Tennessee will play Ohio State in a two-year football series, 2018 and 2019, Tennessee athletic director Mike Hamilton announced in a release today.
The first game will played at Neyland Stadium on Sept. 1, 2018, and the second in Ohio Stadium on Sept. 7, 2019.
"We're looking forward to a series with another one of college football's storied programs," Hamilton said. "I know our fans will enjoy going to the Horseshoe as much as their fans will enjoy coming to Neyland Stadium."
The Vols and Buckeyes have met only once previously in football, a 20-14 Tennessee victory in the 1996 Florida Citrus Bowl when both teams entered the game tied for fourth nationally in the Associated Press poll.
Tennessee's signing class for 2012
Tennessee defeats Georgia 3-2 in…
Memorable moments in Pat Summitt's…
Scripps Interactive Newspapers Group
Comments » 59
ctownvol writes:
On a different and very sad note I read on another site that ex-Vol lineman Heath Benedict was found dead. Not sure why KNS isn't reporting this yet. Very sad indeed.
WorkinLikeHeck writes:
Once Fulmer is gone, so is UT football.
ctownvol writes:
How did Tennessee ever win football games before Phil? Don't get me wrong, I love Coach Fulmer, but UT will win after he is gone. I DO hope that is a long way off though.
IdahoVol writes:
We are one of the few major programs that schedules teams like this on a regular basis. Over the next twelve years we have home-and-homes scheduled with UCLA, Oregon, North Carolina, Oklahoma, Nebraska, and now Ohio State. That's pretty strong, regardless of the idiotic posts this story is sure to generate. From a fan's standpoint these are tremendous games to see.
ctownvol writes:
I agree Idaho. All of that on top of the fact we play an already hellish SEC schedule.
Timed_vol (Inactive) writes:
IdahO
That is what college football SHOULD be. That is one of the major reasons I'm a big proponent for a playoff.
You should be able to play tough, marquee games and have it MEAN something, even if you lose. Also, you should be able to lose 2 or even 3 games and not have it 'kill' your season if you play a decent schedule.
Basketball has it right.
Timed_vol (Inactive) writes:
Dang;
you know age is catching up to you when you realize you might die of old age before future football schedules come to pass.
volboy81#211803 writes:
This is great! UT IS the only SEC team with the guts to schedule teams like UCLA, OKLA, NEB, OHIO STATE, SYRACUSE, CAL, NOTRE DAME, MIAMI, UNC, OREGON, etc. giving Vol fans a chance to travel to great destinations. Even some of our "soft" games are against people like Marshall and Fresno. SEE YOU IN L.A. ON SEPT. 6
GO VOLS!!
pabashia#208095 writes:
If Fulmer is gone by then, we may actually stand a chance.
volchiq writes:
I think Pat's philosophy has rubbed off on the other UT coaches (play the best), first Bruce now Phil. Unfortunately, I am afraid it might bite Phil in the end.
I can see it now, we are ranked 10th at the start of the season, we play the first game of the year against a good OH St. and lose a close one, but drop to 15th or so. We could win every other game of the year, but because we were judged at the beginning of the year, before a game has even been played, as not as good as some other team that ends with one loss, we don't get a shot at the BCS. The Auburn Phenomenon.
Football needs a playoff!
iowavol writes:
Volchiq, CPF has always scheduled tough opponents so perhaps it is Pat that learned from him. He's been trying for years to get Michigan, but they don't want any more of Tennessee than the occasional bowl game. Oklahoma is the same way. I'm surprised they finally got Nebraska and Ohio State. Good for the Vols - those will be nice wins regardless of who is the coach.
RemembertheAlamo writes:
So who are we playing in 2020 and 2021? Who Cares? We should be preparing for UAB on Aug 30, 2008.
jimr07 writes:
all of you that want a playoff, present a plan that makes sense. so far, none have been presented.
