Blog Entry

National notes leading w/ TCU-Wisconsin

Posted on: February 10, 2011 2:28 pm
Edited on: February 10, 2011 2:33 pm
 
Let's straighten out this TCU-Wisconsin mini-controversy. There's a huge reason the Horned Frogs did not want to play the Badgers for the second time in nine months. Its 2011 schedule is all but full.

TCU took a bit of a beating in the court of public opinion this week when Badgers coach Bret Bielema casually mentioned on a radio show that he had been approached by a third party to play the Horned Frogs in Madison in 2011. TCU turned down the "offer." Words like "rematch" and "ducking" entered the conversation on the always level-headed Worldwide Interweb. 

It wasn't a true rematch in that Wisconsin wasn't willing to return the game. There was no ducking because, in truth, TCU's schedule is about to be finalized. The public just doesn't know about it yet. 

The only other opening on the TCU schedule is expected to be filled by BYU on Friday, Oct. 28 at Cowboys Stadium. Pending the final contracts, that's the way it's going to be. TCU's other non-conference games are against Baylor, SMU, Louisiana-Monroe and Portland State. The Froggies will be playing five non-conference games because there are only seven conference games in its final season in the Mountain West.

AD Chris Del Conte's "Anytime, anyplace, anywhere," blast was in reference to Ohio State after Gordon Gee's "Little Sisters of the Poor," comment during the season. It doesn't apply to Wisconsin which was not committed to a return game. TCU is at a level now that it doesn't have to take one-off games on the road. 

It has future home-and-homes scheduled with Oklahoma, Virginia, LSU and Arkansas.




England, Hong Kong weigh in on the BCS: Nothing like a little foreign influence in the BCS. 

The San Diego State International Sports MBA Case Competition is taking on the postseason system in its annual contest involving some of the world's best MBA programs. Twelve schools are being asked to present their best alternatives for postseason college football. The winning group of students will present their case this summer to Mark Cuban, a noted BCS critic and NBA referee baiter who proposed his own playoff plan last year.

Among the MBA programs involved are San Diego State, UCLA, USC, Cal, Notre Dame, Texas, Florida as well as -- wait for it -- Oxford and Hong Kong University.

"We're really interested in what they say, they have no skin in the game," said Greg Block, a media relations director at San Diego State. 

Per the press release, "The largest hurdle ... is to work around the existing personalities and relationships in the current system, making it possible for an independent, outside company to navigate the existing power structures, earn a profit and enact lasting change that is supported by all (I-A) universities."

A time-saving hint for the MBAers: They might start by calling the Rose Bowl, Big Ten and Pac-12 to figure out how to get those three entities in a playoff. No one inside the system has been able to do it yet.

A winner will be determined Friday night. 



Signed and sealed: If you want to view the inner workings of an NCAA CEO you'll have to wait another 57 years. 

Bumping around the NCAA website this week, I discovered something called the Richard D. Schultz Papers. If that sounds like something akin to presidential papers, you're right. Schultz was the NCAA's second executive director from 1987-1993, following the iconic Walter Byers. During his time NCAA basketball revenue skyrocketed, a football playoff became topical and gender equity became a major issue as Title IX took hold.

The point is, you may have to wait a while to read about it.  Schultz' papers were sealed back in 1993 for 75 years or until 2068. All 111 boxes, taking up 57 linear feet. 

"There are some documents the public will never see," said NCAA librarian Lisa Douglass. 

The records are open only to NCAA employees and to "outside researchers" at the discretion of NCAA librarian, according to the site. I don’t know how much juicy stuff is in there but Schultz was not without a bit of controversy in his career. He resigned in 1993 after an investigation into improper loans given to athletes while he was AD at Virginia. 

Juicy stuff, if you're an NCAA nerd like me and love poking around that that kind of stuff. For some reason Byers' papers are more accessible. Those of Cedric Dempsey, who replaced Schultz and Myles Brand are still being assembled.
Comments

Since: Jan 13, 2007
Posted on: February 13, 2011 11:03 am
 

National notes leading w/ TCU-Wisconsin

TCU = cowards....anytime ....any place....yea right ,I can tell the AD really meant what he said...at least Gee has said he was wrong for saying what he said,let us see what this big mouth AD says about his false claims.



Since: Dec 14, 2007
Posted on: February 12, 2011 6:19 pm
 

National notes leading w/ TCU-Wisconsin

 TCU doesn't want to play because of the firepower they are losing. They also don't want to play because they can't afford a loss as they have to travel to Boise later in the year.  This is just like when Boise beat Oklahoma way back when, Stoops offered Boise a game in Norman the following season, Boise politley refused. So TCU is probably gonna follow the Boise lead and ride this win over one of the big boys for the next 5 years or so. You know what TCU, I wouldn't want to go to Madison and play either, lol...



Since: Nov 14, 2010
Posted on: February 11, 2011 4:45 pm
 

National notes leading w/ TCU-Wisconsin

TCU needs to offer Wisconsin a date in Ft. Worth on a weekend where they already have a game scheduled. When Wisconsin finds out that there is no return date to Madison and turns the game down, the sports "journalists" can run a story captioned "Wisconsin Not Interested in Rematch With TCU".



Since: Feb 11, 2011
Posted on: February 11, 2011 11:40 am
 

National notes leading w/ TCU-Wisconsin

Dennis, you forgot an important point.  The 3rd party proposal was for an opening season game.  TCU already has a contract with Baylor for this date.  TCU is not Tech -- they don't back out of contracts, and TCU owes Baylor a home game.  So, TCU is getting hammered in the press for being chicken to play Wisconsin again.  Hey, TCU would rather tick off casual fans then a former SWC foe and the only current Big 12 school that will play them.  If Wisconsin offered a home and home (or Jerry World) then I am sure the deal would have been excepted



Since: Jan 14, 2010
Posted on: February 11, 2011 2:34 am
 

National notes leading w/ TCU-Wisconsin

Not a huge mistake FOR TCU. Not a mistake at all.
Wisconsin thinks it's the 'big boy,' it's not. Why does TCU have to prove once again they are better than the cheese-suckers? They don't. It's the haters, who no doubt love the BCS and all things cheese, that want this to happen.
TCU doesn't have to take 1 offs anymore. Wisco knew this and are desperate to spin this as if TCU ran BECAUSE THEY CAN'T BEAT THEM ON THE FIELD. Nice try weaksucks. You lost, and they won; you go to them.
RooneyDog is confusing myth with history. FSU, Miami, PSU etc.. went for one offs, just as Boise State did; until they did not have to do so. That day has arrived for TCU.
Suck failure Badgers, you have to travel, NOT TCU. Stop making excuses for your loss. You were beat by a better team, get over it.



Since: Dec 11, 2007
Posted on: February 10, 2011 8:00 pm
 

National notes leading w/ TCU-Wisconsin

I don't care about this and that. A big school wanted to play you , you want respect and to be in the true national picture... YOU TAKE THE CHALLENGE!!!!!! There is no excuse for TCU to turn this down. I don't care if Wis. offered 1 dollar you take it and go there and kick their ass!! TCU is at the level they don't need this... WHAT are you kidding they need to beat everyone anytime any place. Back in the day Miami and Florida St. wanted respect and to beat the best so they did, they went to Oklahoma,Nebraska, Ohio St. and won champoinships then they didn't have to do it anymore. Huge mistake TCU


The views expressed in this blog are solely those of the author and do not reflect the views of CBS Sports or CBSSports.com