Scheduling for the CFP.

[Gator]

I want to discuss scheduling in a serious manner. That is, I don’t want to get bogged down with “should teams be allowed to play FCS teams?”. There are 134 FBS teams for 2024. The probability of say a #10 team beating FBS team 120-134 is ~99%. . The probability of a #10 team beating FCS team is ~99.99%. The probability of a #10 team beating a high school team is ~99.9999%. For the top 10 team that’s less than 1% difference between the odds of beating an FBS team 120-134 and a high school team. Conversely, the probability of the #10 team beating the #1 team is MUCH lower than the probability of the #10 team beating the #11 team (a difference of only 10 ranking positions). The “strength of schedule” is at the top of the schedule and NOT at the bottom.

What factors do you think the CFP committee should stress/look-at in ranking teams? How should “uneven” scheduling between candidates be handled? Auto-bids in a 12 team field, really??

 

[Gator]

I'll start things off by replying to my own post!
The CFP committee has stated that SOS will be a "consideration". To my knowledge, they haven't expanded on that statement. How much will it be considered? What do they think constitutes "SOS"? Are they going to "reward" teams with a "good SOS" and punish teams that don't have a "good SOS"?

The committee should be very careful of sending the wrong message about scheduling. Suppose the Big Ten opts for Michigan, Ohio State, Penn State, Oregon, USC, and Washington to stop playing each other. These teams can only play games against the remaining 12 conference teams. The SEC decides that Alabama, Georgia, LSU, Oklahoma, Tennessee, and Texas won’t play each other for the forseeable future but can only schedule the other 10 conference teams. Combine these with patsy OOC scheduling and there would be high probability that this “arrangement” would result in 10-12 undefeated teams from just these two “power conferences”. Why shouldn’t they do this (after all there are MILLIONS of $ at stake here)? All of the 12-0 SEC and Big Ten teams would still have greater “SOS’s” than almost ANY non-P4 team.

 

[belcherboy]

Suppose the Big Ten opts for Michigan, Ohio State, Penn State, Oregon, USC, and Washington to stop playing each other. These teams can only play games against the remaining 12 conference teams. The SEC decides that Alabama, Georgia, LSU, Oklahoma, Tennessee, and Texas won’t play each other for the forseeable future but can only schedule the other 10 conference teams.

I’m sorry, I just can’t take this seriously. This is an impossibility. They would kill their tv contracts. I would even venture to say that the tv contracts already mandate that many of these teams will have to play each other at least semi regularly. The Ohio and Michigan rivalry isn’t going to end. Current and future tv contracts are built on games between the above games.

This is almost the equivalent of asking “What if Patrick Mahomes played 17 home games against the Carolina Panthers next year?”

 

[Gator]

I’m sorry, I just can’t take this seriously. This is an impossibility. They would kill their tv contracts. I would even venture to say that the tv contracts already mandate that many of these teams will have to play each other at least semi regularly. The Ohio and Michigan rivalry isn’t going to end. Current and future tv contracts are built on games between the above games.

This is almost the equivalent of asking “What if Patrick Mahomes played 17 home games against the Carolina Panthers next year?”

Where do you find that "the tv contracts already mandate that many of these teams will have to play each other at least semi regularly." The contracts might say that 8 conference games are played by each team and perhaps the times but NOT who plays who! Just like in the NFL, it is the league that determines the schedule. I'm waiting for UM and OSU to play on the last weekend of the season and then play again the next week in the CCG for several years in a row. Then we'll see how things change!

 

[belcherboy]

Where do you find that "the tv contracts already mandate that many of these teams will have to play each other at least semi regularly." The contracts might say that 8 conference games are played by each team and perhaps the times but NOT who plays who! Just like in the NFL, it is the league that determines the schedule. I'm waiting for UM and OSU to play on the last weekend of the season and then play again the next week in the CCG for several years in a row. Then we'll see how things change!

There already is a lot of speculation that they are moving the Ohio vs Michigan game to mid season, but that really doesn't matter.

