(05-10-2023 11:04 AM)SouthEastAlaska Wrote:  I mean is this news really that surprising? There isn't a P5 anymore, there's a P2 and everyone else.

That's not really true. There's a P2, and M3 (for now, possibly an M2 soon), and a G5.

If Indiana drops their Virginia home-and-home for 2027-28, they're replacing it with a G5 team, not with Kentucky.

(05-10-2023 10:55 AM)BruceMcF Wrote:  Also, in this approach UCLA always flies east in the year that USC is hosting Notre Dame, getting their shot at the Prime Time OTA 7pm slot in the alternate years when USC flies east.

Year 1: USC hosts ND, UCLA flies to Michigan State, Rutgers hosts Penn State, Maryland plays OOC (Navy? I dunno)
Year 2: UCLA hosts Michigan State, USC flies to Penn State, Rutgers at Maryland, (USC at ND in September / early October)
Year 3: USC hosts ND, UCLA flies to Penn State, Maryland hosts Michigan State, Rutgers plays OOC (UConn? I dunno)
Year 4: UCLA hosts Penn State, USC flies to Michigan State, Rutgers hosts Maryland

Another peculiarity to make this work is that Rutgers/Maryland is not regular H/A/H/A, but is H/H/A/A/H/H, etc.

Then in "the first Saturday in November" or some such lock down USC/UCLA, Ohio State / Pen State, and have the conference play a round of the annually locked games.

Hard pass on this... sorry. Even if you force UConn on Rutgers, it makes no sense to clump the Bruins with those teams into those windows. My guess is ND will no longer get accommodation for this scheduling caveat.

(05-10-2023 10:38 AM)bullet Wrote:  

(05-10-2023 09:38 AM)CardinalJim Wrote:  Disappointed to see The Big Ten do this. Gone will be must see games like Michigan vs Washington and Ohio State vs Notre Dame in place of games that no one else wants to see beyond the scheduled team’s fans.

Not good for college football

And they have lightened their no FCS rule as well. That I dislike even more.

Did you mean to say they have just now announced a further lightening of the only FCS every second year rule?

That is not something reported in the article.

Or did you meant to say they announced several years ago a lightening of the no FCS rules to only FCS every second year, and that is going to continue?

Because, yeah, they aren't going to announce that the small stadium schools can go back to scheduling 2-1's with MAC schools while at the same time saying the small stadium schools can no longer buy a cheaper FCS game in years that they have four Big Ten home games.

(05-10-2023 10:02 AM)BruceMcF Wrote:  

(05-10-2023 09:38 AM)CardinalJim Wrote:  Disappointed to see The Big Ten do this. Gone will be must see games like Michigan vs Washington and Ohio State vs Notre Dame in place of games that no one else wants to see beyond the scheduled team’s fans.

Not good for college football

tOSU, Penn State, That School Up North and USC are likely to continue to schedule one (or more) OOC P5 game, looking at competition for CFP12 spots.

Doubtful. Michigan just went to the four-team playoff with an OOC of UConn, Hawaii and Colorado State.

Look at Alabama 2022 and imagine that Alabama-Texas had been a conference game. That leaves an OOC of Austin Peay, Utah State, ULM. Anybody think that Alabama would have been kept out of a 12 team playoff because of a weak OOC schedule? Me neither.

The TV networks didn't get the OOC rule in the TV contracts, so the P5 OOC games are probably going away

(05-10-2023 11:18 AM)johnbragg Wrote:  The TV networks didn't get the OOC rule in the TV contracts, so the P5 OOC games are probably going away

Part of the Notre Dame squeeze play

Well, the new commissioner is quickly learning the lessons from Michigan’s last season: It’s easier to make the CFP if you don’t schedule P5 OOC opponents…with a corollary of it’s more important to make the CFP than to play P5 OOC games. Maximizing CFP bids is now the B1G’s priority.

FWIW - I don’t believe that brands, such as Notre Dame, will struggle to find opponents. Games against USC, Michigan, Michigan State, Ohio State, etc. should gain more importance. Unfortunately, it’s the regional/quasi-rivalry games (UVa v Maryland or Rutgers v Syracuse or Virginia Tech v Purdue or Indiana v Louisville or Duke v Northwestern) that will be cut back.

This change will also set-up the B1G for its next media deal. Moving to a 10-game conference schedule will be seen favorably by fans.

(05-10-2023 10:55 AM)BruceMcF Wrote:  

(05-10-2023 09:27 AM)Just Joe Wrote:  

(05-10-2023 08:13 AM)RUScarlets Wrote:  UCLA would be screwed rivalry weekend when USC is hosting ND. Who would they play? UConn?

