Visualizing UT's Schedule as an Independent
The Longhorns declaring their athletic independence (at least in football anyway) has been bandied about for quite some time now. And while I don't think anyone doubts it's plausibility, especially of late, I also don't get the feeling most UT fans really think it's a distinct possibility - what with the holiday super conference shopping season right around the corner and Larry Scott making his list and checking it twice to find out who's been OU and who's been Baylor.
As with anything college football related, Belmont's next move will most likely come down to guaranteed and potential monetary gain. But let's suspend fiscal disbelief for a minute and visualize what an independent football schedule might actually look like as if its attractiveness to fans were the determining factor of what UT does next...
When thinking about the potential schedule, I set the following parameters:
1) The main objective is to maximize national exposure without alienating the regional base...in other words, don't cut off your recruiting nose to spite UT fans who like playing the teams their friends, neighbors and coworkers root for.
2) Maintain the delicate balance of weighing strength of schedule/post season aspirations against always maximizing viewer interest...translation: always put some meat on the plate, but don't forget the veggies and the starches. And save room for one or two cupcakes for dessert.
3) Remember that Texas will essentially be playing 12 or 13 non-conference games and who's on the schedule will most likely be just as important as when they're on the schedule...in layman's terms, it pays to spread out the heavy hitters and put a few of them late in the line-up after they've been thru a gauntlet of their own.
I also took some notes regarding Notre Dame's scheduling practices as the God Squad has been doing this for a while now and is a team whose pedigree, fan base and yearly goals closely align with our own...
2011 NOTRE DAME SCHEDULE
(Annual games in bold)
South Florida (Oops)
Michigan
Michigan State
Pitt
Purdue
Air Force
USC
Navy
Wake Forest
Maryland
Boston College *
Stanford*
Notes: Judging by this and schedules from years past and future, it looks like a fairly even balance between regional rivals/long standing games and nationwide exposure in fertile recruiting areas. And it's also hard to miss the fact that most of the non-long standing games are against AQ schools that are decent but not perennial power teams. And I don't think that's by accident. Though I did notice ND has OU and Miami on the schedule next year and they may be doing that partly because they haven't been getting the boost in SOS they typically get from teams like Michigan and USC of late.
[UPDATE] * Note from our resident Leprechauna: Stanford is more of an annual game than Boston College. BC and the Irish aren’t playing in 2013, 2014, or 2017, and they’ve only played each other 20 times. Stanford is also a newer rivalry, but they’ve played every year since 1997 and are scheduled to play every year through 2019.
Onward. So using those parameters and examples as a guide, what might Texas' schedule look like if they were independent...
TEXAS MOCK SCHEDULE AS AN INDEPENDENT
(Annual games in bold).
Rice - Mack doesn't want a heavy hitter right off the bat and Rice is a team with regional and historical ties. Also, Rice is in Houston, a huge recruiting hotbed and alumni base. Alternatives would be teams like SMU or some of the non-AQ schools from Louisiana (La-La) or Florida (FAU).
BYU - Funny how that worked out, but they'll be a fellow independent and annual game for as long as they stay that way.
Cal - West Coast exposure. I think UT would also entertain playing Stanford, UCLA, Washington, either Arizona school and maybe Oregon in this spot.
Notre Dame - Another fellow independent and a great national marquee match-up.
Baylor - Regional game in our own backyard. Easy on the travel. Might see Houston here too, maybe even TCU.
OU - Main rival. Despite what Stoops said, this game is never going away. The fan bases may hate each other, but they realize this game is largely responsible for making us who we are. It's one of the all-time rivalries along with Army/Navy, Michigan/OSU, Bama/Auburn, USC/Notre Dame and Florida/Gerogia. You don't throw that away regardless because they don't make rivalries like these anymore because they can't make them like these anymore.
Navy - Fellow independent. Willing to play all over US.
North Carolina - East coast exposure. You could put a lot of the schools in the ACC in this spot as well.
Texas Tech - Long standing game, administrations have ties to each other. They will push hard to keep this game.
Penn State - The northeast exposure is nice, but I'm really looking for national exposure here late in the year against another big state school. Other options include Tennessee, Iowa, Florida State, and maybe even Nebraska.
OSU - Another semi-regional game that doesn't require a long flight if played on the road. I could also see schools like Mizzou, Kansas and an AQ like New Mexico here.
Texas A&M - Don't doubt it. It may not be on Thanksgiving, but it'll be on the schedule if we're independent. SEC teams typically play a late season non-con and most of them already have their last game of the year scheduled. I'm on record as saying I'm for putting this rivalry on hiatus, but if Texas is independent, we're not going to leave a regional rivalry like this off the table.
What do you think? I feel like I protected the regional base, stayed loyal to our fellow independents and got some good national exposure in fertile recruiting regions. Might have gone a little heavy on the strength of schedule though.
