(01-21-2019 07:20 PM)Side Show Joe Wrote:  Thanks. I believe that scheduling these types of P5 games is crucial to any G5 program looking to improve their lot in life. Bringing these P5 programs into our stadiums is huge for generating fan interest, recruiting, and should help build better match-ups for signing media deals, as the home team controls the media rights to these games.

I believe North Texas will continue to make these P5 home and home announcements every year. In a few more years, our schedules might be among the best within the G5. Now, we need to make sure we are building a program that can win a fair amount of these match ups. I think we are on the right track, but only time will tell.

Exactly. Which is why the calls for G5's to improve their CFP schedule strength by taking one-and-done P5 road games is silly. The G5's are caught between a rock and a hard place. They cannot do body bag games and 2-for-1's and while adding the kind of home stadium games that help develop a strong and growing season ticket base. Basically, when it comes to taking one off roadie games vs the P5's--the G5 can only do that at the expense of developing attractive home schedules. Traditional home and home series with P5 teams is the only way to build an attractive and reasonably challenging home schedule.

(01-21-2019 11:13 PM)Side Show Joe Wrote:  

(01-21-2019 09:17 PM)P5PACSEC Wrote:  

(01-21-2019 08:31 PM)UTEPDallas Wrote:  Baylor and Texas Tech make geographical sense. Cal was a good get.

We had an idiot AD who rejected a home and home with Miami and no, I’m not talking about the MAC school. The Canes even offered to play the first game in El Paso and he still rejected their offer. Rumor has it he rejected a one and one with Minnesota and Virginia and decided instead to sign with Buffalo and Louisiana. I’m glad he’s gone.

Not sure about Baylor fans but Texas Tech fans will fill up Apogee.

Ask TCU and SMU fans about our invasions in their home stadium.

It is my hope that by the time these games come around, North Texas will be filling up Apogee, and the Texas Tech and Baylor ticket allotment will be all that is available to our visitors. Remember, UNT has over 300,000 alumni living in DFW. Hopefully by 2027 we will be winning enough that our fans will be filling up our 30,000 seat stadium.

I don't think that's possible, because there's only 235,000 total UNT alumni.

That's still a lot though. More than about 1/3 of P5 schools.

North Texas seems to be on the rise from an outsiders perspective. Good stuff OP

(01-22-2019 03:58 PM)Captain Bearcat Wrote:  

(01-21-2019 11:13 PM)Side Show Joe Wrote:  

(01-21-2019 09:17 PM)P5PACSEC Wrote:  

(01-21-2019 08:31 PM)UTEPDallas Wrote:  Baylor and Texas Tech make geographical sense. Cal was a good get.

We had an idiot AD who rejected a home and home with Miami and no, I’m not talking about the MAC school. The Canes even offered to play the first game in El Paso and he still rejected their offer. Rumor has it he rejected a one and one with Minnesota and Virginia and decided instead to sign with Buffalo and Louisiana. I’m glad he’s gone.

Not sure about Baylor fans but Texas Tech fans will fill up Apogee.

Ask TCU and SMU fans about our invasions in their home stadium.

It is my hope that by the time these games come around, North Texas will be filling up Apogee, and the Texas Tech and Baylor ticket allotment will be all that is available to our visitors. Remember, UNT has over 300,000 alumni living in DFW. Hopefully by 2027 we will be winning enough that our fans will be filling up our 30,000 seat stadium.

I don't think that's possible, because there's only 235,000 total UNT alumni.

That's still a lot though. More than about 1/3 of P5 schools.

Your number may only reflect our under graduate total. Truth is there are a few different numbers floating around out there. Our athletic department reports our total living alumni population at 380,000. Naturally the vast majority of those live in the north Texas region within driving distance of UNT.

Here is the link where the AD posted the 380K.

https://www.meangreenscholarshipfund.com/whoweare.html

(01-22-2019 02:55 PM)Attackcoog Wrote:  Exactly. Which is why the calls for G5's to improve their CFP schedule strength by taking one-and-done P5 road games is silly. The G5's are caught between a rock and a hard place. They cannot do body bag games and 2-for-1's and while adding the kind of home stadium games that help develop a strong and growing season ticket base. Basically, when it comes to taking one off roadie games vs the P5's--the G5 can only do that at the expense of developing attractive home schedules. Traditional home and home series with P5 teams is the only way to build an attractive and reasonably challenging home schedule.

