I mean, you could be USC/UCLA and have something like @Rutgers, home in LA, @PSU, home in LA, Michigan, home in LA, @Miami (expansion), etc, etc.
-
You do not need to register if you are not going to pay the yearly fee to post. If you register please click here or log in go to "settings" then "my account" then "User Upgrades" and you can renew.
HuskerMax readers can save 50% on Omaha Steaks through December. New customers get $30 off.
Major Advantage to B1G Flex Schedule: Expansion
- Thread starter DuckTownHusker
- Start date
I mean, you could be USC/UCLA and have something like @Rutgers, home in LA, @PSU, home in LA, Michigan, home in LA, @Miami (expansion), etc, etc.
I do think the B1G at least initially did a better job of balanced scheduling. Every team in the conference will play every other team at least twice over a 4-year basis.
Indiana’s insistence and the B1G acquiescence to allow them to play Purdue cross division every year resulted in imbalanced scheduling the last 10 years. Look at how many times we played tOSU vs Indiana since our inclusion into the B1G.
Long term you are right having Minnesota and Wisconsin as their permanent rivals (along with NU) will limit their opportunities to play tOSU, PSU and others but I also hope it limits their opportunities to play Rutgers, Indiana and NW as well.
Yep that is my point
It isn‘t mean or silly or unfair … it is simply unbalanced. That fact you cannot deny. Look at how many times Iowa has played tOSU vs how many times we’ve played tOSU.
Whether you believe the scheduling was done fairly, with some sort of collusion or not are conclusions for you to draw. tOSU has been for the last decade plus a top 5 team in the nation. Iowa fans may counter and claim they’ve played PSU more than Nebraska … they have (not as much as the tOSU differential) but nevertheless they have.
Now there are lots of fans who welcome the strength of schedule, those who feel we should play the heavyweights if we want to be a heavy weight. Great fine. But don’t go justifying that the SOS is fair and reasonable … is isn’t. It is unbalanced and by its nature it will create some unfairness.
You seem to concern yourself with SOS of Iowa. Are you trying to say that the B1G 10 is treating Nebraska unfairly based on Ohio State. I would argue 6 other teams have been designated to play Ohio state every year in the past. Maybe that is what was unfair.
I talk about Iowa because I‘ve had this discussion countless times with a Sqwuakeye fan … so I know some of the facts and details. Sure the other 6 teams in the East play tOSU but they also play Rutgers and Maryland and Indiana arguably the bottom third residents of the B1G.
The Big Ten wants Nebraska vs Ohio State much more than any other West division team -- because it'll drive TV ratings. It's that simple. It's not that they're trying to screw Nebraska -- it's just smart business. And as a Husker fan, I want that as well.
I’m talking about the Rutgers, marylands and the indianas who only play two easy games and 4 tough ones. The bottom line is we have no reason to whine.
Disagree and disagree
It isn’t the B1G that wants NU v tOSU … it’s the TV execs.
The B1G should be concerned with balanced scheduling, they should be concerned with fairness and yes revenue generation.
If you support NU playing tOSU more than Iowa did/does then you are inarguably consigning Nebraska to a worse overall record than Iowa and Wisconsin and you should zero issues with a year-over-year performance that is on average less than your West division peers.
Alabama doesn’t play Georgia moreso than any other East division school in the regular season? Is not the SEC concerned with TV ratings? Why would you want to play tOSU and go 1-7 when we can’t even beat Purdue on a consistent basis? Where we should be, where we want to be and where we are currently are three different places and “wanting” to play tOSU is fools gold.
I do believe the current ‘24-‘25 conference schedule is about as fair and balanced as you could hope for … not complaining about the future … the past 10 years were not fair, impartial or balanced. And frankly it didn’t matter because NU was, during the SF era, in the bottom quarter of the league … if we would have swapped Rutgers for tOSU for all those years we’d have a few more wins but still would be in the bottom quarter of the league.
Before we start talking CFP and B1G titles I’d like to see a few 8 and 9 win seasons … those will come along faster if we are playing Indiana about the same amount of times as we play tOSU.
Our schedule is fair compared to many. You want to nit pick Iowa go ahead.
Not nitpicking Iowa … nitpicking the entire B1G West … we had a tougher conference schedule than every team in the B1G West our entire tenure in the B1G. That was a detriment to us winning the B1G West as opposed to other schools in that division.
As a side point … our very first year in the B1G we played 8 conference games (4 of them ranked) against - Wisconsin, Michigan, tOSU, MSU, Iowa, PSU, Minnesota and NW. We didn’t play Purdue, Indiana and Illinois who finished that year a collective 15-23 (overall) and 4-20 in conference. Why didn’t USC and UCLA play such a “welcome aboard“ schedule?
Back on point … you defenders of the schedule … I am not arguing collusion, I am arguing that the toughness of the schedule was A factor, not THE factor, but A factor as to why we did not perform as well as we could’ve.
Our schedule going forward is very fair. It’s the past 10 years I’ve been referencing. I think the new schedules are great, fair and reasonable. I think the addition of USC and UCLA gives the TV execs plenty of good inventory to use without overtly forcing teams to play unbalanced schedules.
It didn't matter because Nebraska has sucked for most of the last 8 years, but it could have been a factor if they were decent and playing a far tougher schedule than their fellow West counterparts. That's the key takeaway that some people don't seem to get.
I agree.
No doubt the TV executives want NU-OSU -- but also no doubt the Big Ten leadership works with those people to come to an agreement.
I truly don't care about "fairness" when it comes to the schedule. I've read this complaint literally hundreds of times over the past several years -- no exaggeration. I see it as whining -- because that's all it really is. Nothing has nor ever will come from Huskermax posters complaining about scheduling. Spitting into the wind.
Maybe (BIG maybe) we could have had 5 wins instead of 4 -- with a mediocre Big Ten opponent instead of OSU -- but I'm skeptical it would have even changed the win total. We lost to plenty of Indiana types of teams over the past several years. Probably still would have been 4 wins. The odds are, we would have replaced a loss to Ohio State with a loss to Indiana or whatever. I'd rather lose to OSU than the countless bad losses to bad teams.
The only thing I care about is our play on the field against whomever we are scheduled to play. I'm looking forward to better results on the field due to better coaching -- not better results on the field due to easier schedules.
Last edited:
