ALTOONA, Pa. -- What do fans want to see? And does that even matter anymore?
Not really. Because most of this is really about, in no particular order:
• What coaches want
• What TV networks want
• What will make the most money for universities
For a number of years, there has been a debate about whether the Big Ten should switch from a nine-game conference schedule to eight games. The biggest reason for that? Well, the SEC has an eight-game schedule, that league has been the best in the country for a long time, so why not follow suit and see if it works out better?
In an interesting turn of events, however, there had been a lot of talk lately about the SEC ditching the eight-game slate and moving to a nine-game conference schedule. But while that still might happen down the road at some point, the SEC announced Thursday it is sticking with an eight-game format for the 2024 season, when it will be adding Texas and Oklahoma.
What are the pros and cons of each format? A lot of that depends on each individual program and where it stands in the college football class system.
Let's break it down.
THE BIGGEST ISSUE
This is common sense stuff. If we're trying to determine which teams most deserve a playoff berth, it helps if everybody is playing by the same rules.
If Big Ten teams are playing nine conference games, that is inherently more difficult than playing eight. Teams are more likely to lose to a conference opponent that knows its style of play, particularly when that game is on the road.
An SEC team, on the other hand, can use that extra game to schedule a weaker non-conference opponent, with the game almost always being at home.
That has long been a MAJOR advantage for the SEC, particularly when it comes to trying to make a four-team playoff.
Now, once the playoff expands to 12 in 2024, a case can be made that the eight vs. nine issue won't be as big of a factor. Simply because making a four-team field provides very little margin for error in your schedule and results, while a 12-team playoff offers more leeway.
OK, so ...
WHY WOULD SEC WANT TO CHANGE?
It's all about rivals and protected games.
In 2024, the SEC will play an eight-game league schedule and will abandon divisions. With 16 teams in the league, scheduling will be a chaotic mess. Trying to make things even for everybody in the league while giving fan bases the traditional rivalry games they've grown accustomed to is going to be a major problem.
This is from ESPN's story Thursday:
"(SEC Commissioner Greg) Sankey had strongly hinted at his preference for a nine-game conference schedule leading up to the SEC's spring meetings in Destin, Florida, this week. The proposal would have featured three permanent opponents, which would preserve long-standing rivalries, as well as six rotating opponents."
What's interesting about this debate is it comes down to fan criteria on what they want to see.
If you're a Penn State fan, would you rather see a schedule that includes:
1. The easiest path to a playoff berth? Or ...
2. A schedule that includes several traditional marquee rivals, such as Ohio State, Michigan and Michigan State?
If you answered 1 above, then an eight-game schedule would be better, simply because it would mean one less week of possibly getting beaten by a good or decent Big Ten team.
If you answered 2 above, then a nine-game schedule would be better.
Why?
In a nine-game league schedule with no divisions -- which the Big Ten is likely to adopt in 2024 -- Penn State would have three protected opponents every year. We've all been discussing this scenario for more than a year now, and trying to figure out which three opponents would remain on the schedule every season.
You can absolutely bank on Ohio State and Michigan State being two of them. Penn State vs. Ohio State is a gigantic money maker and TV draw, and the league absolutely needs that annual game. The Big Ten has always liked the Penn State-Michigan State pairing, and that would remain.
The third protected game likely would be either Maryland or Rutgers, preserving some sort of Eastern clash and giving one of those two teams the golden nugget of having Penn State on the schedule every year.
Another huge advantage of the nine-game schedule, as Sankey said above, is the additional six rotating opponents. From a logistics standpoint, having nine teams in that format would be WAAAAAY easier for a conference to divvy up the schedule.
BETTER NON-CON FACTOR
Look, as much as fans don't want to hear it, James Franklin absolutely prefers playing the easiest non-conference schedule possible. The path of least resistance. I did a We Are podcast on this a few weeks ago.
Franklin knows he has to play nine Big Ten games, which is more challenging than SEC teams playing eight league games. So, if he could, I'm certain Franklin would be perfectly fine playing the likes of Delaware, Kent State and Buffalo every year. Sure, those teams wouldn't help Penn State's strength of schedule at all, but the SOS will take care of itself playing nine Big Ten games, several of which would include Ohio State, Michigan State and possibly Michigan, USC, Wisconsin or Iowa.
Even playing Delaware, Kent State and Buffalo every year, Penn State most likely could still make a 12-team playoff by going 10-2 overall. So, why risk playing a tougher opponent in the non-con?
Alrighty, but ...
If the Big Ten had an eight-game league format, it would put more pressure on Penn State to go out and schedule a tougher opponent in the non-con. If you're a fan who cares more about seeing outstanding opponents in home-and-home series, then you'd have a better chance getting that if there were an eight-game league schedule.
WHAT DO TV NETWORKS WANT?
Easy. They want inventory that's filled with great games. When you pay $7 billion for that inventory, you're looking for as many quality matchups as possible.
A nine-game league schedule would provide far more of that, as opposed to a bunch of teams scheduling another cupcake if they had an eight-game schedule.
PENN STATE VS. PITT
This part is simple, whether fans on either side want to accept it or not.
If the Big Ten had an eight-game league schedule, it would be MUCH more likely for the Nittany Lions to play the Panthers on a frequent basis.
But with a nine-game league schedule, the rivalry will be largely abandoned.
Penn State doesn't want to play Pitt, either for financial reasons -- which I've discussed ad nauseum over the years -- and certainly not when it has to play nine Big Ten games every year. Again, as mentioned up above, Franklin would prefer the path of least resistance, which means few or no games against any quality opponents.
So, Penn State is scared of playing Pitt, right?
Well, kind of, in a roundabout sorta way ... but not really.
Franklin wants to play as few teams as possible that can actually beat Penn State. He knows Pitt can beat Penn State, like it did in 2016 and cost the Lions a playoff berth.
But it's not really just about Pitt. As stated a few times now, Penn State knows it doesn't really have to play any quality opponents in the non-con and can still reach the playoff.
The playoff is the goal for Penn State. Not renewing a rivalry that, frankly, has barely even qualified as a rivalry for the better part of a generation.
WHAT'S GOING TO HAPPEN
The Big Ten is staying at nine games. Period. There's just no way to accommodate everything from scheduling and TV inventory standpoints with an eight-game schedule. Too many rivalry matchups would be lost, and too many quality inventory games.
The SEC will be at eight games for the immediate future, but you can pretty much bank on that league also going to nine games in the next few years.
Again, it just creates so much more flexibility from a scheduling standpoint, and will provide fans with more of the classic rivalry games they want to see.
The SEC would give up its longstanding advantage of having to play one less tough conference game. And part of that advantage has always been the ability to schedule an extreme creampuff the week before a huge game, something most major teams in the SEC do.
But again, once we get to a 12-team playoff, a whole lot of things will change with regards to teams understanding what it will take to make the field on a consistent basis. Just like Franklin and Penn State, once SEC teams go to a nine-game league schedule, you can count on most of them to begin softening their non-conference schedules to make up for having one more tough game in the league.
WHAT DO YOU WANT TO SEE?
I've presented a lot of factors here, with pros and cons for eight and nine. So, which would you rather see as a fan? Post your thoughts in the comments.
One word of caution: If you're going to comment about how Penn State should still play Pitt a lot, then you'd better come up with reasons and criteria for WHY that would actually be good for the Lions while navigating a nine-game Big Ten format.
Yeah, of course most people want to see that game played regularly. I do, as well. But the bottom line is that there are plenty of legitimate reasons for Penn State not to play Pitt, both financially and from the standpoint of having the easiest path to a playoff berth.