Is It Wise to Play Virginia Tech?
29 comments so far
August 19, 2009 by
As the Big 12 media days took place this month, so did the Atlantic Coast Conference’s. It was no big surprise that Virginia Tech was named the favorite to win the ACC, given they return a lot of good players from a team that won the Orange Bowl. But aside from some exposure and the potential for a “signature win”, does it make sense in this day and age for Nebraska to schedule a team like the Hokies?
In the days of the Big 8, it made a lot of sense to schedule some big-time opponents out of conference. There were years where there seemed like there were only two quality teams in the Big 8 (Nebraska being one of them), so it made sense to try to schedule some good competition out of conference to get at least one good test before a showdown for conference supremecy.
But these days, there’s no shortage of good teams in the Big 12. If you’re not playing Texas one year, you’re playing Oklahoma. Even if you run roughshod through the regular season, there’s still a Big 12 championship game to be played. Any team that’s 13-0 after running that gauntlet (regardless of how weak the non-conference schedule) is going to be hard to keep out of the national championship game.
There could be an argument to be made that a better non-conference schedule would improve the chances of getting into a national championship game with a loss. But that seldom has worked out for Nebraska, largely because the Husker’s losses often tend to come at the end of the season.
So if there’s no big upside to a big non-conference game, what about the downside? In 2002, it was a bad loss at Penn State that may well have contributed to a loss a week later to Iowa State. It’s also made the Huskers fall to the Independence Bowl and a 7-7 final record. In 2004, a non-conference loss cost NU a bowl bid for the first time since the 1960’s, the longest bowl streak in the country. Likewise, the 2007 non-conference loss to USC not only shattered the Huskers confidence but kept Nebraska from being bowl eligible. Last year, the home loss to Virginia Tech likely cost NU a spot in the final AP Top 25 rankings.
Wouldn’t NU be better off playing a softer schedule (even if it costs some exposure and invites some criticism)? Bill Snyder built a program on weak scheduling. It’s a fairly proven formula. Why not try to schedule Duke every year. Get Indiana on the slate too. Start a border war with Wyoming. Get Stanford coming to town. See if Syracuse would like to play against you.
But taking losses when you don’t have to probably costs you more than it helps. So you better not lose.
Did you enjoy this article?
Get Husker news by email
Follow us on Twitter
Related Stories: Scheduling
Post a comment
Chris Aug 19 09
I don't like this concept at all. I still think you need to try to schedule at least one quality opponent every year outside of your conference. I don't like the idea of my team just scheduling MAC,Sun Belt, and FCS schools so we can have eight home games all the time. The players you recruit don't come to Nebraska to play directional state, they come to play in big time games whether they be conference or ooc. And as a fan I want to see my favorite program challenge themselves. I know money is the number one player, but is one game a year like Va Tech so much to ask for?
Pete Aug 19 09
I think it's important that we play Va Tech or USC or some other big name each year. While we may not always beat them, it forces the Huskers to get ready and makes them a better team in the long run. I personally don't respect teams that line up cupcakes year in and year out. And if we do win a big one early, it puts us in contention immediately if we're respected to begin with. Then we're back to where we want to be....in contention week in/week out. No guts, no glory! BTW, in the days of Jim Harbaugh, I don't consider Stanford to be a pushover.....they beat USC didn't they? And they're starting to get the recruits.
Dwayne Aug 19 09
To answer your question of softening the schedule, uh... No.
Husker Mike Aug 19 09
"But these days, there’s no shortage of good teams in the Big 12."
If Big XII teams failed to play teams like Virginia Tech, BYU, and Miami...how would you know that?
I'd argue that if Nebraska were updating their schedule, they'd be best served by dropping one of the Sun Belt game - none of whom broke Sagarin's Top 100 last season.
Ben Aug 19 09
As a VT, fan I ask the same question regarding the scheduling of Nebraska. While the current huskers aren't the powerhouse teams of the 90's (and prior), there is still enough talent on the field to win any game they play. On the other hand, last year's bama team dominated a top 10 opponent (albeit, grossly over rated) to start the season which vaulted them into the national discussion. I'd like to see the BCS require conference match ups (a la the basketball conference "challenges"), to ensure that top rated teams from conferences play each other (including the non-BCS, so they have legit claims to be in the NCG or even a BCS bowl, if they go undefeated).
