College Football at the FBS level has always had the challenge of scheduling competitively among each other without ruining traditions and conference scheduling. However, since 1996, FBS programs at the NCAA level of college football has significantly increased it scheduling of FCS (Football Championship Subdivision) programs to not only offer financial assistance to these FCS programs, but furthermore add wins to the FBS overall records and increases the statistics of the team and players. These wins give a mirage like credibility to any and all FBS programs. Published research has proven that the scheduling of FCS games by FBS programs offers no value, limited interest by fans, growing conversation by the sports media in online, television and print media.
Recently, during the airing of the Georgia/Murray State game with Georgia winning 63-17, the ESPN on air announcer; Beth Mowins had made a comment stating and paraphrasing what Beth Mowins said “that these games should not be scheduled…. that the NCAA should investigate into not scheduling these games…. the fans would rather see more competitive games versus Power Five opponents or FBS porgrams” (Mowins, 2019). Its interesting that research has been performed on this subject within college football of FBS scheduling FCS programs. The published findings can be found in my book ” College Football In the BCS Era The Untold Truth Facts Evidence and Solutions” (Siggelow, 2013 & 2016). Furthermore, the published research in which I speak of is found in Chapter 7 titled ” Non Conference Scheduling and the FCS.” The data within that specific chapter covers all game played during the BCS Era of college football, which includes non conference games and non conference FCS games scheduled by FBS programs. The research is historical and longitudinal.
The past research of FBS/FCS games scheduled during that time frame assist in proving that these specific games scheduled by FBS programs possess no validity and or purpose. I have continued that longitudinal and historical data collection and analysis during the CFP Era as well. The results possessing mirror like data results with FBS programs scoring more points per game on average, increased average scoring difference in these scheduled games and all for what. The 2019 FBS college football season will have scheduled 114 games versus FCS opponents with no purpose or reason for these games.
The current 2019 data of the FBS versus FCS games has returned these results as of the completion of the third week of the college football season. There have been 88 games played with 26 games left during the remaining nine plus weeks left. As of this posting the FBS possesses an overall record of (85-3) versus FCS programs with a win loss percentage rate of (.965). Currently, FBS programs are averaging 42.9 points per game(PPG) while FCS programs are averaging 14.1 PPG. Of those 88 games, 65 of them have resulted in FBS programs winning by 3 posessions or more. Currently the FBS is outscoring the FCS by an average of 28.7 PPG. Below is a chart that shows the conference by conference results and data for 2019 FBS/FCS games already completed:
2019 FBS/FCS Games Data as of 09/15/2019:
Grid: CONF-Conference; FCS W/L- Record versus FCS programs; GMS L- Games remaining during the 2019 FBS College Football Season; WIN BY- Average Points Spread by FBS programs versus FCS Programs; FBS PPG- Average Points Per Game by FBS Progams within that specific FBS Conference and FCS PPG- Average Points Per Game scored by FCS Programs against those specific FBS Conferences.
| CONF | FCS W/L | GMS L | WIN BY | FBS PPG | FCS PPG |
| AAC | (9-0) | 1 | 36.4 | 48.8 | 12.4 |
| ACC | (7-1) | 7 | 36 | 42 | 10.8 |
| B10 | (4-0) | 0 | 52.5 | 59.5 | 7 |
| B12 | (9-0) | 0 | 28.4 | 43.1 | 14.6 |
| CUSA | (11-1) | 1 | 16.7 | 36.3 | 21.5 |
| IND | (0-1) | 6 | 0 | 20 | 45 |
| MAC | (10-0) | 1 | 25.6 | 41.1 | 14.6 |
| MWC | (10-0) | 2 | 22.8 | 36.9 | 13.8 |
| P12 | (8-0) | 0 | 28.2 | 41 | 12.7 |
| SBC | (8-0) | 2 | 29.1 | 43.7 | 14.6 |
| SEC | (9-0) | 6 | 42.6 | 51.2 | 8.7 |
There are still many FBS/FCS games to be played. As you can witness the ACC and SEC combined possess 13 games left with FCS opponents remaining during the course of the 2019 FBS season. This means that the ACC and SEC data will SIGNIFICANTLY increase, but there will be NO NEGATIVE ranking or lack of credibility when we get closer to the CFP playoffs and rankings. A more interesting dichotomy with the FBS/FCS scheduling is that both the ACC and SEC have scheduled 15 FCS games but each conference possesses 14 members within the conference. This indicates that these two FBS conferences wish not to schedule other FBS programs either Power Five or Group of Five programs for fear of losing its college football credibility. There is no need to schedule these games, unless the FCS program makes a commitment to playing at the FBS level of play stating that by year X we will be classified as a FBS program.
Yes this is an indication and offers significant evidence that college football at the FBS level needs to possess a scheduling change to how games are scheduled during the course of the season. Is it possible to schedule college football like the NFL? Is it possible to eliminate FCS scheduling? Is it possible to increase scheduled games among Power Five Conferences versus Group of Five Conferences? Is it possible to make the FBS college football schedule to be universal, standardized, balanced, with a cross conference scheduling like the NFL and improved cross divisional scheduling within the each conference, all while maintaining traditional rivalries during the course of the FBS season?
The answer is a significant, YES! I published these findings within my book, which is titled above as Chapter 16: Balanced Scheduling Possible or Impossible? To the sports media both in print, television and online, many of you have spoken of and or preached about the need for change in college football at the FBS level. MY published research discusses many subjects within college football within the FBS level of play and some of those subjects include scheduling, an expanded playoff format, the credibility of FBS programs either as individuals or conferences and many more subjects. From my perspective, you may be sports media members but fail to know the facts, truths and data behind the need for change in college football at the FBS level. My book is available for purchase at lulu.com
Please, remember where you hear it and follow APA/MLA rules and always cite your sources. IF any sports media members either in print, television and online use any of postings, use APA/MLA and or ask me if you can use my information. ALWAYS GIVE CREDIT WHERE CREDIT IS DUE.