• Hi Guest,

    We've updated the site to combine all the forums that were part of the Big Sky Fans Network into one location. This will make it easier to navigate and participate in all the discussions for each school without having to have multiple accounts, etc. We are still working out some tweaks but please let us know if you notice anything.

    With the migration, in some circumstances, your username could have been merged with one of your other usernames from the other forums. If this is the case, you can request to change your username in your account details page of your profile.
  • Hi Guest, want to participate in the discussions, keep track of read/unread posts and more? Create your free account and increase the benefits of your eGriz.com experience today!
  • Guest, do want an ad free experience on BigSkyFans.com among other benefits? Upgrade your account today!

    Simply click your profile name > account upgrades > BigSky Club > choose between the year long subscription (two free months) or month to month

    Thanks for the continued support. Cheers!

Schedule/Blanchett article in S-R

oldtimeewualum

Active member
I am surprised that there has not been more of a response on this site to Blanchette's article in today's Spokesman. He basically called out our athletic director for the this year's football schedule - and, IMO, rightfully so. Although I am a much bigger basketball fan than football, I have attended many EWU football games over the past quarter century. And you dont have to be a coach or to know that this year's football schedule was setting our team up for failure. This is the worst schedule that I can ever remember.

Knowing that we were opening the season at UW for money, and that we were beginning Big Sky play with Montana on the road in week 3, and in week 4 we were playing last year's conf champs MSU,the only sensible thing to do was to get a home game in week 2!!! A minimally competent AD would have recognized this and got us a home game in between UW and UM.

Even more disturbing to me is how Chaves tried to explain it away in the S-R article by saying that "it isn't easy to get somebody to come to Cheney." And it's easier to get people to go to Vermillion, SD?! First, nobody said it was supposed to be "easy" and second, the AD at South Dakota found somebody to come to Vermillion which is much tougher and much more expensive to get to than Cheney. And their AD found a sucker to do it without even having to return the game to us!!!

Next, he says that it would have taken $50k - $70k to get a drop down game. You should be able to get that money either by convincing the administration that it is crucial, or get off your ass and go raise it. After all, we are the defending national champs with 15 returning starters and need to build on the momentum from last year by ensuring that we are in the playoffs this year. This schedule has seriously jeopardized those chances. Hopefully Beau and the guys can overcome the incompetence of Chaves. I thought the absence of quotes from Baldwin in the article spoke volumes. Sometimes silence is deafening and in this case makes it very clear what I had already heard from behind the scenes - that Baldwin was pissed about the whole deal.

And how about Chaves throwing the university administration (read: President Arevalo) under the bus by blaming the scheduling of Central last year on a neutral field on the "institution?" First of all, any AD worth his salt would never schedule a lower-level opponent on a neutral field. Do you think WSU would play us at Joe Albi? Of course not. You do not give a lower-level opponent a better chance to beat you. Ever. I would challenge all of you out there to name a I-A opponent in last 10 years that has played a I-AA team on a neutral field. That is what we did by playing a D2 team on a neutral field. And on top of that, we gave up a home game to do it, and lost money when you take into account what we paid in rent and what we lost in home ticket sales. And even if the money was a wash, you dont do it! And if the AD was smart enough and/or had a nut sack, he would have stood up and said "No" when the Alumni Office or Development Office brought up the idea. If that had happened, Arevalo would have deferred to the judgment of the AD. And to go one step further, if it was the AD's idea, he should be fired for gross incompetence.

And have you seen this year's gauntlet of a basketball schedule? I happen to know that the schedule changed dramatically from the time Earlywine was fired until Coach Hayford was hired. It seems that Chaves wants the basketball team to get off to the same type of start as the football team.
 
Im not a fan either of the schedule. But, I do see a loss to South Dakota (a very good team IMO) and a win against a DII as the same thing though...

Regarding the EWU vs. CWU game... I think it was still a good move to get EWU football on the west side. I think JMU's IA opponent next year will be faced on a neutral field. Heck Idaho as a IA team even traveled to Montana before Idaho got sick of losing to them a few years back...
 
As I've mentioned in other threads, it was a risk/reward situation to give up a DII home game and travel to Vermillion and it backfired. USD was a 3-8 team last year out of a weaker conference. But they did beat Minnesota which means they were probably talented but young. Fast forward and something tells me that by the end of the season this loss isn't going to look so bad.

