(06-22-2017 07:23 AM)goofus Wrote:  if a conference goes to 18, they could go with rotating divisions. Either by setting up 4 pods, or doing random divisions each year.

Or you go with 10 conf games, which is better anyway. 5/5, then two guarantee home games vs G5 every year.

Save non-conf P5 games for the post-season, as it should be!

(06-20-2017 06:06 PM)YNot Wrote:  I wonder if you could have the semi-finals the first weekend in December; then the Army-Navy on the second weekend; then the CCGs the following Friday and Saturday (December 15-20 time frame). Most years, that would give the champions 2+ weeks before the CFP.

Is that enough time? Is that too close to Christmas?

The last time I checked these guys are supposed to be Student/Athletes - that time frame falls in the middle of 1 semester finals.....

(06-22-2017 09:49 AM)Eldonabe Wrote:  

(06-20-2017 06:06 PM)YNot Wrote:  I wonder if you could have the semi-finals the first weekend in December; then the Army-Navy on the second weekend; then the CCGs the following Friday and Saturday (December 15-20 time frame). Most years, that would give the champions 2+ weeks before the CFP.

Is that enough time? Is that too close to Christmas?

The last time I checked these guys are supposed to be Student/Athletes - that time frame falls in the middle of 1 semester finals.....

That's why they don't play the second weekend in December. Reserve that for the Army-Navy game.

The current FBS schedule has 14 games scheduled for December 1-2 and 8 bowl games between December 16-20, 2017.

EDIT: And there are 14 bowl games scheduled between December 16-24, 2017.

That's 44 to 56 FBS teams playing during the suggested time frame - like 35-45% of FBS schools - under the CURRENT schedule.

(06-22-2017 07:38 AM)MplsBison Wrote:  

(06-22-2017 07:23 AM)goofus Wrote:  if a conference goes to 18, they could go with rotating divisions. Either by setting up 4 pods, or doing random divisions each year.

Or you go with 10 conf games, which is better anyway. 5/5, then two guarantee home games vs G5 every year.

Save non-conf P5 games for the post-season, as it should be!

"As it should be"????

Is this written on any stone tablets brought down from Mt. Sinai??

Saving non-conference P5 games for the postseason makes no sense. There are already too few P5-P5 regular season OOC games as it is, especially considering that it is a beauty pageant that selects the participants for the playoff and highest exhibition bowl games.

No surprise fans of the two major independent football teams look on in horror at the idea of no P5 non-conf games during the regular season ....

Yes, Terry, as it should be!

It makes a lot of sense, YNot.

How does it make sense to eliminate fantastic regular season football games like:

- Clemson-Auburn
- Florida St.-Alabama
- Michigan-Florida
- Ohio St.-Oklahoma
- Georgia-Notre Dame
- Georgia Tech-Tennessee
- Pitt-Oklahoma St.
- Oregon-Nebraska
- Virginia Tech-WVU
- USC-Texas
- Texas A&M-UCLA
- Stanford-Notre Dame
- Arkansas-TCU
- Arizona St-Texas Tech

let alone:
Florida-Florida St.
Georgia-Georgia Tech
Clemson-South Carolina
Louisville-Kentucky
Pitt-Penn St.
Iowa-Iowa St.
BYU-Utah
etc.

??

Because they don't control the TV rights to the away games. When you replace that with a conf game, you control TV rights for both year's games.

All those games can be played as bowl games, where they belong.

Wow.

That means you couldn't think of a counter-argument.

But if you do, feel free to share it.

(if BYU was in the Big 12, you wouldn't care)

The counter-argument is that the conferences do control half of the TV rights and the gate revenue and donations related to these marquee OOC games that will get MUCH BETTER ratings, exposure, revenue, and attendance than the possible replacement in-conference games. Plus, there are substantial indirect benefits to play a high profile game on the road or at a neutral venue - such as exposure, strength of schedule improvement, recruiting, and so forth.

Clemson and the ACC will easily take the 2-game series with Auburn, even if it means that the first game is out of the conference's control. Auburn's visit to Death Valley in 2017 is one of the prime games for season ticket holders and will be on ESPN prime time. An extra game against Duke or Pitt is not going to come anywhere close to the excitement, exposure, hype, and REVENUE that will come form the 2017 Auburn-Clemson game.

The Tennessee-Virginia Tech game last year had like 150K attendance and fantastic ratings.

It is IMPOSSIBLE for the ACC to replicate the 2017 Alabama and Florida St. game in Atlanta. Not. Possible. This is a prime time ABC broadcast that will likely be in the top-5 ratings for the season. An extra FSU game against Duke or Pitt will be lucky to get on ESPN2.

