Keep in mind that replacing a P5 game with a Group of 5 or a FCS school will cost us over a million dollars a game (not including more opportunity cost of higher gate and concessions revenue).
Football B1G considering removing P5 OOC opponent requirement
- Thread starter Richie O
- Start date
Bingo.
What's the math?
Have to do it over 2 years right to account for home away with a P5?
Home/Away P5:
1 game day revenue (gate, parking, consessions)
1 away game travel expense (semi local travel)
Home/Home G5:
2 game day revenues (gate, parking, consessions)
2 bought game expenses
The reality is Pitt plays a very very weak schedule. Seriously who did Pitt play these last two years in or out of conference? You discount those three games but Pitt only played two ranked teams all season. In 2021 they played 3 out of the 14 games. . Pitt conference schedule is a joke along with the entire schedule.
Their OOC is better than Rutgers. That is all that matters to me. Reality is that the B1G schedule (outside of OSU and Michigan) isn't much better. Even PSU has gotten better with their OOC schedule lately.
You are really going out of your way to deny the reality that Rutgers has a difficult schedule. Pitt? Laughable.
In regards to Pitt, I was just referencing their OOC. Outside of Clemson (and they are coming back to reality), their conference is a bunch of average teams.
In regards to our schedule, it will always be "tough" due to OSU, MICH and PSU. Indiana, Maryland and Michigan St we should be competitive against. Same for most of the west. The B1G is a good conference. It's still the big 2 though.
This doesn't make a lot of sense. If we are good enough to seriously think about being an at-large playoff team then we are good enough to contend for the Big Ten title.
Do you ever see us beating OSU? I can’t at this point but think a 1-2 loss team could get an at large. A strong OOC would help.
This was my reaction to the post you are commenting on as well. I respect Pitt for picking up a few good non-conference games. But with the recent state of the ACC, with zero elite teams (although Clemson and FSU will be back), some solid ones, the best teams not in Pitt's division, they pretty much had to do this.
I don't see the point of ignoring the presence of three annual elites on Rutgers schedule. They are playing those games, and their records reflect that.
I don't think everybody is accustomed yet to the stark difference in conference quality. B1G EAST and SEC teams are going up against 3-4 elite teams every year. A five-win team (as an example) from those two conferences is a completely different animal than a five-win team from most other conferences in a given year. But in general, I still see people comparing W-L records with no accounting at all for anything like that.
A 3 loss team could even get in some years. IIRC, looking back to 2014 if you look at an expanded CFP there were some years that would've happened.
A 3 loss team from the SEC or a team not named Rutgers would have a chance. My comment was for Rutgers to be considered for an At Large, we would have to have no more than 1-2 losses (with a good OOC). I think we lose the benefit of doubt if our OOC is Wagner, Temple and some other G5 school. We need at least 1 P5 OOC (win preferably) each year.
I wouldn't rule it out, all depends the resumes of teams around us in any given year. You wouldn't have thought Cincy would get in despite being undefeated but things broke their way around them and they did.
It's hard to imagine beating OSU at the moment, but it's also hard to imagine going 10-2 against a tough schedule.
Its hard to imagine beating Maryland or Illinois at this point.