Another bad thing about new Big "XII"

[OUMallen]

This just hit me:

We'll have 9 conference games every year now. Those, other than OU/tx, will be on a home-and-away basis.

So, one conference game (OU/tx) is never in Norman. OU and Norman lose money on that.

But NOW, we have an additional conference game that HAS to be either home or away depending on the scheduling. Because of that, OU loses the ability to choose to possibly schedule a home game against a non-con, instead having to go with the conference conference opponent. Every other year, that'll be an away game. So, every other year, OU and Norman are forced to forgo a LOT of money.

I'm sure they factored that into the decision. But I bet Norman merchants didn't.

[Phil]

Nope. In the Big 12, we only had three home conference games every other year. In the Big 12-2, we'll have four home conference games every year. We have three non-conference games to play with, and if we schedule them all at home, we'll have seven home games, five on the road. Most years, we'll be six home and six road, the same as it's usually been for quite a while now.

[OUMallen]

Nope. In the Big 12, we only had three home conference games every other year. In the Big 12-2, we'll have four home conference games every year. We have three non-conference games to play with, and if we schedule them all at home, we'll have seven home games, five on the road. Most years, we'll be six home and six road, the same as it's usually been for quite a while now.

Aaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaa aaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaah. OK. That's like the riddle about the 3 guys that chip in 10 bucks each to the bellhop and I made a bad assumption about the way our current conference schedule set up.

Dallas, Houston, San Antonio, Kansas City lose a potential game eveyr few years though. But I don't care about that. :D

[cvsooner]

Wha? How does OU lose the ability to possibly schedule a non-con at home? You've got four conference games and you set up a home and away with two good teams, so one of those is always at home...That's five.

Add in one patsy at home--a la Idaho State or Middle Tennessee or the like, who will get a whole lot more money to play in Norman than at home...and you're back to six.

You're worried about nothing.

[OUMallen]

Wha? How does OU lose the ability to possibly schedule a non-con at home? You've got four conference games and you set up a home and away with two good teams, so one of those is always at home...That's five.

Add in one patsy at home--a la Idaho State or Middle Tennessee or the like, who will get a whole lot more money to play in Norman than at home...and you're back to six.

You're worried about nothing.

Wait. OK, status quo, there are years where we had 4 home conference games. 2009 we had Baylor, KSU, A&M, OSU. We had the opportunity to schedule 4 noncon games at home if we wanted. That would be potentially eight home games. Pretty sweet. (UT in DAL)

Going to next year, we will have 3 noncon potential home games, and 4 home games. That is only SEVEN potential home games. Because UT is in Dallas, we never get that home game.

Since there are 9 conference games, every other year you should have 5 at home, 4 at home, 5 at home, 4 at home, right? Well, because UT is always in Dallas, we will have 4 at home (white in Dallas), 4 at home (Crimson in Dallas), 4 at home (white in Dallas), so on. Right?

If we can ONLY max out at 4 conference games at home because UT is in Dallas, and we can ONLY max out 3 non-con at home, that's an overall MAX of 7 games. And I showed in 2009 we could have had 8 at home. Thus, we lose the potential to schedule an eighth game in Norman.

Make sense? Or have I been working on these pleadings too long this morning?

[soonerboy_odanorth]

This just hit me:

We'll have 9 conference games every year now. Those, other than OU/tx, will be on a home-and-away basis.

So, one conference game (OU/tx) is never in Norman. OU and Norman lose money on that.

But NOW, we have an additional conference game that HAS to be either home or away depending on the scheduling. Because of that, OU loses the ability to choose to possibly schedule a home game against a non-con, instead having to go with the conference conference opponent. Every other year, that'll be an away game. So, every other year, OU and Norman are forced to forgo a LOT of money.

I'm sure they factored that into the decision. But I bet Norman merchants didn't.

Actually it is an improvement from a conference game standpoint. We will still have 6, and in some years 7, home games. In the last few years since the NCAA went to 12 games we have alternated years with 3 conf home games one year (like this year), and 4 conf home games the next. We filled the extra games with non-conf opponents. Now we will play 4 home conf games every year. It removes a scheduling headache for finding an extra home opponent for one thing.

However, I think it also probably waters down our non-conf schedule. We'll still have the home-and-home with a marque non-conf opponent. But the other two non-conf games will be against no-return-required cupcakes, except for the Tulsa and TCU games already on the books. But even then those years have room to add another home non-conf opponent to get to 6 home games. And the only problem I have with that is I did want to see more of the TCU's and Cincinatti's in Norman rather than the Ball State's, or even the extra visits from Iowa State and Kansas State, etc. Personally I'm bored with those matchups (and why I would have loved the idea of a Pac10 move in the case of a BigXII without Nebraska.)

In the end though, I think it is moot because I don't see any way this conf stays at 10 teams. The champ game money is just too much, especially w/ Jerry Jones handin out the dollar bills like candy out of a pez dispenser to get butts into the seats of his new palace.

