Continued GARBAGE OOC scheduling from Penn State (& James Franklin)

[GrimReaper]

You’re cherry picking too. The most recent example is not better. That certainly didn’t hurt Michigan making the playoffs the last few years. And to the OP’s point, based on what your saying, Franklin is certainly not to blame for the history of PSU scheduling weak OOC opponents.

So fifteen years is cherry picking.? Whatever.

 

[PSU_Lions_84]

The Big Ten has no divisional format in 2024.

OK, I'm done. Not the right venue to teach reading comprehension.

 

[GrimReaper]

OK, I'm done. Not the right venue to teach reading comprehension.

And I quote "Especially when your division of that conference is amongst the toughest in the country. Not like Penn State plays in B1G West division" But you're done.

 

[PSUFTG2]

I don't believe that Barry is arguing for another home-and-home, just better ones. In the four years PSU is playing Temple and Syracuse home-and-home, it has seven home games.

Truthfully, I am not advocating for anything. Just trying to lend some clarity and explanation (which may be an uphill slog, and not worth taking on).
I don't have enough skin in the game to be an advocate either way. My personal observation is that many fans just want to see PSU win - whether they are scheduling Georgia, or The Sisters of the Poor, they don't care. They just want a "W". Those folks probably love the scheduling of maximum cupcakes.
I also expect there are some - who lay out big $$$ for every game - who are less than pleased. Different strokes for different folks. But those folks can vote with their wallets - if they feel strongly enough about it. So no harm done, and I need not be troubled to advocate for them.

The folks I do feel bad for are the players. They only get a handful of Saturdays in their entire careers, to strap on the pads and compete. Not every game is going to be a top 25 matchup, obviously. But the more quality match ups the better, and each time they have a game against a Villanova or their ilk, is one less opportunity to compete at the level they have earned. But, again, I don't have any skin in that game either.

 

[PSUSignore]

There's almost no incentive to schedule difficult non-conference games under the current playoff structure, you will rarely need that boost in schedule difficulty to qualify, especially under a 12 or 14 team model where the Big 10 and SEC contractually get more spots than other conferences. The amount of increased revenue from have a challenging home and home would likely be trivial, what does it add... maybe a 10-20% increase in attendance and concessions vs. a cream puff game? Compared to the possible risk of missing a playoff berth if we were to lose such a game, that is relatively meaningless. Like it or not, this scheduling approach is almost certainly here to stay.

 

[Midnighter]

Fellas, the bigger issue is why didn’t Coach Franklin post a congratulatory tweet to Cael and the wrestling team.

 

[GrimReaper]

Truthfully, I am not advocating for anything. Just trying to lend some clarity and explanation (which may be an uphill slog, and not worth taking on).
I don't have enough skin in the game to be an advocate either way. My personal observation is that many fans just want to see PSU win - whether they are scheduling Georgia, or The Sisters of the Poor, they don't care. They just want a "W". Those folks probably love the scheduling of maximum cupcakes.
I also expect there are some - who lay out big $$$ for every game - who are less than pleased. Different strokes for different folks. But those folks can vote with their wallets - if they feel strongly enough about it. So no harm done, and I need not be troubled to advocate for them.

The folks I do feel bad for are the players. They only get a handful of Saturdays in their entire careers, to strap on the pads and compete. Not every game is going to be a top 25 matchup, obviously. But the more quality match ups the better, and each time they have a game against a Villanova or their ilk, is one less opportunity to compete at the level they have earned. But, again, I don't have any skin in that game either.

Understood. I'm in the same boat, though there really is no good rationale for not upgrading the home-and-home segment of the OOC, unless it's fear of competition.

 

[GrimReaper]

There's almost no incentive to schedule difficult non-conference games under the current playoff structure, you will rarely need that boost in schedule difficulty to qualify, especially under a 12 or 14 team model where the Big 10 and SEC contractually get more spots than other conferences. The amount of increased revenue from have a challenging home and home would likely be trivial, what does it add... maybe a 10-20% increase in attendance and concessions vs. a cream puff game? Compared to the possible risk of missing a playoff berth if we were to lose such a game, that is relatively meaningless. Like it or not, this scheduling approach is almost certainly here to stay.

