ADVERTISEMENT

The stupidity of nine conference games.

C

Cornmaker

Nov 26, 2007
13
51
13
This bowl season the B1G will send eight teams bowling, while both the SEC and ACC send 11 teams to bowls. In addition the B1G has missed the playoffs for the third straight time. That extra conference game results in an average of 0.5 more losses. For average teams that extra 0.5 loss plays a big role in making a bowl game or not. One can also argue that B1G teams are more beat up by playing that extra conference game.

There is an argument that the nine conference games brings in extra money for the conference. I do not know the actual money difference between having one extra conference game vs a non conference game, but I would doubt it would outweigh the financial loss of the missing the CFP and three bowl games.

In summary the nine conference game schedule is hurting the B1G chances in the CFP and in sending teams to bowl games. There is an argument that it generates extra money for the B1G, but IMO when the money lost due to missed bowl games and CFP appearances in included, it costs the B1G financially also. The nine conference game schedule hurts the conferences finances and its prestige. It is pure stupidity by the conference higher ups and must end.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Klaus 7196
Cornmaker said:
This bowl season the B1G will send eight teams bowling, while both the SEC and ACC send 11 teams to bowls. In addition the B1G has missed the playoffs for the third straight time. That extra conference game results in an average of 0.5 more losses. For average teams that extra 0.5 loss plays a big role in making a bowl game or not. One can also argue that B1G teams are more beat up by playing that extra conference game.

There is an argument that the nine conference games brings in extra money for the conference. I do not know the actual money difference between having one extra conference game vs a non conference game, but I would doubt it would outweigh the financial loss of the missing the CFP and three bowl games.

In summary the nine conference game schedule is hurting the B1G chances in the CFP and in sending teams to bowl games. There is an argument that it generates extra money for the B1G, but IMO when the money lost due to missed bowl games and CFP appearances in included, it costs the B1G financially also. The nine conference game schedule hurts the conferences finances and its prestige. It is pure stupidity by the conference higher ups and must end.
Click to expand...
The BIG has 9 teams going to bowl games, not 8. Ohio State, Michigan, MSU, PSU, Purdue, Iowa, Wisconsin, NW, and Minnesota. Maryland and IU lost their last conference games and missed a bowl. At 2-7, IU did not deserve to go to a bowl game.
 
  • Like
Reactions: BBG
His point is valid. By playing an extra conference game the B1G is making all their top teams go through another Purdue-OSU type game versus Alabama playing SW Missouri St right before their rivalry weekend. The solution is to make all the P5 conferences play 9 as opposed to everybody playing another cupcake.

They forced the Big 12 to play a useless championship game, I'm sure they can force the SEC to play 9. Now how do we get ND to play another tough game?
 
  • Like
Reactions: chiboiler7 and ChuckJr
The problem is not the B1G. The problem is the SEC. You are correct with the 8 vs 9 schedules. However, the idea should be to get rid of games against non-competitive teams, not encourage them.

If anything, the BCS committee should penalize those teams that play the cupcake games. Look at ND, they played 12 games: 6 home, 4 away and 2 neutral sites. Neutral sites are almost home games for them. In fairness, the only non-conference cupcake was Ball St, and that turned out to be a close game. But Navy, USC and their ACC teams were not strong.

Alabama played 7 home games, 1 neutral site and 4 road games. All road games were SEC teams. The non-conference games were Louisville, Ark State, The Citadel and Louisiana. Louisville was the neutral site game. In almost any year, 3 of the 4 are non-competitive. If the committee was serious, they would penalize a schedule like that.

If anything, the present system favors the select few. Teams like UCF, who has gone undefeated in two regular seasons, is not permitted in. Plus, the PAC-12 has also been underrepresented, though Washington did make it last year.

I do not think that the present system can last much longer.
 
Last edited:
  • Like
Reactions: NVboiler and chiboiler7
What cost OSU was not 9 conference games, but being exposed by Purdue. If Michigan didn’t have a mental block with OSU we would never be talking about this. I’m happy we have 9 conference games, I think when we inevitably go to an 8 team playoff with Power 5 auto bids it will alleviate all of this.
 