WTH? Since when is it 'traditional' for P5 to do home-and-home with G5?

Would I like USF to have a home and home with Florida? Of course I would. But is taking a two-for-one better than not having them on the schedule at all? Of course it is.

So sure, if the choice is home and home or 2 for one or one and done on the road, of course any G5 should take home and home.

But the reality is, that's not usually the choice, as UCF found out when it insisted on a one for one with Florida.

I'm glad USF has a 2 for 1 with Florida rather nothing at all.

(01-22-2019 07:02 PM)Side Show Joe Wrote:  

(01-22-2019 03:58 PM)Captain Bearcat Wrote:  

(01-21-2019 11:13 PM)Side Show Joe Wrote:  

(01-21-2019 09:17 PM)P5PACSEC Wrote:  

(01-21-2019 08:31 PM)UTEPDallas Wrote:  Baylor and Texas Tech make geographical sense. Cal was a good get.

We had an idiot AD who rejected a home and home with Miami and no, I’m not talking about the MAC school. The Canes even offered to play the first game in El Paso and he still rejected their offer. Rumor has it he rejected a one and one with Minnesota and Virginia and decided instead to sign with Buffalo and Louisiana. I’m glad he’s gone.

Not sure about Baylor fans but Texas Tech fans will fill up Apogee.

Ask TCU and SMU fans about our invasions in their home stadium.

It is my hope that by the time these games come around, North Texas will be filling up Apogee, and the Texas Tech and Baylor ticket allotment will be all that is available to our visitors. Remember, UNT has over 300,000 alumni living in DFW. Hopefully by 2027 we will be winning enough that our fans will be filling up our 30,000 seat stadium.

I don't think that's possible, because there's only 235,000 total UNT alumni.

That's still a lot though. More than about 1/3 of P5 schools.

Your number may only reflect our under graduate total. Truth is there are a few different numbers floating around out there. Our athletic department reports our total living alumni population at 380,000. Naturally the vast majority of those live in the north Texas region within driving distance of UNT.

Here is the link where the AD posted the 380K.

https://www.meangreenscholarshipfund.com/whoweare.html

Wow. That would put you as a top-5 biggest schools in the country outside the Big 10 (10 Big 10 schools are over 400k). I think the only ones bigger than you are Texas, TAMU, and Florida.

But pardon me if I'm a little skeptical of that number, especially for a school that only became independent in 1988.

*edit - apparently I misread the university's literature about "UNT at 20" - they changed their name in 1988.

(01-22-2019 07:21 PM)quo vadis Wrote:  

(01-22-2019 02:55 PM)Attackcoog Wrote:  Exactly. Which is why the calls for G5's to improve their CFP schedule strength by taking one-and-done P5 road games is silly. The G5's are caught between a rock and a hard place. They cannot do body bag games and 2-for-1's and while adding the kind of home stadium games that help develop a strong and growing season ticket base. Basically, when it comes to taking one off roadie games vs the P5's--the G5 can only do that at the expense of developing attractive home schedules. Traditional home and home series with P5 teams is the only way to build an attractive and reasonably challenging home schedule.

WTH? Since when is it 'traditional' for P5 to do home-and-home with G5?

Would I like USF to have a home and home with Florida? Of course I would. But is taking a two-for-one better than not having them on the schedule at all? Of course it is.

So sure, if the choice is home and home or 2 for one or one and done on the road, of course any G5 should take home and home.

But the reality is, that's not usually the choice, as UCF found out when it insisted on a one for one with Florida.

I'm glad USF has a 2 for 1 with Florida rather nothing at all.

Its a decision every school has to make---but its not a all or nothing decision. There are plenty of P5's that play home and homes vs the G5. Frankly, Im glad we turn down 1-and-dones and 2-for-ones----but for some schools it might work well.

That said, we will do something thats not a true home and home---as long as it effectively mimics a home and home. For instance, the Oklahoma series we have is actually one game in Norman and one at NRG in the Advocare Kickoff game ("neutral site"). Its not a true home-and-home----but its close enough. The NRG game was included in our season tickets---so Im fine with that type of arrangement. A home and home series like N Texas just signed vs Baylor is just the kind of deals our AD likes to find.