Listen, if you believe that the Big Ten tv contract didn't have a stipulation that Michigan would play Ohio every season, go for it. That game has been a cash cow for everyone. There is no way they kill that game.

There is also no way that "the Big Ten opts for Michigan, Ohio State, Penn State, Oregon, USC, and Washington to stop playing each other." Future tv contracts are dictated on ratings, and once again, the current contract most certainly has some stipulations to keep the conference from not giving the networks a bunch of great regular season matchups. It makes absolutely NO financial sense that a conference would kill their best matchups during the regular season.

Also, notice what the NFL does with their scheduling? There is a reason that the top teams play each other every regular season and the bottom feeders often play a much easier schedule in the NFL. It's for ratings, and the NFL has mastered this with competitive scheduling. If you think that these networks signed a $8 billion tv contract wit the Big Ten and have no say in the scheduling, I'm sorry but I think you're crazy.

The 12 team playoff will improve scheduling. It already has this upcoming season. Just look at the matchups we have for next year.

 

[QuestionSocratic]

ESPN is reporting that the CFP committee is considering a 14 team playoff for 2026.

 

[Gator]

There already is a lot of speculation that they are moving the Ohio vs Michigan game to mid season, but that really doesn't matter.

Listen, if you believe that the Big Ten tv contract didn't have a stipulation that Michigan would play Ohio every season, go for it. That game has been a cash cow for everyone. There is no way they kill that game.

There is also no way that "the Big Ten opts for Michigan, Ohio State, Penn State, Oregon, USC, and Washington to stop playing each other." Future tv contracts are dictated on ratings, and once again, the current contract most certainly has some stipulations to keep the conference from not giving the networks a bunch of great regular season matchups. It makes absolutely NO financial sense that a conference would kill their best matchups during the regular season.

Also, notice what the NFL does with their scheduling? There is a reason that the top teams play each other every regular season and the bottom feeders often play a much easier schedule in the NFL. It's for ratings, and the NFL has mastered this with competitive scheduling. If you think that these networks signed a $8 billion tv contract wit the Big Ten and have no say in the scheduling, I'm sorry but I think you're crazy.

The 12 team playoff will improve scheduling. It already has this upcoming season. Just look at the matchups we have for next year.

I was just trying to see how the SEC and B1G could "muscle" more teams into the playoffs to get a bigger share of the CFP pot of gold. I see as of now they have opted for a different approach.

CFP officials discussing 14-team playoff in 2026

CFP executive director Bill Hancock said the idea of a 14-team College Football Playoff starting in 2026 was discussed at Wednesday's meeting in Dallas but added, "There's work still to be done."

www.espn.com

They want MORE guaranteed qualifiers (up to FOUR) for the B1G and the SEC!

 

[belcherboy]

I was just trying to see how the SEC and B1G could "muscle" more teams into the playoffs to get a bigger share of the CFP pot of gold. I see as of now they have opted for a different approach.

CFP officials discussing 14-team playoff in 2026

CFP executive director Bill Hancock said the idea of a 14-team College Football Playoff starting in 2026 was discussed at Wednesday's meeting in Dallas but added, "There's work still to be done."

www.espn.com

They want MORE guaranteed qualifiers (up to FOUR) for the B1G and the SEC!

The real money is in the regular season contract for these conferences. Don't get me wrong, they would love more playoff money by having more teams eligible, but they need to keep Fox and the rest of the gang who invested $7-$8 billion into their conferences regular season tv rights happy. The bigger the ratings on these regular season games, the more money everyone makes. Ohio vs Michigan is likely the most cemented game in all sports. It will be on the schedule forever. (unless another pandemic cancels a game)

I foresee, with the ability to lose 2-3 games and still make the playoffs, teams playing tougher schedules now. Big games are just better for recruiting, and better financially especially in future tv/streaming right negotiations. The days of Mercer games are likely going to end in the near future. I don't like that as I love watching these little programs benefit from these big paydays, and it gives the little guy a chance to play the big boys. Liberty has been able to see some success in this regard the past 4-5 years. The problem is that these games don't do anything for the sport. They are viewed as a tune up game and no one, outside the die hard fans, wants to watch it.

