Will the SEC non-conference scheduling be as bad as the Big Ten's if the SEC goes to nine conference games?

We’re diving deep into 2025 schedules, and you have questions…

From Jordon:
I was looking at the Big Ten and noticed next season they only have 12 non-conference games against Power 4 teams & most are at home. Is this going to be a trend as the SEC will probably go to nine conference games as well? Not trying to pick on the Big Ten. I was just curious with their conference size. I did not look at the ACC’s schedule, full disclosure.

Don’t worry, Jordon. I looked at every league’s schedules. And here are the numbers.

There are 42 non-conference games involving either two power conference teams or a power conference team and Notre Dame.

As Jordon pointed out, Big Ten teams will play in 12 non-conference games either involving another power conference team or Notre Dame. No team plays more than one such game, and six teams — including Penn State — play none. The highlights? Texas at Ohio State, Michigan at Oklahoma, Wisconsin-Alabama and USC-Notre Dame. For all the whining the Big Ten schools do about the ACC and SEC only playing eight conference games, they make up for this disadvantage by (mostly) avoiding challenging non-conference games. 

As Jordon also pointed out, the SEC might eventually move from eight to nine conference games. I don’t think this will decrease the quality of SEC non-conference games for one specific reason. One of the potential causes for the SEC to move to nine is because that is what the Big Ten wants before it will engage in a scheduling agreement with the SEC. So a nine-game SEC schedule might mean as many or more Big Ten-SEC matchups as the Big Ten has total power conference non-conference games in 2025. Plus, I don’t see any of the four annual ACC-SEC in-state rivalry games getting canceled or scaled back.

This year, the SEC has 18 such games, but a few teams are shouldering more of the burden. Alabama is playing Florida State and Wisconsin. Florida plays Miami and Florida State. South Carolina is playing Virginia Tech and Clemson. Ole Miss is playing none of these games after Wake Forest canceled the Oxford half of what originally was a home-and-home. 

The ACC is the undisputed champ of scheduling these games with 27 for three reasons:

An eight-game conference schedule.

A deal with Notre Dame that guarantees five ACC teams will play the Fighting Irish every year.

The four aforementioned ACC-SEC in-state rivalry series.

Plus, ACC members Virginia and N.C. State are padding the stats by playing one another in a non-conference game. 

But the ACC also has the most* teams scheduling multiples of these games: Clemson (LSU, South Carolina), Florida State (Alabama, Florida), Georgia Tech (Colorado, Georgia), Miami (Notre Dame, Florida), North Carolina (TCU, UCF), SMU (Baylor, TCU), Syracuse (Tennessee, Notre Dame), Virginia Tech (South Carolina, Vanderbilt). 

*I guess we probably also should include N.C. State, which plays Virginia out of conference and Notre Dame.

The Big 12 is another nine-conference game league, so its number is smaller than the ACC and the SEC. But it is bigger than the Big Ten. Big 12 teams will play 15 such games. One, however, is the return game of a non-conference Kansas State-Arizona series that was scheduled before the Sun Devils moved into the league.

Baylor, after years of getting crushed for weak non-conference schedules, seems to be trying to change its reputation all at once. The Bears are one of two Big 12 teams with two such games this season. They play Auburn and SMU. TCU, meanwhile, plays North Carolina and SMU.

As Jordon noticed with the scarcity of these games involving Big Ten teams, there aren’t enough of them. My hope is that some changes that lay ahead will inspire better non-conference scheduling, but things look bleak in the short term.

Nebraska recently canceled a future home-and-home series against Tennessee, and Cornhuskers coach Matt Rhule said it wasn’t in his team’s best interest to play a tough non-conference game because it wouldn’t help his team make the College Football Playoff. 

This is exactly the wrong line of thinking. First, Rhule needs to worry about winning eight games in a season at Nebraska before he worries about making the CFP. Second, any thinking that encourages the scheduling of bad games needs to be eradicated.

It’s going to be, but probably not in a gentle way. The plan to give the Big Ten and SEC four automatic bids each to the CFP would solve it by making the results of the non-conference games inconsequential relative to CFP selection (but relevant for seeding). But that’s probably not the final step. 

That potential step probably will become the ultimate answer to the next question…

From Rush:
If we have a national sport now, what is the purpose of “regional” conferences that formed 100 years ago?  It seems to me the primary ones benefitting from the SEC/Big Ten takeover of the CFP are Greg Sankey and Tony Petitti, doing all this to continue to justify their jobs.

Couldn’t the presidents and ADs of the schools nationwide come together, eliminate the conferences, hire a commissioner, divide the country into rational geographic regions and sell the whole thing to ESPN and Fox and make the same or more money that they do now without sacrificing rivalries and other aspects that make college football so great.

The settlement this week between the ACC and Clemson and Florida State started the clock ticking toward something like what Rush suggests, but I don’t think the outcome will be as sunny for everyone as Rush implies.

What Rush described is something similar to the College Sports Tomorrow plan that was led by search firm chair Len Perna and pitched to schools last year with little interest from the Big Ten and SEC. It would create a nationwide league using all the teams currently in power conferences and share the money evenly. The idea was a “rising tide lifts all boats” philosophy that organizers hoped would convince the Big Ten and SEC that they could make more money than now even if they shared with the others.

But that group failed to understand one thing: money is great, but money and power are better. The Big Ten and SEC weren’t about to give up their power to form a super league with everyone. The more likely outcome is they form a super league with one another and possibly invite a few more schools.

This week’s settlement would allow any team to leave the ACC for less than $100 million precisely when the Big Ten’s TV contract expires. That makes the summer of 2030 important. Equally important is the summer of 2032, when the next CFP TV deal ends. Then there’s 2034, when the SEC’s TV deal ends.

We’ve already seen that the 18-, 17- and 16-team alignments in the power leagues is unwieldy. If the Big Ten did want to add more schools, it might be too big to function as a conference. With the Big Ten and SEC already working together, it’s possible they try to join forces.

It’s also possible the most bankable brands in those leagues don’t want to subsidize the less bankable brands anymore. And that gets to the first part of Rush’s question. Why do the Big Ten schools need to remain together and why do the SEC schools need to remain together? Why wouldn’t the most valuable among them join forces and create the most lucrative league they could?

We don’t know the answers to these questions yet. Perna told The Athletic’s Stewart Mandel he thinks the inflection point is 2032. It’s possible that after the settlement the timeline moves up to 2030. 

That’s not that far away, so enjoy this version of college football while you can.

A Random Ranking

Reader Justin wants me to rank the chips that are “the most crushable in one sitting.”

1. Zapp’s Voodoo Heat
2. Kettle Sea Salt and Vinegar
3. Dirty Sriracha Honey
4. Spicy Sweet Chili Doritos
5. Tostitos Scoops (but only with salsa)
6. Golden Flake Dill Pickle
7. Pringles Original
8. Lay’s Barbecue
9. Ruffles Cheddar and Sour Cream
10. Zapp’s Spicy Cajun Crawtators