James Franklin suggests neutral site for future Pitt/Penn State games | TribLIVE.com
Pitt

James Franklin suggests neutral site for future Pitt/Penn State games

Jerry DiPaola
1655587_web1_AP_19251753375061
AP
Fans tailgate outside of Beaver Stadium before an NCAA college football game between Penn State and Buffalo in State College, Pa., on Saturday, Sept. 7, 2019.

When Pitt visits Penn State on Saturday at Beaver Stadium, the game will be the 100th and last between the in-state rivals for the foreseeable future.

But Penn State coach James Franklin said it could resume if the schools can “get creative” and, possibly, move the game to a neutral site.

“You just want it to be an even exchange,” he said. “The best way to do that is a neutral site. I’m talking in terms of making it make sense for both schools. That’s an option and it’s one of many.”

Franklin didn’t mention any possible sites, but the only venue within the state that makes sense is Philadelphia’s Lincoln Financial Field (capacity 69,176).

When the teams met in 2016 at Heinz Field, the game attracted the largest crowd in the history of that venue (college or pro), 69,983. A crowd close to 110,000 is expected Saturday at Beaver Stadium.

Jerry DiPaola is a Tribune-Review staff writer. You can contact Jerry by email at [email protected] or via Twitter .

Categories: Sports | Pitt
TribLIVE commenting policy

You are solely responsible for your comments and by using TribLive.com you agree to our Terms of Service.

We moderate comments. Our goal is to provide substantive commentary for a general readership. By screening submissions, we provide a space where readers can share intelligent and informed commentary that enhances the quality of our news and information.

While most comments will be posted if they are on-topic and not abusive, moderating decisions are subjective. We will make them as carefully and consistently as we can. Because of the volume of reader comments, we cannot review individual moderation decisions with readers.

We value thoughtful comments representing a range of views that make their point quickly and politely. We make an effort to protect discussions from repeated comments either by the same reader or different readers

We follow the same standards for taste as the daily newspaper. A few things we won't tolerate: personal attacks, obscenity, vulgarity, profanity (including expletives and letters followed by dashes), commercial promotion, impersonations, incoherence, proselytizing and SHOUTING. Don't include URLs to Web sites.

We do not edit comments. They are either approved or deleted. We reserve the right to edit a comment that is quoted or excerpted in an article. In this case, we may fix spelling and punctuation.

We welcome strong opinions and criticism of our work, but we don't want comments to become bogged down with discussions of our policies and we will moderate accordingly.

We appreciate it when readers and people quoted in articles or blog posts point out errors of fact or emphasis and will investigate all assertions. But these suggestions should be sent via e-mail. To avoid distracting other readers, we won't publish comments that suggest a correction. Instead, corrections will be made in a blog post or in an article.