It’s time to open our eyes, these high-caliber OOC games

[cotton]

Ive been saying this for 10 years...look at the teams that play in the BCS bowls every year...none of them schedule themselves into the ground like we do out of conference...(Alabama did play 2 (VT and Clemson) tough ones but both were exposed for being overrated later in the year.)

:

That's crap. Bama played a top 10 Va Tech team. In '08, Florida played Miami and FSU in '08 and '06 . LSU played top 10 Va Tech. Texas went to top 5 Ohio State in their championship season. USC played Va Tech in '04 and top 10 Auburn in '03. Ohio St had top 10 Wazzu. Miami played Penn St and #12 Washington. Florida St had UF and Tennessee played Syracuse.

In fact, every single National Champion since the BCS started had a heavyweight OOC game on their schedule except 2000 Oklahoma and LSU in '03 (who shared it.)

 

[lylsmorr]

What's really frustrating about that is the 4 losses to UCLA and Notre Dame. Those teams were AWEFUL.

What's really embarrassing is how uncompetetive we have been in most of those games.

but Notre Dame had a decided schematic advantage

 

[cotton]

I agree with the OP. These high profile OOC games are nothing more than self inflicted wounds and we need to dump them. The SEC is such that the winner will more than likely earn a spot in the chamionship game anyway, so screw anyone who thinks that SEC teams need to schedule blockbuster matchups outside of the conference.

Carnell Williams thinks this post is funny.

 

[volberry]

That's crap. Bama played a top 10 Va Tech team. In '08, Florida played Miami and FSU in '08 and '06 . LSU played top 10 Va Tech. Texas went to top 5 Ohio State in their championship season. USC played Va Tech in '04 and top 10 Auburn in '03. Ohio St had top 10 Wazzu. Miami played Penn St and #12 Washington. Florida St had UF and Tennessee played Syracuse.

In fact, every single National Champion since the BCS started had a heavyweight OOC game on their schedule except 2000 Oklahoma and LSU in '03 (who shared it.)

i see that everyone schedules an overrated vt. they can beat anybody but have proven to lose to anybody. not a huge gamble for a top 5 team to play. schedule the cupcakes and sell kneyland out for the 1st two games.

 

[cotton]

i see that everyone schedules an overrated vt. they can beat anybody but have proven to lose to anybody. not a huge gamble for a top 5 team to play. schedule the cupcakes and sell kneyland out for the 1st two games.

I don't know what that means.

However, judging by the beatdown they gave us the last time we played, I do not think Virginia Tech is the patsy you seem to make them out to be.

 

[Zenitram]

Sometimes the cards just fall poorly. This series was scheduled after the 2004 season when Tennessee was riding pretty high and Oregon just finished a 5-6 season (though it was the only losing season in the past 16 years).

No one knew what Oregon or Tennessee would be like, and it turned out both had different coaches and even administration. Oregon caught Oklahoma in 2004 and 2006, both very strong years even by Oklahoma standards. Either way I wouldn't take back our OOC games for anything (Michigan, Purdue, Oklahoma, Utah, Tennessee, Georgia, Texas A&M, etc.) As a fan it is much more fun to play the big boys than it is the scrubs. Our other two OOC games are New Mexico and Portland St, yeah those are a lot of fun......

On the plus side, you guys don't come to Autzen until 2013. The teams and collegiate climates will be quite a bit different, and that's where the fun lies. Michigan came to Oregon in 2003 and it wasn't until 2007 that we paid a visit to the Big House. It sucks waiting those years as a fan but it gives two completely different types of ball games (as opposed to UCLA vs. Tenn where neither team was particularly good two years in a row).

 

[volberry]

I don't know what that means.

However, judging by the beatdown they gave us the last time we played, I do not think Virginia Tech is the patsy you seem to make them out to be.

maybe you're stuck in 1998. we suck right now. vt should have beaten us

 

[MemphianVol]

Carnell Williams thinks this post is funny.

He can laugh away. I said more than likely, not always.

 

[OHvol40]

Teams inside the SEC don't need big OOC games in this BCS system....

Teams in all other conferences do. The problem is that since other conferences are trying to rise up to the level of the SEC, they want to schedule SEC teams.