File that for when the selection committee excludes a school on the basis of strength of schedule, which I'll argue will become more likely going forward.

 

[Pennst8]

I swear --- people just say stuff without checking any facts.

In that case, I'm talking about your claims about "because this goes back to (Saban's) MSU days."

When Saban was at MSU, he had ALL of the following over a mere 5 years of OOC games:

• 3 OOC games against Notre Dame.
• 2 OOC games against Nebraska: these were in 1995 & 1996, so this was PEAK Nebraska.
• 2 OOC games against Oregon.
• 1 OOC game against Boston College.
• 2 OOC games against Louisville and 1 against Colorado State - these weren't teams from Power conferences but they were definitely amongst the better non-Power conference teams of the 1990s.

That's pretty damn tough! What were your claiming again - that Saban scheduled weak OOC at MSU?

Good god! Give it a rest with your analysis crap. You hate Franklin. Got it. You are sad about the teams we play. Got it. Alabama played this type of schedule for 20 years and it was fine. Just stop the melodramatic storyline. It's moronic.

 

[PSUSignore]

File that for when the selection committee excludes a school on the basis of strength of schedule, which I'll argue will become more likely going forward.

It may happen, but in the future teams on the cusp will have 2-4 losses, not like the 0-2 losses like the 4 team model had. So those teams have less of an argument regardless and those truly top teams will still get into the playoff. The committee doing so doesn't really prove a lot, as we all know they change their rationale at will. They could have used SOS to put PSU in over UW in 2016, but they didn't. But then in subsequent years they relied more on SOS. They just pick the teams they want, then craft a rationale around it after the fact, which is a huge part of the reason this subjective nonsense is so maddening in the first place. Just make a bracket with all the conference winners, throw in a couple of at large spots because there will certainly be some years where a 2nd place conference finisher will deserve a shot, and there's your playoff. The people in charge overthink it way too much. Put the ownership on the conference to figure out who their best team is and who they want to rep the conference in the playoff, which is a much easier job because conference teams all follow the same scheduling rules, are far more likely to play head to head and have common opponents. It's not possible to accurately rank a 133 team field where nobody plays each other and they all follow a different set of rules by conference. The solution is to stop trying to do that.

 

[Nitt1300]

a grip- get one

 

[PSUFTG2]

It may happen, but in the future teams on the cusp will have 2-4 losses, not like the 0-2 losses like the 4 team model had. So those teams have less of an argument regardless and those truly top teams will still get into the playoff. The committee doing so doesn't really prove a lot, as we all know they change their rationale at will. They could have used SOS to put PSU in over UW in 2016, but they didn't. But then in subsequent years they relied more on SOS. They just pick the teams they want, then craft a rationale around it after the fact, which is a huge part of the reason this subjective nonsense is so maddening in the first place. Just make a bracket with all the conference winners, throw in a couple of at large spots because there will certainly be some years where a 2nd place conference finisher will deserve a shot, and there's your playoff. The people in charge overthink it way too much. Put the ownership on the conference to figure out who their best team is and who they want to rep the conference in the playoff, which is a much easier job because conference teams all follow the same scheduling rules, are far more likely to play head to head and have common opponents. It's not possible to accurately rank a 133 team field where nobody plays each other and they all follow a different set of rules by conference. The solution is to stop trying to do that.

There will be even more "arguing" with the 12 team format. Because you will not only have the "we should have been in" arguments - but also the "we should have gotten a bye" arguments, and the "we should get a home game" arguments. It is going to be a *** show that will make the "old" system look like a well-oiled machine.

 

[OhioLion]

Go look at the OOC schedule in the early 2000’s and get back to us. Bowling Green, Temple, Youngstown State, Toledo, etc. etc. etc. I think PSU even played Coastal Carolina when they were a brand new program. The OOC schedule has been pretty consistent since then. It’s about making money for the athletic department and I’m not sure the HC has much to do with it.

Check Paterno’s century mark wins. Bowling Green holds two of them - supporting your argument. His 200th and 300th wins were against the mighty Falcons of Wood County, Ohio.
Goodness it was so nice to be on the wrestling room board the last few weeks. No whining like spoiled brats.

