UConn and Duke Schedule 4 Game Home and Home Series

[shizzle787]

I am hoping that Army waits until 2026 to join the American. If they do I hope we do the following:

1. Schedule a P4 H/H for 24/25 with 24 at home and 25 away. We need a P4 home game next year.

2. Pay Temple a small inconvenience fee to switch our 26/27 series so that we play at home in 26.

These two moves would fill our 24-26 schedule, guarantee at least six home games each year from 24-26, guarantee 5 P4 games and at least 1 P4 home game those years as well.

Assuming Army cancels their other games with us, we would still have 9 and 7 games scheduled for 27 and 28 respectively.

 

[UConnJim]

I am hoping that Army waits until 2026 to join the American. If they do I hope we do the following:

1. Schedule a P4 H/H for 24/25 with 24 at home and 25 away. We need a P4 home game next year.

2. Pay Temple a small inconvenience fee to switch our 26/27 series so that we play at home in 26.

These two moves would fill our 24-26 schedule, guarantee at least six home games each year from 24-26, guarantee 5 P4 games and at least 1 P4 home game those years as well.

Assuming Army cancels their other games with us, we would still have 9 and 7 games scheduled for 27 and 28 respectively.

I'm not sure Army is going to join the AAC. Why?

Army is currently playing about 2 P5 schools per year, 1 to 2 FCS schools, and the 2 other service academies Navy and Air Force. If they go to the AAC, they play 8 conference games, but what if the AAC moves to 9 conference games? Basically, Army's schedule would become 9 AAC games, Navy (out of conference), Air Force, and an FCS game. Do they want that schedule? Even at 8 conference games, the schedule becomes 8 AAC games, Navy, Air Force, 1 FCS, and 1 OOC game. Seems restrictive. Also, there is the cost of dropping future games and there could be some impact on the Army/Navy game.

I think Army would be better off with a 4 game scheduling alliance with the AAC. Thus, Army gets 4 guaranteed games per year, Navy and Air Force games, 1 to 2 FCS per year and scheduling flexibility on 4 to 5 games per year. Kind of like the Notre Dame deal with the ACC. In return, the AAC gets a guaranteed attractive opponent for 4 games per year which will help home attendance and TV rights value.

 

[uconntailgater]

I would like to get Rutgers on the schedule. Easy drive for both fan bases.

 

[John]

I would like to get Rutgers on the schedule. Easy drive for both fan bases.

I'm up for any of the old Big East programs
Rutgers
Cuse
Pitt
Louisville
WVU
USF
Temple
Cincinnati
BC
Va Tech
Miami

 

[freescooter]

The better competition you play, the better recruits you can get.

The more you win, the better recruits you get. Again, there is no value in playing 4-6 P5 games and losing them all. We need to get to the point where we win those games or we need to down grade the schedule. And if we do that we need to play for something. So we need to be shopping for a league that will take us as football only. Then play maybe 2 P4 teams a year.

 

[gioff2323]

I have a kid at Virginia Tech. It would be awesome to go see the Huskies in Blacksburg.

Great place to see a game

 

[shizzle787]

I'm not sure Army is going to join the AAC. Why?

Army is currently playing about 2 P5 schools per year, 1 to 2 FCS schools, and the 2 other service academies Navy and Air Force. If they go to the AAC, they play 8 conference games, but what if the AAC moves to 9 conference games? Basically, Army's schedule would become 9 AAC games, Navy (out of conference), Air Force, and an FCS game. Do they want that schedule? Even at 8 conference games, the schedule becomes 8 AAC games, Navy, Air Force, 1 FCS, and 1 OOC game. Seems restrictive. Also, there is the cost of dropping future games and there could be some impact on the Army/Navy game.

I think Army would be better off with a 4 game scheduling alliance with the AAC. Thus, Army gets 4 guaranteed games per year, Navy and Air Force games, 1 to 2 FCS per year and scheduling flexibility on 4 to 5 games per year. Kind of like the Notre Dame deal with the ACC. In return, the AAC gets a guaranteed attractive opponent for 4 games per year which will help home attendance and TV rights value.

I hope you are right as it would be a huge boon to our scheduling if they stay independent.

 

[pepband99]

I like playing P4 opponents as much as the next guy but not if we are going to lose all the time. What sense does it make to play 6 and go 0-6

Your argument would make sense if we weren't a little - a lot against everyone, too. Correlation without causation.

 

[John]

The more you win, the better recruits you get. Again, there is no value in playing 4-6 P5 games and losing them all. We need to get to the point where we win those games or we need to down grade the schedule. And if we do that we need to play for something. So we need to be shopping for a league that will take us as football only. Then play maybe 2 P4 teams a year.

it's a balancing act - playing winnable games BUT also having maximum exposure to teams from major conferences.

