Perhaps the BEST B1G Forum anywhere, here at College Football Fan Site, CFB51!!!

'

No, that's actually my point. Teams at the top don't back down from a challenge.

I get the other side of the coin. If OSU plays Western Kentucky in 2008 instead of USC, then they spend the season in the NC hunt with a senior QB instead of being forced into a rebuilding year breaking in a freshman QB.

That mentality doesn't fly with OSU fans though. You'd be laughed out of the room if you came up with that particular suggestion.

You're turning a scheduling inequity into a test of manhood.  Ooga-booga.  

Of course you're wasting your time.  

I don't care.
To you, anything I say is wrong.
I get it.
Get another hobby.

Not everything, but this one is, imo.

I don't think that Miami would have derailed either of the NCs that Florida won with Meyer or Tebow.

By ducking them all you've done is cost yourselves a bunch of easy Ws in Florida-Miami series, as the Gators have been by far the better program over the last 15+ years.

You're not the only one of course. Oklahoma should be trying to pad their record vs Nebraska instead of ducking them. aTm should be trying to gain some ground in the Longhorn series instead of ducking them.

Oh well.

You are ignoring the fact that this is about MONEY not manhood.  

The PAC schools tend to play better OOC opponents not because they are manlier but because they can't sell tickets to crap games because football in general and CFB specifically are not as big on the West Coast as they are in the Midwest and South.  

The Buckeyes are now in a pattern of playing nine conference games, one marquee OOC game, and two scrubs.  In theory they could play three marquee OOC games instead.  Most of us, as fans, would love to see an OOC slate of Bama, Clemson, and Oklahoma but the AD at tOSU doesn't schedule that.  Why?  It isn't because he is ducking Bama/Clemson/OU, it is because we (the fans) are willing to fork over cash for tickets to games against Ohio MAC schools so he doesn't have to schedule Bama/Clemson/OU to sell tickets.  He can fill the stadium with paying customers for games against BGSU, Toledo, Akron, Kent, OhU, etc.  He does that not because he isn't manly enough to schedule Bama/Clemson/OU but because financially he is better off with BGSU/Toledo/Akron.  

The quick math:
When tOSU schedules those marquee OOC home games the opponents demand a return trip.  Thus, in a two-year cycle the Buckeyes end up with one great home game that they can charge a premium for and one road game that they get nothing (financially) from.  The same goes for UF/Miami and everybody else for that matter.  

If the Buckeyes instead schedule BGSU they pay them a small fraction of the gate, keep the rest, and don't have to go to their place the next year so they get two crap home games instead of one good one.  

I do think that this will change moving forward for two reasons:

• The pressure to "never schedule a loss" will lessen as the playoff expands.  Pre-BCS, OOC losses were nearly always fatal to NC hopes.  In the BCS era OOC losses were frequently fatal to NC hopes.  In the CFP era so far OOC losses have nearly always been fatal to NC hopes but there are exceptions (tOSU's OOC loss to VaTech in 2014 for one).  When the CFP expands to eight or (probably) 12 OOC losses will no longer be so damaging.  If a B1G or SEC Championship basically guarantees you a spot then who cares if you lose OOC to Miami or Bama?  
• Ticket demand is clearly softening.  We've talked at length on this board about the CFB Bubble and I believe that it is real.  As that process continues it will become increasingly difficult for schools like tOSU and UF to fill their stadiums with paying customers for games against crap opponents so they will have to upgrade their schedules in order to sell tickets.  That doesn't necessarily mean that UF will start playing Miami every year or that tOSU will increase to two or three Marquee games but it does mean that the crap games will necessarily be replaced by better games.  

of Ohio St and Texas really wanted more money they would schedule big time opponents

the TV networks LOVE this

and Ohio St wouldn't have to write checks for 6 figures to encourage scrubs to come to C-Bus for a beating

but, obviously the helmets are flush with cash

of Ohio St and Texas really wanted more money they would schedule big time opponents

the TV networks LOVE this

and Ohio St wouldn't have to write checks for 6 figures to encourage scrubs to come to C-Bus for a beating

but, obviously the helmets are flush with cash

There is a quirk there:
Ohio State doesn't get paid directly by the networks.  Instead, the B1G has a contract with the network and Ohio State gets 1/14th of that money.  Lets say, in theory, that the networks are willing to pay $14,500,000 for tOSU vs TX but only $250,000 for tOSU vs BG.  

If Ohio State plays BG twice the league (not tOSU) gets $500,000 for the two games.  

Alternatively, if Ohio State plays a H&H with TX the B1G gets $14,500,000 for the game in Columbus while the B12/TX get the money for the game in Austin.  

The B1G is $14,000,000 better off with tOSU playing Texas, but Ohio State is only $1,000,000 (1/14th) better off.  Ohio Stadium holds more than 100,000 people so as long as tOSU can get at least $10 per ticket for the game against BG, the Ohio State University Athletic Department is better off playing BG twice at home rather than TX in an H&H.  

The obvious solution would be to allocate the league's TV money based on ratings draw.  The problem is that this solution would be GREAT for Ohio State and probably reasonably good Michigan, Penn State, Nebraska and a few others but it would be seriously detrimental to the smaller schools.  

agreed, the time for the upgrade in non-con schedules would be at the time of the next contract negotiation with FOX/ESPN

Barry Alvarez is in favor of going back to 8 conference games to level the playing field with the SEC.

my point was, if non-con scheduling really wanted to make money for Ohio St and the Big Ten, there would be better games vs better teams