Big Ten Non-Conference Scheduling Mandates

[NUCat320]

A note on the ESPN scroll today says:
- Starting next year, the B1G will mandate that every football team play at least one non-conference game against a "Power Five" team;
- Or, against Notre Dame, Navy, Army, or BYU [independents];
- Or, against Cincinnati or UConn [deemed the 'good' programs from the AAC, apparently, or maybe there are a few conference teams that have them scheduled in the coming years, and the B1G didn't want anybody to have to 'pull a James Franklin']

This is good for the fans, right? I like it.

Is it news? Scroll also says ACC and SEC have the same or a similar rule in place.

This rule doesn't affect NU at all, I don't think, but probably affects Indiana or maybe Maryland or Rutgers or Minnesota. [I think Purdue always plays Notre Dame, and Illinois always Missouri, though maybe that has changed. Many conference schools have annual P5 rivalry games.]

Army just became significantly more in-demand, perhaps.

Also, probably one step closer to the formal splitting of the P5 and its rules, and 'the rest of them' and their rules, and all of those sad, sad schools that jumped to the Big East at the prospect of losing in a BCS game.

 

[iskaboo]

Illinois has not played Mizzou since 2010 but has played at least one Power 5 team (primarily Washington or Arizona State) each year. They have also played Cincinnati.

The only year the Minnesota did not play a Power 5 school was 2013. They have played TCU for the past two years.

http://www.fbschedules.com/ncaa/ncaa-football-schedules.php

 

[Purple Pile Driver]

A note on the ESPN scroll today says:
- Starting next year, the B1G will mandate that every football team play at least one non-conference game against a "Power Five" team;
- Or, against Notre Dame, Navy, Army, or BYU [independents];
- Or, against Cincinnati or UConn [deemed the 'good' programs from the AAC, apparently, or maybe there are a few conference teams that have them scheduled in the coming years, and the B1G didn't want anybody to have to 'pull a James Franklin']

This is good for the fans, right? I like it.

Is it news? Scroll also says ACC and SEC have the same or a similar rule in place.

This rule doesn't affect NU at all, I don't think, but probably affects Indiana or maybe Maryland or Rutgers or Minnesota. [I think Purdue always plays Notre Dame, and Illinois always Missouri, though maybe that has changed. Many conference schools have annual P5 rivalry games.]

Army just became significantly more in-demand, perhaps.

Also, probably one step closer to the formal splitting of the P5 and its rules, and 'the rest of them' and their rules, and all of those sad, sad schools that jumped to the Big East at the prospect of losing in a BCS game.

Curious add by including the OR's in there. Why not make it clean and just keep it at Power 5 teams?

 

[wildcat229]

A note on the ESPN scroll today says:
- Starting next year, the B1G will mandate that every football team play at least one non-conference game against a "Power Five" team;
- Or, against Notre Dame, Navy, Army, or BYU [independents];
- Or, against Cincinnati or UConn [deemed the 'good' programs from the AAC, apparently, or maybe there are a few conference teams that have them scheduled in the coming years, and the B1G didn't want anybody to have to 'pull a James Franklin']

This is good for the fans, right? I like it.

Is it news? Scroll also says ACC and SEC have the same or a similar rule in place.

This rule doesn't affect NU at all, I don't think, but probably affects Indiana or maybe Maryland or Rutgers or Minnesota. [I think Purdue always plays Notre Dame, and Illinois always Missouri, though maybe that has changed. Many conference schools have annual P5 rivalry games.]

Army just became significantly more in-demand, perhaps.

Also, probably one step closer to the formal splitting of the P5 and its rules, and 'the rest of them' and their rules, and all of those sad, sad schools that jumped to the Big East at the prospect of losing in a BCS game.

Navy is no longer an independent. They are part of the AAC. Curious on why Army and Navy are in but Air Force is not.

 

[hdhntr1]

A note on the ESPN scroll today says:
- Starting next year, the B1G will mandate that every football team play at least one non-conference game against a "Power Five" team;
- Or, against Notre Dame, Navy, Army, or BYU [independents];
- Or, against Cincinnati or UConn [deemed the 'good' programs from the AAC, apparently, or maybe there are a few conference teams that have them scheduled in the coming years, and the B1G didn't want anybody to have to 'pull a James Franklin']

This is good for the fans, right? I like it.

Is it news? Scroll also says ACC and SEC have the same or a similar rule in place.

