For a conference like the Big 12, where there’s not a lot of history and synergy between schools from opposing divisions, I think it makes more sense to play 8 conference games and 2 P5 OOC games against schools they do have some history with, like WVU and their old Big East rivals or BYU vs Utah and some of these Pac 12 schools they’ve lined up.

Freeing up 1 more game for the OOC schedule opens up the opportunity for more wins vs going 0.500 against yourself.

(01-26-2022 10:42 AM)YNot Wrote:  9-game conference schedule with 12 teams is a mistake. See the PAC 12 for the last decade. You *guarantee* more losses within the conference, which hurts in the rankings compared to other conferences that have fewer conference games AND more teams.

Follow the SEC model. Your division winners are more likely to have nice-and-shiny win-loss records and you're more likely to get additional teams into the top-25.

If at all possible, also follow the SEC model of having one G5 non-con game in late October or early-to-mid November rather than front-loading them all.

It can give you a better chance to rest starters who may be dinged up, as well as give some live game experience to freshmen and sophomores later in the year. It’ll help keep them sharp, and by then for freshmen they may be better adjusted to the speed and complexity of the college level. Both can be advantageous heading into the stretch run, and the latter can be a better bridge to spring ball as well.

(01-28-2022 11:19 AM)bear2be2 Wrote:  

(01-28-2022 10:40 AM)YNot Wrote:  

(01-26-2022 03:33 PM)bear2be2 Wrote:  

(01-26-2022 10:42 AM)YNot Wrote:  9-game conference schedule with 12 teams is a mistake. See the PAC 12 for the last decade. You *guarantee* more losses within the conference, which hurts in the rankings compared to other conferences that have fewer conference games AND more teams.

Follow the SEC model. Your division winners are more likely to have nice-and-shiny win-loss records and you're more likely to get additional teams into the top-25.

There are certainly compelling reasons to move to eight conference games, but I think you could make a relatively strong case for nine as well.

I'd be fine either way.

I don't think Big 12 programs will have the cache nationally to smoke and mirrors our way into playoff/title discussions. I think we all need to be prepared to earn whatever we get. Nine conference games gives our teams more opportunities to do that. But that's more opportunities for wins and losses, so you have to pick which matters more or is more helpful in the long run.

Mathematically, 9 conference games *guarantees* more losses within the conference because it's a zero-sum game.

The argument for 9 games is the potential for better Big 12-owned TV content. Two more cross-division games like WVU-BYU and TCU-UCF are potentially better inventory than the extra OOC games each of those teams could schedule. But, would 9th conference games like BYU-Kansas and UCF-Texas Tech might not move the needle as much as BYU-Stanford and WVU-Georgia Tech.

It also guarantees more wins, and one additional opportunity for those at the top of the league to boost their standing nationally, which was my point. Are you more concerned about the final resumes of your best teams or the perception of your mid-tier teams/overall depth? The calculus changes depending on your priorities.

It does not guarantee *more* wins. It guarantees *a* win in the conference-only matchup, but at the expense of the opportunity for the two conference teams to *both* earn a win in the extra OOC game.

The SEC model has delivered the result that most SEC teams are 3-1 or 4-0 in their OOC schedule, which does wonders for the win-loss records and rankings. Not only more 10-win teams, but more 6-win and bowl-eligible teams too.

(02-02-2022 05:54 PM)YNot Wrote:  

(01-28-2022 11:19 AM)bear2be2 Wrote:  

(01-28-2022 10:40 AM)YNot Wrote:  

(01-26-2022 03:33 PM)bear2be2 Wrote:  

(01-26-2022 10:42 AM)YNot Wrote:  9-game conference schedule with 12 teams is a mistake. See the PAC 12 for the last decade. You *guarantee* more losses within the conference, which hurts in the rankings compared to other conferences that have fewer conference games AND more teams.

Follow the SEC model. Your division winners are more likely to have nice-and-shiny win-loss records and you're more likely to get additional teams into the top-25.

There are certainly compelling reasons to move to eight conference games, but I think you could make a relatively strong case for nine as well.

I'd be fine either way.

I don't think Big 12 programs will have the cache nationally to smoke and mirrors our way into playoff/title discussions. I think we all need to be prepared to earn whatever we get. Nine conference games gives our teams more opportunities to do that. But that's more opportunities for wins and losses, so you have to pick which matters more or is more helpful in the long run.

Mathematically, 9 conference games *guarantees* more losses within the conference because it's a zero-sum game.

The argument for 9 games is the potential for better Big 12-owned TV content. Two more cross-division games like WVU-BYU and TCU-UCF are potentially better inventory than the extra OOC games each of those teams could schedule. But, would 9th conference games like BYU-Kansas and UCF-Texas Tech might not move the needle as much as BYU-Stanford and WVU-Georgia Tech.

It also guarantees more wins, and one additional opportunity for those at the top of the league to boost their standing nationally, which was my point. Are you more concerned about the final resumes of your best teams or the perception of your mid-tier teams/overall depth? The calculus changes depending on your priorities.

It does not guarantee *more* wins. It guarantees *a* win in the conference-only matchup, but at the expense of the opportunity for the two conference teams to *both* earn a win in the extra OOC game.

The SEC model has delivered the result that most SEC teams are 3-1 or 4-0 in their OOC schedule, which does wonders for the win-loss records and rankings. Not only more 10-win teams, but more 6-win and bowl-eligible teams too.

It's a zero-sum game. An extra week of conference games guarantees the conference six more wins and six more losses than they'd be guaranteed with a one fewer week of conference games and an extra week of nonconference games. You could go 12-0 or 0-12 in that extra week of nonconference games.

So it comes down to whether you value those six Power 5 wins you're guaranteed more than those six conference losses you're also guaranteed. If your goal is to have the best resume possible at the end of the regular season, a ninth conference game makes sense. If you're goal is to have a bunch of mediocre teams potentially look one win better than they really are, it doesn't. Again, it all comes down to your priorities.

But I think we're being naive if we think Big 12 teams playing an eight-game conference schedule will get the same benefit of doubt that the SEC gets. There's a very good chance that would be held against us.