As we noted below, we have uploaded a document/essay explaining some of our thoughts on the scheduling practices within college football.
After sending the document to an associate for review, he said it was too long. That may very well be the case, and in order to make things a little less burdensome for those who may not enjoy taking on 3,000 words focused so narrowly on scheduling, we offer the following as a condensed version of some of the arguments. Take this as a teaser, if you will, as we hope you will find the time to download, read, analyze and consider the arguments posed within the essay.
- Scheduling is a two-part system: conference games and
out-of-conference (OOC) games. The conference slate is usually
rigid and decided well in advance. It is beneficial and
necessary. The OOC slate is more arbitrary, and more likely to be
- It is to the game's benefit, especially in regards to understanding the relative strengths of teams within a given season, to foster an environment of equitable scheduling. There are several impediments to that vision.
- First, not all conferences are the same size. The 10-team conferences are easier to judge and analyze, while the larger 12-team conferences are split into divisions and have various means to gerrymander their schedules in ways favorable to the more elite teams.
- Also, OOC scheduling is unregulated. For every USC taking on Virginia Tech on the road, Notre Dame annually and elite teams within small conferences, there are several Auburns and Kansas States, taking on 1-AA opponents at home, and avoiding if at all possible BCS conference teams, let alone elite smaller division schools. We support the open scheduling rules, but are intolerant of the various elusive and exploitative ways many established programs go about making their OOC slate. It hurts the game, artificially boosting their records and rankings at the expense of good teams who were willing to test themselves against more legitemate opponents.
- We set aside some guidelines, perhaps rules, to schedule opponents. Nobody from outside D-I should be tolerated. Contending teams on BCS conference teams that take on weak teams from the smaller, non-BCS conferences should be frowned upon and their credibility (when it comes to rankings) held up to very strict scrutiny.
- One last point we more or less forgot to mention in the essay-loading up a schedule with home games is unacceptable. No elite BCS conference team that regularly contends (Ohio State, USC, Georgia, etc.) should have an 8-game home schedule, or in an 11-game slate, have 7 home games and just 4 road games. Home field advantage is very pronounced in college football, and such maneuvering usually goes unnoticed and uncriticized. The buck stops here. There is nothing wrong with 6 home games and 5 road games, or 6 home and 6 road, but there is simply no justification for 7/4 or 8/4, 8/5 imbalances.