DRC: Baker examining UNT scheduling philosophy

[GangGreen]

It is kinda strange having a scheduling thread without 90. I hope Cerebus gave him some methadone so he doesn't come down too hard. Maybe I'm just silly, but I would like to dump the one and dones and the FCS games at the same time. I like the SMU & Army series. 

I would love an OOC schedule that looked like this:

at Tulsa

SMU

at Army

Texas State

 

[untjim1995]

7 minutes ago, MeanGreenTexan said:

Again, I'm not speaking to RV's aptitude for making a schedule or running an Athletic Dept.   The post I was replying to was making a point that the coach was being consulted regarding scheduling the entire time.

What happens if WB decides to not only keep the FCS games on the schedule, but add more?   We gonna fly banners and try to run him off?

If he does something that stupid, you won't need a banner to run him off...

[MeanGreenTexan]

Just now, untjim1995 said:

If he does something that stupid, you won't need a banner to run him off...

So if we keep FCS games on our schedule for the next 10 years, but start piecing together winning seasons and ticket sales increase, bowl games increase, recruiting level increases, possibly (due to winning) UNT finds a new conference, etc...   You would want to run off WB because of the FCS games?
@Cerebus has already mentioned the Boise St. model.   Scheduling FCS teams every year to pad wins is not a bad thing.  I think there are alot of people here who are burned by scheduling FCS teams due to the Portland St disaster last season.  I understand the hurt, but look at the big picture.  UNT needs wins.  FBS bylaws allow for 1 FCS game per year to count towards bowl eligibility.   We need to take advantage of that right now... we just came off a 1-11 season.

[DT 90]

19 hours ago, ChristopherRyanWilkes said:

Yeah but if you keep all your home games, there's a big following in DFW. Haven't been to that game, but I'd assume Aggies outnumber Hogs. You want A&M out of that contract? 

No it's half and half.  Yea, I would like it if they are out of Jerry's contract.  You go from a having a true home field advantage to a stadium that is half and half.  As plush /nice as Jerry World is, it does not have the atmosphere of Kyle Field.

[ChristopherRyanWilkes]

2 minutes ago, DT 90 said:

No it's half and half.  Yea, I would like it if they are out of Jerry's contract.  You go from a having a true home field advantage to a stadium that is half and half.  As plush /nice as Jerry World is, it does not have the atmosphere of Kyle Field.

Yeah but if you aren't giving up a home game anyways, isn't it better to have neutral site than going to Arkansas for an away game? I guess maybe every other year it would only take away an away game and then the next year it's taking a home game... but still.

[DT 90]

Honestly, you want to play in Jerry World when UNT cannot even sell out Apogee?   You play an Alabama in JW it will essentially be an Alabama home game. 75,000 Alabama fans (because they can get tickets to away games like this) and maybe 10K Mean Green. 

3 minutes ago, ChristopherRyanWilkes said:

Yeah but if you aren't giving up a home game anyways, isn't it better to have neutral site than going to Arkansas for an away game? I guess maybe every other year it would only take away an away game and then the next year it's taking a home game... but still.

Playing the Pigs is Fayetteville is actually pretty damd fun. Did it once.  Nothing like seething hatred coming from the stands. Same as playing at DKR or Death Valley.

[H-towngreen]

I'm with Cerebus. I've been a fan of the Boise method. I have no problem a FCS team. Of course it would be nice if it were SHSU or SFA for the extra crowd. The big thing is if you are going to schedule teams from a P5 conference schedule the lower end teams. Vandy, Iowa St, Kansas, Colorado. Those are still name teams that maybe down the road we have a chance of beating. Get a home and home with them.

[El Paso Eagle]

What I would like to see is Wren and company get some of the money games moved out. I truly believe there are enough schools that would step in the get the money. Then when Seth and company turn the program around we can be more competitive.

At this time we need to find our "niche" that will allow us to be successful - someone needs to be the next Boise, TCU, Houston ... Lets find our way to build the program and yes we will need to walk before we run, but we need to think of the long term positive effects of building a solid foundation for not only football but all athletic programs at the University.

[VideoEagle]

Thank you @Cerebus for saving me a lot of typing. Yes, there really is nothing wrong with playing FCS teams and getting an easy win. Teams in the Big 12 do it. SEC teams do it. AAC teams do it. Other CUSA teams do it. 

