Here's What I'd Like To See

[emmitt01]

Nobody likes watching us get our heads bashed in when we play "guarantee" games. And nobody likes going to Austin, Norman or Baton Rouge knowing those teams will never come to Fouts. So, my question, is this...why not branch out and replace these teams with teams further away but still higher up the food chain than us? Minnesota seats 50,805. Rutgers seats 52,454. Purdue seats 62,500. Northwestern, who just played in Dallas, seats just over 47,000. There are teams that, while they won't give us the million dollar guarantees would write us a pretty decent check and...wait for it...might even consider coming to our place. Before anyone says "they'd never play in our stadium b/c it's too small and they have no reason to come to Denton" think about it before just assuming. How often do these teams get to come into the metroplex? How many of them recruit Texas in general and this area in specific. Think Purdue wouldn't like to have kids from Houston, San Antonio or Austin come watch them play a short drive away? And, unlike Texas or OU, these schools don't have alumni bases in the metroplex that are so large we couldn't accomodate. Did K-State overrun our stadium? I know, I know, kids want to play the "big boys." Are you honestly telling me that a kid who is considering NT would decide not to because he's gonna travel to play Iowa State or Minnesota instead of UT? I don't buy that for a second and I think it's just become gospel because it's been repeated enough times. Why continue to play these games where we have EVERYTHING to lose and nothing to gain except the pay check? No, I'm sorry, these are not "opportunity" games. At least not until you build the program for a while by WINNING and begin to use that to recruit the players who are capable of beating the "big boys."

Boise didn't become who they are by scheduling murderer's row...at least not in the beginning. They drew players in by winning first. Until then it's just scrimmmage for sale.

Call me crazy if you want, but I think with a little creativity we could use our new stadium to our advantage instead of just as a place to return to after taking a brutal beating in week 1.

[H-towngreen]

Minnesota

Iowa State

Washington

Vandy

Northwestern

Kansas

Colorado

Arizona State

Name teams that would bring some peeps, and that we would still have a chance of beating. But if we lose it's still a "big time" school.

[ColoradoEagle]

Boise didn't become who they are by scheduling murderer's row...at least not in the beginning. They drew players in by winning first.

Not really sure what you mean by murderer's row. Clemson and Kansas State were winnable games. Alabama was a very average SEC team until the year before we played them. If we'd happened to play UT-Austin this year, it would have been a winnable game. There's just no way to know for sure who's going to be up or down in a given year. What if we'd scheduled Stanford for this year back in 2008? We'd be giddy for this season, ready to face a team that went 5-7 in '08, and then all of the sudden we're playing a team that finished 12-1 with a win in the Orange bowl.

Boise State

1996 @ Arizona State

1997 @ Wisconsin

1998 @ Utah (borderline)

1999 @ UCLA

1999 @ Utah

2000 @ Arkansas

2001 @ South Carolina

2002 @ Arkansas

2003 @ Oregon State

2004 vs. Oregon State

2005 @ Georgia

2005 @ Oregon State

2006 vs. Oregon State

2006 @ Utah

2007 @ Washington

2008 @ Oregon

2009 vs. Oregon

2010 @ Virginia Tech

2010 vs. Oregon State

[UNTflyer]

@ Minnesota

Marshall

SMU

@ UConn

@Marshall

Minnesota

@SMU

UConn

[All About UNT]

Nobody likes watching us get our heads bashed in when we play "guarantee" games. And nobody likes going to Austin, Norman or Baton Rouge knowing those teams will never come to Fouts. So, my question, is this...why not branch out and replace these teams with teams further away but still higher up the food chain than us? Minnesota seats 50,805. Rutgers seats 52,454. Purdue seats 62,500. Northwestern, who just played in Dallas, seats just over 47,000. There are teams that, while they won't give us the million dollar guarantees would write us a pretty decent check and...wait for it...might even consider coming to our place. Before anyone says "they'd never play in our stadium b/c it's too small and they have no reason to come to Denton" think about it before just assuming. How often do these teams get to come into the metroplex? How many of them recruit Texas in general and this area in specific. Think Purdue wouldn't like to have kids from Houston, San Antonio or Austin come watch them play a short drive away? And, unlike Texas or OU, these schools don't have alumni bases in the metroplex that are so large we couldn't accomodate. Did K-State overrun our stadium? I know, I know, kids want to play the "big boys." Are you honestly telling me that a kid who is considering NT would decide not to because he's gonna travel to play Iowa State or Minnesota instead of UT? I don't buy that for a second and I think it's just become gospel because it's been repeated enough times. Why continue to play these games where we have EVERYTHING to lose and nothing to gain except the pay check? No, I'm sorry, these are not "opportunity" games. At least not until you build the program for a while by WINNING and begin to use that to recruit the players who are capable of beating the "big boys."

Boise didn't become who they are by scheduling murderer's row...at least not in the beginning. They drew players in by winning first. Until then it's just scrimmmage for sale.

Call me crazy if you want, but I think with a little creativity we could use our new stadium to our advantage instead of just as a place to return to after taking a brutal beating in week 1.

