Scheduling philosophy going forward

[shizzle787]

For a long time, I have wanted us to play 6 P4 teams every year as an independent, but with the ACC going to 9 conference games, I am going to have to scale that back slightly.

Here is what I would like to see from our schedule post-2027 if we stay independent in the near future:

5 P4 home and home games a year (no body bag games) alternating with two home games one year and three the next

Yearly: Syracuse, BC, Duke

Rotation for the other two spots: Pitt, Rutgers, WVU, Maryland, Northwestern, Vanderbilt, UNC, NC State, Virginia, Wake Forest, Louisville

One FCS per year at home- this guarantees us seven home games every other year

UMass, Buffalo and Temple every year

I don't see any as rivals but they are local schools we have history with that are very winnable games

2 American teams per year (in addition to Temple)

Yearly: USF

Rotation: ECU, Memphis, Tulane, Rice

1 west coast team per year

Rotation: Wyoming, Air Force, UNLV, Colorado State, Utah State, New Mexico, Nevada



Prospective schedule:

1. CCSU (H)
2. Syracuse (H)
3. @ UNC (A)
4. Northwestern (A)
5. Temple (A)
6. Duke (H)
7. USF (A)
8. Buffalo (H)
9. Rice (A)
10. UMass (H)
11. BC (A)
12. New Mexico (H)

Home slate- CCSU, Syracuse, Duke, Buffalo, UMass, New Mexico

 

[CTFAN4LIFE]

For a long time, I have wanted us to play 6 P4 teams every year as an independent, but with the ACC going to 9 conference games, I am going to have to scale that back slightly.

Here is what I would like to see from our schedule post-2027 if we stay independent in the near future:

5 P4 home and home games a year (no body bag games) alternating with two home games one year and three the next

Yearly: Syracuse, BC, Duke

Rotation for the other two spots: Pitt, Rutgers, WVU, Maryland, Northwestern, Vanderbilt, UNC, NC State, Virginia, Wake Forest, Louisville

One FCS per year at home- this guarantees us seven home games every other year

UMass, Buffalo and Temple every year

I don't see any as rivals but they are local schools we have history with that are very winnable games

2 American teams per year (in addition to Temple)

Yearly: USF

Rotation: ECU, Memphis, Tulane, Rice

1 west coast team per year

Rotation: Wyoming, Air Force, UNLV, Colorado State, Utah State, New Mexico, Nevada



Prospective schedule:

1. CCSU (H)
2. Syracuse (H)
3. @ UNC (A)
4. Northwestern (A)
5. Temple (A)
6. Duke (H)
7. USF (A)
8. Buffalo (H)
9. Rice (A)
10. UMass (H)
11. BC (A)
12. New Mexico (H)

Home slate- CCSU, Syracuse, Duke, Buffalo, UMass, New Mexico

Generally agree - just want FIU, FAU, and other east coast and midwest recruiting grounds as opposed to the west coast. East/Southeast/Mid-Atlantic and Midwest are much better for high school and portal recruiting, our alumni, fans, etc.

 

[JwittersPAC]

For a long time, I have wanted us to play 6 P4 teams every year as an independent, but with the ACC going to 9 conference games, I am going to have to scale that back slightly.

Here is what I would like to see from our schedule post-2027 if we stay independent in the near future:

5 P4 home and home games a year (no body bag games) alternating with two home games one year and three the next

Yearly: Syracuse, BC, Duke

Rotation for the other two spots: Pitt, Rutgers, WVU, Maryland, Northwestern, Vanderbilt, UNC, NC State, Virginia, Wake Forest, Louisville

One FCS per year at home- this guarantees us seven home games every other year

UMass, Buffalo and Temple every year

I don't see any as rivals but they are local schools we have history with that are very winnable games

2 American teams per year (in addition to Temple)

Yearly: USF

Rotation: ECU, Memphis, Tulane, Rice

1 west coast team per year

Rotation: Wyoming, Air Force, UNLV, Colorado State, Utah State, New Mexico, Nevada



Prospective schedule:

