The Case for Cupcakes: In Favor of Padding College Football Schedules With Weak Teams

I’ve done my share of ranting about college football powerhouses that pad their schedules with non-conference cupcake teams. But I’m going to mix it up. I’ve seen the light. I’ve had a change of heart.

If a team has a tough conference schedule, why on earth do we insist that they play tough non-conference games too?

Now, let me be clear. It’s horrifying to watch Tim Tebow and the Florida Gators drop a 62-3 bomb on an FCS (formerly Division I-AA) opponent like poor Charleston Southern. Nobody wants to see that. Except maybe Urban Meyer.

But it doesn’t mean I totally disagree with it.

There are a thousand reasons why the very best teams in the country shouldn’t be playing the very worst. But there are a few redeeming reasons that make it acceptable.

There’s Good Money in Losing

First of all, the games are good for the smaller team. (Wait for it…)

Don’t forget that it’s the schools that schedule these games. They choose to go play Texas or Oklahoma or USC, and those giant living monuments of football greatness make it worth their time—with their checkbooks.

Charleston Southern, for example, got paid $450,000 to go down to Gainesville and bend over. They’ll get another $450,000 paycheck when they travel to play South Florida this Saturday. A couple of big-name programs get warm-up games, and Charleston Southern gets a new athletic facility.

It’s a win-win. Even ask Charleston Southern coach Jay Mills, who said they are “very grateful for the opportunity” to get destroyed by the Gators.

But does that excuse Florida from, without exaggeration, buying a win?

It’s easy to see why they do it. Ohio State has an uphill climb after dropping a close game to the USC Trojans, when they could have played an underachiever instead. The same Oklahoma Sooners who walloped Idaho State 64-0 fell the week before to BYU, and now have to play catch-up if they want to get back to the BCS Championship Game.

But for Florida and Texas, both guilty of purchasing wins, I can let it slide if the rest of their schedule is strenuous enough.

They’ve Got Good Conference Games

Texas has three ranked opponents on the docket (#12 Oklahoma, #16 Oklahoma State, and #22 Kansas), plus always-tough games against Texas Tech and Texas A&M. RPI lists their strength of schedule as #1 in the country. They qualify.

Florida qualifies as well, with the nation’s #7 strength of schedule. And that’s even with a light SEC schedule—they don’t play #4 Alabama or #5 Mississippi, which they might in other years.

Now contrast that with a strong mid-major team, like BYU. Last year the Cougars’ strength of schedule was only #60 in the country.

But they changed things this year, scheduling Florida State and jumping on the opportunity to play Oklahoma in the new Cowboys Stadium in Dallas. It’s entirely on the strength of their non-conference schedule that this year their SOS is #19 in the country.

That’s proving to be enough to enter BYU into BCS Championship discussion.

I suggest, then, that the onus of big-game scheduling lies on the mid-majors. As much as I’m a huge proponent of BCS-busting, I’ll be the first to admit that no team without wins over nationally-relevant teams deserves to be in contention for a BCS championship. That’s a given.

For teams in BCS conferences, though, it’s still a gamble to not schedule any big non-conference games. If their conference takes a dive—neither the ACC nor the Big East are at all compelling this year—then their schedule does as well.

It’s a little safer in the SEC or the Big 12, since they hold so much favor with poll voters at the moment, but nothing’s a guarantee. And since games are often scheduled years in advance, there’s no telling how good a non-conference opponent will be when the teams actually meet on the field.

Take USC as a example. The Trojans know that the Pac-10—deserving or not—simply doesn’t have the national cachet of the SEC or Big 12.

Because of that, USC has made a habit of beefing up its non-conference schedule. They play Notre Dame every year, and often line up another tough non-conference foe as well (like Ohio State this year). Whether the Pac-10 as a conference is up or down any given year, USC is going to play enough big games to make them a national title contender.

And if you’ve been paying attention, you know that Pete Carroll’s “play anybody, anytime” philosophy has been a strength, not a liability, to USC’s national prominence.

That’s All I’ve Got

I can’t keep this up. Padding schedules still creates a world of problems.

Cupcake games not only pad a team’s schedule, but also individual players’ statistics. Florida and Texas have Tim Tebow and Colt McCoy, two real-deal Heisman candidates, taking snaps—and they both know they won’t bring home the trophy without Heisman numbers.

Their cupcake games have served them well, with both quarterbacks putting up solid numbers.

And these games screw up the college football rankings. USC, Alabama, and BYU, who have all beaten top ten teams, sit in the rankings behind Florida and Texas—who have two blow-out wins apiece, but over teams who were Just Happy To Be There.

Half the blame there goes to the existence of preseason college football rankings, which should be abolished, and the other half goes to cupcake scheduling.

Have we forgotten how strange it is that teams can play teams from the division below their own? It’s like an NFL team putting a college team on their schedule.

It’s impossible, as a fan of college football, to say that I think more teams should schedule FCS opponents, or lightweights in general. Those games just aren’t fun to watch. USC-Ohio State last week was worth a hundred Florida-Troys.

Or more. That Trojan-Buckeye duel was the most-watched college football game ever played on ESPN, including bowl games, with a 7.3 rating—and it was the most-watched college football game overall since the Miami-Florida State game in 1994 that drew a 7.7.

In the end, I’ll get off my soapbox and get back to criticizing national college football powers for scheduling the weakest opponents they can find. When all is said and done, these matchups should never see the light of day.

But when these games do come up—and they always will—at least we can rationalize their existence.