CFB programs will have to decide between continuing marquee non-conference games or prioritizing the CFP
The changes continue in college football.
College football is constantly changing. Whether it is the expansion of conferences or new postseason formats, the sport many grew up with looks very different from how it did five or 10 years ago.
The change isn't slowing down, either. Programs across the country are trying to figure out how best to prepare for the current college football landscape, particularly the new 12-team College Football Playoff, which is leading to even more changes.
During a recent appearance on The Triple Option podcast, former Buckeye head coach Urban Meyer asked current Ohio State head coach Ryan Day about scheduling marquee opponents in the non-conference.
"Why would you dare play — I think you're opening up with Texas next year. Why?" Meyer said to Day.
Meyer's question is one that college football programs across the country face: What is the benefit of playing a demanding non-conference schedule?
Last season, the Scarlet and Gray played Akron, Western Michigan, and Marshall before starting Big Ten play. The year before that, Michigan played East Carolina, UNLV, and Bowling Green. Both teams went on to win the national championship. Indiana made the Playoff after facing one ranked team — Ohio State — all season. Oregon, the No. 1 team heading into the Playoff, had a marquee non-conference game against Boise State. This is in addition to nine conference games Big Ten teams play, while those in the SEC only play eight.
If the primary goal each season is to win a national championship, a team has to set itself up for success. Under the four-team Playoff model, building a résumé of strong wins was a way to get into the postseason tournament. Based on last year's Playoff field, accumulating as many wins as possible is the way in. Because of this, some, like Meyer, see these marquee non-conference games as not worth the risk, especially teams in the Big Ten and the SEC. Would the Buckeyes have gotten into the Playoff last year if they lost a non-conference game in addition to the two Big Ten losses?
Additionally, the Scarlet and Gray played 16 games last year, seven against top-10 opponents, the most in college football history. Given the physical toll, those games take on players, is it worth adding another ranked matchup early in the season?
On Friday, Nebraska announced it is canceling its home-and-home series with Tennessee in 2026 and 2027. While Husker athletic director Troy Dannen cited renovations to Memorial Stadium and the need for an additional home game in 2027, this cancelation also eliminates a potential pitfall for the Cornhuskers each year.
But there's another side to the coin. While expanded conferences potentially lead to more exciting games — Ohio State played at Oregon and USC hosted Penn State last year, for instance — there is a desire for more marquee matchups scattered throughout the season.
Meyer pointed out that games like the Buckeyes and the Longhorns are good for fans, but they also good for the sport. The Ohio State-Texas rematch of the January Playoff semifinal will create a buzz leading into the season. The 2025 opening weekend also features Alabama traveling to Florida State, LSU traveling to Clemson and Notre Dame at Miami.
These are the games fans want to attend and tune in to on television. While Buckeye fans will still watch their team face a MAC program to start the season, they are most interested in getting a top-five game on campus (or traveling to SEC country for one). The Playoff, which featured ranked matchup after ranked matchup, was proof of the games that generate the most interest in college football.
While winning is important for getting into the Playoff, programs nationwide also need to continue making money. One way to do that is to continue having these big-time non-conference games.
"If we're sharing revenue with the athletes, which is the right thing to do, how do we produce more content?" Ohio State athletic director Ross Bjork said this week when speaking to reporters. "How do we have more high-level matchups? Clearly, the viewership in the CFP, people want to watch these games, and they want high-level matchups. We owe it to the game, we owe it to our athletes to say, 'Can we have more content?'"
.
.
.
continued
Just sayin': Even though the conferences really need these marque non conference games to help keep the networks to continue paying the big money for their TV rights; as we move forward I expect to see fewer and fewer marque non conference games. The only exceptions may be in some designated "Kickoff Classic Games" where both teams get a really huge payout.