Topic: It's the schedule, stupid...

[_sturt_]

Exactly who did Northern Illinois beat?

1. To answer your question straight-up, and assuming you're referring to NIU's Orange Bowl team of 2012, they mainly beat a ranked Kent State who had beaten some decent teams, but also... if memory serves correctly, so please correct me if not... beat Kansas, Army and UT-Martin, and took a loss to Iowa by one point.

2. Recognize that even NIU played in a conference that the numbers say is slightly superior to the one we're about to play in... and it gets a little worse once Charlotte joins next year.

3. http://www.herdfans.com/12thman/index.php?topic=74250.msg583089;topicseen#msg583089

[_sturt_]

the actual truth is we don't know how the selection committee will pick when for example we are 13 and 0 this yr and UCF is 11 and 1 with a win over Penn St and a 7 point loss at Missouri. I don't like the odds. Schedule strength has been bandied about for yrs now and I believe we need to play a big team in the OOC. #1 is we need the money and #2 is if we win the conf we will get a better bowl with a better opp even if its not the access bowl. And if we are good enough to beat someone in the access bowl then we should be good enough to beat someone in the OOC part. Qu-eers and VT in the same yr no but I fear our fate in the hands of the selection guys with aschedule like 2014. And I realize we had UL scheduled...not our fault. Still think all AAC squads could have two losses this yr....got my fingers crossed for the Herd.

Wow. Mark May 26, 2014 on your calendar, BHFI... I can't find anything in that post that I can disagree with. :)

[_sturt_]

LTH2, I don't disparage the need for money or recruits. Of course not. But this is about scheduling specifically. And I defy you or banker or anyone else to show how money or recruits are the crucible matters as it pertains to making the road to equal consideration with AAC or MWC straighter. There is no amount of money that any of us Joe Fans can give that is going to change the schedule situation for 2015 or 2016 or 2017. There is no recruit that can be obtained who is going to change the schedule situation. This is one of those areas where it's purely a matter of how things are structured... it costs us no more or no less to implement changes that put us in an optimal position for the CFP bowl.

[BuyNtelos4]

I will say that I figure an 11-1 AAC team would get the access bowl over us, providing there loss is early in the season giving them time to work their way back up through the polls.

[lovetheherd2]

LTH2, I don't disparage the need for money or recruits. Of course not. But this is about scheduling specifically. And I defy you or banker or anyone else to show how money or recruits are the crucible matters as it pertains to making the road to equal consideration with AAC or MWC straighter. There is no amount of money that any of us Joe Fans can give that is going to change the schedule situation for 2015 or 2016 or 2017. There is no recruit that can be obtained who is going to change the schedule situation. This is one of those areas where it's purely a matter of how things are structured... it costs us no more or no less to implement changes that put us in an optimal position for the CFP bowl.

Stuart, we can agree to disagree.

I have been involved in alumni and Big Green membership solicitations for some 20+ years. The number of folks who will celebrate and come to game watching and second guess the leadership or decisions are significantly unlimted when we are winning in my experience.

The number of folks who can significantly contribute financially and with time and effort to the programs has been shrinking for years. Hamrick has made progress reaching to to old friends and finding new ones. But it's doggone hard and takes a LOT of time and effort. He's done better than anyone in the last 10 to 15 years or more.

The dollars for Big Green funds the scholarships and allows other funds to help with coaches salaries, travel budgets and many other things needed to raise the stature of Marshall in the eyes of the rest of the world.

I learned the hard way in many past situations, if someone tells you it's not about the money..... you better believe it's about the money and find another advisor. Ideas and suggestions do not raise the program. Worker bees and the funds to do the work and implement the ideas will work.

In the end it will all work out. If it doesn't work out, it's not the end. Water seeks it's own level and so will our program. If the program finds the money and the workers, it will continue to improve, if not..... strength of schedule will not improve much.

Again, just my opinion.

[_sturt_]

LTH2, I've read your post three times now, and I'm still trying to decipher whether you took into consideration the premise of this thread at some point (?)... ie, our disadvantage to AAC and MWC schools in reaching the CFP bowl due to the weakness of our conference. It's like we're talking past each other.

