I don't know why I do this, because I really don't care as much as I used to . . . which is why I don't argue nearly as much on this site anymore.
But when Jerry Claiborne got here, in 1982, we played Oklahoma and Clemson (think how much fun that would have been in 2017!!) plus Kansas State and at least 6 SEC games. No doubt that was suicidal and I would say 0% of Kentucky fans think that kind of scheduling would be a good idea.
Yet, once he took over, the "dumbing down" of the schedule began, and has continued to this day, adding N. Tex State, East Tenn State, Charlotte, Jacksonville State, and a bunch of OVC/MAC and IAA stiffs that interest no one. But in all that time, we have not been ranked in the top 20 since 1984 (when we played and beat Rutgers, Indiana, and Tulane), and the biggest bowl game we have been invited to since then (Outback, 1998) came in a season where we beat Louisville and Indiana. Still are waiting for that first winning conference season in more than 40 years. Have not won a bowl game in nearly 10 years, have not won 9 games in over 30 years, etc.
So, it seems to me that we have already tried the "schedule three stiffs and hope for the best" method . . . but where has it gotten us? A smaller stadium and dwindling fan base is one result, there is NEVER a capacity crowd for those games. Not even close. And how has that built our football program? You aren't fooling anyone by beating 3 OOC teams and squeezing out a nickel dime bowl bid, just like 80 other teams receive. How about earning a little credibility by playing and beating West Va, Pitt, UC, Illinois, IU, Northwestern or Purdue along with two other easier OOC games? That way, if you happen to beat Louisville and the other "good" OOC team, you are likely to get more good regional PR, and maybe even a better bowl bid than another team that chose to play 3 or even 4 crappy opponents to pad their record.
And if you can't beat those teams I named, then you aren't building much of a program.