The Rest of College Football

[Dr. Strangelove]

Interesting comparisons...here's the traditional Big8 and Big10 over 50 years from 1946-1995

1. Oklahoma (.775)
2. Ohio State (.732)
3. Michigan (.720)
4. Nebraska (.701)
5. Michigan State (.583)
6. Colorado (.577)
7. Missouri (.514)
8. Iowa (.498)
9. Purdue (.493)
10. Illinois (.485)
11. Wisconsin (.472)
12. Minnesota (.469)
13. Oklahoma State (.468)
14. Kansas (.465)
15. Iowa State (.407)
16. Indiana (.387)
17. Northwestern (.324)
18. Kansas State (.299)

[Dr. Strangelove]

fwiw I definitely think the Big8 has a good argument for being the better conference for most of the 70's and 80's.

[THE_WIZARD_]

UNL and OU dominated so much that the other programs success was overshadowed...much like M and OSU...and the Big Ten.

[lineygoblue]

Looks like 2023 will be the final year of the 4 team playoff. The way was paved today for the 12 team format to be instituted in the 2024 season.

https://www.espn.com/college-football/story/_/id/35152132/rose-bowl-agrees-amended-deal-paving-way-early-cfp-expansion

[iam416]

The OSU-M game has one more year of being all or nothing. Then it becomes all or a lower seed in the CFP.

[Mike]

I also worry about how Big Ten realignment will affect The Game. If they do away with divisions, which seems imminent, then there will eventually be rematches of UM-OSU in the title game. Then depending on the playoff draw there could be a matchup there as well. It's going to be weird.

Once the 12 game playoff is in place there will be considerably fewer big OOC games among P5 teams to begin the season.

[iam416]

So, I wouldn't be surprised if they create sort of de facto pods of teams that always play one another thus making it harder for rematches. OSU-M-PSU, e.g.

But, yeah, at 16 it's going to be very hard if you don't divisions (or pods). I mean 9 conference games. That's 6 teams you didn't play. You finished tied with one of those 6 and it goes to Strength of Record? GTFO. Or there's a massive 4-team pile up at 8-1.

I guess the thing is -- with 12 it won't matter as much. Yeah, the B10 CG would be nice, BUT you're still in the CFP.

And I disagree re OoC. I think it really frees it up. Losing OoC isn't so devastating. I mean -- don't get me wrong -- YOUR school ain't in a hurry to schedule any OoC teams worth a shit. But I think most teams will actually embrace it UNLESS they move to 10 conference games.

I try not to underestimate the stupidy of Kevin Warren, so whatever the worst possible organizational alignment is for 2024, I'm going to just go ahead and assume that's what it'll be.

[iam416]

But to your fundamental point...the OSU-M game will never be the same after 2023. Just won't.

[Mike]

My rationale for fewer big games in the beginning of the season is because there will be so many at the end. I think a 10 game conference schedule is likely so there will only be 2 non-con games anyway. They will be treated like preseason games to work out kinks and get the new guys acclimated before you hit the gauntlet. The days of the East-West imbalance will be gone after realignment so the East champ will no longer be gifted a win in the CCG. Let's swap out USC for Purdue this season as an example. Say Michigan loses the CCG, then goes on the road in a 6/7 matchup. In successive games you might play OSU, USC, and @LSU. Win there and you get ______ in a bowl game quarterfinal. I mean, shit man. If you don't get a bye (top 4) in the playoff it will require 4 straight wins against teams in the top 12 of the final rankings. And that's AFTER you play your rivalry game and CCG (should you make it).

Why would you bother with a home and home with a blue blood program, risk an early season loss and a home game revenue when you might play 3 to 6 of them at the end of the season?

EDIT: So for TV purposes, and to not completely backload the CFB schedule, I could see them scheduling games like OSU-USC as the Big Ten opener along with other eye-catching matchups. Maybe take Michigan and OSU to LA for a double-header to start the conference slate and then they go band to AA and C-bus the following year. Things like that. There's a lot of cool things they can do with a 16 team super conference to make for compelling matchups throughout the year. But if there's only two non-con games, I don't see anyone being very compelled to make those games difficult.

[iam416]

I'm just going to go ahead and assume that Kevin Warren already has booked OSU-M for August 24 in Munich. With a Noon LOCAL time kickoff.

[Mike]

LOL

[Dr. Strangelove]

Simplest scheduling solution for now is a 9 game schedule with 3 permanent "rivals". You'd play the remaining 12 teams twice every four years. That's actually more frequent meetings than we currently have with the West (once every 3 years outside of the appointed "rival"). I know some have said there's no need for three permanent rivals but anything else makes it overly complicated and unbalanced.

[iam416]

Yeah, that's the best way to do it, so it will almost assuredly not be done.

[Cody_Russell]

I wish they went to 8 playoff teams instead. Try to keep a little more regular season meaning in college football.

12 is too far to the extreme IMO. Do we really need to give teams of the quality like Clemson, Utah, Tulane, and K-State an opportunity? Nah.

[iam416]

Yeah, I mean, we get blowouts with FOUR. All the time. With twelve it'll be ugly.

What it will turn into is an SEC invitational. I don't even really think that's debatable at this point. Ohio State, M, USC and Clemson (maybe) can maybe challenge a little. But, fundamentally, it'll be an SEC invitational. The SEC has lost three times to non-SEC teams in the CFP -- to Ohio State and Clemson twice. Badass teams. One other game was close (Georgia-Oklahoma), the rest of have been shellackings.

With 12, you're looking at, what, 6 auto bids and 6 at-larges. That's at least 2 more SEC teams. And they'll be pipe-hitting good most years.

That's where CFB has been and it's only move more in that direction with NIL.