Don't worry about losing to a FCS teams. Yes, it happened last year and yes it was embarrassing. But I believe we have lost a total of two games to an FCS/1AA team while we were FBS/1A since 1AA/FCS was created in the 70s. Portland State last year and UAB back in 1995. Two since 1AA/FCS was created in 77 or 78. Oregon State has lost six as has Wake Forest. So has Utah State. UNLV has lost TEN! Temple has lost ELEVEN! And all of those teams still schedule FCS teams because they are likely wins. Not just "winnable" but likely wins.

Here's a site about FBS vs FCS but it hasn't been updated in a year or so. 

The crowd at the game Saturday sure seemed to enjoy the game. So did the crowd at Nichols State a couple of years ago. There is nothing wrong with putting a "likely win" on the schedule. 

[Got5onIt]

No to neutral site and No to FCS games. Swap FCS for G5 games for teams like San Diego St. & San Jose St., etc. Let some of them Cali kids have exposure to UNT. I still stand by the fact NT has been a doormat so long most Texas kids turn their noses at us. Those 3-Star Cali kids don't hear the t-shirt fans dogging NT all the time....

Let's continue to play P5's just try to stay away from perrennial top 5 teams ( Alabama comes to mind).

Edited September 16, 2016 by Got5onIt

[UNTFan23]

55 minutes ago, Got5onIt said:

No to neutral site and No to FCS games. Swap FCS for G5 games for teams like San Diego St. & San Jose St., etc. Let some of them Cali kids have exposure to UNT. I still stand by the fact NT has been a doormat so long most Texas kids turn their noses at us. Those 3-Star Cali kids don't hear the t-shirt fans dogging NT all the time....

Let's continue to play P5's just try to stay away from perrennial top 5 teams ( Alabama comes to mind).

How about Sun Belt teams?

[untjim1995]

4 hours ago, MeanGreenTexan said:

So if we keep FCS games on our schedule for the next 10 years, but start piecing together winning seasons and ticket sales increase, bowl games increase, recruiting level increases, possibly (due to winning) UNT finds a new conference, etc...   You would want to run off WB because of the FCS games?
@Cerebus has already mentioned the Boise St. model.   Scheduling FCS teams every year to pad wins is not a bad thing.  I think there are alot of people here who are burned by scheduling FCS teams due to the Portland St disaster last season.  I understand the hurt, but look at the big picture.  UNT needs wins.  FBS bylaws allow for 1 FCS game per year to count towards bowl eligibility.   We need to take advantage of that right now... we just came off a 1-11 season.

Your original question was if Wren Baker scheduled multiple FCS opponents per year. That's absurd to even contemplate.

then you changed the argument back to one FCS game per year,, which I don't think is smart at all for a team that needs support. Getting 16k for a FCS opponent at a 30k stadium isn't good or really helpful. Boise could do it because they had the civic support and very little competition for entertainment dollars. Being in Denton and in DFW, we literally don't share any of that in common. 

 

[UNTFan23]

8 minutes ago, untjim1995 said:

Your original question was if Wren Baker scheduled multiple FCS opponents per year. That's absurd to even contemplate.

then you changed the argument back to one FCS game per year,, which I don't think is smart at all for a team that needs support. Getting 16k for a FCS opponent at a 30k stadium isn't good or really helpful. Boise could do it because they had the civic support and very little competition for entertainment dollars. Being in Denton and in DFW, we literally don't share any of that in common. 

 

I wonder what attendance will look like for the Oct. 1st game if we're 1-3 or 2-2. I'll bet we have more if we're 2-2.

We also could be 0-2 right now if it weren't for that FCS school, so there's that. That could mean we'd either be 0-4 or 1-3 heading into that Oct. 1st game. We're not in a position to look down on FCS games when wins are something that are hard to come by.

[Got5onIt]

41 minutes ago, UNTFan23 said:

How about Sun Belt teams?

No belt teams in California or the west coast...

[UNTFan23]

Just now, Got5onIt said:

No belt teams in California or the west coast...

But what about scheduling a Sun Belt team in general?

[Got5onIt]

1 minute ago, UNTFan23 said:

But what about scheduling a Sun Belt team in general?

Nah. Need exposure in states that are recruiting hot beds...

[UNTFan23]

1 minute ago, Got5onIt said:

Nah. Need exposure in states that are recruiting hot beds...