This rule doesn't affect NU at all, I don't think, but probably affects Indiana or maybe Maryland or Rutgers or Minnesota. [I think Purdue always plays Notre Dame, and Illinois always Missouri, though maybe that has changed. Many conference schools have annual P5 rivalry games.]

Army just became significantly more in-demand, perhaps.

Also, probably one step closer to the formal splitting of the P5 and its rules, and 'the rest of them' and their rules, and all of those sad, sad schools that jumped to the Big East at the prospect of losing in a BCS game.

Three things will affect NU. One, move to 9 conference games. Second is part of the first, dropping to 3 OOC games. The third is elimination of FCS games. This makes the road to a bowl more difficult. Most years (except last year) we have been at least 3-1 in OOC meaning only having to win 2-3 conference games to get to a bowl. This ups it to at least 3 and likely 4 conference wins. Also makes it unbalanced between home and away. Probably means no more two game power 5 OOC schedules as it could mean having to win 5 conference games just to get to a bowl. And if you only have 4 home conference games in a year that could be really difficult. Probably reduces # of BIG teams reaching bowls by at least two to three.

 

[hdhntr1]

Navy is no longer an independent. They are part of the AAC. Curious on why Army and Navy are in but Air Force is not.

Wasn't AF in the WAC or does that even exist any more? Army and Navy are both on the East coast so it would make sense for them but not for AF. And is the PAC 12/14 or whatever ready to take them or the Big 12? If not, they have no Power 5 conference to go to.

 

[kaTNap]

Air Force is in the Mountain West conference, as are a lot of the old WAC schools.

 

[charcat]

So does this preclude match ups with other academic schools like Tulane Rice etc?

 

[wildcat229]

Wasn't AF in the WAC or does that even exist any more? Army and Navy are both on the East coast so it would make sense for them but not for AF. And is the PAC 12/14 or whatever ready to take them or the Big 12? If not, they have no Power 5 conference to go to.

Your East Coast reasoning is probably the answer. I was really questioning the inclusion of Army as a Power Five surrogate when they are generally not the same caliber as Air Force or Navy.

 

[docrugby1]

I suggested a few years ago that a "sub conference" of academic equivalent schools be formed. I would have NU and Stanford in the west, Duke and Vanderbilt in the east. NU plays Stanford and Duke plays Vanderbilt first weekend of season. The winners and losers play each other on the 3rd Saturday of the season. The first year the west hosts the 3rd weekend games, the east the following year. After 2 years the pairings can be switched, for instance, NU and Duke are paired with Stanford and Vanderbilt paired for a 2 year cycle. All schools are in different conferences so that would be helpful. Other schools could be substituted periodically ND or BC for Duke, Navy or Army for anyone

Rice, Tulane and Air Force would be left out under new B1G guidelines

 

[NJCat83588]

So does this preclude match ups with other academic schools like Tulane Rice etc?

Nope. Just means those games don't count against the mandatory Power 5+ game.

 

[AstroCat]

These new requirements are actually closer to how Big Ten football used to be back in the "old days". In the 1970’s, there were a total of 11 games and 8 of those were conference games, with only 3 non-conf games. A brief scan of NU’s schedule in those days showed that most of our non-conf opponents were from power conferences. Just take a look at the Northwestern schedule from 1974 (with rankings in parentheses):

Michigan State
Notre Dame (1)
Nebraska (10)
Oregon
Iowa
Purdue
Ohio State (1)
Minnesota
Indiana
Wisconsin
Illinois

As you can see, scheduling FCS (or 1-AA) teams did not seem to occur back then. I do not know if that was because it was not allowed or if Big Ten teams simply chose not to. Also, in those days, you sometimes started the season with a conference game, which is something Big Ten never does today.

 

[shakes3858]

We still have an FCS game booked in 2016 and 2017. Additionally, in 2018, we start the season at Purdue.

 

[sdDaveP]

Curious add by including the OR's in there. Why not make it clean and just keep it at Power 5 teams?

I think they added the exceptions because they were already on the schedules for some Big Ten teams (who requested those exceptions).

 

[NJCat83588]

We still have an FCS game booked in 2016 and 2017. Additionally, in 2018, we start the season at Purdue.

Existing FCS games were grandfathered in.

 

[hdhntr1]

These new requirements are actually closer to how Big Ten football used to be back in the "old days". In the 1970’s, there were a total of 11 games and 8 of those were conference games, with only 3 non-conf games. A brief scan of NU’s schedule in those days showed that most of our non-conf opponents were from power conferences. Just take a look at the Northwestern schedule from 1974 (with rankings in parentheses):

Michigan State
Notre Dame (1)
Nebraska (10)
Oregon
Iowa
Purdue
Ohio State (1)
Minnesota
Indiana
Wisconsin
Illinois

As you can see, scheduling FCS (or 1-AA) teams did not seem to occur back then. I do not know if that was because it was not allowed or if Big Ten teams simply chose not to. Also, in those days, you sometimes started the season with a conference game, which is something Big Ten never does today.

And in 1970, there were 10 games total. 7 conference and 3 non conference. But back then with only one bowl you could go to, the need to get to a certain number of wins was meaningless.

 

[FeliSilvestris]

Wasn't AF in the WAC or does that even exist any more? Army and Navy are both on the East coast so it would make sense for them but not for AF. And is the PAC 12/14 or whatever ready to take them or the Big 12? If not, they have no Power 5 conference to go to.

Assuming "they" means AF, it seems that a few years ago the Big 12 approached them but were turned down by AF on competitive grounds. Their AD Mueh was quoted saying:

"We were approached by the Big 12, and I told them we're not a good fit for that conference. In the Big 12, geography makes sense, the economics make sense, but recruiting makes no sense for us. I can't recruit against Texas, Oklahoma, Oklahoma State,...That's why I turned down the Big 12. I can't do that to my kids, because they'll get beat up. I'd love the extra $12 million or whatever it would be per year from the TV money. And I know how I'd spend the money. I'd build a new soccer stadium, and I'd build a new baseball facility, all in one year. But I can't do that."

So, it seems they do NOT want to join a P5 conference.

Back then they were quite interested in becoming a FB-only member of the Big East (now AAC) where they were planning to join Navy and Army. Plans apparently changed, and now only Navy is in the AAC.

 

[villox]

I'm glad they're making teams keep a Power-5 opponent in non-conference since they're eliminating FCS. A quick glance at the schedule indicates every single team already has at least one power 5 opponent, but with the elimination of one cupcake I could have seen teams dropping Power 5 anyway.

http://grfx.cstv.com/photos/schools...014-15/misc_non_event/2015-schedule-chart.pdf

 

[kaTNap]

As you can see, scheduling FCS (or 1-AA) teams did not seem to occur back then. I do not know if that was because it was not allowed or if Big Ten teams simply chose not to. Also, in those days, you sometimes started the season with a conference game, which is something Big Ten never does today.

Until just a few years ago, a D-1A (= FBS) school could only count one D-IAA (= FCS) win toward bowl eligibility every four years, so most big schools didn't bother playing them. The FCS schools complained because they wanted the big payday they could get by playing an FBS school regularly.

 

[pawildcat]

And in 1970, there were 10 games total. 7 conference and 3 non conference. But back then with only one bowl you could go to, the need to get to a certain number of wins was meaningless.

There were also a few years in the '80s when it went to nine conference games as the schedule increased to 12 games. As late as the '60s, many teams played a nine-game schedule overall. I believe the 1962 team that was No. 1 for a while ended up 7-2.

 

[hdhntr1]

There were also a few years in the '80s when it went to nine conference games as the schedule increased to 12 games. As late as the '60s, many teams played a nine-game schedule overall. I believe the 1962 team that was No. 1 for a while ended up 7-2.

I believe they added the 8th conference game and 11 overall in 71. Just saying back then, there was only one bowl game for the conference so preseason was meaningless other than preparing for conference games as far as bowls were concerned.

 

[hdhntr1]

Until just a few years ago, a D-1A (= FBS) school could only count one D-IAA (= FCS) win toward bowl eligibility every four years, so most big schools didn't bother playing them. The FCS schools complained because they wanted the big payday they could get by playing an FBS school regularly.

Got to wonder what they (FCS) will do now that they have basically been cut out. Have to feel that this will cause other problems

 

[FeliSilvestris]

Got to wonder what they (FCS) will do now that they have basically been cut out. Have to feel that this will cause other problems

Cut out from what? Isn't this policy specific to the B1G?
If so, FCS teams scheduling other conferences may not be affected. If all P5 conferences do it, there are non-P5 conferences for FCS teams to play against.
Regardless, most FCS teams play the vast majority of their games against FCS opponents, so that part of their schedule wouldn't be affected anyhow.

