B1G Scheduling Proposal

[medinabuckeye1]

I know the early conference games (Purdue/Northwestern in week one, Ohio State/Rutgers in week two) are not terribly popular here but I like them.  It helps to balance off against some particularly awful early season schedules.  For example, look at the spreads in this week's B1G games (from the Stupid upset picks thread):

• MSU has a bye
• Iowa is playing an FCS team
• Penn State is favored by 35
• Michigan is favored by 35
• Wisconsin is favored by 21
• Northwestern is favored by 21
• Maryland is favored by 16
• Indiana is favored by 14.5
• Minnesota is favored by 14.5
• Ohio State is favored by 13
• Nebraska is favored by 11.5
• Illinois is disfavored by 10
• Purdue is disfavored by 7
• Rutgers is disfavored by 3

That is a pretty uninteresting schedule overall.  I think it wouldn't be so bad if we did this (note that overall we need to have 63 B1G games in 13 weeks):

• One conference game in week 1
• Two conference games in week 2 (3 cumulatively)
• Two conference games in week 3 (5)
• Four conference games in week 4 (9)
• Four conference games in week 5 (13)*
• Six conference games in week 6 (19)
• Six conference games in week 7 (25) 
• Six conference games in week 8 (31) 
• Six conference games in week 9 (37) 
• Six conference games in week 10 (43) 
• Six conference games in week 11 (49)* 
• Seven conference games in week 12 (56) 
• Seven conference games in week 13 (63)

*Note:  The two teams that only played one conference game in the first five weeks would NOT play a conference game in either week 5 or week 11.  That way they could choose whether to schedule an OOC game in week five and their bye in week 11 or an OOC game in week 11 and their bye in week 5.  The other 12 teams would have a bye somewhere in weeks 6-10 which is reasonably close to the middle of the season.  

As far as comparing teams:

• After week 1:  Two teams would have played a conference game, 12 would have played none.  
• After week 2:  Five teams would have played a conference game, nine would have played none.  
• After week 3:  Nine teams would have played a conference game, five would have played none.  
• After week 4:  Four teams would have played two conference games, 10 would have played one.  
• After week 5:  12 teams would have played two conference games, two would have played one.  
• After week 6:  10 teams would have played three conference games, four would have played two.  
• After week 7:  Eight teams would have played four conference games, six would have played three.  
• After week 8:  Six teams would have played five conference games, eight would have played four.  
• After week 9:  Four teams would have played six conference games, 10 would have played five.  
• After week 10:  Two teams would have played seven conference games, 12 would have played six.  
• After week 11:  All 14 teams would have played seven conference games.  
• After week 12:  All 14 teams would have played eight conference games.  
• After week 13:  All 14 teams would have played nine conference games.   

[MarqHusker]

Big Jim is standing by waiting to evaluate this.

[ELA]

I know the move from 8 to 9 conference games made the schedule a little wonky for a few years due to teams having prior commitments.  That's how MSU has wound up with a bye week in Week 2, Week 3, Week 3 the last three years, which is awful.  I'm hoping with the 9 game conference slate known going forward, the scheduling gets quite a bit better.

[iahawk15]

Just my initial thought, and I haven't done the logistical work to see if it's airtight, but I think it puts undue pressure on OOC scheduling for a team to play two conference games in the first four weeks.

Traditional Notre Dame matchups aside, most FBS OOC scheduling happens in the first four weeks (although FCS teams in the South seem to be readily available in November), and therefore limits available opponents for the teams selected to play two September conference games. Unless we limit that second game to Notre Dame opponents, which is unfair, in my opinion.

So I would propose a slight tweak to your schedule, with seven (instead of nine) games happening in the first four weeks. I also don't particularly love a week 11 bye. This is what I came up with:

Week 1. 1 Conference Game (1 cumulative)
 2. 2 (3)
 3. 2 (5)
 4. 2 (7)
 5. 5 (12)
 6. 6 (18)
 7. 6 (24)
 8. 6 (30)
 9. 6 (36)
10. 6 (42)
11. 7 (49)
12. 7 (56)
13. 7 (63)

[medinabuckeye1]

Just my initial thought, and I haven't done the logistical work to see if it's airtight, but I think it puts undue pressure on OOC scheduling for a team to play two conference games in the first four weeks.