While I don't think there's any chance the rivalry stops, I think there's a more than zero % chance it moves permanently to October and leaves rivalry weekend for USC/UCLA. It would be different if it was always the last weekend. That the game has pretty much always alternated dates I think makes it much more possible that could be on the table.

Conversely, I think there's always a chance it moves permanently to rivalry weekend, giving UCLA the chance to at least schedule an OOC rival of their own every year without switching back and forth. Wasn't the whole reason for the October game in South Bend being because USC didn't want to be playing in the Midwest at the end of November? Not really an issue now that they'll have conference games in Minneapolis and Madison.

Lessee:
The Game (Big Ten version)
Indiana / Purdue
Illinois / Northwestern
[ Wisconsin / Minnesota / Iowa / Nebraska ]
Rutgers/Maryland (The Bowl Eligibility Bowl brought to you by the Big Ten Network)

We already have this oddball Michigan State / Penn State thing, because Michigan State's biggest rival has Michigan State as their number two rival, and Penn State with their "Big Eastern Independent" legacy is really in the same state with being the number two rival of their biggest Big Ten rival. So unlock them.

And Maryland / Rutgers is an awfully recent "rivalry", created by the fact that Penn State would have noisily about being forced in rivalry week to play the two Eastern schools they were noisily arguing for before their entry.

So unlock Maryland / Rutgers as well as Michigan State / Penn State, and have Maryland and Rutgers be the ones to play OOC to balance USC playing OOC in Rivalry Week. This approach keeps Michigan State and Penn State always in-house, but at the cost of one year in a four year cycle traveling to either Maryland or Rutgers during Rivalry Week.

Also, in this approach UCLA always flies east in the year that USC is hosting Notre Dame, getting their shot at the Prime Time OTA 7pm slot in the alternate years when USC flies east.

Year 1: USC hosts ND, UCLA flies to Michigan State, Rutgers hosts Penn State, Maryland plays OOC (Navy? I dunno)
Year 2: UCLA hosts Michigan State, USC flies to Penn State, Rutgers at Maryland, (USC at ND in September / early October)
Year 3: USC hosts ND, UCLA flies to Penn State, Maryland hosts Michigan State, Rutgers plays OOC (UConn? I dunno)
Year 4: UCLA hosts Penn State, USC flies to Michigan State, Rutgers hosts Maryland

Another peculiarity to make this work is that Rutgers/Maryland is not regular H/A/H/A, but is H/H/A/A/H/H, etc.

Then in "the first Saturday in November" or some such lock down USC/UCLA, Ohio State / Pen State, and have the conference play a round of the annually locked games.

PSU definitely wanted more eastern schools in the B1G, but those are not the two they would have championed if they were demanding a rival. Pitt added nothing to footprint, WVU isn't academically acceptable, and the B1G couldn't land UND or 'Cuse. All Rutgers/UMD did for PSU was give them easier travel, some lacrosse rivals, and it allowed the B1G to compound UMD/Rutgers alumni footprints w/ PSU's alumni footprint to solidly claim NYC/DC/Baltimore markets for the BTN. No doubt PSU is appreciative for their adds, but it's like getting the 5 or 6th best item on your xmas list from Santa

(05-10-2023 11:12 AM)johnbragg Wrote:  

(05-10-2023 11:04 AM)SouthEastAlaska Wrote:  I mean is this news really that surprising? There isn't a P5 anymore, there's a P2 and everyone else.

That's not really true. There's a P2, and M3 (for now, possibly an M2 soon), and a G5.

If Indiana drops their Virginia home-and-home for 2027-28, they're replacing it with a G5 team, not with Kentucky.

I'm kidding John, that was a little tongue-in-cheek.

Watching PeteTheChop mental gymnastics is more entertaining than actual gymnastics!

(05-10-2023 08:44 AM)Glenn360 Wrote:  Was it a requirement or suggestion?

Michigan 2022: UConn, Colorado St, Hawaii
2023: East Carolina, UNLV, Bowling Green

... 2024: Fresno, Arkansas State, vs Texas
... 2025: New Mexico, CMU, @ Oklahoma

tOSU 2022: Arkansas State, Toledo, vs Notre Date
2023: Youngstown State, WKU, @Notre Dame
2024: Southern Miss, WMU, [TBA]
2025: UConn, vs Texas, [TBA]

If it's a requirement, they'll have to grandfather in existing contracts.

As far as, "the Big Ten Champions got into the playoff without playing a P5 school OOC", to be sure, if a school can count on being the Big Ten champion every year, then their spot into the top 4 QF hosts is pretty secure, independent of OOC games. The question is more where you get seeded if you are in the at-large pool.

