CBS: If Big Ten, SEC programs want to keep fans engaged, they should move to 10-game conference schedules

Per Tom:

There have been a lot of changes in college football in recent seasons, and few of them have been good for fans. We've seen conferences torn apart, and while the transfer portal and NIL have been great for players (and long overdue), they have frayed the threads of the relationship between players and fans. We're also seeing programs go away from spring games, which have often been one of the best options for fans to see their favorite teams in person and interact with players.

A change in nonconference scheduling would be another blow for fans. If you're a Nebraska fan right now, and you're spending money on season tickets, how excited are you to see that home game against Tennessee replaced with Bowling Green? I doubt you're excited, and you aren't getting a refund on those tickets. In fact, you'll probably end up paying more.

Remember thinking schools would shift funds from building ridiculous facilities, and maybe we'd see coaches salaries decrease so they could use that money to pay players instead? How naive we were! If you're going to follow the NFL model, that means nobody has to take paycuts! Not when fans can pay for it!

So why not throw the fans a bone? An expensive, condescending bone.

With conferences routinely featuring between 16 and 18 teams, it makes sense to expand conference schedules for a lot of reasons. If leagues went to 10 games per season, you'd see conference opponents more often. It would also allow leagues to keep more traditional rivalry games on the schedule every season. It'd also provide more attractive matchups, which is good for television partners and fans.

There have been whispers of the Big Ten and SEC talking about playing annual nonconference games against one another, which is great in theory -- particularly if it's like college basketball, where the matchups are based on the prior season's finish. The problem here is that while TV partners would love to be guaranteed a game between the reigning SEC and Big Ten champions, if you're a Mississippi State fan, how excited are you about Northwestern coming to town? Are Wisconsin fans getting fired up to host Kentucky? If you polled the fans of these schools, they're more likely to prefer playing an extra conference game. Familiarity breeds contempt, after all, and not every school will compete for playoff bids. Contempt is all so many fans have.

While that 10th game might cost you an Ohio State vs. Texas every fall, it will also increase the odds you get Georgia vs. Alabama, or Oregon vs. Michigan. Those are games that will generate ratings and have stakes in conference and playoff races. (It will also increase the odds your best teams finish in the top four spots to get those auto bids ... if you're into that kinda thing.)

It would also help ensure there are more intriguing matchups each weekend. Now that there are so many different networks with rights to games, that matters. These schools love the money they're getting in their new deals, but if they want to keep it coming, they need to keep those companies cutting the checks happy.

If they don't, and those networks move onto something else, the fans you've been taking for granted all this time might not be so willing to help anymore.


Go Gophers!!

Can't say I particularly agree. I like the non-conference slate. It's good getting some experience against something different regularly. The Big Ten has protected rivalries and marquee match-ups happen every year regardless.

Plus I think it's beneficial having the easier slate to start off the year before the conference schedule begins. I think the notion in the article about "familiarity breeding contempt" is also sort of absurd at this point considering all of the changes that have made the Big Ten almost unrecognizable.

lol what makes you think they'd give a shit? The goal of the conference is to try put teams in the playoff and make their "brand" look good. attendance in the stadium is a distant afterthought. Even if you're at Michigan and put 100k butts in the seats your revenue is maybe 2-3mil in ticket sales. If you make that 50k say for BG (which is low given the season tickets), it's still just a drop in the bucket. Would you maybe increase ST sales some? Perhaps. But by that logic, they would've scheduled big OOC games for forever to compensate which most schools don't.

Maybe we should just have schools only play their conference schedules and make it a 12 game schedule.

In reality, it's important for the health of the sport. The smaller schools rely on these non-con games for budget balancing. The bigger schools like them to rack up wins to make bowl games and the postseason. Playing an extra conf game for "fan viewership" isn't going to move the needle.

SEC should 100% go to 9 conference games. Big Ten should 100% not go to 10 conference games. No preseason, and conference schedules are tough enough already.

BleedGopher said:

Remember thinking schools would shift funds from building ridiculous facilities, and maybe we'd see coaches salaries decrease so they could use that money to pay players instead?

Click to expand...

The writer does not understand how NIL works.

MNVCGUY said:

SEC should 100% go to 9 conference games. Big Ten should 100% not go to 10 conference games. No preseason, and conference schedules are tough enough already.

Click to expand...

There is no preseason

Yes go to 10 games

I can see both sides to this. One extra conference game means one additional loss for half the conference teams. The author makes a good point about Nebraska fans preferring to see Tennessee than Bowling Green, but what happens later in the season when teams are 4-3 instead of 5-2 and essentially eliminated from any shot at the playoff or a 2nd tier bowl game? Not sure which I'd prefer as a fan. I know last year, for example, losing that week 1 game against UNC and knowing we had much tougher B1G opponents coming up was a downer. Feeling kind of "out of it" in August sucks.

