Your memory is failing you at a young age Nate. Your bio indicates you were born in '81 and there is only a handful of years where we've played "2 tough non-conference games" as you suggest. Many of these years we've played 1 tough OOC game and that game has been the last one of the year. Pick up a media guide...you'll see the same type of scheduling then as you are seeing now with a few "big name" schools added in every couple of years or so.
In answer to your question...there are many, many reason why our schedule is what it is next year. No longer will you find conferences that only have 7 conference games per year (allowing 3-4 OOC games). With the NCAA allowing 12 game seasons it would seem that it makes schedules like this more of a possible reality, but the NCAA was thinking along $$ lines more so than "headline" matchups.
Alabama schedule (off dates for non-conference games) have been set in stone for over a decade now. Like any other school, we want those 2 million plus profit games that come from playing schools you may not consider to be "tough OOC" games. However, when you look at schools like the PSU's, the USC's, etc. those schools need the pay-days as badly as we do and they haven't had their athletic budget hindered over the past decade with the loss of bowl revenue. In other words, thinking a school can just pick up the phone and say "let's play" isn't the case...in fact, it is far from reality. Heck, it took us close to two months just to get the FSU game finalized partly due to scheduling, partly due to TV rights to broadcast it, partly due to how the $$'s would be split...
While I can understand slightly what you are contending the realities of our situation aren't what you have asserted they used to be, nor can they be what you'd like on a year to year basis. In '86 and '87 are the only two years we've played two OOC opponents I'd consider "tough," Penn State and Notre Dame. (as in ranked and excluding bowl invitations)
