Wow, Ohio State plays 1 ranked opponent all year, Arkansas plays 8 in a row..

[HoopsDawg]

MSU plays 7 I think. Talk about uneven schedules. Ohio State is legit, but there's just no way they lose 2 games with schedule so that means you can go head an pencil them in the final 4.

[msstate7]

Use a pen.

If Ohio state played in the sec, I'd use a pencil. They're better than any sec team and have the best coach in the country IMO

[DanDority]

Use a pen.

If Ohio state played in the sec, I'd use a pencil. They're better than any sec team and have the best coach in the country IMO

While this is true, you never know who is going to be ranked or not ranked later in the season.

[Really Clark?]

I doubt at the end of the year it will be only 1 ranked team they will have played. MI State and Wisconsin should both be ranked teams but of course that's counting playing Wisconsin in the title game. Then you may have MN or maybe MI sneaks in. Hey maybe Va Tech ends up ranked. But the next 6 games or so is pretty weak. Can't do much about conference. Of course No Ill has dropped off some but when thy scheduled they were a pretty solid team.

[nsvltndog]

Agreed. OSU or any Big 10 team's schedule is a joke, but that is a legit team that is absolutely one of the 4 best teams in the country.

One thing I also notice about the Big 10 is they tend to avoid big cross division match-ups during the regular season. The bottom half of that conference is likely not going to change/improve, but they should do a better job of making the top teams in each division play one another if they want to improve their national perception.

[Jack Lambert]

This is why Arkansas will not be in the final four.

[War Machine Dawg]

It's ridiculous that a so-called national power has such a soft schedule yearly. I wouldn't say about their OOC if the Big 10 was worth a damn, but it isn't. They play literally 2-3 games a season that have a chance to be even semi-competitive, and those aren't guaranteed. They may be legit, but it isn't right that they don't catch hell from the media about their schedule. Meanwhile, Saban is whining and forcing SEC teams to play ANOTHER tough game while playing an SEC schedule. I f'n hate that guy.

[TUSK]

Use a pen.

If Ohio state played in the sec, I'd use a pencil. They're better than any sec team and have the best coach in the country IMO

I used this: 1507

gonna let that last crack slide....

[FISHDAWG]

I used this: 1507

gonna let that last crack slide....

I'm with you on this one Tusk ... I mean after all it was Va. Tech

[archdog]

Their conference is not any more difficult than TCUs at this point in time.

[bgover4]

Va. Tech was in that game until their QB went down (by the way was that a major injury). After that they couldn't get anything going. Neither team looked all that impressive.

[TUSK]

Va. Tech was in that game until their QB went down (by the way was that a major injury). After that they couldn't get anything going. Neither team looked all that impressive.

their offense capitalized on some OSU mistakes, and losing their QB hurt, for sure, but I never got the feeling that VT had a chance in stopping OSU's offense...

I think OSU just had a bad 2nd quarter.

[Matty Dispatch]

Meanwhile, Saban is whining and forcing SEC teams to play ANOTHER tough game while playing an SEC schedule. I f'n hate that guy.

I wouldn't mind this. Games against Northwestern State, Troy and LA Tech are pretty boring and make up 43% of MSU's home games. We only get college football for 12 games a year, it sucks that half of them are yawners. It would be great if all the power conferences got together and played each other for a 12 game schedule - maybe throw in one homecoming game if need be. Then you'd have a much more interesting schedule like the NFL where every week it's interesting.

[Dawg61]

Ohio State and North Carolina for final two SEC teams.

[Really Clark?]

I wouldn't mind this. Games against Northwestern State, Troy and LA Tech are pretty boring and make up 43% of MSU's home games. We only get college football for 12 games a year, it sucks that half of them are yawners. It would be great if all the power conferences got together and played each other for a 12 game schedule - maybe throw in one homecoming game if need be. Then you'd have a much more interesting schedule like the NFL where every week it's interesting.

I'm probably against that on a few levels but one those reasons is these are not professional athletes. They are still suppose to be student athletes. Combine that with the guantlet we already go through, bigger injury risk and more preparation within the NCAA time constraints.

