Another bonus from this awesome run: we now have proof of concept for the scheduling plan of scheduling 3 OOC patsies.
We could have played Louisville, or whoever. It's useless to do so. You'll get plenty of challenges in conference. Notre Dame scheduled 2 or 3 tough games, depending on how you feel about USC. They lost two close ones early in the season and both of those teams bumped them out. Miami got their spot.
It's silly to play anyone you can't beat handily. 0 and 1 loss P4 teams are always getting in.
On top of that it turns out we didn't even schedule 3 patsies.
Old Dominion ended up 9-3 with an SP+ ranking of 48.
Kennesaw State was 10-3, the Conference USA champ, and had an SP+ of 78.
Using ESPN metrics, they were at least in the same ballpark as programs like Cincinnati (49), Duke (51), South Carolina (53), Arizona St. (54), Florida (61), & Kentucky (63).
Another bonus from this awesome run: we now have proof of concept for the scheduling plan of scheduling 3 OOC patsies.
We could have played Louisville, or whoever. It's useless to do so. You'll get plenty of challenges in conference. Notre Dame scheduled 2 or 3 tough games, depending on how you feel about USC. They lost two close ones early in the season and both of those teams bumped them out. Miami got their spot.
It's silly to play anyone you can't beat handily. 0 and 1 loss P4 teams are always getting in.
The 9 conference games helped dictate that. However, playing a good team out of conference now, isn't always a bad thing. It can give you a loss, but it can also give you a good win. Oregon was almost trapped by that with their schedule this year and our schedule last year. As we saw with a lot of teams, the number of losses matter but they seem to really give more credit for good wins.
It's a catch-22. If you schedule a light non-conf, you only have room to lose once. A second loss for Oregon could've been lethal, just like it would've been for IU last year. If you schedule a tough non-conf, you seem to get an additional game leeway and, in some instances, if you win that non-conf game it could really springboard you up. I think IU keeps that ND game.
However, playing a good team out of conference now, isn't always a bad thing. It can give you a loss, but it can also give you a good win.
The juice isn't worth the squeeze
A good friend will bail you out of jail, but your best friend will be sitting next to you in the cell saying "that was f***ing awesome"
However, playing a good team out of conference now, isn't always a bad thing. It can give you a loss, but it can also give you a good win.
The juice isn't worth the squeeze
Not if the squeeze ends in the same result.
Soft non-conf schedule wins, you can only have 1 conf loss.
Tough non-conf schedule (and you lose), you can only have 1 conf loss (thereby its the same outcome as easy schedule).
Tough non-conf schedule (and you win), you get 2 conf losses....thats a win.
Not if the squeeze ends in the same result.
Soft non-conf schedule wins, you can only have 1 conf loss.
Tough non-conf schedule (and you lose), you can only have 1 conf loss (thereby its the same outcome as easy schedule).
Tough non-conf schedule (and you win), you get 2 conf losses....thats a win.
Ifs and Buts...
A good friend will bail you out of jail, but your best friend will be sitting next to you in the cell saying "that was f***ing awesome"
@tmft Good post! Can't ignore the Old Dominion and Kennesaw State type teams as they play some respectable football. Next year the Hoosiers open with North Texas. The Mean Green were 11-2 in 2025 and lost the conference championship game to NCAA playoff bound Tulane. Looking ahead that game could prove to be a very competitive challenge.
I know I'm alone on a mountain top, but I still like the idea of scheduling 1 P5 precon (Lville/UK/UVA/Cincy type), and then a couple cupcakes. We just beat OSU and this many folks are really sweating playing an Lville or UVA? I think people get drunk and myopic off us piling up all these wins, but at some point we're going to have a 2-3 loss season and wish we'd played a better name to help out. Cracks me up all the folks who quote competition platitudes like "iron sharpens iron", "to be the best, you have to beat the best" and then think it's fine to schedule all cupcakes. Besides, with the SEC going to a 9 game conf schedule, didn't we agree that we have to play a P5 precon too now?
@kkott - I am with you. I have always been a on the side of scheduling cupcakes to build the IU brand of success, under the guise that if we did end up becoming a perennial winner, we begin scheduling a tougher non-conf opponent. It can be highly advantageous with our coaching staff and a returning QB, to play a top team right out of the gate as we are likely to be better prepared than them. Get a notch in our belt early on and relieve some pressure, much like OSU does.
Tough non-conf schedule (and you win), you get 2 conf losses....thats a win.
Are there examples of this?
Because here are teams with 2 conference losses and a P4 non-conf loss who didn't get in:
- Michigan
- Texas
- Southern Cal
- UVA (2nd conf loss was in champ game)
- Georgia Tech
Tough non-conf schedule (and you win), you get 2 conf losses....thats a win.
Are there examples of this?
