Scheduling

[Buckzip]

"Don't schedule Syracuse, Indiana or Kentucky. They're too tough."

Too much losing breeds a loser mentality.

I'm an Akron grad and I know this is an Akron board, but indulge me for a few seconds. I also have a degree from Toledo and I follow both teams. Both cities are comparable in size and demographics, and they both have very nice football facilities, but there's a huge difference in the fan base, at least for football.

Toledo always puts BCS teams on its schedule and they beat their share. This year it is was Purdue. Last year it was Colorado. In recent years they've beaten Kansas, Michigan, and a few others I can't think of right now. The fans love it and its a recruiting tool, for sure. One of the most thrilling games I have ever been to was when UT beat Pitt at the Glass Bowl during Larry Fitzgerald's senior year. I remember reading the next day that a bunch of recruits were at the game and they had to be impressed. The place was filled to the rafters and it was rocking the entire game.

If the Toledo AD was to announce tomorrow that fewer BCS schools would be scheduled because "They're too tough," he would be fired.

What Akron needs is a head coach who can create a winner. Sooner or later they'll get the right guy (law of averages?) and then people will get what I'm talking about. We got a taste of it with JD, and it was great.

Well said and true.

[skip-zip]

"Don't schedule Syracuse, Indiana or Kentucky. They're too tough."

Too much losing breeds a loser mentality.

I'm an Akron grad and I know this is an Akron board, but indulge me for a few seconds. I also have a degree from Toledo and I follow both teams. Both cities are comparable in size and demographics, and they both have very nice football facilities, but there's a huge difference in the fan base, at least for football.

Toledo always puts BCS teams on its schedule and they beat their share. This year it is was Purdue. Last year it was Colorado. In recent years they've beaten Kansas, Michigan, and a few others I can't think of right now. The fans love it and its a recruiting tool, for sure. One of the most thrilling games I have ever been to was when UT beat Pitt at the Glass Bowl during Larry Fitzgerald's senior year. I remember reading the next day that a bunch of recruits were at the game and they had to be impressed. The place was filled to the rafters and it was rocking the entire game.

If the Toledo AD was to announce tomorrow that fewer BCS schools would be scheduled because "They're too tough," he would be fired.

What Akron needs is a head coach who can create a winner. Sooner or later they'll get the right guy (law of averages?) and then people will get what I'm talking about. We got a taste of it with JD, and it was great.

Well said and true.

I agree also. Do we really want to lose the interest of potential recruits, and lose the rest of the fans we actually have right now? Go ahead and bore them to tears by playing a MAC schedule plus a few games against some non-threatening opponents. That'll sure help generate some excitement.

[Blue & Gold]

On the one hand:

Screw the BCS - non-BCS dichotomy. Most of the BCS schools play at about the same level as the upper tier MAC schools. There are really only about 20 BCS programs we should avoid playing. I, and everyone else could list them off the tops of our heads. We all know who the perennial Top 20 programs are. Penn State and Ohio State happen to be on that list - and for some reason we've been real fond of scheduling those two teams lately.

'Cuse, Kentucky & Indiana ain't on the list. They suck. We just rrrrrreeeeeaaaaaalllllllyyyyyyy suck.

If we even had a mediocre team we'd probably be sitting at 3-1 right now.

Unfortunately, we may be the 3rd worst team in all of D-1 ball. (Ahead of only EMU & WKU.)

[Blue & Gold]

but your recruiting slowly erodes when you don't win.

Football players want to win. They don't want to walk off the field into that locker room a loser.

If the wins come on the head of un-prestigious opponents, that's something slightly more nuanced to deal with.

Talented players (just like all players) want to go somewhere and be apart of something great and something fun.

It's no significant consolation when someone is recruiting you for a mid-major that has a consistently losing record to have them tell you that they are playing more BCS teams than the other guy who is winning.

Over-scheduling is a good thing if you overschedule within reason.

Get the winning started first... even if you have to underschedule first to do that.

When the ball is rolling, then set the bar higher.

And on the other hand, this is good perspective. Basically KD's strategy for b-ball scheduling.

[K92]

"Don't schedule Syracuse, Indiana or Kentucky. They're too tough."

Too much losing breeds a loser mentality.

I'm an Akron grad and I know this is an Akron board, but indulge me for a few seconds. I also have a degree from Toledo and I follow both teams. Both cities are comparable in size and demographics, and they both have very nice football facilities, but there's a huge difference in the fan base, at least for football.