Lastly, if you really want to put this schedule to the test, stack it up against the other most likely scenario and that's going to help form the Pac 16, which would probably look something like this...
TEXAS MOCK SCHEDULE IN THE PAC 16
(Regional non-con, non-AQ like Rice)
(East coast non-con, but AQ team with high profile like a Georgia, Penn State or even Florida - hello Muschamp)
(Another east coast non-con, but another non-AQ like Florida Atlantic)
(Pac 16 North Division rotation - Cal, Stanford, Oregon, Oregon State, WU, WSU, CU, Utah)
(Another Pac 16 North Division rotation)
Texas Tech
OSU
OU
Arizona
Arizona State
USC**
UCLA**
(Possible Pac 16 Championship Game)
[UPDATE]** Up for debate as some believe if the Pac 16 forms, UCLA and USC will go with the North or West division and Utah and Colorado will actually be with Texas in the South or East division.
Not sure which one gives us a better chance to fight for a title. The independent schedule seems tougher on paper, but also allows for more flexibility. The Pac 16 schedule depends a lot on who we draw from the Pac 12 north division. We get Washington State and Oregon State this year compared to getting Stanford and Oregon, pretty big swing. Then again, we would also have to play in the conference championship game.
Your thoughts...no doubt you all have been thinking about this too.
54b
@longhorn54b
104 comments
|
0 recs |
Do you like this story?
Comments
No way it's pac16 south
They won’t put USC OU and UT in the same division, it’ll be east/west and we’ll be stuck with AZ and the Mnt schools
by TowerPower on Sep 7, 2011 12:13 AM CDT via mobile reply actions
I would not say stuck
Per say. And in most scarios we will be with the AZ schools, its just if its the LA teams or Denver/Utah. Stuck would be if we ended up with the NW schools
Maybe they would put the old pac 8 back together
For one division
WA
WSU
Or
Or State
Cal
Stan
SC
UCLA
The new comers in the other? Just a thought
"Talent is God-given; be humble. Fame is man-given; be grateful. Conceit is self-given; be careful." John Wooden
by 082288 on Sep 7, 2011 12:20 AM CDT up reply actions 1 recs
I like that alot
While the downside is only playing SoCal every 4 years, upside is only one game a year on West Coast.
That idea has been batted about
But Texas won’t be in the Pac 16 without our precious little pretty LHN
A&M: Ready,Set, Go.....
Yea..LHN
The network that most of the State can not see. I have thought, and said on this site that there is more to the LHN that we can see.
I agree
that the LHN at this point is a negotiating chip. UT has done the work in obtaining the contract and now it brings it to the new conference as a way to increase its exposure and revenues.
An article in the Houston Chronicle today said that the contract contains language that it would be subject to the rules and regs of a new conference. In addition the Pac-12 has a conference deal for the creation of regional sports networks for its members. So the LHN could be the Tex/Ok network for UT, Tech, OU and OSU. But the important issue is that UT brings this to the table and can argue for a greater split or at least a reimbursement for costs incurred or revenues lost.
I also still think that UT welcomes the loss of the Ags so that it can leave whichever school (e.g., Baylor and possibly Tech) behind without the Legislature trying to block the move. UT argues that thier leaving is only a repsonse to the Ags departure and the Legislature needed to stop A&M which caused the dominoes to fall.
Also the described West and East divisions in the Pac-16 make all the sense in the world from a tradition as well as a travel and timezone standpoint.
I concur that the UT/A&M game will only continue if the schools are in the same conference (which is unlikely) or UT goes independent (which i doubt but might prove the case).
Pardon the typos. Where is the splchec?
All new states are infested, more or less, by a class of noisy, second-rate men who are always in favor of rash and extreme measures, but Texas was absolutely overrun by such men. --Sam Houston--
email me
at jungmanb@hotmail.com If we can email from here i have not figured it out.
I am in Houston, where are you located? My name is Bob Jungman and W&L Class of ’77.
Pardon the typos. Where is the splchec?
All new states are infested, more or less, by a class of noisy, second-rate men who are always in favor of rash and extreme measures, but Texas was absolutely overrun by such men. --Sam Houston--
That's exactly what they will do.
Less memorable than Sam Okey's Hawkeye career.
by Kyle McCann't on Sep 7, 2011 2:45 AM CDT up reply actions
When it comes to Independence
It’s not the football slate that bothers me. Win our games, and we’ll be fine. Heck, we can probably even win less and still maintain national and BCS relevance—see ND.
The problem is the non-revenue sports (and men’s basketball, in our case). I’m plenty worried about where those get parked and how relevant they stay.
Agree
And this is part of the reason I wrote that I didn’t think a lot of fans thought going independent was a distinct possibility.
Originally, i think we thought we could go independent in football and let all the other non-rev sports stay in the Big XII…but that gets a lot more complicated now that there would be no Big XII.