1. CCSU (H)
2. Syracuse (H)
3. @ UNC (A)
4. Northwestern (A)
5. Temple (A)
6. Duke (H)
7. USF (A)
8. Buffalo (H)
9. Rice (A)
10. UMass (H)
11. BC (A)
12. New Mexico (H)

Home slate- CCSU, Syracuse, Duke, Buffalo, UMass, New Mexico

Are not the P4 conferences going to 10 P4 games a year? I think for UConn similar to other G5 schools you will be seeing less games than more against P4. I think UConn should shoot for 2 to 3 P4 games per year but play higher quality G5 schools like USF, Boise State, Memphis State, Tulane, and JMU. On the P4 front I would stick with teams from ACC - BC, Syracuse, Pitt, Duke, and UNC. I think it is highly unlikely to get a SEC team to East Hartford.

 

[noeynox]

5 P4 games is a lot and seems highly ambitious. If you want no body bag games i assume you want teams you can beat Duke, BC, Syracuse, Wake Forest. Problem is when you start winning those, they're not going to want to play you.

 

[shizzle787]

Are not the P4 conferences going to 10 P4 games a year? I think for UConn similar to other G5 schools you will be seeing less games than more against P4. I think UConn should shoot for 2 to 3 P4 games per year but play higher quality G5 schools like USF, Boise State, Memphis State, Tulane, and JMU. On the P4 front I would stick with teams from ACC - BC, Syracuse, Pitt, Duke, and UNC. I think it is highly unlikely to get a SEC team to East Hartford.

No. UConn will continue to be able to schedule at least 4 P4 games a year on average. Some of the P4 are going to 10 P4 games, but that will change in a year or two when seven Big Ten teams go 5-7 or worse.

 

[JwittersPAC]

No. UConn will continue to be able to schedule at least 4 P4 games a year on average. Some of the P4 are going to 10 P4 games, but that will change in a year or two when seven Big Ten teams go 5-7 or worse.

Doing a quick internet search the SEC, ACC, and BIG12 are going to 10 P4 games. Why are you so confident of UConn being able to schedule 4 games per year when it is widely believed that all G5 schools will be getting less games against P4 teams from 2026 and subsequent.

 

[Platt81]

Doing a quick internet search the SEC, ACC, and BIG12 are going to 10 P4 games. Why are you so confident of UConn being able to schedule 4 games per year when it is widely believed that all G5 schools will be getting less games against P4 teams from 2026 and subsequent.

I don’t know if this rule still applies, but multiple conferences qualified UConn as a P4 opponent for scheduling reasons. If this is still the case it actually should give them an advantage as teams will want to schedule us as one of their “P4” OOC games.

 

[shizzle787]

Doing a quick internet search the SEC, ACC, and BIG12 are going to 10 P4 games. Why are you so confident of UConn being able to schedule 4 games per year when it is widely believed that all G5 schools will be getting less games against P4 teams from 2026 and subsequent.

Because we are UConn. Everyone said we would struggle to schedule P4 home games six years ago when we went independent. That was a lie. Though we are G6, our overall athletic brand is much closer to that of a mid-level P4. Schools want to play us (see Maryland, Pitt, UNC). The only school that cancelled a home and home with us was Ole Miss, and I wasn't very confident that was going to get played anyway. We don't play Big 12 or SEC teams regularly so I am not worried about them. As far as the Big Ten and ACC, neither will keep the 10 game requirement for more than two or three years. How do I know this? About a decade ago the Big Ten created guidelines that banned playing FCS teams. That was squashed soon thereafter by the bottom half of the league who were struggling to make bowl games.

Going to 9 conferences games is one thing; forcing schools to play an additional P4 game will not last long-term (especially in the Big Ten and ACC- the two conferences whose teams we play regularly).

Finally, don't be surprised if the Big Ten and ACC consider us (and a select few others like Army, Navy, USF, Tulane, Memphis, BSU, UNLV) as P4 for scheduling purposes. The Big Ten did this about a decade ago (and we were included).

 

[ZooCougar]

5 P4 games is unnecessary and also improbable going forward.

This fake it till you make it mentality will only result in more losses.

3 is probably the max we can get and the max that we actually want.

