CSNbbs

Quote:Ingram said a scheduling plan is still being discussed, but the ideal setup could be two guarantee games against schools in "Power Five" conferences, one home game against an FCS school and a home-and-home against another FBS school, but Ingram said the home-and-home needs to start at UAB.

Hmm.

If New Mexico State will come play you for $1 million, we'll do $850k.

I will say it again. Ingram needs to get on the same page with everyone else.

Ugh, two "money games"? I understand the necessity of having one, but two guaranteed losses on the schedule sucks.

Quote:"We're just working through that before I make the decision on who and when," Ingram said Wednesday night. "There are six or eight schools that we're talking to actively about four games. I bet tomorrow, there will be a ninth. People reach out almost every day."

That is Ingram in a nutshell. That should be "we". An AD scheduling single handedly is usually always detrimental to a program.

Even if he is thinking "I", publicly you say "We"...it's common sense public speaking 101. I would say he needs a PR coach, but they would probably insist that we pay for it.

I still think Ingram is a short-termer and won't last on the southside longer than Frazier did.

Ingram is full of it. Clark said before he wanted to get away from two body bag games and get to 1 money game and more winnable or reasonably matched games. It sucks going into conference play 1-3

1 game against FCS opponent,
1 FBS home and home(probably G5),
1 money game against top P5 school,
1 money game against "beatable" P5 school.

I don't really see a problem with this type of schedule...

(10-01-2015 12:41 PM)WesternBlazer Wrote: [ -> ]1 game against FCS opponent,
1 FBS home and home(probably G5),
1 money game against top P5 school,
1 money game against "beatable" P5 school.

I don't really see a problem with this type of schedule...

Nothing wrong with that, but:

"Ingram said a scheduling plan is still being discussed, but the ideal setup could be two guarantee games against schools in "Power Five" conferences, one home game against an FCS school and a home-and-home against another FBS school, but Ingram said the home-and-home needs to start at UAB."

If we can get P5 teams that travel and are a reasonable long shot would be great. Duke, Louisville, Miss State, Vandy, Iowa state, Kansas, Nebraska, would be awesome.
Hell even a few home and homes with AAC or Mountain West teams would be great.

(10-01-2015 12:41 PM)WesternBlazer Wrote: [ -> ]1 game against FCS opponent,
1 FBS home and home(probably G5),
1 money game against top P5 school,
1 money game against "beatable" P5 school.

I don't really see a problem with this type of schedule...

I'm good with that. I'm not good with two top 25 teams, but if we get a Kansas or Illinois or something similar to pay us to come there, I don't see it as a huge issue.

(10-01-2015 12:53 PM)rook360 Wrote: [ -> ]

(10-01-2015 12:41 PM)WesternBlazer Wrote: [ -> ]1 game against FCS opponent,
1 FBS home and home(probably G5),
1 money game against top P5 school,
1 money game against "beatable" P5 school.

I don't really see a problem with this type of schedule...

Nothing wrong with that, but:

"Ingram said a scheduling plan is still being discussed, but the ideal setup could be two guarantee games against schools in "Power Five" conferences, one home game against an FCS school and a home-and-home against another FBS school, but Ingram said the home-and-home needs to start at UAB."

If we can get P5 teams that travel and are a reasonable long shot would be great. Duke, Louisville, Miss State, Vandy, Iowa state, Kansas, Nebraska, would be awesome.
Hell even a few home and homes with AAC or Mountain West teams would be great.

Of course, the upside of a team scheduling a home and home is not having to pay the visiting team for the game...

(10-01-2015 12:20 PM)blazerjay Wrote: [ -> ]

Quote:"We're just working through that before I make the decision on who and when," Ingram said Wednesday night. "There are six or eight schools that we're talking to actively about four games. I bet tomorrow, there will be a ninth. People reach out almost every day."

That is Ingram in a nutshell. That should be "we". An AD scheduling single handedly is usually always detrimental to a program.

Even if he is thinking "I", publicly you say "We"...it's common sense public speaking 101. I would say he needs a PR coach, but they would probably insist that we pay for it.

I still think Ingram is a short-termer and won't last on the southside longer than Frazier did.

I do agree with this. Clark is obviously very popular among the fan base, and eliminating him from this quote was beyond stupid. Coach Clark and Ingram should be on the same page, but Ingram doesn't ever go out of his way to make it appear that is the case. I've been a big supporter of give the man times, but nobody above him is directing him to say that he is making the decisions.

(10-01-2015 12:58 PM)WesternBlazer Wrote: [ -> ]

(10-01-2015 12:53 PM)rook360 Wrote: [ -> ]

(10-01-2015 12:41 PM)WesternBlazer Wrote: [ -> ]1 game against FCS opponent,
1 FBS home and home(probably G5),
1 money game against top P5 school,
1 money game against "beatable" P5 school.

I don't really see a problem with this type of schedule...

Nothing wrong with that, but:

"Ingram said a scheduling plan is still being discussed, but the ideal setup could be two guarantee games against schools in "Power Five" conferences, one home game against an FCS school and a home-and-home against another FBS school, but Ingram said the home-and-home needs to start at UAB."

If we can get P5 teams that travel and are a reasonable long shot would be great. Duke, Louisville, Miss State, Vandy, Iowa state, Kansas, Nebraska, would be awesome.
Hell even a few home and homes with AAC or Mountain West teams would be great.

Of course, the upside of a team scheduling a home and home is not having to pay the visiting team for the game...

And we get the gate on UAB bringing in a team that people don't usually get to see play live.

(10-01-2015 12:41 PM)WesternBlazer Wrote: [ -> ]1 game against FCS opponent,
1 FBS home and home(probably G5),
1 money game against top P5 school,
1 money game against "beatable" P5 school.

I don't really see a problem with this type of schedule...

we had two SEC teams last year in Miss St and Arkansas, we still managed a 6-6 season. If we do this, we need to spread them out so we don't start 1-3.

Most AD's work with their coach in scheduling games not the trustees.

I like this schedule for 2017:

Alabama A&M (local, brings a good crowd, winnable)
Coastal Carolina (moving up to FBS in the Sunbelt, winnable)
at Memphis (re-kindles an old rivalry, they are good and may be more willing to play us)
at Kentucky (we had them scheduled before, and it looks like they still have a game available)

Just for giggles

http://www.fbschedules.com/ncaa/2017-col...edules.php

(10-01-2015 11:39 AM)thebernreuter Wrote: [ -> ]

Quote:Ingram said a scheduling plan is still being discussed, but the ideal setup could be two guarantee games against schools in "Power Five" conferences, one home game against an FCS school and a home-and-home against another FBS school, but Ingram said the home-and-home needs to start at UAB.

Hmm.

I believe Ingram is thinking money games to bolster UAB's bottom line. That last sentence indicates he learned from our experience with Ole Miss to get the P5 game at home first.

Get a MAC team. We've never played one.

and I think the at FLORIDA rumor for 2017 has legs.

(10-01-2015 01:27 PM)the_blazerman Wrote: [ -> ]Most AD's work with their coach in scheduling games not the trustees.

Ok that's the second time I've heard something about trustees having a hand in the scheduling. Something about 2 money games until subsidies no longer needed.