[Football1]

Much is made of schedules. Strong ones; weak ones; out of state teams; private schools - they all get made and we all debate them. But really - who makes the schedule for each team? Is their a better strategy or any strategy that goes into this?

For the poll - should you schedule stronger non-distict oponents who are likely to beat you so you are better prepared for playoff play or does that set a bad tone and increase the risk of injury. Vote strong if you feel you should play the hard teams even if you lose; vote weak if you feel you should ensure your team wins so they get used to winning.

[Dragonsdad]

Much is made of schedules. Strong ones; weak ones; out of state teams; private schools - they all get made and we all debate them. But really - who makes the schedule for each team? Is their a better strategy or any strategy that goes into this?

For the poll - should you schedule stronger non-distict oponents who are likely to beat you so you are better prepared for playoff play or does that set a bad tone and increase the risk of injury. Vote strong if you feel you should play the hard teams even if you lose; vote weak if you feel you should ensure your team wins so they get used to winning.

F1,I think a team should schedule strong for the first half of the season and then schedule down to get their team on a roll. But I think a team should schedule a strong team for the last game of the regular season to help prepare for the playoffs. I think you learn more from teams better than you. For instance,if you play a stronger team than you,say you are 1A and you play a 3 or 4A team,then when you play the next game,a team in your class, then you feel more comfortable that you can compete at a higher level. However a team schedules,there has to be a strategy to get your team playing better come playoff time. Because I believe that is what the regular season is for,preparation for the playoffs.

[ole_blue_sack_15]

perrys got a tough schedule! and the last 2 games being harlan co and summerset!

[64black&gold]

I think it totally depends on the players you have. Return a lot of starters you need to play a tough schedule. Lots of new guy in new roles then make it a little easier. But always building for playoffs. No 3 or 4 away games straight and things like that.

[Alpha_Male]

If you have a weak team that isnt in contention for a region title then schedule weak teams that you can get atleast a few w's so the kids will see how it feels to win. If you have a chance at making it deep into the playoffs you should have some tough teams to be prepared for the playoffs. As well as a weak team some where on the schedule so your starters will have some time to rest and your backups get in-game experience. But it all depends on the team and how they respond to a few bad losses or a few blowout wins. Either way you can only get better by having close games with teams that you are evenly matched up with.

[comeback_kidxXx]

I think it totally depends on the players you have. Return a lot of starters you need to play a tough schedule. Lots of new guy in new roles then make it a little easier. But always building for playoffs. No 3 or 4 away games straight and things like that.

:Thumbs:

[Football1]

If you have a weak team that isnt in contention for a region title then schedule weak teams that you can get atleast a few w's so the kids will see how it feels to win. If you have a chance at making it deep into the playoffs you should have some tough teams to be prepared for the playoffs. As well as a weak team some where on the schedule so your starters will have some time to rest and your backups get in-game experience. But it all depends on the team and how they respond to a few bad losses or a few blowout wins. Either way you can only get better by having close games with teams that you are evenly matched up with.

I agree. Knowing your players and what level they will be able to compete at allows you to form a schedule that challenges them but keeps it competitive. Problem is - coach's tend to overestimate their teams abilities.

[Dragonsdad]

I agree. Knowing your players and what level they will be able to compete at allows you to form a schedule that challenges them but keeps it competitive. Problem is - coach's tend to overestimate their teams abilities.

I agree with that,but have also seen teams go 5-8 and vie for the region. Example: Greenup Co. 2007 season. They played a tough schedule and lost to several teams better than themselves but over achieved in the playoffs. I believe because they played such a tough non district schedule. They were 1-6 to start the season.

[DEVIL89]

I agree to a point about all this the only problem that I see is this, it is high school football and in that there are alot of little rivalries here or there with different schools that are close to you so it is hard to try and schedule certain type of games. There is also traveling involved at a certain point also. So it really doesn't quite workout that way, also when you schedule teams to play you at least schedule a home-home type of contract so to change that each year would be difficult. And like I said you might have an experienced team one year and a totally young team the next so it would be very hard to schedule a certain way.