Then why not Florida since we already play games against the F_U schools?

[MeanGreenMailbox aka TFLF]

It's not a "Boise State" philosophy.  As already demonstrated through posting actual games scheduled, well over 100 of the FBS schools have FCS schools on their schedule. 

FCS scheduling has nothing to do with RV.  Everyone in the country, outside a very small few, schedules FCS schools.

Complain about the SMU or Army series if you like, but scheduling FCS is just keeping up with the Joneses when it comes to college football.  

19 minutes ago, UNTFan23 said:

I wonder what attendance will look like for the Oct. 1st game if we're 1-3 or 2-2. I'll bet we have more if we're 2-2.

We also could be 0-2 right now if it weren't for that FCS school, so there's that. That could mean we'd either be 0-4 or 1-3 heading into that Oct. 1st game. We're not in a position to look down on FCS games when wins are something that are hard to come by.

Yes, and this is what I've pointed out over and over - this scheduled and the future schedules give us the opportunity to go 2-2 or 3-1 every season in OOC. 

And, especially now, with scholarships low, the team needs this type of schedule to get more confidence and more competitive.  Losing rarely breeds better competitiveness. 

 

[MeanGreenTexan]

21 minutes ago, untjim1995 said:

Your original question was if Wren Baker scheduled multiple FCS opponents per year. That's absurd to even contemplate.

then you changed the argument back to one FCS game per year,, which I don't think is smart at all for a team that needs support. Getting 16k for a FCS opponent at a 30k stadium isn't good or really helpful. Boise could do it because they had the civic support and very little competition for entertainment dollars. Being in Denton and in DFW, we literally don't share any of that in common. 

 

I can see how you would mis-construe what I said to mean scheduling multiple FCS teams per year which would be asinine.   I'm not a wordsmith, but that is not what I meant at all originally or otherwise.   When I said: " What happens if WB decides to not only keep the FCS games on the schedule, but add more?"  I mean/meant "What if we were to leave the existing FCS teams on our schedule, and then schedule more (obviously 1/yr) past 2020?"

As for your attendance worries...    Win, and people will come regardless of opponent.  Build a team that can consistently win 7, 8, 9 games a year, and Apogee will be full every week. 

[MeanGreenHoops]

26 minutes ago, MeanGreenTexan said:

As for your attendance worries...    Win, and people will come regardless of opponent.  Build a team that can consistently win 7, 8, 9 games a year, and Apogee will be full every week. 

So much this and what @Cerebus said. We needs wins. Most people look at the record before they decide to come to a game. Since we are usually 1-3 or 0-4 attendance plummets. 2013 proved that if you have a winning record people will come to games later in the year. We need wins.

And before someone says attendance wasn't that great during the Dickey years, go back and look at the starts to those seasons. Most were awful. People give up and wait till next year.

[Got5onIt]

1 hour ago, UNTFan23 said:

Then why not Florida since we already play games against the F_U schools?

 

We have the F-U's in CUSA. Hasn't done much good for us in FL so far.....

[Cerebus]

Of course scheduling fcs teams just ruins a season. Remember how nobody showed up to the Heart of Dallas bowl because one of our wins was against FCS Texas Southern?

[VideoEagle]

10 hours ago, untjim1995 said:

Boise could do it because they had the civic support and very little competition for entertainment dollars. Being in Denton and in DFW, we literally don't share any of that in common. 

 

SMU, TCU and near the metroplex Baylor all schedule FCS teams. So do Houston, Rice, Tulane, Miami and Northwestern - all both are in major markets with competition for sports dollars and most of them could use more local support. 

And if you are worried about not getting into the playoffs because you played a FCS team - BOTH teams in the championship game played FCS teams last year. 

[vpackrats]

Did someone say "neutral site game"?  Give me the Cotton Bowl during the State Fair of Texas in October!  That's would be pretty bad-ass -- and waaaay more atmosphere than playing at the Deathstar.  There's a reason why Texas - OU still plays there when JerryWorld has so many more bells & whistles.

Edited September 17, 2016 by vpackrats

[North Texas Shep]

Neutral site games can be fun if you can get fans to show up. That and they are an addition to our 6 home games and not counted as one. Like Houston, Tulsa, New Mexico, Texas State, Ragin Cajuns, etc  @ the Cotton Bowl.