A change in scheduling philosophy

[shizzle787]

With COVID and a budget shortfall being omnipresent, why don't we schedule more body bag games?

Due to lack of fans for the forseeable future, we really only need the minimum 5 home games a year. This gives us the flexibility to schedule more big boys, get on national TV more, and give kids who don't want to be back-ups at big-time P5 schools the chance to play 5-7 P5 schools a year including 3 big boys.

Example schedule

1. Purdue (H)
2. Duke (A)
3. Oklahoma (A)- pay day game
4. Clemson (A)- pay day game
5. Maryland (H)
6. Army (A)
7. Liberty (H)
8. FIU (A)
9. BYU (H)
10. Holy Cross (H)
11. LSU (A)- pay day game
12. UMass (A)

6 P5 games (3 against big boys), 4 games against independents, 1 G5, and 1 FCS games. There is no reason why we can't do this starting in about 4-5 season.

 

[uconntailgater]

I can understand two Pay day games. Three may be a bit much.

 

[Adios]

I'll have to trust school administrators over message board posters.

 

[Blades]

I'd just like to see Uconn get to 12 games for 2021 (UConn Schedule)....Signs could point to a home game with Houston since they seem to be the only team ( according to FBS Schedules-Houston) besides Maryland, whose open date doesn't work, that's short a game for 2021 since they announced their game with

Grambling St vs Houston, back in NOV.​

Also since Uconn took Houston's 2021 away game @ Vandy ( announced last July , Vanderbilt adds UConn to 2021 football slate, replacing Houston).... it may have been an unannounced swap deal until the AAC releases their schedule dates for 2021.... With the full 2021 SEC and 2021 ACC schedules coming out this week, it doesn't seem like there will be many dance partners left to get Uconn to 12/ 6 home games in 2021.

 

[coachcap]

A problem with the OP's premise is that in the COVID-19 era, the P-5 conferences are only scheduling in conference games. Exceptions may be made for traditional rivalries (UGA-GTech, Clemson-USCe) but otherwise it's a closed door.

 

[Chin Diesel]

A problem with the OP's premise is that in the COVID-19 era, the P-5 conferences are only scheduling in conference games. Exceptions may be made for traditional rivalries (UGA-GTech, Clemson-USCe) but otherwise it's a closed door.

Considering the 'rona era will be gone by Aug, scheduling around it is a moot point.

Yes, there will still be some cases but everything needed for collegiate sports to function normal will be on track.

Now, if you are suggesting some conferences may be using the threat as a way to make things more advantageous for them, I agree.

 

[ShakyTheMohel]

Without a league...and with that schedule...UConn would never play in a bowl game. Players and fans like bowl games. Seems like a bad idea.

 

[Palatine]

Without a league...and with that schedule...UConn would never play in a bowl game. Players and fans like bowl games. Seems like a bad idea.

If they go undefeated with that schedule they will be in playoff.

 

[Chief00]

Games against LSU, OK and Clemson are going to take their injury toll.

If Randy pulls the DNP again next season whike collecting his $1 million- it will be difficult to recover.

 

[Slick]

I can understand two Pay day games. Three may be a bit much.

One of the problems with the body bag games is the injuries that we will incur will kill us against the teams that we have a chance to beat.

 

[Slick]

Games against LSU, OK and Clemson are going to take their injury toll.

If Randy pulls the DNP again next season whike collecting his $1 million- it will be difficult to recover.

Chief all the players and coaches will be vaccinated (including you) .why would you think we wouldn’t play next season?

 

[DoctorWho85]

If they go undefeated with that schedule they will be in playoff.

When not if.

 

[businesslawyer]

With COVID and a budget shortfall being omnipresent, why don't we schedule more body bag games?

Due to lack of fans for the forseeable future, we really only need the minimum 5 home games a year. This gives us the flexibility to schedule more big boys, get on national TV more, and give kids who don't want to be back-ups at big-time P5 schools the chance to play 5-7 P5 schools a year including 3 big boys.

Example schedule

1. Purdue (H)
2. Duke (A)
3. Oklahoma (A)- pay day game
4. Clemson (A)- pay day game
5. Maryland (H)
6. Army (A)
7. Liberty (H)
8. FIU (A)
9. BYU (H)
10. Holy Cross (H)
11. LSU (A)- pay day game
12. UMass (A)

6 P5 games (3 against big boys), 4 games against independents, 1 G5, and 1 FCS games. There is no reason why we can't do this starting in about 4-5 season.