Toledo always puts BCS teams on its schedule and they beat their share. This year it is was Purdue. Last year it was Colorado. In recent years they've beaten Kansas, Michigan, and a few others I can't think of right now. The fans love it and its a recruiting tool, for sure. One of the most thrilling games I have ever been to was when UT beat Pitt at the Glass Bowl during Larry Fitzgerald's senior year. I remember reading the next day that a bunch of recruits were at the game and they had to be impressed. The place was filled to the rafters and it was rocking the entire game.

If the Toledo AD was to announce tomorrow that fewer BCS schools would be scheduled because "They're too tough," he would be fired.

What Akron needs is a head coach who can create a winner. Sooner or later they'll get the right guy (law of averages?) and then people will get what I'm talking about. We got a taste of it with JD, and it was great.

I have thought for a long time that Toledo was most similar school to Akron in the MAC. Urban campuses in medium sided industrial cities. Both play little brother to a larger city to the north. Very similar demographics, I believe.

I have always been a closet admirer of the Toledo football program. Since the time I enrolled at Akron back in 1986, they have beaten Purdue (3 times), Michigan, Iowa State, Kansas, Pittsburgh, Minnesota, and Penn State. Not a fantastic list, but some nice quality wins over the years. They have given their fans something to cheer about, although they have had their ups and downs. It is a shame they don't get more fan support than they do.

I think there are definitely positives to scheduling lower tier BCS programs. We just have to get good enough to beat them. Until we have progressed to that point, I would be in favor of home-and-homes with other non-AQ schools. I never liked the idea of playing 1-AA schools because nobody cares or can get excited about them.

[Blue & Gold]

I really only like scheduling a 1-AA if it's for the season opener. It's an easy win ( ) and essentially serves as a "Fan Fest" scrimmage to get the team prepared for the rest of the D-1's. Many of the Top 20 programs do this, so I don't think there's any reason the rest of the D-1's shouldn't. It's fun for the Un-Top-20's to assert dominance, if only for a week.

[Captain Kangaroo]

And on the other hand, this is good perspective. Basically KD's strategy for b-ball scheduling.

I think a better analogy is --

Say Dambrot schedules Fordham, Nebraska, DePaul and Penn State.

Fan complains: "Jesus...the guy is scheduling the Atlantic 10, Big 12, Big East and Big 10...what a suicide schedule!"

Nope. He'd be scheduling very beatable teams that just happen to reside in nationally recognized conferences.

I would love it if we regularly scheduled hoops like we did 2010 football.

[xu9697]

Most surprising to me is how few non-BCS games there are. That may be one of the MAC's big problems, we really aren't playing like competition. Most of the BCS games are against the Big Ten which probably has to do mostly with geography and travel. I've said before, I'd take one payday game, one FCS game (since you're not going to get a payday team to come here) and then two games against whoever (BCS or non-BCS) we can get to do a home-home series. If it is a BCS team. it is likely they are not going to be a top team so then it would be like competition. I'd be fine with a schedule like that.

Right on! The "pay day" and FCS games are pretty clear= they are here to stay.

So the other 2 can simply be.."If you want a 1 for 1 with us, we will play you".

Key will be making sure, if we schedule a 1 for 1 with a BCS team, the 1st game is either here (unlikely) or the buyout is huge (like $1 million!!).

As the program/team gets better (whenver that might be), you can drop the FCS game and add in another 1 for 1 with a FBS (BCS or non) that is willing to do it.

[zen]

"Don't schedule Syracuse, Indiana or Kentucky. They're too tough."

Too much losing breeds a loser mentality.

I'm an Akron grad and I know this is an Akron board, but indulge me for a few seconds. I also have a degree from Toledo and I follow both teams. Both cities are comparable in size and demographics, and they both have very nice football facilities, but there's a huge difference in the fan base, at least for football.

Toledo always puts BCS teams on its schedule and they beat their share. This year it is was Purdue. Last year it was Colorado. In recent years they've beaten Kansas, Michigan, and a few others I can't think of right now. The fans love it and its a recruiting tool, for sure. One of the most thrilling games I have ever been to was when UT beat Pitt at the Glass Bowl during Larry Fitzgerald's senior year. I remember reading the next day that a bunch of recruits were at the game and they had to be impressed. The place was filled to the rafters and it was rocking the entire game.

If the Toledo AD was to announce tomorrow that fewer BCS schools would be scheduled because "They're too tough," he would be fired.

What Akron needs is a head coach who can create a winner. Sooner or later they'll get the right guy (law of averages?) and then people will get what I'm talking about. We got a taste of it with JD, and it was great.

That's the difference that I am talking about.

If we scheduled BCS teams and won some of them, that would actually help recruiting.

