Texas Tech Future Schedules. ????

by Pablo M on Sep 22, 2009 7:37 AM CDT Comment 24 comments

i was looking at an article from ESPN that talked about top programs and who they will be playing through the 2015 to 2020 seasons. So I decided to look at Texas Tech's future schedules. One thing that jumped right out is the lack of future scheduling. The second thing I noticed is that Leach finally did not schedule a D II team for the next two years. See: http://huddleuptexas.com/College/FutureSkeds/BXII.htm

2010 schedule looks nice and I think we as Tech supporters will love it. SMU, New Mexico, TCU and Houston shapes up as a very nice set of nonconference teams and should boost Tech's power rating through the roof.

2011 is TCU, New Mexico and Nevada with Louisiana L the Ragin Cajun with the tentative pencil in as first choice or another series with Texas El Paso.

2012 is just New Mexico.

Though its not uncommon in scheduling its becoming a big deal in who you schedule as preseason rankings and BSC inside track for the season. I would love for Tech to schedue for example, Arizona or Arizona State, a Big 10 team like Illinois or Minnisota or even Iowa. I would love to see Michigan or Michgan State. Then there is the MAC teams. Any of these would put Tech in the inside track. Tulsa would be nice but they pulled from Playing Tech through the 2011 season in a home and home to preserve their chances at going to a higher bowl.

It may scare some people to play the higher talent than what we normally do. But the truth is that we are demanding more of the program than ever in the past. We are seriously as boosters and fans looking for the next step up the rung to a conference title, a BCS Bowl and a national Title. These things are now just 2 games and 5 high level recruits away.

All we need do is take the first step to a great future.

This is a FanPost and does not necessarily reflect the views of Double-T Nation's writers or editors. It does reflect the views of this particular fan though, which is as important as the views of Double-T Nation's writers or editors.

0 recs | Comment 24 comments

Story-email Email Printer Print

Comments

Arkansas

Are we ever going to play Arkansas? We haven’t played them since the SWC disolved. Texas played them last year and the year before. A&M plays them this year and probably next year. We should schedule Arkansas for 2012.

by rednader on Sep 22, 2009 9:28 AM CDT reply actions 0 recs

That would cause my family heart burn… parents and extended family are all from there and are arkansas fans…

Wreck 'Em Tech!

J.T.H.

by redraidersax on Sep 22, 2009 12:37 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs

Problem...

The problem is that TTech like most upper level teams want to control 7 home games. The afore mentioned teams generally will want at least a Home/Home but they may want 2 Homes. I’m not real big on playing in Dallas for one of our Home games. Playing in Dallas for Baylor’s Home is fine, and SMU, TCU is ok but don’t give away a Home game for Dallas. Also let’s not go over board. Part of our success is winning our non-conf. games. Do up grade— Tulsa, Tulane, Mississippi State, Vandy, Stanford, and similar teams would be fine. Wreck’em Tech

by techgolf44 on Sep 22, 2009 9:48 AM CDT reply actions 0 recs

Dallas

What’s the negative for Dallas? it sucks as students and local people, but i know the largest percentage of Tech alum come out of dallas. we usually have pretty good support there.

also really like the idea of miss state and vandy… would get SEC games… even if it is the lower teams…i’d even throw in Kentucky or South Carolina if we wanted to push a little harder.

Wreck 'Em Tech!

J.T.H.

by redraidersax on Sep 22, 2009 12:41 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs

disagree

part of our past success is from scheduling weak non conference opponets. we could play these teams anywhere and still beat them. plus,

to keep the trend of trying to become a tier 1 football program we need to start scheduling tougher opponets. all these cinderalla opponets were fine before, but to keep the national spotlight on us, we have to schedule exciting games. we want national reconginition right? theres no way around it!

On top of all of that, if your alumni like myself and do not live in lubbock and dont have time/money to be able travel to all the home games. I have to wait till the texas game to be able to watch my alla mater play football on tv! that by far is what pisses me off!

by chad0454 on Sep 22, 2009 4:24 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs

Notre Dame

We would get national exposure, money, and a win!

by Red Raider in South GA on Sep 22, 2009 10:09 AM CDT reply actions 0 recs

Guaranteed

… to be played on NBC…

“Notre-Dame Broadcast Channel”

Wreck 'Em Tech!