@longhorn54b
PAC is the best for Non-AQ
They have one of the better Olympic sport conferences and at least care about Baseball/Softball unlike alot of others. I personally hate Indy, and alot of that is based on the Non-AQ.
Indie in Football
ACC in everything else. We keep the LHN and lets check out the other sports.
Basketball: Check (Duke, UNC)
Baseball: Check (Virginia, UNC, FSU, Miami)
Yeah….thats all that matters I guess.
Eight Walls a new MMA blog from Fantake
Follow me on Twitter
Follow Eight Walls on Twitter
SECede?....Whoop(s)!!
The ACC isn't the Big East.
Sure, they’re a shit-show in football, but they have decades of history and rock-solid core of UNC, Duke and UVA that steer the ship to a large degree. I simply don’t see them allowing Texas in for every sport but football.
Less memorable than Sam Okey's Hawkeye career.
by Kyle McCann't on Sep 7, 2011 2:48 AM CDT up reply actions
Oh I agree
I was just thinking out loud for a decent outcome for Texas if they were to only go Independent in football.
Eight Walls a new MMA blog from Fantake
Follow me on Twitter
Follow Eight Walls on Twitter
SECede?....Whoop(s)!!
I know it sounds crazy, but this sounds like a job for the C-USA...
It’s a good conference for baseball (Rice!) and basketball (Memphis!), not to mention sports outside of football aren’t really dependent on being in a power conference.
I actually like the independent schedule more than the Pac 12 schedule. It’s funny that you mentioned Penn State and Georgia as potential match ups. Potentially very funny.
If we’re independent Aggie on the schedule makes more sense, but I still don’t like it. They need a counter punch to the stomach over this mess. That being said, unless Texas is undefeated, it becomes tougher for a wounded Aggie team to play spoiler. I assume Texas will get the Notre Dame BCS deal. If Texas has 2 or fewer losses, we should be in a position for a BCS bowl.
by billfromlaketravis on Sep 7, 2011 12:29 AM CDT reply actions
RE: Big Ten opponents for an independent schedule.
Big Ten OOC games will be at a premium for BCS opponents in the near (2013) future, as the league has opted to go with a 9-game conference schedule for now. What that means is Big Ten schools aren’t likely to add two BCS opponents in a single year when they’re already playing 9 in their league. This will eliminate the traditional Notre Dame opponents (Michigan, Michigan State, Purdue), Iowa (Iowa State), Northwestern (plays a fellow private academic powerhouse every year) and, with a likely Pac-12/16 move coming, Nebraska (Oklahoma back on the schedule). Sure, Penn State, Wisconsin and Ohio State are very real (and attractive) possibilities, but after that it’s Minnesota, Indiana and Illinois. Yeah, they’re not great.
Less memorable than Sam Okey's Hawkeye career.
by Kyle McCann't on Sep 7, 2011 2:55 AM CDT up reply actions
schedule
as and Independent Rice and Baylor(im sure we made some deal with them) will both be every year, and possibly TT.
If it becomes the Pac16, it will be coastal and continental. If its north/south, the north is way too weak comparing, kinda like the Big 12 was.
Also, if/when we have 4 superconferences, there might be more big time OOC games bc losing a game OOC wouldnt matter bc the conf champ would go to the BCS. So maybe ND for thanksgiving or a UNC or Penn St would be fun every other year to get our presence on the east coast. we would have 3 OOC games and 1 would likely be Rice and another likely Baylor.
I like Independent for football more and more
We’re Texas…we have plenty of options for other non-revenue sports.
BYU’s schedule is as follows: Ole Miss, Utah, UCF, Utah State, San Jose State, Oregon State, Idaho State, New Mexico State, Hawaii.
I like adding Hawaii….that could be fun. I like the way this is lining up. We could basically pick a middle of the pack automatic qualifier from each conference.
Say a Big 10 team, a Big East Team not TCU-a real east coster, an ACC team, an SEC team like any team other than A&M. ARK makes a lot of sense.
OU from Pac 10. That is 5 auto qualifiers, then play BYU, ND, and a service team like Air Force, Navy or Army for 8. That leaves 4 regional games against Tech, Baylor, Rice, UH SMU. Hawaii too and/or a Utah or Boise State.
A&M: Ready,Set, Go.....
Now the funny guy is masquerading as an analyst.
This site…
Follow me on Twitter: @GhostofBigRoy
Burnt Orange Nation
by Wescott Eberts (GoBR) on Sep 7, 2011 12:55 AM CDT reply actions 4 recs
+1
Eight Walls a new MMA blog from Fantake
Follow me on Twitter
Follow Eight Walls on Twitter
SECede?....Whoop(s)!!
Don't worry, Notre Dame's schedule will get funnier and funnier as the season goes along.
Perhaps a picture of Brian Kelly’s head exploding would help…an ND spokesman said they stapled their last coach’s stomach and they’ll probably staple this one’s mouth.
