(07-19-2017 11:37 AM)BearcatJerry Wrote:  

(07-19-2017 11:17 AM)Cat-Man Wrote:  

(07-18-2017 08:42 PM)Former Lurker Wrote:  

(07-18-2017 04:29 PM)BearcatJerry Wrote:  

(07-18-2017 10:39 AM)Cat-Man Wrote:  Not sure I ever understood the concept of not wanting to play the best teams? Especially when tiebreakers come into play when deciding League Championships/Bowl invites. Not to mention how you are perceived on a National level when being ranked or discussed whether or not you are legit. You'd think we would have learned that from the basketball side.

This is the "Bill Snyder" (of Kansas State) school of thought... Snyder literally junked the K-State schedule the first time he was their coach and scheduled in only teams with losing schedules where he could. (The (then) Big 8 Schedule was weak outside of Nebraska and Oklahoma and was only 7 conference games at that point anyway...) Snyder was not afraid to schedule 1AA/FCS programs either, and would have scheduled as many of them as he could...even when the rule was passed that you could only count 1 1AA win towards Bowl eligibility; he figured he could get to 6 without trying most years so what's that extra "win" worth?

The idea was that most people could care LESS about "who" you beat than the gaudy "10" or "11" next to your name in the parenthesis. AND HE WAS LARGELY VINDICATED. Very few people care that you "lost close" to Michigan. Many casual eyes catch the "10-2" next to your name at the end of the season. And, here's the clincher... POLL VOTERS DON'T CARE EITHER. They vaulted the hapless K-State program up the rankings with all those soft wins and "K-State" became a "known" commodity after a couple of seasons with the inflated win schedule.

Now, of course, K-State was playing in a "Major" (now Power) Conference and benefitted from playing Oklahoma (even when they sucked after their near, post-Switzer, Death Penalty) and Nebraska. But K-State used the gaudy win-numbers and their Bowl appearances to gain a swagger and brand name. And Snyder became a preeminent coaching name from it too.

Just remember: 10>6. Every time. 10 wins against cupcakes is greater than 6 wins (with 6 "close" losses) to "major" names.

JoePa always played a cupcake schedule in the pre-B10 years, adhering to this same philosophy.

That's comparing apples to oranges. It was a different time then. Pre-BCS when EVERYTHING was dictated by Polls. Therefore 10-2 did mean more than 6-4 because half the time the pollsters never saw most teams play. They just went off their record.

I don't think it's much different...especially for those teams outside of the "Power" conferences. Do you really think they are going to place a three-loss "g" team--who's three losses came against Michigan, Florida State, and another "good" team--over a one (or no) loss "g" team who won their games over a bunch of nobodies? Oh, there would be some consternation over it, all under the heading of "how unworthy the 'g' teams are...", especially if that "g" team got bounced in their bowl. This almost happened two years back when Marshall was 11-1 going into the CUSA CCG, and had they won that game I think they would have been put into the NY 6 slot ahead of Houston. We'll never know, but I think there was at least a plausible argument for that happening.

The other thing that is even more true is that most "pollsters" (and the polls still figure into the ranking formula) see LESS of the "g" teams play now...so all they really do is look at the record and the popular "buzz" about what other people are saying. Our exposure has shrunk as we have been pushed off the mainline channels.

I am not advocating that UC "do" this. I'd rather us play Michigan any day of the week over "Eastern Michigan." But I'm also not naïve enough to assume that the people who make decisions about "who's worthy" actually care enough about the Truth to dig below the cosmetic appearances. I think the Win-Loss record usually captures the day rather than "who you played."

To be clear, my initial point wasn't that I think UC should load up on the non-conf schedule. My point is that I prefer them play the top teams in the AAC. I don't view it as a positive that they miss Memphis and Houston. My philosophy has always been to be the best you have to beat the best. Settle it on the field. Not back your way into a league title because you won some goofy tiebreaker formula.