Should the Big Ten Schedule Change?

[CookyPuss]

I did a little investigating, and I believe the rule is 12 teams for a conference championship game. I couldn't find the actual rule, but here is a quote from an article discussing the history of the rule:

LINK

"The magic number seems to be 12," Weaver said. "But I'm not so sure you couldn't have the member institutions of I-A pass the legislation for 10 teams and have a playoff. I don't think 12 is magical, that's where it came from."

I was thinking that was why the SEC, Big 12, and ACC expanded.

 

[martinss01]

waiting 50 some odd days for a game is obsurd. the first change i would make is every bowl game would be played prior to the new year. the whole 06/07 season is crap. the entire season should begin and end under the same calendar year, period.

second, teams should play their last games the same week. no more 1 conference off for a month while the rest of college football plays on. while it is part of the layoff issue, just as importantly is the way voting works with college football. we're talking about everything from team rankings to individual awards. active teams/players tend gain ground whether they deserve to or not over idle ones. while i beleived whole heartedly that florida and usc both deserved the #2 spot over scum, they certainly didn't deserve to drop simply because another team won and they were idle. thats absolute bullshit no matter how you slice it and very disrespectful. if a team wants to play a longer season, thats fine. they simply have to start their season earlier.

all individual awards should be moved until on/after new years. the bowl game is part of the season. i can't for the life of me understand why you would give out awards prior to the end of the season... doing so before the end fails to take into consideration performances on the biggest stage (rivalry games aside) and hurts team coheasion as a key team mate is traveling the country when they should be practicing with the team.

random opinions:
personally, id rather see the big 10 drop a team than add one.

i see no reason to add a conference championship. i don't have a problem with split conference champions. college football isn't perfect. with the number of teams and the reletively small number of games played... no system can be expected to function in a fair manner.

i feel bad for bsu. but not that bad. if you want to be taken seriously you have to play serious teams. even if bsu had scheduled clunkers with big names and had the season they had, they very well may have played for the nc. it would be hard to tell bsu no if htey had played miami, fsu, notre dame etc... an undefeated season with a few big names (even if those names were overrated/having down years), they would have had a legit shot. if teams like bsu want to be considered for the nc game they have to sign up for schedules that warrant such consideration. my guess is that if they had beaten oklahoma during the regular season and a top tier name from the pac 10, sec, or big 10 they would have played in the nc game instead of a 1 loss florida. thats the beauty of the current bcs system. its far from perfect, but it does give every team a shot if they decide they want it.

 

[ncbuckeye3]

Somebody correct me if I am wrong. I seem to recall from years ago that the NCAA required that conferences have 12 teams to have a championship game. Again, someone please correct me if I am wrong about this.

12 Teams for a conference championship is the NCAA mandate. When the ACC expanded a few years ago, remember that VaTech and Miami joined one year then BC joined them the next? The ACC petitioned the NCAA to be allowed to play a championship game that season with 11 teams and they were denied.

12 is the magic number for a conference championship game.

But, I'll say it again, we don't need to add a team to get to play a longer season, we just need to change our schedule. Do like USC, add a couple of bye weeks and play scUM the first weekend in December when the conference championship games are being played, same day as UCLA-USC.

 

[Zurp]

I clicked the "do nothing" method. But that was mostly because I don't really care much. I don't really like the idea to start the season later. And I don't care much for bye weeks.

I just don't think that anything needs to be done. A team should be able to be game-ready after 5 days, after 7 days, 14 days, or 50 days. If a team knows when their next game is going to be, there's no excuse for the entire team (that I can think of) to not be "up" for that game.

 

[OSU_Buckguy]

I just don't think that anything needs to be done. A team should be able to be game-ready after 5 days, after 7 days, 14 days, or 50 days. If a team knows when their next game is going to be, there's no excuse for the entire team (that I can think of) to not be "up" for that game.

as was noted in an earlier message, teams are permitted only 15 practices between the final regular season game and the bowl game. because of this, there is far more down time for teams from the big ten that are competing in the bcs bowl games than those from other conferences.

 

[exhawg]

Schedule The Game the day of the conference championship games with a bye the week before for Thanksgiving. That would allow the team 2 bye weeks during the season rather than playing 12 games in 12 weeks.
I don't think the layoff had anything to do with the game Monday, but I think it would be good to have a break or 2 during the season.

 

[23Skidoo]

I voted to add a bye week, but I don't think that's all we need to do. Ever since the season was expanded to 12 games last year, I've thought the B10 needs to do something. We are now the only premiere conference w/o a CCG or where everyone doesn't play eachother.
I personally thinkg that CCGs are basically stupid. I don't like playoffs either, but I think even with playoffs -- CCGs are still a stupid idea. That's a little bit of a different discussion though.
I think we have a couple of options
A. do nothing
B. add a 12th team and go with a CCG
C. Cut a school (PSU) or convince a B10 member to give up their football program (kind of like Chicago did).
D. Play 10 conference games.

I think A is a copout. I already noted that I hate CCGs, so I don't like B either. I don't think C is very realistic at all. I think playing 10 B10 games is our best option. Most B10 teams don't schedule a legit BCS opponent every year, and even if they do, this still leaves 1 OOC game to give the in-state MAC schools some cash. I think Michigan and Iowa are the only schools with out-of-conference rivals (that they play).
If you are going to add a 12th team -- remember that ND already declined, based on their image. When they declined, money was not even being discussed in the process yet. All of their other sports also compete in the Big East. I think that is their best fit. Pitt and WVU have also stated they aren't going anywhere without eachother. From the Big Easy, this leaves Louisville, Cinci, Syracuse and Rutgers. I have a feeling 'Cuse and Rutgers are too far away and prefer their ties to the BE. We also have to remember there should be academic considerations as well.

