OOC Schedule
by longhorn543 on Jul 25, 2007 9:55 AM CDT
Email
PrintThe current Michigan/Notre Dame series concludes with the 201 season. ESPN reports that Michigan is looking to schedule a home and home series with a national power from a major conference. Michigan's AD states that several teams have been in contact about the two year series.
Isn't this an opportunity that Texas has to jump on? The Ohio State games prove that a big interconference matchup like this will draw major attention and give Texas a chance for more national exposure to its program. Plus, the 2005 Rose Bowl was a great game between two storied programs that left fans of both teams (and college football fans in general) wanting more. If I was Dodds, I'd be on the horn getting these games scheduled right away.
Oh yeah...Oklahoma is the team replacing Michigan on Notre Dame's schedule.
All comments, FanPosts, and FanShots are the views of the reader-authors who create them.
30 comments
|
0 recs |
Do you like this story?
Comments
Good opportunity.
I only wish that it had been the horns who had gotten ND instead of OU. Michigan will be a great game for the horns every year as far as media exposure and playing a power house goes. However, ND would have been an almost guaranteed win as well as the exposure.
Here's hoping Dodds jumps on this opportunity.
by YouDontKnowMe on Jul 25, 2007 10:00 AM CDT reply actions
I was thinking the same thing
The threat that Notre Dame poses is somewhere between Arkansas St. and TCU, but the whole world would watch that game.
Not that I think Texas should fear big opponents (I would personally prefer to play Michigan), but ND would be a savvy business decision.
by BrooklynHorn on Jul 25, 2007 11:50 AM CDT up reply actions
I pre-agree with HornChamps
We need to get Mich on our slate asap. I think we also need to get something with a Pac 10 team. I'm thinking some sort of revenge game for that 97 atrocity with UCLA.
We're going to have...
an opportunity to take exact revenge on UCLA specifically; they are on our schedule both of those years.
by BrooklynHorn on Jul 25, 2007 11:46 AM CDT up reply actions
As much as I would like to see it
It will not happen.
Mac has already said that he would not have scheduled OSU if he were around when that schedule was made.
The only way a change in scheduling is going to happen is if enough fans put pressure on Dodds for better quality OOC games. Currently Dodds and Mac are assuming that fans will be more complacent with 10 wins and a bowl game.
10 wins and a bowl game
is always awesome, but I would like to make sure those wins come from credible teams. Michigan would be a great add to the schedule.
by YouDontKnowMe on Jul 25, 2007 10:24 AM CDT reply actions
The same reason I wanted UT to be USC.
Better ooc games for each team in the conference means better coverage for those teams. Beter schedules and better coverage of the teams in Big 12 is good for all 12 of us.
by YouDontKnowMe on Jul 25, 2007 11:18 AM CDT up reply actions
Sure
I care about Texas' opponents for two reasons. One, the best should play the best - for themselves and for the fans. Wouldn't you rather see Texas take on a top ranked opponent instead of Arkansas St. or Rice? Two, national perception is greatly enhanced by a game of this magnitude. Fans, voters, media, computers etc. are much more likely to give credit (which should translate into a higher ranking) to a team that plays a quality opponent such as Michigan instead of one that feasts on the bottom dwellers of 1-A football.
And as for A&M, I'd love for them to toughen up their opponents. A victory over a team with a quality schedule can only help!
But......
The reason we hired Mack Brown was to win Conference and National Championships. Our OOC sucks this year, but where will we start the season ranked? Top 5 or at least top 10 right? By playing two patsies (Rice and Arkie State) and a VERY good TCU team at home we should be able to enter conference play undefeated with a good idea of what this team is. This should put us in a position where if we go unbeaten in Conference play we will be partying in New Orleans in January. Isn't that what we want? I would love for us to play the Michigans and Notre Dames of the College Football world, but what I really want is another MNC. If that means playing Rice, Directional Louisiana schools, or a Sun Belt team then so be it.
personally it's what you want to see from
the product ... we love the finish
but even more so we love the journey
a lot of people get blinded within that
i want to see exciting plays and drama
not a team vs b team
but that's me
Where did you hear...
Mac has already said that he would not have scheduled OSU if he were around when that schedule was made.
?
I can't believe this. Is he that chicken? I was unaware! Please reference that so I can be sure.
Mac Quote
This is from his press conference leading up to the game, I know he has said it more directly before:
On the impact of a playoff system on a game like this Saturday's: I do think that with a playoff we would see more games like this. Then you would work to be in the top eight and have your champs at the end of the year. Right now, a loss doesn't put you out [of the running] but it makes it more difficult. Thank goodness both of these teams are rated in the top 10, so if something is going to happen to one of the two, it is not going to put you out of the mix for the rest of the year. You will still be within reason and have very difficult conference schedules that can still get you back up there. Until we see a playoff system of some type, I do not think we will see any more games like this.
I know he has said it more directly before, but I don't know where to find the quote. HornsChamps might know.
This is always the same discussion
when scheduling comes up. How you feel about the OOC schedule largely depends on your hopes/goals for the football team. Do you want to schedule guaranteed marquee games during the regular season, or do you want to have a schedule that provides the best opportunity to be playing in a post-new year's bowl game?
