Utah’s Non-conference schedule sucks. Change my mind.

[Utesbyfive]

We have a home and home with ONE power 5 school in the next five years. That’s it. We play a string of FCS, and G5, and BY-f**king-U.

We’re not impressing anybody. Mel Tucker has some good points about scheduling here: https://www.denverpost.com/2019/06/07/mel-tucker-cu-buffs-football-fix-pac-12-sec-big-ten-schedules/

Hint, he wants to schedule like the SEC.

[ironman1315]

No. I wont.

[chinngiskhaan]

Don’t be a fool. Who is there to impress? The nonexistent committee to decide who wins the Pac12? The Pac12 crown happens to be decided on a football field. All this team needs to worry about is winning its conference games. Schedule 3 FCS teams for all I care. We aren’t making the playoff either way, so what difference does it make?

We need to prove that we can win the Pac12 championship before we worry about OOC SOS. Don’t be a fool

[Utesbyfive]

You’re the fool. Schedules have to be made 5 years in advance. If we don’t schedule up in the future, we will have even less of a chance to make the playoff.

Why are you fools not optimistic about the future? Why do you think that scheduling doesn’t matter?

All these whiny negative posts about “Oh Utah sucks, and will never do anything so why bother?” are stupid.

[chinngiskhaan]

who said Utah sucks? You are the one being negative about Utah’s schedule. I didn’t say anything negative at all. I just think the school’s goal should be multiple Pac12 titles before we even worry about the playoff. We pretty much have to go undefeated in conference to get into the playoff regardless of OOC schedule, and we all know that just isn’t happening anytime soon.

If we win multiple Pac12 titles in a short period of time (like 3 in your 5 year time period) we will be considered a contender for the playoff regardless of our OOC schedule… Then we just have to worry about not losing in conference, and we are good.

I’m fine playing schools with bigger name recognition, but it does us absolutely zero good to lose games. Bigger names, not better teams.

[Utesbyfive]

 

If we win multiple Pac12 titles in a short period of time (like 3 in your 5 year time period) we will be considered a contender for the playoff regardless of our OOC schedule… Then we just have to worry about not losing in conference, and we are good.

Unbelievable. The very first time we win the conference, we will be in the mix for the CFP. Don’t you understand that? Short-sighted in the extreme.

[Stone]

@chinngiskhaan speaks truth. Look, I love seeing cool non-conference games as much as anyone. It is so much more fun to play Michigan or Notre Dame than Idaho State. So much more fun. However, while fun from a fan perspective, it also makes it far more likely that the team will suffer a loss and/or injuries… which decreases the ability to win the Pac12 (the loss does not directly change the Pac12 race, of course, but it impacts they psyche of the team if they start conference play undefeated versus with losses).

Utah needs to win the Pac12 before it needs to worry about making the playoffs. And frankly, if Utah wins the Pac12, I don’t think the nonconference schedule will have much effect on whether Utah gets invited to the playoffs (sure, it is part of the evaluation, but better to have won every nonconference game against patsies than to have lost to a great team). When it comes to March Madness invitations, there is more evidence of benefits from scheduling up. Football, not so much.

In short, while I find a great nonconference game more interesting from a viewing perspective, it often runs counter to what most fans want—i.e., winning championships. Can you have both? Yes, theoretically, but it is much much harder to do both.

[Utesbyfive]

I don’t understand this attitude. We will win the conference someday. If we have a conference loss, and our non-con schedule is s**t, we don’t make the 4 team playoff. What’s so hard to understand about that? You guys have no faith in our team, and no faith in the future.

I’m sorry, but a lot of you are extremely short-sighted.

[Stone]

Yes, we will win the conference someday. When we do, I will be ecstatic. But under which scenario will Utah’s odds of being invited to the playoffs be better:

(1) played 3 pretty weak nonconference games and won them all; 

(2) played 3 strong nonconference games and won 1 or 2 of them? 

(3) played 2 weak nonconference games, 1 strong game, and won 2 of them?

Now, of course, one would say, the best odds of being invited are to play 3 strong nonconference games and win them all. But how many times has that happened? ZERO. Could it happen *someday*? Of course, but there is faith and there is reality. Given infinite time, the dream scenario will happen someday. But I want an opportunity at the playoff sooner than later. That requires a conference championship sooner than later. Why do you think the  SEC schedules DOWN? Some of their teams are beginning to play harder nonconference schedules, but generally, the approach is to schedule DOWN.

Even if you say, well, SEC teams play at least one tough nonconference game every year, I would counter that by noting that the SEC only plays an 8-game league schedule, whereas the Pac12 plays 9 league games. So pick one Pac12 league game and call that a nonconference game, and what do you know, each Pac12 team now has a nonconference schedule equivalent to the SEC. 

Two things that would promote better nonconference games are: (1) an 8 game playoff, with auto bids for each league champion and (2) a requirement that each league play the same number of conference games.

[chinngiskhaan]

The Pac12’s reputation means absolutely nothing until we actually win the Pac12

[Utesbyfive]

Do you think that we have a chance to win it within the next five years? If so, our non-con schedule will not help us get to the playoff. It’s garbage, and amateurish.

[Chidojuan]

I don’t see how our OOC is any different than the 2016 Washington team, who went to the playoff.  Seems pretty equivalent to ours this year, and future years if we keep TDS on the schedule.  They had Rutgers, Portland State and Idaho.  Rutgers can reasonably be compared to BYU.  Sure, they’re actually in a conference, but they haven’t been relevant for a long time.  The other teams are directly comparable to the FCS and G5 teams on our schedule.  This year it’s TDS, Idaho State and NIU.  I’d actually argue that ours this year is tougher than theirs in 2016, next year is TDS, Montana State and Wyoming.  Probably tougher than theirs in 2016 as well.  2021 seems similar.  We add SDSU and have Weber again, as well as the dreaded TDS game.  Similar games in 2022, in 2023 we drop a G5 and add P5 Baylor.  I don’t see what the problem is.  The formula is there to go to the playoff, and we have a precedent in the Pac-12.  Why deviate from that?  All it will do is cost you wins and injuries.

[Stone]

I agree the nonconference schedule is weak. But, ultimately, that may be the right strategy for long-term (and short-term) success.

[Author]

Posts