Big Ten/Pac-12 to enter regular season scheduling agreement in 2017

[Blackshirt316]

IMO this is a bad idea.

What you are effectively doing is making it more difficult to schedule OOC games against Big Name non Pac 12 BCS teams as you're already locked into an OOC away game each other year. Which will have a negative effect on recruiting the south and south east regions for the conference.

Plus the Big Ten is already regarded as too much of a mid-west centric conference why make that stereotype even more engrained? - Expecially if it makes it tougher for certain teams to continue playing other traditional OOC opponents, IE Notre Dame, Pitt etc.

Also probably inflames the whole Penn State resentments of not being Eastern leaning enough.

Not to mention the timezone issues and the fact that noone cares about Pac 12 football outside of the Pac 12 aside from the Rose Bowl game.

FAR too many negatives and not anywhere near enough positives IMO. If Big Ten teams want to schedule series with Pac 12 teams they can do that without the league mandating they do it.

I don't see it as a bad thing, having Colorado (the most likely choice for NU) replace South Dakota State (and the like) is a good thing. He's also saying that they may not go to a 9 game conference schedule so NU would still get to play to creampuffs. Colorado will just replace the lower division teams like Wake Forest and then we keep the Tennessee's, Miami's, and Oklahoma's (ok, I'm dreaming there) as our marque OOC game. But even if they go to the 9 game schedule, NU will be ok if we are as good as we all hope we will be by that time. I have no problem with a cream puff, CU and a OU type OOC every year.

The problem with your post is that the Pac 12 game in many years would most likely replace the Tennesee's and Miami's not the South Dakota States because of scheduling issues.

For financial stability Nebraska's athletic department requires a MINIMUM of 7 home games a year. As does pretty much every other program.

With an 8 game conference slate that means you are guaranteed 4 conference home games with 4 conference road games each year.

So Nebraska schedules one big OOC game every year and can be flexible with when that road game takes place because one OOC game still lets them have 7 home games every year and up to 8 home games every other year.

If you add a Pac 12 team to the mix you've now got 5 guaranteed road games every other season. (4 conference and 1 OOC)

That severely limits your other big name OOC potential matchups because now you are no longer flexible on when that road game takes place.

Put it this way -

This starts in 2017. We have 3 OOC home games scheduled that year and already are scheduled to visit Tennesee in 2018. That means we MUST host the first Pac 12 game in 2017 to maintain the 7 home game financial need in 2018.

Then whatever 2019 OOC game we schedule if we were to schedule a home/home series with another BCS team would also have to be played in that team's stadium because the 2nd game in 2020 can't be on the road because we have to go to Boulder again (or whatever Pac 12 team it is).

11 other Pac 12/Big Ten teams will also be in the same predicament. So that is a lot of teams all needing to have very specific scheduling dates and that doesn't count the fact that those other leagues need home/away dates filled too.

So now you're setting up a system where the demand for BCS opponents with the right home/away setup starts to outweigh the supply and you'll be seeing a lot more of what we just saw last year with a P12 team and 3 cupcakes OOC.

And that's IF they do home/home series with the Big 10 and Pac 12 games. If they do the proposed neutral site matchups then count on never playing other BCS OOC games because now you're guaranteed to always be playing 3 cupcake OOC games to hit that 7 home game mark and have no possibility of the ocassional 8th game of extra revenue.

 

[Muck]

Plus the Big Ten is already regarded as too much of a mid-west centric conference why make that stereotype even more engrained? - Expecially if it makes it tougher for certain teams to continue playing other traditional OOC opponents, IE Notre Dame, Pitt etc..

Did you just argue that playing teams from California, Oregon, Washington & Arizona instead of ones in Indiana & Pennsylvania will reinforce the stereotype of the B1G being a regional 'mid-western' conference?

 

[Blackshirt316]

Plus the Big Ten is already regarded as too much of a mid-west centric conference why make that stereotype even more engrained? - Expecially if it makes it tougher for certain teams to continue playing other traditional OOC opponents, IE Notre Dame, Pitt etc..

Did you just argue that playing teams from California, Oregon, Washington & Arizona instead of ones in Indiana & Pennsylvania will reinforce the stereotype of the B1G being a regional 'mid-western' conference?

No, but I apologize as my wording did unintentionally imply that.