_______________

(05-10-2023 08:47 AM)ken d Wrote:  ... I'm surprised that hasn't happened before now. And surprised that there aren't more attractive games scheduled on Labor Day weekend when there are oodles of good timeslots available and so many body bag games at a time when fans are starved for college football.

I expect the fans starved for college football is why there aren't more attractive games scheduled on Labor Day weekend ... opening day seems like the day a body bag game probably has the smallest impact on ticket demand.

If you are going to take the hit on game interest in order to get an additional home date, take the hit when it hurts the least.

(05-10-2023 08:06 AM)quo vadis Wrote:  

Everyone laughed at Aresco, then poof, there goes the P5 labels

Ohio St. isn't waiting for the official announcement:

https://charlotte49ers.com/news/2023/5/1...-2029.aspx

(05-10-2023 02:32 PM)49RFootballNow Wrote:  Ohio St. isn't waiting for the official announcement:

https://charlotte49ers.com/news/2023/5/1...-2029.aspx

It's not the first buy game for a season that signals not seeking a P5 game ... it's the third.

____________

(05-10-2023 02:28 PM)CoastalJuan Wrote:  Everyone laughed at Aresco, then poof, there goes the P5 labels ...

... then the people remembered how hard Aresco worked to try to make "P6" a thing, and laughed even harder.

Get ready for those Temple versus PSU/Rutgers games...

Of course they do this after the media rights agreements are signed. CBS/NBC/FOX must be loving those future W1/W2/W3 schedules - and NBC has to air 2 primetime games every Labor Day Weekend.

(05-10-2023 09:38 AM)CardinalJim Wrote:  Disappointed to see The Big Ten do this. Gone will be must see games like Michigan vs Washington and Ohio State vs Notre Dame in place of games that no one else wants to see beyond the scheduled team’s fans.

Not good for college football

The P and M conferences want their teams playing 9 "P5 caliber" opponents. Service academies, BYU, UCONN, etc count in that group. If we all move to 9 game Conference schedules then there's no reason to force schools to give up a $$$ making game, and we as CFB fans still get to see roughly the same number of P5 vs P5 games.

Doesn't really mean anything. Most schools have their schedules mostly set until the mid-2030s.

(05-10-2023 10:02 AM)BruceMcF Wrote:  

(05-10-2023 09:38 AM)CardinalJim Wrote:  Disappointed to see The Big Ten do this. Gone will be must see games like Michigan vs Washington and Ohio State vs Notre Dame in place of games that no one else wants to see beyond the scheduled team’s fans.

Not good for college football

tOSU, Penn State, That School Up North and USC are likely to continue to schedule one (or more) OOC P5 game, looking at competition for CFP12 spots.

____________

(05-10-2023 09:44 AM)otown Wrote:  this is just a exercise to maximize home games. If scheduling OOC P5 teams, you will most likely have to do 1-1's. Now they bank on an expanded conference slate, and you can schedule 3 body bag games all at home with G5's.

I do not even think you will see many 2-1's with G5's in this scenario.... at least with the SEC and B1G.

Its your Indianas and Northwesterns who are most likely to drop to 3 Go5 games, and they are the ones most likely to have that be 2-1 and 3-1 games.

Look at a four year cycle of 4/5 and 5/4 conference games. If you are aiming at 7 home games annually in a small stadium Big Ten school, you need 10 OOC home games. A pair of H/H P5 contracts and the allowed 2 FCS games in years there are only 4 Big Ten homes games means 6 OOC buy games, which in the current market is somewhere in the $8m-$12m bracket.

Replace the pair of H/H P5 contracts with a pair of 2-1 and/or 3-1 contracts, and now you only need 2-4 Go5 buy games over a four year cycle. Make them 3-1's, and you can schedule two Go5 buy game contract in the same year you have 5 Big Ten home games, matching the two FCS buy game contracts in the year you have 4 Big Ten home games.

Heck, Michigan State might restart the 3, 3-1 contracts with the MAC Michigan Directionals, over an eight year cycle.

That makes sense. IU actually tried to cancel this season’s neutral site game in Indianapolis in March…. 6 months before kickoff.

After that I can see them canceling the game here next season or the game in Bloomington in 2025.

(05-10-2023 03:00 PM)TeamRamRod1 Wrote:  Doesn't really mean anything. Most schools have their schedules mostly set until the mid-2030s.

Schedules mostly set until the mid-2030?

Doesn't really mean anything.

But muh P5 breakaway!