Grandpa Duck

For years the NCAA has suffered from insufficient funds to properly enforce its rules. The schools that make up the NCAA are the problem. Until the schools provide an adequate funding budget, and a procedure for enforcement that leads to application of the penalty quickly, say 90 days, the NCAA will continue to be disrespected.

I am well aware that many here are not fans of sportswriter John Canzano. Regardless, if you want to gain a better appreciation of Dan Lanning as a recruiter, read Canzano’s column issued today shortly after noon.

Only one thing will prevent OBD from being national champs. That is failure to protect Dante Moore. When he was not protected last year everything went sideways. If it takes a full house backfield to protect him that’s what must happen. With our receivers Dante can find them through double coverage, but only if he’s focused on them. When he is distracted by onrushing defense we’re toast.

Jon, I take the "Cig lead" and Penn State "bust" into account by adjusting the Divisions every two years. What bothers me most about Divisions is that one of the primary benefits of belonging to a Conference like the B1G is playing against the best teams in the country like Ohio State, Michigan and Indiana. My current thinking about the first two years of Divisions in the B1G puts those three teams in the East. May have to reconsider that.

Jon, I started with two threads from a couple of weeks ago where posters were complaining about unfairness of next year's BiG schedule. That's all I am addressing. I have no purpose whatsoever to make college football teams equal, or even equitable. I know the playoff format is all screwed up and there is nothing we fans can do about that. I'm not even going to try. All I want to do is have the football teams in the B1G all begin the season from the same starting line. I have made a list of B1G teams as they finished, first through eighteenth, over the last two seasons. That whole list will be in the next article I write on this topic. Here are the top eight from the list and the teams from that top eight they are scheduled to play this year: 1. Indiana Ohio State, Michigan and USC 2. Oregon USC, Illinois, Ohio State, Michigan, 3. Ohio State Illinois, Iowa, Indiana, USC, Oregon, Michigan 4. Iowa Michigan, Ohio State, Illinois 5. Michigan Iowa, Penn State, Indiana, Oregon, Ohio State 6. Illinois Ohio State, Oregon, Iowa 7. USC Oregon, Penn State, Ohio State, Indiana 8. Penn State USC, Michigan (Note: in making the above list I'm working with a difficult block schedule that has only the team logos, and I'm very human.) I doubt that any serious fan of the B1G would argue that those eight are, at least, among the top ten teams going into the 2026 season. You tell me, Jon, would two Divisions playing round-robin be more fair than Ohio State playing six of the top eight teams in the conference? As things are in College football, I would not change a thing about recruiting, the portal, or NIL. With Dan Lanning as our coach, the Duck facilities and Division Street providing the money, OBD are near the top in opportunity to make the playoffs. But if I were a coach in the B1G, I would much rather be Penn State playing two teams from the top eight than the schedule of Ohio State playing six teams from the top eight. Or do you want to be Michigan playing teams 1-4 plus Penn State? All I want is scheduling fairness, and next year's B1G schedule doesn't make the cut.

I'm not wild about Conference Championships either, now that OBD have one. But my actual purpose here is to appeal to the powers of the conference to schedule fairly, and those powers are accustomed to having a Conference Champion. It may be that giving them an easy route to retain that historic honor will make it simpler to schedule fairly.

I need to better understand what you are saying, Duckman60 and Canvasback. Does your cross-division 1 plays two determine a Conference Champion? If yes, please explain who is the champion if both the #1 teams win.

Canvasback, you and I are on the same track for a workable two-Division structure without expanding the conference. Upon reading Jon Joseph's first response, #2 above, I had the same idea when he spoke of a flex-schedule at the end of the season. With nine teams in a Division, after the eight game round-robin, the ninth game would be against a team from the other Division, with the opponent based on standings after the eight games. I have a different take on home field. In the next article I willl propose that for the final game, in odd years. the home field is in the east and even years the home field is in the west. That will allow for schools to plan and sell tickets in advance for the final game. They will know the day and place, and the opponent will be determined the on the standings after eight conference games. Teams will know that they are going to travel, they just will not know for sure where. Ties within the Division would be broken in the usual way, with head to head deciding. A three way tie would be broken by comparison of results with other teams in the Division. For example if one of the three beat #1, that team would win the top place in the tie, and so forth. And, the conference champion will be the winner of #1 in the east vs. #1 in the west. This is a change that could be put in place for 2027, without waiting for a conference expansion. And, Jon, you underestimate us humans when you say that in-conference scheduling cannot be fair. I agree that computers are not the answer. Computers are no better than the humans that invented them, and in many respects not as good. We are getting closer to fair scheduling just by making proposals and discussing them.

Two things, conference expansion and playoff scheduling. Maybe it makes sense for the B1G to announce that in 2030 the conference will expand to 20 teams and thereafter there will be no further consideration of expanding. They could even name teams they are considering and include Notre Dame along with five or six others. Then the Irish will be presented with a now or never decision. To me, allowing the playoff committee and the bowls to impact matters beyond their primary objective, like scheduling, is nonsense. The conferences could just tell them: "We are available to begin playoff games on January 1, 2025, a Friday and you, playoff committees and bowl committees, arrange your schedules accordingly with games on that day and the next. No games more than eight days apart." As it is now, the tail is wagging the dog.

Go thoughts, Feather. I miss playing Cal and Stanford. I wonder whether the experience that schools in the B1G before bringing in OBD, fuskies, UCLA and USC are having with the expanded conference as is would cause them to object to two more from the west coast.

Predictably, Jon Joseph presents some enticing arguments that provoked my mind to consider different directions for reply. That’s a good thing. It is exactly what I hoped for while writing the article, and more. Jon does not really ATFQ of which two schools the B1G should consider for expansion because he gives us six! And not two divisions, but three. I struggle to understand how three divisions with four cross-over games can ever be symmetrical. Of necessity, there is no way the teams will be playing comparable opponents in the cross-over games. The Socratic question to you, Jon, is: “How is that symmetrical?” Hence, is it fair? I have considered the flex schedule at the end of the regular season before, but Jon gave me a new twist that I will address in the next article. Hint, maybe there is a way for the B1G to achieve symmetry with only 18 teams and not expand. Thanks for that. Notre Dame is an obvious candidate for expansion. Charles and I have discussed this possibility and he believes that the Irish broadcasting deal with CBS will keep them independent. More to discuss there.

iubhounds, you piqued my interest a couple of weeks ago with the thread you began titled: "Having to Fly East for Games". That caused me to really think about scheduling. I hope to say more about that topic in the near future. Like you, when ASU and Arizona took the PAC from 10 to 12 I was concerned that it was a mistake. There may be an answer for us "old school" curmudgeons. I'm working on it. As to Moos, I lived in Salem when he was hired as the Duck AD. He came there for "Oregon Club". I knew immediately that he was not a good fit for OBD.

Beat me by one point!

Seahawks win 27-14 2 to 3 sacks 238 yds

Bringing in a new DC or OC means that person would bring changes in the plays and systems that players and other coaches would need to learn. As it is OBD hit the ground running the day after Indiana ended their playoff run. There’s always room for improvement. What Lanning chose to do allows for growth without disruption.