Page 15 of 23

Re: Official Future Scheduling Thread

PostPosted: Wed Jan 11, 2017 10:49 pm
by HJS
ATLeagle wrote:My guess is Daz drove this schedule more than Bates.

Which makes sense as he's got 4 years left on his contract.

In all honesty, I have no problem with these ads. Like it or not, Kansas and Rutgers are peer programs... at least they are based on the last 8 years (and likely the next 4). The schedule going forward is fine. Of the eleventy billion things to criticize the program on, getting winnable P5 games on the schedule is simply not one of them.

Re: Official Future Scheduling Thread

PostPosted: Thu Jan 12, 2017 12:19 am
by MilitantEagle
HJS wrote:
ATLeagle wrote:My guess is Daz drove this schedule more than Bates.

Which makes sense as he's got 4 years left on his contract.

In all honesty, I have no problem with these ads. Like it or not, Kansas and Rutgers are peer programs... at least they are based on the last 8 years (and likely the next 4). The schedule going forward is fine. Of the eleventy billion things to criticize the program on, getting winnable P5 games on the schedule is simply not one of them.


This. Heading to Alumni to watch them play Purdue, Rutgers or Kansas is a lot better than going to see Wagner, Buffalo or UConn. It's fine considering the state of the program. Win games and play an exciting team in a bowl game.

Re: Official Future Scheduling Thread

PostPosted: Thu Jan 12, 2017 8:10 am
by dtwalrus
MilitantEagle wrote:
HJS wrote:
ATLeagle wrote:My guess is Daz drove this schedule more than Bates.

Which makes sense as he's got 4 years left on his contract.

In all honesty, I have no problem with these ads. Like it or not, Kansas and Rutgers are peer programs... at least they are based on the last 8 years (and likely the next 4). The schedule going forward is fine. Of the eleventy billion things to criticize the program on, getting winnable P5 games on the schedule is simply not one of them.


This. Heading to Alumni to watch them play Purdue, Rutgers or Kansas is a lot better than going to see Wagner, Buffalo or UConn. It's fine considering the state of the program. Win games and play an exciting team in a bowl game.


Some people will just never be satisfied. Bates is doing almost everything the fanbase wanted with the schedule.

1) Fewer FCS cupcakes. Check. Several seasons without an FCS opponent coming up.

2) More P5 opponents. Check. Including 5 of the next 10 seasons with 2+.

3) More logical G5 fillers. Check. UMass, UConn, Temple.

People here just keep moving the goal posts and apparently now the only thing that matters is scheduling baby rapists, forget the fact that Michigan and Alabama might have zero interest in playing us. Forget the fact that we add nothing to an opponent's playoff resume right now.

The scheduling has moved in the right direction. Now in the next few years if we can get back to being a respectable 8-10 win program, maybe we can lure some baby rapists into the schedule.

Re: Official Future Scheduling Thread

PostPosted: Thu Jan 12, 2017 8:37 am
by TobaccoRoadEagle
i think we're hard pressed to complain about rutgres, no matter how much it stinks. the dirty jerz is an important recruiting ground and having a game there for the local gweeds to watch should be a good thing.

there is no possible positive spin that comes out of scheduling kansas other than that they are even more of a punching bag over the last 10 years than we are

Re: Official Future Scheduling Thread

PostPosted: Thu Jan 12, 2017 9:56 am
by twballgame9
There is zero wrong with scheduling p5 punching bags. Rutgers is a++ scheduling. P5, probably winnable, recruiting ground.

Re: Official Future Scheduling Thread

PostPosted: Thu Jan 12, 2017 10:09 am
by eepstein0
TobaccoRoadEagle wrote:i think we're hard pressed to complain about rutgres, no matter how much it stinks. the dirty jerz is an important recruiting ground and having a game there for the local gweeds to watch should be a good thing.

there is no possible positive spin that comes out of scheduling kansas other than that they are even more of a punching bag over the last 10 years than we are


Schedule teams where we actually recruit. BC hasn't recruited Indiana, Kansas, Illinois or Missouri in forever. Replace those schools with Maryland, Texas Tech, and maybe Georgia or something. We at least recruit there.