@longhorn54b
by 54b on Sep 7, 2011 1:11 AM CDT up reply actions 1 recs
Well, Oklahoma just steamrolled the team that beat them in South Bend last year.
As a lifelong Chicagoan, there are few things I hate more than Notre Dame. Their fall to mortality has been joyous to watch.
Less memorable than Sam Okey's Hawkeye career.
by Kyle McCann't on Sep 7, 2011 2:56 AM CDT up reply actions
Ha! GBR is still smarting over that BOH comment I see...
…Heh. Don’t let it get to you, man, you do great work.
by iamjackburton on Sep 7, 2011 11:26 AM CDT up reply actions
My main concern with Independence...
is not our schedule vs a conference schedule, I am sure the AD can figure out the proper balance.
My main concern is for Texas & ND being independent (while super-conferences form) how does this fit in with a Playoff System. The 4 SCs would assuredly all have spots, whose to say with their power or clout they would not try to nudge UT/ND outside of the picture.
How does Texas secure a spot to the “Dance” whether its Bowls/Playoffs if they go independent?
This chaos is designed to insure a playoff system NEVER materializes
and a playoff system will not come to fruition.
oh hail the Purple and White
Your proposed independent schedule
makes a lot of sense for football except there is no way we play Couger High. The last time we played them in Houston the UH AD pissed DeLoss off so bad he said we would never play them again.
The real problem with independence is all the other sports.
Still remember when that Coug trophy hunter took out Shaun Roger's knee...was ready to stick a fork in them then
Then that whole seat controversy at their new stadium just sealed the deal.
No doubt Deloss is not a fan, but money talks…you get the Cougs to agree to a game in Reliant, I see it happening again. Hard to say no to Houston’s alumni base…just as big as Dallas’ and they want a game in their home town whenever they can get it.
@longhorn54b
by 54b on Sep 7, 2011 9:10 AM CDT up reply actions
I love watching the Horns in Houston
The only time I can watch a Horns game live without having to schedule work and life around it.
by iamjackburton on Sep 7, 2011 11:25 AM CDT up reply actions
If Texas were to go independent, I could see an annual game in Houston
And it wouldn’t have to be against a Houston-area team or an annual rival…could change from year to year and be a team like Navy that likes to travel or a team from another conference that wants to tap that recruiting area.
@longhorn54b
Schedule and Independence
Sounds good in theory, truth is Notre Dame hasnt been good in a long time and has suffered since becoming an independent over time.
1) When you are good its hard to get schools to schedule you (Wisconsin)
2) Recruits dont all like to fly (Hawaii)
3) Travel eats up budget and Navy doesnt bring a full house to Austin, nor does Austin travel to Maryland (although the A-10 jets are cool to start and everyone should see that)
4) Scheduling becomes a nightmare, baseball and basketball get screwed.
5) The other successful independents you mention are church or government funded.
The Pac 16 makes school admin happy, scheduling happy, baseball and basketball happy and fans get better football games. Its good enough.
ND went independent in 1978
The Lou Holtz era, a national championship, and the Decade of Dominance all happened after that.
Also, ND is a Catholic university, but it is not “church-funded.” It isn’t even funded by the Congregation of the Holy Cross. It’s funded like other private universities – through donations, tuition, and the income from its endowment.
Whoever said laughter is the best medicine had clearly never tasted Scotch.
agreed they were good for awhile
but you must admit the last 10 have been bad. Their scheduling even got pathetic to win 6. Those private donations you speak of and endowment not being church money makes me laugh. Old ladies/chuch whatever you want to call it dude, Id say it’s the same.
The decay happens over time is my point, there is none of that in the PAC-16 just a fight for conference dominance and probably a shared channel with the West schools.
It’s akin to marraige and kids and the man-whore. You can be the successful man-whore for 10 more years, but then where are you? It’s better to be married and in a conference to get regular good games without having to hunt year after year.
No.
My point is that independence and performance were not correlated. The Gerry Faust era was almost immediately after ND went independent and there were several terrible seasons, then in the mid 1980’s Lou Holtz came in and they were good. Holtz left in 1996 and there have been mediocre coaching hires since then – Davie, Willingham, Weis. There are other schools in conferences who were dominant in the 1980’s or 90’s and mediocre since. Decay over time doesn’t happen in the PAC-whatever? I imagine that’s news to UCLA.
Scheduling is not an issue for ND. They have so many rivalries and longstanding series with big name programs – USC, Michigan, Michigan State, and now Stanford more recently, plus some other rivalries/series that are with not-as-good programs, true, but don’t require a “hunt” for a schedule – Purdue, Navy, BC. They agree to play Big East teams every year as part of their affiliation with the Big East for non-revenue sports. That takes care of a big chunk of the schedule right there. Plus, lots of schools like playing ND because they get national TV coverage on NBC that they might not otherwise get. ND does not have to “hunt.”