WorkinLikeHeck writes:
Rrticle mentions the 1996 Citrus Bowl win over Ohio State...ahhh, the good ole days of getting pantsed by Florida every year (except 1998) and going to Orlando.
dalvol writes:
Ashley, I didn't realize that President Obama had anything to do with UT football!
watchdog writes:
Ah yeah the '96 Citrus Bowl. Every time I'm reminded of Eddie George saying how Peyton didn't deserve the Heisman for not winning the big one, I ask myself when he's going to give his up to Tommie Frazier... 'cause, you know, Frazier's Nebraska team won it all that year and Frazier was the Heisman runner-up, while Eddie got, what, like half his rushing average against Tennessee in that loss? Win the big one, indeed.
Anyway, this'll be a great game. Has the potential to rank up there with the home-and-away with Notre Dame in the '90s.
Tenn_Dawg writes:
This is great for college football and the SEC. If I am blessed enough to still be around then I will definately tune into this one.
99gator writes:
jimr07
take 16 schools, conference champs from 8 leagues....(the BCS leagues, the WAC, and the Mountain West) and 8 at large teams.
all teams selected and seeded like the basketball tourney. every round played on campus locations until the championship round.....played at a designated bowl sight.
if you get rid of the 12th game, which the NCAA just added.....the most games a school could possibly play would be 16. lsu played 14 last year. not too much of a difference.
RoyaltyVol#280778 writes:
This is great, I just hope I can still stand and holler by then!
Timed_vol (Inactive) writes:
jim07;
are you just trying to start a fight?? there have been a billion proposals that 'make sense'.
Sense has nothing to do with it. What keeps the bcs schools from a playoff is 1) BIG MONEY and 2) THE BIG 10.
Used to be, the argument was 'too many games'; well the teams now play upwards of 14. 'Season is too long'; well, the season now runs to the middle of January.
You can always find a reason NOT to do something; I will give you reasons TO do something:
-Fairness; reduce the political bullcarp now dominating the champiohship mess
-Fairness (2): give more teams a shot
-Less pressure on coaches: yes, less. A team can lose a few games, and still have 'a chance'. UT has had several years where 1 loss wiped out the season's hopes
-Athlete development: coaches will be more inclined to develop young players to aid in the playoff run
-Fiscal: playoffs will be a big draw over the current bowls, both onsite fans and TV
-Did I mention fariness?? All you have to do is looke at OSU being in the hunt for 2 years in a row when other teams where more deserving, or go back to how Auburn got hosed.
So, yeah, let's get it going. Create a basketball sylte selection committe, go with the top 'X' teams, where X is some number over 10, and get this puppy on the right path.
jclowers writes:
A playoff system that would actually work for everyone involved (BCS, networks NCAA). Get rid of the "National Championship" game and go back to the 4 BCS Bowls (picked by BCS). Winners of each bowl will play each other (Orange Winner vs Sugar winner) (Rose winner vs. Fiesta winner). Then the winners of those games play in the National Title game. It adds 2 more games if you get rid of the 12th regular season game you have 15 as the most games anyone would play. This would not get rid of the BCS (which people making money off of do not want to lose), this would at least let the teams decide it on the field. And you could still play all the "other" bowl games for teams not in the BCS. It still is not a perfect system but a very agreeable system.
RoyaltyVol#280778 writes:
I would say I look forward to this game, but when it arrives I will be an AARP member eating at Shoneys getting my senior discount and who knows, maybe wearing depends, yikes!
rabidvol1998 writes:
I can't wait to see Coach Fulmer roaming the side-line at Ohio Stadium.
Glad we continue to schedule aggressively.
Go Vols.
MrBamSeydu writes:
BCS CHAMPIONSHIP SERIES (my playoff proposal):
You force every conference to have it's own post-season conference championship game (Big 10, for example, does not have one yet). You take each conference champion from the 6 "BCS conferences" and give them automatic births into the NCAA tournament. The seeding for those 6 teams is based off the BCS formula (kind of like an RPI in basketball).