 

[CookyPuss]

We are now the only premiere conference w/o a CCG and where everyone doesn't play eachother.

Incorrect. Neither the Pac 10, nor the Big East plays a CCG.

I think playing 10 B10 games is our best option. Most B10 teams don't schedule a legit BCS opponent every year, and even if they do, this still leaves 1 OOC game to give the in-state MAC schools some cash. I think Michigan and Iowa are the only schools with out-of-conference rivals (that they play).

With a 12 game schedule, that leaves you with 2 OOC games, not 1. I think playing at least one more conference game makes sense. It seems like everyone just added another patsy to their schedule when this took place. The Pac 10 and Big East don't have a CCG, but they have smaller conferences and play everybody. I also think they need to bring back the bye week and start a week later.

 

[IronBuckI]

Incorrect. Neither the Pac 10, nor the Big East plays a CCG.

He said premiere conference, and the Big East does not qualify. The Pac 10 does play everyone in their conference, so he isn't incorrect about that either. Although, that's just me guessing that the word 'or' should've been placed where the 'and' is, when he said CCG and play everyone in their conference.

As I said a few pages back. I do like your idea of adding one conference game, and still allowing 3 OOC's.

 

[23Skidoo]

Incorrect. Neither the Pac 10, nor the Big East plays a CCG.

Misunderstanding. I meant the ACC, SEC, and B12 play a CCG -- P10 and BE all play eachother. I suppose I should have "or" instead of "and".

With a 12 game schedule, that leaves you with 2 OOC games, not 1.

I know that leaves us with 2 OOC games. My point was that most B10 teams schedule **AT MOST** 1 quality opponent every year. So that still leaves 1 OOC game for the MAC charity cases. The only schools I see this being a issue with is Michigan and Iowa because they each have a single OOC rival -- so ttun probably wouldn't be able to play Vanderbilts and such.

I think playing at least one more conference game makes sense. It seems like everyone just added another patsy to their schedule when this took place. The Pac 10 and Big East don't have a CCG, but they have smaller conferences and play everybody. I also think they need to bring back the bye week and start a week later.

I think the bold part speaks to my point above, so we're on the same page there.
However, you can't add 1 conference game. The problem is that we have 11 teams. The math doesn't work out. You have to add at least 2 games.
It seems now that adding PSU was perhaps a mistake in the long-run, but there was no way we could have known about the 12-game CCG rule or the scheduling "issues" we'd have now back in '92.

 

[CookyPuss]

He said premiere conference, and the Big East does not qualify. The Pac 10 does play everyone in their conference, so he isn't incorrect about that either. Although, that's just me guessing that the word 'or' should've been placed where the 'and' is, when he said CCG and play everyone in their conference.

As I said a few pages back. I do like your idea of adding one conference game, and still allowing 3 OOC's.

Duh, my brain froze on the end of his sentence. Totally, missed that. Thanks for the catch.

 

[23Skidoo]

He said premiere conference, and the Big East does not qualify. The Pac 10 does play everyone in their conference, so he isn't incorrect about that either. Although, that's just me guessing that the word 'or' should've been placed where the 'and' is, when he said CCG and play everyone in their conference.

Yea... I think I'm going to fix that right now. My bad.
The BE is, by default, still a premiere conference. They're a BCS conference and they've won 2 BCS bowls now in 2 years. To me, at least, that is a premiere conference.

 

[CookyPuss]

Misunderstanding. I meant the ACC, SEC, and B12 play a CCG -- P10 and BE all play eachother. I suppose I should have "or" instead of "and".

Sorry, about that. You were clear, my brain wasn't working.

However, you can't add 1 conference game. The problem is that we have 11 teams. The math doesn't work out. You have to add at least 2 games.
It seems now that adding PSU was perhaps a mistake in the long-run, but there was no way we could have known about the 12-game CCG rule or the scheduling "issues" we'd have now back in '92.

Just to clarify. Right now we play 8 conference games and 4 OCC games. I know we can add one more and play 3 OCC games, like the Pac 10. I realize this does not solve the playing everybody problem. However, I'm not sure we can add 2 conference games. There may be a 3 OCC game minimum as I can't find any conference that plays less than 3.

 

[23Skidoo]

Sorry, about that. You were clear, my brain wasn't working.



Actually, my math all of our math was goofy. Right now we play 8 conference games. I know we can add one more and play 3 OCC games, like the Pac 10. I'm not sure we can add 2 conference games. There may be a 3 OCC game minimum as I can't find any conference that plays less than 3.

No prob with the misunderstanding :)
The problem with adding 1 game is that, because we have an odd number of teams, the numbers won't even out. 11 (teams) *9 (games) = 99 / (2 teams per game) = 49.5 games. Basically, when you actually write it out -- there will be 1 team left with no opponent (who hasn't already played 9 games). So either 1 team only plays 8 games, or you match that team up with somebody who ends up playing 10 games. 11 teams = a real pain in the ass all around.

 

[23Skidoo]

I've never heard about a minimum-OOC game requirement. But it also wouldn't surprise me if it exists. If it does exist, it would explain why the P10 didn't play everyone before the 12-game season.
The more this topic gets thrown around, the more I think PSU just needs to join the Big East.