 

[Da_Aisijimo_Gou]

I have a kid at Virginia Tech. It would be awesome to go see the Huskies in Blacksburg.

Great college football environment, Blacksburg’s a good college town, and the region’s a good long weekend or longer destination for anyone into hiking, outdoor activities, etc.

Yesteryear, if only Terry Caulley was not injured in a 2003/4ish game against VIrginia Tech …

 

[ZooCougar]

I'm not sure Army is going to join the AAC. Why?

Army is currently playing about 2 P5 schools per year, 1 to 2 FCS schools, and the 2 other service academies Navy and Air Force. If they go to the AAC, they play 8 conference games, but what if the AAC moves to 9 conference games? Basically, Army's schedule would become 9 AAC games, Navy (out of conference), Air Force, and an FCS game. Do they want that schedule? Even at 8 conference games, the schedule becomes 8 AAC games, Navy, Air Force, 1 FCS, and 1 OOC game. Seems restrictive. Also, there is the cost of dropping future games and there could be some impact on the Army/Navy game.

I think Army would be better off with a 4 game scheduling alliance with the AAC. Thus, Army gets 4 guaranteed games per year, Navy and Air Force games, 1 to 2 FCS per year and scheduling flexibility on 4 to 5 games per year. Kind of like the Notre Dame deal with the ACC. In return, the AAC gets a guaranteed attractive opponent for 4 games per year which will help home attendance and TV rights value.

Army to the AAC has cooled.

 

[shizzle787]

Army to the AAC has cooled.

Possibly, but let’s hope that is the case as it is almost an automatic November game.

 

[Fairfield_1st]

The more you win, the better recruits you get. Again, there is no value in playing 4-6 P5 games and losing them all. We need to get to the point where we win those games or we need to down grade the schedule. And if we do that we need to play for something. So we need to be shopping for a league that will take us as football only. Then play maybe 2 P4 teams a year.

The better the schedule, the more attractive we are to potential recruits. You're right we need to start winning some, but they need to be on the schedule. If you were a player, would you rather line up against Charlotte and FIU or Duke and Tennessee. Any player we want at UConn would rather play the big time school. I don't want the kid that wants UNCC or FIU.

 

[freescooter]

it's a balancing act - playing winnable games BUT also having maximum exposure to teams from major conferences.

Agree. But we’ve gone 1-8 so far( I looked it up) since being Indy. We’ve been outscored 339-83. We have been shut out more times than we have scored more than 14 points. And sure, Michigan and Clemson are really good. But Middle of the road P5s have blasted us too. Outside of BC and Vandy, we have been in none of these games. That can’t continue. We need to beat the Vanderbilts of the world and go .500 vs BC Syracuse, Duke, NC State, Indiana type teams. Sure on occasion one or another of them has a very good team like this years Duke, but generally they are decidedly average. If we can’t get to a point where that is a realistic expectation we need to stop talking about playing 4-6 P5 teams and focus on playing 1-2. Get football into a league where it CAN be competitive, and go from there. Assuming you could pull it off would it really be that bad to play, say BC (H), Michigan (A). Then play 8 games against the AAC or somebody and maybe 1 each vs among the MAC, the MWC or the Sunbelt. I’m not sure it is that much better to go 1-5 vs 6 P4-5 teams and 5-1/4-2 vs a mix of AAC, MAC, Sunbelt and MWC. Maybe you have a great season and go 11-1, 10-2 and get ranked 19. Some of you are sort of like the farmer who wanted to enter his mule in the Kentucky Derby. Not to win but in hopes that he benefits from the association.

 

[freescooter]

The better the schedule, the more attractive we are to potential recruits. You're right we need to start winning some, but they need to be on the schedule. If you were a player, would you rather line up against Charlotte and FIU or Duke and Tennessee. Any player we want at UConn would rather play the big time school. I don't want the kid that wants UNCC or FIU.

That is exactly the kid we get. And the odd Maine or Delaware transfer.

 

[shizzle787]

Agree. But we’ve gone 1-8 so far( I looked it up) since being Indy. We’ve been outscored 339-83. We have been shut out more times than we have scored more than 14 points. And sure, Michigan and Clemson are really good. But Middle of the road P5s have blasted us too. Outside of BC and Vandy, we have been in none of these games. That can’t continue. We need to beat the Vanderbilts of the world and go .500 vs BC Syracuse, Duke, NC State, Indiana type teams. Sure on occasion one or another of them has a very good team like this years Duke, but generally they are decidedly average. If we can’t get to a point where that is a realistic expectation we need to stop talking about playing 4-6 P5 teams and focus on playing 1-2. Get football into a league where it CAN be competitive, and go from there. Assuming you could pull it off would it really be that bad to play, say BC (H), Michigan (A). Then play 8 games against the AAC or somebody and maybe 1 each vs among the MAC, the MWC or the Sunbelt. I’m not sure it is that much better to go 1-5 vs 6 P4-5 teams and 5-1/4-2 vs a mix of AAC, MAC, Sunbelt and MWC. Maybe you have a great season and go 11-1, 10-2 and get ranked 19. Some of you are sort of like the farmer who wanted to enter his mule in the Kentucky Derby. Not to win but in hopes that he benefits from the association.