Because it's a recipe to be UMass forever. Winning fans back requires winning, even if it means dumbing down the competition. Once you win there are more fans, more players have interest, you get better players and you win even more games, get more fans, and increase your level of competition.

We did this once folks. It shouldn't be a mystery. Step #1 is winning, and the schedule has to allow that. When you can win with a tougher schedule, you toughen it.

 

[freescooter]

Because it's a recipe to be UMass forever. Winning fans back requires winning, even if it means dumbing down the competition. Once you win there are more fans, more players have interest, you get better players and you win even more games, get more fans, and increase your level of competition.

We did this once folks. It shouldn't be a mystery. Step #1 is winning, and the schedule has to allow that. When you can win with a tougher schedule, you toughen it.

Exactly this. It’s called schedule for success. As you start winning you can start upgrading. But we should never go into a season without 3-5 “sure” wins on the schedule. I use the term advisedly since stuff happens, but that should be the goal.

 

[Drew]

I continue to be amazed that we aren’t scheduling games vs New Mexico State. We should seriously ink a 25 year series with them.

 

[freescooter]

I continue to be amazed that we aren’t scheduling games vs New Mexico State. We should seriously ink a 25 year series with them.

Just guessing but since we already have trips to California Utah and Wyoming over the next few years, and I keep hearing they are trying to work something with BYU and a Texas school, there isn’t great interest in traveling west more than once a year. Maybe for USC or Washington, but not for New Mexico State.

 

[Blades]

I keep hearing they are trying to work something with BYU and a Texas school.....

True...As I mentioned above, it could be the Houston Cougars this year as #12 (maybe a home and home ) along with....

 

[Drew]

Just guessing but since we already have trips to California Utah and Wyoming over the next few years, and I keep hearing they are trying to work something with BYU and a Texas school, there isn’t great interest in traveling west more than once a year. Maybe for USC or Washington, but not for New Mexico State.

Yeah I get it from an attractive game standpoint. And I know the travel is far. But at some point we actually have to, you know, beat someone. Home and home with Utah State is better than NMSU for us how? NMSU perpetually sucks and counts as a FBS win towards bowl eligibility and we can play them in Nov/Dec when teams are playing conference games. Just seems to make too much sense not to play them.

 

[freescooter]

Yeah I get it from an attractive game standpoint. And I know the travel is far. But at some point we actually have to, you know, beat someone. Home and home with Utah State is better than NMSU for us how? NMSU perpetually sucks and counts as a FBS win towards bowl eligibility and we can play them in Nov/Dec when teams are playing conference games. Just seems to make too much sense not to play them.

Yeah I get that. But still, if we are going to travel across the country 3 times a year why did we leave AAC? It is a balancing act to some extent.

 

[Drew]

Yeah I get that. But still, if we are going to travel across the country 3 times a year why did we leave AAC? It is a balancing act to some extent.

It's just the opinion of what our philosophy for scheduling games moving forward should be. If UConn wants to maximize their chances at being bowl eligible (and thus drumming up more interest in the program) they should have UMass and NMSU on the schedule every single year IMO. Pair that with a crappy New England or HBCU FCS team and that gets you 3 basically "automatic" wins. That means you need to go 3-6 against the remainder of the schedule which likely features 1-2 "buy" games that are automatic losses and 1-2 "additional" P5 games that are part of H/H series that you theoretically "could" win but will be underdogs in like Purdue, Illinois, Cuse, etc. I'd love to see the below as a sample version of future schedules (note this is not reflective of active contracts, just what I'd like to see from a "difficulty" standpoint:

1. @ P5 buy game
2. P5 H/H
3. @ P5 H/H
4. G5 H/H
5. @ G5 H/H
6. G5 H/H
7. @ G5 H/H
8. G5 H/H
9. FCS buy game
10. @ P5 buy game
11. NMSU H/H
12. UMass H/H

So as an example it would be something like

1. @ Auburn
2. Purdue
3. @ Syracuse
4. Temple
5. @ FIU
6. Georgia Southern
7. @ UTSA
8. Marshall
9. Delaware State
10. @ Georgia
11. NMSU
12. @ UMass

Assuming wins v UMass, NMSU, and DSU, you'd need to go 3-6 against Auburn, Purdue, Syracuse, Temple, FIU, GASO, UTSA, Marshall, UGA to make a bowl game. So realistically 3-4 against Purdue, Syracuse, Temple, FIU, GASO, UTSA, Marshall. I don't think its asking too much of the program to get to that level of respectability/mediocrity.