 

[Keyser Soze 16802]

PSU has their home-and-home OOC road games on the upcoming schedules against Syracuse and Temple.

This is ridiculous

 

[PSUSignore]

There will be even more "arguing" with the 12 team format. Because you will not only have the "we should have been in" arguments - but also the "we should have gotten a bye" arguments, and the "we should get a home game" arguments. It is going to be a *** show that will make the "old" system look like a well-oiled machine.

I can definitely see that happening, and as usual the infuriating committee that makes it up as they go will somewhat control the bye and home game placements. The committee needs to be abolished and a more objective, analytical model put in their place. I have never once wondered how Condoleezza Rice would rank college football teams and yet that's exactly what they did.

Given where we are today my ideal system would be what I said above, all conference champs, a couple at larges, and I'd have an average of multiple computer models handle the rankings of those that qualify, where the computer algorithm criteria and weightings are publicly known so that schools can create schedules and strategize in games to maximize their chances.

 

[PSUFTG2]

I can definitely see that happening, and as usual the infuriating committee that makes it up as they go will somewhat control the bye and home game placements. The committee needs to be abolished and a more objective, analytical model put in their place. I have never once wondered how Condoleezza Rice would rank college football teams and yet that's exactly what they did.

Given where we are today my ideal system would be what I said above, all conference champs, a couple at larges, and I'd have an average of multiple computer models handle the rankings of those that qualify, where the computer algorithm criteria and weightings are publicly known so that schools can create schedules and strategize in games to maximize their chances.

Basically agree (Though there simply is no objective way to select from non-champion teams playing in different conferences/leagues that don't even play one another. That is just impossible - though folks will debate that until they are hoarse).

FWIW: an 8 team "playoff" eliminates most of the nonsense (no "byes" nonsense, no "home game" nonsense)... and you get every conference champion in, to at least reduce (a bit) the "we deserved to be included" moans.
But sense, fairness, reasonableness, all play a distant second fiddle to the $$$ (or, at least, what the powers-that-be think will generate the most $$$ - though I think in the long term they may be selling themselves snake oil anyway).
And, truth be told, the folks who sign the checks (the TV folks) absolutely love the opportunity to have endless talking heads inciting endless nonsense about "who is in" - stuff that, so far anyway, has drawn more than enough eyeballs to fill a lot of air time. They love the stupidity. Truly. So there will be what there will be - at least for the near future.

 

[GrimReaper]

It may happen, but in the future teams on the cusp will have 2-4 losses, not like the 0-2 losses like the 4 team model had. So those teams have less of an argument regardless and those truly top teams will still get into the playoff. The committee doing so doesn't really prove a lot, as we all know they change their rationale at will. They could have used SOS to put PSU in over UW in 2016, but they didn't. But then in subsequent years they relied more on SOS. They just pick the teams they want, then craft a rationale around it after the fact, which is a huge part of the reason this subjective nonsense is so maddening in the first place. Just make a bracket with all the conference winners, throw in a couple of at large spots because there will certainly be some years where a 2nd place conference finisher will deserve a shot, and there's your playoff. The people in charge overthink it way too much. Put the ownership on the conference to figure out who their best team is and who they want to rep the conference in the playoff, which is a much easier job because conference teams all follow the same scheduling rules, are far more likely to play head to head and have common opponents. It's not possible to accurately rank a 133 team field where nobody plays each other and they all follow a different set of rules by conference. The solution is to stop trying to do that.

Don't disagree. But with a larger playoff as we move down the totem pole there will more likely be more teams with the same numerical record. To break up the clumps, the committee in its infinite wisdom will look at "better wins" and/or "better losses" to separate the clumps. It's basically
Herba$$'s eye test in a different form.

 

[GrimReaper]

Check Paterno’s century mark wins. Bowling Green holds two of them - supporting your argument. His 200th and 300th wins were against the mighty Falcons of Wood County, Ohio.
Goodness it was so nice to be on the wrestling room board the last few weeks. No whining like spoiled brats.

And the relevance of that to current and future scheduling decisions being made by a different group of people in charge?

