Scheduling Out of Conference Scheduling Article

The Fake Lonnie Finch · April 10, 2012

Highlights increase in BCS AQs playing FCS more these days:

http://rivals.yahoo.com/ncaa/football/news?slug=mh-huguenin_college_football_schedule_overview_040912

Notes two or three times that Texas Tech, for the seventh year in a row, plays no BCS AQs in their out of conference schedule.

Not taking the easy way out: Louisiana Tech and SMU, both playing three BCS AQs.

Teams with EIGHT home games in 2012: Arizona, LSU, Ohio State, and South Carolina. Wow.

I'm all for more home games...even if it means we have to play down to FCS. I still like the idea of an annual game versus an HBC.

We can talk all we want about playing up. But, frankly, we need to win consistently before we go crazy.

Kansas State spent years focusing on getting winnable home games in September before they stepped out and began home and home with USC and others.

When you're small and your success is broken or spotty, as our is and K-State's was, you've got to do yourselves some favors in scheduling.

For the most part, I think Rick's done that. K-State proved you don't have to let bigger programs beat the hell out of you to succeed. And, they incubated in the pre-BCS days as well, so they weren't getting money based on league bowl participation. We're in the same kind of boat.

K-State made their own success on the field; we will have to do the same.

Edited April 10, 2012 by The Fake Lonnie Finch

DeepGreen · April 10, 2012

So, you're saying our opening game at LSU could be a problem?

The Fake Lonnie Finch · April 10, 2012

So, you're saying our opening game at LSU could be a problem?

Not for LSU. With seven other homes games, they are fine with or without us visiting. We could use another. I'd have dropped them or Kansas State, if possible, and added an FCS home game.

That's just me...and Bill Snyder during the K-State rebuilding.

glick1980 · April 10, 2012

Not for LSU. With seven other homes games, they are fine with or without us visiting. We could use another. I'd have dropped them or Kansas State, if possible, and added an FCS home game.

That's just me...and Bill Snyder during the K-State rebuilding.

We already have an FCS game, and you can only count one towards bowl eligibility.

The Fake Lonnie Finch · April 10, 2012

K-State OOC during Bill Snyder rebuild:

1989 (1-10)

@ Arizona State, L

Northern Iowa, L

Northern Illinois, L

North Texas, W

1990 (5-6)

Western Illinois, W

New Mexico State, W

@ Northern Illinois, L

New Mexico, W

1991 (7-4) - First year of .500 record w/o OOC

Indiana State, W

Idaho State, W

Northern Illinois, W

@Washington, L

1992 (5-6)

Montana, W

Temple (PA), W

New Mexico State, W

@Utah State, L

1993 (9-2-1) - First year with winning record w/o OOC

New Mexico State, W

Western Kentucky, W

@ Minnesota, W

UNLV, W

1994 (9-3)

Louisiana-Lafayette, W

Rice, W

Minnesota, W

@UNLV, W

1995 (10-2)

Temple (PA), W

@ Cincinnati, W

Akron, W

Northern Illinois, W

The Big 12 came along in 1996, and the out of conference games went from four to three. But, you see the pattern. They always had three home games in September, all against winnable opponents.

People criticized K-State once they started winning. But, so what? The idea is to get to the point where you are winning.

We're on a delicate line - money. LSU and OU and Texas, etc. pay us for schedule fodder. Do we gain in the long run? Have we gained in the long run?

We haven't built a winning program. But, we've gotten money to pay bills. So, which draws fans? Come see us, we paid our bills!

Over time, I believe, having a big, reliable fan base is most important. To Rick's credit, we do have more winnable games scheduled in the future. I still don't see accepting five home games while going on the road for a roadkill game.

Perhaps, though, Coach McCarney can build this thing into a "Giant Slayer" and the argument will be made moot.

The Fake Lonnie Finch · April 10, 2012

We already have an FCS game, and you can only count one towards bowl eligibility.

Yes, but being in the Sun Belt...getting to bowl eligibility should not be a problem. We don't have a steep climb in the Belt.