Let me try a political analogy... if we're talking about getting our favorite candidate elected, there are things that cost money like advertising and staff, and those are vital. But then, too, there are things we can work toward in the election structure that might give our candidate an advantage... maybe for instance we recognize that by requiring voter ID, we're likely going to be more advantaged or disadvantaged... or maybe for instance we recognize that by there's advantage in keeping the electoral college or an advantage in eliminating it... you see, in NONE of those does it cost any more or any less because we're talking about policy... we're talking about the framework of the structure/conditions under which the regular season and championship game are conducted. Sure, you can say that it's ultimately about the money in an election, but as easily as that may roll off one's lips, the truth is that there are things like voter ID requirements and electoral colleges--policies--that cost nothing yet have bearing.

All good?

So let me just take the simplest solution put on the table thus far... humor me and assume for the sake of argument that the consensus sees advantage (ie, in the pursuit of competing for the CFP bowl) in having two additional slots for ambitious programs like ours to fit-in two more quality opponents... what do you assert are the direct costs to Marshall that necessarily would be associated with CUSA legislating that?

[The E-Man]

Getting married on Saturday, and plan to start planning for a home purchase.

Also, since I can't give a whole lot monetarily, I spend a lot of free time trying to get Marshall media exposed online to help with fan growth and recruiting (probably doesn't account for much, but I can try).

Dunk, congratulations! on your marriage. I wish you, and your bride to be lots of happiness. You do a lot with your online videos. Thanks for all that you do.

[MUther]

Dunk, congratulations! on your marriage. I wish you, and your bride to be lots of happiness. You do a lot with your online videos. Thanks for all that you do.

Yeah wait till he tries editing ten hours of footage with his wife breathing down his neck about the grass needing cut.  Doomed, I say!   ;D

[MUther]

The worst thing about all this mess is no one would be worried at all if we had a win over Louisville, which is fairly likely as they lost their QB and would have been at our place this season, to add to the rest of whatever we do.

[Dunk]

Yeah wait till he tries editing ten hours of footage with his wife breathing down his neck about the grass needing cut.  Doomed, I say!   ;D

Haha, I actually made a 24 minute long video for the wedding showing us growing up through pictures and old home videos. Hard to get motivated for that one because it's not quite as exciting as athletic highlight videos.

[banker]

Sturt, scheduling tougher gets us nothing but losses if we don't have the money and players to compete. Quite honestly, as I have been trying to get through your pompous skull for over a year, our schedule as it is this season is more advantageous to our goal of reaching the access bowl.

Going undefeated, which I doubt we do even with our weak schedule, is the hardest thing for those selecting the Access Bowl participant to ignore. Why is it hard to ignore undefeated?  Because only 5 non AQ teams have done it in the last 24 years. Think about that, there have been about 60 non AQ teams and in the last 24 years, 1,440 opportunities, only 5 teams have gone undefeated.  Marshall, Tulane, Utah, TCU and Boise twice. A team has less than a one half of one percent chance of going undefeated.

Who would go between a 13-0 Marshall and an 11-1 UCF?  It would be close and would probably depend on when UCF lost, who they lost to and if the loss prevented them from winning the AAC, which would automatically eliminate them.  No matter what we do with scheduling we can't get to the point where our schedule would be ranked higher than AAC schools, so that's a moot point.

This brings us back to money. You want to play a schedule that allows us to be viewed the same as AAC and MWC schools?  Build the facilities, pay the coaches, recruit the players and build a CUSA dynasty. Do that and those conferences will come looking for you. Playing  a round robin with MAC teams that are no more respected than CUSA teams does nothing to raise the perception of your schedule. It only adds losses to the top teams of those two conferences and makes them easier to ignore.

[QuickStrike]

Nothing wrong with this schedule.  It is our schedule and it is what it is.  Just keep winning and we enjoy the top 25 every year.  If WVU, the AAC, or anybody else doesn't like it, then they can pony up 1 for 1 games and try to give us more losses.  I like the potential of double digit wins each year.

[QuickStrike]

A team has less than a one half of one percent chance of going undefeated.

