Poll - Have You Had Enough Little Brother Scheduling

Off the top of my head

Un-neutral site - we beat Okie - off-year for them

1 and done that became a 2 for 1 - We lost a close one to Texas in an off-year for them

1 and done - We narrowly beat a bad Ole Miss team

Un-neutral site - We lost to TCU in a year they were beatable

Wisconsin - 1 and done will become a 2 for 1

ND - 4 for 2 - lost to a very good ND team in a close game - later games in jeopardy

Michigan 1 and done





I may have left out a team. Please comment and add any I have omitted.



Have you had enough of this little brother treatment, or would you be content to play more teams like AZ, ASU, WSU, UW, UCLA, CAL, MWC, Baylor, BSU, GT, Virginia, etc. - BCS teams that play us straight up, and BSU and former MWC teams that do, plus teams like USU that give us advantage, and U?



Or continue playing on an un level field?

For me it is time to just say no. I do not care if - wait I do care - especially if it is an elite team like USC, Oregon, Texas, Okie, Nebraska, Wisconsin, Michigan, ND, Alabama, LSU, etc.



Just say no. It is not good for the program. Others we envy - hardly ever did this and no longer do his - it is a fool's game.



Tee em up - Home and Away - sure. But do not give them an advantage. They already have an advantage.

In total honesty, I don't think TH is scheduling these games because he doesn't have a clue. He's the one that knows the landscape. I don't always agree that everything needs to be so cloak and dagger, but I don't believe he would be signing BYU up for these games if he didn't believe this was what he had to do to be relevant. It's exciting to finally be playing B1G teams, somewhere though we've got to get them back to Provo and I don't know how that will ever be accomplished without BYU being in a conference.

How many of those posting here complaining of our "little brother" scheduling were justifying our same treatment of Utah State a few weeks ago? I'm sorry, but every argument made that "we have a larger stadium", "we can guarantee much more money", etc. holds true in reverse here.



I think those who say those doing our scheduling "don't have a clue" probably should be examining themselves and asking themselves if they do.

When I saw the title of this thread, I knew it was from Bib.

IowaCougar wrote:
How many of those posting here complaining of our "little brother" scheduling were justifying our same treatment of Utah State a few weeks ago? I'm sorry, but every argument made that "we have a larger stadium", "we can guarantee much more money", etc. holds true in reverse here.



I think those who say those doing our scheduling "don't have a clue" probably should be examining themselves and asking themselves if they do.

This is what the big brothers do. USU has been our little brother for a long time. Been rolling over for teams like Auburn too. USU is getting tired of it and rebuffed an attempt by U to turn them into their little brother too. Can't blame them. If I were them I would not do it for Auburn, U or Y. But I think they need the money and have no choice. Typical of WAC teams and often MWC teams.



BYU should have plenty of money and should say no. And if they play WAC teams and some if the lower MWC teams. Sure - be big brother any time you can. Get home field advantage.



That is how it works. Everyone envoy's SEC. Go look at their schedules. They are always Big Brother in OOC games. Almost never an exception.



I just hope you are not going to be whining every time we lose one of those road games.



[ Post made via Mobile Device ] http://cougarcorner.com/images/mobile.png" alt="" loading="lazy" style="max-width:100%">

If that is the definition of "little brother" treatment, do you consider BYU on the same level as these other teams you mention? If BYU should be considered a peer to these teams, they should be running in their circles and playing teams they play, right? By that definition I'd say BYU is not there yet. Give it a few years playing the tougher schedule and show that you can be competitive and that respect will grow. The funny thing about respect is it seems to come when its earned. When you have to constantly tell others how much respect they owe you, it usually means you aren't there yet.

Fido wrote:
If that is the definition of "little brother" treatment, do you consider BYU on the same level as these other teams you mention? If BYU should be considered a peer to these teams, they should be running in their circles and playing teams they play, right? By that definition I'd say BYU is not there yet. Give it a few years playing the tougher schedule and show that you can be competitive and that respect will grow. The funny thing about respect is it seems to come when its earned. When you have to constantly tell others how much respect they owe you, it usually means you aren't there yet.

