Big Ten, Pac-12 To Create Inter-League Schedule System
by Brian Favat on Dec 28, 2011 1:53 PM EST
in Boston College Football
Email
Print
Earlier in the year, Stanford coach David Shaw suggested that the BCS AQ conferences make scheduling deals a la the Big Ten-ACC Challenge in basketball. At the time, I posited that it was an awesome idea that would never get off the ground due to concerns about SOS and programs incentives to schedule their way to 6-7 wins and an annual bowl game.
So, yeah, about that:
BREAKING: Pac-12 and Big Ten enter scheduling agreement. All 12 teams playing an inter-league football game starting 2017.
— Pete Thamel(@PeteThamelNYT) December 28, 2011
The question I have is: could the ACC strike a similar scheduling arrangement with another BCS AQ conference?
When I proposed a similar scheduling arrangement for the ACC back in July, the Big Ten edged out both the SEC and the Pac-12 as the conference readers most wanted to see paired with the conference. But since then, both the ACC and SEC have announced plans to expand to a total of 14 teams by 2012 (SEC) and 2014 (ACC). And it would appear that the Big Ten and Pac-12 are hitching their wagons to one another, so ... ACC-SEC inter-league scheduling?
There are plenty of compelling matchups between the two leagues, and most of those are typically featured in Atlanta at either the start of the season (Chick-Fil-A Kickoff Classic) or season's end (Peach Bowl).
There are also a lot of undesirable matchups between ACC and SEC schools, especially when you add schools as different as Missouri, Texas A&M, Syracuse and Pittsburgh to the fold. Syracuse-LSU, anyone? BC vs. Mississippi State?
Complicating an ACC-SEC Football Challenge scheduling arrangement further is the fact that many ACC schools already play their in-state SEC counterparts at season's end -- Florida vs. Florida State, Georgia vs. Georgia Tech, South Carolina vs. Clemson, Vanderbilt vs. Wake Forest.
Good luck trying to convince Georgia or Florida State to leave the state for a non-conference game. And good luck convincing Virginia Tech to schedule any BCS AQ opponent in non-conference play.
Still, you can't help but marvel at the symmetry of the two conferences, and think about the possibilities ...
29 comments
|
0 recs |
Do you like this story?
Comments
And good luck convincing Virginia Tech to schedule any BCS AQ opponent in non-conference play
Like Alabama, Nebraska, Pitt, Ohio State and Wisconsin?
Nope, like Appalachian State, East Carolina, Marshall and Arkansas State.
Editor, BC Interruption
by Brian Favat on Dec 28, 2011 5:28 PM EST via mobile up reply actions
That was written half-jokingly. Just a gentle ribbing for VaTech’s laughable 2011 non-conf schedule.
Editor, BC Interruption
by Brian Favat on Dec 28, 2011 5:34 PM EST via mobile up reply actions
We were just trying to get a feel for what an SEC Out of Conference schedule is like. I think Tech planned on playing Norfolk State in mid-November, just to really get the feel down.
by Estonianzulu on Dec 28, 2011 9:05 PM EST up reply actions
As a fan I love it
But the ADs and HCs would never go for it. Just think, 9 conference games, Notre Dame, an Inter-League game (but against who..with the ACCs luck, we would be paired with the Big East) and what, either a MAC school or 1-AA school?
Too many chances to lose a game and hurt bowl chances plus the loss for someone anyway, of a home game and its revenue.
This is what’s going to happen moving to 9 conference games anyway, more chance to lose games. We are going to find out that some programs that have traditionally been 7 or 8 win teams suddenly are struggling to get 6 wins and those that have been borderline bowl teams are now on the outside looking in.
If this were basketball or hockey where you are playing in excess of 30 games, everyone would be on board , but in football..forget it.
agree
9 ACC games
1 ND game
1 patsy FCS game
1 remaining game
That is 10 quality football games. 1 gimmee, and one more. I say, make it a MAC or CUSA in a desirbale recruiting area. Plus, assuming we can win, BC might need that extra win to go bowling.
plus what are the choices. Not BIGTEN, not PAC10. SEC is too rough. BE? Hell no. Big 12? maybe, but nah, cuz we’d get Iowa State or some good team that no one cares about.
no, I’d stick to MAC and CUSA for game #12.