  • Like
Reactions: purduepat1969, boiledmeconium, Cthreepo and 5 others
Purduemoe said:
What cost OSU was not 9 conference games, but being exposed by Purdue. If Michigan didn’t have a mental block with OSU we would never be talking about this. I’m happy we have 9 conference games, I think when we inevitably go to an 8 team playoff with Power 5 auto bids it will alleviate all of this.
Click to expand...
This.
 
  • Like
Reactions: ejs1111
arcb102000 said:
The problem is not the B1G. The problem is the SEC. You are correct with the 8 vs 9 schedules. However, the idea should be to get rid of games against non-competitive teams, not encourage them.

If anything, the BCS committee should penalize those teams that play the cupcake games. Look at ND, they played 12 games: 6 home, 4 away and 2 neutral sites. Neutral sites are almost home games for them. In fairness, the only non-conference cupcake was Ball St, and that turned out to be a close game. But Navy, USC and their ACC teams were not strong.

Alabama played 7 home games, 1 neutral site and 4 road games. All road games were SEC teams. The non-conference games were Louisville, Ark State, The Citadel and Louisiana. Louisville was the neutral site game. In almost any year, 3 of the 4 are non-competitive. If the committee was serious, they would penalize a schedule like that.

If anything, the present system favors the select few. Teams like UCF, who has gone undefeated in two regular seasons, is not permitted in. Plus, the PAC-12 has also been underrepresented, though Washington did make it last year.

I do not think that the present system can last much longer.
Click to expand...
ND being allowed to still be independent and having such a weak schedule and get in is what irritates me.
 
  • Like
Reactions: herrli, Purdue85, cjcollie and 4 others
I'm not sure if 9 conference games is a bad idea or not. This season probably isn't a great argument on way or another. The bowl-deserving teams made bowl games. The CFP-deserving teams made the CFP.

Also, nonconference does not equal cupcake. All 3 of our NC opponents made a bowl game. The bigger problem is teams being allowed to schedule 3 opponents from G5/FBS.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Yellowstone1004
Yes it is not fair or equal but the ONLY way the B1G can fix this is by playing 8 conference games, the SEC and the ACC have made it clear they are not going to 9! The other glaring problem with the current system is if an Independent is in their Top 1-6 the next to last ranking. They should be required to play the highest ranked Group of Five on Championship Weekend instead of getting a bye! All that would take is the Group of Five moving their Championship games up a week but giving them a great shot at getting in the top Four. This year it would have been UCF vs ND.
 
Last edited:
  • Like
Reactions: Frankie611
Our goal is not to get some crappy 5-7 Big Ten teams into crappy bowl games by making it easier for them to get to 6-6. Our goal is to for Big Ten schools to play each other more. With 8 conference games and our locked rivalry with IU, we'd never get to see many of the teams in the Big Ten East. I would rather play Big Ten schools than anybody else. Hell, let's go to 10 conference games
 
  • Like
Reactions: Frankie611, BeerbellyBoiler, BoilerBulldog and 1 other person
boilerHup said:
Our goal is not to get some crappy 5-7 Big Ten teams into crappy bowl games by making it easier for them to get to 6-6. Our goal is to for Big Ten schools to play each other more. With 8 conference games and our locked rivalry with IU, we'd never get to see many of the teams in the Big Ten East. I would rather play Big Ten schools than anybody else. Hell, let's go to 10 conference games
Click to expand...
This is basically what is happening with the B1G basketball scheduling philosophy too.
 
Does anybody in here NOT think that Bama and UGA are the 2 best teams in the country? If so...who is?
 
pboiler18 said:
Does anybody in here NOT think that Bama and UGA are the 2 best teams in the country? If so...who is?
Click to expand...

I don’t. Georgia got blown out by LSU in addition to losing to Bama. Clemson is better I think. I would have liked to see Georgia vs. OU or OSU also. In any event, putting them in would have been unfair in two ways. 1. Bama already beat them to win the SEC championship, they shouldn’t have to face an immediate rematch. 2. Georgia has two losses and didn’t win a conference championship. Their best win was against Florida. OU has one loss and had won a conference championship. OSU has one loss, had won a conference championship, and had beaten a better team than Georgia.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Boiler_Pete99 and SDBoiler1
FirstDownB said:
I'm not sure if 9 conference games is a bad idea or not. This season probably isn't a great argument on way or another. The bowl-deserving teams made bowl games. The CFP-deserving teams made the CFP.