 

[iskaboo]

The FCS universities get big paydays for playing FBS schools and therefore usually conceding a loss. A school like Eastern Illinois will lose out big time monetarily if it can no longer schedule an FBS opponent.

 

[FeliSilvestris]

The FCS universities get big paydays for playing FBS schools and therefore usually conceding a loss. A school like Eastern Illinois will lose out big time monetarily if it can no longer schedule an FBS opponent.

Are you replying to my post?

As I wrote, this thread seems to be about scheduling restrictions imposed by the B1G.

There are other P5 conferences which may have different policies, as well as non-P5 FBS conferences.

FCS schhols may still have plenty of FBS foes to choose from. And they still have to play their own FCS conference schedules, and non-conference FCS teams. Few if any FCS teams schedule more than 1 or 2 FBS opponents, and not necessarily P5 one(s).

 

[hdhntr1]

The FCS universities get big paydays for playing FBS schools and therefore usually conceding a loss. A school like Eastern Illinois will lose out big time monetarily if it can no longer schedule an FBS opponent.

In many cases it goes a long way toward funding their programs.

 

[hdhntr1]

Are you replying to my post?

As I wrote, this thread seems to be about scheduling restrictions imposed by the B1G.

There are other P5 conferences which may have different policies, as well as non-P5 FBS conferences.

FCS schhols may still have plenty of FBS foes to choose from. And they still have to play their own FCS conference schedules, and non-conference FCS teams. Few if any FCS teams schedule more than 1 or 2 FBS opponents, and not necessarily P5 one(s).

The playing the power 5 team goes a long way to paying for their overall program. Non Power 5 programs cannot offer that kind of payday. And while others might still be able to schedule them, I could see that disappearing quickly when the difference gets them to not count those victories. (similar to what it was) Think that will not happen? THought I heard that the PAC 12 or 14 or whatever it is being called these days was going to a 9 game conference schedule as well. Can the elimination of FCS games be far behind? In fact, I don't see FCS games in the PAC now at least in the schools I checked. That is two conferences that no longer would allow FCS. How long does it take for other Power 5 conferences to be prevented and if they can no longer schedule FCS and have it count, wouldn't the NCAA be forced to keep FCS games from counting for any D1 program for bowl eligibility? That would effectively cut the money for the FCS programs and I would guess that many would fold..

 

[hdhntr1]

The playing the power 5 team goes a long way to paying for their overall program. Non Power 5 programs cannot offer that kind of payday. And while others might still be able to schedule them, I could see that disappearing quickly when the difference gets them to not count those victories. (similar to what it was) Think that will not happen? THought I heard that the PAC 12 or 14 or whatever it is being called these days had a 9 game conference schedule as well. Can the elimination of FCS games be far behind? In fact, I don't see FCS games in the PAC now at least in the schools I checked. That is two conferences that no longer would allow FCS. How long does it take for other Power 5 conferences to be prevented and if they can no longer schedule FCS and have it count, wouldn't the NCAA be forced to keep FCS games from counting for any D1 program for bowl eligibility? Otherwise it jeopardizes their lucrative bowl program. That would effectively cut the money for the FCS programs and I would guess that many would fold..

 

[Catreporter]

The playing the power 5 team goes a long way to paying for their overall program. Non Power 5 programs cannot offer that kind of payday. And while others might still be able to schedule them, I could see that disappearing quickly when the difference gets them to not count those victories. (similar to what it was) Think that will not happen? THought I heard that the PAC 12 or 14 or whatever it is being called these days was going to a 9 game conference schedule as well. Can the elimination of FCS games be far behind? In fact, I don't see FCS games in the PAC now at least in the schools I checked. That is two conferences that no longer would allow FCS. How long does it take for other Power 5 conferences to be prevented and if they can no longer schedule FCS and have it count, wouldn't the NCAA be forced to keep FCS games from counting for any D1 program for bowl eligibility? That would effectively cut the money for the FCS programs and I would guess that many would fold..

PAC-12 has been on a nine game schedule for the last couple of years, I believe.

 

[wildcat229]

PAC-12 has been on a nine game schedule for the last couple of years, I believe.

The Pacr10/12 has been playing a 9 game schedule since 2006.