 

[Gator]

The real money is in the regular season contract for these conferences. Don't get me wrong, they would love more playoff money by having more teams eligible, but they need to keep Fox and the rest of the gang who invested $7-$8 billion into their conferences regular season tv rights happy. The bigger the ratings on these regular season games, the more money everyone makes. Ohio vs Michigan is likely the most cemented game in all sports. It will be on the schedule forever. (unless another pandemic cancels a game)

I foresee, with the ability to lose 2-3 games and still make the playoffs, teams playing tougher schedules now. Big games are just better for recruiting, and better financially especially in future tv/streaming right negotiations. The days of Mercer games are likely going to end in the near future. I don't like that as I love watching these little programs benefit from these big paydays, and it gives the little guy a chance to play the big boys. Liberty has been able to see some success in this regard the past 4-5 years. The problem is that these games don't do anything for the sport. They are viewed as a tune up game and no one, outside the die hard fans, wants to watch it.

Wow, there are so many things I want to say - I don't know where to begin.

I'll start with..

I believe that I see a trend towards more IN-conference games and fewer OOC games in general and fewer P5 OOC games in particular. I firmly believe that is the wrong direction to move.

A few years ago, the Big 12 played a round robin among their 10 conference teams. Each team played EVERY other conference team. Did that end the squabbling over what the "best" team was? NO!! No matter how many games are played there will still be doubt. Thus, the question becomes, "how many is enough?" Would changing the %age of conference games by 5% do that much to alter peoples opinions?

The SEC so far has stuck with 8 in-conference games. Thus each SEC team will have 15 conference foes of which they will play 8. 8/15 = 53.33%

The B1G wants to have 9 in-conference games. Thus, each B1G team will have 17 conference foes of which they will play 9. 9/17 = 52.94% of conference foes. (That a smaller %age than the SEC plays with only 8 conference games!) So why "should" the SEC move to 9 games?

Conversely, suppose the B1G adopted an 8-game conference schedule. 8/17 = 47.1% (that's only 5 % less than with a 9-game schedule). I repeat, "Would changing the %age of conference games by 5% do that much to alter peoples opinions?"

I have more...

 

[Gator]

This is somewhat long, sorry...

I want to stress the importance of OOC games.
I’d like for you to imagine two power conferences each with nine teams. Each conference decides to play a round-robin for their in-conference games Conference “A” finishes the round-robin with team records: 8-0, 7-1, 6-2, 5-3, 4-4, 3-5, 2-6, 1-7, and 0-8. Conference “B” finishes the round-robin with every team 4-4. In today’s world, these two conferences would opt to play 36 non-conference games against the “Sisters of St. Mary”. Under this scenario, Conference “A” would finish the season with team records: 12-0, 11-1, 10-2, 9-3, 8-4, 7-5, 6-6, 5-7, and 4-8. Conference “B” would finish the season with every team 8-4. The 12-0 team would be CFP bound, the 11-1 would be a probable, and the 10-2 a possible. Conference “B” ????

But suppose that these two “power” conferences elected to forego the “traditional patsies” and decide that each team will play at random FOUR members of the opposite “power” conference to fill out their schedules. To everyone’s amazement Conference “B” wins all 36 game! Thus, Conference “A” finishes the regular season with teams having the following records: 8-4, 7-5, 6-6, 5-7, 4-8, 3-7, 2-10, 1-11, and 0-12. Conference “B” finishes the season with every team 8-4.


In this “nightmare” scenario, the Conference “A” Champion which looked like a world-beater at 8-0 is now, after the OOC games, arguably the 10th best team in just this 18 team field! In today’s world, all 18 teams would be left out of the CFP if it were possible! This is why many “power” conference teams opt to play non-conference games against “Sisters of St. Mary”. Things won’t change unless the committee passes over teams that don’t play quality OOC opponents. No matter how many IN-conference games a team plays NONE of them help in determining NATIONAL ranking; only OOC games can do that. Of course that assumes the OOC games are meaningful. They are of limited use if Alabama plays Duke, and Michigan plays Vanderbilt. They would be meaningful if Michigan plays Alabama, and Duke plays Vanderbilt!