Brian Aug 19 09
Why play a team like Virgina Tech you ask? Because its fun to watch!. Even if fans will show up for the directional Michigans of the world, they'd much rather see a real game, and not a blowout. Maybe I'm in the minority here, but I'd rather watch 12 good games and not play in the National Championship then watch a dozen mediocre blowouts.
Brian Aug 19 09
Why play a team like Virgina Tech you ask? Because its fun to watch!. Even if fans will show up for the directional Michigans of the world, they'd much rather see a real game, and not a blowout. Maybe I'm in the minority here, but I'd rather watch 12 good games and not play in the National Championship then watch a dozen mediocre blowouts.
Steve Aug 19 09
The counter-argument to needing a tough nonconference opponent might be 2000 Oklahoma. They played UTEP, Arkansas State and Rice (all at home) and won the national title. They played some tight games down the stretch, which suggests that it wasn't the kind of team that goes 13-0 against any schedule. If OU had gone on the road against Miami or something early, who's to say whether they could have run the table?
WyoHuskerFan Aug 19 09
Damn Right it's wise. What does it say to your team not to schedule quality opponents, "You're not ready for prime time." One of the few things I've admired about the CU program over the years is their OOC schedule. Much more challenging then NU's, and yes I believe it made the Buffs a better team. I don't know how you prepare for the big games by playing lesser competition. I'd like to see them get back to playing one from each of the Big 10, ACC, Pac 10 and SEC schools every year, or even the Big East. If you're going to play the MWC it needs to be Utah/BYU/TCU, not Wyoming or New Mexico, same with the WAC. Challenge Boise State, not Nevada. And what's up with coming to Laramie? I love it the game's in my backyard, however the stadium is tiny! If you want a border war, look east and make it IOWA.
GBR!
RedDenver Aug 19 09
As Brian pointed out, we want to play tough teams because it's fun to watch. If you're only concerned with national rankings and national titles, then by all means only schedule patsies (I'm looking at you Florida). But if, like me, you watch football to be entertained by good competition, then you want to play tougher opponents knowing that it might cost your team in the national picture. The biggest rewards come with the largest at stake.
James Moore Aug 19 09
Yes, you should schedule a Virginia Tech a USC or whoever. People want to compete and they want to play against the best. Especially in places that we are looking to establish a recruiting presence. In the future trips to the Deep South, Southeast and California should be considered. What better way to market the program than to take it on the road? Sure we have Oklahoma, Texas, and some other high-quality programs within the conference but you've got to get ready to play against people like this. Sure we, like other big name programs have to schedule a couple of scrimmages to get things moving, but that's how the college football world works. As is our goal should be to schedule a nice intersectional matchup every year, turn the Big 12 North into our personal Big 8, and if you make the Conference Championship and win, well you are on the big stage at that point. . .
To be ready to play in a BCS or major bowl requires being able to prepare and execute, at high intensity levels without losing focus. A lot of times when someone goes from 4 or 5 cupackes and then, bam time to bring it!!! Well when things come easy sometimes people don't like the idea of having to work for success. It's easy to walk around with your hand out asking for something for nothing. Personalities like that don't react well when they get punched in the face and taste their own blood. (See Missouri non-conference last year and then look at the Oklahoma State game and Texas).
HuskerFaithful1 Aug 19 09
If teams adopt policies about not scheduling tougher non-conference games then maybe they are making a statement that they are not good enough to be the national champion. I hardly think that one single "stronger" non-conference game should be a reason to lose a chance to play for a National Championship unless it's a team that shouldn't be playing in one in the first place. At least if you win that non-conference game it's easier to argue why you should be there in the first place. Let's not forget that strength of schedule does play a part in that calculation.
I also might add that LSU beat non-conference #9 VT then lost conference games to both #17 Kentucky and Arkansas and still made it to the National Championship game. I highly doubt that they would have made it there if they would have played Troy State instead of a #9 VT.
iggy Aug 19 09
correction HF... they crushed Va Tech... and it was pretty much that win that the pollsters remembered when it came time to vote. That and IIRC both games went 3OTs before LSU lost them. That team was sick.
Carl VT Aug 19 09
As a VT fan, I am really glad that we scheduled the series with NU. I went out to Lincoln and was thoroughly impressed by the town and the Husker fans. We had a great time hanging out at the Big Red Meat Wagon before and after the game (thanks!). And I look forward to returning the hospitality this year to all the Huskers who make the trip to Blacksburg.
