(09-22-2015 09:24 PM)Okielite Wrote:  

(09-22-2015 09:22 PM)HuskyU Wrote:  

(09-22-2015 09:17 PM)Okielite Wrote:  

(09-22-2015 09:12 PM)HuskyU Wrote:  Obviously, "other factors" are also very important...

Army:

2014: 4-8
2013: 3-9
2012: 2-10
2011: 3-9
2010 7-6

Army and Navy have obvious differences and reasons beyond performance why the B1G would count them as p-5 games.

Not sure there is a football statistic that would put Uconn above other g-5 programs. Certainly not performance, attendance, or TV ratings.

Where is Air Force then? The truth of the matter is that you don't know what other criteria is being used.

Colorado. Nowhere near the B1G footprint and not a team who historically played a lot of B1G schools. Not a strategic region for them.

Air Force is likely not on any B1G NC schedules, thus why they are not mentioned.

And neither do you.

next?

Fail. Navy is not on any Big Ten schedules either. And they only have 3 openings left through 2024!

(09-22-2015 09:28 PM)Okielite Wrote:  

(09-22-2015 09:20 PM)HuskyU Wrote:  

(09-22-2015 09:15 PM)Okielite Wrote:  

(09-22-2015 08:11 PM)HuskyU Wrote:  

(09-22-2015 08:06 PM)Okielite Wrote:  It's funny how the B1G allowing its bottom dwellers to count a AAC game as a p-5 game hs led the UCOnn fans to believe they are getting a B1G invite soon.

They just don't' want to inconvenience low level programs like Indiana by forcing them to change the schedule.

They are not getting ready to add Cinci, Army, Navy, and UConn.

Again making things up to fit your agenda. No UCONN fans here said a Big Ten invite was coming based on this announcement. What we did say is that we'll have an easier time getting Big Ten schools to schedule home and home series.

Not at all. Why are you so paranoid? Seriously?

I can provide a link but I suspect I'm not supposed to link a competitor. It's been said plenty of times. Here are some examples from you fanbase.

Huge news for us, from a perception standpoint.

If the B1G considers our football team to be P5-worthy, then I wouldn't think there's much standing between us and a B1G invite, right?

You've been right on a couple of really important things on this board (or, at least, the basketball board), so I allow myself to get a little more excited about what I'm perceiving, in a couple of posts, as optimism from you. Don't know if that's coming from anything you've heard, or you've just been generally bull-ish on UConn to the B1G, but I don't recall it, personally, before the last few posts I've been reading

If UConn cut a deal to play Ohio St at MetLife or Gillette, it would absolutely count. Hopefully, count as a league game, too.

Nothing but good news for UConn. The B1G must have some smart guys working in their offices that remember that UConn held its own as a BCS member and are simply caught in a funk from 1 bad hire and being stuck in AAC purgatory. Put UConn in a P5 conference and we'll be competitive again. No question about that.

but the general vibe I get is the B1G schools like us a lot.

Thats great to hear. Our FB program is finally coming around and we are already competitive today in the B1G. I wish we already moved on to the B1G already so we can start planning for stadium expansion etc. I am confident UCONN can carry New England and part of NYC for the B1G.


So entertaining.

Can you read? I said no UCONN fans on this board were saying anything about a Big Ten invite. Your quotes are all from the Boneyard, not here. If you have an issue with those posts then you should take your criticism there.

Can you read? I never said there were fans on this board saying that. You said that. Then I gave some examples of UConn fans saying this meant the B1G invite was coming from another board. LAffin.

Get it straight son. Or go whine at the B Y with the rest of em.

The only one whining is you with your Husky obsession (whether NIU or UCONN). Were you bitten as a child? Perhaps humped by a hotdog?

(09-22-2015 09:28 PM)HuskyU Wrote:  

(09-22-2015 09:24 PM)Okielite Wrote:  

(09-22-2015 09:22 PM)HuskyU Wrote:  

(09-22-2015 09:17 PM)Okielite Wrote:  

(09-22-2015 09:12 PM)HuskyU Wrote:  Obviously, "other factors" are also very important...

Army:

2014: 4-8
2013: 3-9
2012: 2-10
2011: 3-9
2010 7-6

Army and Navy have obvious differences and reasons beyond performance why the B1G would count them as p-5 games.