(01-22-2019 07:48 PM)Captain Bearcat Wrote:  

(01-22-2019 07:02 PM)Side Show Joe Wrote:  

(01-22-2019 03:58 PM)Captain Bearcat Wrote:  

(01-21-2019 11:13 PM)Side Show Joe Wrote:  

(01-21-2019 09:17 PM)P5PACSEC Wrote:  Not sure about Baylor fans but Texas Tech fans will fill up Apogee.

Ask TCU and SMU fans about our invasions in their home stadium.

It is my hope that by the time these games come around, North Texas will be filling up Apogee, and the Texas Tech and Baylor ticket allotment will be all that is available to our visitors. Remember, UNT has over 300,000 alumni living in DFW. Hopefully by 2027 we will be winning enough that our fans will be filling up our 30,000 seat stadium.

I don't think that's possible, because there's only 235,000 total UNT alumni.

That's still a lot though. More than about 1/3 of P5 schools.

Your number may only reflect our under graduate total. Truth is there are a few different numbers floating around out there. Our athletic department reports our total living alumni population at 380,000. Naturally the vast majority of those live in the north Texas region within driving distance of UNT.

Here is the link where the AD posted the 380K.

https://www.meangreenscholarshipfund.com/whoweare.html

Wow. That would put you as a top-5 biggest schools in the country outside the Big 10 (10 Big 10 schools are over 400k). I think the only ones bigger than you are Texas, TAMU, and Florida.

But pardon me if I'm a little skeptical of that number, especially for a school that only became independent in 1988.

North Texas has been an independent university since it was founded in 1890. We are a university system, with satellite campuses in Fort Worth and Dallas. We are the 4th oldest university in Texas that plays football at the FBS level, behind only Texas-1881, Texas A&M-1871, and Baylor-1845. We have never been part of another university system, and we currently have over 38,000 students enrolled. From the source you listed, UNT awarded a total of 8,255 degrees in 2016. At that pace it only takes about 45 years to reach the 380,000 listed as our total living alumni population. Sure we were probably not awarding 8,000 degrees a year 50 years ago, but we do have alums walking around that have had their degrees for well over 50 years. If the 380,000 living alumni number is off, it probably isn't off by enough to make a difference.

(01-22-2019 07:21 PM)quo vadis Wrote:  

(01-22-2019 02:55 PM)Attackcoog Wrote:  Exactly. Which is why the calls for G5's to improve their CFP schedule strength by taking one-and-done P5 road games is silly. The G5's are caught between a rock and a hard place. They cannot do body bag games and 2-for-1's and while adding the kind of home stadium games that help develop a strong and growing season ticket base. Basically, when it comes to taking one off roadie games vs the P5's--the G5 can only do that at the expense of developing attractive home schedules. Traditional home and home series with P5 teams is the only way to build an attractive and reasonably challenging home schedule.

WTH? Since when is it 'traditional' for P5 to do home-and-home with G5?

Would I like USF to have a home and home with Florida? Of course I would. But is taking a two-for-one better than not having them on the schedule at all? Of course it is.

So sure, if the choice is home and home or 2 for one or one and done on the road, of course any G5 should take home and home.

But the reality is, that's not usually the choice, as UCF found out when it insisted on a one for one with Florida.

I'm glad USF has a 2 for 1 with Florida rather nothing at all.

I think USF can certainly find P5's willing to schedule home and home series. Florida just isn't one of them.

This situation is true for every G5 program. North Texas can't get Texas or Texas A&M to sign a home and home either. The focus needs to be on identifying the P5's that will sign them and getting the best match-ups that will appeal to your fan base, give your team a chance to win, and serve as vehicles to improve your program's perception.

UNT is the kind of G5 that can pull of H and Hs with the lesser to middling P5s because:

Dallas/Ft Worth is a talent rich recruiting ground that schools want to have a presence in

They have a new stadium with modern amenities

Mean Green fans please don't take this the wrong way but P5s feel much more comfortable that they will ultimately come always with a pair of Ws compared to say scheduling Boise St, UCF, or one of the other top AAC schools.

I wish UNT the best and hope they flourish in C-USA West.

(01-21-2019 11:13 PM)Side Show Joe Wrote:  

(01-21-2019 09:17 PM)P5PACSEC Wrote:  

(01-21-2019 08:31 PM)UTEPDallas Wrote:  Baylor and Texas Tech make geographical sense. Cal was a good get.

