Should the Pac-12 move to an 8-game schedule if the B1G does?

[Buffnik]

https://nebraska.rivals.com/news/mo...day-games-and-big-ten-scheduling-philosophies

Moos hinted that the league is in strong talks about modifying the 9-game conference schedule that puts the Big Ten at a competitive disadvantage against the SEC and ACC when it comes to the College Football Playoff, New Year's Six Bowl games and overall win-loss records which effect polls and strength of schedule.

"We might have some other schedule news here in a week or so in regards to 2022, on," Moos said. "It was something I really became a bulldog on in regards to Nebraska and some of the traditional power programs in the Big Ten not beating each other up so bad. Because in my opinion the strength of schedule really hasn’t had much impact on who’s being selected for the College Football Playoff. We are in the process of addressing that to hopefully mine another satisfaction.”

I like playing 9 Pac-12 games, but if the ACC, B1G and SEC are all playing 8 then we almost have no choice but to make the move. I think USC and Stanford (who draw the most water anyway) would spearhead the change since they've got their Notre Dame game locked in as a major non-conference matchup. 10 major opponents on the schedule before looking at other OOC opponents is probably too much if the other conferences are at 8 in-conference games.

 

[Darth Snow]

Yes. It's insane to do it this way, but yes.

 

[BuffLuke80]

Went with yes as well.

 

[BehindEnemyLines]

Yep.

Perhaps it could lead to another attractive ooc game.

 

[Bison]

If the California schools insist on playing each other every year, 8 games will be impossible.

 

[Bufffan68]

Yes. My OCD likes the even-ness of playing half the north teams every year. Plus it could help revenue if we schedule a high-profile game with a larger payout than say CU v OSU in Oregon.

 

[hokiehead]

I think the Pac should do it regardless of whether the B1G does it.

Fans on this board have been complaining for years they felt the schedule put them at a disadvantage. if you really believe that's true, and if the playoffs are important to the conference, and you have the authority to correct it, why the hell not?

Edit: I also think the 9 game schedule drives a further divide between the P5 conferences and the rest of college football. I'm in favor of taking steps that might help close the gap.

 

[Duff Man]

The same writer is contradicting his own story today. Does not sound like the Big 10 is dropping a conference game.

 

[The Alabaster Yak]

The same writer is contradicting his own story today. Does not sound like the Big 10 is dropping a conference game.

Moos could definitely be hinting at something other than dropping a conference game. Perhaps having more equitable cross division matchups/rotations? I think @TDforTD said on 247 that Nebraska has played Ohio State 6 times and Indiana twice since joining, while Iowa has played OSU twice and Indiana 6 times.

 

[Buffs35]

Better yet, if we went to zero conference games, MM would never lose a conference game again.

 

[Duff Man]

Moos could definitely be hinting at something other than dropping a conference game. Perhaps having more equitable cross division matchups/rotations? I think @TDforTD said on 247 that Nebraska has played Ohio State 6 times and Indiana twice since joining, while Iowa has played OSU twice and Indiana 6 times.

Could be. But it is a little funny to hear a West team whining.

 

[SINKRATZ]

So we're going to make our conferences bigger but play fewer conference games? That makes zero sense to me and just lessens the importance of the conference. Why not just eliminate the minimum all together and just acknowledge these schools are a just a group of joint venture partners for purposes of selling tv rights.

The only reason a 9 game conference schedule could be considered a disadvantage is if you assume that 9th game would be replaced by a cupcake which would just make the schedule less attractive IMO. I'd rather the BCS just require a 9 game schedule across all conferences.

 

[ahoelsken]

So we're going to make our conferences bigger but play fewer conference games? That makes zero sense to me and just lessens the importance of the conference. Why not just eliminate the minimum all together and just acknowledge these schools are a just a group of joint venture partners for purposes of selling tv rights.

The only reason a 9 game conference schedule could be considered a disadvantage is if you assume that 9th game would be replaced by a cupcake which would just make the schedule less attractive IMO. I'd rather the BCS just require a 9 game schedule across all conferences.

Here are some of the SEC games for week 12 (the week before rivalry weekend) this year:
The Citadel at Alabama
Liberty at Auburn
Rice at LSU
Middle Tennessee at Kentucky
Chattanooga at South Carolina
Idaho at Florida

This works because they don't get punished for it. For that matter, the committee never will-the same network has both the rights to the CFP and is the power that be behind the SEC network. Unless somebody comes in and outbids ESPN for CFP tv rights in 2026, we need to change what we do to stay more competitive. Money is what drives this sport, guys. If the NoCal schools have to settle for one game a piece against USC and UCLA.........so be it.

 

[GoldenSkier]

I'd say yes. Allows CU more flexibility. Could use that game for getting exposure in a recruiting area. An annual game in the state of Texas is what I'm thinking of.

 

[patebuff]

If every other P5 conference is doing it, they sure hell better, regardless of how many teams are in the Pac.

 

[ScottyBuff]

Let's go to 11 conference games and 1 OOC "warm-up" game. Screw everyone else. Let's build on our conference rivalries and have more meaningful games. Get rid of the divisions and just have the top 2 teams play for the conference title. I would think attendance and TV ratings (and then value) would increase instead of 1/6th to 1/4th of the scheduled games being meaningless cupcakes that nobody attends or watches on TV. Bowl games would mean alot more if that was your one chance to play a big OOC matchup.

