Stallion wrote:there seems to be a constant barrage of misinformation on this board about how "Tcu did it" lead by FTH and his totally clueless comments that TCU didn't schedule BCS teams. In fact, from 1998-2010, TCU played 28 games against BCS schools and fact had an outstanding record of 20-8 including:
TCU also played about 23 more games with schools like BYU, Boise St, Utah and Louisville who were on the BCS track and were clearly BCS level schools or schools like Cincinnati, USF who in fact were to become BCS schools. So by my count that is 51 games with BCS school, BCS level schools or schools on tract to become BCS level schools
Ok, lets filter out the bowl games (where the AD has zero control on scheduling) so byebye ISU 2005, USC, A&M, and Wisconsin.
That leaves 25 games over 13 years- an average of 1.92 per season. If you include 2011 in that (which makes sense due to their still being MWC) it drops to 1.85 with the one game vs BCS foes (Baylor) dropping the average down.
So TCU averaged a little more than one fewer than SMU has had the last two seasons- and if SMU had one more easy foe instead of A&M, TCU, or Tech they'd probably be bowling right now against ECU. Two is probably the best balance of (A) boosting sos and (B) not killing early season momentum.
It is important to note that TCU did this with an 8 game league schedule which gave them four dates to play with. If SMU has to play 9 in the coming years (I don't know if they do) it would make sense to drop it to one game.
About a month ago, I broke down TCU's scheduled non-conference games (not including bowl games). By season. It would behoove you to research it that way. They spread their challenging games out instead of playing Texas, OU, Nebraska all in one year. I maintain that the optimal OOC schedule to replicate what TCU did is as follows:
1 High Level P5 team every 2 years / switch to 2nd low level P5 team on the alternate years
1 Low Level P5 team every year (Wazzu, Virginia, Wake)
1 Easy Win FCS/bottom FBS game (UAB, New Mexico State) each year
We didn't go to a bowl because we couldn't beat the team ranked 103 in the Sagarin ratings. No teams deserves a bowl if it can't beat a single Top 100 team
"With a quarter of a tank of gas, we can get everything we need right here in DFW." -SMU Head Coach Chad Morris
When momentum starts rolling downhill in recruiting-WATCH OUT.
seriously doubt if that will happen. If Briles is feeling generous he will probably only hang 50 on us. But what does it matter? it's only a pre-season game for us.
seriously doubt if that will happen. If Briles is feeling generous he will probably only hang 50 on us. But what does it matter? it's only a pre-season game for us.
Isn't there a past smu coach who used the first couple of games as pre season games? I think the reasoning was different though .
MustangStealth wrote:With schedules set 6-8 years in advance, there is no guarantee who will be good or bad in a particular year. We could have scheduled Duke 6 years ago and it would have looked like a sure win at the time, while Wake had just won the ACC and would have scared the pants off of you guys. The bottom line is that you have to beat who you play. Crying about the schedule is a waste.
Good point, you have a lot of people in here acting like scheduling happens in a vacuum and you can just pick and choose which teams to play whenever you want to play them. You can't go wrong with a slate of Texas P5 teams because even if they're not good they'll still bring fans and beating them will gain you a lot of credit around the state.
They who would give up an essential liberty for temporary security, deserve neither liberty or security
Who the f is concerned about BCS busting when we can't even beat mediocre teams...our OCC 3-1, 2-2 OCC sham would fall apart 1-2 games into conference. This sort of worrying is irrelevant unless you can actually beat someone. I know, schedule for the future...but whining about the past or the near future? Pointless because we couldn't have done anything with a 2-2 OCC anyway.
Northwestern was actually very good one season when we beat them at home. Believe they were co big ten champs...LT had 325+ yards againsy them. Its crazy to think that pat sullivan recruited LT and no one else wanted him.
sbsmith - good lord you could not be more wrong. that is what we have done for the last several years, and after we start every year at 1-3 then nobody cares and our season is basically over. We absolutely need to stop that idea and try something new.
gostangs wrote:sbsmith - good lord you could not be more wrong. that is what we have done for the last several years, and after we start every year at 1-3 then nobody cares and our season is basically over. We absolutely need to stop that idea and try something new.
Completely agree. Schedule down like k st and tech to build up some 9-10 win seasons....then you can toughen up the OOC.
.
KICK EM STANGS!