Mutha-scratchin' Schedule Nerds

[UNT90]

I don't think i meant that we "had" to in the sense that it is an imperative for the continued success of our program, just meant that it makes a lot of sense. Was pointing out that we have historically played them more than any other team. We lament a lack of rivalries. SMU has a rival in TCU and by conference default, UH. Rice has UH. MTSU has WKU. We have no sole rivalry we can point to.

We compete with Texas State for the same recruits. We are a similar institution. We just lost to an upstart-team in San Antonio. I'm not sure what delusional world our fans are living, with respects to UNT's place in the college football world. I don't think there's a thing wrong with playing a Sun Belt program in our non-conference schedule. Especially one in the Austin area.

We have also historically SUCKED at football. Does that mean we should keep sucking?

Just no. Have a higher goal than a Sunbelt team for a home and home.

[Eagle1855]

We have also historically SUCKED at football. Does that mean we should keep sucking?

Just no. Have a higher goal than a Sunbelt team for a home and home.

Not sure the two are related. But I am sorry that my goals aren't high enough

Which is your favorite rivalry that we enjoy at UNT? And try to pick one where the other team actually considers us a rival.

[forevereagle]

Not sure the two are related. But I am sorry that my goals aren't high enough

Which is your favorite rivalry that we enjoy at UNT? And try to pick one where the other team actually considers us a rival.

He doesn't care about rivalries, unless we can convince UT or someone of that caliber to be a rival.

[UNT90]

Not sure the two are related. But I am sorry that my goals aren't high enough

Which is your favorite rivalry that we enjoy at UNT? And try to pick one where the other team actually considers us a rival.

We have zero rivalries. Hopefully Rice turns into one.

It damn sure doesn't need to be a team from a lower conference.

I bet SMU fans would agree with this post...

[UNT90]

He doesn't care about rivalries, unless we can convince UT or someone of that caliber to be a rival.

Way to try and catagorize to fit your narrative.

[Eagle1855]

We have zero rivalries. Hopefully Rice turns into one.

Exactly. Rice already has a rival. It's never going to change. It goes back long before any of us watched football.

Nowhere in my post did I suggest replacing those opening games with a Texas State. I suggested replacing a game like Army with an actual in-state program that could be considered a rival -- and has been in the past.

Keep the opening games against P5 conference teams. And find some that are mid-level P5 teams that are willing to do 1-and-1 or 2-and-1 deals (like KSU).

[UNT90]

Exactly. Rice already has a rival. It's never going to change. It goes back long before any of us watched football.

Nowhere in my post did I suggest replacing those opening games with a Texas State. I suggested replacing a game like Army with an actual in-state program that could be considered a rival -- and has been in the past.

Keep the opening games against P5 conference teams. And find some that are mid-level P5 teams that are willing to do 1-and-1 or 2-and-1 deals (like KSU).

Texas St. Already has a natural rival in Craphole. Craphole, a school that isn't afraid to play P5s at home, by the way.

If your criteria is we must find a school that doesn't already have a rivalry, then we are left with very few options.

Maybe only La. Tech? Do they have a rival?

[Eagle1855]

Texas St. Already has a natural rival in Craphole. Craphole, a school that isn't afraid to play P5s at home, by the way.

If your criteria is we must find a school that doesn't already have a rivalry, then we are left with very few options.

Didn't say that either. My only interest was Texas State because they also do not have a current FBS rival, having left SHSU in FCS. They start a series with UTSA (I assume that's Craphole?) in 2018 that then continues from 2021 on. So they have a really good understanding of how to build and maintain rivalries.

We don't. We never have. Which is why we're everyone's afterthought in the State of Texas. No one hates North Texas because no one cares.

But I'm sure that Army series will get heated. So we'll cross our fingers on that.

[TheFranchise]

Does a school have to be limited to just one rivalry? I mean Notre Dame has several (USC, Michigan State, Navy, Purdue, Boston College, Stanford, Army and PIttsburgh) and until A&M bolted for the SEC, Texas had A&M and Oklahoma.