In other words, Ohio State would've been the #1 overall this past season (if they had gone on to win their non-existent post-regular season conf. championship game) and LSU would've been #2 overall (ranked #2 in BCS and won their tourney). After that, let's say (for argument's sake) UGA was ranked #3 and had lost to LSU in the SEC championship game. Well guess what? They don't make it, because if you can't win your conference you don't deserve a shot at the national championship. This basically makes each conference championship game the "1st Round" of the national playoff system. So let's say, after UGA, USC was #4 and had beaten #5 Cal (theoretically only, I realize Cal was not #5) in the PAC-10 championship game. USC would be the 3rd highest rated team available and having won their conference, so they'd get the #3 overall slot for the NCAA tourney. And so on and so forth until each of the 6 BCS conferences are all seeded 1 thru 6.
Now, the problem comes with smaller conferences. But what you'd do is (similar to NCAA b-ball's 64/65 play in game) have a 4 team playoff with the 4 HIGHEST RATED NON-BCS CONFERENCE CHAMPS in the final BCS poll. What this does is take into account overall record, rankings, strength of conference, etc. Let's say Memphis wins the Conf USA Championship game, but they lost all their non-conference games and 1 conference game and finished something like 8-5 with a final BCS rank of #48 overall. Then let's say you've got Fresno State 11-2(WAC), UNLV 10-3(MWC), FAU 12-1(Sun Belt), and Central Michigan 9-4(MAC).... and these 4 conference champs are higher ranked in the final BCS poll than Memphis. You'd seed those teams 1 thru 4 in the 2 NCAA play-in games using the highest to lowest BCS ranking.... and Memphis would be out of luck (should've won some out of conference games!! this makes the regular season matter too!!!)
OKAY, so #1 Fresno State beats #4 Central Michigan, while #3 FAU beats #2 UNLV.
Fresno State gets the #7 seed and FAU gets the #8 seed in the NCAA BCS Football Tournament (having only played ONE extra game).
EXAMPLE:
#1 Ohio State (BIG 10.. or well 11) vs #8 FAU (Sun Belt)
#2 LSU (SEC) vs #7 Fresno State (WAC)
#3 USC (PAC 10) vs #6 Miami (ACC)
#4 Oklahoma (Big 12) vs #5 West Virginia (Big East)
MrBamSeydu writes:
You still play ALL other Bowl games as usual (they never matter anyway, right??). You can call the tournament The BCS Championship Series (which is what that SHOULD mean). You can use the Rose Bowl as the 2nd place Pac-10 team vs the 2nd place Big-10 team EVERY year (which is what that is SUPPOSED to be... as far as conferences goes). The Orange Bowl, Sugar Bowl, and Tostitos Fiest Bowl can each sponsor the higher-end bowl games rather than being involved with the actual tournament. This way, everyone still gets their money and the championship is won on the field.
The only SINGLE issue with this is: what do you do with Div 1 "independant" teams like Notre Dame? Well guess what Notre Dame? Join a conference. It's ridiculous that you aren't in one as it is, so if you want to be involved..... stop trying to act like you're any different than anyone else.
MrBamSeydu writes:
BCS CHAMPIONSHIP SERIES (my playoff proposal):
You force every conference to have it's own post-season conference championship game (Big 10, for example, does not have one yet). You take each conference champion from the 6 "BCS conferences" and give them automatic births into the NCAA tournament. The seeding for those 6 teams is based off the BCS formula (kind of like an RPI in basketball).
In other words, Ohio State would've been the #1 overall this past season (if they had gone on to win their non-existent post-regular season conf. championship game) and LSU would've been #2 overall (ranked #2 in BCS and won their conference championship game). After that, let's say (for argument's sake) UGA was ranked #3 and had lost to LSU in the SEC championship game. Well guess what? They don't make it, because if you can't win your conference you don't deserve a shot at the national championship. This basically makes each conference championship game the "1st Round" of the national playoff system. So let's say, after UGA, USC was #4 and had beaten #5 Cal (theoretically only, I realize Cal was not #5) in the PAC-10 championship game. USC would be the 3rd highest rated team available and having won their conference, so they'd get the #3 overall slot for the NCAA tourney. And so on and so forth until each of the 6 BCS conferences are all seeded 1 thru 6.
