Lawboy wrote:
I think BYU would be wise to keep the tough games at 4-5 a year with 7-8 easy games. Works for every other big school. No reason to schedule 6 tough games a year at all. I am fine with switching Wyoming, UNLV, UNM and SDSU, CSU for Hawaii, SJSU, NMSU and Idaho, along with USU. That is a a wash. 4-6 WAC type games is fine with me. I think we need to get a Duke on schedule, a Syracuse, a Vandy, etc. Teams with BCS names, but not BCS games. Show we can thump thse teams just like the big boys. No reason to play a brutal schedule.
We will probably know more in the next hour, but BYU's 2011 schedule is already looking tough with games with Oregon State, Texas, and Boise State. If you add Notre Dame, I would shoot for 1-2 good games against BCS opponents (ie, Clemson and Texas Tech). That leaves 6-7 games. Assuming we get Clemson and Tech, you have 6 games left. You could easily get Utah State and Hawaii. Those are two relatively easy games. With the remaining 4 games, I think two of those should be against NMSU, Idaho, or SJSU (or CSU, SDSU, UNLV...if they's take us). The remaining two, ideally, would be against a Duke, Indiana, Syracuse, etc. I just don't see those games coming together for 2011. So, BYU will instead have to go after a couple of additional WAC/MWC leftovers.
Moving forward, I love the idea of standing games against:
Utah
Utah State
Notre Dame
Navy
And then, follow this formula:
2 Pac 12
2 Big XII
2 WAC/MWC
2 ACC/Big East/Big Ten
The balancing act will be to mix and match the Texas-type match-ups with low-level BCS teams and the TCU/BSU match-ups with UNLV and NMSU....