So you're saying there's a chance?  ;D

[FlyHawk98]

Nothing wrong with this schedule.  It is our schedule and it is what it is.  Just keep winning and we enjoy the top 25 every year.  If WVU, the AAC, or anybody else doesn't like it, then they can pony up 1 for 1 games and try to give us more losses.  I like the potential of double digit wins each year.

I agree. When people start complaining about our schedule offer them a 1-1. No more of these 2 and 3-1s imo. A few programs are worth 2-1s but I don't think those schools would come to Huntington lol.

[_sturt_]

What to do with you, banker? Is there really anything in this newest post that hasn't been debunked already? Let's see...

Sturt, scheduling tougher gets us nothing but losses if we don't have the money and players to compete.

True statement.  

But of course, Mr. Insincerity gets us started with a misleading premise... ie, most years we've played in CUSA, we've went into November with a chance to win our division. We have had the money and players to compete. By most accounts, we just didn't have the coaches, though now evidently, people want to have it the other way around and blame it on money and players without actually having to let the words "I was wrong, Snyder was okay" emerge from their keyboards/mouths.

Quite honestly, as I have been trying to get through your pompous skull for over a year, our schedule as it is this season is more advantageous to our goal of reaching the access bowl...

There you go again.

How bout some context. It's this kind of thinking that should make us all worry that if Arkansas State pulls off an undefeated season, they'll beat out a one-loss Cincinnati or Boise team for the CFP bowl.

Really? You're worried?

Sorry. I'm just not.

No matter what we do with scheduling we can't get to the point where our schedule would be ranked higher than AAC schools, so that's a moot point.

Well, whaddayaknow... at least banker is headed in the right direction.

Indeed, it's a problem playing in a division that will otherwise be populated by 4 Sun Belt schools and 2 schools that only started their programs in recent memory. Compare that to what we had in CUSA or even what we had in MAC, and it's a pretty decisive step down in competition... no news there, as that's largely the whole reason so many Herd fans are salivating for the season to get started. We can agree on this much--we desperately need at least two of those programs to assert themselves rapidly as viable and stable, and God help us, 3 or 4. But that's out of our control, and all we can do is plan in case the best, or at least an acceptable, scenario emerges.

As to your statement, again, another half-truth one... yes, it's probably true that we can't get to the point where our schedule... that is, our conference schedule... would be ranked higher than AAC schools. That much might be, and probably is, a moot point.

But that's not to say that we can't, to a significant degree, compensate for the conference schedule through other means, nor that we shouldn't bother... in fact, you can choose to ignore it, but I'll just bring it back up over and over again... that would be me, the one who bothered to go back and put all the numbers into an Excel file so that everything was in plain view... that we can compensate sufficiently to be competitive with AAC and MWC champs, but we have to build in to the system some ways that allow us to do just that... compensate.

It's this simple.

We need ways to ramp up the other six games that NCAA rules say we don't necessarily have to play against CUSA competition.

There are three tried-and-true premises that characterized nearly every school that emerged since 2005 to be the best non-AQ school... play in one of the two best non-BCS conferences, play at least one top 25 team, and lose no more than one game. And when NIU made it without satisfying A, it was in a year when, for the first time, all of the non-AQ conferences finished within two Sagarin points of each other--a virtual deadlock.

There's hope... which is why I'm so adamant that we can't let the MAC-fan attitudes win this thing.

This brings us back to money. You want to play a schedule that allows us to be viewed the same as AAC and MWC schools?  Build the facilities, pay the coaches, recruit the players and build a CUSA dynasty. Do that and those conferences will come looking for you.

One teensyweensylittle problem with that, of course, and you know it, you sly devil... until the contract schools expand and take some AAC schools in, there's no room... and with word coming down this month that the NCAA may finally dispose of the 12 team requirement for championship games, the one conference that may have been making some moves almost certainly won't.

Money won't matter.

Now, again, lest I be misinterpreted... that's no excuse for not building facilities, paying coaches and recruiting players to build a CUSA dynasty. But again, it's misleading... I would even say, just an outright lie... to suggest that we have to wait for an invite to improve our position.

