PonyFans.com

So, I went to the SMU Signing Day event here in Houston today, and someone asked about scheduling. I suspect he was referring to the difficulty of a schedule (not necessarily ours).

Coach Morris basically (and I'm paraphrasing) said the following: Keep a couple of the good rival schools, but make the other two "guarantees". This way we can get the wins, which draws the attention and fans. Once we get that under our belt and we're winning, then we can start scheduling the Florida State's, Georgia's, etc.

Why do I bring this up? Because it seems that there's 2 aisles here; one side wants to schedule tough teams and expect to beat them, because that's who our fan base cares about. The other aisle says schedule softies, get the wins, with the assumption that fans will come later.

Sounds to me, Coach Morris wants a blend of both.

Blend of both is what most have been saying until we get better. Problem is, a schedule like last year ( remember they are set up years in advance) was to be after winning and " scheduling the Florida States, Georgia's, etc.". Problem was that Jones did not progress the program to where it should have been by last year so the schedule was to top heavy.

skurtn wrote:So, I went to the SMU Signing Day event here in Houston today, and someone asked about scheduling. I suspect he was referring to the difficulty of a schedule (not necessarily ours).

Coach Morris basically (and I'm paraphrasing) said the following: Keep a couple of the good rival schools, but make the other two "guarantees". This way we can get the wins, which draws the attention and fans. Once we get that under our belt and we're winning, then we can start scheduling the Florida State's, Georgia's, etc.

Why do I bring this up? Because it seems that there's 2 aisles here; one side wants to schedule tough teams and expect to beat them, because that's who our fan base cares about. The other aisle says schedule softies, get the wins, with the assumption that fans will come later.

Sounds to me, Coach Morris wants a blend of both.

With most things, the "extreme" position is probably not the best solution.

Long term, I would love to see us play (in order) :
1) SFA (at Ford every year)
2) UNT (home and home is fine)
3) TCU - (home and home) - I would love to see this game get popular enough to move to a neutral field (JerryWorld or the Cotton Bowl during the State Fair) every year. Heck, if Northwestern can play a game at Wrigley, maybe we can play a game at the Ballpark??
4) Baylor/Arkansas (or high profile "Pay" game like the Michigan game in a few years) - we need to stop playing them before we play a "patsy" and work out any kinks.

For what they are, most of those teams would result in a "decent" crowd for what they are.

Digetydog wrote:

skurtn wrote:So, I went to the SMU Signing Day event here in Houston today, and someone asked about scheduling. I suspect he was referring to the difficulty of a schedule (not necessarily ours).

Coach Morris basically (and I'm paraphrasing) said the following: Keep a couple of the good rival schools, but make the other two "guarantees". This way we can get the wins, which draws the attention and fans. Once we get that under our belt and we're winning, then we can start scheduling the Florida State's, Georgia's, etc.

Why do I bring this up? Because it seems that there's 2 aisles here; one side wants to schedule tough teams and expect to beat them, because that's who our fan base cares about. The other aisle says schedule softies, get the wins, with the assumption that fans will come later.

Sounds to me, Coach Morris wants a blend of both.

With most things, the "extreme" position is probably not the best solution.

Long term, I would love to see us play (in order) :
1) SFA (at Ford every year)
2) UNT (home and home is fine)
3) TCU - (home and home) - I would love to see this game get popular enough to move to a neutral field (JerryWorld or the Cotton Bowl during the State Fair) every year. Heck, if Northwestern can play a game at Wrigley, maybe we can play a game at the Ballpark??
4) Baylor/Arkansas (or high profile "Pay" game like the Michigan game in a few years) - we need to stop playing them before we play a "patsy" and work out any kinks.

For what they are, most of those teams would result in a "decent" crowd for what they are.

No argument there. In a couple of years, I'd like to the FCS team replaced with a low rung FBS team like UTEP, New Mexico, Texas State, etc, simply because it's a FBS team and helps out SOS.

mrydel wrote:Blend of both is what most have been saying until we get better. Problem is, a schedule like last year ( remember they are set up years in advance) was to be after winning and " scheduling the Florida States, Georgia's, etc.". Problem was that Jones did not progress the program to where it should have been by last year so the schedule was to top heavy.

That's a sticky situation then. Seems like that sets up programs for failure without much of an opportunity to recover beyond major renovations and even more money spent to dig out of a hole. Of course, it also perfectly highlights a coach's inability to do his job, but at the expense of the program.

Digetydog wrote:3) TCU - (home and home) - I would love to see this game get popular enough to move to a neutral field (JerryWorld or the Cotton Bowl during the State Fair) every year. Heck, if Northwestern can play a game at Wrigley, maybe we can play a game at the Ballpark??

That would be cool. Except the Rangers would want the game to be played in Nov. rather than Sept.

Keep UNT and TCU with a home and home for the foreseeable future ("rival schools"). Plus a lower rung FBS and a FCS. For next 2 years (this year and next year).

Then move to 2 "lower rung" FBS schools but that are locally appealing (eg UTSA?). The next 2 years.

Then, UNT, TCU, Baylor, and a lower run FBS school with a name. (this is the Michigan year though). But in year 5 of HCCM I'm not worried about adding another "big" program. By this point, we should be winning the AAC and really start pushing for a P5 invite.

I just want to get to the point where a game against TCU, Baylor, or UT is actually a very competitive game and who knows who would win it. If we can get there within 4-5 years, THEN we'll set some attendance records. Bball did it in 2. Can FB do it in 5?

ojaipony wrote:Keep UNT and TCU with a home and home for the foreseeable future ("rival schools"). Plus a lower rung FBS and a FCS. For next 2 years (this year and next year).

Then move to 2 "lower rung" FBS schools but that are locally appealing (eg UTSA?). The next 2 years.

Then, UNT, TCU, Baylor, and a lower run FBS school with a name. (this is the Michigan year though). But in year 5 of HCCM I'm not worried about adding another "big" program. By this point, we should be winning the AAC and really start pushing for a P5 invite.

I just want to get to the point where a game against TCU, Baylor, or UT is actually a very competitive game and who knows who would win it. If we can get there within 4-5 years, THEN we'll set some attendance records. Bball did it in 2. Can FB do it in 5?

Depends on if Chad is still here in 5 to be honest.

Surprisingly, Northwestern St brought lots of fans and their band. Two bands give Ford lots of atmosphere. Also, SFA brings lots of fans. Would also like to see Rice again. Louisiana Tech would be fun but they might kick our behinds for the next several years.

NW St. has a lot of alumni in Dallas I think. I know of three. I'd like to see them here again.

skurtn wrote:So, I went to the SMU Signing Day event here in Houston today, and someone asked about scheduling. I suspect he was referring to the difficulty of a schedule (not necessarily ours).

Coach Morris basically (and I'm paraphrasing) said the following: Keep a couple of the good rival schools, but make the other two "guarantees". This way we can get the wins, which draws the attention and fans. Once we get that under our belt and we're winning, then we can start scheduling the Florida State's, Georgia's, etc.

Why do I bring this up? Because it seems that there's 2 aisles here; one side wants to schedule tough teams and expect to beat them, because that's who our fan base cares about. The other aisle says schedule softies, get the wins, with the assumption that fans will come later.

Sounds to me, Coach Morris wants a blend of both.

Did Morris give any examples of "good rival schools" or "guarantees"?

sbsmith wrote:Did Morris give any examples of "good rival schools" or "guarantees"?

He didn't give any examples, nor did he make direct comments about our existing schedule.