Re: Official Future Scheduling Thread

PostPosted: Thu Jan 12, 2017 10:09 am
by commavegarage
id still rather see a peer punching bag (vandy, for example), than some horrible school in a terrible location that we have zero in common with.

northwestern a few years ago and stanford (despite the fact that my unborn children will be in grad school by the time those games happen) were the right direction.

rutgers is fine.

kansas and purdue are the wrong direction.

Re: Official Future Scheduling Thread

PostPosted: Thu Jan 12, 2017 10:11 am
by eepstein0
dtwalrus wrote:
MilitantEagle wrote:
HJS wrote:
ATLeagle wrote:My guess is Daz drove this schedule more than Bates.

Which makes sense as he's got 4 years left on his contract.

In all honesty, I have no problem with these ads. Like it or not, Kansas and Rutgers are peer programs... at least they are based on the last 8 years (and likely the next 4). The schedule going forward is fine. Of the eleventy billion things to criticize the program on, getting winnable P5 games on the schedule is simply not one of them.


This. Heading to Alumni to watch them play Purdue, Rutgers or Kansas is a lot better than going to see Wagner, Buffalo or UConn. It's fine considering the state of the program. Win games and play an exciting team in a bowl game.


Some people will just never be satisfied. Bates is doing almost everything the fanbase wanted with the schedule.

1) Fewer FCS cupcakes. Check. Several seasons without an FCS opponent coming up.

2) More P5 opponents. Check. Including 5 of the next 10 seasons with 2+.

3) More logical G5 fillers. Check. UMass, UConn, Temple.

People here just keep moving the goal posts and apparently now the only thing that matters is scheduling baby rapists, forget the fact that Michigan and Alabama might have zero interest in playing us. Forget the fact that we add nothing to an opponent's playoff resume right now.

The scheduling has moved in the right direction. Now in the next few years if we can get back to being a respectable 8-10 win program, maybe we can lure some baby rapists into the schedule.


I really have no desire to play the Bamas and Michigans of the world right now. We have enough Top 10 teams on the schedule every year.

Stanford and Ohio St make sense from a recruiting perspective

Re: Official Future Scheduling Thread

PostPosted: Thu Jan 12, 2017 10:12 am
by eepstein0
commavegarage wrote:id still rather see a peer punching bag (vandy, for example), than some horrible school in a terrible location that we have zero in common with.

northwestern a few years ago and stanford (despite the fact that my unborn children will be in grad school by the time those games happen) were the right direction.

rutgers is fine.

kansas and purdue are the wrong direction.


Northern Illinois and Mizzou are also the wrong direction. Play Cincinnati and UGA or Florida instead

Re: Official Future Scheduling Thread

PostPosted: Thu Jan 12, 2017 10:14 am
by angrychicken
My only problem with playing these teams is that it will likely hurt our strength of schedule and keep us out of the 4 team playoff.

Re: Official Future Scheduling Thread

PostPosted: Thu Jan 12, 2017 10:18 am
by dtwalrus
I also wonder how much we're seeing a self-sorting of the P5 in terms of future scheduling, with the top 40 teams scheduling other top 40 teams to bolster playoff resumes, the middle 40 scheduling the most attractive remaining teams (likely other middle 40 teams) and the bottom teams left with only each other to play. There might be some flexibility with this if there's a geographically or historically appropriate rivalry, but generally I think we're seeing rank sorting.

Right now, unfortunately, we're a bottom 40 team. Rutgers, Kansas and Purdue might be as good as it gets until the program takes a step forward.

Re: Official Future Scheduling Thread

PostPosted: Thu Jan 12, 2017 10:25 am
by commavegarage
dtwalrus wrote:I also wonder how much we're seeing a self-sorting of the P5 in terms of future scheduling, with the top 40 teams scheduling other top 40 teams to bolster playoff resumes, the middle 40 scheduling the most attractive remaining teams (likely other middle 40 teams) and the bottom teams left with only each other to play. There might be some flexibility with this if there's a geographically or historically appropriate rivalry, but generally I think we're seeing rank sorting.