Not sure there is a football statistic that would put Uconn above other g-5 programs. Certainly not performance, attendance, or TV ratings.

Where is Air Force then? The truth of the matter is that you don't know what other criteria is being used.

Colorado. Nowhere near the B1G footprint and not a team who historically played a lot of B1G schools. Not a strategic region for them.

Air Force is likely not on any B1G NC schedules, thus why they are not mentioned.

And neither do you.

next?

Fail. Navy is not any any Big Ten schedules either. And they only have 3 openings left through 2024!

You must have missed the whole location/footprint thing. Read it slowly. Get a map. Can you see why they might want to play them now? Good.

Keep laughing as being wrong can be depressing.

Likely the only reason I can think of for UConn being included is location as well. Can you think of any legitimate reasons?

(09-22-2015 09:30 PM)HuskyU Wrote:  

(09-22-2015 09:28 PM)Okielite Wrote:  

(09-22-2015 09:20 PM)HuskyU Wrote:  

(09-22-2015 09:15 PM)Okielite Wrote:  

(09-22-2015 08:11 PM)HuskyU Wrote:  Again making things up to fit your agenda. No UCONN fans here said a Big Ten invite was coming based on this announcement. What we did say is that we'll have an easier time getting Big Ten schools to schedule home and home series.

Not at all. Why are you so paranoid? Seriously?

I can provide a link but I suspect I'm not supposed to link a competitor. It's been said plenty of times. Here are some examples from you fanbase.

Huge news for us, from a perception standpoint.

If the B1G considers our football team to be P5-worthy, then I wouldn't think there's much standing between us and a B1G invite, right?

You've been right on a couple of really important things on this board (or, at least, the basketball board), so I allow myself to get a little more excited about what I'm perceiving, in a couple of posts, as optimism from you. Don't know if that's coming from anything you've heard, or you've just been generally bull-ish on UConn to the B1G, but I don't recall it, personally, before the last few posts I've been reading

If UConn cut a deal to play Ohio St at MetLife or Gillette, it would absolutely count. Hopefully, count as a league game, too.

Nothing but good news for UConn. The B1G must have some smart guys working in their offices that remember that UConn held its own as a BCS member and are simply caught in a funk from 1 bad hire and being stuck in AAC purgatory. Put UConn in a P5 conference and we'll be competitive again. No question about that.

but the general vibe I get is the B1G schools like us a lot.

Thats great to hear. Our FB program is finally coming around and we are already competitive today in the B1G. I wish we already moved on to the B1G already so we can start planning for stadium expansion etc. I am confident UCONN can carry New England and part of NYC for the B1G.


So entertaining.

Can you read? I said no UCONN fans on this board were saying anything about a Big Ten invite. Your quotes are all from the Boneyard, not here. If you have an issue with those posts then you should take your criticism there.

Can you read? I never said there were fans on this board saying that. You said that. Then I gave some examples of UConn fans saying this meant the B1G invite was coming from another board. LAffin.

Get it straight son. Or go whine at the B Y with the rest of em.

The only one whining is you with your Husky obsession (whether NIU or UCONN). Were you bitten as a child? Perhaps humped by a hotdog?

So because someone says something true about your school you get mad and chance the subject to personal talk. So predictable. So sensitive. So paranid. So funny.

CAn you think of any legitimate reasons why UConn would be considered a p-5 level opponent? Any football rankings? Attendance? TV ratings? PErformance? Definitely none of those.

I'm thinking location. Close to B1G fan bases. That seems to be the common denominator that I see.

What do you see?

USF was the school that got denied "P5." I'm sure IL's schedule will be ok'd from the league office since it may not be possible to reschedule a new game two years from now, but 2019 on Wisconsin's schedule may not work if there is a P5 team out there they can get scheduled.

(09-22-2015 10:15 PM)Nebraskafan Wrote:  USF was the school that got denied "P5." I'm sure IL's schedule will be ok'd from the league office since it may not be possible to reschedule a new game two years from now, but 2019 on Wisconsin's schedule may not work if there is a P5 team out there they can get scheduled.

That will be a UConn conference game by then.

It is however another example of a out of footprint school being denied.

(09-22-2015 10:19 PM)Okielite Wrote:  

(09-22-2015 10:15 PM)Nebraskafan Wrote:  USF was the school that got denied "P5." I'm sure IL's schedule will be ok'd from the league office since it may not be possible to reschedule a new game two years from now, but 2019 on Wisconsin's schedule may not work if there is a P5 team out there they can get scheduled.

