9
Started By
Message
The worst aspect of modern college football that gets the least attention
Posted on 8/2/26 at 2:20 am
Posted on 8/2/26 at 2:20 am
Gigantic oversized conferences produce extremely lopsided schedule disparities.
Saw a long Twitter thread from the College Football Nerds talking about this issue.
https://x.com/i/status/2083563892811116823
It's always been difficult to compare teams across conferences, but now you can't even reliably compare two teams within the "same" conference.
They provided a few ridiculous examples.
FSU and Clemson are both in the ACC yet they share ONE common opponent. Ordering them in conference standings is a complete farce.
SMU plays 1 game against the top 7 finishers of the ACC. Their schedule is literally the entire bottom half of the conference.
They used A&M last year as an example from the SEC, who through no fault of their own also had a conference schedule that was almost exclusively the entire bottom half of the conference.
With 8-10 you can do full round robin, with 12 you could do reasonable divisions, there a reason conferences naturally stopped there for all of history until everything went insane a few years ago.
A conference of 16, 18, 20 teams isn't really even a conference anymore. The teams at the top of the standings will be as much a function of favorable schedule as quality of team.
Saw a long Twitter thread from the College Football Nerds talking about this issue.
https://x.com/i/status/2083563892811116823
It's always been difficult to compare teams across conferences, but now you can't even reliably compare two teams within the "same" conference.
They provided a few ridiculous examples.
FSU and Clemson are both in the ACC yet they share ONE common opponent. Ordering them in conference standings is a complete farce.
SMU plays 1 game against the top 7 finishers of the ACC. Their schedule is literally the entire bottom half of the conference.
They used A&M last year as an example from the SEC, who through no fault of their own also had a conference schedule that was almost exclusively the entire bottom half of the conference.
With 8-10 you can do full round robin, with 12 you could do reasonable divisions, there a reason conferences naturally stopped there for all of history until everything went insane a few years ago.
A conference of 16, 18, 20 teams isn't really even a conference anymore. The teams at the top of the standings will be as much a function of favorable schedule as quality of team.
This post was edited on 8/2/26 at 2:25 am
Posted on 8/2/26 at 3:04 am to StansberryRules
Posted on 8/2/26 at 4:11 am to StansberryRules
you can inline that stuff even on tRANT's 486 servers running 2002 ASP.NET webforms
Loading Twitter/X Embed...
If tweet fails to load, click here.Posted on 8/2/26 at 4:28 am to StansberryRules
We need to resolve this with a 32 team playoff system!
Posted on 8/2/26 at 8:03 am to Victor R Franko
We need to resolve this by creating 8 smaller conferences that make geographic sense and have a lot of historical rivalries.
Posted on 8/2/26 at 8:13 am to wm72
quote:
We need to resolve this by creating 8 smaller conferences that make geographic sense and have a lot of historical rivalries.
That's going to take Congress establishing a governing body that can align and control college sports with a legal authority that some jackass judge in Oxford, MS or Lubbock, TX can't overrule on a whim.
Posted on 8/2/26 at 8:15 am to StansberryRules
One of the things I loved about college football was the regional flair it brought with it. When the SEC expanded into Arkansas and South Carolina in 1990, it at least made geographical sense. The same thing holds true with Penn State when they joined the Big Ten that same year. Miami, Virginia Tech, and Boston College joining the ACC in the early-00s also made geographic sense.
But then came conference expansion post-2010. So many moves were made that were influenced by television markets and not geographical compatibility that you now see the mess we're in.
But then came conference expansion post-2010. So many moves were made that were influenced by television markets and not geographical compatibility that you now see the mess we're in.
Posted on 8/2/26 at 8:24 am to StansberryRules
Agree with the premise. Umat last year thought they broke through when really they were just the top turd in the dungpile of lower performing SEC teams. Got exposed in the CFP.
The SEC should consider what the NFL does and adjust the coming years schedule based on prior year performance. That'd mean UGA and a+m would have two of the hardest schedules and Arkansas and State two of the easiest. Would have to add a caveat that requires teams that haven't played in previous 4 years to play, or something like that.
The SEC should consider what the NFL does and adjust the coming years schedule based on prior year performance. That'd mean UGA and a+m would have two of the hardest schedules and Arkansas and State two of the easiest. Would have to add a caveat that requires teams that haven't played in previous 4 years to play, or something like that.
Posted on 8/2/26 at 8:27 am to StansberryRules
quote:
It's always been difficult to compare teams across conferences, but now you can't even reliably compare two teams within the "same" conference.
And the disparity between conferences has greatly increased.
I think I saw somewhere that Georgia’s schedule for 2026 was rated as one of the “easiest” in the SEC. That “easy” schedule includes road trips to Alabama and Ole Miss, and a home game against Oklahoma. Three playoff teams from last year, with two on the road.
And then if Georgia goes 9-3, I’m supposed to sit there and hear how an 11-2 non-conference-champ team from the Big XII is “more deserving” despite MAYBE playing one team that level or higher all year.
I don’t like a world where a 9-3 jumps an 11-2, but when you allow the Big Ten and SEC to consolidate 90% of the power programs in America, that’s the world you necessarily create.
Posted on 8/2/26 at 8:28 am to wm72
How about 64 teams then? Would that work?
Posted on 8/2/26 at 8:56 am to StansberryRules
To be fair, even with smaller conferences there was an extraordinary imbalance of regular H-A games in multiple matchups and even greater disparity in in-conference and OOC strength of schedules
Posted on 8/2/26 at 9:06 am to StansberryRules
quote:
worst aspect of modern college football that gets the least attention
Gigantic oversized conferences produce extremely lopsided schedule disparities
That gets plenty of attention. It's why Indiana saying they're the best is silly. They play Ohio State and that's it. Meanwhile, Texas plays Ohio State AND Tennessee, Oklahoma, Florida, LSU and Texas A&M.
Posted on 8/2/26 at 10:16 am to StansberryRules
quote:
SMU plays 1 game against the top 7 finishers of the ACC. Their schedule is literally the entire bottom half of the conference.
So UT in its first sec year and A&M’s schedule from last year basically?
It does suck Nd is unfair unless you go to exclusive 12 game conference schedules.
This post was edited on 8/2/26 at 10:21 am
Page 1 of 1
Popular
Back to top
Follow SECRant for SEC Football News