Having experienced both soft schedules and OOC games against quality opponents (both wins, close losses, and crushing defeats) I definitely think that playing quality opponents, win or lose, is better for the fans, improves the play of the team (like when we lost to USC to open our season then went on to win the ACC Championship) and in the long run brings better players to your school.
GO HOKIES!
GO BIG RED! (I hope you win all of your games but 1!
Guy Aug 19 09
I would also like to add that scheduling the weaker teams is great but what happens when one of those teams beats you (remember what Ball State almost did, or Troy v. Missouri or Appalachian St. v. Michingan). I think we can all agree a loss to a Va Tech or USC is much easier to take than a loss to a team from the MAC or Sun Belt.
Now this is not saying that we need to play only teams from BCS conferences, but we need to make sure we don't assume those games are guaranteed wins.
HuskerFan4Life Aug 19 09
Just ask Tom Osborne if he would like to play Syracuse again...Does the writer not remember 1984????
This is the lamest blog I have seen on this site! This is Nebraska, we want to play and beat the best!!!
Go Big Red!!!
KAW Aug 19 09
Every team should have the Fresno St. or USC attitude: Any team, any place, any time. Besides, if we hadn't played USC, ol' Billy boy might still be around. Besides, look at our OOC schedule next season. Took a page right out of Mac Brown's book, except we can't play 4 out of conference teams within our state. I for one like the big games. Now we just need to win one! GBR!!!
B Aug 19 09
VT alum here. Of course you schedule VT. And of course VT schedules Nebraska. I'll tell you why: Because when you play difficult out-of-conference teams early in the year, especially before conference play, it makes you a better team even if you lose. And THAT gives you a better shot at winning your division and conference. The hottest fire makes the strongest iron!!!
Ackos Aug 19 09
You must be happy with next years schedule.
MC4VT Aug 19 09
We do play Boise State next year in D.C. Not a push over.
Qualuedtke Aug 19 09
Bill Snyder built a program on weak scheduling? And how many national championships did that garner him? You play the best to be the best, or never rise to that level.
bnahusker Aug 19 09
C'mon Steve,
How hard was it to keep your tongue in your cheek as long as it took you to type this?
Washington, UCLA, Miami and Tenn are on future schedules along with Southern Miss and Fresno St. This is fantastic scheduling! There are some dogs in there but the Power of Red would starve to death on the Bill Snyder/K-State diet!
GBR!
Bob
nccusefAN Aug 19 09
I understand picking on Syracuse is easy to do of lately but they werent always a easy win. In fact Syracuse is 7-5 all time against Nebraska. These games are scheduled several years down the road most of the time and hopefully the Cuse will be back. With that said Id love to see Nebraska on the schedule.
Dwayne Aug 19 09
I don't think Steve's in the opinion of NU scheduling patsy teams. He's simply pointing out the pros and cons. Steve never suggested what he favors, but only offered a few facts of what has happened over the past few years. It's called reading comprehension people.
Bill Kerr Aug 19 09
Yes.
If they didn't, then that would be one more pay-per-view that I would have to pay for in California.
OU7times Aug 21 09
Husker tams of the past seemed to have the 'any time, any place' mentality. So, Nebraska hasn't quite been Nebraska in th last few years. I wouldn't change that mentality of playing quality oponents for anything including easy wins.
There's no indication that Va Tech will or could blow Nebraska out this season, and they didn't last season either, so why not play them?
I just don't care for playing cupcakes as it really creates a no win situation as far as school/team image. Getting a true measurement of where you stand against the best available teams says a lot.
Quality of wins as opposed to quantity of wins.
WOW Aug 23 09
'Soften the non-conference schedule'????
You mean,
Florida Atlantic
Arkansas State
Louisiana Lafayette
all at home isn't soft enough???
Mac Aug 27 09
Scheduling tough non-conference teams earns respect. For years VT got a bad rap for scheduling too many Division II teams, which we deserved. Now with Bama, Nebraska and a tough East Carolina team, there's a lot more risk... We all know the higher the risk, the higher the potential reward.
Go Hokies!
Mac Aug 27 09
Scheduling tough non-conference teams earns respect. For years VT got a bad rap for scheduling too many Division II teams, which we deserved. Now with Bama, Nebraska and a tough East Carolina team, there's a lot more risk... We all know the higher the risk, the higher the potential reward.
Go Hokies!