You clearly have no idea how challenging scheduling games can be. Obviously GBS is in the position where they're looking to schedule easier games, well guess what... everyone is looking to schedule wins. The teams that GBS thinks they can beat that will be better than UPE won't schedule GBS because they don't think they can beat them. At the end of the day if you're going the route of trying to achieve a win you end up against a CPS and at that point you take what you can get.
The only way I would buy what you are saying is if the AD/HC at GBS went above and beyond in search of a game and had to settle for UPE because
everyone else they contacted was worried about losing to GBS.
Do you know that to be the case? I don't know it not to be the case, so you MIGHT be right.
However, all the signs point to GBS wanting a sure win and they found one. GBS finished at 1-8 and they were looking for a game they could win. They had been playing the likes of Barrington, Stevenson, etc. for non-con games, and they scheduled UPE this year. Is wanting to find a win bad? Not in and of itself. But don't you think there should be self-imposed limits?
Again I ask: How low is too low to look for a win or an easier game? Were there NO options for GBS other than UPE? NONE? I'm not talking Curie or Simeon or Phillips. On the competitive array, there are a few hundred football playing schools in between UPE and those other CPL schools I named. To be sure, most of them weren't looking for week 1 games, but many were.
Look, I get that scheduling non-con games is easier said than done. But, I don't buy that GBS couldn't find a non-con game against schools a step or two above UPE on the competitive array because those schools were ducking the Titans.
Hey, if you want to rest your case on the argument that UPE was the 100% best that GBS could do, be my guest.