[soonerboy_odanorth]

Dangit I just wasted a lot of typing while a few others got in before me....

Thanks, Mallen! Jacka**! ;)

[OUMallen]

Nope. In the Big 12, we only had three home conference games every other year. In the Big 12-2, we'll have four home conference games every year. We have three non-conference games to play with, and if we schedule them all at home, we'll have seven home games, five on the road. Most years, we'll be six home and six road, the same as it's usually been for quite a while now.

See the thing is, in the Big 12-2, everyone else other than OU and UT will get 5 home and 4 away, then 4 home and 5 away.

E.g.- in 2010, Iowa State gets 5 conference games at home. But we NEVER will get 5 at home. And we won't. UT home games are in Dallas.

we took away a noncon where we could choose to be at home, and replaced it with a conference game that will alternate home and away.

Every year that we SHOULD have 5 at home, we'll only have 4 at home due to UT home games being in DAL. 4 MAX Conf home games + 3 MAX noncon home games = 7 MAX ome games any year.

Thus, we lost the opportunity to schedule a home game.

[OUMallen]

Actually it is an improvement from a conference game standpoint. We will still have 6, and in some years 7, home games.

But NEVER will we have 8. Which we could have had under the old system.

[Soonerfan88]

Yes, there was the potential for 8 home games but Joe C. has never scheduled more than 7 in any season but majority in last 10 years have had 6.


Edit: Remember also that adding more home games increases season ticket prices and I don't think Joe C. or D. Boren want to do that right now.

[soonerboy_odanorth]

See the thing is, in the Big 12-2, everyone else other than OU and UT will get 5 home and 4 away, then 4 home and 5 away.

E.g.- in 2010, Iowa State gets 5 conference games at home. But we NEVER will get 5 at home. And we won't. UT home games at in Dallas.

Because we took away a noncon where we could choose to be at home, and replaced it with a conference game that will alternate home and away, every year that we SHOULD have 5 at home (but only have 4 due to UT in DAL), we'll only have 4 at home.

Thus, we lost the opportunity to schedule a home game.

So we lost the possibility of getting to 8 home games instead of what looks to be a max of 7. Good point. (Though 7 home games has been rare enough anyway- 2001, 2003, 2007.)

But, you want to give up Big D and go home and home to get the potential of an 8th home game? I guess I'm a little selfish on that one and would vote no. Sorry Norman businesses.

[OUMallen]

Yes, there was the potential for 8 home games but Joe C. has never scheduled more than 7 in any season but majority in last 10 years have had 6.


Edit: Remember also that adding more home games increases season ticket prices and I don't think Joe C. or D. Boren want to do that right now.

That's not the point. I said we lost the opportunity to do so. We COULD have.

[OUMallen]

So we lost the possibility of getting to 8 home games instead of what looks to be a max of 7. Good point. (Though 7 home games has been rare enough anyway- 2001, 2003, 2007.)

But, you want to give up Big D and go home and home to get the potential of an 8th home game? I guess I'm a little selfish on that one and would vote no. Sorry Norman businesses.

No, that's not the point. My point is that in the old system, we were better off. In lots of ways, but in this little interesting way as well.

[OUMallen]

Phil, am I doing this right? Or am I just loopy?

[Phil]

And my point is that its a wash. We will have six home games every year, sometimes seven, and never eight. Exactly the same as it has been for a long time.

[Phil]

Phil, am I doing this right? Or am I just loopy?

You're not loopy, but losing an opportunity we never took anyway doesn't really amount to anything. We're not OSU - we don't have to have eight home games to have a good season. There are a lot of our fans that look forward to a nice non-conference road trip every year, or at least every other year, myself among them.

[OUMallen]

That opportunity had value. And we lost it. It's not worth crying over, but it's not something that should be casually dismissed, IMO. The landscape could change where we would like the opportunity. Say, if a sweet scheduling deal came up where we had 3 noncon home games scheduled and a badass school decided they could come last second, too. Can't do that now.

Like I said, it's not worth crying over, but to casually dismiss it as A) not an interesting point, or B) not worth value seems goofy to me.

Oh well, back to not caring, everyone!

[jkjsooner]

Yes, there was the potential for 8 home games but Joe C. has never scheduled more than 7 in any season but majority in last 10 years have had 6.


Edit: Remember also that adding more home games increases season ticket prices and I don't think Joe C. or D. Boren want to do that right now.

One reason we don't is because we usually play at least a couple of BCS teams that would require a home/away series. That's not going to change so we'll continue (on average) play at least one non-conference road game a year.

No matter how you parse it, unless we change our OOC scheduling philosophy (meaning fewer big OOC games) we've lost a home game ever two years.

[jkjsooner]

I haven't looked back at the schedule but I think we generally play two home/away OOC series a year and a couple of "pay you to come here" teams a year.

Since we now have 3 OOC games, we could drop one of the home/away series and keep the two "pay you to come here" teams which would make up the difference.

However that solution seems really pathetic. We're trading a game with FSU or Cincy with a game with ISU. That just sucks.

[jkjsooner]

I just looked back at previous schedules. It seems that we usually play 3 OOC games that require a home/away series and one that does not. Some years we played 2 and 2.

Nevertheless, to preserve the average number of home games we will have to play on average one less OOC home/away series per year. Sucks.

[Phil]

I casually dismiss this thread.

[85sooners]

:confused:

[OUMallen]

I casually dismiss this thread.

Sorry to waste your time with insight. :P

[Phil]

Meh. ;)

[Bruiser53]

See the thing is, in the Big 12-2, everyone else other than OU and UT will get 5 home and 4 away, then 4 home and 5 away.

E.g.- in 2010, Iowa State gets 5 conference games at home. But we NEVER will get 5 at home. And we won't. UT home games are in Dallas.

we took away a noncon where we could choose to be at home, and replaced it with a conference game that will alternate home and away.

Every year that we SHOULD have 5 at home, we'll only have 4 at home due to UT home games being in DAL. 4 MAX Conf home games + 3 MAX noncon home games = 7 MAX ome games any year.

Thus, we lost the opportunity to schedule a home game.


http://www.soonersports.com/ot/future_football_schedules.html

Scroll down a little ways to the FAQ, and it has a good explanation of the Tiny 10's scheduling process going forward. It is a pretty interesting read. Regarding the neutral site games, it looks like 8 of the ten schools will be playing designated neutral site games per year (I guess the powers at be were encouraged by their neutral site game at a 1/3 full cotton bowl :confused: ). So the only two teams without a designated neutral site game in the Big 12-2 is Aggie 1 and 2. A&M already has a neutral site series with Arky in Jerryworld for the forseeable future, so little brother is the only school without a neutral site game. You didn't think Texas would let themselves be the screwed by a neutral site game going forward did you?

[OUinFLA]

this thread makes my head hurt.

since I am not traveling 1300 miles to see OU play, Im sorry I got the headache.

[SoonerSpock]

Wait. OK, status quo, there are years where we had 4 home conference games. 2009 we had Baylor, KSU, A&M, OSU. We had the opportunity to schedule 4 noncon games at home if we wanted. That would be potentially eight home games. Pretty sweet. (UT in DAL)

Going to next year, we will have 3 noncon potential home games, and 4 home games. That is only SEVEN potential home games. Because UT is in Dallas, we never get that home game.

Since there are 9 conference games, every other year you should have 5 at home, 4 at home, 5 at home, 4 at home, right? Well, because UT is always in Dallas, we will have 4 at home (white in Dallas), 4 at home (Crimson in Dallas), 4 at home (white in Dallas), so on. Right?

If we can ONLY max out at 4 conference games at home because UT is in Dallas, and we can ONLY max out 3 non-con at home, that's an overall MAX of 7 games. And I showed in 2009 we could have had 8 at home. Thus, we lose the potential to schedule an eighth game in Norman.

Make sense? Or have I been working on these pleadings too long this morning?

The reality is that during the Stoops era your argument is mute as the largest number of home games we have played in any year is 7 which we did in 2001, 2003, 2007 and 2008. Every other year we played 6 except 1999 when we played 5.

Since we have gone to the 12 game regular season schedule OU has always played a non-conference road game going to Tulsa (twice), Alabama, UCLA, Oregon, Washington and Cincinnati.

[jkjsooner]

The reality is that during the Stoops era your argument is mute as the largest number of home games we have played in any year is 7 which we did in 2001, 2003, 2007 and 2008. Every other year we played 6 except 1999 when we played 5.

Since we have gone to the 12 game regular season schedule OU has always played a non-conference road game going to Tulsa (twice), Alabama, UCLA, Oregon, Washington and Cincinnati.

You're making our point. To retain the same number of home games we'll have to drop some of those good series you mentioned above.

Given, we never play 8 games but we still will have to play fewer big games that require home/away series or we'll lose a home game every other year.

When I first thought about playing 3 OOC games instead of 4 I was a little disappointed but I figured we'd drop one of our Chattanooga/Idaho St/Utah St. type games. Unfortunately, we can't do that if we want to continue playing the same number of home games.

In essence we have one of the following choices:

1. Trade a patsy OOC opponent for the additional conference game and lose a home game every other year.

2. Trade a good OOC opponent that requires a home/away series for the additional conference game.

Considering the additional conference game will be against a boring opponent (we no longer have NU afterall) I think we're going to need to keep the good OOC opponents on our schedule. That means we lose on average 1/2 of a home game every year.

[OUMallen]

The point is: we lost something that had value. I hadn't seen anyone mention it yet. We could have used it in the future. Thought it was interesting.

But some of you sure are happy to give away the option.

[MamaMia]

And my point is that its a wash. We will have six home games every year, sometimes seven, and never eight. Exactly the same as it has been for a long time.

...but I REALLY like it when we have 8. :P