I mean the conference is already seen as focusing too much on the middle and western areas of the country due to the longstanding history with the Pac 12 and the Rosebowl. With this move you're further distancing yourself from the interest from southern and eastern recruits in Texas, Florida etc.

 

[HuskerBCS]

I can't wait till we get to watch a non conference B1G vs Pac12 game and then see a rematch in the Rose Bowl. :sarcasm

I don't really understand the point of this. It would be completely different if it was against the SEC or Big12 because then you could avoid rematches in the bowls. There is no way to avoid it with the Rose Bowl.

 

[Nexus]

I can't wait till we get to watch a non conference B1G vs Pac12 game and then see a rematch in the Rose Bowl. :sarcasm

I don't really understand the point of this. It would be completely different if it was against the SEC or Big12 because then you could avoid rematches in the bowls. There is no way to avoid it with the Rose Bowl.

Not true. As of right now B1G is contracted to three bowl games against SEC (Capital One, Outback, Gator). Three bowl games against Big 12 (Insight, Meineke, TicketCity). And only one bowl game with Pac-12 which is the Rose Bowl.

 

[GSG]

I can't wait till we get to watch a non conference B1G vs Pac12 game and then see a rematch in the Rose Bowl. :sarcasm

I don't really understand the point of this. It would be completely different if it was against the SEC or Big12 because then you could avoid rematches in the bowls. There is no way to avoid it with the Rose Bowl.

Nevermind. Nexus beat me to it.

 

[PuttinUp6]

How has no one brought this up yet......WE COULD PLAY FRICKING WASHINGTON AGAIN!!!!!!!!!!!!!

 

[HuskerBCS]

I can't wait till we get to watch a non conference B1G vs Pac12 game and then see a rematch in the Rose Bowl. :sarcasm

I don't really understand the point of this. It would be completely different if it was against the SEC or Big12 because then you could avoid rematches in the bowls. There is no way to avoid it with the Rose Bowl.

Not true. As of right now B1G is contracted to three bowl games against SEC (Capital One, Outback, Gator). Three bowl games against Big 12 (Insight, Meineke, TicketCity). And only one bowl game with Pac-12 which is the Rose Bowl.

I know the B1G is contracted to play bowl games against the SEC and Big12. If Florida and Nebraska played a non conference game in an SEC vs B1G challenge and then happened to end up as the second or third place teams in both the B1G and SEC, the bowls could put, for example, Nebraska in the Cap One Bowl and Florida in the Outback to avoid the rematch. The wouldn't HAVE TO play each other again in the Cap One Bowl.

If Nebraska and Oregon play each other in the non conference and then both teams end up winning their conference title, the HAVE TO play each other again in the Rose Bowl. There is no way to avoid the rematch. Only way they don't is if one of them is playing for the National Title.

 

[Nexus]

I can't wait till we get to watch a non conference B1G vs Pac12 game and then see a rematch in the Rose Bowl. :sarcasm

I don't really understand the point of this. It would be completely different if it was against the SEC or Big12 because then you could avoid rematches in the bowls. There is no way to avoid it with the Rose Bowl.

Not true. As of right now B1G is contracted to three bowl games against SEC (Capital One, Outback, Gator). Three bowl games against Big 12 (Insight, Meineke, TicketCity). And only one bowl game with Pac-12 which is the Rose Bowl.

I know the B1G is contracted to play bowl games against the SEC and Big12. If Florida and Nebraska played a non conference game in an SEC vs B1G challenge and then happened to end up as the second or third place teams in both the B1G and SEC, the bowls could put, for example, Nebraska in the Cap One Bowl and Florida in the Outback to avoid the rematch. The wouldn't HAVE TO play each other again in the Cap One Bowl.

If Nebraska and Oregon play each other in the non conference and then both teams end up winning their conference title, the HAVE TO play each other again in the Rose Bowl. There is no way to avoid the rematch. Only way they don't is if one of them is playing for the National Title.

I'm indifferent to the scenario either way. The same thing can be applied to the B1G CCG. It's unavoidable sometimes. Just play the game and be glad you're playing for something, is my mindset.

