UT's non-conference schedule

#1
R

rebel7254

Well-Known Member
Joined
Nov 25, 2007
Messages
73
Likes
0
#1
Forgive me if this has been discussed before. I'm sort of new here.

Why does UT try to schedule a decent non-conference opponent every year? Since strength of schedule essentially means nothing in regard to rankings as long as you're in a BCS conference (See Kansas / Ohio State), then what is the purpose? Think about it. If we would've scheduled bottom feeder teams for ALL of our non-conference opponents like mostly everyone else does, then we would be in Georgia's position right now with an outside shot at the National Championship (WVU would have to lose obviously).

Instead, because we decided to play California instead of somebody like Tennessee Tech, we have absolutely no chance for National Title.

What is the benefit of trying to schedule a good non-coference opponent each year? Is it money? If that's it, then it's not worth it IMO. What does it get us? A greater chance to have one more loss on our record, which is a huge disadvantage because the SEC is tough enough as it is. If we were in some crap conference like the WAC, then I could understand a scheduling a decent non-conference opponent for credibility's sake. But since we're in the SEC, doing so is not necessary.

Like I said, if you're in a BCS conference all you have to do is win and you're going to be in the NC title hunt every year, no matter how crappy your conference or division is in that particular year. There's no point in making it harder to get there by voluntarily playing formidable opponents while pretty much everybody else is scheduling guaranteed wins. Even UAB, which is the token decent non-conference opponent UT in 2008, is far more risky than Bowling Green for example.

I just don't see the need for it, and I wish they'd stop it so we could put ourselves in a better position to contend for the NC each year.
 
#2
#2
rebel7254 said:
Forgive me if this has been discussed before. I'm sort of new here.

Why does UT try to schedule a decent non-conference opponent every year? Since strength of schedule essentially means nothing in regard to rankings as long as you're in a BCS conference (See Kansas / Ohio State), then what is the purpose? Think about it. If we would've scheduled bottom feeder teams for ALL of our non-conference opponents like mostly everyone else does, then we would be in Georgia's position right now with an outside shot at the National Championship (WVU would have to lose obviously).

Instead, because we decided to play California instead of somebody like Tennessee Tech, we have absolutely no chance for National Title.

What is the benefit of trying to schedule a good non-coference opponent each year? Is it money? If that's it, then it's not worth it IMO. What does it get us? A greater chance to have one more loss on our record, which is a huge disadvantage because the SEC is tough enough as it is. If we were in some crap conference like the WAC, then I could understand a scheduling a decent non-conference opponent for credibility's sake. But since we're in the SEC, doing so is not necessary.

Like I said, if you're in a BCS conference all you have to do is win and you're going to be in the NC title hunt every year, no matter how crappy your conference or division is in that particular year. There's no point in making it harder to get there by voluntarily playing formidable opponents while pretty much everybody else is scheduling guaranteed wins. Even UAB, which is the token decent non-conference opponent UT always plays, is far more risky than Bowling Green for example.

I just don't see the need for it, and I wish they'd stop it so we could put ourselves in a better position to contend for the NC each year.
Click to expand...
1. Cal is a four loss team. They weren't a quality opponent. We got beat by a mediocre team.
2. Bowling Green is better than UAB four out of five years.
 
#3
#3
It's a better enjoyment for the game, of course if you win. But also, I'd like to continue to watch these games on tv instead of getting nontelevised games like LA-Laf.
 
#4
#4
Some valid points... but what is more exciting, a west coast road trip to play Cal or UCLA, or a home game against Akron St or Rice?

Texas fans gripe about their non conf schedule (TCU, Rice, Ark St, Cental Florida) and about how boring it typically is (last couple of years versus OSU was the exception).

But I remind them that their odds of winning the NC are much higher by playing patsies and being in a weaker conference.

Its kind of tough, do you want more week to week excitement, or a better chance of winning the NC?
 
#5
#5
Recruitting and TV Visibility.........I want to earn the NC.....not be a Big Ten Champ and question how many other teams are better than me, if I do win it all........Look at this way if we had won Cal and AL Games we would be in the NCG with the SECCG win....if we had beaten AL and lost to FL and Cal we would be where GA is right now.....
 
#6
#6
I am not up on all the BS .. I mean BCS rules and how they rank. Doesnt the strength of schedule still have something to do with it though? If not shouldnt Hawaii be ranked #1 right now since they are the only undefeated team.
 