But it's also not the end of the world. If we finish 7-4 with an all D1 schedule we are virtually a lock to get an at-large bid. If it's 7-4 with a DII ...well just ask Montana how that works out in regards to the playoffs. We are now in a very similar situation to last year after the MSU game with a a pair of D1 losses and a number of question marks but everything still a possibility. Heaven forbid if we somehow sneak pass the Griz and protect home court against the Cats or do the unthinkable and finish 9-2 again. All of a sudden, that all-D1 schedule is looking real good when it comes to seeding.

As for the CWU game last year, my understanding is that the university made enough in sponsorships for it to be a financial win for the university. West side exposure for recruiting and alumni contributions. I didn't agree with it but it makes sense. I thought you were the guy who wanted Chaves to raise more money? :mrgreen:
 
Oldtimeewualum,
Your vendetta against Chaves hurts your credibibity on any other issues and is tiresome and shallow. Find another venue to voice your thoughts but be man enough to do it way where you use your full and real name. You appear cowardly to continue to release your frustrations here behind a screen name. I believe Bill has done a great job for the dept. and the university This scheduling issues is old and boring, move on. I would not be surprised if the SD loss will turn out to be the wake up call the team needed to play to their full potential the rest of the year.
Go Eagles!!
 
The schedule issue was talked about a lot on this forum when it was first released last winter. Yes the South Dakota gamble backfired but I still feel that it was better than the alternative of playing a DII school. Its not a good schedule but given the talent level of this team something we should have been able to overcome and I don't see how the benefits of playing a DII at home before school has even started could outweigh the benefit of playing a DI team that would count toward the overall record for the playoffs. Playing road games has never really been an issue in the past so there wasnt any reason to believe that we couldn't have won that game. Yes the worst-case scenario is definitely playing out before our eyes but the USD game we should have won handily, we just didn't show up.
 
[
quote="eaglesfootball"]The schedule issue was talked about a lot on this forum when it was first released last winter. Yes the South Dakota gamble backfired but I still feel that it was better than the alternative of playing a DII school. Its not a good schedule but given the talent level of this team something we should have been able to overcome and I don't see how the benefits of playing a DII at home before chool has even started could outweigh the benefit of playing a DI team that would count toward the overall record for the playoffs. Playing road games has never really been an issue in the past so there wasnt any reason to believe that we couldn't have won that game. Yes the worst-case scenario is definitely

This. And from an at-large playoff bid perspective, the USD game really doesn't change anything. With a DII we could afford three losses. With the current schedule we can still afford 3 losses. It does hurt our chances at earning a seed, but then again, seeded teams should beat USD on the road. We are also still undefeated in conference. :nod:
 
If we had scheduled D2 Central for our second game, and lost (which has happened before) do you think 'oldtimeewualum' would now be ranting about what an idiot Chaves was for scheduling them?
After winning the national championship maybe it became tougher to bring in an FCS team to Cheney?
When/if LaDopa gets his new permanent east side stands it may be possible to pay teams to come to Cheney- it worked for the Griz! I totally support Chaves that he's doing well on a tough job - being an AD at Eastern. Hey, at least old time didn't mention Earlywine!!
 
Let me say I think that Chaves has done a great job with a lot of things at Eastern, and by and large has done a very good job. But his scheduling- especially in football- has been really poor.

It just gets worse next year when we are scheduled to open AT Washington State and AT Idaho. That's just terrible. Aynone knows what every year we haven't made the playoffs since 2002 has in common? We opened with two consecutive road games against FBS opponents. Learn from your mistakes!
 
Spoeagle said:
If we had scheduled D2 Central for our second game, and lost (which has happened before) do you think 'oldtimeewualum' would now be ranting about what an idiot Chaves was for scheduling them?
After winning the national championship maybe it became tougher to bring in an FCS team to Cheney?
When/if LaDopa gets his new permanent east side stands it may be possible to pay teams to come to Cheney- it worked for the Griz! I totally support Chaves that he's doing well on a tough job - being an AD at Eastern. Hey, at least old time didn't mention Earlywine!!

In the past, we have scheduled lots of home-homes with FCS teams. It didn't suddenly become more difficult.
 
I have spoken enough about this years schedule and how I completely disagree with it, S. Dakota was a gamble and it didn't pay off. The biggest issue was the timing of the game, being sandwiched between Washington and Montana but that topic has been beaten to death, but I am glad Blanchett wrote an article on it.

