We’re starting to hear a few things from the poobahs on the selection committee about criteria. There’s a lot of talk about schedule strength, which is welcome, of course. But it’s also one of those easier said than done things, too. Or maybe not.
As an athletic director, one of Radakovich’s prime duties is making Clemson’s nonconference football schedule. He has to mix the right blend of teams with the Atlantic Coast Conference opponents to come up with a slate that draws fans to Memorial Stadium and gives the Tigers a chance to succeed.
He doesn’t necessarily see the implementation of the College Football Playoff as catalyst for sweeping changes in how teams schedule.
“There are certain times when people are going to say, ‘This team that we have coming back is going to be really good. We have a chance to really make a run. Is this schedule set up for us to do that?” Radakovich said. “Now the year following that the same AD may say, ‘I’ve lost all of this stuff. How am I going to make sure that this team has a chance to be successful?’ That’s the difference between football and basketball.
“In basketball you can change your schedule like that. In football it’s a lot more difficult. It could be something that’s an outgrowth of this new system.”
C’mon, Dan, it’s not that difficult to drop a 1-AA cupcake for a neutral site game to start the season against a D-1 opponent. You pull out the ol’ Rolodex – or more likely, you’ve got the number on speed dial – call your friends at ESPN to make something happen, and voilà!, instant schedule credibility. (Plus, do it early, and even if you lose, you’ve got time to regain your stature with a playoff run.)
Expect to see a rise in spot scheduling like this as teams realize ways to game the new system.
Get The Picture 
What? Your telling me these AD’s have to do something difficult? If only they were properly compensated for such stringent activities.
LikeLike
I’m with the Big 10. Drop or limit FCS opponents, maybe once every other year or even every 3 or 4 years. Of course this would help those schools go broke, or broker. Clemson will have to avoid playing 2 a year like this season.
LikeLike
This topic supplements a thread under the Tech scoreboard topic. Beating a perennial ACC Coastal Division contender every year helps us a lot more than beating GA Southern, GA State or Kennesaw State every year, especially when we beat Tech on the road.
LikeLike
We say that now, but we may have to reconsider after a then-Div1 GaSouthern beats Tech next year. (Not saying it’d happen, but it’d be quite hilarious. Plus Tech lost their last meeting with a team that run the same offense when Air Force beat them in the bowl in 2010.)
LikeLike
I have always thought that schools that struggled with credibility of their conference schedule don’t do themselves any favors with the 1-AA cupcakes. I am not saying that they have to put Ohio State or Stanford on the schedule, but a bottom tier school from another AQ conference would look a little better than a FCS school. And it would still reasonably guarantee you an easy win. Throw a Kansas, an Illinois, a Utah, a Kentucky, a Virginia on there.
LikeLike
+1. I favor scheduling Kansas as the opener for the next available slot, home as opener but away in the 4th game of the season. Repeat the same process with Illinois, Utah and UVA. Never open the season on another team’s home field.
LikeLike
I’ve heard a rumor that we are playing FSU in the dome in 2016, so hopefully the SOS argument continues
LikeLike
Would that be the current Dome, or will the Stankonia Dome be complete by then?
LikeLike