The Football Scheduling Thread

[Utah]

I love how the schedule up drum beaters are the first to call for coaches heads when the wins aren't there.

You get USC, UCLA, Colorado, and the Arizonas every year. You also get one or more of Washington, Oregon and Stanford.

Now, on top of that, what's more important? Playing another P5 school or more likely Hood of more wins, higher ranking, higher recruiting, higher prestige, etc?

It's really a no brainer. For the level of program we are, scheduling up is just dumb.

There is nothing to be gained and everything to lose. It's on the same level of idea as playing BYU every year.

It makes no sense.

[Utah]

Also, where are you getting your SOS info from? Because of it is season ending, then the SOS is inflated due to a conference champ game and at least one playoff game.

Anyways, talk of playoffs is foolish at this point. You need top 10 recruiting classes for that. We aren't there yet.

Let's go win the south. Scheduling down helps us do that.

[SoCalPat]

I agree with everything you said except this. There is risk either way. Maybe we go 13-0 and grab a playoff spot because of a weaker non-conf. Maybe harder games cause us to miss a bowl game one year or cause us to miss a top 25 ranking. Maybe a tougher grind takes a brutal toll on performance or depth.

I'd be excited to see better teams on our schedule, but, man, let's not forget how amazing our schedules already are.

Those are largely inconsequential feats. So what if we miss a bowl game? We missed two earlier this decade and followed it up with a 28-11 run.

Once you get past the top 10, few fan bases beat their chests over a ranking 11-25.

You think those are significant accomplishments every year, and that's fine. For me, in some years (2014) they are significant. In some years, like last year, they do nothing for me.

If we go 13-0, we're in the playoff 99 seasons out of 100. Going 12-1 at least once in the next 10 years is much more likely than going 13-0. Again, we are not the kind of program that gets multiple bites at the playoff apple. So when those seasons come around, why not implement a scheduling strategy that's more likely to get you in the playoff rather than leaving you out?

[SoCalPat]

I love how the schedule up drum beaters are the first to call for coaches heads when the wins aren't there.

You get USC, UCLA, Colorado, and the Arizonas every year. You also get one or more of Washington, Oregon and Stanford.

Now, on top of that, what's more important? Playing another P5 school or more likely Hood of more wins, higher ranking, higher recruiting, higher prestige, etc?

It's really a no brainer. For the level of program we are, scheduling up is just dumb.

There is nothing to be gained and everything to lose. It's on the same level of idea as playing BYU every year.

It makes no sense.

Nobody's beaten up Kyle for losing to USC two years ago, or Washington last year. We beat him up for losing big games in November, or like Cal last year.

And as far as scheduling up goes, we're really talking about one game in our schedule. Which we can afford to do.

[SoCalPat]

Also, where are you getting your SOS info from? Because of it is season ending, then the SOS is inflated due to a conference champ game and at least one playoff game.

Anyways, talk of playoffs is foolish at this point. You need top 10 recruiting classes for that. We aren't there yet.

Let's go win the south. Scheduling down helps us do that.

Because scheduling down has worked so well for us in basketball, hasn't it?

[Utah]

Because scheduling down has worked so well for us in basketball, hasn't it?

Basketball and football are two different beasts and it isn't smart to compare them.

BTW, how has this scheduling strategy hurt us the last few years?

What teams have been ranked in every single college football poll?

Were we not top 10 and top 3 with our schedule?

We don't need to schedule up. We need to win games in Nov.

[Scorcho]

Basketball and football are two different beasts and it isn't smart to compare them.

BTW, how has this scheduling strategy hurt us the last few years?

What teams have been ranked in every single college football poll?

Were we not top 10 and top 3 with our schedule?

We don't need to schedule up. We need to win games in Nov.

completely agree!

and you can make a valid argument that a lighter OOC football schedule will leave the team more rested come November. I will give credence to Andy Phillips and Tom Hacket who both claimed the reason for Utah's late season swoons were due to mental and physical fatigue. They both believed that they were putting in more time that other PAC-12 schools.


OOC Schedules across the country:

Wisconsin - Utah State, FAU, BYU
Colorado - CSU, Texas State, Northern Colorado
Baylor - Duke, Liberty, Texas San Antonio
Penn St - Akron, Pitt, Georgia St
Oregon - Nebraska, SUU, Wyoming
Missouri - Missouri St, Purdue, Idaho

[DrumNFeather]

Chris Hill did mention yesterday on the Bill Reilly show that they need to reevaluate how they approach the football schedule moving forward. I feel like that alone allows SCP and I to sneak out of this discussion with the tag team titles on this issue...for now.