K-State fought in a Big Eight with Nebraska, Oklahoma, Colorado, and Kansas (with Glen Mason making them a Top 10 program).

Our fight to six wins shouldn't be difficult. We almost had five last year with many injuries and inexperience. If we can't go at least 5-3 in the Sun Belt every year, why are we even fielding a program? This is the worst conference competitively for football in FBS.

We really have no excuse for not winning at least five in the Belt a year. Dickey - not interested enough, maybe. Dodge - not qualified enough, maybe. McCarney...there is no excuse for him. He's been in much tougher environments his entire career.

Two FCS games shouldn't kill us bowl-wise as long as we're in the Belt. I don't accept that. This is the perfect conference to incubate a winner in. We should be become here what Boise State became in the WAC.

Edited April 10, 2012 by The Fake Lonnie Finch

smoothfresh · April 10, 2012

Amen Lonnie... I was there for everyone of those games. Do you think our fans were happier about beating the likes of Idaho St as opposed to playing at Alabama and getting drilled (for those who don't know the answer its "Hell Yes"). When a program has been "down" wins are all that matters. As Rick stated to us, there is a real easy answer for not having to play at Alabama, at LSU, etc... show your a$$ up to our beautiful stadium regardless of the opponent and things will change.

glick1980 · April 10, 2012

Yes, but being in the Sun Belt...getting to bowl eligibility should not be a problem. We don't have a steep climb in the Belt.

K-State fought in a Big Eight with Nebraska, Oklahoma, Colorado, and Kansas (with Glen Mason making them a Top 10 program).

Our fight to six wins shouldn't be difficult. We almost had five last year with many injuries and inexperience. If we can't go at least 5-3 in the Sun Belt every year, why are we even fielding a program? This is the worst conference competitively for football in FBS.

We really have no excuse for not winning at least five in the Belt a year. Dickey - not interested enough, maybe. Dodge - not qualified enough, maybe. McCarney...there is no excuse for him. He's been in much tougher environments his entire career.

Two FCS games shouldn't kill us bowl-wise as long as we're in the Belt. I don't accept that. This is the perfect conference to incubate a winner in. We should be become here what Boise State became in the WAC.

I agree we should play one FCS game per year, but not two. I think we should play an FCS home game, 1-for-1's with like schools in like conferences, and 1-for-1's or 2-for-1's against non-power BCS schools. Basically all winnable games and no more Alabama's, LSU's, OU's and UT's.

The Fake Lonnie Finch · April 10, 2012

Look, we stormed the field after we beat a horrible Indiana program last year. Yes, we did. And, I proudly took my wife and kids over the wall with me.

This program...these players...need good experiences to build upon. We can't suck for a couple of season like OU and Texas in the mid- late-90s, but still have good athletes coming in that a bona coach can use immediately (Mack Brown inheriting Ricky Williams and Major Applewhite; Bob Stoops inheriting Roy Williams and Rocky Calmus).

We need wins. The team needs wins. We needed to pound Middle Tennessee like we did. We need to beat Texas State. "Coming close" against Kansas State and Houston...what does that do? A loss is a loss. We've "hung in there for a half" and "come close" before.

The edge is a winning attitude sometimes. But, you don't get a winning attitude by losing.

The Fake Lonnie Finch · April 10, 2012

I agree we should play one FCS game per year, but not two. I think we should play an FCS home game, 1-for-1's with like schools in like conferences, and 1-for-1's or 2-for-1's against non-power BCS schools. Basically all winnable games and no more Alabama's, LSU's, OU's and UT's.

I could live with that as well. Good idea, Glick.

Do we agree, though, that five home games a year isn't a great thing? And, we should try to get to six home games even if that means playing two FCS schools some seasons if we must?

