We Need to Look at Scheduling UConn

[SMU_Alum11]

How did TCU do it? By scheduling and beating the teams 11 talks about above

Thank you. I get there are different thoughts out there and the cupcake model works if you aren't in a metro area.

TCU uptick starting 2008:

In 2008, they played Stanford (W), #2 Oklahoma (L). This is with MWC having #8 BYU, #10 Utah and #9 Boise State.
In 2009, Clemson (W), Virginia (W), #16 BYU. MWC had #16 Utah and #6 Boise State.
In 2010, #24 Oregon St (W), Baylor (W) and with MWC #6 Utah and beat #4 Wisconsin in Rose Bowl.

Obviously we know more of the recent history afterwards but they've always had some good challenges and they were in a tough conference as well. I honestly wished we played Wisconsin this year with this team on the road. We would win; I know it.

[gostangs]

How did TCU do it? By scheduling and beating the teams 11 talks about above

They did it it by building momentum as the program got better. Also won in a CUSA schedule. They didn’t do it by front loading the schedule with teams they were likely to lose to. Don’t be emotional and be strategic. Ww will get there but by building up the schedule over time not by throwing up 1-3 schedules that suck the interest out of the program. Not sure how many times we need to see that happen more than 30 times to figure that out.

[SoCal_Pony]

Disagree on the old SWC foes - those losses suck the wind out of us for the year. We DO NOT need to go back to that. We need to be auditioning for other conferences - PAC and ACC specifically. we are NEVER getting in the Big 12 because they have 2 privates already and we add nothing to them. Bring in one lower level PAC or ACC teams, add in two FBS patsies, and TCU.

No offense but I really hate this mentality. It's very JJ-esque. I understand why we did it this year to only have one tough opponent since NTCC clearly just had a 1 hit wonder year.

My ideal that would generate interest

1) Baylor or Tech
2) TCU
3) Rice
4) Consistent low grade P5 (e.g. Kansas, Pitt, NC State, Minnesota, etc).

That schedule above would easily get us attention, help our conference especially we can go 3-1 or better. I bet the team we have now could have gone 4-0 with this and we would have been ranked in week 5.

‘11, you are proposing playing 2 teams that are typically better than us, 1 school that is typically worse than us, and 1 school that is kinda equal to us, but one we would have to play on the road every other year, so in those years we would be underdogs in 3 of our 4 OOC games.

Go look at the OOC schedules for UT, OU, Ark, A&M, TCU, Ok St, Baylor, Tech & Houston. Coogs are the only team with an OOC schedule remotely close to what you are proposing (OU, Wash St, NTSU & PV A&M).

Everyone else is creating OOC schedules that attempt to ensure an easy winning record. SMU should be no different.

I would propose:

TCU
Rice / NTSU / UTEP / UTA
patsy
lower tier P5 such as Kansas/Duke/Purdue/Oregon St

[SMU_Alum11]

Disagree on the old SWC foes - those losses suck the wind out of us for the year. We DO NOT need to go back to that. We need to be auditioning for other conferences - PAC and ACC specifically. we are NEVER getting in the Big 12 because they have 2 privates already and we add nothing to them. Bring in one lower level PAC or ACC teams, add in two FBS patsies, and TCU.

No offense but I really hate this mentality. It's very JJ-esque. I understand why we did it this year to only have one tough opponent since NTCC clearly just had a 1 hit wonder year.

My ideal that would generate interest

1) Baylor or Tech
2) TCU
3) Rice
4) Consistent low grade P5 (e.g. Kansas, Pitt, NC State, Minnesota, etc).

That schedule above would easily get us attention, help our conference especially we can go 3-1 or better. I bet the team we have now could have gone 4-0 with this and we would have been ranked in week 5.

‘11, you are proposing playing 2 teams that are typically better than us, 1 school that is typically worse than us, and 1 school that is kinda equal to us, but one we would have to play on the road every other year, so in those years we would be underdogs in 3 of our 4 OOC games.

Go look at the OOC schedules for UT, OU, Ark, A&M, TCU, Ok St, Baylor, Tech & Houston. Coogs are the only team with an OOC schedule remotely close to what you are proposing (OU, Wash St, NTSU & PV A&M).

Everyone else is creating OOC schedules that attempt to ensure an easy winning record. SMU should be no different.