Now at-a-glance a lot of people may wonder what the incentive is for us to accept these games, but don't forget its all about the benjamins. The revenue from playing Oregon, ND, UCLA.......... is gonna be much more than the revenue from NW Idaho State.

 

[surething]

i am sickened at the "we need to play lesser talent in order to win games" mentality. Where has the spirit of ut football gone? back in the day we would play anybody any where at anytime. Now we want to schedule pansies so we guarantee a win.

here is a thought. it is true we are no longer are feared... think about it. have we become the new san jose st., north texas, idaho st, and western kentucky? do ooc schools look to play us early in order to get a win?

we need to get tough and get tough in a hurry.

 

[Bruleif]

I have always been proud that my alma mater, UCLA, schedules good OOC opponents (unlike a majority of the SEC teams, some of whom should be ASHAMED of their non-conference scheduling).

I think UCLA is one of just 3 schools that have never scheduled a non-BSC OOC opponent. I cannot recall who the other two schools are.

We play Houston this week and then travel to Austin for Texas. We will get stomped in both games.

The Bruin schedule is thought by some to the be third toughest in the country but then again we would have a tough schedule if we were playing high schools this year. Based on what I have seen of the team so far, we could EASILY go 0-12.

O' for the good old days when we were 7-6!

 

[surething]

once again...

i am sickened at the "we need to play lesser talent in order to win games" mentality. Where has the spirit of ut football gone? back in the day we would play anybody any where at anytime. Now we want to schedule pansies so we guarantee a win.

here is a thought. it is true we are no longer are feared... think about it. have we become the new san jose st., north texas, idaho st, and western kentucky? do ooc schools look to play us early in order to get a win?

we need to get tough and get tough in a hurry.

 

[Thump]

I think this is another good argument for a playoff. The Strong OOC opponents challenge your team and test them in ways that the lessor teams would not. IF (and that is a big IF no a if) the NCAA would go to a playoff system that allowed top teams to battle it out even with one or two losses you would truly get to see some great games and you would also see teams less worried about harder OOC games. These games would become more popular and thus make for much more exciting football. This game, though tough to watch, gives the players an idea of what it takes to play big time football. Now they know, time to get to work and get ready for the gators!

 

[arkyvol]

put me down in the category of fans who would prefer to lose to an oregon and know how far down we are than being 2-0 against the u.t. martins of the world and suffering from the self delusion of greatness.

 

[VolsSportsFan]

If we are going to run from having one good OOC game a year, which is basically what we do, then we should be ashamed. And we played UCLA the last 2 seasons and they were bad, and we still lost. Just because UCLA is a known program doesn't mean it's playing a hard OOC oppoent.

I want to keep playing at least one good OOC team a year, and if we fear doing that, then we have some problems.

 

[tvolsfan]

It’s time to open our eyes; these high-caliber OOC games may be doing far more harm than good. Since 2002, we are 2 – 7 in these high-caliber OOC games with an average margin of defeat of more than 14 points.

I am concerned that these games are only making it more difficult for us to get back on top. It’s no secret that the lifeblood of a program is recruiting. We need them, our rivals have them. Do you realize how much easier it would be to sell our program to these young recruits when we aren’t getting embarrassed? How about with an extra ‘W’ on our schedule every year? Sure, the ‘We play in cool places OOC’ may be a fun recruiting tool, but I think winning an extra game and not getting embarrassed on a national stage one less time each year would help far more.

I understand that it may be a lot of fun for the fanbase to travel to these great college football venues. I myself traveled to Cal in 2007 and had an amazing time. My rebuttal would be, wouldn’t you rather see the program recruit better? Wouldn't you rather see us getting back to winning faster? Wouldn’t you rather see us finish the year with a better record? Wouldn’t you rather see us win the SEC again?

With Ohio State, Nebraska, Oklahoma, USC, and Oregon on our schedule in the future, I have major concerns about how much they will hurt us rather than help us rebuild this once great program.

2010 – Oregon at home, L by 35
2009 – UCLA at home, L by 4
2008 – at UCLA, L by 3 in OT
2007 – at Cal, L by 14
2006 – Cal at home, W by 17
2005 – at Notre Dame, L by 20
2004 – Notre Dame at home, L by 4
2003 – at Miami, W by 4
2002 – Miami at home, L by 23

We haven't been that good for a long time. When we are, we'll be fine in these games.