If we shedduled BCS teams and lost almost all of them, that actually hurts recruiting.

Whether or not scheduling cupcakes and winning helps recruiting is debatable... but I still think no one wants to join a loser.

We need to ease up on the scheduling a bit until the ball starts rolling.

[xu9697]

I would say we seem to be struggling with scheduling, b/c a majority of FBS teams (including most MAC schools) have their non-conference schedule set for 2011. We still have @ OSU and @ UC with no home games scheduled.

For 2011, besides the FCS game, probably looking at another Big East team (since they sometimes struggle to find a 5th non-con game) or one of WAC teams that might be left out in the cold..though I think they are a couple years away from real scheduling/conference issues.

[skip-zip]

And on the other hand, this is good perspective. Basically KD's strategy for b-ball scheduling.

I think a better analogy is --

Say Dambrot schedules Fordham, Nebraska, DePaul and Penn State.

Fan complains: "Jesus...the guy is scheduling the Atlantic 10, Big 12, Big East and Big 10...what a suicide schedule!"

Nope. He'd be scheduling very beatable teams that just happen to reside in nationally recognized conferences.

I would love it if we regularly scheduled hoops like we did 2010 football.

It would be a move in the right direction, for sure. We could at least wear the "they can compete with teams from major conferences" label. But, do you think that would be enough to get a "these guys can compete with some of the nation's better programs" label? I think this second step is what would be needed to get serious at-large consideration. But, at least what you suggest could be the beginning of getting to that point. Right now, I don't think we have nearly enough games to get us into either category.

[RACER]

kentucky plays in the sec.they are a bottom feeder? they would beat any mac champs every year.

if we find the right coach eventually we will get it right.

where have you been.it's been 25 years of terrible football.we had one decent year when we won the mac with a 7-6.

toledo has been terrible over the last few years.kids are not coming to akron with four losing seasons in a row.

[skip-zip]

kentucky plays in the sec.they are a bottom feeder? they would beat any mac champs every year.

if we find the right coach eventually we will get it right.

where have you been.it's been 25 years of terrible football.we had one decent year when we won the mac with a 7-6.

toledo has been terrible over the last few years.kids are not coming to akron with four losing seasons in a row.

That wasn't nearly our best year in 1-A. We were 7-3-1 in 1992 under Gerry Faust. Our first year in the MAC.

[xu9697]

Looked over 2011 potential FBS opponents. I might have missed a few (but looked over MANY), but if your assumption is that 1 FBS team will come here (along with 1 FCS team), here is what you are looking at...

ULM (Louisiana-Monroe), Middle Tennessee, North Texas and Arkansas State are the most likely teams.

Utep would be a possiblity, but only if they want to travel for a 3rd OOC game.

Houston has a lot of space...little help from Mack?

Rutgers, Syracuse and Iowa State are the most plausible BCS opponents that MIGHT come here next year.

[Dave in Green]

kentucky plays in the sec.they are a bottom feeder? they would beat any mac champs every year. .....

The Bobkitties of Ohio U respectfully disagree after beating UK in 2004 in Kentucky, 28-16.

[RACER]

you have to go back to one game in 2004.let's find one game out of 100 that was six years ago.

im sure ou is still talking about that game; since they have nothing else to talk about.that's how bad the mac is in occ play.i

i guess if someone thinks they are a bottom feeder go for it.im sure most football fans would laugh at the statement.

i am talking about 2010.kentucky would beat any of our mac schools.temple might put up a good fight.

[Dave in Green]

kentucky plays in the sec.they are a bottom feeder? they would beat any mac champs every year.

if we find the right coach eventually we will get it right.

where have you been.it's been 25 years of terrible football.we had one decent year when we won the mac with a 7-6.

toledo has been terrible over the last few years.kids are not coming to akron with four losing seasons in a row.

you have to go back to one game in 2004.let's find one game out of 100 that was six years ago.

im sure ou is still talking about that game; since they have nothing else to talk about.that's how bad the mac is in occ play.i

i guess if someone thinks they are a bottom feeder go for it.im sure most football fans would laugh at the statement.

i am talking about 2010.kentucky would beat any of our mac schools.temple might put up a good fight.

Ever hear the old saying about moving the goal posts?

[Blue & Gold]

I previously posted that the BCS - Non-BCS dichotomy is a false one, or at least way overblown; that there are really only perhaps 20-ish traditional programs I'd be afraid of scheduling, year-in-and-year-out, if the Zips were any good at all.

Unfortunately, when I look @ the conference breakdowns, the Big 10 has more teams I'd try to avoid than any other conference, SEC included.