Traditional Notre Dame matchups aside, most FBS OOC scheduling happens in the first four weeks (although FCS teams in the South seem to be readily available in November), and therefore limits available opponents for the teams selected to play two September conference games. Unless we limit that second game to Notre Dame opponents, which is unfair, in my opinion.

My unstated assumption is that MAC (and similar) teams have more scheduling flexibility and will adjust accordingly to match what B1G teams need.  I think the reason FCS teasm in the south are readily available is that SEC teams need them there so they make themselves available.  IMHO, the same would happen up here with MAC type teams.  

[Brutus Buckeye]

I don't think anyone would schedule their P5 nonCon in the middle of the year. The minor independents are always searching for opponents during October and November. So BYU, Army, NMSU, etc would be readily available.

And yes, the Mac typically doesn't make up their schedule until the body bag games have been finalized, then they build it around that. Their members need those games in order to survive, so they take priority over the conference slate.

[medinabuckeye1]

And yes, the Mac typically doesn't make up their schedule until the body bag games have been finalized, then they build it around that. Their members need those games in order to survive, so they take priority over the conference slate.

I think it is important to note that I wouldn't advocate for the B1G to announce and start this effective next year.  That would cause a host of scheduling difficulties.  Instead, I would advocate that we announce this several years in advance to provide the B1G teams and their "body bag" opponents plenty of time to schedule.  In that case I think that, as @Brutus Buckeye pointed out, the MAC would work around it and our teams would have no trouble scheduling one or two of their "body bag" games in weeks four and five.  

[LittlePig]

How about 

3 conference games  in week 1
4 in week 2
4 in week 3
4 in week 4
5 in week 5
5 in Week 6
5 in week 7
5 in week 8
5 in week 9
5 in week 10
5 in week 11
6 in week 12
7 in week 13

[ohio1317]

I prefer zero before nonconference play is done.  I get the logic in them, but think one a week for first 3 weeks or so is fine.  Really they probably only really need them then when not weeks lot of big nonconference games scheduled (TV wants some good games each week given what they are paying).  That seems to be kind of where we are going as lots of games week 1 on futute schedules, with most of rest week 3 if I remember right (guessing because more big games have happened week 2, but would have to double check all of this).

Regardless, all nonconference games should generally be done by end of September unless a school has great opportunity for big one later and wants to go that route.

[FearlessF]

what the networks like, the networks get

they need good content to draw viewers and advertisers

[TyphonInc]

what the networks like, the networks get

they need good content to draw viewers and advertisers

And with the TV contracts as the main motivator, is there a way to have 3 conference games every week? That way Fox, ESPN, and BTN all could have a potential conference game on thier slate.
No one team gets more than 2 games, and maybe a push to have the "preseason" games be inter-divisions?

• Three conference game in week 1
• Three conference games in week 2 (6 cumulatively)
• Three conference games in week 3 (9)
• Three conference games in week 4 (12)
• Seven conference games in week 5 (19)
• Five conference games in week 6 (24)
• Five conference games in week 7 (29)
• Five conference games in week 8 (34)
• Five conference games in week 9 (39)
• Five conference games in week 10 (44)
• Five conference games in week 11 (49)
• Seven conference games in week 12 (56)
• Seven conference games in week 13 (63)

Does my math add up?

[Hawkinole]

Medina,

I think we are moving in this direction of scheduling earlier conference games, although I cherry picked Iowa's future scheduling.

I don't recall Iowa playing early conference games. But they have them on future schedules:

2020 - Minnesota Week 3
2021 - Indiana Week 1

[ELA]

I recall Michigan opening with Illinois once in the 90s.  No clue why.

[medinabuckeye1]

• Five conference games in week 7 (29)
• Five conference games in week 8 (33)

No.  29+5=34 not 33.  Other than that it looked ok and you corrected it in the next line where you had 33+5=39.  
I'm going to go ahead and guess here that you were editing it before posting and missed that on the edit because I assume that you know the math.  I've done that.