We had an idiot AD who rejected a home and home with Miami and no, I’m not talking about the MAC school. The Canes even offered to play the first game in El Paso and he still rejected their offer. Rumor has it he rejected a one and one with Minnesota and Virginia and decided instead to sign with Buffalo and Louisiana. I’m glad he’s gone.

Not sure about Baylor fans but Texas Tech fans will fill up Apogee.

Ask TCU and SMU fans about our invasions in their home stadium.

It is my hope that by the time these games come around, North Texas will be filling up Apogee, and the Texas Tech and Baylor ticket allotment will be all that is available to our visitors. Remember, UNT has over 300,000 alumni living in DFW. Hopefully by 2027 we will be winning enough that our fans will be filling up our 30,000 seat stadium.

Good luck.

(01-22-2019 08:29 PM)Side Show Joe Wrote:  

(01-22-2019 07:21 PM)quo vadis Wrote:  

(01-22-2019 02:55 PM)Attackcoog Wrote:  Exactly. Which is why the calls for G5's to improve their CFP schedule strength by taking one-and-done P5 road games is silly. The G5's are caught between a rock and a hard place. They cannot do body bag games and 2-for-1's and while adding the kind of home stadium games that help develop a strong and growing season ticket base. Basically, when it comes to taking one off roadie games vs the P5's--the G5 can only do that at the expense of developing attractive home schedules. Traditional home and home series with P5 teams is the only way to build an attractive and reasonably challenging home schedule.

WTH? Since when is it 'traditional' for P5 to do home-and-home with G5?

Would I like USF to have a home and home with Florida? Of course I would. But is taking a two-for-one better than not having them on the schedule at all? Of course it is.

So sure, if the choice is home and home or 2 for one or one and done on the road, of course any G5 should take home and home.

But the reality is, that's not usually the choice, as UCF found out when it insisted on a one for one with Florida.

I'm glad USF has a 2 for 1 with Florida rather nothing at all.

I think USF can certainly find P5's willing to schedule home and home series. Florida just isn't one of them.

This situation is true for every G5 program. North Texas can't get Texas or Texas A&M to sign a home and home either. The focus needs to be on identifying the P5's that will sign them and getting the best match-ups that will appeal to your fan base, give your team a chance to win, and serve as vehicles to improve your program's perception.

Yes, USF has had home and home with P5. But, as you say, that's been with lower-rung P5 like Illinois.

I just don't think you really "build" a program with those opponents. You need to get the big-name opponents, and as you say, those programs aren't nearly as likely to sign a home and home.

So, while I am happy that USF has gotten some home/home with some lower-rung P5, I am *more* happy that we have signed the likes of Florida and Texas to 2 for 1s.

I would much rather USF have a 2 for 1 with Texas than a home/home with Illinois, a 2 for 1 with Florida than a home/home with Colorado, etc.

(01-22-2019 02:47 PM)UTEPDallas Wrote:  

(01-22-2019 02:39 PM)usffan Wrote:  Hope the buyout for the return game is decent. Then again, this is such a driveable game for Baylor that I don't doubt they play the return game.

Our AD didn't negotiate a good buyout of Baylor's return game in our scheduled home and home with the Bears, so it turned into a payday game after the fact. We didn't learn our lesson, which is why Michigan State did the same thing to us a few years later.

USFFan

I don’t have any data that backs my claim but I think there’s more Baylor alumni/fans in DFW than in Waco. The Baylor fans you’ll see at the UNT game will be mostly from DFW and this game is for them. I’m sure Texas Tech is in a similar situation. There’s not that many job opportunities in Waco and Lubbock once they graduate so they move to places like Dallas, Houston and Austin.

When UTEP used to bring good crowds to TCU and SMU games, it was basically UTEP alumini in DFW. Few made the 650 mile trip from El Paso.

You’ve got around 45-55k alumni for each of Baylor and Tech in DFW. One of the reasons they did a DFW neutral site game between the two from 2009-2018.