Here are the only BCS teams I'd be extremely hesitant to schedule if I were non-BCS. (Note that all the other BCS schools generally get destroyed by these select few teams too.)

Big 10:

1. Columbus State

2. Michigan (I'm assuming Rich Rod is going to restore them to national prominence)

3. Iowa

4. Wisky

5. Penn State (why do we love to schedule these guys?)

6. Nebraska (I know, I know, I'm one year ahead of myself)

*A top-tier MAC team competes @ the same level as the rest of the Big 10

SEC:

1. Florida

2. Tennessee

3. Georgia

4. LSU

5. Alabama

*A top-tier MAC team competes @ the same level as the rest of the SEC

ACC:

1. Miami

2. Virginia Tech

*A top-tier MAC team competes @ the same level as the rest of the ACC

Big 12:

1. Texas

2. Oklahoma

*A top-tier MAC team competes @ the same level as the rest of the Big 12

Big East:

none

Pac-10:

1. USC

2. Oregon

*A top-tier MAC team competes @ the same level as the rest of the Pac-10

Independant:

1. Notre Dame (Again, I'm assuming Kelley is going to take the Irish back to national prominence.)

Please spare me the exceptions which prove the rule. This is based on tradition, or an average year, or year-in-year-out, whatever you like to call it. (I know Stanford is having a great year, Cal had a great run for about 5 or 6 years in a row; Missouri had a good 3-year stretch, etc., etc.)

So that's it, folks. If the Zips were even a mediocre D-1 team I'd be amped about playing any BCS school not listed above (as the Zips stand presently, we get beat by IAA's.)

So, how many programs are on the list? 18. There's not even 20 BCS schools on the elite list. The dichotomy is not between BCS - non-BCS. The dichotomy is between these 18 schools and all the rest.

*Of course, I should clarify, that by "top-tier MAC school" I basically mean the best 1 or 2 teams in the league. Lol.

[scottditzen]

Skip, you sure about that?

I kinda remember being picked by the MAC coaches to come in first...then coming in dead last.

kentucky plays in the sec.they are a bottom feeder? they would beat any mac champs every year.

if we find the right coach eventually we will get it right.

where have you been.it's been 25 years of terrible football.we had one decent year when we won the mac with a 7-6.

toledo has been terrible over the last few years.kids are not coming to akron with four losing seasons in a row.

That wasn't nearly our best year in 1-A. We were 7-3-1 in 1992 under Gerry Faust. Our first year in the MAC.

[GJGood]

Could someone please go see how the MAC's record against BCS schools this season? While you are at it, how did we do against non-bcs schools and I-AA schools?

I had the same thought, I'm just not too lazy to do it myself. I didn't count MAC games.

Akron FCS 0-1 BCS 0-3 Non-BCS 0-0

Ball State FCS 1-1 BCS 0-2 Non-BCS 0-0

BGSU FCS 0-0 BCS 0-1 Non-BCS 1-2

Buffalo FCS 1-0 BCS 0-2 Non-BCS 0-1

CMU FCS 1-0 BCS 0-1 Non-BCS 0-0

EMU FCS 0-0 BCS 0-1 Non-BCS 0-1

Can't State FCS 1-0 BCS 0-2 Non-BCS 0-0

Miami FCS 0-0 BCS 0-2 Non-BCS 1-0

NIU FCS 1-0 BCS 1-2 Non-BCS 0-0

Ohio FCS 1-0 BCS 0-1 Non-BCS 0-1

Temple FCS 1-0 BCS 1-1 Non-BCS 0-0

Toledo FCS 0-0 BCS 1-1 Non-BCS 0-0

WMU FCS 1-0 BCS 0-1 Non-BCS 0-0

So FCS 8-2, BCS 3-20, Non-BCS 2-5.

Most surprising to me is how few non-BCS games there are. That may be one of the MAC's big problems, we really aren't playing like competition. Most of the BCS games are against the Big Ten which probably has to do mostly with geography and travel. I've said before, I'd take one payday game, one FCS game (since you're not going to get a payday team to come here) and then two games against whoever (BCS or non-BCS) we can get to do a home-home series. If it is a BCS team. it is likely they are not going to be a top team so then it would be like competition. I'd be fine with a schedule like that.

One MAJOR reason why the number of games against non-BCS opponents is down is the rule now allowing FCS wins to count toward bowl eligibility. If you are a WAC, CUSA, or Sun Belt school why play a MAC school in a home and home series when you can have a one and done home games against an FCS school that you will likely defeat? The same is true with the MAC, why schedule a non-BCS team when you can play an FCS school?