Playing  a round robin with MAC teams that are no more respected than CUSA teams does nothing to raise the perception of your schedule. It only adds losses to the top teams of those two conferences and makes them easier to ignore.

Dang it, you are a tedious one. In my best Sylvester voice... insufffufferrerrabbabble.

One of the two conference champs will get the benefit of an end-of-season springboard. Some years it would be us, some years it wouldn't.

If we're good... if we deserve it... we'll win... and those games will be testimony to that, and we won't be ignored. If we're not, we'll lose those games, and appropriately, you'll be right... we'll be ignored.

Like someone smart... in your world, no doubt, "pompous"... once said... if you're scared, get a dog.

[banker]

But your problem is you live in a land full of fairy dust and unicorns.  Please tell me which conference we can be in and play 6 non conference games?  Oh, that's right, there's no such thing so it's nothing but a straw man.  A figment of your imagination that has no basis in reality, is never going to happen, and that you drone on about ad naseum.

We can not out schedule AAC teams because their conference schedule, top to bottom, is more difficult than ours. UCF is playing Penn State and Missouri this year, doesn't matter who we play non-conference, if we went tougher than that then we would still be weaker overall. Doesn't matter though because that's the completely wrong strategy. Why?  Because most likely UCF will lose to one of those two teams and neither of those teams will make a BCS, or whatever they call them now, bowl game. They are proving to the voters that they don't belong.

I'm sorry that you can't figure out that this whole system is based on perception, marketing, and illusion. Every media outlet spent years thinking Boise was great. Why?  They played in the WAC which was a horrendous collection of football playing institutions, but they totally dominated them, year after year, and then would step out and beat a fair to middling AQ team from time to time. In no year did Boise have a team that was good enough to win any AQ league, not even the Big East. They would have been lucky to go .500 in league play. They would have a hard time winning CUSA 2.0. They would have had a difficult time winning the current alignment of the AAC. The pundits thought they were great because they won all the time.

When you don't lose it's hard to say you're not good.  Who was better last year, Marshall or wvu?  Why do you have the opinion you have?  Who would most college football fans think was better?  Why?  How did the poll voters see it? Why?

Truth is I think we were better, you look at records, common opponents, etc.  in reality though, who's to say.  It all comes back to perception, marketing and illusion.  You don't give anyone reason to doubt you.

[_sturt_]

But your problem is you live in a land full of fairy dust and unicorns.  Please tell me which conference we can be in and play 6 non conference games?  Oh, that's right, there's no such thing so it's nothing but a straw man.  A figment of your imagination that has no basis in reality, is never going to happen, and that you drone on about ad naseum.

But your problem is, even the most elementary of solutions, you claim is the stuff of fairy dust and unicorns.

Balderdash. Hogwash. Bullsheet.

We're talking a simple decision at the CUSA annual meeting. You know.. that's kinda like what they do at those meetings... make adjustments in things that they perceive will make for a stronger conference... ie, more profitable outcomes for the conference.

Now, look, I entirely get it why you are ambivalent about any MAC relationship--that because it requires an external entity to collaborate, and sometimes those relationships in the corporate world work, and sometimes they don't.

But, banker, whereas I considered you at least an intelligent human being before, if you're going to contend that they'd never give an ear to a limiting the required season to six games... that, when everyone understands the payday at stake... you're suddenly calling your own intelligence into question... you can only go so far with this thing of finding fault with anything proposed before you step over the credibility line. You're straddling. 

We can not out schedule AAC teams because their conference schedule, top to bottom, is more difficult than ours. UCF is playing Penn State and Missouri this year, doesn't matter who we play non-conference, if we went tougher than that then we would still be weaker overall. Doesn't matter though because that's the completely wrong strategy. Why?  Because most likely UCF will lose to one of those two teams and neither of those teams will make a BCS, or whatever they call them now, bowl game. They are proving to the voters that they don't belong.

For a change, lots to agree with in this one...

First, you go back and affirm again that you agree that their conference schedule is more difficult than ours. Absolutely.

