What is so special about "Round Robin" schedule?

[VaultHunter]

The SEC regarded as the best conference in college football does just fine without playing a "round robin"

The ACC has had 2 teams in the playoffs without playing a "round robin" and is doing just fine

Same for the Big10 and the PAC12.

All of these conferences have a few schools who might not offer as much in football success as others but contribute in other ways.

Honestly this "I'm happy with round robin schedule" argument comes across as either lazy or like WVU is better and beyond playing a school like Cincinnati, UConn, Memphis, Temple ect. Except most of WVU'S history in football is playing schools like these or even smaller less successful.

So basically it's a bad thing to have a schedule with Texas, Oklahoma, Oklahoma State, TCU, Texas Tech, Baylor, Memphis, Cincinnati

And not a schedule with Texas, Oklahoma, Oklahoma State, TCU, Texas Tech, Baylor, Iowa State, Kansas.

Makes no sense.

 

[LowFatMilk]

I think the biggest bitch is not having the top (most popular...aka Texas and OK) on the schedule every season.

 

[Buckaineer]

Not sure why the dig on WVU's opponents since WVU has spent plenty of games playing Miami (FL), VT, BC, Syracuse and Pitt when they were great, Penn State the same, Texas, Oklahoma, Oklahoma State, TCU, Baylor, Kansas State, and many OOC matchups such as Ohio State, Alabama, Auburn, LSU and other powers over the years. Many years.

That said, the round robin is probably the truest test of a conference--you play everyone. Its as tough as it can be in a conference. The problem is that it doesn't benefit the BIG 12 to do this. All it does is guarantee a more difficult path to getting more wins.

The other conferences aren't going to shrink and play a round robin schedule and they aren't going to give up lucrative CCGs either.

 

[xgunnx]

I think the biggest bitch is not having the top (most popular...aka Texas and OK) on the schedule every season.

I know for me that is exactly why i like the Round Robin schedule. Having UC, UConn or even Memphis on the schedule wouldnt be a issue for this Mountaineer fan. I just hate to lose teams from the schesule that are marquee conference match ups. Which could possibly happen depending on how the teams are divided into Divisions.

Also, this is only my opinion, a 10 member conference with a Round Robin schedule that has a CCG rematch is ridiculous.

 

[Buckaineer]

The simple solution to not having a round robin and not facing both Texas and OU some years, is to schedule a power team OOC in the years you don't play one in conference.

You don't play Texas one year, try to schedule PSU or Tennessee or VT or someone popular.

That and keep in mind some years you might play a Cincinnati instead of Kansas or similar circumstance.

For everyone, not having to play all the tough teams makes for better yearly results for more schools.

 

[xgunnx]

For everyone, not having to play all the tough teams makes for better yearly results for more schools.

Also more often then not, teams get beat up. Its one of the reason depth in the BIG 12 is important.

There are lots of pro's and con's with a RR schedule.

 

[coalcountry52]

The SEC regarded as the best conference in college football does just fine without playing a "round robin"

The ACC has had 2 teams in the playoffs without playing a "round robin" and is doing just fine

Same for the Big10 and the PAC12.

All of these conferences have a few schools who might not offer as much in football success as others but contribute in other ways.

Honestly this "I'm happy with round robin schedule" argument comes across as either lazy or like WVU is better and beyond playing a school like Cincinnati, UConn, Memphis, Temple ect. Except most of WVU'S history in football is playing schools like these or even smaller less successful.

So basically it's a bad thing to have a schedule with Texas, Oklahoma, Oklahoma State, TCU, Texas Tech, Baylor, Memphis, Cincinnati

And not a schedule with Texas, Oklahoma, Oklahoma State, TCU, Texas Tech, Baylor, Iowa State, Kansas.

Makes no sense.

Round robin means you can't ditch certain teams and get to the title game. You also don't get the benefit of a weak-ass division. But I guess we can play a Big Least schedule and listen to everyone saying we don't deserve being in contention for anything because we avoided teams A, B, and C.