And “dude,” there is actually a big difference between a school run and funded by a church, like BYU, and a religiously-affiliated school that is funded by private donations. A school run by the Roman Catholic Church (of which the Catholic University of America is the only one that isn’t a seminary), or even one run by a specific order of priests/brothers/sisters, is not equivalent to one funded by donors who are primarily Catholic. A church that funds and runs a university can control everything about it. The church can’t control the donor-funded university, which is why you have so many people in the Catholic Church complaining about how “liberal” the university has gotten. And the income from an endowment being church money makes even less sense, since it’s investment income. I’d say you’re wrong, “dude” (by the way, I’m not a dude).
But what do I know, I’m just someone who went to grew up Catholic, worked for and was very involved in the Catholic Church, went to ND, and has a law degree.
Whoever said laughter is the best medicine had clearly never tasted Scotch.
FAIL: you said: "...The Gerry Faust era was almost immediately
after ND went independent …".
This is just wrong. Notre Dame has been an independent since at least the 1940s. If you believe that there is any temporal relation between the Gerry Faust era and ND’s independence, then you were studying at ND – probably top of the class, no doubt, because you sure weren’t soaking up any of that Golden Dome history in football.
oh hail the Purple and White
Independent since the divisions in college football were created in 1978
I should have clarified what I was referring to. It’s been a D-1 FBS Independent since such a thing was created in 1978. I know damn well ND has never been in a conference.
But I appreciate the assholish comment that I don’t know anything about football. That’s very nice of you.
Whoever said laughter is the best medicine had clearly never tasted Scotch.
What divisions were created in 1978
that is relevant to this discussion? Link? I’m 57 years old and worked in sports for years; I grew up in a Big 8 town. In your prior post you unequivocally said “ND went independent in 1978.” That statement is unambiguous. Again, Notre Dame’s independence in football has no temporal relationship with the 70s, 80, 90s, – nothing. Nothing I point out really adds to the case that you are making for yourself quite nicely that you know little, at least, about Notre Dame and its status as an independent. Not trying to be difficult. Just trying to clear the thinking, a little, for those young Longhorn fans that believe because Notre Dame has done well as an independent that Longhorn too will do well as an independent. Not necessarily so.
oh hail the Purple and White
I’m not trying to argue with you. I misspoke and left out the fact of what I was referring to – college football was divided into D-I, etc. in 1978, so what are now known as the D-I FBS Independents were not such until 1978. I assumed that is what the guy was referring to since he talked about ND “going independent” – official, D-1 independence, for whatever that is worth. Otherwise it doesn’t make sense, because ND was of course never affiliated with a conference before then so it couldn’t “go independent.” That was my best guess at what he meant.
But my overall point was that there is no correlation between success and independence. Which it sounds like is also what you are saying. The guy I was responding to was arguing independence caused ND’s current mediocrity. I was refuting that. I appreciate the clarification for others’ benefit, but there is no reason for you to be saying that I am “making [a case] quite nicely for myself that [I] know little…about Notre Dame” based on that miscommunication. It sounds like we agree independence is not necessarily related to success or failure, so you are being insulting for no good reason. I clarified, admitted that I was not giving the full picture that an outsider might understand, and showed that I actually know what is going on, and if your argument and purpose are what you say they are, there’s no reason to be an asshole to a woman who is trying to have a reasonable discussion with you and who actually agrees with your argument.
Whoever said laughter is the best medicine had clearly never tasted Scotch.
Notre Dame is mediocre
and has been for awhile. Earlier decay: UCLA is a product of LA’s decline the last 15 years. USC is a castle within LA, all the difference. Stanford however is great this year, debunks your argument a bit about what can be in a conference. ND still hunts for scheduling and they must, to win 6. If you win 10 games, schools wont play you, if you win 6, they will and you become mediocre trying to get back to glory. KU will take UT’s place in the PAC-16 if we dont go. This is limited opportunity.
Sigh.
Stanford however is great this year, debunks your argument a bit about what can be in a conference.
I’m not sure exactly what this sentence means, but I actually said that Stanford is a good program that ND has a contract to play for several more years. So I’m not sure what “argument” that comment is “debunking.” My point, yet again, was that success and conference affiliation vs. independence are not correlated. And I already explained to you point by point how ND’s schedule is mostly set for each year so they don’t have to hunt.
Whoever said laughter is the best medicine had clearly never tasted Scotch.
you mean
Notre Dame is scheduled to lose to Stanford this year. Success in conference versus not is correlated, you are just wrong. 0 National Championships for Independents in forever (sigh)
Now you're just being obtuse
ND won a national championship in 1988. There are plenty of schools in conferences who haven’t won a national championship in longer. Most of them, in fact. ND has 11 national titles, and coupled with the fact that ND is the 3rd winningest FBS program in history and #2 in winning percentage yet has never been in a conference, the fact that you’re trying to argue independence = a poor record is laughable.
