Three different threads on the Oregon Football message board, the Our Beloved Ducks forum over the recent months have addressed B1G football scheduling. Some of the many ideas on that topic have been incorporated in a draft letter to B1G Commissioner Tony Petitti. Our own Mr. FishDuck...

Join Me: A Letter to BIG Commissioner Tony Petitti

Good thoughts, Mike, thanks.

Please cc: the honchos at Fox, CBS, and NBC. Tony might love the idea, but the inventory is owned by the media.

This season, Oregon plays UCLA, USC, and UW.

The four West Coast teams playing each other every season and one less trip to the Eastern or Central time zones would be an easy fix and one that would be acceptable to the broadcast partners, I think.

Divisions? I'm not sure anyone in B1G HQ wants to return to an East-West split, with the East being the more difficult conference and dominating Big Ten championship games.

In 2030, we could see a Super Conference dominated by B1G and SEC teams with value-added programs like Notre Dame added on.

If the B1G stays on its own, I think we will see the conference expand to 24 teams, with playoff revenue split by success on the field and court, and media income split by the number of viewers over a given period.

This is today's revenue share model in the ACC. Miami keeps all of the football playoff revenue it earned last season.

Regardless, we will see significant change on or before 2030, including a 24-team playoff, and your thoughts on equitable scheduling will be even more relevant if the B1G adopts the ACC revenue distribution model.

The worst teams in the NFL play the easiest schedules the league can arrange. But the goal in CFB is not focused on parity. SEE: 3-loss Bama in the 2025-26 PO and 2-loss BYU on the bench.

The B12 champ game loss mattered; the SEC champ game loss did not matter. Nor did a loss to a bad FSU team.

Equity in every endeavor organized and managed by homo sapiens is elusive. But it never hurts to try, peacefully, to find equity.

Thanks again for your thoughts.

Mike, scheduling change updates in the NFL - The emphasis in the NFL is always on parity - CFB Billionaire Battles are not seen in the NFL -

Here is the College Football News national SOS ranking for B1G champ contender schedules, including OOC games: Oregon 6, Michigan 7, USC 15, Ohio State 17, UW 26, Indiana 50, Penn State 51, and Iowa 55.

The team with the highest ranking in The Sporting News Composite top 25 ranking with the easiest schedule is No. 7 Texas Tech. The Red Raiders' schedule is ranked 65th out of 68 Power 4 teams. One preseason-ranked team, No. 23 Houston, is on the schedule, with the game to be played in Lubbock.

This disparity, IMO, is an even bigger issue than in-conference scheduling equity. Especially with a PO committee that makes things up as they go along.

The Basketball Committee discloses a team's schedule strength week by week. The Football Committee does its business in the dark except for the light that shines on Alabama.

https://www.cbssports.com/nfl/news/nfl-tweak-scheduling-formula-if-regular-season-stays-at-17-games/?eid=c7d8647c6247db8d08c59fe44bc30380a147aa90b9e33099045cd46ddc6a485b&ftag=SNL-04-10aaa0b&ET_CID=542848&ET_RID=5248271

This is the 🤬we get from the Football Playoff PO Committee -

https://www.cbssports.com/college-football/news/college-football-playoff-rebrands-logos-cfp/?eid=c7d8647c6247db8d08c59fe44bc30380a147aa90b9e33099045cd46ddc6a485b&ftag=SNL-04-10aaa0b&ET_CID=542848&ET_

Relative to the old Pac12, I thought any divisions should be east-west, not north-south. For example, Oregon in the east, OSU in the west, UCLA in the east, USC in the west, and so on. That would have given teams up and down the coast access to the Bay Area, L.A., and Arizona markets every season with a home or away game....which would have helped maintain ties for recruiting. Cross over games could include an annual rival matchup with the remainder rotating.

I point this out solely as a mental trigger that "natural geography" isn't the only thing that should be considered when creating divisions within a conference.

Creating a schedule five years out with all the changes that occur within the conference between NIL, coaching changes, etc.? It is nuts, and thus why I like this format suggested. As he noted--gaining two more teams to the conference for a clean 9-game conference schedule would be an upgrade to this convoluted way of deciding schedules, IMHO.

Your proposal means it could be possible for two B1G TEN teams never play each other for the rest of the B1G TEN existence. The B1G TEN will never allow that to happen.

It is unfortunate that we/college football have unbalanced schedules, but even the NFL has unbalance schedules. There are too many teams to try and create a balance schedule.

We already talk about the B1G and SEC being better than all the other leagues in football. One could argue teams from the B1G/SEC have the most NIL money have an unfair advantage.

It would be nice to have more balanced schedules between the "top" teams in the B1G, but with the requirement of playing all teams within a certain time frame makes it unlikely.

1 hour ago, HDuck said:

Relative to the old Pac12, I thought any divisions should be east-west, not north-south. For example, Oregon in the east, OSU in the west, UCLA in the east, USC in the west, and so on. That would have given teams up and down the coast access to the Bay Area, L.A., and Arizona markets every season with a home or away game....which would have helped maintain ties for recruiting. Cross over games could include an annual rival matchup with the remainder rotating.

I point this out solely as a mental trigger that "natural geography" isn't the only thing that should be considered when creating divisions within a conference.

Spot on, H! Your logical P12 alignment didn't happen because USC fans wanted their trip to SFO every season to watch SC vs Stanford or Cal. Thus, the Cali, Pat Haden, scheduling format.

A Big Ten East-West division alignment based on past results in Big Ten play would hose over the teams in the East. I don't fault B1G HQ for underestimating the prowess of Indiana in 2023. Who knew?

And who knew that many potential top draft picks would be returning to Oregon instead of playing in the NFL?

Equitable scheduling in today's CFB with NIL, largely unrestricted CFB free agency, and significant roster turnover every season is not possible IMO. Especially when a scheduling goal is for every conference member to play one another at least twice over five years.

As I noted above, you might convince Tony to adopt Mike's well-thought-out plan. But Tony's consent is meaningless without the approval of the media partners.

Unequal scheduling in CFB would be a lesser problem if the PO committee revealed its metrics and used them.

No E$PN sneak peeks before the ultimate field is revealed, with the metrics that support the field and the seeding of the field revealed at the same time.

If the field and the seeding do not match the metrics, the committee spokesperson has to explain the reasoning behind ignoring the metrics.

A 24-team field would also help with the disparity in scheduling. Yes, the 25th team and its fans would beef, but would No. 25 be able to win four games on the way to a title?