Right now, unfortunately, we're a bottom 40 team. Rutgers, Kansas and Purdue might be as good as it gets until the program takes a step forward.


this is stupid. look at what other teams are scheduling

cuse has wisconsin home and home on the schedule (and just had lsu home and home)

uva has byu home and home (and just had oregon home and home)

duke has bama and a northwestern home and home on the schedule.

wake has a home and home with vandy and ole miss

these are all "non top 40" schools.

Re: Official Future Scheduling Thread

PostPosted: Thu Jan 12, 2017 10:25 am
by dtwalrus
eepstein0 wrote:
TobaccoRoadEagle wrote:i think we're hard pressed to complain about rutgres, no matter how much it stinks. the dirty jerz is an important recruiting ground and having a game there for the local gweeds to watch should be a good thing.

there is no possible positive spin that comes out of scheduling kansas other than that they are even more of a punching bag over the last 10 years than we are


Schedule teams where we actually recruit. BC hasn't recruited Indiana, Kansas, Illinois or Missouri in forever. Replace those schools with Maryland, Texas Tech, and maybe Georgia or something. We at least recruit there.


1) Maryland recently scheduled Virginia Tech (x4) and WVU. We actually probably could schedule them, but this is less exciting than Purdue in my book.
2) Texas Tech's recently announced P5 OOC: Oregon, Arizona, Arizona State, NCST. I see baby rapists and warm weather "peers." They probably have zero interest in playing BC.
3) Georgia has GT every year. The only other P5's they've scheduled are Notre Dame, UCLA and a neutral site against UVa in Georgia. They almost certainly have zero interest in playing BC.

Who else you got?

Re: Official Future Scheduling Thread

PostPosted: Thu Jan 12, 2017 10:34 am
by twballgame9
eepstein0 wrote:
TobaccoRoadEagle wrote:i think we're hard pressed to complain about rutgres, no matter how much it stinks. the dirty jerz is an important recruiting ground and having a game there for the local gweeds to watch should be a good thing.

there is no possible positive spin that comes out of scheduling kansas other than that they are even more of a punching bag over the last 10 years than we are


Schedule teams where we actually recruit. BC hasn't recruited Indiana, Kansas, Illinois or Missouri in forever. Replace those schools with Maryland, Texas Tech, and maybe Georgia or something. We at least recruit there.


Ucf

Re: Official Future Scheduling Thread

PostPosted: Thu Jan 12, 2017 10:37 am
by angrychicken
twballgame9 wrote:
eepstein0 wrote:
TobaccoRoadEagle wrote:i think we're hard pressed to complain about rutgres, no matter how much it stinks. the dirty jerz is an important recruiting ground and having a game there for the local gweeds to watch should be a good thing.

there is no possible positive spin that comes out of scheduling kansas other than that they are even more of a punching bag over the last 10 years than we are


Schedule teams where we actually recruit. BC hasn't recruited Indiana, Kansas, Illinois or Missouri in forever. Replace those schools with Maryland, Texas Tech, and maybe Georgia or something. We at least recruit there.


Ucf

FAU

Re: Official Future Scheduling Thread

PostPosted: Thu Jan 12, 2017 10:40 am
by eagle33
Yukon game at Fenway = stupid.

Re: Official Future Scheduling Thread

PostPosted: Thu Jan 12, 2017 10:41 am
by dtwalrus
commavegarage wrote:
dtwalrus wrote:I also wonder how much we're seeing a self-sorting of the P5 in terms of future scheduling, with the top 40 teams scheduling other top 40 teams to bolster playoff resumes, the middle 40 scheduling the most attractive remaining teams (likely other middle 40 teams) and the bottom teams left with only each other to play. There might be some flexibility with this if there's a geographically or historically appropriate rivalry, but generally I think we're seeing rank sorting.