Whoever said laughter is the best medicine had clearly never tasted Scotch.
1988 is ancient history
I dont think ND will win 6 games this year. SEC has been dominating lately, cant get there from here either in the Big 12, PAC-16 cures that right up. Let’s not talk about the 80s again please. Truth is ND would finish 5th or 6th in the Big 12, they just arent that good anymore, sorry if that hurts your feelings. No more fighting, hook ‘em and let’s beat the mormons…
That's not the argument
I never made any predictions about ND’s record this year. You’re throwing that in as a red herring. Something that is not relevant to this argument is not hurting my feelings. You can’t make an argument about what has historically happened (e.g., historical records versus conference affiliation or lack thereof). 2011 is one data point in the history of a football program that began in 1987. There are good ones and bad ones, and recently there have been some bad ones. That does not negate the history, which is what the whole argument is about. You’re using the same logic as the Aggies who say they have no reason to feel inferior to Texas because they beat us last year and we were 5-7.
Have a nice day.
Whoever said laughter is the best medicine had clearly never tasted Scotch.
"2011 is one data point in the history of a football program that began in 1987."
If only Notre Dame had started playing football before the late ’80s, they might have some history to fall back on.
Hahaha, nice catch.
*1887. Mea culpa.
Whoever said laughter is the best medicine had clearly never tasted Scotch.
FWIW
Stanford is more of an annual game than Boston College. BC and the Irish aren’t playing in 2013, 2014, or 2017, and they’ve only played each other 20 times. Stanford is also a newer rivalry, but they’ve played every year since 1997 and are scheduled to play every year through 2019.
Whoever said laughter is the best medicine had clearly never tasted Scotch.
That brings about one of my biggest questions in all of this
There are a lot of non-conference games that have been scheduled far into the future. A lot of these are going to be forsaken due to conference realignment. How much fallout do you think there is going to be legally when these Ks gets breached across the country?
There is so much beauty because life can be so symmetrical that it gives birth to this almost silent poetry . . . (like) a girl who's terrible at grammar saying, "Mama, you raised me good," and then being pushed down a well . . .
I'm sure it depends on the Ks themselves
It’s hard to speculate without seeing the actual contracts, because we don’t know if there are liquidated damages provisions, etc. I could maybe see phasing in conference games during a transition period until most schools have fulfilled their contracts, or if it will be more profitable to just breach and pay damages, then I’d expect schools to just do that. It will be interesting, though.
Whoever said laughter is the best medicine had clearly never tasted Scotch.
Agreed
I mean, you’d think that the attorneys for the respective schools would covers situations like this, but stranger things have happened. If not, it’s going to be really interesting to see what kinds of defenses are raised. It’s hard for me to make any correlations because, sadly, we didn’t get to apply a lot of (any) contract principles to sports scheduling conflicts 1L year.
There is so much beauty because life can be so symmetrical that it gives birth to this almost silent poetry . . . (like) a girl who's terrible at grammar saying, "Mama, you raised me good," and then being pushed down a well . . .
I have a hard time seeing
an Independent schedule looking anywhere near that attractive. Looks more like wishful thinking to me. I suspect as super conferences form, there will be fewer slots and fewer incentives for teams to schedule a formidable non-conference opponent like Texas, which is to say that Penn St. won’t play us simply because we ask. I really see maybe one or two good games and a whole lot of crap filling out the rest of the calendar. Independence is the worst option for the fans.
I think Notre Dame's schedule for 2012 refutes your testimony
I also think you’re underestimating the power of money and exposure
@longhorn54b
by 54b on Sep 7, 2011 9:20 AM CDT up reply actions
Notre Dame may have similar problems after realignment
also, their current schedule benefits from a lot of long-term scheduling partners.
But what are you certain of exactly?
You’re certain of playing OU and a bunch of teams that are traditionally not that good (with USC, UCLA, Oregon, Washington) once every 4-8 years?
You're certain of a schedule
comparable to what we have now, but likely much better. We would swap out schools like Iowa St., Kansas, and Baylor with schools like Arizona, Arizona St., and Utah (already a slight improvement), plus the possibility of power from the coast, such as USC or Oregon (and in those years our schedule will be awesome).
Independence assures us of nothing. People have to prepare themselves for the possibility we will be playing a lot of service academies and Baylor. Whether or not you think it is likely, we don’t yet know the nuances that will affect the newly aligned college football landscape, so the possibility of this scenario must be acknowledged. If you assume independence is just awesome!! because we can play whomever the hell we want, I think you’ll get a dose of sobering reality when it actually happens.
Perhaps.
But why settle for a conference schedule about what we have now when there is the possibility of getting a much better schedule? I’d prefer to take the risk than settle.