No one is arguing against scheduling two one-and-done tomato cans. I think people would like to see an upgrade to the home-and-home portion, which is pretty much the only way to get better teams on the OOC schedule.

 

[LBUfanatic]

Really? Going back fifteen or so years Michigan has played Washington, ND, Florida, Colorado (in a good year), Utah, BYU, Bama, and Oregon. Ohio State has played ND, Oregon, Cincinnatti (in its good years), Oklahoma, VT, USC, and Washington.

I was commenting on Saban and Alabama. Someone else posted that at MSU Saban played a strong OOC schedule while at MSU. Which is true but those games were likely scheduled before his long tenure there from 1995-1999

 

[LBUfanatic]

I swear --- people just say stuff without checking any facts.

In that case, I'm talking about your claims about "because this goes back to (Saban's) MSU days."

When Saban was at MSU, he had ALL of the following over a mere 5 years of OOC games:

• 3 OOC games against Notre Dame.
• 2 OOC games against Nebraska: these were in 1995 & 1996, so this was PEAK Nebraska.
• 2 OOC games against Oregon.
• 1 OOC game against Boston College.
• 2 OOC games against Louisville and 1 against Colorado State - these weren't teams from Power conferences but they were definitely amongst the better non-Power conference teams of the 1990s.

That's pretty damn tough! What were your claiming again - that Saban scheduled weak OOC at MSU?

I’ll give you that Saban had to play those games on his schedule; however, given that he was only there for 5 seasons, will you concede that it want him who scheduled those games? Mind you, this was before major conference realignment and the uprooting of schedules that has taken place over the past 10 years or so.

 

[Monty2007]

From ESPN on this subject!
We have a repeat winner. For the second season in a row, Michigan has earned the "honor" of playing the nation's cushiest nonconference schedule. The two-time defending Big Ten champion doesn't face a single Power 5 opponent. This was also the case a year ago, marking the first time in 78 years the Wolverines didn't play a nonconference game against a current Power 5 member or Notre Dame. Michigan opens this season with three straight home games against East Carolina, UNLV and Bowling Green. It originally had a home-and-home series with UCLA set for 2022 and 2023, but canceled it in 2019 to guarantee at least seven home games each season.

The only team rivaling Michigan in this category is Georgia, which plays UT Martin, Ball State and UAB at home and closes the regular season against in-state rival Georgia Tech on the road. The Bulldogs were originally scheduled to play Oklahoma, but the SEC dictated that game be scrapped with the Sooners joining the league in 2024.

Both MI and GA have done quite well.

Now look what you done, you bought facts into this. You're going to confuse him.

 

[SoCalLion]

I’ll give you that Saban had to play those games on his schedule; however, given that he was only there for 5 seasons, will you concede that it want him who scheduled those games? Mind you, this was before major conference realignment and the uprooting of schedules that has taken place over the past 10 years or so.

I won't concede that to you, given that:

• Saban TOOK the job in the 1994-95 offseason knowing that Nebraska was on the schedule for the next 2 years and knowing they were defending National Champions.
• The Colorado State game was one of those "preseason classics" that was scheduled as an ADDITIONAL game: Saban willingly decided to face off with an extra credible OOC foe (don't laugh at CSU, they finished 11-2 and #17 in 1997, and were than an 8-4 team in 1998) --- on top of a schedule that already included both ND and Oregon.
• You have provided no tangible/verifiable evidence (thus far) of Saban actively trying to get out of tough OOC games.

I'm sorry, but you made a claim that Saban had weak OOC schedules during his 5 years at MSU, without doing any research on your own end. I did some research to show that's simply not true. And now instead of saying "you're right, you got me", you're wanting me to concede something to you?

 

[LBUfanatic]

I won't concede that to you, given that:

• Saban TOOK the job in the 1994-95 offseason knowing that Nebraska was on the schedule for the next 2 years and knowing they were defending National Champions.
• The Colorado State game was one of those "preseason classics" that was scheduled as an ADDITIONAL game: Saban willingly decided to face off with an extra credible OOC foe (don't laugh at CSU, they finished 11-2 and #17 in 1997, and were than an 8-4 team in 1998) --- on top of a schedule that already included both ND and Oregon.
• You have provided no tangible/verifiable evidence (thus far) of Saban actively trying to get out of tough OOC games.