That will be a UConn conference game by then.

It is however another example of a out of footprint school being denied.

You may end up having to explain to people the whole footprint thing regarding this topic so they can grasp it

Anyways, I wished there were more games scheduled against Miami. Great place to play a game from a recruiting exposure standpoint.

(09-22-2015 10:27 PM)Nebraskafan Wrote:  

(09-22-2015 10:19 PM)Okielite Wrote:  

(09-22-2015 10:15 PM)Nebraskafan Wrote:  USF was the school that got denied "P5." I'm sure IL's schedule will be ok'd from the league office since it may not be possible to reschedule a new game two years from now, but 2019 on Wisconsin's schedule may not work if there is a P5 team out there they can get scheduled.

That will be a UConn conference game by then.

It is however another example of a out of footprint school being denied.

You may end up having to explain to people the whole footprint thing regarding this topic so they can grasp it

Anyways, I wished there were more games scheduled against Miami. Great place to play a game from a recruiting exposure standpoint.

Seem like there would be a list of strategic g-5 schools that a conference might have based on individual needs like alumni locations , TV markets, recruiting, or time zones. Allowing those schools to count at P-5 games gets you the benefit of playing those schools regularly without having to add them to the conference.

The PAC conference can schedule BYU or Boise for example and still get the benefit without the baggage. I think that is likely what we are seeing here.

(09-22-2015 09:24 PM)Okielite Wrote:  

(09-22-2015 09:22 PM)HuskyU Wrote:  

(09-22-2015 09:17 PM)Okielite Wrote:  

(09-22-2015 09:12 PM)HuskyU Wrote:  Obviously, "other factors" are also very important...

Army:

2014: 4-8
2013: 3-9
2012: 2-10
2011: 3-9
2010 7-6

Army and Navy have obvious differences and reasons beyond performance why the B1G would count them as p-5 games.

Not sure there is a football statistic that would put Uconn above other g-5 programs. Certainly not performance, attendance, or TV ratings.

Where is Air Force then? The truth of the matter is that you don't know what other criteria is being used.

Colorado. Nowhere near the B1G footprint and not a team who historically played a lot of B1G schools. Not a strategic region for them.

Air Force is likely not on any B1G NC schedules, thus why they are not mentioned.

And neither do you.

next?

To be far. Colorado, Colorado State and Air Force are close schools for Nebraska on the west. I think Big 10 will consider Colorado State and Air Force as P5 like schools. The problem with this is that I like to watch Northern Illinois Vs Ohio State on tv, not Ohio State Vs Kansas. Some P5 schools don't deserve to be recognize as P5 the way they are playing, and teams like Boise State and Northern Illinois play like P5 schools.

(09-22-2015 09:12 PM)HuskyU Wrote:  Obviously, "other factors" are also very important...

It depends on whether the "RPI + Other Factors" standard that Rudner announced was in fact used to make the decision about Army, UConn, and Cincy or whether the decision to allow them to count as P5 was made informally, but then the B1G realized that the issue could arise again and they need a more formal standard.

I suspect the latter. Rudner mentions RPI first, so this implies it matters greatly. It is hard to imagine that schools with RPIs as low as UConn or Army could have made it as P5 if this standard was in effect no matter what 'other factors' were in play. RPIs that bad would be a killer.

Thus, my guess is that the decision related to Army and Navy were political (and if Air Force comes up, they will be approved as well), and that the decisions related to Cincy and UConn were made off-the-cuff, with the motivation being to help Indiana out of a scheduling jam.

In other words, the "other factors" that got Cincy and UConn in was just Indiana's need to solve a scheduling problem, not something that acknowledges something special about Cincy or UConn. Just my guess, could be wrong of course.

The "RPI + Other Factors" standard will be used going forward.

(09-22-2015 11:44 PM)DavidSt Wrote:  

(09-22-2015 09:24 PM)Okielite Wrote:  

(09-22-2015 09:22 PM)HuskyU Wrote:  

(09-22-2015 09:17 PM)Okielite Wrote:  

(09-22-2015 09:12 PM)HuskyU Wrote:  Obviously, "other factors" are also very important...