BYU will not prove they can compete in those circles by giving an advantage. BYU would be at best 50/50 on a level field.



But this is what you are missing. Beating them will make them avoid playing you at all. That is how the current system works. They want an almost certain win which is why they want the home field advantage. They are not looking for fairness - they are trying to thrive in an unfair world. Just what BYU needs to be.



The elite teams play many teams on a home and away equal footing. The ones in their own conference, basically. Outside of conference they try to find someone that will agree to give them an unfair edge. Almost without exception.



Many BYU fans envy what U, TCU, and BSU accomplished. They forget, however, that those schools rarely scheduled an out of conference game vs a really good team. Cupcakes almost exclusively, or winnable games. So they went undefeated. More than once. Proven formula.



Then all 3 got promoted and are in tougher conferences than they were in - but playing on EQUAL footing - and go look



Suddenly, they are not going undefeated. Utah has started 0-4 both years in PAC. TCU has 3 losses and counting, iirc, in Big 12, and BSU has two losses in The MWC for heck sakes - tougher than WAC was, I guess.



So it is tough scheduling up even for those that were going undefeated. Yet BYU fans often expect to go undefeated while scheduling up even though BYU was not going undefeated and they are willing to give up home field and play other teams and expect to go undefeated.



Insanity. BYU is good, but not good enough to do that.

The big difference between BYU (and Hawaii for that matter) and those Utah, TCU, and BSU teams is when they did face a good team in their BCS bowls what happened? They won. I don't want BYU to sit a big fish in a small pond so they can put up 10-2 records year after year beating New Mexico State, UNLV, Wyoming, etc. I'll take an 8-4 or 7-5 year with a tough schedule over 10-2 against a bunch of patsies any day. Play a competitive SOS and be a decent team and you gain respect. Lots of wins against poor competition has proven to not work--especially when you fail to win when you eventually get the opportunity to face someone tough. It sounds like the biggest difference between our POVs is you don't believe BYU can compete--but want the respect of someone who can when it comes to scheduling. A paradox, no? With every game on BYU's schedule being OOC, you can't just look at the 3-4 OOC games in a Big5 conference team's schedule and say that BYU should be doing that to everyone.

If we can replace the WAC teams at 150 rpi with teams in the 60 range our SOS would see a big bump and our record probably would not change at all. We should beat all 50-60 ranked teams. We can find these teams in the MAC/Sun Belt/MWC conferences.

Bib, you are obsessed with this topic. That is all.

Since independence began in 2011...



Oregon State - 1 for 1

Washington State - 1 for 1

Boise State - series of 1 for 1's

Hawaii - series of 1 for 1's

Georgia Tech - 1 for 1

Cincinnati - 1 for 1

Houston - 1 for 1

Southern Miss - 1 for 1

Central Florida - 1 for 1

Middle Tennessee State - 1 for 1

Southern Miss - 1 for 1

East Carolina - 1 for 1



Ole Miss - 1 and done

Nebraska - 1 and done

Michigan - 1 and done

West Virginia - 1 and done



Texas - 2 for 1

Notre Dame - looking like a 2 for 1

Wisconsin - 2 for 1

Fido wrote:
The big difference between BYU (and Hawaii for that matter) and those Utah, TCU, and BSU teams is when they did face a good team in their BCS bowls what happened? They won. I don't want BYU to sit a big fish in a small pond so they can put up 10-2 records year after year beating New Mexico State, UNLV, Wyoming, etc. I'll take an 8-4 or 7-5 year with a tough schedule over 10-2 against a bunch of patsies any day. Play a competitive SOS and be a decent team and you gain respect. Lots of wins against poor competition has proven to not work--especially when you fail to win when you eventually get the opportunity to face someone tough. It sounds like the biggest difference between our POVs is you don't believe BYU can compete--but want the respect of someone who can when it comes to scheduling. A paradox, no? With every game on BYU's schedule being OOC, you can't just look at the 3-4 OOC games in a Big5 conference team's schedule and say that BYU should be doing that to everyone.