 

[hdhntr1]

A note on the ESPN scroll today says:
- Starting next year, the B1G will mandate that every football team play at least one non-conference game against a "Power Five" team;
- Or, against Notre Dame, Navy, Army, or BYU [independents];
- Or, against Cincinnati or UConn [deemed the 'good' programs from the AAC, apparently, or maybe there are a few conference teams that have them scheduled in the coming years, and the B1G didn't want anybody to have to 'pull a James Franklin']

This is good for the fans, right? I like it.

Is it news? Scroll also says ACC and SEC have the same or a similar rule in place.

This rule doesn't affect NU at all, I don't think, but probably affects Indiana or maybe Maryland or Rutgers or Minnesota. [I think Purdue always plays Notre Dame, and Illinois always Missouri, though maybe that has changed. Many conference schools have annual P5 rivalry games.]

Army just became significantly more in-demand, perhaps.

Also, probably one step closer to the formal splitting of the P5 and its rules, and 'the rest of them' and their rules, and all of those sad, sad schools that jumped to the Big East at the prospect of losing in a BCS game.

Basically it is a coach and program killer. Looks good for the top of the conference but for the middle and bottom not so good. There are three rules. 9 game conference schedule (only 3 OOC) Power 5 opponent and no FCS. No other conference has even two of these limitations.

With these new rules, I would guess that at least 1/3 of the teams currently going to bowls out of the BIG would not be going. This while their competition in other conferences do go. The extra practices, the warm weather trip, the recognition and the rest. Among other things, this would also make the recruiting job harder. Like I said, no problem for the top of the conference but for the bottom half, big problems. FOr example, PSU, IL and Rutgers last year would have likely not made it with the new rules. Makes it harder to build or bring back a program. Mean time, if that same team was in Big 12, ACC or SEC, they make it.

Just saying it harkens back to the period where the BIG only had one bowl and everyone else was SOL. This led to the BIG 2 Little 8 where recruiting for other teams was at a severe disadvantage. One thing if everyone is playing by the same rules, but if they are not...

 

[Catreporter]

Basically it is a coach and program killer. Looks good for the top of the conference but for the middle and bottom not so good. There are three rules. 9 game conference schedule (only 3 OOC) Power 5 opponent and no FCS. No other conference has even two of these limitations.

With these new rules, I would guess that at least 1/3 of the teams currently going to bowls out of the BIG would not be going. This while their competition in other conferences do go. The extra practices, the warm weather trip, the recognition and the rest. Among other things, this would also make the recruiting job harder. Like I said, no problem for the top of the conference but for the bottom half, big problems. FOr example, PSU, IL and Rutgers last year would have likely not made it with the new rules. Makes it harder to build or bring back a program. Mean time, if that same team was in Big 12, ACC or SEC, they make it.

Just saying it harkens back to the period where the BIG only had one bowl and everyone else was SOL. This led to the BIG 2 Little 8 where recruiting for other teams was at a severe disadvantage. One thing if everyone is playing by the same rules, but if they are not...

I agree that this could hurt the "middle class" of the conference. Everyone has to play five BIG road games every other year so that will make getting to seven home games some years a challenge for everybody. But the big boys can afford to pay the big money it might require to get teams to play there without giving them a return game. I don't know that the teams who don't sell out or have smaller stadiums can afford to do that. .

 

[FeliSilvestris]

Basically it is a coach and program killer. Looks good for the top of the conference but for the middle and bottom not so good. There are three rules. 9 game conference schedule (only 3 OOC) Power 5 opponent and no FCS. No other conference has even two of these limitations.

You may have misunderstood that all OOC opponents must be P5.
That is NOT what they are saying.

It is that AT LEAST ONE of the OOC opponents must be from the P5 (plus exceptions).

I think NU has for decades satisfied that rule, in the vast majority of the seasons. California, Stanford, Duke, Vandy, ND of course, Army, AF, etc would still satisfy the rule and have been scheduled in recent decades. I think one of the very few exceptions may be 2006, when NU apparently played Miami (OH), NH (IAA) , EMU, and UNLV (going 2-2 with a loss to NH). Even in the pre-GB era NU played at least one P5 opponent (for example, Duke, AF, Army, Mizzou and Washington were among the OOC opponents in the years prior to GB)

As far as nont scheduling FCS teams, it only affects a team that needed that FCS win to be bowl-eligible. Any team that under the current system wins 7 or more games would still have at least 6 FBS-victories which would be minimally enough for bowl eligibility. Those with only 5 FBS victories are the ones affected. As discussed elsewhere, the gap between a weak FBS opponent (say bottom half of the MAC or equivalent) and a relatively strong FCS team is not very big. So, there are plenty of weak FBS opponents to replace the FCS ones.

