12th-game legislation or the 12th of never
That's likely when fans will see a Pitt-USC or Penn State-Oklahoma matchup fill the newly minted 12th spot on NCAA Division I football schedules.
Wednesday, May 11, 2005

By Ray Fittipaldo, Pittsburgh Post-Gazette

When it comes to cashing in on the business of college football, there's no place like home.

So when Division I-A university presidents conceded that financial considerations were one of the biggest reasons for passing the 12th-game legislation last month, the response from athletic directors whose job is to schedule games was predictable.

As they scurry to find that extra opponent for the 2006 season -- the first year 12 games are allowed -- schedule makers for Pitt, Penn State and West Virginia said that added game will be used to buy a "guarantee game" so they can have seven home games every season. They said playing host to seven home games is essential to running a solvent athletic department.

For those who were hoping the 12th game might serve as a way to create some blockbuster interconference matchups (say, for example, Pitt vs. Southern California or Penn State vs. Oklahoma), don't hold your breath. In order for that to happen, teams would have to play seven home games every other season, and that trade-off isn't enough for the bottom-line university administrators.

"That seventh home game, we need to take advantage of that financially," said Mike Parsons, the deputy athletic director at West Virginia who is in charge of scheduling. "Does that guarantee we'll have seven home games every season? No, not 100 percent of the time, but it better be close to it."

Pitt athletic director Jeff Long and Penn State athletic director Tim Curley share the same view. None of the three schools are ready to announce which team will serve as the 12th game in 2006 -- that should come over the summer or early next fall -- but expect a steady diet of Mid-American Conference schools and the like to parade through Heinz Field, Beaver Stadium and Mountaineer Field.

Curley said Penn State will have seven home games every season and occasionally an eighth. That means there's only room for one home-and-home series each year. Curley said playing opponents that are willing to do two-for-ones or three-for-ones are possibilities in the future. Curley also is studying whether neutral site games with marquee opponents would be beneficial to Penn State.

"The problem with neutral site games is the finances," Curley said. "You can make more money with a home game."

Thus, the scramble is on to find smaller Division I-A or I-AA schools willing to go on the road for the so-called guarantee, a sum of money home teams dole out to visiting opponents for the trouble of traveling and usually getting stomped on the field.

If most Bowl Championship Series conference schools have the same philosophy, there aren't going to be enough guarantee opponents for the games. That means the price of guarantees are going to go up.

Curley said Penn State pays anywhere from $150,000 to $600,000 for guarantee games now and expects schools to try to raise those prices.

"At some point a decision has to be made how much you're going to pay for a guarantee," Curley said.

Those that are not willing to pay a higher guarantee or simply cannot find a I-A opponent will have to settle for a I-AA opponent. The NCAA also passed legislation that allows I-AA opponents to count toward bowl qualification standards every season. In the past, victories against I-AA teams could count toward bowl qualification once every three years.

From a public relations perspective, all schools would like to play I-A foes, but in some years there might not be a choice.

"We would prefer to play I-A schools," Long said. "In difficult years of scheduling, when we need to, we'll be able to do [I-AA games]."

Not all Division I-A schools are having to deal with the headaches that go along with scheduling an extra game every season. The Pac-10, for example, has decided to play a full round-robin league schedule. Each team will play nine conference games instead of eight, which had been the case with an 11-game schedule.

The Big Ten will look at possibly playing a round-robin 10-game conference schedule. If that happened, each Big Ten school would have only two non-conference games every year because there are 11 teams in the Big Ten.

"We'll have that discussion this spring," Big Ten commissioner Jim Delany said. "In the past, Illinois and Michigan have tended to want to play more conference games. The idea is that it would provide us with a true champion. And that's a good statement. From a television perspective, we would have more games on, which would be better. Even from an attendance perspective, our teams would draw better.

"But when it comes to achieving a winning record and being bowl-eligible, it would be more difficult. If I had to predict, I would say we would have a strong majority favor the status quo. But we'll see."

The eight-team Big East will have a seven-game league schedule and five non-conference games to schedule every year. There are no immediate plans to add another school

Quote:The Big Ten will look at possibly playing a round-robin 10-game conference schedule. If that happened, each Big Ten school would have only two non-conference games every year because there are 11 teams in the Big Ten.

Wow....10 conference games??? I wouldn't have been surprised by 9, but it's tough for me to believe that they would go to 10. I guess it gives you 5 home games every year, but you lose the OOC slot.

The schools that put 60k plus in the stands shouldn't have a problem scheduling extra home games. The scheduling problem is going to occur for the schools that don't have high attendance. The only way those school are going to get extra home games is to schedule 1aa schools or pay through the nose to get 1a schools. It's going to suck when a school loses out on a BCS bowl or National Championship game because they scheduled a weak program in order to get that extra home game.

Biggest benefit for most "large/BCS" Schools can be summarized in just ONE sentence from the article:

"The NCAA also passed legislation that allows I-AA opponents to count toward bowl qualification standards every season."

[B]

That says it all.

Unlike the past where Div I-A Teams could only count a Div I-AA win once every 4 years, now...they can play the extra 12th game as a HOME non-conf game with a "cheap" Div I-AA team EVERY SINGLE YEAR vs signing a 2-for-1 deal with a good non-BCS School...or even a non-conf HOME game with a good non-BCS School that they might lose to and lose $$$$$$$$ from a lower Bowl slot.

Div I-AA and Top BCS Programs made out like a BANDIT in this deal!

Losers are lower BCS Programs and most non-BCS Programs.

KL

If I'm a Big 10 fan, I like the idea of a 10 game conference schedule. You get to play everyone in the conference every year and have a true conference champion. You can still schedule a cupcake every year and then play a home and home with another school. That way, you have 6 home games one year and 7 the next.

3601 Wrote:If I'm a Big 10 fan, I like the idea of a 10 game conference schedule. You get to play everyone in the conference every year and have a true conference champion. You can still schedule a cupcake every year and then play a home and home with another school. That way, you have 6 home games one year and 7 the next.

Notre Dame play a few of Big Ten every year.