J.T.H.

by redraidersax on Sep 22, 2009 12:42 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs

One issue

As we start to get better… people might not want to play us…

i don’t have any real statistical information on this but my guess is….

you can usually get really crappy schools that need the money we offer and don’t care who they play… or you get teams that are better than us or around the same level that either think they have a really good shot at beating us, or want the game because if they beat us it’s something they really need to boost a program…

seems like it would be harder to find people to play that are at a better skill level than the Sister Marys but wouldn’t ask for a larger money deal.

Wreck 'Em Tech!

J.T.H.

by redraidersax on Sep 22, 2009 12:46 PM CDT reply actions 0 recs

Underrated

The fact that we are underrated doesn’t help any either. Every coach in the nation knows that we have a shot at walking onto the field and beating their team on any given Saturday. The fact that we are underrated means that if they win they get minimal credit for beating us and if they lose (which is a real possibility as stated above) they get reamed for it. It’s lose lose for a top 35 or so team.

by jdeeTTU on Sep 22, 2009 1:19 PM CDT reply actions 0 recs

good point

by Campeador on Sep 23, 2009 9:00 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs

Dallas

My point is that we should play in Dallas/Ft. Worth but let it be against SMU,TCU, UNT, or a home game for someone else not for Tech. I think Tech fans may underestimate just how powerful “The Jones” is, especially now that we are expanding it and the economic impact on Lubbock for each home game. The better the economics in Lubbock the better it is for Tech! I’m originially from Dallas but a Tech game in Dallas doesn’t change the ecomony in Dallas but it does in Lubbock! Wreck’Em

by techgolf44 on Sep 22, 2009 1:40 PM CDT reply actions 0 recs

I think we NEED to play in DFW

We should also consider Houston.

I think we could draw some better schools by offering to play at a neutral site – like Jerry’s world, the Cotton Bowl, or Reliant Stadium- especially if it is a school that tries to recruit from Texas. Exposure in DFW and Houston is great for our own recruiting. It’s not just about SOS, it’s about additional exposure for the potential recruits in these areas to Tech instead of just A&M, Texas, etc..

We aren’t quite at a level where we can demand teams come to us, unless we want to play La.La. U every year. Any tema from a BCS conference is pretty much going to demand a home/home, as will the better teams from C-USA, MWC, WAC, etc.

If we are going to play better schools, lets pick some that are somewhat regional and play them at a neutral site.

by NM99 on Sep 22, 2009 1:53 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs

Houston

I think playing Uof H in Reliant would be a great idea. Club seating, revenue creating suites. UH’s stadium is way to small! way to many ttu alumni can not get tickets.

by chad0454 on Sep 22, 2009 4:26 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs

UH won't play a home and home where there home is Reliant

that’s why Texas plays Rice instead of UH these days.

by Texas Wahoo on Sep 22, 2009 4:36 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs

UH used to play in Reliant but stopped because they simply couldn’t muster the manpower to compete against the UT/A&M/TTU fans who would show up in droves to watch their alma maters play in town. Moving it back to Robertson helps them keep the numbers close.

UH is basically ripping off Tech fans in Houston who want to see this game… $100 a ticket. You have to buy a ticket package that includes Tech + your pick of two schools nobody’s ever heard of. Any other UH home game goes for $40 and is sold individually.

by merrik on Sep 22, 2009 5:13 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs

we do the same

We sell ticket packs for UT/A&M/OU and maybe even OSU last year (I can’t remember). They are a 3 ticket package with 2 of our non-conference patsies. It’s common practice I think. Plus the UT package will cost 2 to 3 times what a ticket to see Kansas State will cost. So no need getting mad at UH for doing the same thing Tech does as a way of generating revenue… good ol’ supply and demand.

by jdeeTTU on Sep 22, 2009 5:37 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs

Looks like Tech sells individuals to those too...

http://www.texastech.com/sports/m-footbl/spec-rel/091609aaa.html

“Texas Tech has moved up its single-game ticket sales date for the Texas A&M and Oklahoma games…Individual tickets for each game are $95. Texas Tech also is offering a $190 Premium Mini-Plan, which includes a ticket to the A&M and OU games and the Kansas game.”

