Skip to content

Kentucky Sports Radio

University of Kentucky Basketball, Football, and Recruiting news brought to you in the most ridiculous manner possible.

BTI’s Rants and Ramblings: UK’s Non-Conference Scheduling Compared to SEC

Mark Zerof | US Presswire

Mark Zerof | US Presswire

The fact of the matter is that the SEC has developed a reputation in football of having teams with creampuff non-conference schedules.  And it’s pretty much deserved for most of the league.  Of course SEC fan will argue there is no reason to challenge yourself in the non-conference if the conference is that strong.  But frankly UK hasn’t even attempted to challenge itself, outside of Louisville, for a very long time.  Do you realize that UK has not played a non-conference game against a BCS opponent not named Louisville since 2005 (Indiana).  They haven’t played a non-conference opponent not named UL or Indiana since 1990 (North Carolina).   That’s not really pushing yourself much.  And maybe many of you don’t care.  But I’d just like to see the schedule beefed up a little for enjoyment and to see where this program stands.

So who in the SEC schedules the hardest in the non-conference?  My rankings are below.  I took into account games schedule outside of normal rivalries, willingness to play true road games, and consistency playing tough opponents.

1. GEORGIA
2015: at Georgia Tech
2014: #16 Clemson, #16 Georgia Tech
2013: at #8 Clemson, at Georgia Tech
2012: Georgia Tech
2011: #5 Boise State (neutral), at #25 Georgia Tech

2. TENNESSEE
2015: Oklahoma
2014: at #4 Oklahoma
2013: at #3 Oregon
2012: NC State (neutral)
2011: Cincinnati

3. ALABAMA
2015: Wisconsin (neutral)
2014: West Virginia (neutral)
2013: Virginia Tech (neutral)
2012: #8 Michigan (neutal)
2011: at Penn State 

4. LSU
2015: at Syracuse
2014: #14 Wisconsin (neutral)
2013: #20 TCU (neutral)
2012: Washington
2011: Oregon (neutral), at West Virginia 

5. SOUTH CAROLINA
2015: North Carolina (neutral), Clemson
2014: at #21 Clemson
2013: North Carolina, #8 Clemson
2012: at #12 Clemson
2011: Clemson 

6. AUBURN
2015: Louisville (neutral)
2014: at Kansas St
2013: Washington St.
2012: #14 Clemson (neutral)
2011: at Clemson     

7. FLORIDA
2015: Florida St
2014: at #3 Florida St,
2013: at Miami (FL), #12 Florida St
2012: at #10 Florida State
2011: Florida State 

8. OLE MISS
2015: None
2014: Boise St (neutral)
2013: at #15 Texas
2012: #14 Texas
2011: BYU

9. MISSOURI
2015: BYU (neutral)
2014: Indiana
2013: at Indiana
2012: Arizona State, Syracuse
2011: at Arizona State

10. ARKANSAS
2015: Texas Tech
2014: at Texas Tech
2013: at Rutgers
2012: Rutgers
2011: Texas A&M (neutral)  

11. KENTUCKY
2015: Louisville
2014: at Louisville
2013: Louisville
2012: at #25 Louisville
2011: Louisville

12.VANDERBILT
2015: None
2014: None
2013: Wake Forest
2012: Wake Forest
2011: UCONN, at Wake Forest   

13. TEXAS A&M
2015: Arizona State (neutral)
2014: None
2013: None
2012: None
2011: Arkansas (neutral)

14. MISSISSIPPI STATE
2015: None
2014: None
2013: #14 Oklahoma St (neutral)
2012: None
2011: None  

Article written by Bryan the Intern

9 Comments for BTI’s Rants and Ramblings: UK’s Non-Conference Scheduling Compared to SEC



  1. TSmithPage
    9:46 am May 19, 2015 Permalink

    Seriously? The SEC is widely regarded as the best conference in football. You need to see UK play a BCS opponent from a weaker conference so it can “push itself”? As long as UK is struggling to play .500 in the SEC, it doesn’t need to be playing other BCS teams that are likely to give it a L instead of a W. All that will get you is an even longer shot at a bowl game at the end of the season. When UK gets good enough in football that we have a winning record in the SEC and are making bowl games on a consistent basis, then we can talk about beefing up the non-conference competition. Until then, your suggestion is just masochistic.



  2. ukjaybrat
    9:47 am May 19, 2015 Permalink

    Come on BTI. you could have at least added the win/loss to those games. i can’t remember all of them and i’m too lazy to do my own research 🙁



  3. The Water Boy
    10:05 am May 19, 2015 Permalink

    Is there a point to this?



  4. El_Joe
    10:16 am May 19, 2015 Permalink

    TSmith called it. As long as we are struggling to reach six wins, you schedule Little Sisters of the Poor and Podunk State if they help you make a bowl. When we start winning 8-9 games a year consistently, then we can “beef up” our schedule. Or how about this– I’m 34. When we have our first winning season in the SEC IN MY LIFETIME, we can beef up the schedule. Until then, this is insane.



  5. El_Joe
    10:32 am May 19, 2015 Permalink

    Or let’s consider it this way. Since that 1990 date you mention, let’s look at some of the work we’ve done in the OOC games (leaving out IU and UofL, per your criteria).

    In 1990, we did lose to UNC… and also to Rutgers by 16. In 1991, we beat Miami of Ohio and Cincinnati by 3. In 1992, we beat Central Michigan by 7 and lost to Cincinnati. In 1993, we beat East Carolina by 3. In 1994, we lost to Northeast Louisiana. In 1996, we lost to Cincinnati 24-3. In 2001, we beat Ball State by 8. In 2004, we lost to Ohio U. In 2005, we went to the last few minutes before beating Idaho State. In 2006 ( a good year for us), we beat Central Michigan by 9 and UL-Monroe by 2. In 2008, we beat MTSU by a yard and six points. In 2011, we struggled to put away WKU (by 11) and Central Michigan (by 14). In 2012 and 2013, we lost to WKU.

    That’s not the record of a program that needs more challenge in its OOC schedule.



  6. symphonist41169
    1:02 pm May 19, 2015 Permalink

    Doesn’t seem to be hurting A&M or Miss St.



  7. tnlongdrvr
    1:10 pm May 19, 2015 Permalink

    Until we are competitive in the SEC it would be pointless to beef up the out of confernece schedule!!!!!! Probably more like stupid. Why would any sane person want to make the schedule any harder than it is. Year in and out we usually play one of the harder schedules in the country. What would we gain by making it harder?



    • TSmithPage
      1:15 pm May 19, 2015 Permalink

      BTI would enjoy it. It would let him know where the program stands… for about a minute before he was asking why the heck Mitch decided to give the program an even tougher schedule. Then, he’d write a column about how poorly UK plays against non-SEC BSC competition and he’d be happy again.



  8. satcheluk
    5:43 pm May 19, 2015 Permalink

    Only a moron would be asking for a tougher schedule.