Army:

2014: 4-8
2013: 3-9
2012: 2-10
2011: 3-9
2010 7-6

Army and Navy have obvious differences and reasons beyond performance why the B1G would count them as p-5 games.

Not sure there is a football statistic that would put Uconn above other g-5 programs. Certainly not performance, attendance, or TV ratings.

Where is Air Force then? The truth of the matter is that you don't know what other criteria is being used.

Colorado. Nowhere near the B1G footprint and not a team who historically played a lot of B1G schools. Not a strategic region for them.

Air Force is likely not on any B1G NC schedules, thus why they are not mentioned.

And neither do you.

next?

To be far. Colorado, Colorado State and Air Force are close schools for Nebraska on the west. I think Big 10 will consider Colorado State and Air Force as P5 like schools. The problem with this is that I like to watch Northern Illinois Vs Ohio State on tv, not Ohio State Vs Kansas. Some P5 schools don't deserve to be recognize as P5 the way they are playing, and teams like Boise State and Northern Illinois play like P5 schools.

You might want to check a map. Yes Colorado touches Nebraska but Lincoln is on the opposite side of the state. You are talking a 10-12 hour drive. That is not close IMO.

Army is P5, I will take it.

I do admit it is funny to see some G5 fans upset about it. History does matter.

(09-22-2015 10:53 AM)adcorbett Wrote:  I would imagine the ACC might do the same thing, as there are quite a few future games scheduled with Cincy, UConn, USF, and UCF.

With 4 OOC games, ACC schools not playing 2 P5 schools OOC should be playing a top G5 program like UConn, Cincy, Boise, etc. on top of meeting their P5 commitment.

(09-22-2015 10:11 AM)FrancisDrake Wrote:  I don't believe this is a permanent designation though. Indiana IIRC petitioned for a waiver for UC and UConn. However, and its not just the B1G, no one takes your "power" credo seriously when you include Army.

Me thinks the B1G is being nice to Army (to encourage B1G schools to schedule them if Army wants) but that any school that ever tried to rely on this to meet their obligation would get a private scolding.

(09-23-2015 07:49 AM)Okielite Wrote:  

(09-22-2015 11:44 PM)DavidSt Wrote:  

(09-22-2015 09:24 PM)Okielite Wrote:  

(09-22-2015 09:22 PM)HuskyU Wrote:  

(09-22-2015 09:17 PM)Okielite Wrote:  Army and Navy have obvious differences and reasons beyond performance why the B1G would count them as p-5 games.

Not sure there is a football statistic that would put Uconn above other g-5 programs. Certainly not performance, attendance, or TV ratings.

Where is Air Force then? The truth of the matter is that you don't know what other criteria is being used.

Colorado. Nowhere near the B1G footprint and not a team who historically played a lot of B1G schools. Not a strategic region for them.

Air Force is likely not on any B1G NC schedules, thus why they are not mentioned.

And neither do you.

next?

To be far. Colorado, Colorado State and Air Force are close schools for Nebraska on the west. I think Big 10 will consider Colorado State and Air Force as P5 like schools. The problem with this is that I like to watch Northern Illinois Vs Ohio State on tv, not Ohio State Vs Kansas. Some P5 schools don't deserve to be recognize as P5 the way they are playing, and teams like Boise State and Northern Illinois play like P5 schools.

You might want to check a map. Yes Colorado touches Nebraska but Lincoln is on the opposite side of the state. You are talking a 10-12 hour drive. That is not close IMO.

UConn is playing Indiana and Illinois. Quick walk down the street, right?

When UConn is mentioned Okielite is never far behind, but now I'm getting the feeling he stalks several teams.

And to be fair I agree with the games were already scheduled so they count theory. Why force these teams to reschedule to accommodate a rule that wasn't in place?

(09-23-2015 09:19 AM)orangefan Wrote:  Me thinks the B1G is being nice to Army (to encourage B1G schools to schedule them if Army wants) but that any school that ever tried to rely on this to meet their obligation would get a private scolding.

Army has an exception primarily because they are an independent, and each conference reviewed each (permanent) independent for inclusion (ND, BYU, Army, and at the time Navy), whereas with the exception of the B1G, no one else (as of now) has given exceptions to schools in a G5 conference.

Here's a good take on this:

The Big Ten's scheduling guidelines just got even dumber. I have a better idea.