I'm sorry, but you made a claim that Saban had weak OOC schedules during his 5 years at MSU, without doing any research on your own end. I did some research to show that's simply not true. And now instead of saying "you're right, you got me", you're wanting me to concede something to you?

I never said he didn’t play tough OOC games just that he didn’t schedule them. He had no leverage at MSU to “try to get out of tough OOC games” not should he have.

 

[Midnighter]

I won't concede that to you, given that:

• Saban TOOK the job in the 1994-95 offseason knowing that Nebraska was on the schedule for the next 2 years and knowing they were defending National Champions.
• The Colorado State game was one of those "preseason classics" that was scheduled as an ADDITIONAL game: Saban willingly decided to face off with an extra credible OOC foe (don't laugh at CSU, they finished 11-2 and #17 in 1997, and were than an 8-4 team in 1998) --- on top of a schedule that already included both ND and Oregon.
• You have provided no tangible/verifiable evidence (thus far) of Saban actively trying to get out of tough OOC games.

I'm sorry, but you made a claim that Saban had weak OOC schedules during his 5 years at MSU, without doing any research on your own end. I did some research to show that's simply not true. And now instead of saying "you're right, you got me", you're wanting me to concede something to you?

Saban did bail/postpone on Penn State though didn’t he?

 

[SoCalLion]

Saban did bail/postpone on Penn State though didn’t he?

Seriously --- ANOTHER ONE. Another example of a poster here making claims without doing a single minute of research!!!

The PSU/Alabama series that was scheduled fof 2004-2005 was postponed, yes. It was postponed at the request of Alabama, yes. It was postponed in 2003, yes.

Nittany Lions' Gridiron Series With Alabama Postponed - Penn State Athletics

STATE COLLEGE, Pa., June 27, 2003 - The University of Central Florida and Cincinnati have replaced Alabama on Penn State's 2004 and 2005 football schedules following

gopsusports.com

Now, of course, Saban became Alabama Head Coach on January 4, 2007.

So the answer to your question is an unequivcable NO.

Yeesh.

 

[PSUFTG2]

Saban did bail/postpone on Penn State though didn’t he?

Nope. Not unless he pulled those strings while he was coaching at LSU (the rescheduled game was prior to Saban at Alabama - during their turbulent Franchione / Price / Shula years)

 

[nittanymoops]

Couple thoughts:

1) Yes, this sucks. It's a poor replacement for VaTech. That was a series I was looking forward to.

2) Yes, season ticket holders are getting kicked in the teeth. Nothing new there, and I've been thinking of giving it up soon. Then again, NLC longevity hath its privileges.

3) Let's stop the comparisons to (insert SEC team here). They only have an eight game schedule and have infinitely more options.

4) Have you seen the Bucknuts OOC this year? (I'll wait and listen for your laughter to indicate you found it.) That said, kudos to their scheduler in the past and future. Of course, they'll make the playoff even if they lose to us and scUM even with that OOC crap.

5) I'd personally rather make the playoff at 10-2 than miss at 9-3. Fundamentally, those are now the games that really matter. And if we are in, then there's another attractive opponent (as long as we don't get stuck with the G5 team).

6) With the B1G expansion, I'm liking the mix of new teams. Letting it shake out for a few years to see where the new axis of power resides (hopefully at the Big Beav!).

7) Ditto letting the new playoff format shake out and see how that goes. Again, I'd rather make it to the playoff than not make it but saw (insert UGa/UNC/Clemson/Choklahoma or your favorite flavor here) play the boys in Blue and White.

 

[Midnighter]

Seriously --- ANOTHER ONE. Another example of a poster here making claims without doing a single minute of research!!!

The PSU/Alabama series that was scheduled fof 2004-2005 was postponed, yes. It was postponed at the request of Alabama, yes. It was postponed in 2003, yes.

Nittany Lions' Gridiron Series With Alabama Postponed - Penn State Athletics

STATE COLLEGE, Pa., June 27, 2003 - The University of Central Florida and Cincinnati have replaced Alabama on Penn State's 2004 and 2005 football schedules following

gopsusports.com

Now, of course, Saban became Alabama Head Coach on January 4, 2007.