Next year does not get any better. We start at Idaho/Wash State, then at Weber. We normally have our bye week in November, but I believe that week is filled the with Cal Poly return game next year, so our bye week is week 3. From my understaning, we will start with 3 straight on the road next year as well, unless I have the cal poly date wrong. We do have 5 home games next year, and they are all quality opponents so that does help.

Chavez does have a tough job and he has done a good job, we are all a little frustrated with the scheduling, but he has done some great things for EWU and hopefully will continue to.
 
The scheduling thing is just compounded by the fact that we're 0-2. 2-0 or even 1-1 and no one would even be saying anything about it. Would we have beat USD on the Inferno? Maybe. They do have a really good home record. I wonder why they went 3-8 last season.
 
Interesting thing to note: Auburn (the FBS champion) would certainly be 0-2 instead of 2-0 had they played both of their games on the road to start the season.

And for those who think 7-4 is good enough-- you might be right, be you also might be wrong. There is no guarantee a 7-4 Big Sky team gets in... and the committee has always been vicious to Eastern by placing us against seeded teams on the road even when we're 8-3.
 
LDopaPDX said:
Interesting thing to note: Auburn (the FBS champion) would certainly be 0-2 instead of 2-0 had they played both of their games on the road to start the season.

And for those who think 7-4 is good enough-- you might be right, be you also might be wrong. There is no guarantee a 7-4 Big Sky team gets in... and the committee has always been vicious to Eastern by placing us against seeded teams on the road even when we're 8-3.

Pretty sure Montana went 7-4 last year (1 win against Div 2 opponent) and didn't get in, they also were in the championship the year before.

If we run the table, or finish 8-3 and win the auto bid for the big sky, we will most likley be seeded this year. If not, we will be on the road. If you are not seeded, it is all about attendance and $$$, which Eastern does not have compared to other schools that are typically in the playoffs.
 
marceagfan5 said:
LDopaPDX said:
Interesting thing to note: Auburn (the FBS champion) would certainly be 0-2 instead of 2-0 had they played both of their games on the road to start the season.

And for those who think 7-4 is good enough-- you might be right, be you also might be wrong. There is no guarantee a 7-4 Big Sky team gets in... and the committee has always been vicious to Eastern by placing us against seeded teams on the road even when we're 8-3.

Pretty sure Montana went 7-4 last year (1 win against Div 2 opponent) and didn't get in, they also were in the championship the year before.

If we run the table, or finish 8-3 and win the auto bid for the big sky, we will most likley be seeded this year. If not, we will be on the road. If you are not seeded, it is all about attendance and $$$, which Eastern does not have compared to other schools that are typically in the playoffs.

A 7-4 Weber got in two years ago. And if memory serves, the year we were in a three way tie and won the auto bid, MSU got in at 7-4 and hosted Furman. NDSU and Nova got in at 7-4 last year. Don't get me wrong, I would be disappointed with 7-4. But in the eyes of the committee, a 7-4 all DI schedule is the same as an 8-3 with a DII. With the expanded 20 team playoff and minus a plethora of 8-3 teams from power conferences or 10-1 teams from lesser conferences, any BSC team at 7-4 with an all DI schedule is a lock for an at-large.

Getting even the 5 seed at 8-3 however would take some luck.
 
kalm said:
marceagfan5 said:
LDopaPDX said:
Interesting thing to note: Auburn (the FBS champion) would certainly be 0-2 instead of 2-0 had they played both of their games on the road to start the season.

And for those who think 7-4 is good enough-- you might be right, be you also might be wrong. There is no guarantee a 7-4 Big Sky team gets in... and the committee has always been vicious to Eastern by placing us against seeded teams on the road even when we're 8-3.

Pretty sure Montana went 7-4 last year (1 win against Div 2 opponent) and didn't get in, they also were in the championship the year before.

If we run the table, or finish 8-3 and win the auto bid for the big sky, we will most likley be seeded this year. If not, we will be on the road. If you are not seeded, it is all about attendance and $$$, which Eastern does not have compared to other schools that are typically in the playoffs.

A 7-4 Weber got in two years ago. And if memory serves, the year we were in a three way tie and won the auto bid, MSU got in at 7-4 and hosted Furman. NDSU and Nova got in at 7-4 last year. Don't get me wrong, I would be disappointed with 7-4. But in the eyes of the committee, a 7-4 all DI schedule is the same as an 8-3 with a DII. With the expanded 20 team playoff and minus a plethora of 8-3 teams from power conferences or 10-1 teams from lesser conferences, any BSC team at 7-4 with an all DI schedule is a lock for an at-large.