Because here are teams with 2 conference losses and a P4 non-conf loss who didn't get in:
- Michigan
- Texas
- Southern Cal
- UVA (2nd conf loss was in champ game)
- Georgia Tech
I think you might've misread what I put but I get it, its a bit of a word salad. In my statement you quoted, I said "Tough non-conf schedule (and you win)". In the cases you stated, they all lost their tough non-conf game.
What I outlined was that if you dont play a tough schedule, you only get one conf loss. If you do schedule tough and lose, you still get that same one conf loss. If you schedule tough and win, then you get 2 losses in conference. So there isn't a negative to play tough and lose, you have the same outcome as playing an easy schedule, you just get one conf loss. Sorry, hopefully that makes more sense.
The top SEC teams don't seem to take a hit at all when they eek out a win over a Mississippi State, Kentucky, Arkansas, etc.
Maybe we can schedule at least one of the dregs of a power conference, early. They aren't really any better than the ODUs of the world, but somehow it is perceived as a greater accomplishment if you win. I kind of liked the IU-Kentucky series in football, though KY was decent for a time.
"You can't make someone listen to reason if they aren't willing to think"-- Ray Bradbury, Fahrenheit 451
Tough non-conf schedule (and you win), you get 2 conf losses....thats a win.
Are there examples of this?
Because here are teams with 2 conference losses and a P4 non-conf loss who didn't get in:
- Michigan
- Texas
- Southern Cal
- UVA (2nd conf loss was in champ game)
- Georgia Tech
I think you might've misread what I put but I get it, its a bit of a word salad. In my statement you quoted, I said "Tough non-conf schedule (and you win)". In the cases you stated, they all lost their tough non-conf game.
What I outlined was that if you dont play a tough schedule, you only get one conf loss. If you do schedule tough and lose, you still get that same one conf loss. If you schedule tough and win, then you get 2 losses in conference. So there isn't a negative to play tough and lose, you have the same outcome as playing an easy schedule, you just get one conf loss. Sorry, hopefully that makes more sense.
But since you can't guarantee you're going to win that tough game that you scheduled on your own, you're putting yourself in peril unnecessarily. See Texas. Yes, they lost to Florida, but replace OSU with Sam Houston State, go 10-2 with losses to UF and Georgia, then they're at least in the conversation at the end unlike how they were this week.
On the other hand, IU, OSU, TT, Oregon, Ole Miss, TAMU all had 'easy' non-conference seasons and we knew they were locks to get in yesterday. Add in a P4 non-con loss to any of those schedules, except maybe IU and OSU, and there's probably at least some sweating going on for them yesterday.
It's just COMPLETELY unnecessary, until the committee tells us it's necessary.
@gros-louis - yeah, but my point is that there isn't anything in peril in comparison.
You play an easy non-conf schedule and can only lose one game all season or you are done. You play a tough schedule and can lose 2 games (counting that tough game). Whats different? The only difference is you have a chance to win that tough game and it helps you. If you lose tha tough game, you still get to lose one more game the rest of the season, just like if you had a cupcake. That is my point. Its not a gamble, its the right decision.
Texas is not in because they lost the tough game AND lost 2 more times in conference. They simply weren't good enough. Had they played a cupcake, their 2 conference losses would've been too much. If Ole Miss had lost another game with their weak non-conf, they were in the same spot as Oregon would've been with another loss. Texas complaints are worthless. They are ranked as high as they are with the 3 losses, because the 3rd loss was to Ohio State so it didn't hurt them.
Your logic with Texas doesn't work because they are rated that high with 3 losses, due to one of those losses being Ohio State. If they didn't play OSU, those 2 losses would be equally as painful. Their SOS and SOR would drop because of it, applying more pressure to them having to win the big conference games.
@gros-louis - yeah, but my point is that there isn't anything in peril in comparison.
You play an easy non-conf schedule and can only lose one game all season or you are done. You play a tough schedule and can lose 2 games (counting that tough game). Whats different? The only difference is you have a chance to win that tough game and it helps you. If you lose tha tough game, you still get to lose one more game the rest of the season, just like if you had a cupcake. That is my point. Its not a gamble, its the right decision.
Texas is not in because they lost the tough game AND lost 2 more times in conference. They simply weren't good enough. Had they played a cupcake, their 2 conference losses would've been too much. If Ole Miss had lost another game with their weak non-conf, they were in the same spot as Oregon would've been with another loss. Texas complaints are worthless. They are ranked as high as they are with the 3 losses, because the 3rd loss was to Ohio State so it didn't hurt them.
Your logic with Texas doesn't work because they are rated that high with 3 losses, due to one of those losses being Ohio State. If they didn't play OSU, those 2 losses would be equally as painful. Their SOS and SOR would drop because of it, applying more pressure to them having to win the big conference games.
No disrespect, but I think you're making zero sense LOL
oh well, we all have strong feelings about it, it seems.
Latest Post: Anyone remember La Bamba restaurant Our newest member: Doug Beder Recent Posts Unread Posts