If you think playing
Oklahoma, USC, UCLA, Oregon, Oklahoma St., Washington, Arizona St., and Stanford is settling, then we’re very different people. I’d say its Texas’ best conference schedule in its entire history, and its not even close.
by BrooklynHorn on Sep 7, 2011 10:48 AM CDT up reply actions
agreed
when you get a girl with everything you want you marry her. When you get a conference with everything you want you join. To go idependent is foolish and not the aged wisdom we should expect from the AD. Man-whore independent may work for awhile but it wont forever.
Points for "man-whore independent"
I like that. Better jump on that URL before UT declares. Could come in useful.
@longhorn54b
not each
we’ll get someone good from the coast just about every year.
by BrooklynHorn on Sep 7, 2011 11:25 AM CDT up reply actions
No
We should join so we can have a conference schedule that even in the worst part of its rotation is better than what we have now, and in the best part of its rotation will be out-of-our-minds phenomenal. All of that guaranteed. And that says nothing of who we could add as a non-conference game (possibly A&M).
I’d say the best years of the PAC-16 rotation are probably better than anything we could do as an independent, which puts the upside as the higher between the two (best-case scenario, we get USC, Oklahoma, and a big-name non-conference opponent in the same season), but with absolutely no risk of a poor schedule. Therefore: highest upside + no risk = win.
Independence probably has a lower potential upside (I just don’t see 3 or 4 blockbuster opponents with 5 or 6 solid opponents ever realistically happening) and it carries with it a much greater risk of some um-memorably dull seasons. This makes Independence a much less attractive option.
But the wall you’re putting up is causing me to suspect that you simply really hate the West Coast.
by BrooklynHorn on Sep 7, 2011 12:21 PM CDT up reply actions
I guess you just value AZ, ASU, Utah, and CU as football opponents more than I do.
We would likely only play one-two games against the Pac 8 every year. So even on the year we get USC, we wouldn’t be getting UCLA, Stanford, Cal, Oregon, or Washington. We’d be getting two arizona schools, Utah, CU, and Tech/OSU/OU.
I’d rather just play USC/UCLA every 8 years as a non-conference game.
For some reason you're choosing to dwell
on the very worst part of the schedule. And even then, if Arizona St. and Utah are the worst of our conference opponents, then that is a fuck lot better than what we have now (Iowa St. and Baylor) or what we’d have as an independent (probably still Iowa St. and Baylor, but throw in Navy or someone else just as shitty).
As we’ve gone back and forth, you keep comparing the worst part of a guaranteed PAC-16 schedule with the best part of a hypothetical independent schedule. That’s illogical, man, let’s compare apples to apples.
The fact that you keep saying you’d don’t want to play Arizona means either 1) you think our independent schedule will be made up of 12 teams all of whom are better than Arizona (which is, um…no), or 2) you have your fingers in your ears screaming LA LA LA I HATE THE PAC-!0 LA LA LA!!!
Did the PAC-10 murder your father or something?
I'm comparing the worst part of the schedule because I think we will have good games anyway.
I think the OU game will continue. I also think we will play Tech either way. It’s possible we’ll also end up having to play Baylor either way. I think we’ll likely play one western brand name school either way (USC/UCLA/Washington/California/Stanford). So the question is whether I’d rather play the rest of the Pac 16 West (AZ, ASU, Utah, CU, OSU) or an assortment of teams, including some teams from the east coast or midwest. I’d rather take my chances with a random assortment of teams.
Come on!
Are you seriously unable to think bigger picture just a little?
You’re not in a deposition, you are allowed to open your mind a touch on a blog.
And if the sonofabitches are gone, then it is goodbye. Good enough. nt-whills
I am opening my mind.
I think our schedule would be better as an independent. It seems like you’re the one shutting your mind to the idea.
How?
It seems like you’re the one shutting your mind to the idea.
I haven’t said anything about the subject in this thread.
And if the sonofabitches are gone, then it is goodbye. Good enough. nt-whills
Do you really want to go that route?
And if the sonofabitches are gone, then it is goodbye. Good enough. nt-whills
by run Bevo run on Sep 7, 2011 10:17 PM CDT up reply actions
My concern with the OU game
is that it will become a home and home series. Seems like every year, either at the hotel or during the ride to/from the game, I hear OU fans complain about the economic loss of not having the game in Norman (and Austin). They want to play the game just not in Dallas every year.
I'm pretty sure that's a minority view
As an OU alum, booster, season and Texas ticket holder, most of the people I am around would be very unhappy if the game left the Cotton Bowl.
Assuming OU and UT can jointly put enough pressure on the City of Dallas to keep upgrading the CB, we’d like to stay there. CB>home-and-home>JerryWorld.
by TwoPalePonies on Sep 7, 2011 2:54 PM CDT up reply actions
Agree also
If this game was moved away from the CB, Jeebus would smite this baby:

Do we really want this baby smotened?
