(06-22-2020 10:46 AM)Atlanta Wrote: (06-22-2020 10:23 AM)Tiger87 Wrote: (06-21-2020 02:55 PM)Atlanta Wrote: (06-19-2020 03:29 PM)Tiger87 Wrote: (06-17-2020 02:46 PM)Atlanta Wrote: Really? The only games our departed AD had any control over are the OOC games - and this is what we get? But you're right, I'll have to focus on the conference games when UT-M & AR St are the fine OOC home games we have.
I thought we were talking the football schedule - not the control of the former AD.
All in all, our home schedule is pretty good.
OK, who sets the OOC football schedule?
Point is, we're talking about the entire home schedule. Not just the OOC. It's a decent home schedule. Leave the blame game out for a minute and you will see that.
Again, it's not off topic to understand how the schedule is determined. We all know we play a conference schedule of 7 games. It's set & can be reasonably projected year to year without any input from our AD. Therefore it is incumbent upon our AD to project the relative weak years & supplement strong OOC games in those years - since it is a primary responsibility of the AD to raise & increase revenues to support the program.
There are three and only three instances where you want the OOC schedule to be stronger.
1. The conference is weak
2. The G5 gets a second spot in the next 4 bowl games a tier below the NY6. These games pay a few million dollars
3. We make the NY6 3 or 4 times in a row and want to make a big playoff push
Cincinnati had almost nothing to gain by playing Ohio State on their field. If they beat them, most would have said Ohio State was no good, and even if Ohio State is very good, it gives Cincinnati very low odds of running the table and making the playoff. Worse, I am 100% sure that Cincinnati would have kicked Boise's ass, but even if they would have beaten us in the AAC Championship game, they probably wouldn't have jumped Boise.
So what's good for us and good for Boise is also good for any G5.
This brings us to my second point. There are around 10 bowls that pay pretty well. IF a G5 team ranked in the top 20 was given a 2nd spot in one of those bowls, then you go for it. That way even if you schedule Ohio State and lose 2 games, you can go to a bowl that pays between $4-9 million. That would be much more fair than being a top 25 team with 2 losses playing in a $1.5 million bowl while a 5 loss P5 team gets a $4 million payout in a better bowl.
Last, but not least, if we manage to make it this year and next year we have nothing left to prove and we might as well go for it.
The way things are set up right now is exactly how it needs to be set up. We are a top 5 conference in the entire country, way ahead of any other G5 conference. If we stay even with the MWC and have one more loss than any of the other 4, we get the spot. All the while we continue to build our brand as a conference.
The remote reward for scheduling one more quality opponent is not worth the massive loss that would happen if we lost that game. Unless winning that game gets you into the playoff; which is a 5% chance, there is no reason to play it.