[Liverpooldawg]

That's why all this "oo look their non-conference schedule is a joke" crap should have never applied to the SEC. We don't have to play an outside team to have a tough schedule. Teams like OSU could play a tough team for every non conference game and still not see as many ranked teams as we do strictly in the SEC.

[ShotgunDawg]

I'm not sure why many, including the media, feel the need to tell us how good Ohio State is when complaining about their schedule. The point is not how good Ohio State is, the point is that playing for a national championship should be precluded by a physical & mental grind in which a team overcomes obstacles & rises to the top. The general integrity of the sport is tied to the fact the teams that end up in playoff DESERVE to be there. While Ohio State may be an awesome team, they have done nothing & will accomplish little to get to the playoff, & regardless of how good they, there is something completely unAmerican & wrong about that.

Is it Ohio State's fault? No, it's the Big 10's fault.

Could Ohio State have scheduled more than one decent non-conference opponent? Yes

The SEC West is a mental & physical grind that, no matter how good or talented you are, tests your mental & physical fortitude. It isn't right for teams to be rewarded for for avoiding that.

[Matty Dispatch]

I'm probably against that on a few levels but one those reasons is these are not professional athletes. They are still suppose to be student athletes. Combine that with the guantlet we already go through, bigger injury risk and more preparation within the NCAA time constraints.

Consider this -

(5) 14-team conferences, each with (2) 7-team divisions (that means Pac 12 adds two and Big 12 adds four....teams like Notre Dame, BYU, Boise, etc. would be candidates)

The first six weeks of the season each team in the "power five" plays some variation of the following: two games against lower division (acts as preseason and homecoming vs. what is now Sun Belt, CUSA or even FCS), and one game against a team from the other four power five leagues - all these games are schedules by the CFB Czar in charge of creating competitive matchups and ensuring everyone plays two home and two away in these games.

The final six games are against only teams in your division. Three home, three away. No cross-divisional games. Mix in a bye week somewhere for each team among these games.

After 12 regular season games, each conference takes it's two division winners and plays a championship game. Winner gets auto-bid to the 8-team playoff.

Three at-large selections are determined by a committee or computer or something to round out the playoff field.

The results of the power five games played during the first six weeks determine seeding 1-4 of conference champions, and committee determines seeding 5-8 (significant punishment for #5 conference champ because 1-4 seeds host first round). Semifinals and finals play out like current CFB playoff.

By creating such a uniform schedule the first half of the season you do two big things: 1. have more interesting match-ups and games 2. allow for teams to play legit competition early that gets them ready for conference play but doesn't penalize them so bad they can't recover because conference play is still so important.

[Liverpooldawg]

That's pretty good. That's the best scheme I think I have seen. The howls from the non-power 5 will be even bigger than they are now. Also I think some cross divisional match ups would have to occur. There are a few games that no one wants to see go away.

[Really Clark?]

Matty that's not bad but that is different than your original post of maybe just a weak homecoming game. The other 3 OOC games were to be Power 5 teams in your original post. Your schedule for the first 6 weeks is a little confusing. I think you are saying play 2 lower conferenced schools then 4 schools from other Power 5 conferences (2 home and 2 away) and then finish up with playing your division only 3 home and 3 away. So you are already easing up some from your original post. Which is fine with me. I don't like and think several schools will balk at losing their cross division rivals. Bama-Tenn, Auburn-Ga, and that's just a couple in our conference. What happens when Tx and A & M are tried to make play each other (which might happen eventually but right now would be an issue). For us now I don't see money being an issue but your are possibly adding a good bit of cost to a Wake Forest having to go cross country to play Washington. And I don't like a Czar choosing the match ups necessarily. Too much for one person really and makes them too powerful to determine outcomes. Like with anything else it would have to be tweaked. Interesting idea with elements that would be fine.

[smootness]

I doubt at the end of the year it will be only 1 ranked team they will have played. MI State and Wisconsin should both be ranked teams but of course that's counting playing Wisconsin in the title game. Then you may have MN or maybe MI sneaks in. Hey maybe Va Tech ends up ranked. But the next 6 games or so is pretty weak. Can't do much about conference. Of course No Ill has dropped off some but when thy scheduled they were a pretty solid team.