Now, the problem comes with smaller conferences. But what you'd do is (similar to NCAA b-ball's 64/65 play in game) have a 4 team playoff with the 4 HIGHEST RATED NON-BCS CONFERENCE CHAMPS in the final BCS poll. What this does is take into account overall record, rankings, strength of conference, etc. Let's say Memphis wins the Conf USA Championship game, but they lost all their non-conference games and 1 conference game and finished something like 8-5 with a final BCS rank of #48 overall. Then let's say you've got Fresno State 11-2(WAC), UNLV 10-3(MWC), FAU 12-1(Sun Belt), and Central Michigan 9-4(MAC).... and these 4 conference champs are higher ranked in the final BCS poll than Memphis. You'd seed those teams 1 thru 4 in the 2 NCAA play-in games using the highest to lowest BCS ranking.... and Memphis would be out of luck (should've won some out of conference games!! this makes the regular season matter too!!!)
OKAY, so #1 Fresno State beats #4 Central Michigan, while #3 FAU beats #2 UNLV.
Fresno State gets the #7 seed and FAU gets the #8 seed in the NCAA BCS Football Tournament (having only played ONE extra game).
EXAMPLE:
#1 Ohio State (BIG 10.. or well 11) vs #8 FAU (Sun Belt)
#2 LSU (SEC) vs #7 Fresno State (WAC)
#3 USC (PAC 10) vs #6 Miami (ACC)
#4 Oklahoma (Big 12) vs #5 West Virginia (Big East)
bshone#598776 writes:
If anyone needs a ride to the game in Columbus in 2019, I'd be glad to pick you up in my Jetson-style hovercraft...
BADGES0413 writes:
Thanks but no bshone, I will mind-meld myself to the game.
99gator writes:
playoffs really have to be played on campus for at least some rounds....
fans can not travel to pasadenam, then dallas, then miami, then phoenix to attend playoff games.
i know they do for the basketball tourney.....but look at the size of the arena
orangebloodgmc writes:
Watchdog, yeah it will be like the '96 Citrus Bowl where Eddie George could not punch it in behind big Orlando Pace against our no-name defensive line. I rarely bet on a game, but my former boss still owes me $5 for that one! Geaux Vawls!
MrBamSeydu writes:
99gator: In my proposal, the opening round games of the NCAA football tourney would be played at the higher ranked team's home field. Is this completely fair? No, but nothing is going to be fair for EVERYONE. After the first round, the final 4 teams (semi-finals one weekend, the national championship 9 or 10 days later on a Mon. or Tues. night) will play at 1 given location randomly selected before each season.
Timed_vol (Inactive) writes:
99gator:
exactly!!!!!
Brad Summey;
The reason I prefer an expanded version is this: if you play in some dink conference, you have it made. I think it's better to pick the top teams, regardless of affiliation. This would get in independants, smaller schools, whatever.
Also, look at bball; UT was by far the best team in sec, but didn't win it's tournament???
A good example: Hawaii had NO business playing UGA, but who knew??
Waht I'm saying is this;
have a BCS committee that, within certain guidelines (such as BCS standings, SoS, whatever) picks the say, best 16 teams, seeds them, and says 'okay, the first 2 rounds are at the highest seed's home:"
So, you go
8 games (home campuses)
4 games (home campuses)
2 games (semifinal locations to be big upon)
1 game (BCS title game, to be bid upon)
As with the NCAA basketball, the final 3 sites coujld be bid upon by ANYONE.
If the bowls wish to continue, that would be up to them, but they would have to bid for the final 3 games just as anyone else.