[SoCalPat]

completely agree!

and you can make a valid argument that a lighter OOC football schedule will leave the team more rested come November. I will give credence to Andy Phillips and Tom Hacket who both claimed the reason for Utah's late season swoons were due to mental and physical fatigue. They both believed that they were putting in more time that other PAC-12 schools.


OOC Schedules across the country:

Wisconsin - Utah State, FAU, BYU
Colorado - CSU, Texas State, Northern Colorado
Baylor - Duke, Liberty, Texas San Antonio
Penn St - Akron, Pitt, Georgia St
Oregon - Nebraska, SUU, Wyoming
Missouri - Missouri St, Purdue, Idaho

Baylor got left out of the playoff in 2014 precisely because of its weak non-con.

A lighter non-con? We played teams rated 36-127-131 in Sagarin and still faded in November. And we missed Stanford and Wazzu as well. Our SOS was 60th! Yet we still gagged in November. There's no valid argument that a lighter non-con would help.

[Scorcho]

Baylor got left out of the playoff in 2014 precisely because of its weak non-con.

2016 Washington Huskies non-conference schedule

Rutgers
Portland State
Idaho


2016 Alabama's non-conference schedule

USC
Western Kentucky
Kent State
Chattanooga


2016 Clemson

Auburn
South Carolina
Troy
South Carolina St


Ohio St
Bowling Green
Tulsa
Oklahoma

If you're in a P5, OOC doesn't seem to matter

[Utah]

Baylor got left out of the playoff in 2014 precisely because of its weak non-con.

A lighter non-con? We played teams rated 36-127-131 in Sagarin and still faded in November. And we missed Stanford and Wazzu as well. Our SOS was 60th! Yet we still gagged in November. There's no valid argument that a lighter non-con would help.

Baylor was left out because of no conference championship game, a shared title with another team and Ohio St beating the living snot out of someone.

Had Baylor and TCU played each other, the winner would have gotten in over Ohio State.

Baylor is not a good example.

Oh, and if I remember correctly, TCU's non-conference was garbage as well that year.

You never address this (because it doesn't fit your narrative) but what about Oklahoma and USC last year? Both scheduled up, both lost, and both were kept out of the playoffs because of it.

What happens is Oklahoma doesn't play Houston or Ohio State and goes undefeated? They are in.

What about USC? If they don't have that murder's row to start the season, play SJSU instead if Alabama, are they more rested and hold us off, and then you have two, one loss teams in the PAC-12 title game.

There is no argument for scheduling up.

What about Stanford a few years ago when they started the year vs Northwestern? If they beat up on Fresno St instead, they are in the playoffs.

I could go on and on.

[SoCalPat]

Baylor was left out because of no conference championship game, a shared title with another team and Ohio St beating the living snot out of someone.

Had Baylor and TCU played each other, the winner would have gotten in over Ohio State.

Baylor is not a good example.

http://www.espn.com/college-football...meId=400547868

[Utah]

http://www.espn.com/college-football...meId=400547868

Lol. Try again. When did they play in the conference title game?

Way to try to mislead though.

[SoCalPat]

Baylor was left out because of no conference championship game, a shared title with another team and Ohio St beating the living snot out of someone.

Had Baylor and TCU played each other, the winner would have gotten in over Ohio State.

Baylor is not a good example.

Oh, and if I remember correctly, TCU's non-conference was garbage as well that year.

You never address this (because it doesn't fit your narrative) but what about Oklahoma and USC last year? Both scheduled up, both lost, and both were kept out of the playoffs because of it.

What happens is Oklahoma doesn't play Houston or Ohio State and goes undefeated? They are in.

What about USC? If they don't have that murder's row to start the season, play SJSU instead if Alabama, are they more rested and hold us off, and then you have two, one loss teams in the PAC-12 title game.

There is no argument for scheduling up.

What about Stanford a few years ago when they started the year vs Northwestern? If they beat up on Fresno St instead, they are in the playoffs.

I could go on and on.

And Washington, with it's 58th SOS at 12-1, is out.

[SoCalPat]

Lol. Try again. When did they play in the conference title game?

Way to try to mislead though.

It's not my fault you don't clarify your points. The point is, Baylor did beat TCU. Having to beat them a second time doesn't apply, nor has that ever been a standard for getting into the playoff.