Michigan? They won't be ranked this year. Minnesota? Seriously doubt it.

Wisconsin may be ranked, but that will only be because they get to beat up on the same weak conference. That was a BYU team without their best player they lost to Saturday.

[Really Clark?]

Michigan? They won't be ranked this year. Minnesota? Seriously doubt it.

Wisconsin may be ranked, but that will only be because they get to beat up on the same weak conference. That was a BYU team without their best player they lost to Saturday.

Oh I was just looking at who OSU actually played and seeing who could possibly get ranked. I don't think MI does either but you know they will have clout and if they get to 8 wins before the OSU game they would be ranked. I think 7-5 is the best they will do. MN is a tic above. Most likely it's just two ranked teams MI State and Wis and three only if VA Tech makes a nice run. And it was NE that lost to BYU.

[War Machine Dawg]

That's why all this "oo look their non-conference schedule is a joke" crap should have never applied to the SEC. We don't have to play an outside team to have a tough schedule. Teams like OSU could play a tough team for every non conference game and still not see as many ranked teams as we do strictly in the SEC.

http://i.imgur.com/cuCPKY3.gif

[Matty Dispatch]

Matty that's not bad but that is different than your original post of maybe just a weak homecoming game. The other 3 OOC games were to be Power 5 teams in your original post. Your schedule for the first 6 weeks is a little confusing. I think you are saying play 2 lower conferenced schools then 4 schools from other Power 5 conferences (2 home and 2 away) and then finish up with playing your division only 3 home and 3 away. So you are already easing up some from your original post. Which is fine with me. I don't like and think several schools will balk at losing their cross division rivals. Bama-Tenn, Auburn-Ga, and that's just a couple in our conference. What happens when Tx and A & M are tried to make play each other (which might happen eventually but right now would be an issue). For us now I don't see money being an issue but your are possibly adding a good bit of cost to a Wake Forest having to go cross country to play Washington. And I don't like a Czar choosing the match ups necessarily. Too much for one person really and makes them too powerful to determine outcomes. Like with anything else it would have to be tweaked. Interesting idea with elements that would be fine.

I was compromising with you on the 2 soft games, and also a schedule of all filler didn't fit the uniformity of the plan I created.

But an example of a schedule for MSU would be like this:

1. vs. LA Tech

2. at Indiana

3. vs. Texas Tech

4. at Arizona

5. vs. Troy

6. vs. N.C. State

7. at Texas A&M

8. vs. LSU

9. Bye

10. at Auburn

11. vs. Alabama

12. at Arkansas

13. vs. Ole Miss

As for the cross-divisional games, particularly in the SEC, that can be solved pretty simply by making it more geographically correct. Trade Auburn and Alabama for Vanderbilt and Missouri. That way Mizzou and Arkansas will always play, Tennessee and Alabama will always play, Ole Miss and Vandy will always play, Auburn and Georgia (and Florida) will always play. MSU/UK, A&M/USC and UF/LSU are rivalries no one will miss - Les Miles has been complaining about having to play UF for years. So in this scenario, the schedule above would include Mizzou and Vandy in place of Auburn and Alabama.

[Really Clark?]

I appreciate you trying to soften the schedule some but now you have just opened up a can of worms on the other side of cross divisional play. Bama and Auburn going east eliminates them playing their traditional division rivals. Not to mention one of our closest opponents in Bama and how the east teams would veto trading those 4 teams. It's unequally balanced now but it's at least it's because of the cycle and stays in the traditional frame work. Look I know there is no easy answer but that is not a simple solution. Not to mention how do you address weaker conferences and try to maintain a SOS balance for the games against the other Power 5 schools. What do you do when we end up playing 8-9 ranked teams and OSU still only plays 3-4 tops? You can't just rank them by power and make only top rated teams play each other, they won't go for that and for the lower tiered schools it ends up with them having an even more difficult time succeeding. To me if you go to this type of play, 4 16 team conferences with 4-4 team divisions per conference with a semi and championship play to determine the 4 participants of the playoffs make more sense. At least until congress and/or school presidents step in because neither of these plans allow for a nontraditional power the opportunity to make it in. We are still dealing with an amateur sport not a professional league.