[RoShamBo]

Ask Highlands, or the last three state champions in 3A what they think.

[Bigblue#4]

I think that you should have a mixture of of 50/50 games and winable games. Very key in how you have your schedule is laid out. Alot of times you may want to start out with two hard games and have a easy game after in the third game just in case you need a momentum booster. Then try to play your toughest team in the 4th game or 5th game,( because it gives you 5 or 6 weeks to see what you need to work on.) Then play district games 6,7,8,9 week. I would want to end the regular season with a good team to measure how far you have came since the 4th or 5th game that get you ready for the playoffs.

[king360]

perrys got a tough schedule! and the last 2 games being harlan co and summerset!

lol

[More Cowbell]

I didn't vote on the poll because I think there should have been a third option: play mostly teams that are on your level.

I don't see the point in playing teams that are either way above or way below your level. Just not much to learn from a 56-0 butt-whipping, no matter which side of it you're on.

Better to mostly schedule teams that are at your team's skill level. Games where it's a 50/50 shot going in whether you win or not. Maybe 1-2 games with teams that are 7-10 points better than you, to give your team a chance to rise to the occasion and beat a better team.

Finally, the last week before the playoffs should be geared to who you think you'll be playing in the first round. If you project your team as a strong #1 seed who should roll over their first playoff opponent, then you should schedule a tough game for week 10, in order to give your team a good test before what could be a blowout win or two. If you're projected as more of a #3 or #4 seed who will open up with a tough road game in the first round, then schedule an easier team for week 10, so your starters can rest up for an important game.

[nky]

Depends on the type of team you have.
If you're a bottom dwelling team, one that traditionally doesn't win you need to schedule weaker teams so that you can compete. If you have an issue with getting kids out to play because they don't want lose you need to schedule weaker teams.
If you plan and have a realistic chance to make a run in the playoffs you should schedule stronger teams especially early that will push your metal and make you better

[BigVMan23]

Everything is realitive. Depending on the talent a team has, a strong schedule to them might be a very weak schedule to someone else, even within their own classification. I also believe it depends on your district. If you play in a four or five team brutally hard district, you might want to stay away from scheduling a lot of hard out of district games. But, considering all that, this is how I would schedule were I a football coach, and I try to do this as a basketball coach, same idea anyway.

2 games against teams that if you don't bring your A+ game, they will beat you.

2 games against teams that will possibly beat you if you don't play "above average". Up this number by at least 1 game if you play in a weak district.

2 games you should win rather handily, perferably against teams in your same class (or up) but no more than 1 class down.

Mandated district games round out the schedule, and you just have no control over them.

In a perfect world, this is how I would schedule. There is a team in my area that I have noticed seems to schedule rather weak and likes to try and put up a bunch of wins during the regular season. Thats fine for a rebuilding team that is trying to establish a winning attitude. But I believe scheduling weak for an established team hurts you during the playoffs, and if the first time you are really tested is in the playoffs, then the coach hasn't done his team any favors. Of course, sometimes you might be scheduling someone who you think might be good and it doesn't turn out that way, so that can happen from time to time. I'd rather be 6-4, 5-5 and have a battle tested team that is a threat to win the state than a 9-1, 10-0 team come playoffs who really hasn't been tested and only played a bunch of teams they should beat to begin with. Of course, I would also love to have a team that was 10-0 come playoff time with wins over Trinity, Highlands, St. X, BG, Boyle County and John Hardin. That would be a team to recon with.:1:

[#1vikingfan]

lol that would be a dream team made up of the best players in the state for like the past two or three years.

[geauxtigers75]

Pretty sure Perry went with the "Come hell or high water or 0-10, we will be ready for the playoffs." Approach. Hats off to Coach Haddix for really beefing our schedule up, it's paying dividends right now and hopefully in November. Although, I think 1 or 2 cupcake games never hurts :biggrin:.

[Bear_Paw]

I think we scheduled who we could get short of hopping on a jet..... personally I like what Perry County has done especially given their early success....