TAKE TWO: Should UK change its non-conference scheduling philosophy?
Cats Illustrated's Justin Rowland and Jeff Drummond offer different takes on whether Kentucky should stick with that basic scheduling philosophy, tweak it or change it entirely.
THE STORYLINE:
It might not be so much of a storyline. It's more of a regular topic of discussion that pops up every year. Kentucky's non-conference football schedule changes from one year to the next but the basic format has been the same throughout recent history. It's Louisville on an alternating home-home basis, along with three opponents that are pulled from the Group of Five or FCS ranks. Is this how Kentucky should continue to schedule in the non-conference moving forward?
FIRST TAKE - JUSTIN ROWLAND
I used to be of the mind that the only thing that made sense for Kentucky football was to build as many near-automatic wins as possible into the schedule. UK hasn't been better than .500 in SEC play since 1977. Because winning SEC games is so tough, I convinced myself that in order to build from the ground up you need to reach the postseason consistently. The best way to do that, it seemed, was to win at least three or four non-conference games a year regardless of the level of competition. After all, how many other teams are really playing daunting non-conference schedules?
Over time I've come to believe that getting into the postseason is an accomplishment and it's helpful but that alone isn't going to move the needle. You have to win big games. There have to be more wins like the one against LSU in 2007 or Louisville in 2016. I'm not suggesting that Kentucky schedule non-conference games against Clemson or Ohio State, but I do think there should be more Power Five opponents to keep fans interested, to build more excitement around the program through the offseason, and to give the players more opportunities for wins that rally people and recruits to their cause.
In addition to the Louisville game I'd like to see Kentucky add at least one more Power Five opponent to the schedule. Indiana, Purdue, maybe occasionally even Ohio State. It might be fun to watch Kentucky schedule a home-and-home with Washington State and former coordinator Mike Leach. It wouldn't make getting to a bowl game any easier, but beating Group of Five and FCS schools doesn't do anything to really move your program forward. I'm interested in games that have some intrigue. If you aren't good enough to beat lower-tier Power Five schools outside the SEC most years then you probably aren't going to accomplish much in the bigger picture anyways.
SECOND TAKE - JEFF DRUMMOND
From a fan standpoint, I think it would be great if Kentucky started expanding its schedule philosophy to include some regular matchups with other P5 programs. A renewal of the Indiana series seems like a natural candidate. I strongly believe the Cats and Hoosiers should be playing in all sports. Likewise, I have always believed UK and West Virginia should play somewhat regularly, a little Hatfields & McCoys shenanigans on the gridiron. Back when the SEC was a much smaller place, we used to see some really intriguing non-conference games. As a kid, I loved seeing the Cats square off against an Oklahoma or Penn State every now and then, even if it didn't always go UK's way. How much fun would a home-and-home against Notre Dame be?
However, from a program standpoint, I'm not sure it would be wise to move forward with more aggressive scheduling at this time. While Mark Stoops has definitely moved UK in the right direction with two consecutive bowl seasons, the Cats are still in that territory where one game can make or break the season. When you're playing eight SEC games and Louisville, there's very little margin for error. Any of the teams that Justin and I suggested as attractive matchups are capable of beating UK on a given day, so it's really hard to justify Mitch Barnhart electing to add them to an already brutal schedule. The only way possible, in my view, is to no longer play UofL on an annual basis. Some on both sides would be fine with that, but I don't think the masses would concur.
If Stoops can get Kentucky to eight or nine wins on a regular basis -- say, two or three years in a row on top of these last two bowl seasons -- then you can start getting a bit more creative with non-conference scheduling.