I personally consider SMU a rival just because of proximity. I don't care that SMU already has one with TCU. I still consider them our "closest" rival.

Now, if you were to say we could only have one "main" rival, well that's different point entirely.

[Eagle1855]

Now, if you were to say we could only have one "main" rival, well that's different point entirely.

I'm not saying we can have only one "main" rival, I'm saying we're the Texas Tech of the non-P5 world: we have several rivals and none of them consider it as big a rivalry as we do.

[TheFranchise]

I'm not saying we can have only one "main" rival, I'm saying we're the Texas Tech of the non-P5 world: we have several rivals and none of them consider it as big a rivalry as we do.

I wasn't really directing that at you, per se. It was more about the ruling out of other schools that already have a rivalry.

I think Tech is a good comparison. Although Texas REALLY started hating them there for a while during the Leach years.

[UNT90]

I'm not saying we can have only one "main" rival, I'm saying we're the Texas Tech of the non-P5 world: we have several rivals and none of them consider it as big a rivalry as we do.

No doubt.

[Censored by Laurie]

Am I the only one that would gladly trade a home and home series with Army for the a long-term home and home series with Texas State (ideally alternating home/away with our UTSA home/away games)? Having SMU and Texas State on the schedule every year, along with UTSA and Rice, seems like a great way to remind the entire state we're here, while building lasting rivalries.

Given that our conference - and, therefore, OOC options - have changed since the contract was signed, I'd try to talk them into cutting the contract from six games to four or two.

I'd hate to stick it to Army, though, given that they are not power guys, but an Independent which struggles to get decent games. Their future schedules are not great: http://www.fbschedules.com/ncaa/indep/army-black-knights.php

Agreed. And I was one of the ones who was happy with the deal when it was put in place, for reasons you mentioned.

But I think we've got to find a way to get Texas State on the schedule in the future. We've played them more times, historically, than any other program. And it's one rivalry in which we actually hold a significant advantage in the all-time record. Hooray.

Don't you jerks dare even mention the idea of dropping that return trip to West Point. Not many opportunities for me to make a 2 hour drive to see UNT.

Plus...you wanna talk about an ideal place to come for road game. Quite possibly the most gorgeous campus/setting for a football game in the country...and only a little over an hour from NYC.

And Eagle1855, you've already got a place to stay. Not you though TFLF.

Edited August 7, 2014 by Censored by Laurie

[untjim1995]

I have a suspicion, that by 2018 and beyond, schedule-wise, it really won't matter about this anyway. If the P5 haven't separated officially by then, I would expect that most of them will have OOCs that only allow G5 or FCS games to be played at their places. I fully expect that by 2018, the P5 will be its own division within the NCAA or it will be completely separated from the NCAA.

To me, the NCAA Tournament and College World Series become the biggest issues for non-P5 schools to consider. If creating a Division 4 keeps the NCAA Tournament and College World Series basically as is, then I'm ok with it. We will never be allowed to compete with them on anything remotely close to equal footing, just like all other G5 schools (I'm looking at you SMU and UH). Let them play each other in a 64 team setup in football if that is what they want. Just don't change the NCAA Tournament or the College World Series. Keep us all with equal access to both. The rest of the G5 and higher-end FCS teams (think Montana, NDSU, etc..) will just have to be creative with their football division and figue out what makes the most sense for them. Make the FCS playoff system available for the G5 when the P5 are not playing their playoff.I think that is the secret that no one talks about that has a big advantage over the current bowl system. People like playoffs, they like knowing that their is a legitimate endgame, not some poll-driven two-game deal.

Nobody cares about FCS schools because they are so small and play other teams that aren't well-known. BUt if we have a system in place where all the current G5 schools are in this hypothetical level, it should at least pick up interest substantially form what it currently is. And a NDSU game against Fresno State playoff game would have more appeal than a typical NDSU versus McNeese State, since no one has heard of McNeese State. Make your new G5 level available for about 65 teams, just as Division 4 will be. If you're an SMU and won't play at this level and quits football, then you have a plethora of FCS teams to step up and replace them.