 

[timmy]

I have always been proud that my alma mater, UCLA, schedules good OOC opponents (unlike a majority of the SEC teams, some of whom should be ASHAMED of their non-conference scheduling).

I think UCLA is one of just 3 schools that have never scheduled a non-BSC OOC opponent. I cannot recall who the other two schools are.

We play Houston this week and then travel to Austin for Texas. We will get stomped in both games.

The Bruin schedule is thought by some to the be third toughest in the country but then again we would have a tough schedule if we were playing high schools this year. Based on what I have seen of the team so far, we could EASILY go 0-12.

O' for the good old days when we were 7-6!

:crazy:

Hopefully you mean FCS.

 

[cotton]

maybe you're stuck in 1998. we suck right now. vt should have beaten us

I'm not stuck anywhere. I know VT is better than we are right now. So is Oregon.

I do believe, however, that the problem is that we are not very good, and not that we play people who are able to demonstrate that we aren't very good. The solution, IMO, should be to get better, and not play people who are worser.

Teams inside the SEC don't need big OOC games in this BCS system....

Ronnie Brown thinks this post is naive.

 

[cotton]

We haven't been that good for a long time. When we are, we'll be fine in these games.

Yes.

 

[golf437]

let me give you a clue, Kiffin recruited that class with EE's who couldn't leave if they wanted to and Nick Saban was the genius behind the LSU recruiting. Anyone and everyone who knows anything about recruiting knows that the recruiting coordinator is more a behind the scenes organization guy. Maybe you are the dumb one, or better yet go drink some koolaide because by the end of the season you are going to need to spike it heavily.

Sorry but you do not have a clue. Our coach will do well.

 

[tango]

I'm definitely more in the, "playing good teams non-conference helps you learn a lot more about your team and hastens improvement" camp. I understand the other side...particularly if you are a high-profile team, with a real shot at the National Championship, but even then, I'd rather my team played at least one legit non-conference game.

I think my post will get drowned out, but several folks have touched on this 'playing a real OOC team gives you a better/more real idea of where your team really is.'

Personally, I'd rather have true cupcakes on the schedule.... especially at the beginning of the season...
If you have real serious issues, they'll be apparent against the cupcakes just as much as they will be against the powerhouses.... the only thing is that if you're playing a cupcake, you should still manage to get a victory in spite of the serious issues.

Witness: Florida, week 1, 2010.

That said, your offense may be able to jack up 500+ yds against a cupcake and that won't really tell you if you've got an "explosive" offense or not. It'll just tell you, potentially, that "no real serious problems exist."

Bottom line: I like starting a season 2-0 and, having played two cupcakes, having an opportunity to find problems that can maybe get addressed for the first real game - Florida.

At worst, you walk out of the Florida game 2-1.
I like that better than 1-2 or, potentially 0-3.

Playing 2 cupcakes in the beginning gives the team a chance to settle down into the season, work out kinks, start the season at 2-0, gain a little confidence.. I think that puts the team in a better mental state heading into a Florida game.

My 2 cents..

 

[JeepJeep]

The way that everybody's in LOVE with Boise State, all you have to do is beat ONE ranked team and win out with crappy other teams, and you're in!!!

 

[thagodfather]

we'll have the depth, talent & coaching to win these games in the next 3 years or so, but you won't catch me complaining if we replace Ohio State, Nebraska, Oklahoma, USC, and Oregon with Eastern Michigan, Iowa State, North Texas, San Jose State and Idaho.

And maybe Wyoming.......uh wait, never mind.

 

[thagodfather]

Why would Florida look like chumps? They have used their weak OOC schedules to build a program that has won 2 National Titles in 4 years.

Texas has used weak scheduling to play for two national titles in 5 years.

Forgive me, but I would be tickled pink to be a chump that plays weak OOC games with trips to the National Championship.

Ohio State normally plays at least one good ooc game every year.

 

[The Ron Mexico]

Anyone that agrees with the OP is not a true Vol fan. I should know, I get told that in almost every thread on VN.