Right now, unfortunately, we're a bottom 40 team. Rutgers, Kansas and Purdue might be as good as it gets until the program takes a step forward.


this is stupid. look at what other teams are scheduling

cuse has wisconsin home and home on the schedule (and just had lsu home and home)

uva has byu home and home (and just had oregon home and home)

duke has bama and a northwestern home and home on the schedule.

wake has a home and home with vandy and ole miss

these are all "non top 40" schools.


Syracuse:
Scheduled LSU before the playoffs started. The 'Cuse vs. Wisconsin series is a good get by Syracuse, and I agree BC should've done everything possible to snag that series.

UVa: Scheduled Oregon before the playoffs started. They've added BYU (Independent playing multiple P5's every year, and also frankly equivalent to Missouri) and Indiana since the start of the playoffs.

Duke: Just added Northwestern, BC and Kansas home-and-home's. That's not any better than BC's Purdue, Kansas and Missouri. They're playing Alabama in the Chik-fil-A Kickoff in Georgia, not a home-and-home. I think Chik-fil-A has a lot of weight in choosing these opponents and every year they schedule someone in the southeast. Also, this was scheduled right after Duke won the Coastal.

Wake: Has scheduled Purdue, Vandy and Ole Miss. Is Ole Miss that much more exciting than Missouri?


Look, I appreciate you challenging me with some examples. I kind of just pulled this out of my ass. But now looking through those 5 teams if anything I feel like my theory is confirmed.

The only real exception is Syracuse schedule Wisconsin, which again, is a great pull from Syracuse. BC should've pulled that off. Wisconsin only had baby rapists prior to the BIG's recent P5 requiriment. They have only G5 for the next three years until the 2020 series with Syracuse. They're just now filling their schedule and they've scheduled Syracuse, VT and Washington State. BC should try to get on Wisconsin long term. A football/hockey two sport series just makes too much sense.

Re: Official Future Scheduling Thread

PostPosted: Thu Jan 12, 2017 10:42 am
by dtwalrus
twballgame9 wrote:
eepstein0 wrote:
TobaccoRoadEagle wrote:i think we're hard pressed to complain about rutgres, no matter how much it stinks. the dirty jerz is an important recruiting ground and having a game there for the local gweeds to watch should be a good thing.

there is no possible positive spin that comes out of scheduling kansas other than that they are even more of a punching bag over the last 10 years than we are


Schedule teams where we actually recruit. BC hasn't recruited Indiana, Kansas, Illinois or Missouri in forever. Replace those schools with Maryland, Texas Tech, and maybe Georgia or something. We at least recruit there.


Ucf


:kudos

I lol'd.

Re: Official Future Scheduling Thread

PostPosted: Thu Jan 12, 2017 10:47 am
by eagle33
eagle33 wrote:Yukon game at Fenway = stupid.


Edit - I guess its Yukon that's giving up the home game not us. So not stupid.

Re: Official Future Scheduling Thread

PostPosted: Thu Jan 12, 2017 10:53 am
by DomingoOrtiz
dtwalrus wrote:
eepstein0 wrote:
TobaccoRoadEagle wrote:i think we're hard pressed to complain about rutgres, no matter how much it stinks. the dirty jerz is an important recruiting ground and having a game there for the local gweeds to watch should be a good thing.

there is no possible positive spin that comes out of scheduling kansas other than that they are even more of a punching bag over the last 10 years than we are


Schedule teams where we actually recruit. BC hasn't recruited Indiana, Kansas, Illinois or Missouri in forever. Replace those schools with Maryland, Texas Tech, and maybe Georgia or something. We at least recruit there.


1) Maryland recently scheduled Virginia Tech (x4) and WVU. We actually probably could schedule them, but this is less exciting than Purdue in my book.

Excited about Purdue? You need a new book.