This would be a revolting schedule. We got 36k for NC State and 30k for Duke. The other two were 20k and 21k respectively. People want to see ACC, SEC, Big Ten, and Big 12 opponents.

 

[John]

This would be a revolting schedule. We got 36k for NC State and 30k for Duke. The other two were 20k and 21k respectively. People want to see ACC, SEC, Big Ten, and Big 12 opponents.

This. Best case scenario is you get a team like the above into The Rent and we have a puncher's chance of winning. It's the blowouts that hurt.

 

[freescooter]

This would be a revolting schedule. We got 36k for NC State and 30k for Duke. The other two were 20k and 21k respectively. People want to see ACC, SEC, Big Ten, and Big 12 opponents.

Then they aren’t UConn fans. They are event fans. It is a problem with most UConn “fans” actually. For hoop fans if you told them Manchester Community College joined the Nee Big East they would show up by the thousands and wax poetic about how great this rivalry has always been. Football fans show up for name brands but not games we could, you know, actually win. Hockey fans show up for top Hockey East brands but not the Vermonts and Merrimacks. It is, I think because a lot of our base isn’t really connected with UConn.

 

[ZooCougar]

That is exactly the kid we get. And the odd Maine or Delaware transfer.

Like it or not. UNCC and FIU are our football peers until something changes.

 

[shizzle787]

Then they aren’t UConn fans. They are event fans. It is a problem with most UConn “fans” actually. For hoop fans if you told them Manchester Community College joined the Nee Big East they would show up by the thousands and wax poetic about how great this rivalry has always been. Football fans show up for name brands but not games we could, you know, actually win. Hockey fans show up for top Hockey East brands but not the Vermonts and Merrimacks. It is, I think because a lot of our base isn’t really connected with UConn.

No, it’s because our wallets aren’t connected with a bad product.

 

[ZooCougar]

No, it’s because our wallets aren’t connected with a bad product.

If all you play is teams that will beat you down, then you will always look like a bad product. 80% of our schedule should be programs we have a chance at beating.

 

[shizzle787]

If all you play is teams that will beat you down, then you will always look like a bad product. 80% of our schedule should be programs we have a chance at beating.

The only two games this year that we had no chance at winning are Duke and Tennessee.

We should have never lost to Utah State or FIU at home. This team has simply underperformed.
This is a bowl team masquerading as a 4-8 team.

I would have rather scheduled a P5 H/H than Tennessee. No interest in playing body bag games and that prevents us from playing a 7th home game every other year.

 

[ZooCougar]

The only two games this year that we had no chance at winning are Duke and Tennessee.

We should have never lost to Utah State or FIU at home. This team has simply underperformed.
This is a bowl team masquerading as a 4-8 team.

I would have rather scheduled a P5 H/H than Tennessee. No interest in playing body bag games and that prevents us from playing a 7th home game every other year.

JMU is going to drill us. You’re crazy.

 

[BlueandOG]

JMU is going to drill us. You’re crazy.

To quote the great Bill Lumberg, "Ooh. Yeah. Um, I'm going to have to go ahead and sort of disagree with you there." JMU has a great record but they've played cupcakes. We have a shot.​

 

[navery12]

I'm not sure Army is going to join the AAC. Why?

Army is currently playing about 2 P5 schools per year, 1 to 2 FCS schools, and the 2 other service academies Navy and Air Force. If they go to the AAC, they play 8 conference games, but what if the AAC moves to 9 conference games? Basically, Army's schedule would become 9 AAC games, Navy (out of conference), Air Force, and an FCS game. Do they want that schedule? Even at 8 conference games, the schedule becomes 8 AAC games, Navy, Air Force, 1 FCS, and 1 OOC game. Seems restrictive. Also, there is the cost of dropping future games and there could be some impact on the Army/Navy game.

I think Army would be better off with a 4 game scheduling alliance with the AAC. Thus, Army gets 4 guaranteed games per year, Navy and Air Force games, 1 to 2 FCS per year and scheduling flexibility on 4 to 5 games per year. Kind of like the Notre Dame deal with the ACC. In return, the AAC gets a guaranteed attractive opponent for 4 games per year which will help home attendance and TV rights value.

 

[shizzle787]

I hope they keep us on the schedule for next year, but I doubt it.

 

[UConnJim]

I was wrong. Also, Army will be moving away from playing their usual 2 to 3 P5 schools per year, so it looks like they are downscaling their schedule. I guess being 2-21 over the past decade against P5 schools may have impacted their decision.