Look, none of this is close to ideal for us. We want so much more, but it is the cold reality that we are a have-not, always have been, always will be. A true collegiate athletic experience is one that we will continue to offer, not some glorified minor league ripoff that the P5s are going to offer, all the while throwing away the education mantra for the almighty $$$ that TV will give them. So we have to try and make that reality as pleasant as possible, if at all possible. If its not, then we have wasted a lot of time with a football program we shouldn't ahve had and UTA will look really smart at the end of all of this. But I do think that real scholarship only college football that involves G5 teams and some others is way better than the old 1-aa system. I don't think there is much to argue on that point. BUt if its the unfortunate reality we face, we are going to need to do what we can to make it as good as possible. It won't be playing schools like Nicholls State or Northwestern State (LA) in conference. It would still be playing CUSA teams or some regionally based conference with peer institutions that we should have been in for the last 50 years that politics kept us from being in. I guess we will see how it all plays out, but it seems like an unavoaidable situation that we all will find ourselves in within the next 4-5 years, if not sooner.

I've said this before, but this is unavoidable for us. Its just a matter of when. We can either figure out how to compete at this level with better known teams than we dealt with back in 1982, since the G5 does have well-known teams, unlike the 1-aa fiasco of the early 80s, or we can quit. But if we quit, I sure as hell don't want to be the chancellor that has to explain why we spent $78 million dollars on a stadium that isn't used anymore, so I doubt that is the way we ever go.

[forevereagle]

Way to try and catagorize to fit your narrative.

Wait, I have a narrative? Please enlighten me as to what might be. I am posting an observation. You keep saying that we should not schedule someone from a lower conference, we must get a P5 home and home, and we should have a minimum of 6 home games each year. When someone proposes a potential rivalry type game, you immediately shoot down the idea. Filling in the gaps, you don't care about an OOC rivalry unless a P5 team develops one with us. If this is anyone's narrative, it's yours.

[UNT90]

Wait, I have a narrative? Please enlighten me as to what might be. I am posting an observation. You keep saying that we should not schedule someone from a lower conference, we must get a P5 home and home, and we should have a minimum of 6 home games each year. When someone proposes a potential rivalry type game, you immediately shoot down the idea. Filling in the gaps, you don't care about an OOC rivalry unless a P5 team develops one with us. If this is anyone's narrative, it's yours.

So now you know how I think? And you didn't say P5, you said UT.

Obviously, we are never going to be a P5 rival. That's stupid, but you knew that, you just wanted to shoehorn my opinion into that box.

Let me make it clear for you. I expect to have a home game against a respectable P5 every 3 years or so (assuming the system stays the same) just like most other respectable G5s. Shoehorn that.

I guess that is asking too much, eh?

[forevereagle]

He doesn't care about rivalries, unless we can convince UT or someone of that caliber to be a rival.

So now you know how I think? And you didn't say P5, you said UT.

Obviously, we are never going to be a P5 rival. That's stupid, but you knew that, you just wanted to shoehorn my opinion into that box.

Let me make it clear for you. I expect to have a home game against a respectable P5 every 3 years or so (assuming the system stays the same) just like most other respectable G5s. Shoehorn that.

I guess that is asking too much, eh?

I put a qualifier on that, but don't let that stop you. Did I offer a little bit of hyperbole? Maybe, but I would think you would be able to recognize that since you seem to incapable of posting anything without inserting your brand. It may be possible that I am just really sick of you rehashing the same ten posts over and over. Love that you are calling out others on trolling, takes one to know one, right?

[UNT90]

I put a qualifier on that, but don't let that stop you. Did I offer a little bit of hyperbole? Maybe, but I would think you would be able to recognize that since you seem to incapable of posting anything without inserting your brand. It may be possible that I am just really sick of you rehashing the same ten posts over and over. Love that you are calling out others on trolling, takes one to know one, right?

Again, you don't have to read it.

