The Big Ten is strongly considering removing its requirement for league teams to play a P5 OOC team annually, starting in 2024 per Brett McMurphy.
Overall thoughts?
Overall thoughts?
Football B1G considering removing P5 OOC opponent requirement
- Thread starter Richie O
- Start date
With the league expanding and possible adding another league game, it makes sense to me. Schedule is plenty difficult now.
Plus, with the twelve team playoffs coming the B2G could have three or four teams in every year. And that is what this is about…..more playoff exposure and money.
Plus, with the twelve team playoffs coming the B2G could have three or four teams in every year. And that is what this is about…..more playoff exposure and money.
Agreed. Teams like USC and UCLA fit the bill. We can easily fill up our schedule with great B1G games and have a few MAC teams for warmups. I would also imagine the decision to include a good OOC game is based on aspirations. Teams like UM, tOSU and PSU may still need those games from a ranking standpoint. But if you are NW or Purdue, you want the necessary wins to make a bowl game.
P5 requirement is meaningless though. The intent was to create big matchups for TV not Penn State vs Syracuse
Ideally we go to 10 conference games with 2 cupcakes games.
Ideally we go to 10 conference games with 2 cupcakes games.
Sounds like something that has come at Michigan's request. On a serious note, the whole model is changing anyway. So let's just see how it shakes out.
Don’t like the idea and think adding additional conference games hinders potential number of future CFP participants from the conference.
The more in-conference games played, the more the mean winning %’s approaches .500.
Besides, how can one claim to have a team from one’s own conference be more deserving than a similar team from another if there are no (or fewer) games played?
The more in-conference games played, the more the mean winning %’s approaches .500.
Besides, how can one claim to have a team from one’s own conference be more deserving than a similar team from another if there are no (or fewer) games played?
I’m not a fan of this either. We’ll see what future big ten schedules look like but for those counting on USC and UCLA- we may not see them other than every 5-6 years or so (??). Most of the Big Ten schedule is full of relatively poor games to begin with and adding Temple, Delaware, Eastern Michigan Tech doesn’t help.
Intersectional games are great for college football. Having less of them is not a good thing IMO.
Intersectional games are great for college football. Having less of them is not a good thing IMO.
Well, they already don't enforce it (look at UM 2022 and 2023) so what does it matter? And they made so many exceptions to the rule (allowing teams like UConn or the military academies to "count") that it was watered down and useless.
No it doesn't. With 12 teams we'll get 3 or 4 every year. Let's not pretending adding anyone other than Ohio State Michigan or USC should ever be a loss for us.
The SEC and Big Ten will make up at least half of the teams every single year--which is why it won't stay at 12 long. We'll probably see 7 from SEC and Big Ten then 1 from the ACC, Big XII, Pac XII and top G5 plus ND. When ND sucks then the ACC or Big XII will get a second or we get 8 from the SEC/Big Ten. Adding another conference game won't hurt at all.
I get the academies though. It's tradition but is playing Air Force really different than Syracuse? Air Force is probably better than at least a 3rd of the P5 schools. Navy and Army not so much right now.
I prefer to get to 20 conference members by adding Oregon, Washington, ND, and perhaps one more pac team or another national or regional power. Then with 10 conference games you could keep one rival you play every year and rotate the remainder of the schools every other year. To me that would be exciting.
Yeah, one year OSU, ND, Oregon, UCLA and the next year Mich, Wash, USC, and Wiscy is a pretty awesome rotation. An excellent year would be 8-2 in conference play.
Very simply the two teams with the best conference records play in a championship game. I would prefer a final four conference tournament, but that’s not practical considering the 12 team format of the college football playoff system creating too many games.
There is no reason to believe the CFP will not continue to make a team’s overall record the most important factor in selecting teams. If the B1G increases the number of conference games, teams will be losing more games than they are now.
Over time that will impact the number of B1G teams that will have made the playoff.
Just because you state things as absolutes and try to be authoritative, doesn’t mean either is so.
20 teams reduces this to same nonsense as before. No good way to determine a champion. Someone will have to…..guess…at some point. At some point it will not be about on field results.
What could have been if real
Playoffs were a thing 20 years ago…..
I don't think this will give playoff caliber teams additional losses, but you are correct that it will give the average B2G team more losses.
You don't believe the SEC and Big Ten will make up at least half of the field? Overall record does matter and so does conference perception. This board just hates that because they can't grasp the concept of a conference...still
I didn’t make any prediction/projection, estimate as you wish.
So if a conference is playing fewer (minimal/no?) games against other P5 conferences, how are they going to enhance how they are perceived? Adding a net .500 record with an extra conference game isn’t a positive.
If a team just misses out because they have an extra loss then they wouldn’t qualify as being playoff caliber?
Then make a prediction
No playing fewer conference games doesn't improve anything. The SEC could play all 12 in conference and it would be the strongest. No one cares that they beat FCS schools. Perception is created based on beating legits not based solely on the record.
If a Top 12- caliber team plays an extra game against an average conference team instead of an OOC opponent, it's not likely to affect those playoff teams. The impact comes in the middle half of the conference which will see the biggest increase in the number of losses.
In that case I’d rather see a game vs P5 Middling than another vs Indiana. That would improve our viewing experience.
You will be annoying.
Those legits are the best from other conferences.
On some occasions they would play better than average teams. On a rare occasion they will play a team better than them. Over time, there will be more losses for those potential contending types of teams than there are now.
Of course the less successful a team, the more likely a negative impact.
Don't even argue with him. Avoid eye contact and move on. His story is so old and worn out, and he only surfaced last year. Legit oppositional defiance disorder, an adult playing contrarian at all times and all hours on a dumbass message board.
You stated it perfectly. Clown states an opinion as if it is fact and repeats the whole "because I said so bit". Has zero ability to engage in meaningful conversation or debate.
It’s beyond obvious that the SEC has benefitted greatly by only playing 8 conference games vs 9 for other conferences (the ACC plays 8 as well but to their credit most of those teams typically play 2 P5 teams not conference). That extra gimme win for the SEC conference wide helps to overinflate the perception of how good the conference is.
Don’t get me wrong, the SEC is clearly the strongest and deepest conference but it gets a boost by having all the conference teams largely have an extra free win vs having a conference game that would automatically be 1 win and 1 loss for the conference. Those extra wins in aggregate make a difference.
I really hope we see the SEC finally go to 9 conference games in 2024 when they expand.
Don’t get me wrong, the SEC is clearly the strongest and deepest conference but it gets a boost by having all the conference teams largely have an extra free win vs having a conference game that would automatically be 1 win and 1 loss for the conference. Those extra wins in aggregate make a difference.
I really hope we see the SEC finally go to 9 conference games in 2024 when they expand.
Plus, they usually play one of the patsies late in the season, often right before their major rivalry game. Allows them to rest up and for injured players to heal.
I get what you're saying but their playoff success is why they get the benefit of the doubt not the scheduling.
