Alternative clickbait headline – “Is Notre Dame scheduling itself out of future playoff contention?”

The schedule for Irish football has become a hot topic in recent months, following the announcements of a two-game series with Wisconsin in 2020/21 and moving next year’s scheduled home game against Syracuse to Yankee Stadium. This debate is nothing new – either within the community of Notre Dame fans or more broadly arguing resumes in these formative years of the College Football Playoff. So what do we now know about making the  playoff, scheduling, and implications for ND moving forward?

A Framework for Comparing Schedules

A helpful and common way to think about scheduling and opponents is using a tier system. Scheduling requires enough advance notice that it’s impossible to predict the ebbs and flows of individual programs. I’m sure when Jack Swarbrick scheduled a home and home with Texas he thought he was getting a Big 12 contender, not a Longhorn teams= that would finish in the bottom half of the conference. The best way to attempt to balance a schedule is to look at historical program performance, knowing that some years things will break favorably, some years you’ll roll snake eyes. Based on head coaching and recent recruiting programs can move over time from one tier to another (Clemson recently jumping to a top tier for example, or Nebraska moving downward).

Defining these tiers, I find there’s value in more tiers and detail versus less. So I’d propose the following definitions:

Tier I: Traditional championship-caliber programs – teams that are expected to compete for the playoff each year, recruit consistently at a high level, and as a result have talent equal or better than Notre Dame. I won’t be comprehensive when listing teams, but this tier would include Alabama, Ohio State, USC, Clemson, FSU, UGA, Texas, and Oklahoma.

Tier II: Top power five programs consistently near the top of their conferences, but not quite Tier I level in historical success and talent. Each tier moving down includes more teams, and current programs like Wisconsin, Virginia Tech, and Stanford are probably strong archetypes of this tier. In a draft where each participant wanted to select the most future playoff participants, these are teams 10-25.

Tier III: Mid-level power five programs – these programs are inconsistent, do not regularly win conference titles, but are not usually found at the bottom of the standings either. They may play spoiler occasionally and make runs if they unearth an elite talent or find a strong head coach – representatives here would include Louisville, Arkansas, Arizona, and recent Northwestern. A strong sustained effort from a group of five program could also nudge their way in here – present Boise State or USF – but fewer than a handful at a time likely qualify.

Tier IV: Bottom-dwelling power five programs and plucky group of five schools (hello, AAC!). Representative teams would be Kentucky, Indiana (although improving!), Duke, Iowa State, Navy, and much of the AAC and Mountain West.

Tier V: Group of five programs that have nothing going for them – at best they possibly make a bowl appearance from winning games in a weak conference, but are at extreme talent deficiencies. Teams like Rice, UMass, most MAC and Sun Belt teams, New Mexico State, and FCS opponents belong here.

What matters for the playoff committee?

There is still a lot to learn as the playoff committee considers different scenarios and challenges each year, and committee members begin turning over. Early on, though, there’s been a few consistent revelations.

Beating top teams counts the most: With a few years of data now, we can see the committee more than anything values wins over top teams. A single win over a top-10 team is likely enough for an undefeated power-five team to justify their place in the playoff. Wisconsin last season is a great example – despite their best wins in the regular season being Northwestern and Michigan, fringe top-25 teams at best, they would have been a lock with a win over Ohio State in the B1G Championship. Iowa in 2015 would have similarly been in with just one top win.

Even this season’s seeding (although ultimately meaningless between the #2 and #3 seed) gives us confirmation. Oklahoma and UGA had comparable resumes, but with the Sooners owning a better win (at Ohio State) they edged out the Dawgs. The only way to beat these top teams, outside of the seeming guarantee to play one if you have a conference title, is to ensure you have 1-2 on your schedule.

Feasting on cupcakes can kill margin of error: While top wins matter most, a schedule also can’t be filled with cupcakes. Baylor has been notoriously scheduling themselves out of playoff contention as soon as they pick up a single loss with garbage out of conference schedules. Scraping the bottom of the barrel of FCS teams and some of the worst group of five programs is a surefire way to bomb strength of schedule ratings as well most of the key stats it’s clear the committee looks at (Strength of Resume, for example).

Mediocre teams filling up the schedule can work: Playing games against middling and poor P5 teams doesn’t really move the needle much either way for the committee, it seems. Win those games without letting an inferior opponent keep it close, and they are baby steps in helping your playoff bid, because you didn’t lose and won’t get penalized. Blow out a few of those teams and it can be an even bigger added bonus and enough to cement a resume if a team has the requisite big win or two so no one can argue they ain’t played nobody.

Alabama last season is an instructive case – prior to the playoff, their best wins were over #17 LSU and #23 Mississippi State. The Tide played one FCS squad but mostly just piled up wins against unranked but mostly P5 or upper G5 teams – FSU, Vandy, Ole Miss, Arkansas, A&M, Tennessee, Fresno State, and Colorado State. That wasn’t the intent of the schedule, but it worked out perfectly as Alabama snuck into the playoff despite not winning the SEC West.

Strength of schedule and resume only matter as a 1-loss tiebreaker: Notre Dame’s path to the playoff is fairly straightforward. Go undefeated, and the Irish are in given the opponents guaranteed to be on the schedule. Lose one game, and you have a chance – depending mostly on the strength and the quality of wins that year. Two losses and the Irish are out barring a miracle, even if they still have terrific wins and an extremely hard strength of schedule.

So Jack Swarbrick and the Irish have a challenging tightrope to walk – formulating a schedule that both maximizes their chances of winning at least eleven games, but that also has enough challenges and opportunities for top wins that Notre Dame will be able to beat out other one-loss teams for a spot if it comes down to that.

