• 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.

Why can't NCAA allow teams to schedule a 13th game this year?

DuckTownHusker

Blackshirt Sith Lord
10 Year Member
The NFL is adding a 17th game this year:


I've long been a proponent of a 14 or 16 game season for NCAAF. The moral purists like to argue that this is still amateur ball and these are young kids who can't be expected to compete in the rigors of a professional-level schedule. But then those same hacks turn around and argue for more TV money, a bigger playoff bracket, etc., etc.

With a 14 game schedule, schools in 14-team conferences could realistically play 3 non-conference games, 6 divisional games and 5 cross-divisional games each year. That means over a 5 year career (redshirt) a player would have the chance to play every cross-divisional opponent at least three times. Two crossover games get played four times and the final cross-divisional foe is played 5 out of 5 years (annually). This allows for a permanent protected rival game (Purdue-Indiana).

With a 16 game schedule, schools could either pick up extra non-conference home games (boosts revenue), or allow for the expansion of conferences to 16 teams or beyond. One of the biggest hurdles to 14/16+ teams in a conference is that some teams rarely meet, which sort of betrays the purpose of sharing a conference. Expanding the schedule drastically reduces this problem.
 
Last edited:

Pops

I have squandered my resistance
15 Year Member
I suppose the NCAA could -- if they wanted to. But I highly doubt they do.

As I mentioned a couple weeks ago when discussing the OU game fiasco, Nebraska can't just add a 13th game without NCAA approval. And if they approve a 13th game for Nebraska, they truly have to open it up to all teams.
Even if that game is against little sister of the poor? The other teams can play the bankrupt and the broke
 
Last edited:

The Impaler

Cake or Death?
15 Year Member
I suppose the NCAA could -- if they wanted to. But I highly doubt they do.

As I mentioned a couple weeks ago when discussing the OU game fiasco, Nebraska can't just add a 13th game without NCAA approval. And if they approve a 13th game for Nebraska, they truly have to open it up to all teams.
To be clear, I'm intending this for all teams, not just NU. Last year nobody played a full schedule, most stadiums had no fans, etc. I think the NCAA should come out tomorrow and allow teams, all teams, to add a 13th game if they so desire.
 

huskerman1

Scout Team
5 Year Member
Nebraska is attempting to get a game in Week One but all assumptions are that they will either move the late OOC game to that week, or buy out that late OOC game and schedule a new. What I'm saying is, let every team go to 13 games for the extra revenue. It would be better for all involved: local businesses, tv partners, larger U's, and smaller U's.

It makes to much sense, so probably not.
 

Bigger Ed

Red Shirt
2 Year Member
Nebraska is attempting to get a game in Week One but all assumptions are that they will either move the late OOC game to that week, or buy out that late OOC game and schedule a new. What I'm saying is, let every team go to 13 games for the extra revenue. It would be better for all involved: local businesses, tv partners, larger U's, and smaller U's.
I figure when they have to start paying players they'll be able to schedule as many games as the player's union allows.
 

Bigger Ed

Red Shirt
2 Year Member
The NFL is adding a 17th game this year:


I've long been a proponent of a 14 or 16 game season for NCAAF. The moral purists like to argue that this is still amateur ball and these are young kids who can't be expected to compete in the rigors of a professional-level schedule. But then those same hacks turn around and argue for more TV money, a bigger playoff bracket, etc., etc.

With a 14 game schedule, schools in 14-team conferences could realistically play 3 non-conference games, 6 divisional games and 5 cross-divisional games each year. That means over a 5 year career (redshirt) a player would have the chance to play every cross-divisional opponent at least three times. Two crossover games get played four times and the final cross-divisional foe is played 5 out of 5 years (annually). This allows for a permanent protected rival game (Purdue-Indiana).

With a 16 game schedule, schools could either pick up extra non-conference home games (boosts revenue), or allow for the expansion of conferences to 16 teams or beyond. One of the biggest hurdles to 14/16+ teams in a conference is that some teams rarely meet, which sort of betrays the purpose of sharing a conference. Expanding the schedule drastically reduces this problem.

I dunno, I think injuries are a valid concern. We can't keep a QB healthy for 12 games, let alone 14-16. I don't think the best players will want it. We already have guys skipping bowl games to minimize the chance of screwing up their pro prospects.