#7
#7
I disagree with you about cal Hat. Longshore got hurt, that's when their losses came.
 
#8
#8
There are also years where it is not clear at the end of November who is #1 and #2, and strength of schedule is the deciding factor at that point.
 
#9
#9
Because we are respectable and want to get stronger as the season progresses. Plus it's always nice to have a good early season matchup.
 
#10
#10
If we were in a NC hunt would we want SOS to come back and bite us (ask Auburn)? You play the best competition you can and I have always liked that about UT. Many fans of other programs feel the same way.
 
#11
#11
VolsZealot said:
I am not up on all the BS .. I mean BCS rules and how they rank. Doesnt the strength of schedule still have something to do with it though?
Click to expand...

The strength of schedule only has something to do with it, now, if humans recognize it. The reason Hawaii isn't ranked highly is because the human polls acknowledge that they play in an inferior conference. Ohio State, on the other hand, is in line for a national title shot just because they play in a BCS conference. We all know the Big 10 is WEAK this year.

It was either last year or the year before that that they greatly diminished the effect that the calculated strengh of schedule has on the BCS formula. They significantly decreased the computer cacluations across the board, for that matter. Basically now, it's like 90% human polls.
 
#13
#13
I've been basically saying what the original poster said for about 5 years now. If you are an SEC school and you go undefeated, there is a 99.9% chance(sorry Auburn) that you are going to play for the national championship. Playing in the SEC will give you a strong SOS. There is no need to play another very good program each year when you are going through the rigors of the SEC.

Tennessee has usually scheduled 1 big time out of conference opponent. I think next year they travel to UCLA and UCLA comes back to Knoxville in 2009. They've recently scheduled Notre Dame, Miami, and Cal.

I live in ACC territory and there is a lot of talk here about SEC schools who don't play anyone out of conference. I have to remind them that playing in the SEC is tougher than playing in the ACC AND scheduling a tough non conference opponent.

A tough non-conference opponent is just another chance for a loss and injuries. Instead if you added a non BCS school to the home schedule it would mean most likely another win and fewer injuries because the game would probably be over by halftime.
 
#14
#14
The media, television and boosters like tough out of conference games though. And the exposure is good for recruiting.
 
#15
#15
DovaVol said:
I disagree with you about cal Hat. Longshore got hurt, that's when their losses came.
Click to expand...

I second that. They got hit with serious injury bug and play in toughest conference outside the SEC. I will now be crazy and state a fact a healthy Cal is as good as, if not better, than a WV in the Big East.
 
#17
#17
I believe we are the only SEC team not to play a D-1aa team or whatever its called now since the SEC split into two divisions. I would like to keep it that way.
 
#18
#18
Jewbaccah said:
I second that. They got hit with serious injury bug and play in toughest conference outside the SEC. I will now be crazy and state a fact a healthy Cal is as good as, if not better, than a WV in the Big East.
Click to expand...

Wow..I'll take WV.. :thumbsup:
 
#19
#19
Right, pure stupidity, I believe most of the nation thought the same thing prior to them getting hit with the injury bug and losing a few. Where would WV be without White for three games? 1-2 at best, yep. I am stupid. Heck, WV healthy would lose 3-4 games in the pac-10, yep I am intellectually challenged for sure.
 
#20
#20
I've always found it refreshing that UT plays people outside of the conference. It's a hell of a lot more fun to see UT-Cal and get on national TV than it is to see UT-ULL. I pity the fans of teams that traditionally play noone outside of conference. Hard to get excited.
 
#22
#22
Playing other OOC BCS teams nationally only helps to broaden the recruiting base and to maintain name recognition. It also helps in selling university paraphernalia.
 
#23
#23
hatvol96 said:
I don't see anyone here disputing that point. It's the first accurate thing you've said in this thread.
Click to expand...


I have said many accurate things and a few off, back when I first started on this thing. I did the same and got the same reaction. I do not know how to prove this one, without a playoff accurate but it is without a doubt right on.

As for playing a tough non-conference opponent-- I think it is great for the game and respect any team who does it. Teams like WV that never do it make me sick. I just hope they have to play a USC, OSU, or SEC team and get exposed.
 
New posts
You must log in or register to reply here.
Advertisement



Back
Top