And, yeah, I'll see such a system as soon my IQ reachws, 5,000, in short, never.
The top 16 covers most of the 'strong' teams for now, and the future might dictate either more or less teams, just as has happened in basketball.
All you gotta do is look at the sweet 16 for basketball, and see the teams no longer there, to know that rankings don't always mean anything.
Timed_vol (Inactive) writes:
99gator:
exactly!!!!!
Brad Summey;
The reason I prefer an expanded version is this: if you play in some dink conference, you have it made. I think it's better to pick the top teams, regardless of affiliation. This would get in independants, smaller schools, whatever.
Also, look at bball; UT was by far the best team in sec, but didn't win it's tournament???
A good example: Hawaii had NO business playing UGA, but who knew??
Waht I'm saying is this;
have a BCS committee that, within certain guidelines (such as BCS standings, SoS, whatever) picks the say, best 16 teams, seeds them, and says 'okay, the first 2 rounds are at the highest seed's home:"
So, you go
8 games (home campuses)
4 games (home campuses)
2 games (semifinal locations to be big upon)
1 game (BCS title game, to be bid upon)
As with the NCAA basketball, the final 3 sites coujld be bid upon by ANYONE.
If the bowls wish to continue, that would be up to them, but they would have to bid for the final 3 games just as anyone else.
And, yeah, I'll see such a system as soon my IQ reachws, 5,000, in short, never.
The top 16 covers most of the 'strong' teams for now, and the future might dictate either more or less teams, just as has happened in basketball.
All you gotta do is look at the sweet 16 for basketball, and see the teams no longer there, to know that rankings don't always mean anything.
Ironcity writes:
Thats out there. I hope I am still alive by then.
99gator writes:
yemmusdarb
i like your proposal. i am not quite as interested in including all of the non-BCS conference champions. however, that would make it a true playoff.
but, at this point, i would not want to see a team florida would put on the schedule for homecoming invited to the playoff.
but, i could live with several such scenarios. i still think you take the major conference champs, plus the wac and mountain west and take 8 at larges, based on some sort of committee selection process like the basketball tournament.
i also think games on campus (besides my point about travel) would create excitement across the country. i can't imagine florida hosting texas or nebraska or several other teams that will never occur otherwise or florida travel to those places.
i think it would be great for the game.
rockyknox writes:
Head coach Clawson will lead up to victory.
DooleyNoted writes:
I wonder how many 2nd place finishes they will have by then? LOL!
MrBamSeydu writes:
But see, I'm trying to take into consideration that the main reasons people are against a playoff is a) money b) extending the season over 16 total games c) awarding strong conferences d) ruining the "bowl game" tradition
Sure, in a perfect world you'd let every team play in the tourney.... or the top 16 from a given poll should be the tourney. But then, again, you're taking human opinion into it. I say if you can't win enough games during the REGULAR season to get into your CONF CHAMPIONSHIP, you shouldn't even be in the discussion. Then, you have to basically consider all the conference championships as Round 1 because you have to win to keep playing for it all. That awards the regular season, the conf championship, and makes ALL the whiners not have a complaint because you had the chance to play it out on the field. I don't want to hear what you were ranked, that's just a poll and a bunch of opinions. Win when you're supposed to win.
As for where the tourney is played (99gator is saying play them on campus)... that's basically what I'm saying. You couldn't play the national championship game at one of the team's homefield though because that isn't very fair now is it?
volchiq writes:
iowavol - I didn't mean to slight CPF, but I have got bball on the brain. I am just mad that the fball system doesn't allow teams to schedule harder opponents without the consequences of losing them. Going by the polls basically neither our boys or girls bball programs would have a chance to play for #1 this year if there wasn't a tourney. Thank goodness there is one!