 

[pic369]

I wouldn't mind going old school MLB. Expand to 13 teams, play round robin and schedule nothing OOC. Make the "experts" spend the whole season trying to figure out which conference and team is best. Then let the playoff sort it out.

 

[Cheers]

The SEC regarded as the best conference in college football does just fine without playing a "round robin"

The ACC has had 2 teams in the playoffs without playing a "round robin" and is doing just fine

Same for the Big10 and the PAC12.

All of these conferences have a few schools who might not offer as much in football success as others but contribute in other ways.

Honestly this "I'm happy with round robin schedule" argument comes across as either lazy or like WVU is better and beyond playing a school like Cincinnati, UConn, Memphis, Temple ect. Except most of WVU'S history in football is playing schools like these or even smaller less successful.

So basically it's a bad thing to have a schedule with Texas, Oklahoma, Oklahoma State, TCU, Texas Tech, Baylor, Memphis, Cincinnati

And not a schedule with Texas, Oklahoma, Oklahoma State, TCU, Texas Tech, Baylor, Iowa State, Kansas.

Makes no sense.

As pointed out below, adding these other teams means that WVU playing the marquee teams in the B12 annually goes out the window. We would likely NOT be playing Texas and OU every season and probably only once every 4 years at home. And the teams you mentioned to plug the holes in the schedule are frankly not of the same caliber. If the BIG 12 must expand to survive and prosper then it will and WVU will likely benefit financially from the arrangement. However from a fan interest perspective, playing Memphis, Cincy and the others is a step down. Nothing against those fine schools but just like us, they are not College Football Bluebloods.

 

[TIREPUNK]

Ask pitt how their FB and BB schedule is going.

No FSU and Clemson in FB some years
No Duke some years in BB, or only getting UNC away.....Only get too play ND at home every 6-8 years now.

Their schedules sucked in both sports this year......because they don't play round robin.

 

[Buster68]

What's wrong about liking the rr schedule? Absolutely nothing. It is truly the best way to determine a conference champion and unquestionably the most difficult road to achieve it. Having said this, in today's collegiate sports landscape, it's time may have passed and survival and/or prosperity may require conforming to the new models used by the other P5 conferences. I don't claim to have the answers, but I do believe that the B12 Presidents, Commissioner and ADs have a better grasp of the situation and don't want to kill the golden goose. We can debate which schools are "worthy" of consideration forever, but they know which ones fit best. I like having UT, OU, TCU and Baylor on the schedule every year, but this may have to change in the future. My priority is prosperity for WVU and right now that involves a prosperous B12. The leaders need to do what they believe will deliver the best results over the long term. I have a preference but I can also live with either rr or divisional play resulting from their actions.

 

[writeon]

A round-robin schedule seems fine, but what if, in the future, Oklahoma (and maybe others) jump to the Big 10, SEC or Pac 12 because of lack of expansion etc.? Big 12 must look to the future.

 

[Woody in Helvetia]

Round Robin is the best way to do a ten team conference. A championship game with round robin is just plain dumb in my opinion. Even when the Big 10 was a 10 team conference they never had round robin, neither did the SEC. The other conferences, ACC, SWC, Big8, and Pacific 8 all did have round robin in their leagues when they 8 or 9 members but never at 10. That being said - I am in favor of expansion because we have several issues that will cause us problems as time moves on. 1 - footprint of the conference(smallest of the 5), 2 - no 13th data point aka Championship game. 3 - Schedule currently too tough to produce a 9-0 conference champion.

 

[TexasforevEER]

I like the idea of a round robin schedule. I also like the idea of expansion and not playing a round robin schedule. In a hundred years I won't know the difference.

 

[Rootmaster]

Round robin schedule...the current marketing hype for the Big12-2=10 since the league member Presidents can't resolve the Ok vs Tx ongoing power struggle and move on to 12 (as the name says lol.)