Generally a team that reaches bowl eligibility with only 5 FBS wins will likely go to a fairly minor bowl, anyway. Maybe better than nothing, but not much better. It'd be still a mediocre (at best) season.

 

[hdhntr1]

I agree that this could hurt the "middle class" of the conference. Everyone has to play five BIG road games every other year so that will make getting to seven home games some years a challenge for everybody. But the big boys can afford to pay the big money it might require to get teams to play there without giving them a return game. I don't know that the teams who don't sell out or have smaller stadiums can afford to do that. .

I would guess this is less of a problem as the OOC games you would play away are likely Power 5 type games. Just schedule so you are at home for that game on the year you only have 4 Conference home games. So those years you would have 3 OOC home games and 4 conference home games. On the year you have 5 conference home games you would play the OOC Power 5 game away so you would have 2 OOC home games.

 

[hdhntr1]

You may have misunderstood that all OOC opponents must be P5.
That is NOT what they are saying.

It is that AT LEAST ONE of the OOC opponents must be from the P5 (plus exceptions).

I think NU has for decades satisfied that rule, in the vast majority of the seasons. California, Stanford, Duke, Vandy, ND of course, Army, AF, etc would still satisfy the rule and have been scheduled in recent decades. I think one of the very few exceptions may be 2006, when NU apparently played Miami (OH), NH (IAA) , EMU, and UNLV (going 2-2 with a loss to NH). Even in the pre-GB era NU played at least one P5 opponent (for example, Duke, AF, Army, Mizzou and Washington were among the OOC opponents in the years prior to GB)

As far as nont scheduling FCS teams, it only affects a team that needed that FCS win to be bowl-eligible. Any team that under the current system wins 7 or more games would still have at least 6 FBS-victories which would be minimally enough for bowl eligibility. Those with only 5 FBS victories are the ones affected. As discussed elsewhere, the gap between a weak FBS opponent (say bottom half of the MAC or equivalent) and a relatively strong FCS team is not very big. So, there are plenty of weak FBS opponents to replace the FCS ones.

Generally a team that reaches bowl eligibility with only 5 FBS wins will likely go to a fairly minor bowl, anyway. Maybe better than nothing, but not much better. It'd be still a mediocre (at best) season.

I understand just fine. The new rules are fine for the top of the conference and it could help get one of those teams into the playoffs. But at this point, the BIG is acting alone and creating an unequal environment that will hurt teams at the bottom trying to build a program and teams in the middle trying to sustain a program.

Look at the results. As it is, with 4 OOC games, it is likely we go at least 3-1 and it can take only 2-3 conference wins to get to a bowl. You have to play a total of 8 Power 5 games with as many as 4 below Power 5. With the new rules, would have to play at least 10. and would have to win at least 3-4 conference games just to get eligible. In the mean time, a mediocre SEC, ACC or Big 12 team sets up and gets to a bowl while the BIG team does not. Then that is used against us in recruiting.

You might think that minor bowls are unimportant but they get the program additional practices which are beneficial for younger players and It gives rewards to the players and addition recognition. If the new rules were in place last year, probably three of the BIG teams who went bowling (PSU, PSU and Rutgers would likely not have gone bowling. In our own case, we would not have gone in 2011 and would likely not been bowl eligible in 2007. We built off of those seasons. This will make it much more difficult for lower level and mid level BIG teams. While it might sound good on the surface, ...

In the end, it is likely about money and TV contracts. Conference games draw more revenue than OOC games and power 5 matchups more than FCS BIG games. But again, while it benefits the top, it hurts the bottom half of the conference.

 

[catsattackfor3]

A top Power 5 Conference game is fine but what does that mean exactly?? Is a game vs. the likes of Kansas, Vandy, Washington State, Wake Forest who are down better for your schedule than Boise State, Northern Illinois or Air Force??? If I am Ohio State and schedule 2 cupcakes and then Vanderbilt am I ok when Michigan State may play Notre Dame and Oregon. It is a slippery slope when you tell schools who to play non conference.