Also, nonconference does not equal cupcake. All 3 of our NC opponents made a bowl game. The bigger problem is teams being allowed to schedule 3 opponents from G5/FBS.
Click to expand...

You forget that 9 games in the SEC gives half the schools one more loss rather than a cupcake win and lower the statistics or RPI on each of the schools....just look at who Alabama played for their out of conference games this year too, a joke!
 
ghostoffatjack said:
You forget that 9 games in the SEC gives half the schools one more loss rather than a cupcake win and lower the statistics or RPI on each of the schools....just look at who Alabama played for their out of conference games this year too, a joke!
Click to expand...
Right. The problem is for that ninth game they are scheduling a cupcake instead of a P5 team.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Frankie611
boilerHup said:
Our goal is not to get some crappy 5-7 Big Ten teams into crappy bowl games by making it easier for them to get to 6-6. Our goal is to for Big Ten schools to play each other more. With 8 conference games and our locked rivalry with IU, we'd never get to see many of the teams in the Big Ten East. I would rather play Big Ten schools than anybody else. Hell, let's go to 10 conference games
Click to expand...
That’s the spirit!
 
pboiler18 said:
Does anybody in here NOT think that Bama and UGA are the 2 best teams in the country? If so...who is?
Click to expand...

Alabama didn't play a balanced team all year until they met Georgia. And then you saw what happened. I think Michigan would have given Alabama all they could handle. Defensively Michigan is as strong as anyone they faced (LSU, Georgia, Miss St). Offensively, Michigan could have put up enough points to keep up. Neither LSU or Mississippi St could do that.
Depending on the OSU team that showed up, they probably could stay with Alabama in an offensive shoot out.
I look forward to seeing Michigan obliterate Florida in their bowl game.
 
Purduemoe said:
I don’t. Georgia got blown out by LSU in addition to losing to Bama. Clemson is better I think. I would have liked to see Georgia vs. OU or OSU also. In any event, putting them in would have been unfair in two ways. 1. Bama already beat them to win the SEC championship, they shouldn’t have to face an immediate rematch. 2. Georgia has two losses and didn’t win a conference championship. Their best win was against Florida. OU has one loss and had won a conference championship. OSU has one loss, had won a conference championship, and had beaten a better team than Georgia.
Click to expand...

You realize Bama is going to beat Oklahoma by 17-24 points right? And then most likely tear Clemson or ND a new one?

UGA should have gotten in because they are legitimately the only team with the depth to compete.

I know there is a bias here but there’s a large difference between losing to LSU by 20 and losing to Purdue by 29.

UGA played 1 poor game. They’ll be the best game that eventual national champion Bama has gotten all year. It suggests to me they are the second best team.

Clemson is such a paper tiger it will be fun watching them get destroyed. Their D is BAD.
 
pboiler18 said:
You realize Bama is going to beat Oklahoma by 17-24 points right? And then most likely tear Clemson or ND a new one?

UGA should have gotten in because they are legitimately the only team with the depth to compete.

I know there is a bias here but there’s a large difference between losing to LSU by 20 and losing to Purdue by 29.

UGA played 1 poor game. They’ll be the best game that eventual national champion Bama has gotten all year. It suggests to me they are the second best team.

Clemson is such a paper tiger it will be fun watching them get destroyed. Their D is BAD.
Click to expand...

UGA was unimpressive most of the year outside of the Florida and Alabama games. I’m not sure about Alabama blowing out Oklahoma as I’m not sure if Tua or Hurts will be playing. In either event, Bama shouldn’t have to face UGA twice in a row. UGA lost a play in game by completely blowing it. They have no one but themselves to blame. With the current system you should never put them in again. If we had 8 teams like we should then they should definitely be in. But with 4 teams you don’t put UGA in when they had a moral victory/horrendous choke job down the stretch and there are two conference champions with better resumes.
 
  • Like
Reactions: SDBoiler1
Purduemoe said:
UGA was unimpressive most of the year outside of the Florida and Alabama games. I’m not sure about Alabama blowing out Oklahoma as I’m not sure if Tua or Hurts will be playing. In either event, Bama shouldn’t have to face UGA twice in a row. UGA lost a play in game by completely blowing it. They have no one but themselves to blame. With the current system you should never put them in again. If we had 8 teams like we should then they should definitely be in. But with 4 teams you don’t put UGA in when they had a moral victory/horrendous choke job down the stretch and there are two conference champions with better resumes.
Click to expand...
Agreed. Giving Georgia another chance at Alabama would undermine the entire system and risk a split championship.
 