The majority of value in the conference TV packages comes from high-profile marquee matchups - not from a few extra FSU v. Duke or Clemson v. Pittsburgh matchups.

Thanks for the thoughtful post. I don't think any of your points are plainly "wrong", per se. I just don't agree that they're slam dunks, like you seem to think they are.

One area you left out is that coaches don't want these games. Too risky. Why risk so much, so early in the season? Sure, selfishly, fans might want them. But fans should only get to demand so much ...


Also don't think Alabama FSU will end up being top 5. Too many great conference games during a regular season. You might want to check out the thread tracking last year's top TV games of the regular season. Stever did a great job reporting the numbers, and I tried to help by listing the likely candidate games each week.

We need the regular season P5 v P5 games to differentiate between the power conferences for the CFP. I'm sure though that the B1G doesn't want this after they almost got multiple teams in last season before we found out of how overhyped they were.

We don't "need" them, in any sense. The CFP has always used subjectivity and "guessing", even when we do have non-conf P5vP5 games.

And when you think about it, really what good is a result from weeks 1, 2, 3, in a 14 week regular season? Within the season, quite a lot can change.

Which coaches have said they do not want OOC P5 games? Minnesota? (and I have no idea who your coach is).

Reality is the opposite - most P5 conferences have instituted a FORMAL P5 OOC scheduling requirement.

Regarding Florida St.-Alabama as a highly-rated game - USC-Alabama in primetime ABC on the opening saturday had almost 8M viewers.

Ohio St.-Michigan = 16M viewers
Alabama-LSU = 10.3M
Louisville-Clemson = 9.2M
Ohio St.-Wisconsin = 8.9M
Alabama-A&M = 8.4M
Alabama-Auburn = 8.2M
Alabama-Ole Miss = 8.1M
Alabama-USC = 7.9M

Definitely expect Alabama-Florida St. to be in that 8-9M range, at least, and absolutely a contender for the top-5.

(06-23-2017 10:50 AM)YNot Wrote:  Reality is the opposite - most P5 conferences have instituted a FORMAL P5 OOC scheduling requirement.

That doesn't mean it's the right thing to do.

Are you sure the Big Ten requires a P5 to be scheduled non-conf? I think the actual mandate is simply no more FCS teams, which is fine.

"Right thing to do" is your opinion - it is not a real-world argument. You'll need to cite an actual coach or administrator or commissioner who has said anything similar to your opinion.

http://collegefootballtalk.nbcsports.com...-fcs-foes/

Starting in 2016, Big Ten schools must schedule one game against another power conference opponent. The Big Ten counts BYU, Army, Notre Dame, Cincinnati, and UConn towards the schedule requirement. Minnesota was granted an exception to count Fresno St. as a power team for scheduling purposes.

(06-23-2017 12:01 PM)YNot Wrote:  You'll need to cite an actual coach or administrator or commissioner who has said anything similar to your opinion.

Just because they're afraid to be put on the record with a public comment, doesn't mean they don't feel that way.

(06-23-2017 12:01 PM)YNot Wrote:  http://collegefootballtalk.nbcsports.com...-fcs-foes/

Starting in 2016, Big Ten schoola must schedule one game against another power conference opponent. The Big Ten counts BYU, Army, Notre Dame, Cincinnati, and UConn towards the schedule requirement. Minnesota was granted an exception to count Fresno St. as a power team for scheduling purposes.

That doesn't mean it's what should be done.


Obviously it's my opinion -- that's the point of internet message boards.

My opinion is that there are TOO FEW P5 v. P5 OOC games. There are already many P5 v. P5 bowl games each year - that system is already in place. To remove the OOC regular season games down grades the quality, excitement, and intrigue of college football played during the regular season.

If you are concerned about revenues and control, the conferences are likely to make LESS money if you remove the regular season OOC games. As I outline in post #51 above, most replacement conference games would draw weaker ratings, attendance, and money than the marquee OOC matchups.

The reason there should be *MORE* OOC games is that the rankings and CFP selection are a beauty contest. It is more difficult to rank teams against each other if they do not play enough games against common opponents - or each other. So, we end up focusing on just a handful of games to try to compare conferences and teams - which ultimately results in relying upon the "eye test" to make ranking and selection determinations.

If there were more games against each other, you wouldn't have to use mental gymnastics and obscure statistical analysis to rank the top-25 and select the CFP and NY6 participants. The candidates are more likely to have more complete resumes, and even common opponents, from which you can make more certain comparison conclusions - or, heaven forbid - the candidates may have actually played each other.