 

[JJ Husker]

I think it's a good idea. Cutting B1G conference games from 9 to 8 and adding 1 PAC-12 matchup per year. Don't see the down side at all. It could possibly make it a little tougher to schedule that one good non-con game but if all B1G schools are doing this then it stands to reason that the PAC-12 matchup may not have to fall in the first 4 weeks of non-con games. I don't want to see a dedicated team (like CU) every year but some variety from another major conference would be nice. Is it really that bad that we may have to give up an opponent like UT Chatt, Fresno, or Wyoming to make this happen? The possibility of a Rose Bowl rematch is very slim but, if it does happen, so what? For the near future, the B1G Rose Bowl rep is going to probably be Wiscy, Michigan, Ohio State, Nebraska, MSU, or Penn St and the Pac rep Oregon, USC, Stanford, & maybe UCLA or Washington. I'm no statistics guru but 1 of 5 or 6 teams being rematched with 1 of about 4 teams in the Rose Bowl, when your chances of meeting them regular season is 1 in 12, is hardly an eventuality to worry about.

Plus, I am tired of the southeastern exposure/recruiting angle constantly thrown in. 1 possible game yearly at a random SEC school is not going to change our recruiting there one iota IMO. If Nebraska or B1G schools want more SEC area recruits, then the best solution is to reduce our entrance requirements to meet those of the SEC. Personally I would rather we remained viable academic institutions rather than lowering ourselves to the SEC academic level. So what if they win 9 out of every 10 NCG's? Most reasonable people can see why that is. I can beat most any 4 year old in a game of chess. Should I be proud of that? Is that a completely fair contest? Personally I felt sorry for the SEC during the Heisman awards. Luck, RG3, and Ball were so well spoken and the standouts from Bama and LSU could hardly formulate a sentence. That's it in a nutshell right there.

 

[Nexus]

@HuskerBCS,

Another thing I should've mentioned in my last post. Bowl reps are interested in traditional powers with big travelling fanbases. They're all about $$ first. Since Nebraska fits both of those definitions, bowl reps wouldn't think twice about a rematch if the other opponent also fits that definition. It's business for them.

With that in mind, who is to say that Nebraska and Tennessee won't play twice in 2017? Both fit the definition highlighted above. And if circumstances allowed (even if they're not playing in the national title game against each other), you can bet any of those bowl games would love to have Nebraska vs Tennessee, rematch be damned.

 

[WoodyHayes1951]

I'd rather have an SEC or ACC challenge but oh well. We don't recruit players out west and like others have mentioned the fanbases out west are lacking. Tiny fanbases mean less exposure(unless you're the Canes).

I think it should rotate some though and not just #1 vs #1, #2 vs #2 etc. It should be handled like the Big Ten ACC hoops challenge.

 

[Michiganball]

Next year Pac-12 is starting their own network. This will give both conferences roughly 43% of the national market from what I was reading. That's pretty damn good exposure for just two conferences. That and the green of course.

 

[HuskerShark]

The problem that I have with this agreement (aside from the financial/national exposure aspect) is that the B1G already has the Rose Bowl, which ties these 2 conferences together already. What I don't like is that you are going to run into a situation where a team from the B1G plays a team from the Pac12 in the regular season and then they win their conferences and face each other in the Rose Bowl.

You know what this means? As fans of those 2 teams, we watch it. For the rest of the country, their view is, "Why waste my time watching that game when I saw them play already this year.

Examples:

Last year: Nebraska and Washington

This year: LSU and Alabama

Both of these games were total drags the first time they were played, so why tune in to watch the rematch in the bowl game when it wasn't a good game to watch in the first place? I guess that's really my only reason to dislike this agreement. I guess if we were to make this type of agreement with anyone, make it with the SEC or Big12. There's my 2 cents.

 

[HuskerBCS]

@HuskerBCS,

Another thing I should've mentioned in my last post. Bowl reps are interested in traditional powers with big travelling fanbases. They're all about $$ first. Since Nebraska fits both of those definitions, bowl reps wouldn't think twice about a rematch if the other opponent also fits that definition. It's business for them.

With that in mind, who is to say that Nebraska and Tennessee won't play twice in 2017? Both fit the definition highlighted above. And if circumstances allowed (even if they're not playing in the national title game against each other), you can bet any of those bowl games would love to have Nebraska vs Tennessee, rematch be damned.

Just doesn't happen very often. Business or not, the bowls try to avoid regular season rematches. In the business aspect of it, they are afraid fans won't travel and buy tickets because it's a rematch. Most fans aren't gonna wanna watch a second game unless the 1st game as an amazing game.