will 'likely' be canceled, and preparing for that action (ie: UN stop preparing for UW and look to the next game; UW focus on recovery).  When the threshold is reached, announce the cancellation.  This also lets TV prepare for something different.

What it doesn't do is allow UW off the hook of playing through 'injuries' if the expected case count fails to increase.

Sambojangles

October 29th, 2020 at 1:38 PM ^

I don't necessarily think the B1G is wrong to tell them no, but I also don't blame Nebraska for making a big deal out of it. They did everything right, Wisconsin clearly didn't and now Nebraska loses a home, division game. 

If MSU had an outbreak and pulled out of our game this weekend, I'm sure there would be many more of us reacting a similar way. At the very least, we would be asking the B1G to move the schedule around so that the team with the Covid issues loses a home, not road game.

I looked at the schedule matrix last night, and assumed that if Wisconsin vs Indiana, the Badgers home crossover (their road game is obviously @ Michigan) later this year, were cancelled, there would have to be lots of other games moved to make it work so that Nebraska gets the Wisconsin game rescheduled and they end up playing the full 8 game schedule. But if it could be done, it would fix most of Nebraska's complaints and keep them from pursuing the OOC game. 

Jim HarBo

October 29th, 2020 at 2:23 PM ^

But Nebraska didn't do everything right, they could have gone to the league to explore the leagues willingness to do this before making it public.   They absolutely knew the answer was going to be no and made this story public so that everybody in Nebraska would concentrate more on "How much the B1G has it out for them" opposed to how much the Nebraska has let their program decline.

Sambojangles

October 29th, 2020 at 3:26 PM ^

I meant that they did everything right in terms of having their players ready to play without an outbreak of the virus. I thought the context was clear, since in the rest of that sentence I wrote "Wisconsin clearly didn't."

Also, we all know that the coaches and administrators at these schools have to play the media to their base like politicians. Of course they knew the answer would be no but now they can go home to the fans and say they tried something.

For years, the MGoBoard complained that our own AD wasn't doing enough to alter the unbalanced schedule of having MSU and OSU home and on the road in the same season. Without a pandemic, he likely never would have gotten it straightened out, but since he never publicly talked about it, people assumed he wasn't doing his job.