Though this assumes the ACC moves to a nine game schedule, which I don’t think is a foregone conclusion even with the Syracuse and Pitt adds.
The reasons cited against an ACC-SEC scheduling arrangement are the same reasons both conferences may just stick with 8 games for football.
Editor, BC Interruption
by Brian Favat on Dec 28, 2011 5:31 PM EST via mobile up reply actions
I love the idea but...
Matchups between the SEC and ACC just suck. there are 4 or so real good ones and a bunch that just blow. Some teams are just impossible to match up.
Klempsun- SC
FSU- Florida
GT- Georgia
Duke- Vandy
BC- Ole Miss
Maryland- Arkansas
NC- Alabama
NC State- Kentucky
WF- MIss State
Virginia- Auburn
VT- LSU
Miami- Texas A&M
Syracuse- Miss State
Pitt- Mizzou
Wake Forest and Vanderbilt have what seems like a long-term series scheduled in football.
So Duke-Mississippi State? Though you have the Bulldogs twice on the above list.
Editor, BC Interruption
by Brian Favat on Dec 28, 2011 5:33 PM EST via mobile up reply actions
Clemson-South Carolina
Florida State-Florida
Georgia Tech-Georgia
Wake Forest-Vanderbilt
Then …
Virginia Tech-Texas A&M — scary, quasi-military schools
North Carolina-Tennessee — border war
Pittsburgh-Kentucky
NC State-Mississippi State — state schools with middling academics
The rest, throw names into a hat and draw.
Editor, BC Interruption
by Brian Favat on Dec 28, 2011 5:40 PM EST via mobile up reply actions
Miami and Florida may also be renewing their rivalry.
"I spent 90 percent of my money on women and drink. The rest I wasted!"
I wonder how this will squeeze ND?
Might be that Purdue, MSU and UM do not want to have ND as the #12 game each year. Might hurt their bowl prospects
9 B1G games
1 PAC12
1 FCS
1 ND???
I know ND already has long term contracts in place with B1G teams, but maybe down the road this will impact ND scheduling
Same with PAC12 — Stanford might not want ND either down the road (I assume USC would always want the now one-sided rivalry)
does this put pressure on ND to join B1G or ACC?
Agreed
Definitely seems to squeeze the Irish a little. Will be interesting to see how it plays out.
Only note on the above is USC (and UCLA, I believe) are two schools who have never played a I-AA opponent. USC always seems to schedule 2 BCS + Notre Dame in non-conf annually, so I don’t think this will ultimately affect USC-Notre Dame either way.
Editor, BC Interruption
by Brian Favat on Dec 28, 2011 5:43 PM EST via mobile up reply actions
lol
I’d love to see which Big Ten school decides the payday from the Notre Dame game is worth saying goodbye to.
BIG = BIG$$$
if playing ND meant a loss of bowl revenue 9(e.g. 5-7 instead if 6-6), i can see B1G saying so long faKe IRISH people.
The B1G is as rich if not richer than ND.
Alright, e-o, please list for me the programs Michigan, Michigan State, and Purdue could schedule instead of Notre Dame that would:
-be non-threatening enough to improve bowl prospects
-get national attention
-sell-out
The B1G has money. No one contests that. But once you have money, you want more money. And the money ND brings is the only reason they can go 0.500 and be treated like a BCS winner.
Fairness
The biggest thing, I think, is getting every conference into a fair arrangement. It might be hard to convince some ACC coaches/ADs to schedule a challenge series if teams in the SEC or Big 12 are not doing something similar. Who wants to see Texas get into the BCS title game playing four OOC nobodies (as happened to them in 2009) while some one loss team that had to go on the road to play LSU gets left out in the cold? Put any group of teams into that scenario.