 

[freescooter]

It's just the opinion of what our philosophy for scheduling games moving forward should be. If UConn wants to maximize their chances at being bowl eligible (and thus drumming up more interest in the program) they should have UMass and NMSU on the schedule every single year IMO. Pair that with a crappy New England or HBCU FCS team and that gets you 3 basically "automatic" wins. That means you need to go 3-6 against the remainder of the schedule which likely features 1-2 "buy" games that are automatic losses and 1-2 "additional" P5 games that are part of H/H series that you theoretically "could" win but will be underdogs in like Purdue, Illinois, Cuse, etc. I'd love to see the below as a sample version of future schedules (note this is not reflective of active contracts, just what I'd like to see from a "difficulty" standpoint:

1. @ P5 buy game
2. P5 H/H
3. @ P5 H/H
4. G5 H/H
5. @ G5 H/H
6. G5 H/H
7. @ G5 H/H
8. G5 H/H
9. FCS buy game
10. @ P5 buy game
11. NMSU H/H
12. UMass H/H

So as an example it would be something like

1. @ Auburn
2. Purdue
3. @ Syracuse
4. Temple
5. @ FIU
6. Georgia Southern
7. @ UTSA
8. Marshall
9. Delaware State
10. @ Georgia
11. NMSU
12. @ UMass

Assuming wins v UMass, NMSU, and DSU, you'd need to go 3-6 against Auburn, Purdue, Syracuse, Temple, FIU, GASO, UTSA, Marshall, UGA to make a bowl game. So realistically 3-4 against Purdue, Syracuse, Temple, FIU, GASO, UTSA, Marshall. I don't think its asking too much of the program to get to that level of respectability/mediocrity.

I agree with that approach. In fact I would love to make UMass our final every year. As I said, balancing act. And your schedule doesn’t have us going to San Diego or Utah St Or BYU. I would be looking for maybe Army rather than New Mexico State and maybe swap out a MAC for one of the CUSA teams but those will vary year to year. I agree with the basic approach though. Set up a schedule where winning is not impossible. And if you have a really good team some year maybe you go 9-3 or even 10-2. I know it was a tough year to put together a schedule but last year had disaster written all over it. Even if we made good progress, there werent many wins there. This season is much more manageable. One final note. I would love to get BYU on the schedule on a regular basis. That should be what we aspire to long term

 

[Exit 4]

So the formula something like below with some variations from year to year:

3 road P5
1 home P5
1 FCS
1 Army
1 UMass
1 Liberty or BYU or gulp NM State (surely we will avoid at all costs)
8 = subtotal

1 AAC or MWC
1 MAC
1 CUSA
1 SunBelt
4 = subtotal

 

[Exit 4]

Wondering if the possible slide of Boise State as the UConn replacement for AAC football has somehow gummed up the Houston game as well as other possible UConn-AAC scheduling.

Quite a decision for Boise State. I dont think moving to the AAC raises their ceiling. Dropping regular games with Fresno, SD State, Colorado St, etc will hurt their big CA pipeline and w/o recruits what are you? Their fans will also lose their west coast relevance. ESPN will be influential as always given its their control of the AAC contract.

 

[ktuck911]

With recruits coming from Texas at a steady rate we might want to work on getting a steady diet of scheduling schools from that state on a regular basis. (Texas State, N Texas, UTSA, mixed in with a P5 level school from time to time - Baylor, Texas, TX A&M, Texas Tech... along with some G5 reunions in Houston and SMU...) And maybe we can make it to Alabama while we're down there from time to time (UAB, S. Alabama, Troy.. with a longshot game against 'Bama.. which would definitely be probably the worst experience ever... They have actual grown men 4 deep across their depth chart)...

 

[Exit 4]

With recruits coming from Texas at a steady rate we might want to work on getting a steady diet of scheduling schools from that state on a regular basis. (Texas State, N Texas, UTSA, mixed in with a P5 level school from time to time - Baylor, Texas, TX A&M, Texas Tech... along with some G5 reunions in Houston and SMU...) And maybe we can make it to Alabama while we're down there from time to time (UAB, S. Alabama, Troy.. with a longshot game against 'Bama.. which would definitely be probably the worst experience ever... They have actual grown men 4 deep across their depth chart)...

I think that was completely the plan 12 months ago and it still maybe the plan going forward. My guess is that the TX schools aren't seeing the value in a H & H coming to the northeast and so we dont really have any games just yet. I'm sure we are trying to get multiple games in TX.