Getting even the 5 seed at 8-3 however would take some luck.

Kalm, I agree 7-4 with our schedule should get us in, 7-4 or 8-3 and we are probably on the road. Have a shot at a seed with 8-3 record if we win the big sky outright or win the auto bid. Considering we play at Mont, at Sac, and at Cal Poly, and host MSU, 8-3 would be a nice record.
 
marceagfan5 said:
kalm said:
marceagfan5 said:
LDopaPDX said:
Interesting thing to note: Auburn (the FBS champion) would certainly be 0-2 instead of 2-0 had they played both of their games on the road to start the season.

And for those who think 7-4 is good enough-- you might be right, be you also might be wrong. There is no guarantee a 7-4 Big Sky team gets in... and the committee has always been vicious to Eastern by placing us against seeded teams on the road even when we're 8-3.

Pretty sure Montana went 7-4 last year (1 win against Div 2 opponent) and didn't get in, they also were in the championship the year before.

If we run the table, or finish 8-3 and win the auto bid for the big sky, we will most likley be seeded this year. If not, we will be on the road. If you are not seeded, it is all about attendance and $$$, which Eastern does not have compared to other schools that are typically in the playoffs.

Agreed. An 8-3 seed would hinge on an equal record and wins against all three including the auto bid in addition to no othe GWFC teams like SUU and USD getting crazy and going 9-2 or better.

A 7-4 Weber got in two years ago. And if memory serves, the year we were in a three way tie and won the auto bid, MSU got in at 7-4 and hosted Furman. NDSU and Nova got in at 7-4 last year. Don't get me wrong, I would be disappointed with 7-4. But in the eyes of the committee, a 7-4 all DI schedule is the same as an 8-3 with a DII. With the expanded 20 team playoff and minus a plethora of 8-3 teams from power conferences or 10-1 teams from lesser conferences, any BSC team at 7-4 with an all DI schedule is a lock for an at-large.

Getting even the 5 seed at 8-3 however would take some luck.

Kalm, I agree 7-4 with our schedule should get us in, 7-4 or 8-3 and we are probably on the road. Have a shot at a seed with 8-3 record if we win the big sky outright or win the auto bid. Considering we play at Mont, at Sac, and at Cal Poly, and host MSU, 8-3 would be a nice record.
 
kalm said:
marceagfan5 said:
kalm said:
marceagfan5 said:
LDopaPDX said:
Interesting thing to note: Auburn (the FBS champion) would certainly be 0-2 instead of 2-0 had they played both of their games on the road to start the season.

And for those who think 7-4 is good enough-- you might be right, be you also might be wrong. There is no guarantee a 7-4 Big Sky team gets in... and the committee has always been vicious to Eastern by placing us against seeded teams on the road even when we're 8-3.

Pretty sure Montana went 7-4 last year (1 win against Div 2 opponent) and didn't get in, they also were in the championship the year before.

If we run the table, or finish 8-3 and win the auto bid for the big sky, we will most likley be seeded this year. If not, we will be on the road. If you are not seeded, it is all about attendance and $$$, which Eastern does not have compared to other schools that are typically in the playoffs.

Agreed. An 8-3 seed would hinge on an equal record and wins against all three including the auto bid in addition to no othe GWFC teams like SUU and USD getting crazy and going 9-2 or better.

A 7-4 Weber got in two years ago. And if memory serves, the year we were in a three way tie and won the auto bid, MSU got in at 7-4 and hosted Furman. NDSU and Nova got in at 7-4 last year. Don't get me wrong, I would be disappointed with 7-4. But in the eyes of the committee, a 7-4 all DI schedule is the same as an 8-3 with a DII. With the expanded 20 team playoff and minus a plethora of 8-3 teams from power conferences or 10-1 teams from lesser conferences, any BSC team at 7-4 with an all DI schedule is a lock for an at-large.

Getting even the 5 seed at 8-3 however would take some luck.

Kalm, I agree 7-4 with our schedule should get us in, 7-4 or 8-3 and we are probably on the road. Have a shot at a seed with 8-3 record if we win the big sky outright or win the auto bid. Considering we play at Mont, at Sac, and at Cal Poly, and host MSU, 8-3 would be a nice record.
Better be thinking about one game !!! UM nothing more !!
 

Latest posts

Back
Top