[jetpilot]

If we're going to schedule an ACC team, I would want it to be Duke. Why? Because UNC or Wake would probably beat us. Cutcliffe certainly has Duke on the right track, but they're still the most likely win out of that conference. And I bet PLENTY of UK fans and students would jump at the chance to beat the crap out of Duke.

As for the idea that UK could go to a better bowl by beating a better non-conference opponent, well, it doesn't work like that. What matters most of all in the bowl pecking order is WINS. Within the SEC structure, bowls will almost always take the team with more wins over the team with less, no matter who those wins were against. It makes the game look more attractive to sponsors and casual fans to have the participating teams with more wins. The only thing that can sometimes trump wins is star power, either with a traditional powerhouse school or a superstar player. The last time UK went to a big-time bowl was after the 1998 season, when the allure of Tim Couch propelled the 7-4 cats into the Outback Bowl.

To me, the bottom line is to get to a bowl game, period. Even going to a low-level bowl playing East Carolina, is better than no bowl at all. And UK isn't to the point yet where they can count on more than 2 wins in the SEC every year. They NEED those out-of-conference wins to have the best chance at a bowl.

Not me. 2-6 in the SEC and 4-0 vs. boring pansies and then a bowl vs. an ECU doesn't do a lot for me. Games not sold out in Commonwealth vs. pansies is all the evidence you need that most people agree. And not scheduling a team because they might beat you? That's not a policy any winning program has...that's why they are winners...