I absolutely hate the rule allowing one FCS win to count toward bowl eligibility every year. Schools that would have scheduled programs like Akron in the past in hopes of earning a victory and acheiving bowl eligibilty (mid- and bottom level BCS schools as well as non-premier non-BCS schools) now can just schedule somebody like the Citadel or Morgan State. Heck, even the top BCS schools are now routinely scheduling FCS schools. It is a travesty and the programs in leagues like the MAC and Sun Belt are being hurt the most by it.

[Big Zip]

Blue and Gold Notre Dame hasn't been a team people fear for like 15 years. Why should Kelley be able to do what Davie, O'Leary, Willingham and Weiss haven't. I'd love to play Notre Dame. I'd love to play Notre Dame in 2012.

[skip-zip]

Skip, you sure about that?

I kinda remember being picked by the MAC coaches to come in first...then coming in dead last.

kentucky plays in the sec.they are a bottom feeder? they would beat any mac champs every year.

if we find the right coach eventually we will get it right.

where have you been.it's been 25 years of terrible football.we had one decent year when we won the mac with a 7-6.

toledo has been terrible over the last few years.kids are not coming to akron with four losing seasons in a row.

That wasn't nearly our best year in 1-A. We were 7-3-1 in 1992 under Gerry Faust. Our first year in the MAC.

Scott, there was never a year back then when we were picked to finish first, but finished last. In fact, I don't think we've ever finished last in the MAC. But, you could still possibly be confusing 1992 with 1993 or 1994.

In 1992, we had our best ever 1-A record at 7-3-1 in our first year in the MAC. In 1993, many people picked us to win the MAC, and we started the season well, but had a ton of injuries and ended up finishing at 5-6 that year. The 1994 team was the one that only won one game, but we still finished ahead of winless OU. And I don't recall anyone picking us to win the MAC that year anyway.

And those are the only 3 years in MAC play that Gerry was the coach.

The part of our history that should be sickening to most of us is that our best I-A record actually came in our first year in the MAC, nearly two decades ago.

[Blue & Gold]

Blue and Gold Notre Dame hasn't been a team people fear for like 15 years. Why should Kelley be able to do what Davie, O'Leary, Willingham and Weiss haven't. I'd love to play Notre Dame. I'd love to play Notre Dame in 2012.

I'm just thinking Kelley (sp?) will restore them to glory. He may not. Who knows? You're probably spot-on. I'm probably just showing my age with still thinking of ND as being or possibly being a premier national power.

Should Florida State be on the ACC list? Man, what's happened to them? They were also a (THE?) dominant national power during my formative college football years.

[GP1]

In 1992, we had our best ever 1-A record at 7-3-1 in our first year in the MAC. In 1993, many people picked us to win the MAC, and we started the season well, but had a ton of injuries and ended up finishing at 5-6 that year. The 1994 team was the one that only won one game, but we still finished ahead of winless OU. And I don't recall anyone picking us to win the MAC that year anyway.

Thanks for the trip down Memory Lane.

I'm always amazed when I think about how fast the Faust years went sour. Faust deservedly takes a lot of abuse for how bad things were at the end, but there was a time in the middle when things appeard to be heading in the right direction. There were some very, very good players during that time period. There were players who would have easily started and excelled in any era since.

A good topic would probably be about how the Zips went from good in 92 to horrible in 94. I think a lot of it had to do with an overreaction by the school in terms of some off the field issues. When the school overreacted, Faust did so even more because he simply was not able to deal with the type of kid who might get into trouble. It was a complete disaster.......

[Buckzip]

In 1992, we had our best ever 1-A record at 7-3-1 in our first year in the MAC. In 1993, many people picked us to win the MAC, and we started the season well, but had a ton of injuries and ended up finishing at 5-6 that year. The 1994 team was the one that only won one game, but we still finished ahead of winless OU. And I don't recall anyone picking us to win the MAC that year anyway.

Thanks for the trip down Memory Lane.

I'm always amazed when I think about how fast the Faust years went sour. Faust deservedly takes a lot of abuse for how bad things were at the end, but there was a time in the middle when things appeard to be heading in the right direction. There were some very, very good players during that time period. There were players who would have easily started and excelled in any era since.

A good topic would probably be about how the Zips went from good in 92 to horrible in 94. I think a lot of it had to do with an overreaction by the school in terms of some off the field issues. When the school overreacted, Faust did so even more because he simply was not able to deal with the type of kid who might get into trouble. It was a complete disaster.......

Faust could recruit. No doubt about it.