So the answer to your question is an unequivcable NO.

Yeesh.

Ah - I didn’t know, that’s why I was asking.

 

[ChandlerPearce]

Truthfully, I am not advocating for anything. Just trying to lend some clarity and explanation (which may be an uphill slog, and not worth taking on).
I don't have enough skin in the game to be an advocate either way. My personal observation is that many fans just want to see PSU win - whether they are scheduling Georgia, or The Sisters of the Poor, they don't care. They just want a "W". Those folks probably love the scheduling of maximum cupcakes.
I also expect there are some - who lay out big $$$ for every game - who are less than pleased. Different strokes for different folks. But those folks can vote with their wallets - if they feel strongly enough about it. So no harm done, and I need not be troubled to advocate for them.

The folks I do feel bad for are the players. They only get a handful of Saturdays in their entire careers, to strap on the pads and compete. Not every game is going to be a top 25 matchup, obviously. But the more quality match ups the better, and each time they have a game against a Villanova or their ilk, is one less opportunity to compete at the level they have earned. But, again, I don't have any skin in that game either.

I agree with your assessment....my only addition is i like playing outside our natural footprint simply for recruiting exposure.

 

[Nitt1300]

I read somewhere that CJF was responsible for the Great Depression, the sinking of the Titanic, and the Boer War.

 

[leinbacker]

Not concerned at all to be honest. Win your conference or do enough to get into the playoffs, but some good fake outrage makes the board go...so have at it.

that seems to be the approach, even if it means noon games on the BTN and lots of empty seats.

 

[laKavosiey-st lion]

We've filled out our 2025 OOC schedule! A 3rd game in addition to playing mighty Nevada and Villanova.

Drum roll, please ............... the 3rd game is against FIU!!!

Over the next 5 years, PSU has 14 OOC games scheduled. Only 3 are against P4 teams, and those games are against WVU and Syracuse.

Ugh. James Franklin (not surprisingly, because he's mostly about self-preservation) does not buy into the philosophical idea of "iron sharpens iron."

If you own 4 season tickets and have stadium parking, what’s a FIU game day cost you including beer n brats?

 

[GrimReaper]

I read somewhere that CJF was responsible for the Great Depression, the sinking of the Titanic, and the Boer War.

Whoever did that background check should be fired.

 

[Bob78]

I posted on the Lions Den board, with some agreement (live, in-house, fan interest matters) and some disagreement (all tomato cans all the time):

Adding FIU is underwhelming, to say the least. I can live with 2 lower tier 1A G5 teams if we have a decent and beatable P4 team as the 3rd (example: Virginia, WVa, and the like). But, a 1AA and two lower-tier 1As? Yeesh.

The seat licenses and ticket prices will increase for 2025, too. The total value for the money takes a hit, for me anyway. I'm not yet ready to give up my tickets and parking and all, but that day will come, and it will come faster as the lesser overall home schedules accumulate. Can't always be just 3 interesting/good/great B1G teams and 4 ho-hums at probably $100 a ticket and $1000 per seat plus $1000 for the parking license.

I get that we want to go 3-0 OOC each season, especially with 9 tough B1G games, plus the conference championship game, and be in position to host the 1st round of the playoffs. 2 losses is not going to be a death blow anymore with 12 to 14 teams getting in. With the SEC and B1G realignment and the span of control they are trying to claim, even 3 "quality" losses may still get an SEC or B1G team in the playoffs, especially if strength of schedule is taken into account in the decision.

But, imo, all of that needs to be balanced with the desire to have a 100,000 seat stadium filled to at least 90% capacity looks-wise for TV for each home game. People looking for missable games will have easy pickings with the 1AAs, the UMasses, etc. Not so much with teams who college football followers know to be an interesting team to see in person.

Get rid of scheduling the 1AA/FCS schools altogether.

Play a decent but very beatable P4 opponent, and then play 2 G5 teams who are likely to be in the middle of their conferences.
As a college football fan, I'm very happy to see the occasional San Diego State or App State as we did a few years ago. They were good opponents who weren't going to be walk-overs. FIU has not done much lately. Nevada has had some success in the past, but has really struggled lately. Both are going to be 30+ point underdogs.