Edited April 10, 2012 by The Fake Lonnie Finch

smoothfresh · April 10, 2012

2012 Bold Prediction: This football team, athletic department and our fans will be leaving the Texas Southern game in a much better mood as opposed to the LSU game.

techdawg88 · April 10, 2012

I think you are giving Tech too much credit. Only reason A&M got added is because they had to give us a home game in Shreveport because they were missing a few games since they moved to the SEC. Tech was originally supposed to be playing Lamar at home on that date. Illinois and Virginia while they technically are BCS are usually toward the bottom of their league

kalebschumann · April 10, 2012

The Fake Lonnie Finch is currently owning this thread with knowledge and awesome thoughts.

glick1980 · April 10, 2012

I could live with that as well. Good idea, Glick.

Do we agree, though, that five home games a year isn't a great thing? And, we should try to get to six home games even if that means playing two FCS schools some seasons if we must?

I hate 5 home games, but I don't see playing two FCS games a year ever happening. Essentially, the second FCS game is going to count as a loss because it doesn't help with bowl eligibility. Would you rather have 12 chances to win 6 games or 11 chances? I like the games with Ball State and Ohio. I hate the games with Alabama and LSU. I don't like ever playing one and done deals now that we are out of Fouts. There is no reason we can't bring 2nd tier BCS teams into Apogee every other year.

The Fake Lonnie Finch · April 10, 2012

Here's the problem, our future schedules have us playing two or three road games a year:

In 2013, we've got two home games OOC - Ball State and Ohio and an away at Georgia. That's as good as it gets for a while. After that it's:

2014:

8/30 - @ Texas

9/13 - @ Tulsa

10/4 - @ Indiana

TDB - SMU

2015:

9/5 - TULSA

TBD - @ SMU

TBD - @ Iowa

2016:

9/10 - @ Florida

TDB - SMU

2017:

TDB - @ SMU

TDB - @ Iowa

I'd be trying to get out of Texas, Georgia, Florida, and one - if not both - Iowa games, and trying to schedule home games in their place...even if it meant going FCS. Am I crazy? Yes and no. But, the 2014 schedule is driving me bonkers.

Beyond just winning and getting competitive, we've got this new stadium! Are we to believe that we're only to have one game per September in this new stadium? Does that sound right?

glick1980 · April 10, 2012

Here's the problem, our future schedules have us playing two or three road games a year:

In 2013, we've got two home games OOC - Ball State and Ohio and an away at Georgia. That's as good as it gets for a while. After that it's:

2014:
8/30 - @ Texas
9/13 - @ Tulsa
10/4 - @ Indiana
TDB - SMU

2015:
9/5 - TULSA
TBD - @ SMU
TBD - @ Iowa

2016:
9/10 - @ Florida
TDB - SMU

2017:
TDB - @ SMU
TDB - @ Iowa

I'd be trying to get out of Texas, Georgia, Florida, and one - if not both - Iowa games, and trying to schedule home games in their place...even if it meant going FCS. Am I crazy? Yes and no. But, the 2014 schedule is driving me bonkers.

Beyond just winning and getting competitive, we've got this new stadium! Are we to believe that we're only to have one game per September in this new stadium? Does that sound right?

I would prefer to replace UT, Georgia, Florida and Iowa with FCS home games. Why in the hell would we agree to play @ Iowa twice? Do we get a home game out of it ever? Hopefully that Tulsa game turns into a conference game and we can replace it with a FCS team.

untjim1995 · April 10, 2012

Here's the problem, our future schedules have us playing two or three road games a year:

In 2013, we've got two home games OOC - Ball State and Ohio and an away at Georgia. That's as good as it gets for a while. After that it's:

2014:
8/30 - @ Texas
9/13 - @ Tulsa
10/4 - @ Indiana
TDB - SMU

2015:
9/5 - TULSA
TBD - @ SMU
TBD - @ Iowa

2016:
9/10 - @ Florida
TDB - SMU

2017:
TDB - @ SMU
TDB - @ Iowa

I'd be trying to get out of Texas, Georgia, Florida, and one - if not both - Iowa games, and trying to schedule home games in their place...even if it meant going FCS. Am I crazy? Yes and no. But, the 2014 schedule is driving me bonkers.

Beyond just winning and getting competitive, we've got this new stadium! Are we to believe that we're only to have one game per September in this new stadium? Does that sound right?