 

[belcherboy]

@Gator

Let's just got back to your original statement.

Suppose the Big Ten opts for Michigan, Ohio State, Penn State, Oregon, USC, and Washington to stop playing each other. These teams can only play games against the remaining 12 conference teams. The SEC decides that Alabama, Georgia, LSU, Oklahoma, Tennessee, and Texas won’t play each other for the forseeable future but can only schedule the other 10 conference teams.

This isn't going to happen. I will say it is an impossibility. Because of what is likely going to eventually be a 16 team playoff, just like the NFL, many of the best teams will be matched up each season. It's a money game thing. They want higher ratings, because of the money it brings and not putting the best teams together in the conference schedule will hold down the ratings.

Look at this year's schedules and you'll see this is already starting to happen. The fear of losing a game or two in October that will keep you out of the playoffs is gone.

 

[Gator]

Let's look at guaranteed positions in the CFP.
In the above nightmare scenario we ended up with 10 teams at 8-4, and one each that were 7-5, 6-6, 5-7, 4-8, 3-7, 2-10, 1-11, and 0-12. How many of these have Guaranteed spots? 4 for each conference? 3?, 2?, 1? There are 52 other "power" conference teams out there that are thinking, "hell, NONE of them belong in the CFP. The committee would hold its nose, pick a conference "B" team at random and then select the Conference "A" champ (the 10 best among this field) and move on. The problem is that for all anyone knows conference "B" might have been 36-0 against the other 52 power teams also. Heck maybe the conference "A" champ might be better than all 52 also! No none knows because they DIDN'T play.

 

[Gator]

@Gator

Let's just got back to your original statement.

Suppose the Big Ten opts for Michigan, Ohio State, Penn State, Oregon, USC, and Washington to stop playing each other. These teams can only play games against the remaining 12 conference teams. The SEC decides that Alabama, Georgia, LSU, Oklahoma, Tennessee, and Texas won’t play each other for the forseeable future but can only schedule the other 10 conference teams.

This isn't going to happen. I will say it is an impossibility. Because of what is likely going to eventually be a 16 team playoff, just like the NFL, many of the best teams will be matched up each season. It's a money game thing. They want higher ratings, because of the money it brings and not putting the best teams together in the conference schedule will hold down the ratings.

Look at this year's schedules and you'll see this is already starting to happen. The fear of losing a game or two in October that will keep you out of the playoffs is gone.

Where do you get this idea? No, what I'm hearing Petitti saying is (paraphrasing) "we need more games in November to be meaningful". There are at least two ways to that. A) arrange schedule so that LOTS of teams reach November undefeated (avoid tough games). B) guarantee four teams get into playoffs so that all a team has to do is end up in the top four of the conference regardless of record. In A) it is better to play no tough OOC teams (so as to be undefeated.) In B) it doesn't matter about OOC games so why not rest your team for the tough November conference games?

 

[Gator]

Look at this year's schedules and you'll see this is already starting to happen. The fear of losing a game or two in October that will keep you out of the playoffs is gone.

I don't see any change in attitudes!
Look the B1G went from having 3 "good" teams (UM, OSU, PSU) to having 6 "good" teams (UM, OSU, PSU, Ore, UW, and USC).
Last year with random scheduling each good team could expect to play 2 GT/ 13 member x 9 games = 1.38 GT per year.
This years with random scheduling each good team could expect to play 5 GT/ 17 member x 9 games = 2.65 GT per year.
Almost twice as many good games for each team!

 

[belcherboy]

Where do you get this idea? No, what I'm hearing Petitti saying is (paraphrasing) "we need more games in November to be meaningful". There are at least two ways to that. A) arrange schedule so that LOTS of teams reach November undefeated (avoid tough games). B) guarantee four teams get into playoffs so that all a team has to do is end up in the top four of the conference regardless of record. In A) it is better to play no tough OOC teams (so as to be undefeated.) In B) it doesn't matter about OOC games so why not rest your team for the tough November conference games?