BTW: Why would playing Cincinnati, Connecticut, Houston or even Memphis be less attractive than Kansas, Iowa State or even Texas Tech (gotta love Lubbock)?

Go to 12.

 

[Airport]

The SEC regarded as the best conference in college football does just fine without playing a "round robin"

The ACC has had 2 teams in the playoffs without playing a "round robin" and is doing just fine

Same for the Big10 and the PAC12.

All of these conferences have a few schools who might not offer as much in football success as others but contribute in other ways.

Honestly this "I'm happy with round robin schedule" argument comes across as either lazy or like WVU is better and beyond playing a school like Cincinnati, UConn, Memphis, Temple ect. Except most of WVU'S history in football is playing schools like these or even smaller less successful.

So basically it's a bad thing to have a schedule with Texas, Oklahoma, Oklahoma State, TCU, Texas Tech, Baylor, Memphis, Cincinnati

And not a schedule with Texas, Oklahoma, Oklahoma State, TCU, Texas Tech, Baylor, Iowa State, Kansas.

Makes no sense.

I can tell you that the long time members of the ACC didn't want to leave the round robin schedule. Coach K was quite vocal about it, down here in aCC territory.

 

[3xWVUenginEER]

It's not just the round robin to me. It's the schools in the round robin. There are no baaaad football opponents (except Kansas-they invented basketball what do you expect), and the opponents and games are awesome. Everybody has a good fanbase in football (except Kansas-see above reasoning). Why mess with that? Especially for something that guarantees no long term future? Season tickets have never been a better value.

Cincinnati isn't the top college football draw in their own city (tOSU is), same with Memphis (a few SEC schools are above them, Tennessee, Ole Miss, & Miss State, etc), the Directional Florida schools (both Florida and FSU are the bigger draws in Tampa & Orlando), and Good Lord forbid the women's basketball school UConn (nobody there even cares about college football. The fall is Sox vs Yanks time).
BYU-yes, but they won't play on Sunday.

You don't build a good to great conference with just more quantity. The quality and similar culture has to be there.

 

[Buckaineer]

If the BIG 12 expands they aren't going to add eight schools. There isn't going to be a division or schedule where WVU or other schools don't play OU or Texas every year.

The "all Texas and OU" division isn't possible anymore--there's no way the networks or the conference want a BIG 12 division and matchups where only half the conference has interesting matchups and they all knock each other off for a championship berth.

WVU would most likely play one school like OU every year in their division, and then play Texas two years on, two years off, or every other year. There's not going to be any four year gap.

 

[TexasforevEER]

If the Big 12 expands they aren't going to add eight schools. Heck, they aren't even going to add three teams.....................according to my shiny shoes source. I hear that after expansion WV will continue to play the same number of Big 12 teams...............leaving room for OOC play.

 

[HammEERman]

Round robin schedule...the current marketing hype for the Big12-2=10 since the league member Presidents can't resolve the Ok vs Tx ongoing power struggle and move on to 12 (as the name says lol.)

BTW: Why would playing Cincinnati, Connecticut, Houston or even Memphis be less attractive than Kansas, Iowa State or even Texas Tech (gotta love Lubbock)?

Go to 12.

Actually I do love Lubbock - went to pilot training there and hung out at the Copper Caboose where they served the best veil parm on the planet.

 

[Buckaineer]

If matchups were the only thing the BIG 12 had to worry or think about then just having a small 10 team conference might be viable long term.

They must concern themselves with competing with others though. Being in the playoffs, putting schools in the best position to be as successful as possible. They must concern themselves with things like tv contracts now and in the future, growing fanbases, recruiting at the top levels so they can be successful and making sure members are at the top financially to compete.

While people in the BIG 12 moan about maybe having to play more teams that will fit somewhere in the middle of the conference most years, schools in other conferences are thriving playing a schedule full of such schools.

Clemson just went 13-0 and played for a national championship with a schedule of:
Wofford, Appalachian State, Louisville, Georgia Tech, BC, Miami, NC State, Syracuse, South Carolina and Wake Forest.

