Playing Tough Schedules...

[EKU_05]

After watching a couple different threads it brought up a question in my mind.

Highlands fans have wondered if, maybe, playing such a difficult schedule as they did set them up for failure. Yet, on the flip side NewCath played a Murder's Row for a 1A school and suffered a lot of setbacks but have responded to avenge two of their previous losses and play their best football.

 

What is everyone's take on scheduling overly difficult on the high school level? Do you feel that on this level confidence plays too much of a role and losing those games becomes too hard to overcome? Does the difference in class make an impact?

 

I have personally been under the belief that in a typical season you want 60/20/20... where 20% are games you should be the udnerdog, 20% are games you should be the clear favorite, and 60% could go either way when you initially schedule.

[AverageJoesGym]

After watching a couple different threads it brought up a question in my mind.

Highlands fans have wondered if, maybe, playing such a difficult schedule as they did set them up for failure. Yet, on the flip side NewCath played a Murder's Row for a 1A school and suffered a lot of setbacks but have responded to avenge two of their previous losses and play their best football.

 

What is everyone's take on scheduling overly difficult on the high school level? Do you feel that on this level confidence plays too much of a role and losing those games becomes too hard to overcome? Does the difference in class make an impact?

 

I have personally been under the belief that in a typical season you want 60/20/20... where 20% are games you should be the udnerdog, 20% are games you should be the clear favorite, and 60% could go either way when you initially schedule.

 

That can be tough to do. A lot depends on the district hand that you are dealt. Corbin and Somerset are good examples, they have had their way in the district which means that they don't get challenged for at least half of their games. This year both teams scheduled brutal pre-district schedules and while they weren't able to really succeed against their opponents they obviously were able to fix their flaws and are still standing. Thier overall records don't look that great but they are in the quarter finals. They really didn't have the chance to schedule a weak pre-district game if they wanted to be tested. Your set up would probably be ideal but again, you have to think about district strength.

[gametime]

It's hit and miss on both sides of this one. Something about Jim and Joe...

[AverageJoesGym]

It's hit and miss on both sides of this one. Something about Jim and Joe...

 

Yeah, high school can be so static from year to year. There are a select group of programs that are really good every year. Outside of that you have to look at what everyone is bringing back in you district and otherwise. I would say that most teams would like one really easy pre-district game followed by X (depending on number of district games) number of competative non-district games, followed by a district in which they win. But although it is almost a perfect world (it is football after all) you can't break it down that neatly each year. It also depends on your standing. If you're trying to build up a program it might be the best thing for you to schedule all easy pre-district games so you can have a winning record. Its just so hard to quantify this question. It just varies from team to team.

[westsider]

After watching a couple different threads it brought up a question in my mind.

Highlands fans have wondered if, maybe, playing such a difficult schedule as they did set them up for failure.

The Highlands fans that make hat contention also disregard Covington Catholic's similar approach in scheduling.

 

Tough schedules tend to pay off. We've seen it here in western Kentucky, particularly with Mayfield. The Cardinals were 2-3 in 1993, then posted 10 straight wins and won the 2A state title. A few years ago, the Cardinals were 2-5 and nearly written off by some, yet made it to the final four and led Danville (the eventual state champion) after three quarters in the semifinals.

[pigman]

If you're an established program I think you schedule as tough as you can. That may be a little more difficult on the class A level as you normally have more players going both ways. You don't want to get to beat up,so it's a fine line.

[colonel-fan]

It's a fine line. I've seen some good CovCath teams mentally and physically beat down by the time they get to the end of the season. Over a 10 game regular season, you can only get mentally up so many times. This year's CovCath team got smoked by Bishop Watterson, a week after going toe to toe with Cincy X for 3 quarters. Watty is probably not the team X is, yet was able to whip the Colonels who were flat after the X game.

[pnthr4life]

At Ludlow our non distict schedule usually consists of teams that are bigger than us. We have had some success against those opponents, but it would be nice to be able to schedule different opponents from time to time. Next year with only having 4 teams in the district I'm anxious to see who we will schedule for those HC and NCC slots, since I'm hearing we aren't playing them next year.

[jbwill2]

A sidebar to this question is what a team learns from the tough games they play. Playing very tough competition exposes weaknesses the team must then work on in preparation for playoff time. The secret to success with this strategy is making the corrections/changes in time for the district and playoffs.

 

Also, if a team consistently plays against physically superior competition, that team runs the risk of having some guys beat up (physically and mentally) come playoff time. It can be a gamble.

[5wide]

I think it depends on the players, the team, and the coaching staff...some teams probably need an easier schedule to get wins and build confidence. They develop that confidence and attitude that makes them think that they can't lose, and thus play better. But, it can backfire, if they don't develop some toughness. If they never get tested, they may not respond well when they do.

 

As for the tougher schedule, it can go both ways as well. Some teams may lose confidence and go in the tank if they take too many tough losses. And some teams will buckle down, learn from their losses, stay confident in their ability and be better for it.

 

I'm not sure there is a definitive answer to this one.

 

My preference would be to have enough tough games on the schedule to allow your team to be tested. First, it will allow you to see how they respond to tough games. And second, it will expose some flaws and show you what you need to work on and improve on. But, I also think you need some easy games to allow your team to build some confidence and not get too beat up from playing tough games every week.

[cshs81]

I'm spoiled. I simply can't imagine going back to a lesser schedule. Bring 'em on.

[malachicrunch]

I'm spoiled. I simply can't imagine going back to a lesser schedule. Bring 'em on.

I agree. One change for next year is that district games will be played earlier in the season. This may effect non district scheduling.

[All Play No Work]

I agree. One change for next year is that district games will be played earlier in the season. This may effect non district scheduling.

 

Week 10 and Week 11 are not supposed to contain district games.

 

I would imagine most district games won't take place in Weeks 1-3 either.

[All Play No Work]

Next year with basically everyone making the playoffs I would schedule on the difficult side because you don't have to worry about being beat up physically and mentally for district games.

[leatherneck]

I'm spoiled. I simply can't imagine going back to a lesser schedule. Bring 'em on.

 

 

I agree completely. And I think its only a limited number of Highlands fans that question the benefit of playing a very tough schedule. The tough schedule this year only hurt us in the win-loss record books, and those are absolutely meaningless to this Highlands fan.