 

[ZooCougar]

Because we are UConn. Everyone said we would struggle to schedule P4 home games six years ago when we went independent. That was a lie. Though we are G6, our overall athletic brand is much closer to that of a mid-level P4. Schools want to play us (see Maryland, Pitt, UNC). The only school that cancelled a home and home with us was Ole Miss, and I wasn't very confident that was going to get played anyway. We don't play Big 12 or SEC teams regularly so I am not worried about them. As far as the Big Ten and ACC, neither will keep the 10 game requirement for more than two or three years. How do I know this? About a decade ago the Big Ten created guidelines that banned playing FCS teams. That was squashed soon thereafter by the bottom half of the league who were struggling to make bowl games.

Going to 9 conferences games is one thing; forcing schools to play an additional P4 game will not last long-term (especially in the Big Ten and ACC- the two conferences whose teams we play regularly).

Finally, don't be surprised if the Big Ten and ACC consider us (and a select few others like Army, Navy, USF, Tulane, Memphis, BSU, UNLV) as P4 for scheduling purposes. The Big Ten did this about a decade ago (and we were included).

Six years ago they weren’t increasing the number of conference games and possibly capping or eliminating G6 games.

 

[BlueandOG]

5 P4 games is unnecessary and also improbable going forward.

This fake it till you make it mentality will only result in more losses.

3 is probably the max we can get and the max that we actually want.

Wake up! We are making it. Look at last season and this season. All of the important metrics are trending in the right direction: wins, bowl appearances, fan attendance, national media attention, etc. We are playing at a P4 level now, and should schedule just like shizzle787 described.

 

[freescooter]

5 P4 games is unnecessary and also improbable going forward.

This fake it till you make it mentality will only result in more losses.

3 is probably the max we can get and the max that we actually want.

I agree. I’ve said before virtually all the teams that are considered “power G6” Tulane, Boise, USF, Memphis, JMU, rarely play more than 1and at most 2 P4 games. Tulane played 3 this year but that is a rarity. Nobody plays 4. You don’t develop a reputation by going 7-5. You don’t get ranked by going 8-4. We are a G6 program. Which means we are going to be at a disadvantage to P4 teams most of the time. We want to be viewed as a very good G6. We do that by beating other G6 teams and going maybe 1-2 against P4s. This year was a bit of an exception. We beat a good, not great, Duke team and a really awful BC. I’d sign on for that every year.

Beamer, when he coached VaTech, was criticized for scheduling “easy” non-conference games. He responded that he scheduled for success. Once he had a nationally ranked team consistently, he added 1 tougher non-conference game. Our scheduling philosophy should be similar.

 

[ConnHuskBask]

Used to agree with this approach but zoo converted me.

You don't get noticed going 7-5 with more difficult schedule.. you get noticed going 9-3 (or better) and covering on the couple P4 shots you get a year.

Go look at the old Boise St schedules when they were becoming the name brand they are today.. they weren't playing Oregon Washington Oregon State Cal and Arizona every year....

 

[Eastwood]

Used to agree with this approach but zoo converted me.

You don't get noticed going 7-5 with more difficult schedule.. you get noticed going 9-3 (or better) and covering on the couple P4 shots you get a year.

Go look at the old Boise St schedules when they were becoming the name brand they are today.. they weren't playing Oregon Washington Oregon State Cal and Arizona every year....

Agreed. No substitute for winning. Just look at Notre Dame.

 

[Chin Diesel]

Develop a preferred schedule. We'll call it Plan A.
Have a back up for Plan A. We'll call it Plan B.
Have a back up to the back up. Plan C.
Have a workst case scenario. Plan D.

Then toss them all away and do the best you can. There isn't any P4 team, and about 8-10 G5 teams, against which UConn has any negotiating advantage.

 

[KryHavok]

Develop a preferred schedule. We'll call it Plan A.
Have a back up for Plan A. We'll call it Plan B.
Have a back up to the back up. Plan C.
Have a workst case scenario. Plan D.

Then toss them all away and do the best you can. There isn't any P4 team, and about 8-10 G5 teams, against which UConn has any negotiating advantage.

^^^THIS!