[NorthwestUteFan]

By the time Baylor rolls around Whittingham will most likely be retired. In the meantime our OOC is unbearable.

I wish the program would just buy out all of the FCS games (starting with 2018) and be done with those garbage games.

[Utah]

It's not my fault you don't clarify your points. The point is, Baylor did beat TCU. Having to beat them a second time doesn't apply, nor has that ever been a standard for getting into the playoff.

I didn't clarify my point? Lol. The whole two paragraphs were about conference championship games. You completely took my sentence out of context.

Even what you quoted shows that.

[Utah]

And Washington, with it's 58th SOS at 12-1, is out.

Probably. Good thing other teams were dumb enough to schedule up OOC, right? Lol.

[DrumNFeather]

I love how the schedule up drum beaters are the first to call for coaches heads when the wins aren't there.

You get USC, UCLA, Colorado, and the Arizonas every year. You also get one or more of Washington, Oregon and Stanford.

Now, on top of that, what's more important? Playing another P5 school or more likely Hood of more wins, higher ranking, higher recruiting, higher prestige, etc?

It's really a no brainer. For the level of program we are, scheduling up is just dumb.

There is nothing to be gained and everything to lose. It's on the same level of idea as playing BYU every year.

It makes no sense.

I meant to respond to this point and never did. You won't ever see me calling for the Coach Whit's head. Ever. He's teflon as far as I'm concerned.

My whole point with scheduling is that I don't think you have to travel that far towards a respectable non-league schedule by just making a few small adjustments that would also help in recruiting as well. For example, instead of scheduling a team like SUU or Weber, you could schedule G5 teams from Texas, which would put players in front of their families on the road at least once during their time at Utah...so a Rice, a UTEP, a SMU. Teams that are all 95% win probability, that also help you put your team in a critical recruiting footprint. I of course understand we're doing this currently with SJSU and SDSU on the schedule, but we will typically make 1-2 trips to CA in league play anyway.

Same thing with mid-low tier P5 schools. If you really truly consider BYU to be your "A" game most of the time (which is flawed thinking, IMO) then why not search for your "B" game among the power 5.

[Utah]

I agree about your G5 scheduling...but it will never happen with Whitt as coach. Ok, maybe it happens once but don't count on it.

He likes that tune up game too much.

The only way to change that would be the NCAA or PAC-12 to make that change and the PAC-12 would be dumb to do that.

The only problem with our schedule is BYU. That's it. Get them off and all complaints go away.

I'd do this:

FCS
G5

Then every 5 years, schedule BYU twice, H/H. that gives you 3 P5 games every 5 years. Maybe a H/H and a big time neutral game. Or, 3 H/H's every ten years with P5.

I'd also try to cut a deal with the Vegas Bowl that we play BYU once every 5 years in our bowl game, as long as we don't make the playoffs, Rose Bowl, Holiday or Alamo Bowl.

We'd play them 6/10 years, we fix our OOC problem, everyone wins.

Until they become a P5 team, we shouldn't play them every year.

[UtahsMrSports]

I meant to respond to this point and never did. You won't ever see me calling for the Coach Whit's head. Ever. He's teflon as far as I'm concerned.

My whole point with scheduling is that I don't think you have to travel that far towards a respectable non-league schedule by just making a few small adjustments that would also help in recruiting as well. For example, instead of scheduling a team like SUU or Weber, you could schedule G5 teams from Texas, which would put players in front of their families on the road at least once during their time at Utah...so a Rice, a UTEP, a SMU. Teams that are all 95% win probability, that also help you put your team in a critical recruiting footprint. I of course understand we're doing this currently with SJSU and SDSU on the schedule, but we will typically make 1-2 trips to CA in league play anyway.

Same thing with mid-low tier P5 schools. If you really truly consider BYU to be your "A" game most of the time (which is flawed thinking, IMO) then why not search for your "B" game among the power 5.

Agreed on all but UTEP. In El Paso, you are nearly as close (or further) to the recruiting hot beds of texas as you are to Denver. Sticking to the East and Central texas schools and I agree completely.

[DrumNFeather]

Agreed on all but UTEP. In El Paso, you are nearly as close (or further) to the recruiting hot beds of texas as you are to Denver. Sticking to the East and Central texas schools and I agree completely.

I was going with a Texas theme man...

[UtahsMrSports]

I was going with a Texas theme man...

