WT Football

[Turbonium]

I have seen both work, although the thread on the main forum makes a pretty good statistical case for not making your schedule too brutal. Then again, there are teams who will finish with a good record, but just aren't very good.

Other times, ADs may be looking at butts in seats. Like UCO keeping NSU on their schedule regardless of how they thought their record would be.

I personally like the balance of a really good test with maybe a lesser test. I never like to see good teams schedule the dregs like OPSU or the fake Lincoln who isn't even a sanctioned school. Let those teams play one another. Pitt did this a lot under old management. It hurts playoff chances, doesn't give you a real learning opportunity, and drives fans away.

Way too many outliers on the main forum thread for it to be taken seriously. Sure, if you're in a tough conference that will challenge you then you can schedule rather OOC opponents, but if you're in the LSC, RMAC, or many other top heavy conferences you damn well better challenge yourself as much as possible. I firmly believe that Pueblo loses today if their OOC games aren't against qualify opponents.

[MooseLodge]

I have seen both work, although the thread on the main forum makes a pretty good statistical case for not making your schedule too brutal. Then again, there are teams who will finish with a good record, but just aren't very good.

Other times, ADs may be looking at butts in seats. Like UCO keeping NSU on their schedule regardless of how they thought their record would be.

I personally like the balance of a really good test with maybe a lesser test. I never like to see good teams schedule the dregs like OPSU or the fake Lincoln who isn't even a sanctioned school. Let those teams play one another. Pitt did this a lot under old management. It hurts playoff chances, doesn't give you a real learning opportunity, and drives fans away.

I think the typical D2 attendee is pretty well educated on the quality of the opponents, and if it isn't a quality opponent, they won't show up at all. So it's a fine line.

[Predatory Primates]

I have seen both work, although the thread on the main forum makes a pretty good statistical case for not making your schedule too brutal. Then again, there are teams who will finish with a good record, but just aren't very good.

Other times, ADs may be looking at butts in seats. Like UCO keeping NSU on their schedule regardless of how they thought their record would be.

I personally like the balance of a really good test with maybe a lesser test. I never like to see good teams schedule the dregs like OPSU or the fake Lincoln who isn't even a sanctioned school. Let those teams play one another. Pitt did this a lot under old management. It hurts playoff chances, doesn't give you a real learning opportunity, and drives fans away.

[ASUPops]

Sul Ross and the New Mexico teams are typically easy wins, at least in the recent past. That ought to be enough fluff in the schedule.

Playing OPSU, Texas College, and. North American made WT weaker, not stronger.

100%

[Buffalo/Islander Alum]

Most of these contracts were signed years ago, so this isn’t on Lynn. During Hughes’ tenure—by his third year—he believed the program would be competing at a high level. Before COVID, they finished 8-3 and just missed the playoffs. The three losses came against ranked opponents, and their non-conference schedule was relatively weak, which hurt their playoff chances.

To address that, they scheduled tougher regional opponents. Unfortunately, things didn’t pan out for Hughes, but Lynn inherited that challenging schedule.

At this point, though, I don’t think you can afford to schedule easy non-conference games—especially now that the MIAA is part of the region. They will get in 3 teams I believe every season.

The Grand Valley contract was in 2022 when the WT ship was starting to sink and then hit the iceberg in Canada.

WT was never in any post season consideration in 2019 because they were in a fourth place tie that they lost to ASU in head to head tiebreaker.

Usually 3 losses is a death sentence when you have 4 conferences in a region.

Pitt State could get away with it this year but they played the top 2 of the GLIAC and finished 1-1.

I get the challenge but there is a thing such as overkill.

2026 schedule first 3 games are Western Colorado at home, Grand Valley on the road, then Angelo State on the road.

That is a gauntlet for most teams but less a WT team that is trying to find traction to have a winning season.

MIAA is only getting 2 teams in this year.

[WT_TKW]

Sul Ross and the New Mexico teams are typically easy wins, at least in the recent past. That ought to be enough fluff in the schedule.

Playing OPSU, Texas College, and. North American made WT weaker, not stronger.

[AmaKnight]

Most of these contracts were signed years ago, so this isn’t on Lynn. During Hughes’ tenure—by his third year—he believed the program would be competing at a high level. Before COVID, they finished 8-3 and just missed the playoffs. The three losses came against ranked opponents, and their non-conference schedule was relatively weak, which hurt their playoff chances.

