- Seven Home Games. I am sure that in surveys and focus groups, most BC fans and ticket holders said they want seven home games. However, ticket sales and our inability to sell out during seven game homestands says otherwise. Does the feedback from ticket holders carry any caveats? Because most of the anecdotal stuff I hear is that people want seven games, but don't want bottom feeder opponents. Until BC reaches a point where ticket demand indicates that we can support a seven game schedule, I question that Bates should keep forcing it. Guarantees for that seventh opponent are going to become more and more expensive. Maybe BC should settle for six home games every few years and go get a payout as a road team from a major program.
- FCS opponents. Bates mentions New Mexico State cancelling at the 11th hour and forcing the Howard issue. The official cancellation may have been 11th hour, but Bates knew it was highly likely months ago. If BC really wanted to find a respectable replacement for the Aggies, they could have been more proactive in their scheduling. I suspect they hoped to pressure New Mexico State to keep the game or pressure their conference to provide another FBS patsy. Since we couldn't get an FBS patsy we decided to pay for an FCS one. I think it was all a calculated risk to help a young team. I don't have a problem with Bates or Addazio for doing that. I just prefer they were a little more forthright about the whole thing.
- Non-conference games. Bates implies that teams were afraid to schedule BC. I am sure that was the case for some of the programs we contacted. However, BC also didn't agree to take on all comers. You cannot say people are afraid to play us and not employ your own any time/any place attitude.
Monday, February 02, 2015
A few quibbles with Bates' latest letter
Brad Bates released a letter on Friday explaining scheduling and addressing the 2015 schedule. I applaud his willingness to address issues in such a public manner, but there are a few things that don't ring true. The three big issues I question are the demand for seven home games, the FCS opponents and the non-conference games.
Scheduling is tough and will only get tougher. Other than playing BYU, I think our best future solution might be playing non-conference games against ACC teams. Wake and UNC are going to do it. Why not us? It is less expensive than other opponents. The fans will see familiar names on the schedule and selection committees will reward those games over lower-level FBS teams. The only downside is potential confusion with regards to ACC divisional races. Yet complaining about that is a nice problem to have. If we lose to say Pitt in an out of conference game yet still win the Division, you won't hear BC ticket holders complaining.