Here is where you are spot on (not that you aren't otherwise) but I watched the UNT-KSU game tonight through Xbox 360's ESPN App. and couldn't help but to again notice that we stood such a great chance at beating them. Are there players in this area and around our great state that wouldn't like to beat an established team like KSU in our own house? It is amazing to me that our attendance was so lousy for such a great matchup. I agree whole heartedly that we should not play the paycheck games but instead use our leverage to schedule home and homes and even 2 vs 1 games. After the last game with KSU and with our new coaching matchup we have nothing....repeat nothing..to be ashamed of in that new stadium. To beat any of the teams mentioned in the home and home would easily garner enough support to match our recruiting status that our basketball program has. Why waste valuable games against UT away when we can get slightly less enticing teams to play here and actually pack our stadium?

[GreenMachine]

"Before anyone says "they'd never play in our stadium b/c it's too small"

I agree with your post especially since Texas Tech and Okie state have both come to SMU's stadium that roughly seats the same as our new stadium.

[Censored by Laurie]

@ UConn

Now you're thinking!

Also, lets keep the Army series instead of the Marshal games.

[Green P1]

Should we all re-post our lists from the other thread?

[adman]

I think the smart, simple solution is to look at DFW demographics and make a list of the top 15-20 colleges/universities that area residents have attended/graduated from.

For example, DFW has the highest concentration of Kansas grads of any town that isn't Kansas City. Being a major metropolitan area you could safely wager there are several schools, similar to Kansas, well represented in DFW. (Excluding the UT's, OU's etc of course.)

Pitch a 1 for 1 with these schools. They get a recruiting trip to football mecca and their highest concentration of alums get an away game a mere 30 minutes from home.

[shaft]

To answer the original question...money. We play those games because they have huge payouts and low travel costs.

When your playing a game for a payout, you take the biggest payout you can find. All the other OOCs are designed to be home-at-homes.

[GrandGreen]

Nobody likes watching us get our heads bashed in when we play "guarantee" games. And nobody likes going to Austin, Norman or Baton Rouge knowing those teams will never come to Fouts. So, my question, is this...why not branch out and replace these teams with teams further away but still higher up the food chain than us? Minnesota seats 50,805. Rutgers seats 52,454. Purdue seats 62,500. Northwestern, who just played in Dallas, seats just over 47,000. There are teams that, while they won't give us the million dollar guarantees would write us a pretty decent check and...wait for it...might even consider coming to our place. Before anyone says "they'd never play in our stadium b/c it's too small and they have no reason to come to Denton" think about it before just assuming. How often do these teams get to come into the metroplex? How many of them recruit Texas in general and this area in specific. Think Purdue wouldn't like to have kids from Houston, San Antonio or Austin come watch them play a short drive away? And, unlike Texas or OU, these schools don't have alumni bases in the metroplex that are so large we couldn't accomodate. Did K-State overrun our stadium? I know, I know, kids want to play the "big boys." Are you honestly telling me that a kid who is considering NT would decide not to because he's gonna travel to play Iowa State or Minnesota instead of UT? I don't buy that for a second and I think it's just become gospel because it's been repeated enough times. Why continue to play these games where we have EVERYTHING to lose and nothing to gain except the pay check? No, I'm sorry, these are not "opportunity" games. At least not until you build the program for a while by WINNING and begin to use that to recruit the players who are capable of beating the "big boys."

Boise didn't become who they are by scheduling murderer's row...at least not in the beginning. They drew players in by winning first. Until then it's just scrimmmage for sale.

Call me crazy if you want, but I think with a little creativity we could use our new stadium to our advantage instead of just as a place to return to after taking a brutal beating in week 1.

Actually there was a time when those games were viewed as an opportunity. Fry was actually elated that UT agreed to play NT. Funny prior to Dickey, the UT games were hard fought and often close. Unfortunately the vast majority of NT recruits in the past come to NT because it is their only or best offer. So oc games are immaterial in that regard, but players want to occasionally play the best. The options for oc scheduling are basically find a like school and play home and away such as SMU, Tulsa, Rice, etc, be the guarantor and bring in a fc college, play a big money guarantee game, or play a 1 home to 2 or more away games series. Making that choice is not only financially based but a descent home schedule needs to be maintained and a slate obtained that offers a reasonable likelihood of success.

Unfortunately, the economics are not significantly effected by the new stadium. The capacity will at most be the same, and all though revenue streams for club seating, suites and improved sponsorship should help, there is still a massive debt service obligation to be met. The new stadium will be a definite plus for scheduling but not to the extent many think. I think one guarantee game against a power is good for the program. It gives a sometimes as we know brutal assessment of where NT's program really is. Outside of excellent money it also provides exposure for the program. It may be negative if the slaughters continue but exposure in the region does the program much more good than the Northeast or West coast. Many of us are still regaling the victory over Tennessee and the theft of a win by UT although both were decades ago. I don't like playing one home for multiple away games, it makes oc schedule difficult and decimates a home schedule if done often. Yes, I would take a 1 to 2 with UT, OU type teams but that is unlikely.