Re: Official Future Scheduling Thread

PostPosted: Thu Jan 12, 2017 10:56 am
by eepstein0
dtwalrus wrote:
eepstein0 wrote:
TobaccoRoadEagle wrote:i think we're hard pressed to complain about rutgres, no matter how much it stinks. the dirty jerz is an important recruiting ground and having a game there for the local gweeds to watch should be a good thing.

there is no possible positive spin that comes out of scheduling kansas other than that they are even more of a punching bag over the last 10 years than we are


Schedule teams where we actually recruit. BC hasn't recruited Indiana, Kansas, Illinois or Missouri in forever. Replace those schools with Maryland, Texas Tech, and maybe Georgia or something. We at least recruit there.


1) Maryland recently scheduled Virginia Tech (x4) and WVU. We actually probably could schedule them, but this is less exciting than Purdue in my book.
2) Texas Tech's recently announced P5 OOC: Oregon, Arizona, Arizona State, NCST. I see baby rapists and warm weather "peers." They probably have zero interest in playing BC.
3) Georgia has GT every year. The only other P5's they've scheduled are Notre Dame, UCLA and a neutral site against UVa in Georgia. They almost certainly have zero interest in playing BC.

Who else you got?


There are like 5 Big XII schools in Texas and we are trying to recruit there. Schedule any of them.

SEC wise, if Georgia and and Florida don't work schedule Vandy they are at least a peer school.

BIG10 wise, scheduling a school in Indiana makes no sense. Penn St, MD and yes Rutgers are smart

Re: Official Future Scheduling Thread

PostPosted: Thu Jan 12, 2017 10:58 am
by DomingoOrtiz
dtwalrus wrote:
commavegarage wrote:
dtwalrus wrote:Wake: Has scheduled Purdue, Vandy and Ole Miss. Is Ole Miss that much more exciting than Missouri?


Yes, much.

Re: Official Future Scheduling Thread

PostPosted: Thu Jan 12, 2017 10:59 am
by dtwalrus
*** Master Post Updated to Reflect 2017 @UConn Switched to vs UConn (@ Fenway) ***

The UConn boards are talking about this being a Neutral Site game, that UConn gave up the home game for a $$$ payout from the Fenway group. Apparently this is how they pay for Diaco's buyout...

Re: Official Future Scheduling Thread

PostPosted: Thu Jan 12, 2017 11:15 am
by dtwalrus
eepstein0 wrote:
dtwalrus wrote:
eepstein0 wrote:
TobaccoRoadEagle wrote:i think we're hard pressed to complain about rutgres, no matter how much it stinks. the dirty jerz is an important recruiting ground and having a game there for the local gweeds to watch should be a good thing.

there is no possible positive spin that comes out of scheduling kansas other than that they are even more of a punching bag over the last 10 years than we are


Schedule teams where we actually recruit. BC hasn't recruited Indiana, Kansas, Illinois or Missouri in forever. Replace those schools with Maryland, Texas Tech, and maybe Georgia or something. We at least recruit there.


1) Maryland recently scheduled Virginia Tech (x4) and WVU. We actually probably could schedule them, but this is less exciting than Purdue in my book.
2) Texas Tech's recently announced P5 OOC: Oregon, Arizona, Arizona State, NCST. I see baby rapists and warm weather "peers." They probably have zero interest in playing BC.
3) Georgia has GT every year. The only other P5's they've scheduled are Notre Dame, UCLA and a neutral site against UVa in Georgia. They almost certainly have zero interest in playing BC.

Who else you got?


There are like 5 Big XII schools in Texas and we are trying to recruit there. Schedule any of them.

SEC wise, if Georgia and and Florida don't work schedule Vandy they are at least a peer school.

BIG10 wise, scheduling a school in Indiana makes no sense. Penn St, MD and yes Rutgers are smart


Vandy - I agree it would be better than Missouri, but they're both still SEC cellar dwellers. At least Missouri has won the East recently. Also, Vandy has been filling their schedule with other academic peers like Stanford (4 game series) and Wake and has scheduled local against NCST. We're not their only peer and they obviously have other preferences.

