_______________________________________I like this perspective. "The program has gone stale, like an old dusted has been that will never be". Well put. . . and an accurate description of the state of affairs since Randy left after the Fiesta Bowl. When we were all saying Randy had build up the program from infancy and maybe had plateau'd. Don't think anyone had in mind, HCPP plateauing the program at a lower level. Shenkman may have seen the handwriting on the wall, too bad we didn't listen.
I am all for 3-1, 2-1 or meadowlands. We are still growing our brand.... PERIOD. Which do you think gains more recognition/exposure for uconn football both nationally and locally.. Uconn vs Buffalo on sny at rent or an out of state game vs ND, Ohio State, Texas on ESPN? Now imagine we win both ... (knowing that none of those teams ever stood foot inside ct) which of buffalo (instate) or Texas is going to pack the rent next game with unpresidented buzz? Beggars can't be choosers.
I'm with you. Most of the BY wouldn't go for any of that. I'm for the go anywhere / play anybody thing. That's how Boise built a brand.
The other thing is that "name" teams actually covers a multitude of things. Sure there are the big names, Ohio State, michigan, Notre Dame, USC, Texas, etc. But it also applies to a bunch of teams which are usually between mediocre and pretty good but which you don't play that often or don't appear that often in this part of the world. If we played Mississippi, for example, There would be some buzz, even if ol Miss isn't that good. they are "exotic" and from the SEC. I suspect Iowa or Michigan State or even K-State or someone would have the same feeling. To some extent the ACC doesn't generate the same excitement, in part I think because we play them so often.
It's going good.
But we're 4-0 with a weak schedule and getting hype.
You're 3-2 with a weak schedule and getting none.
That's the point. Win and hype and excitement come. Lose and it goes away. Not trying to
be a d*ck, just telling you the truth. Sorry that it's a harsh truth, but find someone who
would disagree with me here. If you were 5-0 would any of this scheduling talk or firing your
coach talk be happening? Probably not.
You are so wrong. If we were 5-0, people here would still find a dozen things to be miserable about.
I'm not suggesting we necessarily schedule Ole Miss. Just that the number of schools that would generate some interest and the reasons for that interest is wider than just the usual suspects. I think if you get a series with another SEC school, it doesn't have to be Alabama, or with a Big 10 one, and Ohio State and Michigan are booked, you can still still get teams that will generate a decent level of interest. I mean, there was way more buzz about Iowa State last year than NC State this year. K=State has been good for a fairly long time. They wouldn't be Texas, perhaps, but they'd be interesting and would generate some buzz. More than a run of the mill ACC team...Sometimes it is because the team is good, sometimes its because they have a history and sometimes it is the Kevin Bacon effect...to use OLe Miss again, they play alabama and LSU so by playing them we are getting close to those teams...Some of you seem to forget that it takes two schools to make a scheduling arrangement. It's easy to say we should schedule Ole Miss and Iowa, but Ole Miss gets 3 OOC games. They're playing Central Arkansas, and UTEP, both of who I doubt are getting return games unless it's a 2-1 or greater, and Texas. Where do we fit in there? BCS schools have very few OOC games and we're the worst kind of opponent for them. They look at us the way we look at WMU:no big deal if you win and you're damned if you lose. Is there anyone on this board that doesn't think we're trying to schedule the best opponents we can? Obviously Hathaway blew it on some idiotic series' (Buffalo for 10 games), but complaining about that is a waste of time, even by internet standards.
This is the way to go. Wouldn't exclude ACC teams though. Better than Buffalo & WMU. Way better.The other thing is that "name" teams actually covers a multitude of things. Sure there are the big names, Ohio State, michigan, Notre Dame, USC, Texas, etc. But it also applies to a bunch of teams which are usually between mediocre and pretty good but which you don't play that often or don't appear that often in this part of the world. If we played Mississippi, for example, There would be some buzz, even if ol Miss isn't that good. they are "exotic" and from the SEC. I suspect Iowa or Michigan State or even K-State or someone would have the same feeling. To some extent the ACC doesn't generate the same excitement, in part I think because we play them so often.
I wouldn't exclude ACC teams either. I just want to mix it up. I have no problem with including ACC teams in that mix. Just beware that some of them won't bring the same juice that a comparable team from another league will bring. And if we never play Buffalo again it will be too soon...This is the way to go. Wouldn't exclude ACC teams though. Better than Buffalo & WMU. Way better.
It's going good.
But we're 4-0 with a weak schedule and getting hype.
You're 3-2 with a weak schedule and getting none.
That's the point. Win and hype and excitement come. Lose and it goes away. Not trying to be a d*ck, just telling you the truth. Sorry that it's a harsh truth, but find someone who would disagree with me here. If you were 5-0 would any of this scheduling talk or firing your coach talk be happening? Probably not.