Recent and Future Notre Dame Schedules

Keep in mind we aren’t starting with a blank slate with Notre Dame’s schedule – we can write USC, Stanford, Navy, and five ACC opponents each season in permanent marker. While the ACC opponents vary each year, the rotation has worked out where most years (2 of 3) the Irish will play a Tier I opponent (Clemson or FSU), and usually another Tier II opponent as well (VT or Miami). The remaining three are likely split between Tier III programs (NC State, Louisville, Pitt) and Tier IV (Duke, Wake, Syracuse).

So already, you start most years with two Tier I teams (USC + FSU/Clemson), two Tier II teams (Stanford + ACC team), two-ish Tier III teams (ACC), and three-ish Tier IV teams (Navy + ACC). I do think Navy is arguably Tier III under Coach Ken, but I’m going to err on the side of undervaluing versus overvaluing teams for now.

Since it’s fresh in our minds, the 2017 season featured…

  • Two Tier I teams (UGA and USC)
  • Three Tier II teams (Stanford, Michigan State, Miami)
  • Two Tier III teams (NC State, UNC)
  • Three Tier IV teams (Navy, Wake, BC)
  • Two Tier V teams (Miami (Ohio), Temple)

I think it’s safe to consider this a season where randomness certainly didn’t favor the Irish either. UGA was exceptionally strong, even for a top tier program, and NC State, MSU, and Miami achieved above their usual punching weight for much of the year. The only program that performed below their tier significantly was North Carolina.

So looking ahead at future schedules, how do these stack up? I’ll admit I struggled a bit with the Tiers of the ACC teams and not succumbing to too much recency bias, so you could probably move some of them around between Tier III and IV.

What is an ideal Notre Dame schedule?

Are these schedules too hard if your sole goal is making the playoff? I believe they are. Playing around five Tier I / Tier II opponents each year does give you the potential tiebreaking edge in strength of schedule – but again, that only matters if you can lose one game or less. Winning is hard, even against the Tier III and Tier IV teams of the world (I’m looking at you, playoff teams with losses to Iowa and Syracuse). Throwing in schedules like 2020, with USC, Clemson, Stanford, Wisconsin, and a portfolio of Tier III teams where a few are likely to be dangerous – it’s demanding a Bama-like squad to run that gauntlet when I don’t believe it’s necessary.

It will be fun and entertaining and profitable – and I’ll concede that Jack Swarbrick’s job when putting together a schedule factors in far more than just trying to make the playoff, although that should rank at the top of the list. Keeping that goal in mind, here’s my ideal schedule design for Notre Dame to make the playoff:

  • Two Tier I teams: USC will always make the list, but you simply can’t put all your chickens in that basket (see 2015, when the Irish were lacking a top win in November despite having beaten Texas and the Trojans). Adding another historical top program, which is accomplished more often that not in the ACC rotation with FSU and Clemson, gives you two shots on goal and reduces the chances you miss a top team in a given year. The years where Notre Dame doesn’t play FSU or Clemson is when they should stagger creative matchups with other conferences – the UGA and future Ohio State home and homes, for example.
  • Two Tier II teams, ensuring never more than four Tier I / II teams: Stanford gives you one every year, and most years the ACC gives you a second. On one hand I’m very excited to play Wisconsin at Lambeau Field, on the other I think it’s totally unnecessary for Notre Dame’s resume and more likely to hurt their playoff chances (via a loss) than help them (via the incremental resume boost of a win).
  • One-Two Tier III teams: Again, the ACC deal accomplishes this many seasons. The Irish should be solid favorites in any non-VT, Clemson, FSU, or Miami game in the conference. No need to go overboard here scheduling another solid P5 team in the four empty spaces on the schedule each year.
  • Five-Six Tier IV teams: Come on down, bottom of the ACC! Welcome, future series with Purdue! These are the types of games that are safe ground, keeping Notre Dame’s strength of schedule in solid shape while introducing low possibilities of a loss (in theory, not recent practice … I am trying hard but still have some memories left of sitting through a home loss to Duke).
  • One Tier V team: Playing a home game a year against a cupcake is about right – ideally this comes in week one to let the team settle into a rhythm before competition quickly escalates. Notre Dame’s future week one opponents are Michigan, at Louisville, Navy (actually a good idea), at FSU, and at Ohio State. Good for television ratings, probably not my life in September.

So to make it real, here’s a hypothetical example, filling in teams for each Tier:

@ Navy (Tier IV)
vs Virginia (Tier IV)
vs FSU (Tier I)
@ Boston College (Tier IV)
vs Michigan State (Tier II)
vs Colorado (Tier IV)
BYE
vs USC (Tier I)
vs Purdue (Tier IV)
@ NC State (Tier III)
vs Duke (Tier IV)
vs Nevada (Tier V – Shamrock Series, New NFL Vegas Stadium)
@ Stanford (Tier II)

Geographic diversity, some challenges if things break right, but also a good balance – I think that’s ideal. Now, I hear the potential counter-arguments – the goal really isn’t just making playoffs, it’s also winning them, and if we pull a Sparty and show up just to get shut out by Bama, is it worth it? Scheduling aggressively is good for the sport, good for TV ratings and dollars, and good for recruiting.

But you can also schedule yourself into a disadvantage. If Notre Dame manages to put together a championship caliber team, wouldn’t you rather err on the side of ensuring they make the playoff versus a schedule that could prevent them from getting there? Even with a blowout loss to Iowa, if Ohio State scheduled Vanderbilt instead of Oklahoma, they’re probably in the 2017 playoff by virtue of wins over Wisconsin, Michigan State, Penn State, and Michigan (four Tier I and II teams, if we keep that measure). The type of schedule above I think is plenty tough enough to balance a strong chance at 11 wins with a great team AND solid opponents that would make the Irish worthy of a playoff berth even with one loss.