 

[ahoelsken]

Let's go to 11 conference games and 1 OOC "warm-up" game. Screw everyone else. Let's build on our conference rivalries and have more meaningful games. Get rid of the divisions and just have the top 2 teams play for the conference title. I would think attendance and TV ratings (and then value) would increase instead of 1/6th to 1/4th of the scheduled games being meaningless cupcakes that nobody attends or watches on TV. Bowl games would mean alot more if that was your one chance to play a big OOC matchup.

Why the hell would we do that? We didn't have a 2 loss team last year........much less somebody who finished with one loss. I've been pounding this point home for several months on this board-this league is the weakest league of the football power 5/basketball power 7 right now (as evidenced by the fact that we were OUT of the NCAA tournament before the end of the first round and the fact that we won ONE bowl game as a conference last year). More games against each other will not do anything positive for this league. We need to do a better job of putting ourselves in a position to have success as a league. That means going to 8 games in conference until the SEC and ACC are forced to change to 9. That means getting rid of the rule that forces our teams to be done with their out of conference schedules before the end of September.

 

[The Alabaster Yak]

Let's go to 11 conference games and 1 OOC "warm-up" game. Screw everyone else. Let's build on our conference rivalries and have more meaningful games. Get rid of the divisions and just have the top 2 teams play for the conference title. I would think attendance and TV ratings (and then value) would increase instead of 1/6th to 1/4th of the scheduled games being meaningless cupcakes that nobody attends or watches on TV. Bowl games would mean alot more if that was your one chance to play a big OOC matchup.

Some of that sounds good in theory, but then you’d most likely have the top 2-3 teams in the conference all with at least 2 losses a piece in most years, which means being left out of the CFP most of the time.

 

[Dark Bohner]

Let's go to 11 conference games and 1 OOC "warm-up" game. Screw everyone else. Let's build on our conference rivalries and have more meaningful games. Get rid of the divisions and just have the top 2 teams play for the conference title. I would think attendance and TV ratings (and then value) would increase instead of 1/6th to 1/4th of the scheduled games being meaningless cupcakes that nobody attends or watches on TV. Bowl games would mean alot more if that was your one chance to play a big OOC matchup.

The problem is that it hurts the conference nationally because we eat ourselves. Need to match other conferences to stay competitive for the CFP.

 

[hokiehead]

Win-loss record in non-playoff bowl games is damn near meaningless -- fans shouldn't get bent of shape over that.

 

[CULifer]

Yes. If we can't beat 'em fan-, support- and money-wise (we can't for the foreseeable future), we need to join 'em. Let's remain a strong conference in whatever ways we can.

 

[BerkeleyBuff]

Yes. 8 games is perfectly fine in a 12-team conference. Play your entire division plus half of the other. Less cannibalism = higher rankings for our better teams = more national respect = better standing in playoff rankings.

 

[The Alabaster Yak]

So many threads this could go in, but this is the most recent, "Pac 12 is getting left behind" thread. Lol at California proposing an amendment that would limit coaching salaries at state schools to $200k.

 

[Highlander]

So many threads this could go in, but this is the most recent, "Pac 12 is getting left behind" thread. Lol at California proposing an amendment that would limit coaching salaries at state schools to $200k.

I would laugh so hard of this passed.

Then would worry Colorado would put it up for a vote as an amendment to the state constitution, it would pass, and we wouldn't be able to unwind it.

 

[The Alabaster Yak]

I would laugh so hard of this passed.

Then would worry Colorado would put it up for a vote as an amendment to the state constitution, it would pass, and we wouldn't be able to unwind it.

It says everything about the “culture” of the PAC 12. Hopefully this does not pass, or at least there is some kind of loophole where they can give coaches a faculty designation of some kind.

 

[Deleted member 807]

I'd say yes. Allows CU more flexibility. Could use that game for getting exposure in a recruiting area. An annual game in the state of Texas is what I'm thinking of.

+1

 

[Highlander]

It says everything about the “culture” of the PAC 12. Hopefully this does not pass, or at least there is some kind of loophole where they can give coaches a faculty designation of some kind.

The article brings up an interesting option:

Creating a Football 101 course for coaches to teach. I'm surprised a school hasn't gone headlong in to this by creating a "football coaching major" that is essentially Game week film study in the fall and new wrinkles in the offensive and defensive playbooks in the spring.

The only issue with this is you would have no choice but to make the class open to the general student population and you would have to be careful about what is included each week. Still, what coach wouldn't kill for 3-4 extra hours of game prep each week?

 

[The Alabaster Yak]

The article brings up an interesting option:

Creating a Football 101 course for coaches to teach. I'm surprised a school hasn't gone headlong in to this by creating a "football coaching major" that is essentially Game week film study in the fall and new wrinkles in the offensive and defensive playbooks in the spring.

The only issue with this is you would have no choice but to make the class open to the general student population and you would have to be careful about what is included each week. Still, what coach wouldn't kill for 3-4 extra hours of game prep each week?

They already get that 3-4 hours of game prep. It’s called not having to teach a class...

 

[Not Sure]

So many threads this could go in, but this is the most recent, "Pac 12 is getting left behind" thread. Lol at California proposing an amendment that would limit coaching salaries at state schools to $200k.

The unrepentant homer in me wants this to happen very badly.

But it would be disastrous for the conference, so I guess I would have to come down on the side of “who is the moron who came up with this and does he happen to be related to Jack Kroll?”

 

[Not Sure]

Actually, upon further consideration, it would have no impact on USC or Stanford, and would irreparably damage UCLA and Cal... so yeah, go for it.