OT: Football - upcoming OOC schedules for select B1G and SEC teams- your thoughts

Submitted by Amazinblu on March 28th, 2024 at 9:22 AM

A note about Penn State's '25 OOC schedule - adding FIU - caught my eye and provoked a thought about upcoming seasons.  So, here's what's published about OOC schedules for select teams over the next two seasons.   What do you think.  Your thoughts?

Select B1G Teams: 

Michigan

  • '24: Fresno State, Texas, and Arkansas State
  • '25: New Mexico, @ Oklahoma, and Central Michigan

Ohio State

  • '24: Akron, Western Michigan, and Marshall
  • '25: Texas, Ohio University, and UConn

Oregon

  • '24: Idaho, Boise State, and @ Oregon State
  • '25: Montana, Oklahoma State, and Oregon State

Penn State

  • '24: @ West Virginia, Bowling Green, and Kent State
  • '25: Nevada, Florida International, and Villanova

USC

  • '24: LSU (neutral - Las Vegas), Utah State, and Notre Dame
  • '25: Ole Miss, Georgia Southern, and @ Notre Dame

 

Select SEC teams: 

Georgia (SEC's eight game conference schedule = four OOC games)

  • '24: Clemson (neutral - Atlanta), Tennessee Tech, UMass, and Georgia Tech
  • '25: @ UCLA, Austin Peay, Charlotte, and Georgia Tech

Alabama (SEC plays four OOC games)

  • '24: Western Kentucky, South Florida, @ Wisconsin, and Mercer
  • '25: @ Florida State, ULM, Wisconsin, and Eastern Illinois

Texas (SEC plays four OOC games)

  • '24: Colorado State, @ Michigan, UTSA, and ULM
  • '25: @ Ohio State, San Jose State, UTEP, and Sam Houston

LSU (SEC plays four OOC games)

  • '24: USC (neutral - Las Vegas), Nicholls, UCLA, and South Alabama
  • '25: @ Clemson, Louisiana Tech, Western Kentucky, and TBD

energyblue1

March 28th, 2024 at 9:50 AM ^

LOL, given our OOC schedule the last few decades compared to many other programs including osu, I didn't give two turds about the criticism of the ooc schedule!  Then given we played the same number of power conference teams in the regular season of all but one or two sec teams and acc teams, refused to give even one turd...  Then given the annual sec scrimmage week against fcs schools.. 

BuckeyeinTexas

March 29th, 2024 at 12:20 PM ^

Just like your UCLA matchup that was canceled, Ohio State’s matchup with Washington that was supposed to have been this season was canceled. But nobody has been scheduling tougher OOC than OSU and we have Texas, Alabama, and Georgia already scheduled. Although, honestly, with all of the conference realignment, I’m not 100% convinced that all of those will happen. And more likely from the SEC side. 

1VaBlue1

March 28th, 2024 at 10:19 AM ^

I get the point - protect your path to the playoff, because the conference schedule will get you in.  But this is a pussy's view of the world.  I didn't like it the last couple of years, I won't like it going forward.  Howevs...  Having Texas and Oklahoma on the next two schedules is not like planning 3 (or 4) total cupcakes (aka - PSU and OSU's '24 path, among others).

I will say that Alabama schedule's nicely out of conference, save for the 4th cupcake before Auburn.

StuckinCO2

March 28th, 2024 at 9:32 AM ^

I think we should give some props to at least the select SEC teams you listed for scheduling at least one big(ish) OOC game each year. Meanwhile, OSU in 2024 and PSU in both years have putrid OOC schedules.

With Michigan having had a similarly putrid OOC schedule last year, however, I guess we shouldn't point and laugh.

Blinkin

March 28th, 2024 at 9:35 AM ^

Our 2022 and 23 OOC schedules were awful, borderline offensive to the fans.  I get that with the stronger conference schedules (and soon to be bigger playoff), strength of schedule doesn't matter quite as much, but still.  I'd like to see one P5 opponent on the OOC each year. 

Amazinblu

March 28th, 2024 at 9:50 AM ^

Your points are fair - and, the upcoming seasons will meet that perspective of - "at least one P5 opponent" in the OOC.   This is what's published for Michigan's schedule - of P5 teams.  There's nothing noted after the '27 season.

  • '24 - Texas
  • '25 - @ Oklahoma
  • '26 - Oklahoma
  • '27 - @ Texas
  • '33 - Notre Dame
  • '34 - @ Notre Dame

Blinkin

March 28th, 2024 at 9:58 AM ^

Yeah, and we had Notre Dame in 18 and 19, we had Washington in 21 (and would have in 20 except for Covid), we had Utah in 2014 and 2015, heck we had OreSt and BYU in 2015 too.

It's just that there's a clear degredation of the OOC that went along with the 9 game B1G schedule not getting better, that led to a lot of uninteresting games the last couple of years.  Having a 9 game conference schedule doesn't count for a lot when that's just Indiana, Rutgers, THIS version of Nebraska, etc. 