I would propose:

TCU
Rice / NTSU / UTEP / UTA
patsy
lower tier P5 such as Kansas/Duke/Purdue/Oregon St

I understand the group wanting consistent winning records but that's not going to drive fan attendance or have people talking about us with the proposed OOC. If the AAC has consistently good team then I get it but we saw USF basically collapse into a dying star. They were considered the 2nd best of the conference at one point. Currently this season our only reputable conference challenge is Memphis. Houston and Navy on the road are the next best.

Look we are going to disagree and there are two camps (challenging OOC and better records). It's up to the sports execs to figure out what makes sense. I think if Dykes is able to put teams like this season together then they should try to challenge the season especially if we are looking to be conference favorites every year. This is year 1 so no reason to change the model for next year or the next but if I were Hart (and whoever) I would start considering the season 2021 or 2022 schedule to add a challenging opponent.

[SoCal_Pony]

Look we are going to disagree and there are two camps (challenging OOC and better records). It's up to the sports execs to figure out what makes sense.

‘11, I completely understand your concern about our opponents, attendance and being relevant.

There are now 40 bowls. This isn’t about us disagreeing. It’s about the 100 sports execs you referenced above who have bowl aspirations every year. Of those, I’m not certain you can find even 5 who would create a schedule as difficult as you are proposing.

Your schedule would be amazing. Unfortunately I don’t think it makes sense.

[smitty329]

You are not going to get the attention you want unless you slay Goliath. If you don't pick a fight with the big dog, you won't beat the big dog. Losing to an underdog has a huge downside - challenging and/or beating a favorite - huge upside.

That is the model the Boise St, UCF, and BYU use. That's why they are the top non-P5 programs that get attention. Hell even people recognize App St and James Madison because of upsets of FBS schools.

[mustangxc]

Disagree on the old SWC foes - those losses suck the wind out of us for the year. We DO NOT need to go back to that. We need to be auditioning for other conferences - PAC and ACC specifically. we are NEVER getting in the Big 12 because they have 2 privates already and we add nothing to them. Bring in one lower level PAC or ACC teams, add in two FBS patsies, and TCU.

No offense but I really hate this mentality. It's very JJ-esque. I understand why we did it this year to only have one tough opponent since NTCC clearly just had a 1 hit wonder year.

My ideal that would generate interest

1) Baylor or Tech
2) TCU
3) Rice
4) Consistent low grade P5 (e.g. Kansas, Pitt, NC State, Minnesota, etc).

That schedule above would easily get us attention, help our conference especially we can go 3-1 or better. I bet the team we have now could have gone 4-0 with this and we would have been ranked in week 5.

‘11, you are proposing playing 2 teams that are typically better than us, 1 school that is typically worse than us, and 1 school that is kinda equal to us, but one we would have to play on the road every other year, so in those years we would be underdogs in 3 of our 4 OOC games.

Go look at the OOC schedules for UT, OU, Ark, A&M, TCU, Ok St, Baylor, Tech & Houston. Coogs are the only team with an OOC schedule remotely close to what you are proposing (OU, Wash St, NTSU & PV A&M).

Everyone else is creating OOC schedules that attempt to ensure an easy winning record. SMU should be no different.

I would propose:

TCU
Rice / NTSU / UTEP / UTA
patsy
lower tier P5 such as Kansas/Duke/Purdue/Oregon St

To that point make it:

TCU
UNT
Rice
Lower tier P5

We should never play any FCS teams. Rice > UConn > FCS

[Dukie]

(1) We should definitely play some FCS schools, maybe not every year, but it's great for experience and a W.

(2) Predicting who will be the high-mid-lower P5 schools five years in the future is almost impossible (the "almost" is because Alabama is probably gonna be good, as will be a handful of others). UCF is aiming to schedule high P5 schools, and Stanford looked great five years ago, but sucked by the time they got to Orlando this fall. Just schedule P5s that will generate Dallas interest and/or bring fans. (That rules out Duke, Wake, etc., regardless of how good they are--and for the record, neither of them is lower P5 this year, but many of y'all don't know that because they don't move the needle in Dallas.)

[leopold]

You are not going to get the attention you want unless you slay Goliath. If you don't pick a fight with the big dog, you won't beat the big dog. Losing to an underdog has a huge downside - challenging and/or beating a favorite - huge upside.

You're not wrong, which is why I am against scheduling any FCS teams. As far as the 'big dog' is concerned, well, that's a little harder to do - scheduling them is one thing, winning is another. You can't schedule a win and I'd argue this exact same team could just as easily be 3-2 had we played last years schedule - Michigan could have been a loss and a better UNT team (which they were last year) at their place in the first game isn't scheduling a win. 3-2 isn't bad, but it doesn't give you any attention or momentum, either.