I can see the merit in the posts by @shizzle787 and @ZooCougar. We're in an odd spot if we're considered G5/6 but yet conveniently be thought of as a temp-P4 when it allows an existing P4 team to meet their P4 OOC as @Platt81 posted above. I would love to have wins over P4 teams, and this year we're 2-1 while last year we were 1-3 (albeit close losses in all those games). But as much as I want P4 wins, I want a winning record that says we really are one of the best G5/6, and that can't happen if we're playing 4-5 P4s a year. I think we're on borrowed time with Mora and Sammis, what happens when they leave and now we have a harder schedule with coaching staff (and talent pool on offense, defense, and ST) that isn't on par with what we have/had the past few seasons? If by some miracle we get a P4 invite, then by all means we have a stacked P4 schedule, but to get that invite we have to show that we can CONSISTENTLY be a really good football team.

I remember in the late 80's Wyoming had a great year and finished 11-2 (ranked as high as AP #10 in 1988, beat BYU, Loserville, and Utah, and finished 10-3 the previous year). Would anyone consider Wyoming a solid football team worthy of a P4 slot? I'll admit I have a weakish argument here, but the perception should be that we are not like Wyoming that can have back-to-back good seasons but that we can have sustained success across all opponents. Having a G5/6 loaded schedule with some P4 games that generate fan interest would do that. I want people to pack the rent the way they did during RE1, I want those emotional wins like beating ND on prime time on their field, but ultimately I want and this school needs wins. ACC doesn't care if we win (they love it when we lose to them), they don't want us ever...the BIG12, as much I think we were duped as bait the past 2 years, could potentially still bring us in if they see that we can win, we can get Top 25 votes, and we can draw crowds...these likely won't be achieved by sustained losses to P4s.

 

[Windham4th]

UMass, Buffalo and Temple every year? Are you trying to keep people from coming to the stadium?

 

[Windham4th]

Because we are UConn. Everyone said we would struggle to schedule P4 home games six years ago when we went independent. That was a lie. Though we are G6, our overall athletic brand is much closer to that of a mid-level P4. Schools want to play us (see Maryland, Pitt, UNC). The only school that cancelled a home and home with us was Ole Miss, and I wasn't very confident that was going to get played anyway. We don't play Big 12 or SEC teams regularly so I am not worried about them. As far as the Big Ten and ACC, neither will keep the 10 game requirement for more than two or three years. How do I know this? About a decade ago the Big Ten created guidelines that banned playing FCS teams. That was squashed soon thereafter by the bottom half of the league who were struggling to make bowl games.

Going to 9 conferences games is one thing; forcing schools to play an additional P4 game will not last long-term (especially in the Big Ten and ACC- the two conferences whose teams we play regularly).

Finally, don't be surprised if the Big Ten and ACC consider us (and a select few others like Army, Navy, USF, Tulane, Memphis, BSU, UNLV) as P4 for scheduling purposes. The Big Ten did this about a decade ago (and we were included).

Michigan losing to App State was still fresh in their minds

 

[B1GEast]

I never want to see what we did last year. Schedule a tough first game opponent.

That loss to Maryland was psychological. It set the tone for the year.

I like what we did this year, had a couple of mid tier programs scheduled with a mix of non power conference teams.

We should never schedule a blowout game vs a top program just for a paycheck.

The program doesn't need 55-3 game in their schedule. The optics are bad.

Because we have the luxury of scheduling who's available, you can tell what program is having a down year.

Id like to see a couple of regional or former BE/AAC teams as well.

This years schedule was perfect and looking at it from hindsight, 12-0 was a real possibility.

 

[ZooCougar]

Wake up! We are making it. Look at last season and this season. All of the important metrics are trending in the right direction: wins, bowl appearances, fan attendance, national media attention, etc. We are playing at a P4 level now, and should schedule just like shizzle787 described.

No, With decreasing opportunities this is all highly unlikely even with the upwards trend. We don't have leverage over anyone. That's a pipe dream.

Also we lost to Delaware and Rice this season, that is not "P4 Level".

Lastly, who wants to play Buffalo, Temple and UMass every year? Good lord.

 

[BlueWolf25]

I never want to see what we did last year. Schedule a tough first game opponent.

That loss to Maryland was psychological. It set the tone for the year.

I like what we did this year, had a couple of mid tier programs scheduled with a mix of non power conference teams.

