The premise here is pretty simple: basically ever since Baylor announced that for whatever reason, we'd decided to play Incarnate Word in 2019, people have derided us for our scheduling preferences. Bereft as we are of salient counterpoints, we've had to let them have their fun. It's difficult, if not impossible, to defend yearly schedules that include a lot of Northwestern State, Lamar, and Rice, and just one other BCS school (Duke) in the next 6 years. In fact, it seems most Baylor fans actually agree with those criticisms and wouldn't defend it even if they could. It's something Briles apparently thinks is important as a way to tune up his team heading into conference play, and it is unlikely to change.
Still, when the rumor started circulating this morning that, likely in response to the SEC's new Big 5 scheduling mandate, Alabama was looking for a neutral site 2016 matchup to kick off the season, I couldn't help myself wishing Baylor would throw its hat into the proverbial ring. Putting aside the subsequent rumor that the spot is to be filled by a game against USC in Arlington, the concept itself is something I would dearly like Baylor to do, if possible.
My question to you is whether you agree. In the poll below, vote on whether you'd like to see Baylor schedule a future matchup against Alabama (or someone similar, it doesn't have to be just the Crimson Tide), or if you prefer a softer schedule designed to maximize our chance of winning as many games as possible. I'm genuinely curious what Baylor fans think, and if you want to use this opportunity as a larger referendum for the concept of "scheduling up"-- that is, scheduling more difficult opponents as a way to challenge your program or increase your national profile -- please do so.
Just for the general information purposes, here's our OOC slate over the next few years. 2017 and 2018 and obviously incomplete. For the hypothetical Alabama game, we'd have to buy out Northwestern State on 9/3/16.