If you were
guaranteed a spot in the BCS "Playoffs" for winning your conference, then you would see some really great OOC matchups. Until we get some kind of "playoff" system, I want the most wins I can get.
UT has big games every year, regardless of W/L records.
That is kinda how I feel
Given the current system that we have for crowning a national champion, a big time school like UT, USC, tOSU, UF etc has very little incentive to schedule tough ooc games. Getting through the regular season without a loss is tough enough, with maybe one team surviving unscathed. An undefeated big program will likely have enough in conference marquee games to guarantee a BCS title spot.
Now, if there were a playoff as OUAS suggests, then by all means, schedule 3 marquee games every year. However, with the current system, the incentive to schedule a marquee agem just isn't there for a big school (smaller schools however, have every reason to schedule big time ooc opponents).
but the games wouldn't really be all that excitin
wouldn't OOC games just become exhibitions if conference winners automatically advanced? unless overall record plays into the conference champion equation, then I think ND-UT etc would be NFL preseason -like junk. Maybe I'm forgetting something.
by cowboyhorn on Jul 25, 2007 9:55 PM CDT up reply actions
Im assuming that if
there was a BCS playoff system that there would be a couple of "Open" berths to the playoffs. If that was the case, then strength of schedule, record etc, could still put you in the playoffs.
that would probably make a 16 team playoff
at least, which for college football would become unruly, but seriously, 16 teams, with conference champions and wild cards, will never happen...so, assuming that, i think the best way to keep regular season intensity is to implement the plus-1 system. it basically turns into a four team playoff, and every game still matters (at least to the point where if you lose a OOC game, you pretty much have to win the remaining games on your schedule...in regards to scheduling michigan, this might be the most effective way to scheduling important OOC games for all schools, because by beating a huge contender head2head (regardless if you are a conf champion or not), you can effectively remove them from the playoff discussion if your record is similar.....playoffs implement a head2head atmosphere, and if we have a similar record as michigan (<2wins) yet we won head2head, then i see us almost always advancing to the top four in a plus one system. this is somewhat of a stretch, but i think it gives college football powers a better reason to schedule tough OOC games (at least one) while also dealing woith a realistic playoff.</p>
by cowboyhorn on Jul 27, 2007 4:21 AM CDT up reply actions
oops
that should read <2losses. <br>if we ever have <2 wins in a football season, anyone up for a heavens gate sneaker death party?</p>
by cowboyhorn on Jul 27, 2007 4:22 AM CDT up reply actions
Thanks DogTown and Wells....
You're both right of course. I would love to see a home/home with Michigan, but I'm afraid Wells' observation is correct.
I'll tell you gentlemen, if our Longhorns finish this season in a 3-way undefeated tie with USC and another team from a BCS conference other than the BE, then do you REALLY believe our schedule is good enough to get us in the Nat'l Championship game? Me either.
Most importantly, I'm convinced the OU game with Miami (a game WE could have had BTW) will better prepare the Sooners for the RRS. The game with TCU will expose us to a decent defense but very little on offense. All roads to the Big-XII Championship (and the automatic BCS Bowl) lead through OU and the RRS. Preparing our team for the b!tchslap all Stoops' teams deliver should be job #1 for our OOS. Just my opinion.
Didn't people
bit@h when we lost to NC State early in the season.
What the hell was wrong with us for scheduling a team like that when we should be playing the Arkie States early.
Forgot about Stanford
Strange thought..
Didn't people bit@h when we lost to NC State early in the season. What the hell was wrong with us for scheduling a team like that when we should be playing the Arkie States early.
.
I never heard that from even a single Longhorn fan.
I heard a lot of "What the he!! is wrong with our ST coaching?" and "What happened to scheduling premier opponents like Auburn, ND, Penn State, UCLA and Miami like we have played in the recent past?"
Are you kidding me
That's all I heard. I didn't agree with it though.
Just like we're discussing our OOC and making it stronger, people bitched because NC State was to strong of a team to have early on the schedule.
Initially, people questioned MB and why he would do this only to find out it was his predesessor who did the scdedule.
At least that's what I can remember, but that's alot of JD Black and H20 ago.
Didn't NC States
special teams kick our butt that day............
Hell I can't even remember what year.
1999, MB's 2nd season.............
Too strong.....??
people bitched because NC State was to strong of a team to have early on the schedule.
.
Too strong? It is hard to believe anyone would be so weak as to refer to N.C.State as "too strong".
- 3-8
- 3-8
- 6-5
- 7-5
- 6-6 - The year we lost to them 20-23.
__________
Total: 25-32 - Certainly not this Longhorn fan's idea of a "too strong" to play opponent.
Versus playing Arkie State to strong.
Besides, the bitching is because we lost the game.
Should have played a weaker opponent. That was the talk in print and the tube as I remember it. qualified by a lot of JD Black drinking since then.
by ouALWAYSsux on Jul 31, 2007 11:01 AM CDT up reply actions
Comments For This Post Are Closed
Secondary Sidebar
User Tools
Related FanPosts on Burnt Orange Nation
FanPosts
Community blog posts and discussion.
Certain photos copyright © 2012 by Associated Press or Getty Images. Any commercial use or distribution without the express written consent of Associated Press and Getty Images is strictly prohibited.