I also said nothing about a P5 being our rival. While you may have a point about hyperbole, I don't engage in it on the scheduling issue. The facts are there and easy for anyone to see if they just look at the past 5 non-conference schedules coupled with what we have ahead of us. Here is the link for anyone that cares to look:

http://www.fbschedules.com/ncaa/conf-usa/north-texas-mean-green.php

And how many times has RV been asked publicly about scheduling in the last several months?

Edited August 7, 2014 by UNT90

[LongJim]

Regarding Texas State--you want to schedule them every chance you get. All Texas teams, as much as possible. Is it an end game? No. Same as Texas schedules Rice. Get into central/south Texas as much as possible, and develop rivalries.

[ColoradoEagle]

We already play four other Texas schools for the foreseeable future. I have zero interest in scheduling Texas State. I'd be as excited for those games as I am Nicholls State this year.

[MeanGreenTexan]

We already play four other Texas schools for the foreseeable future. I have zero interest in scheduling Texas State. I'd be as excited for those games as I am Nicholls State this year.

Right.

I mean, we only get to schedule 12 games per year, 8 of which are conference games. Another 2 of which are SMU & Army (starting in 2016) for the forseeable future. We only have 2 other slots to fill per year. I definitely think we need to nix any other long-term deals with anyone, to keep flexibility open.

[The Fake Lonnie Finch]

Regarding Texas State--you want to schedule them every chance you get. All Texas teams, as much as possible. Is it an end game? No. Same as Texas schedules Rice. Get into central/south Texas as much as possible, and develop rivalries.

And recruiting. Already getting lots of kids in Texas a chance to see us from end to end with Louisiana Tech, UTSA, and UTEP in conference. Texas State is just another opportunity to get in front of Texas kids there in central Texas. That's a good good.

That's why I love the regional games as well. Would like to keep us fresh in the minds of the kids and coaches in Oklahoma, Louisiana, and Texas...and Colorado! Come on with a series versus Colorado, RV!

[Ben Gooding]

I wouldn't be opposed for Texas State only for a one time home game. I'd be more intrigued for them than Nichols. On a side note, I'm not looking for Texas State type teams every year at home, but I'm ok with every now and then. RV on the podcast last night said he doesn't want to put the football team in a death trap every year and getting a team such as OU in Apogee might be a bad thing. Yeah, we would pack Apogee and then what? Teams need confidence builders, all teams. I think though with our recruiting progress of the last 2-3 years we do need to schedule better than Nichols for the future. We need to be seen beating up on beatable G5/lower P5 teams and we will have a team to do so the next 3-4 years, especially if we find a competent QB in that time frame. GMG

Edited August 8, 2014 by Ben Gooding

[pastorgrant]

I wouldn't be opposed for Texas State only for a one time home game. I'd be more intrigued for them than Nichols. On a side note, I'm not looking for Texas State type teams every year at home, but I'm ok with every now and then. RV on the podcast last night said he doesn't want to put the football team in a death trap every year and getting a team such as OU in Apogee might be a bad thing. Yeah, we would pack Apogee and then what? Teams need confidence builders, all teams. I think though with our recruiting progress of the last 2-3 years we do need to schedule better than Nichols for the future. We need to be seen beating up on beatable G5/lower P5 teams and we will have a team to do so the next 3-4 years, especially if we find a competent QB in that time frame. GMG

There are a lot of teams between Nicholls State and OU. Give me an Iowa State or a KU or an Arkansas at Apogee.

I do like the IU series and the SMUg series. That's good stuff.

[UNT90]

RV on the podcast last night said he doesn't want to put the football team in a death trap every year and getting a team such as OU in Apogee might be a bad thing. Yeah, we would pack Apogee and then what? Teams need confidence builders, all teams.

That why we play at Tennessee and at Iowa next year. Confidence building, right?

I guess it's easier to beat P6s on the road in RV's mind? Or could it be exactly what RV said it was on the podcast; we want the money for these games. Plain and simple and end of story.

The whoring continues, as does many, many, many, many, many, many alumni's lack of respect for UNT athletics.