(01-23-2019 10:29 AM)quo vadis Wrote:  

(01-22-2019 08:29 PM)Side Show Joe Wrote:  

(01-22-2019 07:21 PM)quo vadis Wrote:  

(01-22-2019 02:55 PM)Attackcoog Wrote:  Exactly. Which is why the calls for G5's to improve their CFP schedule strength by taking one-and-done P5 road games is silly. The G5's are caught between a rock and a hard place. They cannot do body bag games and 2-for-1's and while adding the kind of home stadium games that help develop a strong and growing season ticket base. Basically, when it comes to taking one off roadie games vs the P5's--the G5 can only do that at the expense of developing attractive home schedules. Traditional home and home series with P5 teams is the only way to build an attractive and reasonably challenging home schedule.

WTH? Since when is it 'traditional' for P5 to do home-and-home with G5?

Would I like USF to have a home and home with Florida? Of course I would. But is taking a two-for-one better than not having them on the schedule at all? Of course it is.

So sure, if the choice is home and home or 2 for one or one and done on the road, of course any G5 should take home and home.

But the reality is, that's not usually the choice, as UCF found out when it insisted on a one for one with Florida.

I'm glad USF has a 2 for 1 with Florida rather nothing at all.

I think USF can certainly find P5's willing to schedule home and home series. Florida just isn't one of them.

This situation is true for every G5 program. North Texas can't get Texas or Texas A&M to sign a home and home either. The focus needs to be on identifying the P5's that will sign them and getting the best match-ups that will appeal to your fan base, give your team a chance to win, and serve as vehicles to improve your program's perception.

Yes, USF has had home and home with P5. But, as you say, that's been with lower-rung P5 like Illinois.

I just don't think you really "build" a program with those opponents. You need to get the big-name opponents, and as you say, those programs aren't nearly as likely to sign a home and home.

So, while I am happy that USF has gotten some home/home with some lower-rung P5, I am *more* happy that we have signed the likes of Florida and Texas to 2 for 1s.

I would much rather USF have a 2 for 1 with Texas than a home/home with Illinois, a 2 for 1 with Florida than a home/home with Colorado, etc.

USF has obviously done better than just 'lower-rung' P5. We've been able to get home/home series with Wisconsin, Florida State, Miami, Michigan State, NC State and North Carolina, for example. Obviously Michigan State bought out of the return game (thanks, Doug Woolard!), and both FSU and Miami made those deals because they could appeal to their alumni in Tampa, but it's not like every home/home was Illinois and Syracuse. What USF offers to some schools is a chance to appeal to alumni and recruits who live in Florida, but who otherwise won't play games in this state. This works for B1G and Big XII teams. Frankly, I'm surprised that a WVU series hasn't happened for that reason since they like to recruit here.

But the truth is that, for most P5's, it's a unique blend of balancing the budget, appealing to fans to try to maximize ticket sales AND positioning your team for success. There isn't one universal formula. I think USF's current philosophy is to try to get at least 6 home games/year and therefore budget their road games accordingly to lead to 2 OOC road and 2 OOC home games annually. That means finding schools that will agree to a home/home and coupling 2/1 deals with 'buy' games (typically FCS). Sometimes those decisions are good (like the Wisconsin one). Sometimes they're unpopular (like the home/home with UMass). And sometimes they're just flat out horrible (like the 2/1 with Louisville).

The truth of the matter is that only the AD knows the whole financial picture. It's part of the reason why I can't crucify Danny White for not taking the 2/1 offer from Fl*rida. I've never walked a mile in his shoes.

USFFan

(01-23-2019 10:52 AM)usffan Wrote:  

(01-23-2019 10:29 AM)quo vadis Wrote:  

(01-22-2019 08:29 PM)Side Show Joe Wrote:  

(01-22-2019 07:21 PM)quo vadis Wrote:  

(01-22-2019 02:55 PM)Attackcoog Wrote:  Exactly. Which is why the calls for G5's to improve their CFP schedule strength by taking one-and-done P5 road games is silly. The G5's are caught between a rock and a hard place. They cannot do body bag games and 2-for-1's and while adding the kind of home stadium games that help develop a strong and growing season ticket base. Basically, when it comes to taking one off roadie games vs the P5's--the G5 can only do that at the expense of developing attractive home schedules. Traditional home and home series with P5 teams is the only way to build an attractive and reasonably challenging home schedule.

WTH? Since when is it 'traditional' for P5 to do home-and-home with G5?

