Reply to thread

Message: [QUOTE="diggerfoot, post: 3415056, member: 1673"] None of the choices apply to how I feel. I believe there should be, and to an extent there is, a prioritization that goes something as follows: 1. Games for our recruits (like Vanderbilt and Dangerfield) 2. Projected top 5 teams. 3. Projected top 10 teams. 4. Projected top two teams for each P5 conference. 5. Promising mid-majors. 6. Projected top 25 teams. Because of past history I would give the nod to Tennessee over another team in the same category, but not to one above it. Thus if they are not top 25, I would not schedule them. If they are top 25 but not top ten, and we can fill our scheduling slots with higher priorities, I would not schedule them. If they are a top ten team I would schedule them. In other words, I am neither for nor against scheduling them outside of what is practical. [/QUOTE]