Ay-Ziggy-Zoomba.com

Does anyone know if there has ever been any thought given to doing away with crossover games in the regular MAC-season scheduel? I ask this because far too often it seems that we are wasting games against bottom-feeders like OU in our crossover games, and it seems to me that we are losing out by doing so.

I mean, if we add two teams after the Terds and UCF leave, we'll have seven in each conference again. That would make for six in-conference games, 5 OOC games (in an eleven game scheduel). Dropping crossovers would mean the opportunity to scheduel other, possibly more lucrative non-conference games.

Also, crossover games seem a bit like inter-league play in baseball to me insomuch as it just takes the fun out of the championship game. Look at the last two years -- the MAC championship game has featured two teams that played each other in the regular season already. Wouldn't it make the game more fun to have two teams that had never seen each other before square-off?

If there is something like a longstanding rival between the divisions (such as Kent and BG), then go ahead and scheduel that in a non-conference slot and count it as OOC.

This really seems simple to me, but I'm sure there is some bullshit NCAA regulation out there that will blow my idea to dust. So, if you can find it, great! If not, lets start a movement because I would like to see us be able to scheduel some more OOC games rather than have east teams throw pillows at us. (And I know we may be in the east next year (I'm not even going to get into how bad that would be for us now)).

No way would we play 5 OOC games. First of all, no Div 1 school would probably be available because they would have to rework their schedule. And second of all if we do have more OCC games, many of them may be the likes of Temple, UCF, etc, so we may as well keep it within the conference. I would love to do this.

After UCF and Marshall leave, 6 teams in each division. Play 1 OOC game, and play each team in your div twice. That would total 11 games.

But if we don't have cross over games, what's the purpose of being called a league? Not that I get excited about crummy MAC games - well, actually, I do, because I love winning blowouts - but that's part of what having a two-division conference is all about.

You said: "Dropping crossovers would mean the opportunity to scheduel other, possibly more lucrative non-conference games."

We could schedule more OOC games, but we've had a spotty track record with scheduling non-conference games.

To wit ...

2001: Temple, at Northwestern, at Mizzou
2002: Tenn. Tech, Mizzou, at Kansas
2003: Eastern Ky., Liberty, at Ohio State, at Purdue
2004: at Oklahoma, at Temple, SEMO St.
2005: Temple, at Boise St., at Wisc.

We're a conference. That means playing each other regularly.

It seems to me we have a hard enough time getting 3 decent non-conference games lately(SEMO, Liberty, E. Kentucky). You'd see more of the same with 5 non-conference games. I think 8 conference games gives you a better chance to get the best team winning the division.

bgsufan1972:

No way we do home-and-homes within our division. OOC games are crucial to our long-term growth.

But you bring up a good point in regard to the impact of Marshall and UCF's exit on our schedule.

We play our 5 division opponents and two crossovers, that's 7.

We have three OOC games scheduled, that's 10.

Where's the 11th game? Another MAC game? Do we have to scramble for a I-AA team again?

I think for the 11th game you would have a 3rd cross-divisional game but I'm not sure how the rotation would work. I guess for BG they could move to the East, play Toledo every year, and play the other 4 teams, alternating 2 every other year.

87, what makes us a league without crossover games is the fact that each year the MAC West champ and the MAC East champ play each other in the CONFERENCE championship game. I don't see anything wrong with that, and personally would find it more compelling.

As far as non-conference games go, I think we would be able to find more and better D1A opponents simply because we would have more weekends free to offer other teams. As it stands right now, we are sort of limited as to who we can play with only three possible saturdays open.

Bleeding ...

I think that's wishful thinking. More weekends open isn't always the solution. There are many more issues in play when it comes to scheduling OOC games.

Another problem with the model is that we lose contact with many conference members. I mean, at the very least, Miami and BG have a very rich history that would be watered down if they only met when both teams won their division. And what about longtime MAC members like Ohio U. & Kent State? I think they league would be watered down in this scenario.

Well lets ask Noah, our future Heisman Winner 2018, what he thinks

Bleeding Orange wrote: As far as non-conference games go, I think we would be able to find more and better D1A opponents simply because we would have more weekends free to offer other teams. As it stands right now, we are sort of limited as to who we can play with only three possible saturdays open.

But other conferences have their own conference to worry about scheduling, not to mention taking a bye week in there somewhere. If we were to schedule 5 OOC games, we'd still be playing OOC into October, when other conferences are well into their conference schedule.

That, and what has been said about deciding a champion. The only reason I don't like crossover games is for this reason, if one team played Buffalo and OU, while another played Miami and Kent, its not exactly an "even slate" as a non-crossover schedule would be. That said, I'd rather crown a division champion based on what they do over 8 games than six.

We have a difficult enough time getting nonconference foes to come to Bowling Green now.

Can you imagine the headache of filling another home date?

No offense, but eliminating crossover games is a horrible idea. Why would we have a twelve team conference and play only five of the teams? It's not like we can lure in good non-conference games as it is, so why struggle to find more?

doughash is correct about adding a 3rd crossover game next season once the league drops to 12 teams. I would assume if we go to the east, one game would always be toledo and i would really like a guaranteed game against NIU, but we'll see.


Look at the SEC & Big 12. They play crossover games and I know of no discussion otherwise. If you don't play the crossover games then just split the conference in two, and make a new bowl game in where the two new conference champions play each other.

That's an amazingly bad suggestion....man.

Alright, alright, alright! Uncle!

It was just a silly thought that crossed my mind. Being the idiot that I am, though, I thought I'd run with it for all that it was worth, though.

I guess it was born partly out of my frustration of the possiblity of us shifting to the MAC East. I know that there are some rivalries there and that a lot of people think that attendence will go up if we are playing more Ohio schools, but I just look at Buffalo and what Akron is going to become next year, and I honestly cringe. Kent isn't giving me good vibes, either. OU I can live with, and Miami would be our only quality opponent. I just want us to find some way to stay in the west is all, I suppose.

Anyhow, lay off, I'm done. I got the response I expected and I thank you for it.

Now, tell me why I'm wrong about us moving to the MAC East! God, I just love being kicked in the face! It feels so GOOOOOOOOD!!!!!

and we renew our "rivalry" with kent state. seriously, does anyone know what the anniversary award even looks like?

however, there is a good rivalry developing with NIU that will be tossed aside if we go to the east. two guaranteed crossovers is too much to ask. and personally, i'd rather play toledo every year than NIU. but with that being said, i think miami can more than take over NIU's place in our rivalry priorities.