Glad to see I got the playoff discussion going though. :)
RemembertheAlamo writes:
Playoff plan, follow the same format as Div II, it works for them.......
byobbio writes:
Have you guys ever even watched a Div II playoff game? Not me. I would rather we stick with the BCS format we have and keep all the controversy. It's good for football. For that reason, we never have enough tickets throughout the year and the spirit starts way back in August when it's 98 degrees and we still put 108,000 in the stands for a fall game. I don't want all the best games somewhere where i can't go. Look at basketball. There's always empty seats in every arena throughout the season. Even tennessee's. Don't be in denial. It happens everywhere. Football is made to be seen in person. that's where it belongs and i would like to not mess this sport up.
Peace
Col26ca writes:
I hope we have Bill Duff on the Defensive staff by 2018. He's the New Jersey Freshman that stuffed Eddie George in the backfield on 4th and goal. Will always remember him. I met his parents at freshman day they are great folks and Bill was one tough SOB. My youngest was a freshman with him, he was a gentleman off the field and heck on it. He is now on the History Channel as co-host of the Human Weapon and still one tough SOB.
I'm ready to rock the horseshoe.
jimr07 writes:
OK. i see all of the proposals and here is the problem as i see it. let's say that tennessee goes undefeated 12-0 and obviously wins the sec east. LSU goe 9-3 wins the west. LSU beats tennessee in sec championship game. so, is LSU the SEC representative or tennessee who had a better season. it completely negates a good season for some teams.THE ONLY REASON I DO NOT LIKE THE SYSTEM IS IT COMPLETELY NEGATES A GOOD REGULAR SEASON.I do not disagree with the NCAA tournament. you can get a team like georgia this year to get hot at one point. who had a better season and would better represent the SEC.
tenncorncob writes:
College football has NEVER been as popular as it is now. So, who wants to "kill" the golden goose? I remember the pre-BCS days when number one was in the Sugar Bowl and number two was in the Rose Bowl. At least now, we have the top two in the Championship game. We, also, have 64 teams in a bowl game as a reward for a winning season. Having the bowl games gives 64 teams an extra "spring" practice. This is good for teams due to the limited time the NCAA allows football players to practice. At the end of the bowl season, we have a national champion and 32 bowl winners (which helps 32 coaches end the season on a winning note). But most of all, the regular season means something in college football. Even a loss didn't exclude teams from being in the mix this year. College football was exciting, very exciting EVERY weekend. Just look at the pro's. Patriots went undefeated in the regular season and finished 17-1...lol....Meant absolutely NOTHING. The 10-6 Giants go on a short winning streak and are world champions. The regular season doesn't mean squat in the pro's. You only had to play well enought to get in the play-offs..whoppee..Keep college football the way it is, cause right now, it is the MOST exciting sport going. PERIOD. I think one day, jclowers will be right. They will seed four teams and do a plus one national championship game. That way, the regular season will still mean something. That's my two cents worth as a former college football player who wouldn't want to play 16 games unless they paid me...lol.....
jimr07 writes:
99gator--the only way a playoff system could work is your 16 team proposal. the ncaa with its head stuck where the sun don't shine will never let it happen. you left out the fact that notre dame will always get a bid just because they are notre dame.
jimr07 writes:
tenncorncob--you mean you did not get "laundry" money?
jimr07 writes:
byobbio--but even with the playoff, they are through by early december. any playoff with div I is going to last until january.
vols1314 writes:
Now we can show how dominate the SEC is over the weak big ten. Then finally the big ten will shut the f*** up.
givehim6 writes:
I like the idea that UT wants a tough schedule. If other teams that only have one lose at the of the year did that thay might end up 9-4, or 8-5.
TeamXer writes:
Wow, we're finally scheduling a game versus a Big Ten school. UT has played ONE regular season game against the Big Ten in school history- Iowa in some kind of "kick off classic" game, 1987.
Share your thoughts
Comments are the sole responsibility of the person posting them. You agree not to post comments that are off topic, defamatory, obscene, abusive, threatening or an invasion of privacy. Violators may be banned. Click here for our full user agreement.