BYU could do exactly what TCU, BSU, and U did. It prepared them for their BCS Bowl wins - I am not suggesting that we do what Hawaii did.



[ Post made via Mobile Device ] http://cougarcorner.com/images/mobile.png" alt="" loading="lazy" style="max-width:100%">

KingCoug wrote:
Since independence began in 2011...



Oregon State - 1 for 1

Washington State - 1 for 1

Boise State - series of 1 for 1's

Hawaii - series of 1 for 1's

Georgia Tech - 1 for 1

Cincinnati - 1 for 1

Houston - 1 for 1

Southern Miss - 1 for 1

Central Florida - 1 for 1

Middle Tennessee State - 1 for 1

Southern Miss - 1 for 1

East Carolina - 1 for 1



Ole Miss - 1 and done

Nebraska - 1 and done

Michigan - 1 and done

West Virginia - 1 and done



Texas - 2 for 1

Notre Dame - looking like a 2 for 1

Wisconsin - 2 for 1

So lets say no to the last two groups and play more of the first group - and then play someone really good in a BCS Bowl.



[ Post made via Mobile Device ] http://cougarcorner.com/images/mobile.png" alt="" loading="lazy" style="max-width:100%">

scott715 wrote:
If we can replace the WAC teams at 150 rpi with teams in the 60 range our SOS would see a big bump and our record probably would not change at all. We should beat all 50-60 ranked teams. We can find these teams in the MAC/Sun Belt/MWC conferences.

This. Also, play some ranked higher - home and away. OSU for example. BSU - every year. U. Any of those guys that play straight up.



[ Post made via Mobile Device ] http://cougarcorner.com/images/mobile.png" alt="" loading="lazy" style="max-width:100%">

Jarhead wrote:
Bib, you are obsessed with this topic. That is all.

Guilty as charged. This is my only significant issue with the current state of BYU football. That and unrealistic expectations of certain fans. Other than those two things. Happy as a Clam.



:)



[ Post made via Mobile Device ] http://cougarcorner.com/images/mobile.png" alt="" loading="lazy" style="max-width:100%">

Cougarbib wrote:
I just hope you are not going to be whining every time we lose one of those road games.

This is the only reason I would say not to schedule the games against top-level Universities at exciting and historic venues - Cougarnation doesn't seem to be able to handle it. So much whining about the schedule. It's ridiculous. BYU IS NOT AN ELITE TEAM. Deal with it and then come back with some realistic expectations.



I hope BYU continues to schedule road games every year in the Midwest and in the South. Fans live and die with their teams in these regions. College football is part of their culture. BYU will gain unprecedented exposure and prestige by playing well at these venues. Of course, wins will do even more, but the good showing we made at Notre Dame has and will continue to go a long way. A lot of people saw what BYU is and what it can do, and I'm not just talking about the football players.

I think TH is taking these games to build our brand and to get future H-H deals with some pretty good teams. The first two years we had to have WAC teams and some one and dones. The next three years are some one and dones and two for ones. After that it will be mostly H-H deals or us receiving one and dones.

Utah did 2 1 and dones with Michigan before they got that H-H.



And anyone who uses little brother in a tile with reference to BYU is trolling, plains and simple.



Say it again, Bib needs a timeout. The trolling on BYU fans needs to stop. You can post this discussion without trolling, but he will not stop, and has actually accelerated his tone lately. Now, he just spams the place for reactions.



TIme for him to go bye-bye. He adds nothing to the civil discussion anymore.

YNot wrote:
I hope BYU continues to schedule road games every year in the Midwest and in the South. Fans live and die with their teams in these regions. College football is part of their culture. BYU will gain unprecedented exposure and prestige by playing well at these venues. Of course, wins will do even more, but the good showing we made at Notre Dame has and will continue to go a long way. A lot of people saw what BYU is and what it can do, and I'm not just talking about the football players.

Very true. Even if it's not an elite opponent, in terms of exposure for recruiting, it never hurts to play teams from California, Texas or the South; which is where most players are recruited from.