Citing UCF as the specimen for comparison could be considered cherry-picking, but the general point remains in spite of your unfortunate habit of uttering absolutes like you're divinity ("... doesn't matter who we play, if went tougher, we would still be weaker...").

I don't pretend to know how strong either Penn St or Mizzou are going to be this year, but I'll agree that UCF--being in the conference with a leg-up on the other four--probably would have been better served to play only one of those.

This brings up an important point that you might not want to agree with, but pretty much have to because you essentially made it yourelf... ie, far more often than not, AAC and MWC schools aren't likely to be playing these kinds of OOC schedules for the very reason you just asserted... why extend yourself when the risk/reward is so much more weighted on the risk side... all you have to do is win your freakin conference, and you have a very realistic shot at going to a payday bowl.

I'm sorry that you can't figure out that this whole system is based on perception, marketing, and illusion. Every media outlet spent years thinking Boise was great. Why?  They played in the WAC which was a horrendous collection of football playing institutions, but they totally dominated them, year after year, and then would step out and beat a fair to middling AQ team from time to time. In no year did Boise have a team that was good enough to win any AQ league, not even the Big East... yadayadayada

Divinity is at it again. Heyyy... be quiet back there, Oklahoma... don't you dare challenge banker... same for you all you PAC-10 wanna-bes... you heard him... Boise wasn't that good... gospel is gospel... no, I don't care what the score was... no, I don't care how many Boise guys are in the NFL... gotta respect Divinity.

More seriously and soberly... bank, did you just pull this out of your head or did you actually run some numbers? Because, well, you already knew I did... and while WAC nor any other conference could run with the TCU and Utah endowed MWC, they are only as "horrendous" as you might assign the term to CUSA... that, because, their overall Sagarin numbers for the period beginning with Boise's ascendency to fame in 2006 mirror CUSA's. So... in other words... had East Carolina done to CUSA what Boise did to WAC, your assertion begs for fairness... would you have been so eager to call CUSA "a horrendous collection of football institutions?" Maybe you would have to salvage your point, but the truth is, as a conference, we weren't great but we had our moments, and weren't all that bad either. Same, WAC.

Good place to wrap up and get to sleep... in conclusion, I'm all for mimicking the Boise model, banker... except, to your chagrin, it would require something more CUSA 2.0 like... which, to your chagrin, would require some innovation on our part... like a MAC relationship or like having 6 games to schedule on our own... that is, since CUSA 3.0 is a shadow of 2.0.

[ThunderValley]

You guys have been drawn in AGAIN by the master himself.

You can punch until you look silly but he will always duck and counter. ;D

[goherd24]

Cant even play all of our division opponents at 6 games, and it would be really hard to find a good school (other than the sec who schedules OOC late to basically give them a bye week) that will schedule you in football once conference play starts. Thats the reality and 2 major problems.

[BHFIOHIO]

If you're talkin FB and BB then MT, WKU, ODU and both Tx schools good as any that went to the AAC other than UCF FB. If you're talkin Beale St or he French Qtr or Dallas/Houston big city stuff then yeah. They have it. I think in the near future some will realize CUSA picked wisely. Not to mention the regional games at Charlotte, ODU, MT and WKU. Great oppurtunities for Herd fans who travel. Perception be dammed. Its all about being a winner.

[_sturt_]

You guys have been drawn in AGAIN by the master himself.

You can punch until you look silly but he will always duck and counter. ;D

Makes me think I need to say this, in case it hasn't occurred to some already...

I appreciate Valley's attempt at levity, but lest anyone think there's some part of that that's actually true, please know it's just not. I'm not playing some rhetorical game. If this is, as some have occasionally charged, a matter of self-gratification and ego stroking, God knows, there's some much better ways I could accomplish that than to come to an internet board and routinely subject myself to the snipers gathered here who like to take their shots. I mean, really, I wouldn't sink so much time into it if I didn't truly believe these things I'm saying. I might be wrong about some things... clearly, I don't think I am, but I might be... but one thing detractors like banker can't say about me with any validity whatsoever is that I'm insincere. What might be termed ducking and countering by Valley is actually only having thought this thing through to such a degree that it might make others look silly... but that's all it is... thought invested to the degree that I would spend a few hours on a lazy Sunday afternoon crunching some numbers... it's genuinely not a matter of greater intelligence or gamesmanship, but a desire to see my alma mater somehow take this competitively negative circumstance and turn it into something positive... and because the motivation is genuine, that's why I really don't mind others' constructive criticism... operable word, of course, being constructive... if we're all trying to resolve the same problem, it's all good no matter who comes up with the best solution.