HAIL 2 VICTORS

March 28th, 2024 at 12:07 PM ^

KC to AA Plane Tickets for 4: $1200.00

(2) Hotel Rooms: $500.00

(4) Tickets Together for USC) $1,000.00

Care Rental and Fuel/Parking $300.00

Food: $600.00

MDEN: $400.00

 

As I budget 4K for one game for 4 (probably low) the investment to see Michigan lose to a Texas not so much.  The upside of scheduling USC is the better chance of winning and the iconic history.  

However I see zero upside in this new conference of taking on a difficult OOC schedule with the top of the former PAC12 now in the fold.  

Pay 4K or more to see Michigan lose - or be a local putting even more into season tickets. Watching wins > tough schedules.

I have made that long drive back from South Bend to Chicago after an ND loss - BRUTAL!

 

Mich1993

March 28th, 2024 at 9:51 AM ^

Seems like we could at least play mediocre teams instead of crappy teams.  It's not like we would lose and would better prepare us for Big 10 play, I think.  Maybe 1 crappy team and 2 mediocre teams?

I expect our good OOC games this year and next year will not continue going forward.

Carcajou

March 29th, 2024 at 4:51 AM ^

UNLV and Bowling Green were both at least mediocre - they made bowl games; UNLV even made it to their conference championship.

You want better opponents?  Be willing to give up more home games. The nine-game conference schedule has made it much more problematic to do that.

Amazinblu

March 28th, 2024 at 10:18 AM ^

Over the next five seasons - Penn State and Michigan are only scheduled for regular conference play in the '26 and '27 seasons.

As for this season - the more notable PSU games are: hosting UCLA, Washington, and Ohio State, and they'll travel to play USC and Wisconsin.

It seems the schedulers want a number of B1G games in prime time to draw viewership that correlates to advertising revenue.

NittanyFan

March 28th, 2024 at 12:27 PM ^

Penn State's OOC scheduling has a lot to be desired, but --- no, that's not it.

They're only playing 1 decent or better home-and-home OOC every 2 years: and Pittsburgh isn't going to get that on an annual basis.  

Iowa plays 1 decent or better home-and-home OOC every 2 years too: they play Iowa State annually and there's a lot of Iowa folk who want out of that.  Not because they fear Iowa State.  But because they'd prefer some more variety.

NittanyFan

March 28th, 2024 at 3:02 PM ^

I get it, you have your narrative (and I suppose I have mine) ---- but Pittsburgh's a credible program regardless.  They won the ACC very recently (2021), and that's despite not having a win over PSU in that season or any of the 4 prior.

PSU will play Pittsburgh again at some point, just like the did in the late 2010s.  PSU does GAIN from playing them (it's always good to connect with the western PA fanbase directly).  They just aren't going to do it annually.

Double-D

March 28th, 2024 at 10:17 PM ^

I’m not disrespecting Pitt. But they are a step down from PSU.  Like MSU is to UofM and to a much further extent Cincinnati and OSU.  If you added either Cincinnati or Pitt to the Big Ten for example it would probably raise their programs and create some headaches for their in state big brothers. 

AWAS

March 28th, 2024 at 10:16 AM ^

To me, the ideal schedule has one P5 opponent and one local/regional program. While the marquee matchup won't always be at the Big House, we should be playing at least one directional Michigan or MAC school at home on an annual basis to share the limelight and the wealth. 

One thing that strikes me as terrible for football fans is the pattern of having all tomato cans at home when the P5 matchup is away.  It seems like a lose/lose approach.

 

S.G. Rice

March 28th, 2024 at 10:19 AM ^

These schedules were set in part before the playoff changes, so the prevalence of many cupcakes presumably reflects the old reality of a loss knocking you out.

In the new era you may well get in at 9-3 so the disincentive to schedule real opponents isn’t as strong.

truferblue22

March 28th, 2024 at 11:02 AM ^

I think that for all the "but they ain't played nobody!" talk we got last year (largely from buckeyes, even if it backfired after the sign stealing drama), that's a pretty GD weak schedule. 

 

And even their B1G schedule is fairly soft considering how strong this conference is now. 

FieldingBLUE

March 28th, 2024 at 11:11 AM ^

I have long had a lot to say about SEC scheduling, especially their chickenshit insistence on only playing 8 conference games, however...

They have adapted into a solid OOC template for most teams:
- 1 P5 opponent
- 1 FCS opponent
- 2 G5 opponents

That certainly beats the days when they had 3 G5 and 1 FCS and refused to play other P5 teams unless it was a lopsided regional/state rivalry game. I believe this is actually an SEC directive that all teams should/must(?) schedule like this. 

BUT... B1G teams often play 1 P5 and 2 G5 (and rarely the FCS - PSU?) but replace that weakest opponent with a conference game. And the SEC G5 games tend to be the lowest divisions possible or even the lower schools in the better conferences. 

In the era of a 12-team playoff, I hope there is some better equivalent for football like Kenpom/Torvik that can get us an accurate analytical comparison for these unequal schedules. Is there such a thing at the moment for football?

softshoes

March 28th, 2024 at 11:21 AM ^

The excuse in the past is playing these weaker teams is a way for them to earn some big money. I can't deny the truth of that. Of course at the same time it provides an easier path to the playoffs for the larger schools. 

My main problem with this is UM(ect) make you pay premium for subpar games. If I go to minor league games I expect to pay minor league prices.