Looks like they have individuals for sale now. Although yep, they’re about as expensive as the UH ticket pack. I guess I’m still used to getting into home games for free. :/

by merrik on Sep 22, 2009 6:38 PM CDT reply actions 0 recs

I got one of those mini-plans myself – atm, Kansas, and OU – two ranked conference opponents and a rich ‘non-rival’ patsy. And there are still some good seats left if you don’t mind sitting on the west side with the blue-hairs. A friend at work bought a mini-pack yesterday and his seats are on the 40 yard line, 12 rows up in the upper level.

The prices gave me a little sticker shock I admit, but I enjoy giving the money to Tech much more than I do the $100 I had to give to Jerry the Jerk for the Baylor game.

BTW, the Kansas game was only $55. If it’s anything like last year’s game, that’s less than $1 per point.

by TechFirst on Sep 22, 2009 8:17 PM CDT reply actions 0 recs

TCU in 2010...

Gotta have a win in this one. Not for national exposure or ranking or anything related to those things. We gotta have it for my own personal sanity.
Is there anything worse than losing to TCU and having to listen to Gary Patterson b!tch and moan about not getting any respect around the state??? Answer is NO.
For me, TCU is right up there with my desire for Tech to beat UT, OSU and OU. Sorry Ag’s, I’ve kinda started taking that one for granted.

by imisswesttexas on Sep 23, 2009 10:01 AM CDT reply actions 0 recs

hOME AND HOME

It is pretty wide spread that Leach does not want to schedule teams that won’t play home and home. Yes they will take him in their town but they don’t want to return the favor by coming to Lubbock. Our stadium is not nearly as big as some of the teams we would all like to see, thus the gate is not as good. Also, preparing for the Red Raiders has been a problem, but as more people are beginning to run similiar type of offenses, our future may bring in bigger names, plus we are getting a 6000 seat bump to the stadium. But I believe Leach has been strong about wanting a home and home and you gotta like that…..

by fortworthraider on Sep 23, 2009 3:12 PM CDT reply actions 0 recs

Good point about the gate receipts

Might explain why we aren’t doing a home-n-home with UND and their 10,000 seat stadium.

by TechFirst on Sep 23, 2009 3:42 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs

Penn State in 2012. We used to play them in non-conf.

by ST04 on Sep 23, 2009 3:56 PM CDT reply actions 0 recs

There are

Plenty of teams that Tech can get whom we do not have to do a Home and Home with .

Lousiana Laff, Lousiana Monroe, Florida International, U Central Florida, Most MAC teams. Army, Navy, Airforce just to name a few. Basically, Any Sunbelt, and MAC teams are easy to get a cheap Home only . Its still possible to do Home and Home series and still have 7 home games. Its all in how you schedule it. Thus you spread it out. We have a Home and Home coming up with TCU which is a very tough non conference team who can play defense.

But the point is that Tech can pick off a Michigan State or Central Michigan if we tried. We could pick off a Pac 10 team like Stanford or Arizona if we tried for a Home and Home which would be good for Tech. The others can be a Sunbelt or CUSA Home only purchase.

by Pablo M on Sep 24, 2009 5:48 AM CDT reply actions 0 recs

Just a thought

While reading all of the comments, I was enlightened!

Instead of setting up a conference game in Dallas between any of the Big-12 teams (incl. BU), why not do something a little different. Set it up for a type of “bowl game” for the preseason? Tech could set it up at Jerry’s place and call it “Raider Rivalry Bowl”, “Dallas Bowl”, or something like that. In it, we could set up a different OOC team each year to meet us in Dallas in “The Bowl”. It could become an annual affair and attract higher caliber teams who would love to get some exposure in the Dallas area every now and then. As mentioned, Notre Dame; Michigan or Michigan State; Penn State; Miami, Florida State, LSU or South Carolina; Arizona, Arizona State, California or Washington. Even if they want a home-and-home, the prospect of a game in Dallas would certainly be attractive to a number of the better schools, regardless of who they were playing. There could be some amazing match-ups. With Tech’s alumni base there in the DFW area, Tech would still have a “home field” experience. More money would be available. This could become a national TV draw every year for years to come and could be a springboard up the polls for whomever the winner is. Big stage means huge projections in all areas. It may even become an even-par type game with the UT-OU game. Who knows. I don’t think there would be any negatives on this and it could be something that could galvanize Tech as one of the elite teams deep into the future. Thoughts? Myers? Leach?

TTpilk

by TTpilk645 on Sep 25, 2009 6:45 PM CDT reply actions 0 recs