Would I like USF to have a home and home with Florida? Of course I would. But is taking a two-for-one better than not having them on the schedule at all? Of course it is.

So sure, if the choice is home and home or 2 for one or one and done on the road, of course any G5 should take home and home.

But the reality is, that's not usually the choice, as UCF found out when it insisted on a one for one with Florida.

I'm glad USF has a 2 for 1 with Florida rather nothing at all.

I think USF can certainly find P5's willing to schedule home and home series. Florida just isn't one of them.

This situation is true for every G5 program. North Texas can't get Texas or Texas A&M to sign a home and home either. The focus needs to be on identifying the P5's that will sign them and getting the best match-ups that will appeal to your fan base, give your team a chance to win, and serve as vehicles to improve your program's perception.

Yes, USF has had home and home with P5. But, as you say, that's been with lower-rung P5 like Illinois.

I just don't think you really "build" a program with those opponents. You need to get the big-name opponents, and as you say, those programs aren't nearly as likely to sign a home and home.

So, while I am happy that USF has gotten some home/home with some lower-rung P5, I am *more* happy that we have signed the likes of Florida and Texas to 2 for 1s.

I would much rather USF have a 2 for 1 with Texas than a home/home with Illinois, a 2 for 1 with Florida than a home/home with Colorado, etc.

USF has obviously done better than just 'lower-rung' P5. We've been able to get home/home series with Wisconsin, Florida State, Miami ...

Yes, I was just responding to that aspect of the other poster's comment that discussed lower-rung P5.

(01-22-2019 09:29 PM)Fighting Muskie Wrote:  UNT is the kind of G5 that can pull of H and Hs with the lesser to middling P5s because:

Dallas/Ft Worth is a talent rich recruiting ground that schools want to have a presence in

They have a new stadium with modern amenities

Mean Green fans please don't take this the wrong way but P5s feel much more comfortable that they will ultimately come always with a pair of Ws compared to say scheduling Boise St, UCF, or one of the other top AAC schools.

I wish UNT the best and hope they flourish in C-USA West.

Getting a home-and-home with Cal was a good get. Anytime you can get a home-and-home with a P5 school, that is a good thing for a G5 school. Any P5 school.

Cal really needed a home game in 2019 against an FBS program. They had a home game with UC Davis and with five conference road games and a road game at Ole Miss, they needed a home game to complete their 2019 schedule. North Texas helped them out. Cal has scheduled home-and-home games with Mountain West schools and BYU in the past, but this is the first time I can remember them scheduling a home-and-home with a G5 school outside of the west. Certainly not since the Pac-12 went to a nine game conference schedule in 2006.

Cal has been an up-and-down football school, but they sure produce a lot of football talent. Cal had the most players on this year's pro bowl roster of any school with five. The Cal players on this year's pro bowl roster were Aaron Rodgers, Jared Goff, Cameron Jordan, Alex Mack and Keenan Allen. Cal had 22 players on opening day NFL active rosters in 2018, including Marshawn "Beast Mode" Lynch and DeSean "Silver Linings Playbook" Jackson. Former Cal Tight End Tony Gonzalez should be a first ballot Hall of Fame selection in 2019.

Over the past five seasons in non-conference play, they have beat Northwestern on the road, beat Ole Miss at home, swept a home-and-home from Texas and swept a home-and-home from North Carolina. If they are a "lesser to middling P5," how many other schools are in that category?

(01-23-2019 10:29 AM)quo vadis Wrote:  

(01-22-2019 08:29 PM)Side Show Joe Wrote:  

(01-22-2019 07:21 PM)quo vadis Wrote:  

(01-22-2019 02:55 PM)Attackcoog Wrote:  Exactly. Which is why the calls for G5's to improve their CFP schedule strength by taking one-and-done P5 road games is silly. The G5's are caught between a rock and a hard place. They cannot do body bag games and 2-for-1's and while adding the kind of home stadium games that help develop a strong and growing season ticket base. Basically, when it comes to taking one off roadie games vs the P5's--the G5 can only do that at the expense of developing attractive home schedules. Traditional home and home series with P5 teams is the only way to build an attractive and reasonably challenging home schedule.

WTH? Since when is it 'traditional' for P5 to do home-and-home with G5?

Would I like USF to have a home and home with Florida? Of course I would. But is taking a two-for-one better than not having them on the schedule at all? Of course it is.