ND, FSU were the only really strong opponents and UNC was in the CCG which the BIG 12 doesn't have because it has a round robin.

How is such a schedule worse than a WVU in an expanded BIG 12 playing a schedule like:

Georgia Southern, ECU, Cincinnati, Virginia Tech, Iowa State, Oklahoma, Kansas State, TCU, Baylor, Oklahoma State, Texas Tech and UConn?

BIG 12 schools can play some new schools in conference and still have good schedules. Some years they'll still play UT and OU.

 

[Mountaineer Steve]

The SEC regarded as the best conference in college football does just fine without playing a "round robin"

The ACC has had 2 teams in the playoffs without playing a "round robin" and is doing just fine

Same for the Big10 and the PAC12.

All of these conferences have a few schools who might not offer as much in football success as others but contribute in other ways.

Honestly this "I'm happy with round robin schedule" argument comes across as either lazy or like WVU is better and beyond playing a school like Cincinnati, UConn, Memphis, Temple ect. Except most of WVU'S history in football is playing schools like these or even smaller less successful.

So basically it's a bad thing to have a schedule with Texas, Oklahoma, Oklahoma State, TCU, Texas Tech, Baylor, Memphis, Cincinnati

And not a schedule with Texas, Oklahoma, Oklahoma State, TCU, Texas Tech, Baylor, Iowa State, Kansas.

Makes no sense.

Hold up just a second, are you saying the PAC12 has had 2 teams in the playoffs the past two years? If you are that is flat wrong.

I will add this, a 1 losss UNC team and the ACC would have been left out had UNC beaten Clemson in the CCG. Why? Because their side of the conference is so weak, they had to go undefeated to make it in.

 

[skygusty]

I like playing every other team in the conference in basketball and in football. It is the ten team conference that is the perfect creation. The giant conferences are the abomination. If I could change things they would all be ten team conferences in geographic regions that make sense.

 

[Mountaineer Steve]

I like playing every other team in the conference in basketball and in football. It is the ten team conference that is the perfect creation. The giant conferences are the abomination. If I could change things they would all be ten team conferences in geographic regions that make sense.

Yep, teams in the BIG are pissed they have to wait years to play Ohio State or MeChicken,

 

[skygusty]

The SEC regarded as the best conference in college football does just fine without playing a "round robin"

The ACC has had 2 teams in the playoffs without playing a "round robin" and is doing just fine

Same for the Big10 and the PAC12.

All of these conferences have a few schools who might not offer as much in football success as others but contribute in other ways.

Honestly this "I'm happy with round robin schedule" argument comes across as either lazy or like WVU is better and beyond playing a school like Cincinnati, UConn, Memphis, Temple ect. Except most of WVU'S history in football is playing schools like these or even smaller less successful.

So basically it's a bad thing to have a schedule with Texas, Oklahoma, Oklahoma State, TCU, Texas Tech, Baylor, Memphis, Cincinnati

And not a schedule with Texas, Oklahoma, Oklahoma State, TCU, Texas Tech, Baylor, Iowa State, Kansas.

Makes no sense.

The Big12 is doing pretty well too, but it wouldn't hurt if one of our marquis teams in Texas or Oklahoma could win a national championship without waiting another 10 years. If it has to come from Baylor or TCU or WVU that wouldn't hurt either but this conference needs to win it all pretty damn soon. We have NO idea how the BIG12 would do divisions and we do know that even in the best case scenario, we would play either Texas or Oklahoma less often than we do now. It is also arguable whether adding 2 more teams is going to be dilutive as far as money, and there is no sure thing that the BIG12 will not add two more teams that are both out of our time zone. I'm going to let the shiny shoes decide though and I'm not going to worry about it, no matter what they do. I don't care what your opinion is because unless your name is Gee or Lyons what you think doesn't matter. What they think only matters a little. It is the concensus the conference arrives at that matters and nobody knows what that is going to be. What I think doesn't matter at all. If they expand, fine, I just hope we don't get screwed.