  • Like
Reactions: SDBoiler1
Purduemoe said:
UGA was unimpressive most of the year outside of the Florida and Alabama games. I’m not sure about Alabama blowing out Oklahoma as I’m not sure if Tua or Hurts will be playing. In either event, Bama shouldn’t have to face UGA twice in a row. UGA lost a play in game by completely blowing it. They have no one but themselves to blame. With the current system you should never put them in again. If we had 8 teams like we should then they should definitely be in. But with 4 teams you don’t put UGA in when they had a moral victory/horrendous choke job down the stretch and there are two conference champions with better resumes.
Click to expand...
Exactly, I don’t see how you justify putting a 2-loss UGA team in over undefeated ACC champ Clemson, undefeated ND, and 1-loss Big12 conference champ Oklahoma. In my opinion, OSU is more deserving than UGA as OSU won the BIG.
 
I think we need to play the 9 Big Ten games. It keeps IU honest - and out of bowl games. Every year, they start off 3-0 by playing 3 pudds, then reality sets in - when the Big Ten starts. If you give them another “game of choice”, it would Indiana State, or some Nom-BCS school to get an easy win. Like we did in the Hope and Hazel years. No thanks.
 
  • Like
Reactions: pboiler18 and SDBoiler1
Purduemoe said:
UGA was unimpressive most of the year outside of the Florida and Alabama games. I’m not sure about Alabama blowing out Oklahoma as I’m not sure if Tua or Hurts will be playing. In either event, Bama shouldn’t have to face UGA twice in a row. UGA lost a play in game by completely blowing it. They have no one but themselves to blame. With the current system you should never put them in again. If we had 8 teams like we should then they should definitely be in. But with 4 teams you don’t put UGA in when they had a moral victory/horrendous choke job down the stretch and there are two conference champions with better resumes.
Click to expand...

UGA unimpressive? Cmon man.

I hate arguing SEC football with Purdue fans. You just don't get it and that's ok. If you want the 4 best teams in the playoff, UGA has to be in. It's like Purdue's 41-10 loss to Minny. Was that loss in any way indicative of the team Purdue is? Nope. So why is their Loss to LSU....who is light years better than Minny so damning?

If you want some undefeateds and conference champs....fine...you can do that too and they did. It won't change the end result.

All that has done is assure that Bama will cake walk to the title. Again.
 
Yeah I want to go to 10 B10 games as well.

This year we played 5 conference away games and 4 conference home games.

Doesn't it makes sense to play 5 home, 5 away?

BC and Mizzou were actually good games, but wouldn't it have been a lot cooler to play PSU, Michigan, or even Maryland in one of those slots?

I've long been a proponent of expanding the bball B10 schedule. Might as well go to 26 games right now as far as I'm concerned. True champion. Exciting games through all of December.
 
pboiler18 said:
UGA unimpressive? Cmon man.

I hate arguing SEC football with Purdue fans. You just don't get it and that's ok. If you want the 4 best teams in the playoff, UGA has to be in. It's like Purdue's 41-10 loss to Minny. Was that loss in any way indicative of the team Purdue is? Nope. So why is their Loss to LSU....who is light years better than Minny so damning?

If you want some undefeateds and conference champs....fine...you can do that too and they did. It won't change the end result.

All that has done is assure that Bama will cake walk to the title. Again.
Click to expand...


Stop drinking the SEC Kool-Aid.
 
  • Like
Reactions: SDBoiler1
pboiler18 said:
UGA unimpressive? Cmon man.

I hate arguing SEC football with Purdue fans. You just don't get it and that's ok. If you want the 4 best teams in the playoff, UGA has to be in. It's like Purdue's 41-10 loss to Minny. Was that loss in any way indicative of the team Purdue is? Nope. So why is their Loss to LSU....who is light years better than Minny so damning?

If you want some undefeateds and conference champs....fine...you can do that too and they did. It won't change the end result.

