Why Are CFB People Angry About Big Ten Coaches Wanting To Follow In SEC’s Non-Conference Scheduling Footsteps?

This week at Big Ten Media Days when a handful of Big Ten head coaches spoke on easing up present and future non-conference scheduling, the college football punditry and fandom met them with cries of cowardice and chickenry.

“It’s just like the Big Ten to want to take the easy way out.“

This, of course, completely (and purposefully) ignores the fact that the Big Ten plays nine conference games every year, while the SEC only plays eight. That means Big Ten teams have three non-conference games to fill while the SEC must fill four non-conference slots.

If a Big Ten team schedules a Power Four team in the non-conference, that then gives them 10 Power Four teams on their schedule.

When a Big Ten coach speaks about that kind of thing being unnecessary, they are derided for daring to want an easier schedule.

In actuality, the Big Ten’s coaches are just thinking they should maybe take a page out of the SEC’s playbook.

Only three SEC teams this year will play 10 Power Four opponents. Contrast that against the 12 Big Ten teams that will play 10 Power Four opponents.

Recently, Indiana bought its way out of a scheduled series against Virginia in 2027 and 2028 and replaced that game with lesser opponents. Cignetti was asked about that decision on Tuesday.

“Look, here’s the bottom line, okay, we picked up an extra home game, and we play nine conference games,” he explained. “The two best conferences in college football, any football guy that’s objective will tell you is the Big Ten and the SEC, all right? Twelve of the 16 SEC teams play three G5 or an FCS game. Twelve of those teams play 36 games, 29 G5 games and seven FCS games, and one less conference game. All right? So we figured we would just adopt the SEC scheduling philosophy, you know. Some people don’t like it. I’m more focused in on those nine conference games.”

Some people don’t like it indeed.

When the Big Ten does it, it’s seen as an affront to the sport of football. When the SEC does it, it isn’t seen at all.

The SEC’s 16 teams will play 46 games against Group of Six or FCS teams this year. The Big Ten’s 18 teams, meanwhile, will play 42 such games.

As long as the SEC is going to stick to an eight-game conference schedule and limit their potential losses, then more and more Big Ten coaches are inclined to do the same thing.

Why make it more difficult than it needs to be? Especially if everybody is being judged on wins and losses.

“Well, if we’re going to be in a situation where we get four automatic qualifiers, then I think it’d be great to have a tenth game against a Power Five or Power Four team,” Ryan Day said. “I think it’d be great. If we’re not going to do that, then I don’t think it makes sense to do that. I think that you have your nine conference games and then schedule other games along non-conference opponents that maybe aren’t in the Power Four.”

Penn State’s non-conference schedule this year features Nevada, Florida International, and Villanova.

Embarrassing, right?

Well, Georgia’s non-conference schedule features Marshall, Austin Peay, and Charlotte.

Where is the outcry? Or is that fourth non-conference game against in-state rival Georgia Tech enough to keep the pundits off of UGA’s back?

If you think about it, the fact that Big Ten coaches are receiving grief for this thought process is exactly the reason they’d prefer to have everybody play nine conference games and a tenth Power Four team in the non-conference.

They don’t want to leave things up to popular opinion. They’d rather deal in unpopular facts.

Big Ten coaches are getting derided for suggesting they do what the SEC does, while the SEC is only seen for its strengths.

This is not exactly an encouraging trend should the College Football Playoff move to five autobids and 11 at-large teams.

The selection committee is essentially a judge’s table and they are scoring programs on wins and losses. The SEC already limits the losing their conference can do by only playing eight conference games, then each member school does as much as they can to limit the rest.

And yet it’s the Big Ten coaches in the crosshairs?

“You get these media members that we know are not true national media members,” said Penn State’s James Franklin. “They’re homers to certain conferences. We have them in the Big Ten. Other people have them as well. Then they get on and pound the table about people’s schedules. You’re not comparing the same things. It’s not gonna look the same. We’re already playing nine conference games. Where does it make sense?”

When the Big Ten moved to nine conference games in 2016, they did so because they believed the increase in strength of schedule would help the member schools in making the four-team College Football Playoff.

That’s not quite how things turned out according to Franklin.

“We were sold in the Big 10 all those years when we went to nine games that strength of schedule was going to determine the teams that got into the four-team playoff. That never played out to be the case,” he said. “It never played out to be the case.”

The Big Ten head coaches just want uniformity. They believe everybody should play the same number of conference games. The SEC coaches, meanwhile, want nothing to do with a ninth conference game, but you never hear anything about their yellow streak.

If the Big Ten has to get closer to that uniformity by lightening their non-conference schedule, then blame the SEC.

As long as the bulk of the College Football Playoffs are going to be chosen by a committee, there is no incentive for the Big Ten to do more than the SEC.

So until the SEC is going to rise to the level of the Big Ten, we probably shouldn’t fault the Big Ten for lowering itself to the level of the SEC.

Go to discussion...