I literally want to throw up when I see those future schedules. I hate games at Texas and Oklahoma, but I get that they are royalty around here and playing either of them every once in a while helps the pocketbook, all while allowing our fans a close road game. But seriosuly, games against any SEC team right now, not named Vanderbilt or Kentucky are just stupid. Florida? Georgia? LSU? Alabama from last year? Just stupid. And we make it even easier by playing those great teams in the first month of the year, not later on when we might have a chance to catch a break and play them while they lose attention from their conference games. Just dumb. I really didn't mind choosing Iowa as an OOC opponent, but then we give them a two-for NONE deal, even with a brand new stadium down here to attract a team like Iowa to come and play in and get some recruiting recognition. It literally makes no sense to me, especially when SMU gets A&M, UTEP can get OU in the Sun Bowl and freaking ULM can get Baylor to go to that dump for a game. And don't even get me started on Texas State getting Tech down there for a game in San Marcos--not in five years when Tech could buy the game out, but THIS YEAR!!! Meanwhile, we get Texas Southern as the marquee home game this year...and hope like hell that SMU doesn't back out of our series with them in a few years when their AQ monies start paying out. Are we just that far down on the totem pole that we have to schedule this poorly and can't even reward our fans with a decent home game in the future? Right now, SMU and Tulsa are the "big" OOC home games we have scheduled. We did better than that this past season with both UH and Indiana here. Its fun to play the two I mentioned earlier, but if you tell anyone else that SMU is your marquee home game opponent over the next ten years, lets just go ahead and get prepared for more laughter from the other college football fans in this state and region.

I guess all you can do is just accept it...as usual. But it doesn't mean that it isn't ridiculously stupid, either.

GrandGreen · April 11, 2012

I would prefer to replace UT, Georgia, Florida and Iowa with FCS home games. Why in the hell would we agree to play @ Iowa twice? Do we get a home game out of it ever? Hopefully that Tulsa game turns into a conference game and we can replace it with a FCS team.

Iowa is just what many wanted, a guarantee game that is not a sure beat down. Now we complain. There is one guaranteed game a year thus far scheduled, that is about as good as it gets for a lower tier program. I think the team benefits from one game a year like this, not to mention there is no way to replace the money made. Tulsa, SMU, and Indiana are all good scheduling.

I really don't understand the mind set that playing FCS teams helps your program. The only reason to ever schedule in my opinion is to balance out the schedule to offset the one away guaranteed game. I will be there to see Texas Southern but a 70 to 0 win over a team like that really does little for a FB program. NT is in effect doing the same as a UT or Georgia by buying what should be an easy game. The difference is that they can make a ton of money doing it. And don't give me the Boise example of winning over poor teams and building a program. Boise is about the only game in town, a far way from playing in the Metromess

Edited April 11, 2012 by GrandGreen

The Fake Lonnie Finch · April 11, 2012

I literally want to throw up when I see those future schedules. I hate games at Texas and Oklahoma, but I get that they are royalty around here and playing either of them every once in a while helps the pocketbook, all while allowing our fans a close road game. But seriosuly, games against any SEC team right now, not named Vanderbilt or Kentucky are just stupid. Florida? Georgia? LSU? Alabama from last year? Just stupid. And we make it even easier by playing those great teams in the first month of the year, not later on when we might have a chance to catch a break and play them while they lose attention from their conference games. Just dumb. I really didn't mind choosing Iowa as an OOC opponent, but then we give them a two-for NONE deal, even with a brand new stadium down here to attract a team like Iowa to come and play in and get some recruiting recognition. It literally makes no sense to me, especially when SMU gets A&M, UTEP can get OU in the Sun Bowl and freaking ULM can get Baylor to go to that dump for a game. And don't even get me started on Texas State getting Tech down there for a game in San Marcos--not in five years when Tech could buy the game out, but THIS YEAR!!! Meanwhile, we get Texas Southern as the marquee home game this year...and hope like hell that SMU doesn't back out of our series with them in a few years when their AQ monies start paying out. Are we just that far down on the totem pole that we have to schedule this poorly and can't even reward our fans with a decent home game in the future? Right now, SMU and Tulsa are the "big" OOC home games we have scheduled. We did better than that this past season with both UH and Indiana here. Its fun to play the two I mentioned earlier, but if you tell anyone else that SMU is your marquee home game opponent over the next ten years, lets just go ahead and get prepared for more laughter from the other college football fans in this state and region.