[_sturt_]

Cant even play all of our division opponents at 6 games, and it would be really hard to find a good school (other than the sec who schedules OOC late to basically give them a bye week) that will schedule you in football once conference play starts. Thats the reality and 2 major problems.

Huh? It's a seven team division... six games. What are you thinking, 24?

And, I can't take seriously the idea that finding an additional two opponents each season is "really hard"... we already schedule 4, and another 2 can't be all that daunting... even if they aren't "good," they're far more often than not going to be at least as good as a CUSA West opponent... it at least gives you a chance that you don't otherwise have. Another reality... schools schedule most of their OOC games years in advance... conferences schedule their games around their members' OOC games.

EDIT: For the sake of argument, let's even say that we get down the road a couple of years after having implemented the change, and we find that we're having to schedule FCS schools... simply modify the rule so that you can contract with CUSA West schools like you can any other school for those two slots.

[coloradoherd]

This may have already been said, but I don't have the energy to go back through and read all these posts.  That said, quick question. 

Correct me if I'm wrong, but we were supposed to play Louisville this year, and it had to be moved, right?   

So it's not like our athletic dept. is purposely giving us the weakest schedule possible.  Things like that happen. 

I agree that it would help if our schedule was a little tougher . . . with an opponent like Louisville every year, or the equivalent of a Clemson in 1999.  But we also don't need to play a top 10 team every year. 

At a quick glance, it seems like we have people saying our current schedule is fine and others saying we need to start scheduling top tier SEC opponents, and I just think it's not that stark of an either or question.   

[MUonium]

2014's a bust..UL's situation put a nail in it.  alas, just when the Herd is peaking and make no mistake about it, I'd be silly not to enjoy a peaking team regardless of sched....and i'll admit i voiced my distaste in the past.  it appears the staff tried to meet/come to a consensus of what the fan base wanted over recent years...at least one big boy(for lack of better term); a MAC or two(walking distance rivals) or ECU; and one Fcs.  
now that the turbulence of con hopping has subsided for the moment, there are real opportunities with future scheds (don't know how up to date this is):
2015 is Purdue and two Macs and one Fcs
2016 is UL, one Mac
2017 is two Macs
2018 is one Mac
2019 OPEN
2020 is Ecu
2021 is Ecu and Navy
2022 Navy
we look forward to a stable  ???  ::)  :o  >:(  NCAA  ;D and reasonable, future herd schedules

[_sturt_]

To be clear, the problem being addressed in this thread isn't with the AD's long-term OOC scheduling.

Rather, it's the other part...

The long-term problem inherent with trading our CUSA 2.0 schedule that featured what are now largely AAC programs for a CUSA 3.0 schedule that consists of programs that might have a bright future, but because they all... ALL... have no history of playing at even a MAC level, "might" is, unfortunately for us, the accurate term.

Yes, there's the other side of the same coin... we perceive an opportunity to go undefeated like we haven't had since Chad was suiting up for us... but that short-term blessing belies the long-term curse.

The analogy is this... stand on top of a desk and try grabbing your friend's hand and pull them up to your level... not impossible... but substantially more likely is that, in the effort, they'll end up pulling you down to their level instead.

God knows, too, few of us will be surprised to see a Marshall team somehow slip up in a trap game... of which there will be several this season. It's not nice to think about, but the bubble could so so easily burst with one untimely fumble or interception or missed CB assignment or offensive line assignment that ends with Cato taking a hit that puts him out for the season.... at which point, reality would snap fans' collective head back into place, fully absorbing suddenly the stark reality of the long-term issues that we have to address if we're going to have a shot at preserving our shot at the CFP bowl and, with it, the prestige of our program.