James Burrill Angell

December 1st, 2015 at 12:32 PM ^

I know most people support at least one strong non-conf game but I'm beginning to wonder about that in the era of the playoff. One loss and you're out and with 9 conference games there are some years where we're not only dealing with MSU and OSU plus the occasionally resurgent Penn State but also get cross overs with multiple of Wisconsin, Iowa and Nebraska. 

Look at 2017 when we have to open with Florida in Jerryworld, follow that with a usually better than average Cincinnati and then have Wisconsin and Iowa in crossovers as well as dealing with PSU, MSU and OSU. That seems like a far more difficult gauntlet than most teams in this era have to face. All this in a year where we're likely losing 6 to 7 starters on each side of the ball from the previous year. 

 

Joined: 08/12/2009

MGoPoints: 15982

bklein09

December 1st, 2015 at 12:41 PM ^

You make a good point. Look at Iowa this year. Sure they played Pitt and Iowa State in the noncon, but they missed all the good Big East teams. Schedule isn't great, but they're in the playoff guaranteed if they beat Msu. Heck unc would be in for sure if they didn't drop a game and they played two FCS teams. What's the incentive to having a difficult non conference schedule other than fan satisfaction of course.



Sent from MGoBlog HD for iPhone & iPad

Joined: 08/24/2009

MGoPoints: 7118

drzoidburg

December 1st, 2015 at 6:43 PM ^

It makes a diff when you consider there's 4 spots for 5 conferences, and one of these days, ND might go unbeaten so that's 3 spots Plus we don't know if the committee would ever take 2 teams from the same conference. As of now, it looks unlikely, but by 2022 i strongly believe the playoff will be 8 teams, making OOC much more important

Joined: 09/20/2015

MGoPoints: 2220

NCMtnBlue

December 1st, 2015 at 1:44 PM ^

is the conference championship game.  Might not be enough, but if they win, it will be seen nationally, and be an extra game played compared to Baylor or TCU last year.

And yes, I will always firmly believe that a TCU team losing on the road to Baylor deserved to get in the playoffs more than an OSU team losing at home to Virginia Tech.

Joined: 05/12/2011

MGoPoints: 10411

A Fan In Fargo

December 1st, 2015 at 5:11 PM ^

with the conference schedule and let the cards fall where they will. Do what the SEC teams do. You don't see Bama rolling their tide and playing the tough out of conference games year in and year out. Works for them. Oh and to hell with Notra Lame!

Joined: 02/16/2014

MGoPoints: -9997722

MI Expat NY

December 1st, 2015 at 1:50 PM ^

I think it's a bit early to start drawing conclusions about what is good and what is bad for playoff chances.  Last year, people went on and on about how the Big 12 can't get in without a conference championship game.  This year, Oklahama is a lock despite a bad loss and Clemson or Alabama could potentially find themselves outside looking in if they blow the conference championship games.  This year, you're talking about Iowa getting in despite playing nobody.  Last year, Baylor or TCU is most certainly in if either team had beaten anybod in non-conference play.

There's one way to guarantee entry into the playoffs.  Beat good teams and win your conference.  Scheduling a tough schedule is not going to cost us the playoffs.  Losing twice is going to cost us the playoffs.  Plus, trying to forecast opponent strength 2 or more years down the line is a fool's errand.  Hell, the playoffs may not be at 4 teams by the time some of these games are played.

Joined: 07/24/2008

MGoPoints: 8640

UMinSF

December 1st, 2015 at 4:14 PM ^

Strongly disagree. Perhaps I'm in the minority, but my love of Michigan football does not rest solely on making the playoff. 

What do I love?  A great game against a strong opponent, in a packed big house on a gorgeous autumn afternoon.  That's what I love. UCLA? Perfect.

There's no comparison between a match-up against a traditional power and a snoozefest against a clearly inforior opponent. The SEC has this all wrong, and we shouldn't sink to their level.

Joined: 04/06/2009

MGoPoints: 18204

MichiWolv

December 1st, 2015 at 1:01 PM ^

I'm sure the Big Ten would be in favor of it seeing how they recently added a requirement stating each team has to schedule at least power 5 non-con opponent, and can no longer schedule FCS teams. Maybe the Pac 12 agreement fell apart now that both conferences will play 9 conference games. I'm sure it could still be worked out if they wanted to make it a thing, would just require more effort.

Joined: 05/19/2011

MGoPoints: 406

drzoidburg

December 1st, 2015 at 6:53 PM ^

would be hard to convince teams like iowa with a 10th game already locked, or UM which is trying to make notre dame the 10th. It seems like all thru the Carr years no 2nd P5 opponent was played and even with several added now that they're off the schedule, there's little evidence of that changing. There'd even be grumbling from our own fans about playing "only" 6 home games. In addition, teams like illinois/indiana would be left out of their pathetic bowls half the time, while playoff contenders risk a damaging loss, at least until it's expanded The tv $ for this would have to be obscene to overcome all this

Joined: 09/20/2015

MGoPoints: 2220

charblue.

December 1st, 2015 at 12:56 PM ^

thread devolved into a competitive discussion about nonconference strength versus survival of the conference's most fit Big East players, as should be the concern. In any case, the UCLA dates are dutifully listed under the future schedule pulldown tab at the top of the page here, in case anyone was wondering.

Joined: 05/25/2010

MGoPoints: 11420