2025-26 schedule information

I was just chatting with the WSU beat writer (as I have said before, the guy is awesome, one of the best beat writers around). I asked if the quality of the opponent makes much of a difference when it comes to the cost of buy games, and he said it barely matters. He said pretty much every by game is within a $20k range. I have never thought money was a legitimate excuse for our home schedule, but his comment pretty much confirms it.
Sampson would come into a business class I took at OU several times during the year and discuss sports business. Examples he gave at the time that top teams were requesting hundred of thousands above the lower teams to play on the road. Maybe he exaggerated, maybe times have changed. But Duke not coming to OU for 20k more the Stephan f Austin.
 
Sampson would come into a business class I took at OU several times during the year and discuss sports business. Examples he gave at the time that top teams were requesting hundred of thousands above the lower teams to play on the road. Maybe he exaggerated, maybe times have changed. But Duke not coming to OU for 20k more the Stephan f Austin.
When two power conference school play each other, it isn't a buy game. I can promise you KU didn't pay UNC a dime last season, nor is UNC paying KU this season. Arrangements like that are almost always home and home series.
 
When two power conference school play each other, it isn't a buy game. I can promise you KU didn't pay UNC a dime last season, nor is UNC paying KU this season. Arrangements like that are almost always home and home series.
Sampson explained it that OU got less to go to Top tier and had to pay more for the return visit. He was talking guarantee. May have changed, or maybe not everyone worked same way. KU UNC is different than OU UNC. But I only really know from the class maybe Sampson was trying to make it more interesting or relevant.
 
Sampson would come into a business class I took at OU several times during the year and discuss sports business. Examples he gave at the time that top teams were requesting hundred of thousands above the lower teams to play on the road. Maybe he exaggerated, maybe times have changed. But Duke not coming to OU for 20k more the Stephan f Austin.
Well, there is a limit on what is considered a "buy game." Any power 4 school is not going to be a buy game. And the top (and some not top) teams outside the power 4 aren't going to be either.

One reason why its easier to schedule teams like Pine-Bluff and Mississippi Valley State is that their whole non-conference schedule is buy games. Pine-Bluff played ten road games, including Cincy, Texas Tech, Mizzou, KSU, and Texas. Mississippi Valley State played eleven road games, including Iowa State, Mizzou, Texas, KSU, BYU, Utah, and LSU. Randomly, both also played at Tulsa.

A random team around 200 -- Abilene Christian -- played more home games and only two games at schools that would be considered major by any definition (Baylor and Texas A&M). There's less inventory to buy at some of the schools because they choose to play a more lenient schedule for themselves.
 
When two power conference school play each other, it isn't a buy game. I can promise you KU didn't pay UNC a dime last season, nor is UNC paying KU this season. Arrangements like that are almost always home and home series.
usually they both pay each other .. just the same amount for both seasons .. (at least that is the way it works in football )
 
by the way for those without an athletic sub .. .. if you click this link and then put your browser in "reading mode" (Chrome it is the top right 3 dots / more tools /reading mode) ..

you can read the link for free ..
 

Full schedule out.

There are 365 teams in the country. Here is where Bart Torvik projects the seven teams coming to Norman: 345, 363, 322, 313, 316, 351, and 365.

Gross. And embarrassing.
 
Last edited:
We play zero teams projected in the top 20 and one projected in the top 40 in the neutral and road games. Add that to what might legitimately be the worst home noncon schedule in the history of the sport, and safe to say the encouraging early signs when it came to our schedule were a mirage.
 
I really just don't care about the non conf as long as we have some decent matchups. The rest is filler. I know you guys disagree.
I find very little value in non conference sos. Overall schedule should be all that is looked at
We have Wisconsin, Gonzaga, ariziona state, nebraska, marquette, wake forest, and osu. Couple that with the sec slate and it is a great schedule
 
I really just don't care about the non conf as long as we have some decent matchups. The rest is filler. I know you guys disagree.
I find very little value in non conference sos. Overall schedule should be all that is looked at
We have Wisconsin, Gonzaga, ariziona state, nebraska, marquette, wake forest, and osu. Couple that with the sec slate and it is a great schedule
The thing is, it doesn’t matter what any of us think. What matters is what the committee values. If the committee decides in the future that playing games with one arm tied behind your back and half the lights in the gym turned off, that’s what teams and coaches should do. I’m not basing my argument on my own personal feeling about how teams should schedule, though I do think you should test yourself against teams that at least have a pulse. I’m just focused on what the committee has consistently followed for over a decade.
 
I think the committee has largely cared more about the quads. At home, you have to be at 160 or above to qualify as a quad three or better. If you beat a team bad enough, the penalty in the NET for playing a 360 vs. 175 isn't that bad. So, I guess the theory goes to play your non-conference home games against bad teams. We'll see how it plays out.

From a fan perspective, it would be nice to have one home non-conference game that is at all exciting.
 

Full schedule out.

There are 365 teams in the country. Here is where Bart Torvik projects the seven teams coming to Norman: 345, 363, 322, 313, 316, 351, and 365.

Gross. And embarrassing.
So we're scheduled to play 2 of the worse 3 teams in the country?

Sheesh.
 
I think the committee has largely cared more about the quads. At home, you have to be at 160 or above to qualify as a quad three or better. If you beat a team bad enough, the penalty in the NET for playing a 360 vs. 175 isn't that bad. So, I guess the theory goes to play your non-conference home games against bad teams. We'll see how it plays out.

From a fan perspective, it would be nice to have one home non-conference game that is at all exciting.
I think the committee does distinguish somewhat within quads. They definitely do within Q1. And this is so egregiously bad. It is almost as if someone challenged Moser to put together the worst home schedule possible.
 
The thing is, it doesn’t matter what any of us think. What matters is what the committee values. If the committee decides in the future that playing games with one arm tied behind your back and half the lights in the gym turned off, that’s what teams and coaches should do. I’m not basing my argument on my own personal feeling about how teams should schedule, though I do think you should test yourself against teams that at least have a pulse. I’m just focused on what the committee has consistently followed for over a decade.

The committee looks at it as a whole. not conf vs non conf. Our whole schedule will give us a top 40 SOS (31 last year). thats plenty.

I get the fans aspect. but we can lose a NCAA bid in non conf. Just cant take that risk.
 
Back
Top