Yes Boise was successful playing a weak oc schedule, but NT is not Boise. Boise is in a region with little sports competition with only one other relatively weak fb division team as a rival for support. NT has advantages but is just the opposite of Boise in sports competition and local support. You may have noticed that while NT ruled the Belt, the attendance was not any better than now.

Not being able to accommodate a fan base as little to do with scheduling, it is all about the Benjamin's. With the "bigs" able to generate over $4,000,000 just in ticket revenues alone for a home game with no return required, paying a million to buy a game is great economics. Not to mention, the odds are prohibitive that they are going to win at home against a guarantee opponent while away games are much more challenging. Yes, these schools infrequently play at small venues primarily to prepare for away conference games.

Scheduling is complicated for sure and there is no right solution. As someone mentioned, playing UT this year might have been a good thing, of course when UNT plays them next, they will be back at the top of the chart.

[FirefightnRick]

Funny prior to Dickey, the UT games were hard fought and often close.

And then some....

Rick

[Eagle1855]

And then some....

Rick

What's the story behind this game?

[Adub4ever]

What's the story behind this game?

UNT were winning against texas in the final seconds but they came back to win on a td catch that wasnt in bounds

[untjim1995]

Nobody likes watching us get our heads bashed in when we play "guarantee" games. And nobody likes going to Austin, Norman or Baton Rouge knowing those teams will never come to Fouts. So, my question, is this...why not branch out and replace these teams with teams further away but still higher up the food chain than us? Minnesota seats 50,805. Rutgers seats 52,454. Purdue seats 62,500. Northwestern, who just played in Dallas, seats just over 47,000. There are teams that, while they won't give us the million dollar guarantees would write us a pretty decent check and...wait for it...might even consider coming to our place. Before anyone says "they'd never play in our stadium b/c it's too small and they have no reason to come to Denton" think about it before just assuming. How often do these teams get to come into the metroplex? How many of them recruit Texas in general and this area in specific. Think Purdue wouldn't like to have kids from Houston, San Antonio or Austin come watch them play a short drive away? And, unlike Texas or OU, these schools don't have alumni bases in the metroplex that are so large we couldn't accomodate. Did K-State overrun our stadium? I know, I know, kids want to play the "big boys." Are you honestly telling me that a kid who is considering NT would decide not to because he's gonna travel to play Iowa State or Minnesota instead of UT? I don't buy that for a second and I think it's just become gospel because it's been repeated enough times. Why continue to play these games where we have EVERYTHING to lose and nothing to gain except the pay check? No, I'm sorry, these are not "opportunity" games. At least not until you build the program for a while by WINNING and begin to use that to recruit the players who are capable of beating the "big boys."

Boise didn't become who they are by scheduling murderer's row...at least not in the beginning. They drew players in by winning first. Until then it's just scrimmmage for sale.

Call me crazy if you want, but I think with a little creativity we could use our new stadium to our advantage instead of just as a place to return to after taking a brutal beating in week 1.

Emmitt, major +1 here. This may very well be your best post and it is exactly what I believe we should do, as well. The Rose Bowl was a perfect example of what I believe we should do as far as OOC scheduling. The Big Ten teams are well-known, well-covered, well-funded, and well, slow. In other words, our talent pool down here is speedy. TCU beat Wisconsin with it speed and great coaching, just as every other SEC/Big XII/Pac-10 team normally does to them in both OOC and in bowl games. Ohio State barely beat Arkansas last night, and it represented their FIRST ever win over a school from the SEC in a bowl game. Mississippi State prison-raped Michigan in their bowl game this year--not exactly Alabama or Florida, who also both pasted their Big Ten bowl game opponents.

Playing at Michigan State or Wisconsin probably is a butt-kicking for us right now, but there is no doubt what will happen when we got to Tuscaloosa, Austin, Norman, Baton Rouge, etc. I would love for us to schedule bigtime OOC games with Pac-10, Big Ten, and Big East schools. I think we can at least have a shot at being competitive. Since moving up to FBS in 1995, our closest game in Norman was losing 37-10. Our closest game in Austin was 27-0. Our closest game in Tuscaloosa was 33-7. Our closest game in Baton Rouge was 49-7. All 4 of these teams have combined to win 5 national championships since 2000. During this decade, not once have we played at A&M, a team that has lost to Arkansas State at home and barely beat FIU, while paying out a lot of $$$. We haven't played once at Oklahoma State this decade, which lost at Troy and barely beat them at home this year. This isn't even considering playing OOC games against teams like Purdue, Pittsburgh, Washington, etc...who all pay good $$$, yet have lost to lots of non-AQs in the last 10 years.

The DFW media has made it clear that we won't get any decent coverage if don't win BOTH our conference and beat decent teams in OOC. When we lose 65-0 to Texas in Austin or 56-3 in Baton Rouge, it just reiterates to the media and to the fans that we can't compete with those teams, so we really don't matter. I hate it, but its the reality. But if we can get our act together and go up to Iowa City in a few years and win against Iowa, you would see more respect for us from the DFW media and our fans than ever before. Maybe winning at Iowa is very unlikely, but it seems MUCH MORE possible than winning in Tuscaloosa, Austin, Gainesville, Norman, or Baton Rouge.