Give me Georgia State again, or an improving San Jose State, or an interesting UTSA, or a tough JMU.... the possibilities for piquing my interest as a fan and for winnable OOCs has a pretty wide common ground, I believe. We don't need to be looking at the very bottom of the 130+ 1A teams to meet that criteria for winning the G5 portion of the 3 OOCs at home. And when we have 3 OOCs, good job bringing in WVa or Syracuse and that caliber of P4 opponent - games we should win in any given season - to satisfy me as a college football fan as well.

 

[retsio]

SoCal(?)Lion --
I am not sure you are old enough to remember Jim Tarman and other distinguished members of the Athletic Department - that advised all Penn State students, fans, news media and interested parties ..... football scheduling normally is 7 years out into the future. Zero TV contracts, only two games per year on a TV channel, bowl games by conference with only one independent (e.g. PSU Kansas) and not many colleges will plan to travel to State College that does not have an airport. Also, the East typically does not play our type of football here in the Midwest.

BTW - do you remember UMich scheduling Appalachian State in the B...House -- and UMich LOST ! That was a recent game for analytics.

 

[Bvillebaron]

Since CJF has been here (2014), here are the conference teams with more wins than Penn State during that time:

Ohio State
Michigan
Washington
Oregon
Wisconsin

Iowa has as many wins, but one more loss
USC has 9 less wins, so a bit behind, but right there.

So, 7 conference opponents, whom PSU may play regularly out of 9 regular season conference games, have nearly as many, or as many or more wins - than PSU.

Additionally, PSU needs the 7th home game without a return. That has been discussed ad nauseum as far back as when the Brooklyn kid with the big nose was here.

Yeah, I don't really see the issue here.

Exactly Ro but haters with an axe to grind gonna hate. The clown probably never took a look at the OOC schedules of Alabama and Georgia.

 

[NittanyBuff]

FIU, Nova and Nevada, lol well that's an OC schedule I can't wait for.

 

[ApexLion]

From ESPN on this subject!
We have a repeat winner. For the second season in a row, Michigan has earned the "honor" of playing the nation's cushiest nonconference schedule. The two-time defending Big Ten champion doesn't face a single Power 5 opponent. This was also the case a year ago, marking the first time in 78 years the Wolverines didn't play a nonconference game against a current Power 5 member or Notre Dame. Michigan opens this season with three straight home games against East Carolina, UNLV and Bowling Green. It originally had a home-and-home series with UCLA set for 2022 and 2023, but canceled it in 2019 to guarantee at least seven home games each season.

The only team rivaling Michigan in this category is Georgia, which plays UT Martin, Ball State and UAB at home and closes the regular season against in-state rival Georgia Tech on the road. The Bulldogs were originally scheduled to play Oklahoma, but the SEC dictated that game be scrapped with the Sooners joining the league in 2024.

Both MI and GA have done quite well.

Seems like a thing is going on, a trend if you will, a plan of action maybe, or possibly a method or a modus operandi, derived from a strategy...

OP you followin' or do we need to spell it out for ya?

 

[Keyser Soze 16802]

Everyone gets why we play cupcakes but it's unclear why home and homes with Temple and Syracuse are favored over home and homes with the likes of Auburn. Those two recent games were highly anticipated and a lot of fun. Who gets excited about the Orange or Owls coming to town? Or traveling to upstate New York or Philly?

I get that there is a risk of losing one or both games but geez let's have some cajones

How much fun would a home and home with Tennessee be, just to pick one school

 

[LB99]

Everyone gets why we play cupcakes but it's unclear why home and homes with Temple and Syracuse are favored over home and homes with the likes of Auburn. Those two recent games were highly anticipated and a lot of fun. Who gets excited about the Orange or Owls coming to town? Or traveling to upstate New York or Philly?

I get that there is a risk of losing one or both games but geez let's have some cajones

How much fun would a home and home with Tennessee be, just to pick one school

It takes two to tango. As we learned with VT, sometimes the other school has logistics to deal with also.