To address that, they scheduled tougher regional opponents. Unfortunately, things didn’t pan out for Hughes, but Lynn inherited that challenging schedule.

At this point, though, I don’t think you can afford to schedule easy non-conference games—especially now that the MIAA is part of the region. They will get in 3 teams I believe every season.

[Turbonium]

No, but their record would be. Just like a Tx Tech playing a NE Louisiana type program.

Coaches need to have a couple gimmees (besides Sul Ross). Can't play a Ferris State, GV, and Pueblo every year to start the season. That'd be insanity. That's what WT's doing.

I disagree, it's not like you're trying to get 6 wins to be bowl eligible and go play in the Idaho Potato Bowl in December. Pueblo, and others in the RMAC more recently, started to have more success when they tested themselves against quality programs. I think the top half of the RMAC has done a great job with this the last few years.

[ASUPops]

No, but their record would be. Just like a Tx Tech playing a NE Louisiana type program.

Coaches need to have a couple gimmees (besides Sul Ross). Can't play a Ferris State, GV, and Pueblo every year to start the season. That'd be insanity. That's what WT's doing.

I agree with playing the toughest teams.

[ASUPops]

Issue I have with this statement is that a majority of college football programs schedule a tough game and then an inferior opponent.

For now (maybe a while) WT isnt going to be a playoff threat so it makes sense to schedule an Adams State or Ft. Lewis.

This gives them an opportunity for a win but also to ease new skill players in to new roles and iron out the kinks for the tougher opponents.

Getting blown to bits by championship level squads doesnt accomplish any of those things.

When they do become a playoff caliber team then I am all in for scheduling tough teams to get ready for conference season and SOS purposes.

Your statements seam reasonable, IF, and only IF you are in a rebuild year....new HC, etc.

Otherwise, I disagree wholeheartedly.

But to each their own.

[BuffaloChip]

You think if WT was 7-4 instead of 5-6 simply due to scheduling easier opponents they would somehow improve?

No, but their record would be. Just like a Tx Tech playing a NE Louisiana type program.

Coaches need to have a couple gimmees (besides Sul Ross). Can't play a Ferris State, GV, and Pueblo every year to start the season. That'd be insanity. That's what WT's doing.

[Rockofwesties]

A question for the locals who are on campus. What is the word, will there be coach changes at the end of this season?

[Buffalo/Islander Alum]

You think if WT was 7-4 instead of 5-6 simply due to scheduling easier opponents they would somehow improve?

Issue I have with this statement is that a majority of college football programs schedule a tough game and then an inferior opponent.

For now (maybe a while) WT isnt going to be a playoff threat so it makes sense to schedule an Adams State or Ft. Lewis.

This gives them an opportunity for a win but also to ease new skill players in to new roles and iron out the kinks for the tougher opponents.

Getting blown to bits by championship level squads doesnt accomplish any of those things.

When they do become a playoff caliber team then I am all in for scheduling tough teams to get ready for conference season and SOS purposes.

[Turbonium]

I agree.

I do not understand the thinking behind this scheduling. Yes, you want to play good opponents. But there's a medium ground. Instead of WColo or GV, play a Black Hills, NEOkla, or Highlands. A team needs to build some confidence instead of getting thumped by a top 10 team every week before conference even starts. Hard to build a program if you're always 5-6 or 6-5 because of an extraordinarily tough pre-conference schedule.

I just don't get it. I think McBroom made these scheduling contracts.

You think if WT was 7-4 instead of 5-6 simply due to scheduling easier opponents they would somehow improve?

[ASUPops]

I agree.

I do not understand the thinking behind this scheduling. Yes, you want to play good opponents. But there's a medium ground. Instead of WColo or GV, play a Black Hills, NEOkla, or Highlands. A team needs to build some confidence instead of getting thumped by a top 10 team every week before conference even starts. Hard to build a program if you're always 5-6 or 6-5 because of an extraordinarily tough pre-conference schedule.

I just don't get it. I think McBroom made these scheduling contracts.

Playing harder competition out of conference is a great idea, in my opinion. Play two tough teams, then face LSC teams. You should be better prepared.

If you play weak teams you get a false sense of how good your team actually is. From day one of coaching, I always scheduled two - three very, very tough games. Win those and you are ready to win your district/conference/division. It always worked well for me.

As a player, you WANT to play the best teams, not powder puffs.