I guess all you can do is just accept it...as usual. But it doesn't mean that it isn't ridiculously stupid, either.

I don't mind Tulsa and SMU because they should be our gauge as to where we want to get to...then, pass! OU so desperate for a game they go to El Paso. Florida State so hard up they schedule two FCS games. Crazy. We have no pull...no pull whatsoever.

Iowa is a beat down. They are night and day different than Indiana...and twice?

Crazy.

GrandGreen · April 11, 2012

I don't mind Tulsa and SMU because they should be our gauge as to where we want to get to...then, pass! OU so desperate for a game they go to El Paso. Florida State so hard up they schedule two FCS games. Crazy. We have no pull...no pull whatsoever.

Iowa is a beat down. They are night and day different than Indiana...and twice?

Crazy.

Indiana was not a guaranteed game, hence the game in Denton last year. Iowa is paying the big dollars for a home game, had you rather play Alabama, LSU or Florida? What pull do you expect NT to have, a Belt team playing in a 30,000 seat stadium? It is all about the money.

untjim1995 · April 12, 2012

Indiana was not a guaranteed game, hence the game in Denton last year. Iowa is paying the big dollars for a home game, had you rather play Alabama, LSU or Florida? What pull do you expect NT to have, a Belt team playing in a 30,000 seat stadium? It is all about the money.

OK, then there is a severe miscommunication situation going on then. We were told that the new stadium would open up opportunities for better home games and to move upward in conference affiliation. Plus, it would limit the number of bodybag games. If it "is all about the money" as you mentioned, then just tell us that in a straight-forward manner. As I have said before, Apogee and the current funding of the program get us about halfway for a legitimate FBS program, which is about double or triple from what we were doing at Fouts with Dickey/Dodge as the coach in the Big West/Sun Belt. And, in the school's defense, we are light years ahead of the 1-aa days. But, we need an upgrade in conference affiliation ASAP and we need to play OOC games against teams that matter, both home and away. Just getting a game against SMU and Tulsa here or there at home is not my idea of a high quality OOC matchup. Granted, Tulsa may be a conference game soon (prayers being sent now), but my point is that we deserve a game against better OOC teams than just SMU every once in a while, like we had this past year. Right now, the schedule for our program for years to come suggests that "it is all about the money" is still in vogue. In my mind, the best way that you can see the proof of this is through the OOC schedule for home games and the list of bodybag games. If we have to play at LSU, Georgia, Florida and Texas in OOC, at least give us a home game against a team like Iowa.

Look, I love playing Iowa. They are the perfect OOC game to me. You get $$$ and a chance to beat a decent named team from a big conference that doesn't have the athletes of the SEC/Big XII South powers. We should schedule games against Big Ten schools, Pac-12 schools, and ACC schools that you can hope to compete with. But, I don't view Iowa as a team that you would do a Two-for-none series with, though, when you have Apogee, even if it only seats 30k. Iowa has a lot of alums down here, just like Indiana does. Ohio State, Michigan, and Nebraska all fit that description, but Iowa doesn't. Hell, Michigan State was going to play at Florida Atlantic if their stadium would have been ready. Minnesota has played at FAU and at ULL. Its not asking a lot to get even a 3 for 1 with a team like Iowa, which I still think is too tilted in Iowa's favor. Teams like Purdue, Northwestern, Illinois, Minnesota, etc...would be similar to Iowa, in my opinion.

If we can't do better than what we have scheduled OOC in the future, and ESPECIALLY if we don't get into the Alliance, we probably don't deserve to be considered a true FBS school in the future.