That is the model the Boise St, UCF, and BYU use. That's why they are the top non-P5 programs that get attention. Hell even people recognize App St and James Madison because of upsets of FBS schools.

Well, no, that's not the model UCF used to get to 14-0, and besides, they were winless what? 3 years ago? Now that they are on top of the world they are screaming for 'bama but they fall back to 7-5 and things change.
BYU DOES use it but has been irrelevant for a decade, and is starting to compound their problems with bad decisions concerning conferences. I DON'T want to follow their model, and we couldn't anyway - they use 24-25 year old freshmen who came out of missionary work. Not badmouthing it, but it doesn't apply to us.

KSU used the patsy model for years and built a national championship contender with it. Baylor with Briles followed it and did the same - and are using it again - and all BS aside it has shown it works until you become in the discussion for a National Championship - I think they missed out on the first CFP because of their pathetic OOC - which included us, IIRC.

Most of us believe in a middle ground that allows us to manage expectations, gives us a chance to beat better funded and powerful programs, and yet doesn't throw the team under the bus before even the season begins. It also stays away from the "We're good we're supposed to play good teams/OH NO WE"RE BAD WE'RE SUPPOSED TO PLAY BAD TEAMS!!" pitfalls. Conference play and TCU aside, we need a winable OOC game and those are hard to come by. With four OOC games, that should be doable, and allow for a reach game or two. Hell, as the conference improves, hopefully some of that comes from Houston, UCF, etc.

But few of us are advocating for a schedule full of patsies.

[dr rc]

Do both SMU and TCU even want a yearly series with anymore? I find it rather concerning that there still hasn't been an official release on future games. I had read at one point the series was supposed to continue until at least 2025 but it's not listed on future schedules sections for SMU, TCU, or sites like FBschedules.com.


As far as scheduling other OOC games, I would try to set up home and homes with schools like BYU and Boise. They both get much more national respect than other G5s and have deals with ESPN for their home games. Most of their home games tend to end up on ESPN2 at worst.

The Big 12s TV deal has caused a bunch of those schools games to get funneled to the subscription steaming network ESPN+. I would want assurances any return game with schools like Tech and Baylor didn't end up on there.

[Charleston Pony]

Do both SMU and TCU even want a yearly series with anymore? I find it rather concerning that there still hasn't been an official release on future games. I had read at one point the series was supposed to continue until at least 2025 but it's not listed on future schedules sections for SMU, TCU, or sites like FBschedules.com.


As far as scheduling other OOC games, I would try to set up home and homes with schools like BYU and Boise. They both get much more national respect than other G5s and have deals with ESPN for their home games. Most of their home games tend to end up on ESPN2 at worst.

The Big 12s TV deal has caused a bunch of those schools games to get funneled to the subscription steaming network ESPN+. I would want assurances any return game with schools like Tech and Baylor didn't end up on there.

Big XII and PAC are tied into FOX sports so any games we have with them will be on FOX or FS1. AAC has deals with CBS and ESPN so if we can become one of the darlings of the AAC and schedule teams like BYU or Boise, we likely end up on the deuce or on ESPN flagship is played on a Thursday or Friday night.

[dr rc]

Do both SMU and TCU even want a yearly series with anymore? I find it rather concerning that there still hasn't been an official release on future games. I had read at one point the series was supposed to continue until at least 2025 but it's not listed on future schedules sections for SMU, TCU, or sites like FBschedules.com.


As far as scheduling other OOC games, I would try to set up home and homes with schools like BYU and Boise. They both get much more national respect than other G5s and have deals with ESPN for their home games. Most of their home games tend to end up on ESPN2 at worst.

The Big 12s TV deal has caused a bunch of those schools games to get funneled to the subscription steaming network ESPN+. I would want assurances any return game with schools like Tech and Baylor didn't end up on there.

Big XII and PAC are tied into FOX sports so any games we have with them will be on FOX or FS1. AAC has deals with CBS and ESPN so if we can become one of the darlings of the AAC and schedule teams like BYU or Boise, we likely end up on the deuce or on ESPN flagship is played on a Thursday or Friday night.

Big 12 also has a deal with ESPN. Every school except Texas and OU will have at least one game on ESPN+ starting in 2020 (though a few of them are having to do it this year as well) through 2024. It was part of the deal ESPN did to get their title game. They aren't just putting FCS games on there either. Last weeks game between then #24Kansas State at Oklahoma State was on ESPN+. https://www.si.com/college-football/2019/04/10/espn-big-12-tv-contracts-rights-championship-games