And if the sonofabitches are gone, then it is goodbye. Good enough. nt-whills
I think Texas would make the rounds with a SWC-ish schedule bolstered by some national matchups
Lets say we take 6 base games from Texas… a lot of good TV there for recruiting locally and for the LHN:
Rice
Baylor
Houston
TCU
TT
A&M2
And Add independents:
Notre Dame
BYU
Navy
Then sprinkle in some rotating matchup games from Pac/Big10/SEC:
USC/UCLA/Cal
Ohio State/Nebraska/Michigan/Penn State
Ole Miss/Arkansas
There’s probably room in there somewhere to occasionally add a Florida regional school or two.
OH MY GOD THAT MOCK INDIE SCHEDULE IS AWESOME
This is why I want us to go Independent. I’m sick and tired of playing the junk teams of the Big 12. I would also get rid of the ATM game. I really don’t see the point in continuing to be associated with those hicks, especially now that they’ll have the redneck stink of the SEC all over them.
I share your loathing for A&M
But when you think about protecting the regional base while still trying to maximize interest, A&M is really your best and only bet. Tech may garner some interest out of state, but not like UT/A&M would, especially all that’s gone down now.
@longhorn54b
With regards to a possible pac-16 schedule....
I dont like it broken up into two divisions. That would mean you would play each team in the north twice every 8 years. Instead i would use four divisions, probably something that would look like this.
Division A
Texas
Texas Tech
Oklahoma
Oklahoma St
Division B
Arizona
Arizona State
Colorado
Utah
Division C
UCLA
USC
Cal
Stanford
Division D
Washington
Washington State
Oregon
Oregon State
This way you would play the 3 teams in your division every year and do a home and away series with 2 teams in each of the other divisions. This results in a total of 9 conference games per year and you play each team twice every 4 years. Pretty much all the true regional rivalries would stay intact and play eachother every year. I also like the balance in each of the divisions.
Very smart
I’ve been trying to understand why a conference like the SEC would go to 16 teams with two divisions of 8…if your LSU, it’s basically like trading a game with east division schools every two years for a game with someone like Aggie every year…
I think your solution would work because in a four team pod, each school would still keep their main rivals on the docket each year.
The only challenge I see is determining who goes to the championship game…just the teams with the two best records?
@longhorn54b
by 54b on Sep 7, 2011 2:03 PM CDT up reply actions
There are a lot of ways that they can decide on who to go to the championship game...
but what would interest me the most and really change college football is to have a conference semi final game and then a conference championship game. Just think of the possibilities.
by LongandHorny on Sep 7, 2011 2:42 PM CDT up reply actions 1 recs
Way to ruin my dream
I guess you could always have two pods in each division and pick the best team from the eight.
I like conference affiliation
Developing a history within some (semi-)regional context can create better rivalries in my opinion. I think rivalries bring more interest and excitement to the games. The independent schedule is literally all over the map and I think that waters down the (my) interest, even if some of the opponents are awesome. For instance, imagine the NFL without conferences or divisions – no bueno for me. PAC 16 is very appealing for this fan.
east/west champion game
winner for the bcs 1 or 2 spot
What's really going to happen
Forget joining a new conference.
Forget saving the Big 12 – again.
Forget going independent.
Texas will go GALACTIC.
Texas will use the Longhorn Network to save NASA, colonize the moon, attach the Godzilla-Tron to the International Space Station, and broadcast their games to all of space in their grand plan to rule the universe and recruit outside of the Milky Way.
surfer
if it saves Saturday delivery with the USPS I’m in!
Independent Schedule
This is
4 Texas schools – A&M, Tech, Baylor, Rice
1 Real Rival – OU
1 Renewed Rival – Arky
2 Religious Independents – ND, BYU
3 Service Academies: Air Force, Navy, Army
1 Open spot – If you can’t get a AQ conference foe (unlikely but possible) Have a few more regional schools to pay er, pay. UTA, TxState, and UTSA all join the WAC in 2012.
Houston, SMU, or UTEP from Conference USA. UNT is D1 Sunbelt conference.
So the potential schedule would look like this:
Rice
BYU
@ Arky
Tech
OU ( Dallas)
Navy
Baylor
@Air Force
@UTEP (open for rotation)
Army
@A&M (Thanksgiving)
ND
So that is 6 games in Texas at a MINIMUM (Recruits like their parents to be able to see their games).
Keeps traditional rivalries where they are (OU at the Texas State Fair, A&M on Thanksgiving)
Provides a kick ass game on championship week. Home team gets broadcasting rights.(Bet this game’s ratings beat the pants off any Super Conference Championship)
Sweet irony: playing the real Army the week before A&M.
Am I crazy or is this a pretty sweet schedule and still all-together winnable?
"I love my haters" -VY
not sure if it's been mentioned
but in the independent scenario, you guys are assuming a super conference team wants to line up a big player like UT. doubtful for everyone not named A&M and OU.

by 





