 

[Buckaineer]

How can WVU "get screwed" if the BIG 12 expands? At worst WVU will have a better shot at winning more games every year and a better shot at playing for a BIG 12 championship. If the conference expands and adds a CCG, no one is going to lose money for certain, if they also add a conference network WVU will get far more exposure than ever before, have a strong conference home from now on, and make millions more in revenues every year. No matter what happens WVU will still play multiple great teams home and away every year. It's a win win all the way around.

Uncertainty about the future only comes if the conference chooses not to do anything. That is going to cause major problems down the road.

 

[Cheers]

How can WVU "get screwed" if the BIG 12 expands? At worst WVU will have a better shot at winning more games every year and a better shot at playing for a BIG 12 championship. If the conference expands and adds a CCG, no one is going to lose money for certain, if they also add a conference network WVU will get far more exposure than ever before, have a strong conference home from now on, and make millions more in revenues every year. No matter what happens WVU will still play multiple great teams home and away every year. It's a win win all the way around.

Uncertainty about the future only comes if the conference chooses not to do anything. That is going to cause major problems down the road.

Screwed is not the right term but I consider losing annual games against Texas and/or OU getting diluted. And it's not just those two. I also enjoy our annual match ups with every Big 12 team even KU. I really like everything about this conference; the teams, the fans, the culture. The geography thing is overblown from a fan perspective in my opinion because just about every game is televised. And I know there are a select few who will complain they can't make it to away games but it's a select few. And I say that because we rarely fill up our home games. Why would demand be so high for away venues when we can't fill our own stadium. There are 6 home games available almost every year. Go knock yourself out and attend these games first, then we can discuss how terrible it is for our fans to attend the away games.

 

[Buckaineer]

Screwed is not the right term but I consider losing annual games against Texas and/or OU getting diluted. And it's not just those two. I also enjoy our annual match ups with every Big 12 team even KU. I really like everything about this conference; the teams, the fans, the culture. The geography thing is overblown from a fan perspective in my opinion because just about every game is televised. And I know there are a select few who will complain they can't make it to away games but it's a select few. And I say that because we rarely fill up our home games. Why would demand be so high for away venues when we can't fill our own stadium. There are 6 home games available almost every year. Go knock yourself out and attend these games first, then we can discuss how terrible it is for our fans to attend the away games.

WVU is trying to schedule up OOC. In a year when they don't play a Texas or OU, they could play a PSU or VT or Pitt or other attractive non con opponent.

There's nothing wrong with the BIG 12 or the teams in it, but it seems much better to have a better chance at more wins and participating in championships- and more importantly to continue to be able to play these types of schools than to risk not being in a major conference so that for a few more years everyone can play everyone else.

Also don't understand the disdain for schools like UConn, Cincy etc, when WVU was playing these teams just several seasons ago and wasn't always beating them either. cIncinnati had some particularly strong teams back then and the fans didn't seem to mind attending games in Morgantown or Cincinnati, but now it would be the end of the world? Don't get that at all.

 

[Cheers]

WVU is trying to schedule up OOC. In a year when they don't play a Texas or OU, they could play a PSU or VT or Pitt or other attractive non con opponent.

There's nothing wrong with the BIG 12 or the teams in it, but it seems much better to have a better chance at more wins and participating in championships- and more importantly to continue to be able to play these types of schools than to risk not being in a major conference so that for a few more years everyone can play everyone else.

Also don't understand the disdain for schools like UConn, Cincy etc, when WVU was playing these teams just several seasons ago and wasn't always beating them either. cIncinnati had some particularly strong teams back then and the fans didn't seem to mind attending games in Morgantown or Cincinnati, but now it would be the end of the world? Don't get that at all.

Answer: Excellent, I agree.