I know. Ha! Growing up in East Texas and making the drive across the state every year to visit family in Utah drilled it into my head how ridiculously long it takes to drive across the state.

[SoCalPat]

I agree about your G5 scheduling...but it will never happen with Whitt as coach. Ok, maybe it happens once but don't count on it.

He likes that tune up game too much.

The only way to change that would be the NCAA or PAC-12 to make that change and the PAC-12 would be dumb to do that.

The only problem with our schedule is BYU. That's it. Get them off and all complaints go away.

I'd do this:

FCS
G5

Then every 5 years, schedule BYU twice, H/H. that gives you 3 P5 games every 5 years. Maybe a H/H and a big time neutral game. Or, 3 H/H's every ten years with P5.

I'd also try to cut a deal with the Vegas Bowl that we play BYU once every 5 years in our bowl game, as long as we don't make the playoffs, Rose Bowl, Holiday or Alamo Bowl.

We'd play them 6/10 years, we fix our OOC problem, everyone wins.

Until they become a P5 team, we shouldn't play them every year.

The problem with this, as it pertains to the powers that make up the schedule, is that BYU is viewed as an 'A' game, which also means it's viewed the same as just about every P5 team out there. I'm also guessing playing BYU H-H is far more profitable than playing virtually any other P5.

I am perfectly OK with playing BYU 6/10 years. I'm not sure there are many P5s willing to fill the void in 4/10 years. So BYU stays on the schedule until something changes that simply hasn't shown itself since we got into the Pac-12.

[Utah]

The problem with this, as it pertains to the powers that make up the schedule, is that BYU is viewed as an 'A' game, which also means it's viewed the same as just about every P5 team out there. I'm also guessing playing BYU H-H is far more profitable than playing virtually any other P5.

I am perfectly OK with playing BYU 6/10 years. I'm not sure there are many P5s willing to fill the void in 4/10 years. So BYU stays on the schedule until something changes that simply hasn't shown itself since we got into the Pac-12.

Your first paragraph is why all this talk is just passing the dog days of summer.

As long as Whitt views BYU as an "A" game, we will schedule like this.

As long as this state blindly votes LDS-R, we will play BYU.

I disagree with your last paragraph. You contradict yourself. You say we should schedule up, then you say no one is willing to play us.

I don't think Utah has tried very hard to find another P5 school to play. I think the fans' reaction to the 5-7 seasons has pissed everyone off and they will make sure Utah doesn't miss another bowl game.

In a lot of ways, this is our mess and it's very ironic to sit and listen to all the complaints about scheduling, just a few years off fans wanting to run Whitt out of town.

Whitt is one of the smartest people out there and was doing all the analytics when most NBA GM's were in diapers.

He knows what market he is in and how ridiculous the fans are here. He won't put himself in the same position he was in after his 5-7 seasons again. Especially not with his new contract. He will be here for life and he will make sure he never misses a bowl again.

OOC is key to all of that. Entering the season halfway to a bowl game is the key to longevity. Just ask the SEC.

[noneyadb]

As long as the Pac12 schedule consists of 9 games scheduling to add more p5 teams is not in Utah's best interest. I like Utah playing Weber and SUU as the money stays instate and helps those schools. The other two games need to be vs G5 schools with a P5 every other year until Utah can become a playoff contender.

As far as BYU, I would rather they left the game to chance, and only played at the Vegas bowl. With the new stadium, and added appeal of a bowl game, I think that would refuel a dying rivalry.

[UTEopia]

I agree that unless the NCAA/PAC 12 prohibits games against FCS schools, those games will continue.

I would prefer playing SMU, Rice, FAU, UCF as opposed to SJSU, No. Ill or Wyoming. There is no reason to play No. Ill or Wyo and if we are going to play someone of that caliber, I would rather play USU.

Are people really interested in watching games against Texas Tech, Kansas, Indiana, Kentucky and would such games really help significantly more than BYU. I am all for playing teams like Michigan, Ohio State, Texas etc., but adding just any P5 isn't that interesting to me.

[Utah]

I'd rather beat BYU than some bottom tier P5 school.

I'd rather drop BYU for a top tier P5 school.

[LuckyUte]

I'd rather beat BYU than some bottom tier P5 school...

Wait, isn't BYU essentially a bottom tier P5?

[Utah]

Wait, isn't BYU essentially a bottom tier P5?

Sure. Beating BYU is more fun than beating Indiana or Northwestern or Vanderbilt or Kansas or Purdue or Texas Tech or Kentucky, etc.