In Case You Didn't Know, It's In Reno

by Achilles on Apr 29, 2009 2:57 PM PDT in Football Comment 15 comments

According to the University of Nevada, UCLA has entered into an agreement to play Nevada three times in upcoming years, including one trip to Reno to play the Wolfpack.

RENO, Nev. – The University of Nevada will play host to Arizona and UCLA at Mackay Stadium as part of multi-game deal with each school, athletics director Cary Groth announced today.

Nevada will travel to face the Bruins on Aug. 31, 2013 and again Sept. 19, 2015. The Bruins will come to Mackay Stadium on Sept. 17, 2016.

We don't head for Reno until 2016 -- so don't start packing yet. Our starting quarterback in that game is home right now watching Hannah Montana.

UPDATE (A): Here are Rick Neuheisel's comments from the UCLA release.

"Nevada is one of the top programs in the Western Athletic Conference," said head coach Rick Neuheisel. "In addition, two of the three games are at the Rose Bowl. Reno is an easy trip from Los Angeles, so hopefully, a lot of Bruin fans will go to support us."

0 recs | Comment 15 comments

Story-email Email Printer Print

Comments

Hmmm I wonder if John Savage helped at all with this?

His wife’s father is the head coach of the Nevada football team.

by Ryan Rosenblatt on Apr 29, 2009 3:06 PM PDT reply actions 0 recs

Really??

I can’t wait!! This game has much more meaning than playing Ohio State or Alabama… Pff

DBalter

by westwood12003 on Apr 29, 2009 3:22 PM PDT reply actions 0 recs

We're already at Nebraska in 2013

in 2015 and 2016 we’ll play both UNLV and Nevada, then will likely add a high profile team to finish out the schedule. We need a should win game or two on every non-conference schedule because the Pac 10 plays 9 conference games as opposed to 8. Schedules like last season’s just isn’t smart. Also, UNLV and Nevada will give us a presence in Nevada to help us better recruit in the state.

by Ryan Rosenblatt on Apr 29, 2009 3:35 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs

Reno stadium

I understand the Reno stadium will be increased from the present 10,500 all the way up to 25,000 to accommodate all the interest in attending… :)

BillSouthBay

by Mensgym on Apr 29, 2009 3:54 PM PDT reply actions 0 recs

Ugh

I don’t like this. We don’t get anything from visiting Reno.

by Nestor on Apr 29, 2009 4:39 PM PDT reply actions 0 recs

I like it

It helps recruiting in a state where we could use the help. We got Keenan Graham last year, but players from Nevada are going to Oklahoma, USC, BYU, Oregon, Colorado and Utah in the fall. They produce some pretty good talent and they’re a solid team. They’ve been to four straight bowl games so it’s not like we’re playing a 1-AA team, plus it’s not easy to get teams to agree to a 2 and 1.

by Ryan Rosenblatt on Apr 29, 2009 4:49 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs

Recruiting?

Let’s see – the hotbeds of high school football are Nevada, Florida and Texas, or is it Nevada, Texas and Florida? I never can keep that straight.

Other than that great recruiting coup, I see no benefit to our playing Nevada either at the Rose Bowl or in Reno. I accept the fact that they are a good team, but the expectation in the press (and my own expectation I confess) is that we have a cakewalk against them. I see this as a no win situation. I would prefer that we schedule someone like Auburn or someone in Texas or even New Mexico State (or New Mexico – wherever it is that Coach Walker went.)

All that said, if our CEO likes it, then I support it.

by Fox 71 on Apr 29, 2009 6:48 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs

Yep

We essentially said the exact same thing at the same time. lol

by Nestor on Apr 29, 2009 6:50 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs

That is a good point re recruiting

My concern is that in games like we usually get in a situation when teams like Nevada are more fired up to play UCLA especially on their home turf. I have no problems scheduling Nevada … but they should be all played at the Rose Bowl. We have the upper hand here. They need us (for exposure) then we really need them.

Also I think hen our program is up and running again we are not going to need to play in Nevada to get recruits. But your point is a good one and probably played a factor in CRN deciding to go along with it.

by Nestor on Apr 29, 2009 6:50 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs

Okay, so who would you schedule?

If I could rule as absolute dictator – a concept that could solve so many of America’s ills – here’s what I’d do with the non-conference schedule: 1 game against a regional team from the MWC or WAC, 1 game against somebody from the Big Ten (every single year), and 1 game against a strong team from a key recruiting area, meaning SEC or Big 12 country.

by ucla84 on Apr 29, 2009 7:49 PM PDT reply actions 0 recs

Too much for me

unless that Big Ten team is a middle to bottom of the conference team. A lot of those MWC and WAC teams are good so that’s not an easy game. A strong SEC or Big 12 team is really tough and the Big 10 is no pushover, even if they’re not great. Where’s your gimme win in there? You need a gimme win every year and you need another should win. Pac-10 teams already play 9 games against BCS schools so do you want to play 11 games against BCS schools and another against a WAC or MWC school that is sometimes a damn good squad? That’s not a recipe for winning 10 games or so. Even CRN has mentioned that a schedule needs a gimme game and should only play one really tough team.

by Ryan Rosenblatt on Apr 29, 2009 7:57 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs

Yup

As cool as it was to face Tennesee, BYU and Fresno State last year… one of those should’ve been a gimme against a bottom rung 1-A team or even a 1-AA team. That out-of-conference schedule was murderous, and changing one of the non-BCS games into a Big-10 game would be rough. I mean, we can’t count on Washington and WSU being the 118th and 119th best teams in 1-A forever…

by Magnusblitz on Apr 29, 2009 8:01 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs

I understand your objections, Raz, but I disagree

I’ll take one gimme a year, but I’d also argue for one manageable to semi-tough win and one big challenge. Those are the kinds of games that build character and toughen a team up over the long haul. Of course, who knows who’s going to be a pushover 5-10 years down the road?

When we booked Tennessee, would you have guessed they’d be falling apart by the time we played them? Ditto Texas the last time around in 1997-98. (And if anybody’s got a DVD of that 1997 game…) On the other hand, if we’d have booked, say, LSU eight years ago, imagine our surprise now. For that matter, BYU was notably down until Mr. Mendenhall showed up.

I’m shocked, however, that we’re going to Reno. I totally concur with Nestor – the regional game should always be at home.

by ucla84 on Apr 29, 2009 8:10 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs

Sheeesh!!!!

I thought we were talking basketball until I saw the autumn dates! Reno and UNLV are better known for basketball success. When did they field football teams? If UCLA was trying to pad their schedule, I would have preferred they stick with some cupcakes from the Big Ten such as Indiana or Michigan.

by bruin75 on Apr 29, 2009 9:31 PM PDT reply actions 0 recs