I do believe if/when players become employees of the university instead of students, the number of games they can play will be negotiated with the player's union.
 

johnrr6

Lucky!
5 Year Member
It makes total sense for this year. A one year deal kind of like the one-year exemption given to athletes because of the Covid year.

could be a “do it if you want”

“Any school can do it”

“One year only” to make up for athlete’s “lost competitive events”

Non-power five and FCS schools would be jumping for joy because of it. Big money to them.

And a total kickstart for not just the economy in Lincoln....But honestly, any school that uses the extra game at home.

I love this idea! It makes so much sense that the NCAA will ignore it, and even if they did approve it, the Big Ten would nix it.

I mean I am the Eternal optimist. But after watching the NCAA in the Big Ten for the last year .....I am fairly skeptical :Banghead:
 

Husker In Oklahoma

All Big 10
15 Year Member
I’ve mentioned this several times. Let teams play in week zero (if they want). Not mandatory, but if teams want to, let them. This is basic common sense here. Alabama, Clemson, and some others probably won’t want to, and that’s fine, but if a program can get a game scheduled, just let them. I just get so tired of so much red texasing tape, on something so simple. What’s the big texasing deal?
 

NorthwoodHusker

Travel Squad
I suppose the NCAA could -- if they wanted to. But I highly doubt they do.

As I mentioned a couple weeks ago when discussing the OU game fiasco, Nebraska can't just add a 13th game without NCAA approval. And if they approve a 13th game for Nebraska, they truly have to open it up to all teams.
Since almost every team needs more, put to a vote by the players,and start looking around, why not?
 

johnrr6

Lucky!
5 Year Member
This one would be a PERFECT one for Moos to raise hell about....

Jump the BiG even....go straight to the NCAA.

He is an out of box thinker and showed that on the Oklahoma game.

And he has softened the battlefield somewhat with the idea that we would really like to schedule an additional home game.....and the benefits thereof.

Let him start making some phone calls once he gets about 50 schools that agree....put it all in writing and shove it in front of the NCAA. Voluntary only, one year only. The game does not count for any conference standings. And you could even say that it will not be factored in to the CFP. And any TV revenue would be shared.

I honestly don’t think he would have any trouble getting 50 or more schools to agree. Especially since there’s no pressure to do so one way or another. And the schools can even have the athletes vote whether they want an additional game. (Honestly, do ANY of them vote no?)

I think the press would jump on it in a positive fashion. I mean it’s new, it’s different, it’s more football, and it’s for a good cause!
 
Last edited:

Hville

Junior Varsity
5 Year Member
I guess I’ll be “that guy”. There is no reason to do this. Other than some fans thinking it is a good idea. One more game isn’t going to help the economics significantly to overcome what has already happened.

there are still way too many unknowns going forward on how the restrictions are going to affect next season. Fans need to accept that there is a chance of a full season and stop demanding we make it even longer. There has to be a line drawn somewhere and 12 games is it.

this is a repeat of an expanded playoff argument. Once they listened to the fans demanding the best two teams play after the bowl game it turned into 4. Now they want 8 and that will be followed with 16. If they allow a 13th game for this year only then it will be fans demanding it every year. Then they’ll switch to 14. Geesh just leave it alone and get out of the ncaa and B1G politics demands.
 

cthusker

You talken to me?
5 Year Member
I guess I’ll be “that guy”. There is no reason to do this. Other than some fans thinking it is a good idea. One more game isn’t going to help the economics significantly to overcome what has already happened.
Since
there are still way too many unknowns going forward on how the restrictions are going to affect next season. Fans need to accept that there is a chance of a full season and stop demanding we make it even longer. There has to be a line drawn somewhere and 12 games is it.

this is a repeat of an expanded playoff argument. Once they listened to the fans demanding the best two teams play after the bowl game it turned into 4. Now they want 8 and that will be followed with 16. If they allow a 13th game for this year only then it will be fans demanding it every year. Then they’ll switch to 14. Geesh just leave it alone and get out of the ncaa and B1G politics demands.
Since almost 25% of the population is 18 or under why should there be any restrictions when we're currently vaccinating on average 2.8 million a day? By June 75% of the population should be vaccinated or at least those that want it. I don't believe there should be ANY restrictions for outdoor sporting events. If another game(s) can be scheduled and teams want to I don't see any reason it can't be accomplished pretty easy. The BIG has made such of mess of Covid they should STHU and allow schools to do what's best for them economically.
 
Top