All that has done is assure that Bama will cake walk to the title. Again.
Click to expand...
Arguing who are the "4 best teams" is inherently flawed and subjective. That is why most sports leagues have clear, objective standards for making the playoffs. Win your league or win enough games to earn a wild card spot. The way I look at the CFP is not "who do I think are the 4 best teams" but rather "which teams would have a legitimate claim to be #1 if there was no playoff and the season ended today". That is why I would include any P5 champ over a runner up. The conference championships are essentially a first round playoff. ND essentially got a bye, which sucks, but they would have been penalized for not being in a CCG it if they had lost even 1 game.
 
Purduemoe said:
Stop drinking the SEC Kool-Aid.
Click to expand...
There's a reason the SEC has won so many national titles and it has nothing to do with Kool-Aid. The proof is in the results man. I don't necessarily agree with the top 4 so far as resume. If we are going with who the 4 best teams are I don't think ND or Oklahoma make that cut though.

That's all.

I don't think the whole SEC is good. But its top 2 teams IMO are the best 2 in the country.
 
FirstDownB said:
Arguing who are the "4 best teams" is inherently flawed and subjective. That is why most sports leagues have clear, objective standards for making the playoffs. Win your league or win enough games to earn a wild card spot. The way I look at the CFP is not "who do I think are the 4 best teams" but rather "which teams would have a legitimate claim to be #1 if there was no playoff and the season ended today". That is why I would include any P5 champ over a runner up. The conference championships are essentially a first round playoff. ND essentially got a bye, which sucks, but they would have been penalized for not being in a CCG it if they had lost even 1 game.
Click to expand...

I don't necessarily disagree on any of this. My point was simple...I think UGA is the one team top end skill wise AND depth wise that can hang with Alabama. That will become abundantly clear in a month. Gotta remember those 3 straight #1 Alabama recruiting classes....all of those guys LITTER the 2 deeps and most are RS J or SR at Bama. That team is the most loaded team maybe in the history of college football. Team that with the coaching juggernaut Saban has built (look at his assistant tree over the past 10 years and where they have landed) that team is basically unstoppable.

I don't think UGA choked this weekend. I think Bama adjusted and used their depth to win....like they have done all year.
 
pboiler18 said:
There's a reason the SEC has won so many national titles and it has nothing to do with Kool-Aid. The proof is in the results man. I don't necessarily agree with the top 4 so far as resume. If we are going with who the 4 best teams are I don't think ND or Oklahoma make that cut though.

That's all.

I don't think the whole SEC is good. But its top 2 teams IMO are the best 2 in the country.
Click to expand...

Saban has won most of those championships. Urban won 2. Miles won one with Sabans Players. Auburn paid Cam’s dad and bought one. Sec has won because they have had 2 of the best coaches all time coaching there. Yes they get great talent, but so does OU, OSU, Michigan, Texas, USC, Clemson and FSU. Don’t be like the Ole Miss and South Carolina fans who attribute Sabans dominance to the SEC as a whole.
 
Last edited:
  • Like
Reactions: SDBoiler1
pboiler18 said:
There's a reason the SEC has won so many national titles and it has nothing to do with Kool-Aid. The proof is in the results man. I don't necessarily agree with the top 4 so far as resume. If we are going with who the 4 best teams are I don't think ND or Oklahoma make that cut though.

That's all.

I don't think the whole SEC is good. But its top 2 teams IMO are the best 2 in the country.
Click to expand...
Alabama is clearly one of the two best. To say Clemson is not is questionable. I think Clemson would beat UGA fairly handily in a neutral site game.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

T

Good luck with the coaching search

Replies
1
Views
786
Boilermaker Football
PaBoiler78
P
W

Nobody likes a loss

Replies
14
Views
3K
Boilermaker Football
POTFHBTFU
P
KentuckyBoiler

Which would you rather?

Replies
17
Views
2K
Boilermaker Football
FLAG HUNTER
F
R

How attractive is the Purdue job right now?

Replies
59
Views
4K
Boilermaker Football
iubhounds
I
typeviic

State of 'traditional' BT conf teams.....

Replies
17
Views
2K
Boilermaker Football
goboilers2
goboilers2
ADVERTISEMENT

Latest posts

ADVERTISEMENT
Top Bottom
Back