should the NCAA determine football schedules?

[Lathum]

I was discussing this earlier.

With all the early lopsided games and certain teams scheduling cupcakes and 9 home games a year is it time the NCAA stepped in and took over?

[ISiddiqui]

If cupcakes are scheduled, the offending parties will get penalized in the polls (or not, but that really ends up being a matter of public opinion).

[Swaggs]

Even though I love it, there is so much else wrong with college football that I think this ranks pretty low down on the list of things that need looked at.

[Young Drachma]

They can't do anything right. We can't trust them to do this. Let the teams do it, but can we not have teams scheduling 10 years in advance please? That's just silliness.

[k0ruptr]

wish, woulda made Hawaii's inept AD and weak schedule better.

[sooner333]

I don't think any of the teams really want this outside of the top of the lower confereces like Boise or TCU. The bad teams like the payday, the good teams don't want to put it on the line every week. Also, interest will probably go down in the long run because there won't be the undefeated teams battling to stay that way down the stretch. The perfect season factor is part of what makes college a different game than the NFL.

[DaddyTorgo]

I don't think any of the teams really want this outside of the top of the lower confereces like Boise or TCU. The bad teams like the payday, the good teams don't want to put it on the line every week. Also, interest will probably go down in the long run because there won't be the undefeated teams battling to stay that way down the stretch. The perfect season factor is part of what makes college a different game than the NFL.

except those perfect seasons are weak because so many of the wins are against cupcakes.

shit...if someone goes 11-0 but has 3 games they play teams i didn't know existed and wins those games 66-3, do i really think they're better than a 10-1 team that only lost once to a team that was ranked??

i don't know about anyone else, but i don't

[King of New York]

They can't do anything right. We can't trust them to do this. Let the teams do it, but can we not have teams scheduling 10 years in advance please? That's just silliness.

QFT

[VPI97]

With all the early lopsided games and certain teams scheduling cupcakes and 9 home games a year is it time the NCAA stepped in and took over?
It could up with some schools taking a monetary loss on football due to a combination of not enough ticket revenue, increased travel costs, or loss of income from guarenteed money games. In many situations, football revenue funds scholarships for non-revenue sports (among other things), so forcing schools to abide by a schedule that doesn't fit their budget may end up being the death knell for some small schools in regards to their athletic programs across the board.

[Mizzou B-ball fan]

Certainly no complaints amongst the B12 North top teams as far as schedule strength. Both Nebraska and Mizzou played BCS conference opponents their first two weeks.

[st.cronin]

Rather than direct intervention, what the NCAA could and should do is adjust the BCS to favor teams that play strong ooc schedules. More games like Texas-Hohio State, please.

[sooner333]

Rather than direct intervention, what the NCAA could and should do is adjust the BCS to favor teams that play strong ooc schedules. More games like Texas-Hohio State, please.

Unfortunately, the BCS has already taken away this incentive when they took out the quality wins component.

[Mr. Wednesday]

The only ones who are shirking the responsibility to adjust appropriately are the pollsters. You know, the ones who are putting Louisville and WVU in the top 5 because they have easy schedules. The computer rankings are already adjusted for strength of schedule.

[sterlingice]

except those perfect seasons are weak because so many of the wins are against cupcakes.

shit...if someone goes 11-0 but has 3 games they play teams i didn't know existed and wins those games 66-3, do i really think they're better than a 10-1 team that only lost once to a team that was ranked??

i don't know about anyone else, but i don't

Unfortunately, I think you're in the minority. People looking at college football have the fascination with the perfect season as stated above. So, in voting and fans' minds, it's about "who is the best with no blemishes" rather than "if I add up the good and the bad of everyone, who comes out on top". 1 loss to people is infinitely worse than 0 losses.

As there's no playoff to actually line these teams up in, perception will rule.

SI

[CU Tiger]

hmmm IF the NCAA did the schedules the last week of the season every team would have a home game.
At which point every band would play, there would be a parade and all the teams would run onto the field.
At which time they would realize there is no fitting end to their season. And it would lave a large empty void in the pits of their stomach. But we'd call them all winners. Except the Big Ten of course their teams would fall down running onto the field

[Klinglerware]

Unfortunately, I think you're in the minority. People looking at college football have the fascination with the perfect season as stated above.

SI

Up to a point. I think most people who follow the sport do have at least a heuristic conception of conference quality. For example, nobody is going to get a rise out of Penn or Rowan going undefeated. The same goes with the BCS conferences vs mid-majors in the bowl subdivision--a MAC school can run the table this year, and most people won't take them as seriously as a 10-1 BCS conference school...

[molson]

Rather than direct intervention, what the NCAA could and should do is adjust the BCS to favor teams that play strong ooc schedules. More games like Texas-Hohio State, please.

I though SOS was too strong in the earlier BCS formula. It just seems ridiculous to me that so much weight can be put on the outcome of games you're not even playing in. If you schedule an tradtional 7-8 win team, and they tank out to 2-3 wins in the year you play them, you're punished.

[sooner333]

If you schedule an tradtional 7-8 win team, and they tank out to 2-3 wins in the year you play them, you're punished.

I think the real problem is people thinking that the 7-8 win team is actually good when they were really bad that season. Championships shouldn't be won on perception of how good your schedule is, but by how hard it actually was.

[Mustang]

It's not all about scheduling cupcakes, it's about scheduling cupcakes because that will get you a home games which will get you the $. If you are thinking college football isn't all about the $ then you are kidding yourself...

that or I'm just incredibly jaded...

[st.cronin]

I though SOS was too strong in the earlier BCS formula. It just seems ridiculous to me that so much weight can be put on the outcome of games you're not even playing in. If you schedule an tradtional 7-8 win team, and they tank out to 2-3 wins in the year you play them, you're punished.

I actually don't care about the BCS. I just want to see more games like Nebraska-USC, or Oregon-Miami, etc.

[JeffNights]

Untill the NCAA can reasonably justify how Willie Williams can be eligible to play college football and Jeremy Bloom wasnt, then my answer is NO.