We should never schedule a blowout game vs a top program just for a paycheck.

The program doesn't need 55-3 game in their schedule. The optics are bad.

Because we have the luxury of scheduling who's available, you can tell what program is having a down year.

Id like to see a couple of regional or former BE/AAC teams as well.

This years schedule was perfect and looking at it from hindsight, 12-0 was a real possibility.

Even the timing of these games was great. Playing BC in October and Duke in November gave us a much better chance at beating both rather than earlier in the season.

Also, while getting a P4 game or two at home is obviously great for attendance, we drew 30k+ for CCSU and Air Force too. Winning, entertaining football where you score points will bring in fans. The more 8+ win seasons we can stack up by scheduling for success, the better

 

[Kolumbo]

current P4 teams scheduled
4 - 2026 - maryland (09/12/26), unc, cuse, duke
4 - 2027 - duke (09/11/27), unc, pitt, cuse
4 - 2028 - wake (09/16/28), duke, pitt, cuse
3 - 2029 - purdue (09/01/29), duke, bcu
2 - 2030 - duke (08/31/30), bcu

with this schedule one would think we already have a foot in the ACC door. we could probably try to get games with rutgers, cincy, wvu, ucf. 4 or 5 P4 games are fine the way we are scheduling because those are winnable games. looks like we have Indiana in 2032.

 

[ConnHuskBask]

current P4 teams scheduled
4 - 2026 - maryland (09/12/26), unc, cuse, duke
4 - 2027 - duke (09/11/27), unc, pitt, cuse
4 - 2028 - wake (09/16/28), duke, pitt, cuse
3 - 2029 - purdue (09/01/29), duke, bcu
2 - 2030 - duke (08/31/30), bcu

with this schedule one would think we already have a foot in the ACC door. we could probably try to get games with rutgers, cincy, wvu, ucf. 4 or 5 P4 games are fine the way we are scheduling because those are winnable games. looks like we have Indiana in 2032.

Hope I'm wrong but with the looming increase in league games and our program getting stronger it probably doesn't benefit our ACC foes to continue to schedule us.

 

[KryHavok]

current P4 teams scheduled
4 - 2026 - maryland (09/12/26), unc, cuse, duke
4 - 2027 - duke (09/11/27), unc, pitt, cuse
4 - 2028 - wake (09/16/28), duke, pitt, cuse
3 - 2029 - purdue (09/01/29), duke, bcu
2 - 2030 - duke (08/31/30), bcu

with this schedule one would think we already have a foot in the ACC door. we could probably try to get games with rutgers, cincy, wvu, ucf. 4 or 5 P4 games are fine the way we are scheduling because those are winnable games. looks like we have Indiana in 2032.

I'm not picking on you at all as I agree with a lot of your posts, but I think this is pure hopium (and I freely admit that as I much as I detest the ACC, them inviting us would be an answer to sooo many of our problems and makes the most sense in terms of CR). The thing is, I don't think any number of games we have scheduled with them means anything, and none of the ACC's CR actions have made sense. They are not auditioning us with these games, they are scheduling us cuz they think they can win (and use those losses as justification for keeping us out..."See, UConn can't beat any of our lower teams"). I agree with the rest of your post of scheduling other former Big East foes, if we can get them...though I wonder, who will be the ref crew for us when we visit those teams? ^_^

 

[Kolumbo]

I'm not picking on you at all as I agree with a lot of your posts, but I think this is pure hopium (and I freely admit that as I much as I detest the ACC, them inviting us would be an answer to sooo many of our problems and makes the most sense in terms of CR). The thing is, I don't think any number of games we have scheduled with them means anything, and none of the ACC's CR actions have made sense. They are not auditioning us with these games, they are scheduling us cuz they think they can win (and use those losses as justification for keeping us out..."See, UConn can't beat any of our lower teams"). I agree with the rest of your post of scheduling other former Big East foes, if we can get them...though I wonder, who will be the ref crew for us when we visit those teams? ^_^

I was just listing the games currently scheduled. Who knows what will happen. I don't think there were any plans for the ACC to invite us but I am a glutton for punishment hoping for the best. Iron Balls McGinty