So sure, if the choice is home and home or 2 for one or one and done on the road, of course any G5 should take home and home.

But the reality is, that's not usually the choice, as UCF found out when it insisted on a one for one with Florida.

I'm glad USF has a 2 for 1 with Florida rather nothing at all.

I think USF can certainly find P5's willing to schedule home and home series. Florida just isn't one of them.

This situation is true for every G5 program. North Texas can't get Texas or Texas A&M to sign a home and home either. The focus needs to be on identifying the P5's that will sign them and getting the best match-ups that will appeal to your fan base, give your team a chance to win, and serve as vehicles to improve your program's perception.

Yes, USF has had home and home with P5. But, as you say, that's been with lower-rung P5 like Illinois.

I just don't think you really "build" a program with those opponents. You need to get the big-name opponents, and as you say, those programs aren't nearly as likely to sign a home and home.

So, while I am happy that USF has gotten some home/home with some lower-rung P5, I am *more* happy that we have signed the likes of Florida and Texas to 2 for 1s.

I would much rather USF have a 2 for 1 with Texas than a home/home with Illinois, a 2 for 1 with Florida than a home/home with Colorado, etc.

You need both, IMHO. ANY win over a P5 looks good to the masses, and builds buzz. No matter how crappy Illinois is, the average fan has heard of them, and while not realizing Illinois will finish 4-8, that is a "name" win. Versus a win over say Troy, even if Troy is a better team than Illinois.

(01-22-2019 07:21 PM)quo vadis Wrote:  

(01-22-2019 02:55 PM)Attackcoog Wrote:  Exactly. Which is why the calls for G5's to improve their CFP schedule strength by taking one-and-done P5 road games is silly. The G5's are caught between a rock and a hard place. They cannot do body bag games and 2-for-1's and while adding the kind of home stadium games that help develop a strong and growing season ticket base. Basically, when it comes to taking one off roadie games vs the P5's--the G5 can only do that at the expense of developing attractive home schedules. Traditional home and home series with P5 teams is the only way to build an attractive and reasonably challenging home schedule.

WTH? Since when is it 'traditional' for P5 to do home-and-home with G5?

Would I like USF to have a home and home with Florida? Of course I would. But is taking a two-for-one better than not having them on the schedule at all? Of course it is.

So sure, if the choice is home and home or 2 for one or one and done on the road, of course any G5 should take home and home.

But the reality is, that's not usually the choice, as UCF found out when it insisted on a one for one with Florida.

I'm glad USF has a 2 for 1 with Florida rather nothing at all.

I don't know... at some point you have to take a hit from scheduling like that. either 5 home games one season, or a weakened home schedule for a season. I'd rather focus on scheduling P5;s that will pay Home and Homes.

(01-23-2019 10:40 AM)1845 Bear Wrote:  

(01-22-2019 02:47 PM)UTEPDallas Wrote:  

(01-22-2019 02:39 PM)usffan Wrote:  Hope the buyout for the return game is decent. Then again, this is such a driveable game for Baylor that I don't doubt they play the return game.

Our AD didn't negotiate a good buyout of Baylor's return game in our scheduled home and home with the Bears, so it turned into a payday game after the fact. We didn't learn our lesson, which is why Michigan State did the same thing to us a few years later.

USFFan

I don’t have any data that backs my claim but I think there’s more Baylor alumni/fans in DFW than in Waco. The Baylor fans you’ll see at the UNT game will be mostly from DFW and this game is for them. I’m sure Texas Tech is in a similar situation. There’s not that many job opportunities in Waco and Lubbock once they graduate so they move to places like Dallas, Houston and Austin.

When UTEP used to bring good crowds to TCU and SMU games, it was basically UTEP alumini in DFW. Few made the 650 mile trip from El Paso.

You’ve got around 45-55k alumni for each of Baylor and Tech in DFW. One of the reasons they did a DFW neutral site game between the two from 2009-2018.

Texas Tech has been quite larger than Baylor for decades so I wonder where you got your numbers from?

This 2016 article lists 136K active alumni and you suggest 45-55k live in DFW?
https://www.baylor.edu/alumni/magazine/1...?id=929690

I would imagine Tech has plenty of alumni in DFW who aren't registered with the Alumni association. Same with Baylor.