Penn State - I would love a Penn State game. The hate our fanbase feels towards them is all the more reason. But Penn State has been scheduling local P5's (WVU, VT and Pitt) and baby rapists's (Auburn). This might not be possible no matter how much Bates may beg.

Baylor - Just started scheduling P5's. So far Duke and Utah. They're also in talks for several 1-off neutral site games against Ole Miss and Arkansas. I would like this series, but I wonder if politics might come into play on this one. Very liberal Catholic school vs. very conservative Baptist school?

TCU - Has filled up their P5 schedule with ease against Ohio State, Cal, Stanford and UNC. I'm sure they're dying to play BC...

Texas Tech - Just started scheduling P5's, with Arizona, Oregon and NCST. Not sure they've got any interest in us.

Texas - They generally schedule baby rapists: LSU, Michigan, Ohio State, Arkansas. They did schedule a home and neutral site against Maryland a while ago, playing in '18 and '19. Not obvious they would schedule us. But I actually think they might, for the same reason that USC and Stanford schedule us. Peer institutions in an appealing city with a strong local fan base. Still, would take a miracle.

Again, this is just to say that it's not enough for us to have a wish list and give it to Bates. We have to be within the ballpark of the other teams' wish lists.

Re: Official Future Scheduling Thread

PostPosted: Thu Jan 12, 2017 11:30 am
by eepstein0
I can't do Bates's job and my job at the same time. If BC would like to pay me 1/2 of what Bates makes I'll be happy to be the AD.

You get the point of what I'm saying. Play peer schools or schools where we recruit. UConn, UMass, Temple, Rutgers, Ohio St and Stanford are good examples of this.

Additionally Cincinnati, UCF, FAU, USF, Houston, Georgia St (NFL Stadium) all makes sense.

Games against NIll, Kansas, Purdue, etc. are short-sighted and dumb scheduling.

Re: Official Future Scheduling Thread

PostPosted: Thu Jan 12, 2017 11:30 am
by innocentbystander
eagle33 wrote:ANY game at Fenway = stupid.


FYP

If BC is not playing on the road AND they can't play in Chestnut Hill, play at Gilette

Re: Official Future Scheduling Thread

PostPosted: Thu Jan 12, 2017 11:34 am
by eagle33
innocentbystander wrote:
eagle33 wrote:ANY game at Fenway = stupid.


FYP

If BC is not playing on the road AND they can't play in Chestnut Hill, play at Gilette


Yukon moved the game not BC.

Re: Official Future Scheduling Thread

PostPosted: Thu Jan 12, 2017 11:34 am
by eepstein0
innocentbystander wrote:
eagle33 wrote:ANY game at Fenway = stupid.


FYP

If BC is not playing on the road AND they can't play in Chestnut Hill, play at Gilette


It's better than East Hartford this game is a win-win for BC.

Re: Official Future Scheduling Thread

PostPosted: Thu Jan 12, 2017 11:56 am
by innocentbystander
eagle33 wrote:
innocentbystander wrote:
eagle33 wrote:ANY game at Fenway = stupid.


FYP

If BC is not playing on the road AND they can't play in Chestnut Hill, play at Gilette


Yukon moved the game not BC.


fair enough. they are probably sick of seeing 20,000 empty seats at the Rent

Re: Official Future Scheduling Thread

PostPosted: Thu Jan 12, 2017 11:57 am
by BCSUPERFAN22
eepstein0 wrote:
innocentbystander wrote:
eagle33 wrote:ANY game at Fenway = stupid.


FYP

If BC is not playing on the road AND they can't play in Chestnut Hill, play at Gilette


It's better than East Hartford this game is a win-win for BC.


I thought the Fenway game last year was going to be stupid, but after going, I dont have a problem with it. The fact that this (as epstein said) is staying out of East Hartford is a major win, that area and stadium are a total dump and getting basically an extra home game is a win after giving up a game for IRL last year. I wouldn't be shocked if they totally split ticket sales and make it a neutral field game which makes it even more attractive (hell I could see FSG or the Sox putting their logo at midfield and in endzone making it a total Yukon cuck).