Future Schedules?

[jimmyjames_99]

It seems that typically the next season's football schedule is released about 6-7 months before the season starts. Places like UT and ATM have their next couple years' schedules finalized and more than 50% of the games schedule for nearly the next decade.

What keeps UNT from being able to do the same thing? Will this change with Dodge and having a winning record the next couple of seasons?

[Green Means Go!]

Yeah but, A & M and UT also have had conference stability. They've been in the Big 12 for 12 years now---with no conference members changing. In the time we've been in the Sun Belt, we've had to add FAU, FIU, WKU and Troy.....while jettisoning NMSU, Idaho and Utah State.

Also, I think it's tougher for RV to schedule.....based on the fact, that he doesn't know what stadium his team will be in, in say 5 years.

We do have future OOC home games with Air Force (2009), and Rice and Kansas State (2010). Hopefully, none of those are contingent on us being in a new stadium.

Just two thoughts.....for whatever they're worth.

[Bryan316]

Plus, schools like UT and A&M are ones that people go to to schedule games, unlike us who go to them to schedule games.

[UNTflyer]

Plus, schools like UT and A&M are ones that people go to to schedule games, unlike us who go to them to schedule games.

Yup. I bet Texas and A&M turn schools away all the time.

Some day....

[DallasGreen]

Yup. I bet Texas and A&M turn schools away all the time.

Some day....

Yeah that's why the "killer" non-conference schedule this year of ASU, Central Florida, Rice, & TCU !!!!!!!!!!!

[SCREAMING EAGLE-66]

---Getting better has a catch-22. Notice the Aggie schedule has a lot of "pussy-cats" that they can beat up on... They mostly want teams with reputations that they think they get easy wins against .... and if after that any team they think they can defeat ..... plus maybe one big name team in the top ten that gets people's attention when they win.

---As we get better, there are a lot of teams that will want to avoid us because they fear losing to a team that is not ranked and we don't have a history of being a big winner. You can bet Baylor and maybe even TCU falls into that group now. They might schedule us anyway and take the risk because of the fans we might bring and because we are close by.

---SMU and Baylor is ikely having no trouble getting people to play to them.... they look like easy wins and have won big in the past [ note TxTech has them on schedule ]. On the flip side they want to play someone they can defeat...... but they (SMU ) likes the fact they it is a home/home series and will fill their stadium and goodness knows they need that plus it associates them with the Big Boys again.

---If we start winning a lot, then there are teams that will want to avoid us... until we get good enough to be ranked then things could change again.

[PlummMeanGreen]

---Getting better has a catch-22. Notice the Aggie schedule has a lot of "pussy-cats" that they can beat up on... They mostly want teams with reputations that they think they get easy wins against .... and if after that any team they think they can defeat ..... plus maybe one big name team in the top ten that gets people's attention when they win.

---As we get better, there are a lot of teams that will want to avoid us because they fear losing to a team that is not ranked and we don't have a history of being a big winner. You can bet Baylor and maybe even TCU falls into that group now. They might schedule us anyway and take the risk because of the fans we might bring and because we are close by.

---SMU and Baylor is ikely having no trouble getting people to play to them.... they look like easy wins and have won big in the past [ note TxTech has them on schedule ]. On the flip side they want to play someone they can defeat...... but they (SMU ) likes the fact they it is a home/home series and will fill their stadium and goodness knows they need that plus it associates them with the Big Boys again.

---If we start winning a lot, then there are teams that will want to avoid us... until we get good enough to be ranked then things could change again.

Good point, SE-66, concerning the Stangs...AND...............I wonder if UNT had a 40,000 seat stadium if we could get some of those same teams SMU seems to have no problem scheduling at their land-locked/no parking Ford Stadium and instead, many of those schools come to our new palace in the Mean Green Village.

I realize it ultimately will be all about what our fundraisers can raise as to what size our new stadium will be, but UNT powers really need to ponder upon the idea that at UNT we may really need to go that extra mile with our seating capacity to gain some semblance of advantage (especially over all the ex SWC schools not in the Big 12, namely CUSA schools)?

Am I in left field with all this, uh, too, or does any"one" agree? If not, maybe I, too, need to downsize my expectations for this football program and its potential in light of the 6 million DFW citizens who live within 1 hour (give/take) of our main campus and the Mean Green Village.

Edited August 4, 2007 by PlummMeanGreen

[Guest GrayEagleOne]

Good point, SE-66, concerning the Stangs...AND...............I wonder if UNT had a 40,000 seat stadium if we could get some of those same teams SMU seems to have no problem scheduling at their land-locked/no parking Ford Stadium and instead, many of those schools come to our new palace in the Mean Green Village.

I realize it ultimately will be all about what our fundraisers can raise as to what size our new stadium will be, but UNT powers really need to ponder upon the idea that at UNT we may really need to go that extra mile with our seating capacity to gain some semblance of advantage (especially over all the ex SWC schools not in the Big 12, namely CUSA schools)?

Am I in left field with all this, uh, too, or does any"one" agree? If not, maybe I, too, need to downsize my expectations for this football program and its potential in light of the 6 million DFW citizens who live within 1 hour (give/take) of our main campus and the Mean Green Village.

Jim, old buddy, I tend to disagree. Since, we're making the comparison to SMU, let's say the first phase has a stadium capacity of 32,001 (so we can become #9). That should get us the same teams that the Mustangs are able to attract. Add to that any other team with a capacity of 32,000 or less that can draw a major. Hellsbells, I recall that Troy was able to get a 2 for 1 with Missour with no larger stadium than ours.

Who would the additional 8,000 seats add? No one, unless you proved that you could fill it. Otherwise, it's just an expense. If you could (and they weren't all students) then it could gain you another $250,000+ to guarantee but it wouldn't increase your coffers. In terms of who you could add, possibly some of the lower ranking majors. You still won't get A&M, Texas (who already plays in the Metroplex once a year), Oklahoma, LSU, Florida State, Alabama, Auburn, etc.

I say let's add the amenities that produce revenue every game (luxury suites and club) until the demand for a larger stadium kicks in. Further, if we can get in the Big XII or maybe even ConferenceUSA, then I'll get on your bandwagon. In fact, if we can get in the Big XII then I'd say at least 50,000 seats would be in order.

Maybe I should go back and watch "Field of Dreams" again because all that I can remember coming to the field was a team of ghosts.