Quote:I have a suggestion that could make the Big Ten a leader in the college football community, and could improve schedules not just for their member schools, but for everybody.

Instead of trying to build some complicated actuary table to figure out who is a "good" team or who isn't, just say this:

Big Ten schools will honor all previously negotiated contracts, but moving forward, Big Ten schools will not schedule any football game more than three years in the future.

The only reason schools do this is because everybody else does it, but Big Ten brands are valuable enough that if they stick to their guns, they can make others wait as well, and work to stop this ridiculous practice of scheduling games 8, 9 or more years ahead.

(09-23-2015 10:28 AM)Wedge Wrote:  Here's a good take on this:

The Big Ten's scheduling guidelines just got even dumber. I have a better idea.

Quote:I have a suggestion that could make the Big Ten a leader in the college football community, and could improve schedules not just for their member schools, but for everybody.

Instead of trying to build some complicated actuary table to figure out who is a "good" team or who isn't, just say this:

Big Ten schools will honor all previously negotiated contracts, but moving forward, Big Ten schools will not schedule any football game more than three years in the future.

The only reason schools do this is because everybody else does it, but Big Ten brands are valuable enough that if they stick to their guns, they can make others wait as well, and work to stop this ridiculous practice of scheduling games 8, 9 or more years ahead.

I don't see the problem with long range scheduling and if they don't do it, the probability of getting the P5 conference games they want will be slim.

(09-23-2015 10:31 AM)vandiver49 Wrote:  

(09-23-2015 10:28 AM)Wedge Wrote:  Here's a good take on this:

The Big Ten's scheduling guidelines just got even dumber. I have a better idea.

Quote:I have a suggestion that could make the Big Ten a leader in the college football community, and could improve schedules not just for their member schools, but for everybody.

Instead of trying to build some complicated actuary table to figure out who is a "good" team or who isn't, just say this:

Big Ten schools will honor all previously negotiated contracts, but moving forward, Big Ten schools will not schedule any football game more than three years in the future.

The only reason schools do this is because everybody else does it, but Big Ten brands are valuable enough that if they stick to their guns, they can make others wait as well, and work to stop this ridiculous practice of scheduling games 8, 9 or more years ahead.

I don't see the problem with long range scheduling and if they don't do it, the probability of getting the P5 conference games they want will be slim.

His argument boils down to:

1) If the Big Ten does this, others will follow.

2) When you schedule 10 years in advance, you have no idea whether the game will be a good matchup at the time it's played, or whether you'll have a respectable strength of schedule that year. All you know is whether the team is "P5" or "G5".

For example, Ohio St has a 2023-24 series with Boston College; Indiana has a 2021-22 series with Cincinnati. We don't know, sitting here today, whether BC or Cincinnati will have a better football team, and thus be the "stronger" opponent for a Big Ten team, 7 or 9 years from now. One team could have made a great coaching hire and be in the middle of a long run of 10-win seasons; the other could be in a big hole after lots of recruiting misses and two bad coaching tenures in a row. Or both or neither. The "guessing" is much more likely to be on the mark if you schedule 3 years out instead of 9.

(09-23-2015 10:43 AM)Wedge Wrote:  2) When you schedule 10 years in advance, you have no idea whether the game will be a good matchup at the time it's played, or whether you'll have a respectable strength of schedule that year. All you know is whether the team is "P5" or "G5".

This is solid reasoning. But one reason it comes into play is rivalry games scheduled many years out do actual help TV contracts, because they are steady and can be counted on. Once that is out of the way, teams start building around those games. That is why they had the now ill-fated scheduling agreement with the PAC 12, because it would have been guaranteed games they can sell. Similar to why the ACC got a bump when ND signed their agreement with the ACC, because those were games that could be counted on (as well as the four schools with SEC rivalry games). The PAC 12 knows it gets to sell one ND home game per year as well. Also with teams scheduling more neutral site games, again they feel the need to protect themselves before the games dry up.

Now I don't think the Big Ten has any of those (OOC) now, with ND no longer regularly playing Michigan, Mich St, or Purdue, so they don't necessarily have that as a reason to schedule long term. But all it takes is a few teams outside of the Big Ten to continue scheduling like this, and B1G teams will fill they need to , so that the games they want don't get all booked up.

I think it would take a concerted effort from all conferences to not schedule more than three years out to make it work. And even that would be hard, as the first time someone schedules a four year series....