Note as well that one of the big things that helps this work for the Big 10 and the Pac-12 is that few of their teams have non-conference rivalries. Outside of USC-Notre Dame and Utah-BYU, there really aren’t any major Pac-12 OOC rivalries, which frees up their schedules. The Big 10 has Notre Dame vs. Michigan (which has taken breaks at times) and Purdue (who cares). Why should Jimbo Fisher or Dabo Swinney want to play Florida/South Carolina every year and they have to face another major Big 12 or SEC opponent while Ohio State is combining some Pac-12 team with Akron and West Ohio Poly School for the Blind?
Finally, I’d say the way to go is to try and find a conference that isn’t so geographically aligned as the SEC. That would likely be the Big 12. But then who is left for the SEC to “challenge”? The Big East? The MAC? Uh, yeah, great.
(PS: As to FSU playing out of state, they’ve played 7 OOC games outside of the state of Florida in the last ten seasons, and have @WVU set for 2013, but you are correct in the sense that current coach Jimbo Fisher has expressed a desire to change that kind of scheduling. Perhaps he sees a little imbalance in scheduling as compared to FSU’s big rival: UF hasn’t played a non-conference road game outside the state of Florida since 1991.)
Finally, I’d say the way to go is to try and find a conference that isn’t so geographically aligned as the SEC. That would likely be the Big 12. But then who is left for the SEC to "challenge"? The Big East? The MAC? Uh, yeah, great.
This goes back to fairness though. In order for something like this to work, the number of teams in the conference has to be equal. Which leaves the ACC with only the SEC and MAC. The ACC-MAC challenge? No thanks.
Editor, BC Interruption
by Brian Favat on Dec 28, 2011 5:48 PM EST via mobile up reply actions
Obviously I wouldn’t want the MAC challenge, although I actually like the idea of these challenge series, fairness issues aside. The one thing I would say is that I don’t mind if there are a couple teams left out. Frankly, the worst teams from the previous season would probably be better off just playing some Sun Belt or even FCS team to try and get bowl eligible.
The thing is this arrangement is about easing scheduling constraints and creating more value ($$$) to both Big Ten and Pac-12 schools.
I’m not sure if this works by saying "You 10 schools play one another … and you four schools go shell out up to a million dollars on bringing in a FCS / Sun Belt opponent.
This arrangement works because the Pac-12 and Big Ten are all-in. Something like this has to be all or nothing, which is why I don’t think you’ll ever see the ACC and SEC enter into a similar arrangement.
Editor, BC Interruption
wow -- is this true?
UF hasn’t played a non-conference road game outside the state of Florida since 1991
I think so.
Georgia had a similar streak that dated back to the 60s iirc until they went to Arizona State Over the last few years.
Editor, BC Interruption
by Brian Favat on Dec 28, 2011 5:45 PM EST via mobile up reply actions
Stupid...
you know the point of this is to guarantee an out of conference game with another AQ conference to improve strength of schedule… BUT you know it’ll pit the top teams vs the low teams… neither conference wants to risk a loss for a top ranked team… so it’ll just be 95% of the time a padded win. I hear it’s a 3-5 year trial, encouraged as part of the Pac 12’s tv package… the payout to the Big Ten team will make it worthwhile.
I like sports, movies, and music!
Again
9 ACC
ND
Pick 2….any 2..and recruit and improve our facilities with the $1.4B endowment.
USC, TEXAS, ALABAMA, OREGON, TCU, STANFORD,OHIO STATE, MICHIGAN, WEST VIRGINA.
Why Maine, RI, and patsies.
Play the toughest schedule in America.
MAN UP GDF!
Never going to happen
Unless we want to be Duke football — schedule Stanford, Alabama in non-conference play, sleepwalk through the ACC schedule and win 3-4 games a season.
Editor, BC Interruption
ACC - Big East has more compelling/competitive matchups
Orange you glad it's not football season?
by SUMB44 on Dec 29, 2011 4:53 PM EST via Android app reply actions
Comments For This Post Are Closed
Secondary Sidebar
User Tools
Related FanPosts on BC Interruption
FanPosts
Community blog posts and discussion.