Again, these conferences make the vast majority of their money from their regular season tv contract. TV contracts are mostly determined by ratings (along with geographical footprint). These conferences aren’t going to create a schedule where most their best teams don’t play each other during the season. Games like Michigan vs Ohio move the ratings WAY up, they aren’t going to cancel or avoid those type of games so they can get an extra team or two in the playoffs. They are actually doing the opposite of that now with making better schedules now that they are tripling the amount of playoff teams.

You’re creating an impossible hypothetical.

 

[dtgold88]

I’m sorry, I just can’t take this seriously. This is an impossibility. They would kill their tv contracts. I would even venture to say that the tv contracts already mandate that many of these teams will have to play each other at least semi regularly. The Ohio and Michigan rivalry isn’t going to end. Current and future tv contracts are built on games between the above games.

This is almost the equivalent of asking “What if Patrick Mahomes played 17 home games against the Carolina Panthers next year?”

Beat me to it...was gonna start by saying that's not happening.

Would like to see something more uniform among conferences. 9 conference games (or 10 if they'd like)....one tough OOC and another P5 team. Then could add a regional G5 maybe (MAC team for OSU, for example).

 

[belcherboy]

Beat me to it...was gonna start by saying that's not happening.

Would like to see something more uniform among conferences. 9 conference games (or 10 if they'd like)....one tough OOC and another P5 team. Then could add a regional G5 maybe (MAC team for OSU, for example).

I like that type of conference schedule. I do think they need to just go ahead and leave the NCAA and create a league of 40-50 teams. They could just limit it to the two big conferences; Big Ten and SEC. Both conferences raid the ACC and Big 12 for teams and get 4-6 more teams in each conference. They play mostly conference games, and 1-2 cross conference games each season. Also allow 1-2 games against a lower football division to help keep those programs floating. There would need to be a salary cap and other rules regarding recruiting and transfers.


Another option could be creating a league with "Power 3" conferences . Let FSU and other ACC teams leave to join the Big Ten or SEC. Combine the ACC and Big 12. The Big Ten ends up at 18, the SEC ends up at 16-18, and new ACC/B12 end up at 16-18 teams. You'd need to establish many of the same rules that I mentioned above.

 

[dtgold88]

I like that type of conference schedule. I do think they need to just go ahead and leave the NCAA and create a league of 40-50 teams. They could just limit it to the two big conferences; Big Ten and SEC. Both conferences raid the ACC and Big 12 for teams and get 4-6 more teams in each conference. They play mostly conference games, and 1-2 cross conference games each season. Also allow 1-2 games against a lower football division to help keep those programs floating. There would need to be a salary cap and other rules regarding recruiting and transfers.


Another option could be creating a league with "Power 3" conferences . Let FSU and other ACC teams leave to join the Big Ten or SEC. Combine the ACC and Big 12. The Big Ten ends up at 18, the SEC ends up at 16-18, and new ACC/B12 end up at 16-18 teams. You'd need to establish many of the same rules that I mentioned above.

Figure first idea is where we are headed.....2 conferences of 24 or so schools. something similar to the AFC and NFC. Maybe 4 six team divisions. division winners and another 2-4 wild cards per conference make up the playoff.

 

[belcherboy]

Figure first idea is where we are headed.....2 conferences of 24 or so schools. something similar to the AFC and NFC. Maybe 4 six team divisions. division winners and another 2-4 wild cards per conference make up the playoff.

I don't see them limiting it to 24 teams. They would be leaving A LOT of money on the table. I could see them dumping the Northwestern's and Vanderbilt's of each conference, but someone would have to pick up the FSU's, Clemson's, UNC's, Miami's etc. simply due to the size of their programs and especially due to some of their tv market shares.

I don't see it being any smaller than the NFL (32 teams) and could see it swell to 40 teams.

 

[trojanfight]