Answer: I don't see the two as mutually exclusive. So you're saying WVU can't compete with the elite in the Big 12 so we need to water down the schedule to get more wins? And I also don't agree that if we do t expand the conference is doomed. Bored carries a lot of weight but he is part of the problem. If he and Texas would put their egos away and stop with the puffery the conference would at least stay out of the media and the chatter and articles about losing teams would diminish.

Answer: No disdain but I certainly have a preference to play higher profile teams. And higher profile teams help your SOS which as we've seen in year 1 of the Playoffs is a big factor. See TCU and Baylor for more evidence of this, particularly Baylor.

 

[WVex-pat in GA]

No one cared about our former conference's round robin schedule.

Personally, no matter how many teams are in a conference, I think 9 or 10 conference games should be played. SEC getting away with 8 and claiming to be the best conference is false advertising. They don't even play all the top teams in their own conference let alone OOC.

 

[TexasforevEER]

WVex-pat in GA.....................I like the way you talk! You graduated and all. Right? Anyhalz, you wise beyond your y'EERs. Warez

 

[Buckaineer]

Answer: Excellent, I agree.

Answer: I don't see the two as mutually exclusive. So you're saying WVU can't compete with the elite in the Big 12 so we need to water down the schedule to get more wins? And I also don't agree that if we do t expand the conference is doomed. Bored carries a lot of weight but he is part of the problem. If he and Texas would put their egos away and stop with the puffery the conference would at least stay out of the media and the chatter and articles about losing teams would diminish.

Answer: No disdain but I certainly have a preference to play higher profile teams. And higher profile teams help your SOS which as we've seen in year 1 of the Playoffs is a big factor. See TCU and Baylor for more evidence of this, particularly Baylor.

What I'm saying is that the other conferences are having more success because they don't play a schedule like the BIG 12s round robin. At some point the question becomes " what are you trying to accomplish"? Are you worried about puffing out your chest and proclaiming a round robin schedule is the toughest or do you want to be in the playoffs and play for championships. Because schools like Ohio State, FSU, Clemson and Oregon are getting there on the backs of mediocre to good but not great in conference play. The BIG 12 in the meantime is thumping it's chest, dropping a spot or more in the final tally every year, and getting thumped in non conference matchups against those outside the round robin familiarity. Happens in basketball too.

The round robin is not preparing teams any better for the outside world and its not leading to more victories for anyone. It's not helping the conference or schools to more major bowls or playoffs. Playing a new member doesn't drop the strength of schedule significantly if at all and doesn't mean you can't have a great home schedule either.

 

[Buckaineer]

No one cared about our former conference's round robin schedule.

Personally, no matter how many teams are in a conference, I think 9 or 10 conference games should be played. SEC getting away with 8 and claiming to be the best conference is false advertising. They don't even play all the top teams in their own conference let alone OOC.

Agree, the excuses of the ACC and SEC about playing 9 games need to go out the door.

 

[Cuyahoga Falls Eers]

The Big 12 got it right. You play every team and you are the "one true champion." Iowa showed the fallacy in the OP argument. Got into the conference title game by not playing Ohio State, Michigan and Michigan State. The 4th best team in the Big 12 does not get a shot at the conference title. It's the Big 10, SEC, ACC and Pac-12 that have it all wrong, for the sake of title game money.

In basketball, the Big 12 teams play everybody twice. Hell, as the No. 1 conference in America, the OOC games are a step down in quality in most cases.

It is ain't broke, don't fix it. The Big 12 ain't broke. Everyone else needs to mimic it. The best thing would be to have 8 8-team conferences and the 8 champs play for the national title, a true Elite Eight.

 

[Rootmaster]

The Big 12-2=10 might have "gotten it right", but the rest of the power football world is deciding a new right way. More schools, more markets etc mean more security for members...like WVU.

 

[TexasforevEER]

I was said that the 'round robin' schedule does not prepare the Mountaineers for the 'outside' world and better than not playing such a schedule. The more I read about how people see sports ...............the more I think things. Conference teams can play a round robin schedule or not. I really don't care. Just ............... bring on the Mountaineers! That's what I'm talking about!