I like scheduling a good NC opponent over adding a B1G game. I really enjoyed traveling to Colorado and UNC. I would much rather do that than play Michigan State. We already know that we get to play Iowa and Becky every year. I think an SEC game every year.would be fine. Teams like Miss St and Kentucky would be decent games. Then keep your 2 cupcakes. I really like the Thursday night season opener when we play a major conference opponent.

A few SEC (Kentucky, Florida, Georgia, SC) and now three Big Ten teams (Iowa, Washington, ... I assume but not certain Oregon) have yearly in-state rivalry games. EDIT: also USC-Notre Dame

I'd rather see the remaining SEC and Big Ten teams schedule a 10th game home/away that compliments the 4home, 5home game conference cadence from a 9 conf game schedule.

Gophers vs Colorado could perhaps be a good one to schedule long term? Lot of flights between MSP and Denver.

MNVCGUY said:

SEC should 100% go to 9 conference games. Big Ten should 100% not go to 10 conference games. No preseason, and conference schedules are tough enough already.

Click to expand...

Once there are auto bids by conference then overall record doesn’t matter anymore

They are doing it once this happens. I wouldn’t be surprised if the big ten goes to 11 or 10 game conference schedule.


The TV money will be so large that 6 home games vs 7 won’t hurt that bad.



Someone from the SEC or big ten probably planted the ideas for this article

rugger14 said:

I like scheduling a good NC opponent over adding a B1G game. I really enjoyed traveling to Colorado and UNC. I would much rather do that than play Michigan State. We already know that we get to play Iowa and Becky every year. I think an SEC game every year.would be fine. Teams like Miss St and Kentucky would be decent games. Then keep your 2 cupcakes. I really like the Thursday night season opener when we play a major conference opponent.

Click to expand...

Those teams will be in the conference by 2030 anyways

GopherGrit said:

A few SEC (Kentucky, Florida, Georgia, SC) and now three Big Ten teams (Iowa, Washington, ... I assume but not certain Oregon) have yearly in-state rivalry games.

I'd rather see the remaining SEC and Big Ten teams schedule a 10th game home/away that compliments the 4home, 5home game conference cadence from a 9 conf game schedule.

Gophers vs Colorado could perhaps be a good one to schedule long term? Lot of flights between MSP and Denver.

Click to expand...

USC-Notre Dame as well. I assume that series will continue. These games likely go away with a 10 game conference format.

I disagree completely. Go to eight games like the SEC. Schedule two non-conf P4 games to keep things fun and interesting and help with the accuracy of national rankings. I really enjoyed the two game series with UNC. Am I alone? I used that game all year as one data point as to how good the Gophers & B1G were nationally. Another non-con P4 game would have been very useful. I greatly dislike the subjectivity in the human playoff committee. Scheduling more P4 non-conf games would help alleviate that. Add a weighted computer model 50/50 with the human committee and I'm good!

And for God's sake, no more playoff games! How much more physical abuse are we willing to put these young men through for the sake of our entertainment? Most of them are not going to get paid that much. On that vein, the other two non-conf games need to be relative cupcakes so you help them make a little money, develop your non-starters and rest up from injuries as a pseudo by-week.

Gophers7NatTitlesBadgers0 said:

USC-Notre Dame as well. I assume that series will continue. These games likely go away with a 10 game conference format.

Click to expand...

Not sure about that...can see it continuing as a locked in home and home. Irish should just join the B1G...

Wouldn't 12 conference games create more "engagement"?

I don't want to see non-con evaporate, but a bid for maximum P4 TV and gate money would scuttle all the guarantee games.

IceBoxGopher said:

Can't say I particularly agree. I like the non-conference slate. It's good getting some experience against something different regularly. The Big Ten has protected rivalries and marquee match-ups happen every year regardless.

Plus I think it's beneficial having the easier slate to start off the year before the conference schedule begins. I think the notion in the article about "familiarity breeding contempt" is also sort of absurd at this point considering all of the changes that have made the Big Ten almost unrecognizable.

Click to expand...

If you lose fans in the stands, have no division titles to play for, you'll eventually sink in TV ratings, too, and the golden egg will break into pieces. The conferences, NCAA, presidents, ADs, coaches, all put greed ahead of common sense and rational administration of the game. West Coast teams should not be in the B10, but should still have their own regional conference. Paying players is insane, as is the portal. We have anarchy and it will only get worse until some kind of hammer comes down from Congress or a revived NCAA.

rugger14 said:

I like scheduling a good NC opponent over adding a B1G game. I really enjoyed traveling to Colorado and UNC. I would much rather do that than play Michigan State. We already know that we get to play Iowa and Becky every year. I think an SEC game every year.would be fine. Teams like Miss St and Kentucky would be decent games. Then keep your 2 cupcakes. I really like the Thursday night season opener when we play a major conference opponent.

Click to expand...

100% agreed but unfortunately we have certain coaches and media/boosters clamoring for ending big non-conf matchups because it could hurt playoff seeding. IMO I wish they did a similar thing like the conference challenges in CBB, perhaps rotate them, where SEC and B1G play eachother early in the year. Would be a great way to get fanbases engaged and would make fall camps even more vital