College football analyst Paul Finebaum has publicly criticized Penn State University’s announced non-conference schedule for the 2025 season, describing it as “completely embarrassing” during a recent broadcast. His blunt assessment has sparked significant debate among fans, pundits, and college football insiders, reigniting the ongoing conversation about scheduling strategies and their impact on program prestige.
Penn State’s 2025 non-conference slate features several lower-tier opponents, a stark contrast to the more competitive or high-profile matchups many fans and analysts expect from a program with the Nittany Lions’ history and stature. Finebaum, known for his candid and sometimes controversial takes, argued that the schedule fails to challenge the team or excite the fanbase.
“In today’s college football landscape, strength of schedule matters more than ever,” Finebaum said. “You can’t just pad your win column with easy opponents and expect to be taken seriously by playoff committees, recruits, or even your own fans. Penn State’s 2025 non-conference lineup is a complete step backward and frankly, embarrassing.”
He went on to highlight how other Power Five programs have prioritized scheduling tough non-conference games, either to prepare their teams better for conference play or to enhance their resumes for postseason consideration. Finebaum pointed out that marquee matchups not only boost television ratings and ticket sales but also help maintain the program’s national relevance.
Penn State’s athletic department has yet to respond directly to Finebaum’s remarks, but insiders suggest the scheduling choices were influenced by a combination of factors, including financial guarantees, long-term contracts, and attempts to balance competitive challenges with opportunities for player development and fan engagement.
Some supporters of the Nittany Lions’ approach argue that securing manageable non-conference games allows the team to avoid early-season injuries and build momentum before entering the tough Big Ten schedule. Others see the move as a missed opportunity to reclaim national prominence by proving the team can compete against top-tier opponents outside of conference play.
The backlash on social media was swift, with many Penn State fans echoing Finebaum’s sentiments, calling for a more ambitious and challenging non-conference schedule in the future. Conversely, some followers cautioned against overreacting, noting that the full strength of the team and coaching staff often matter more than the quality of non-conference opponents.
This controversy highlights the broader debate in college football about how programs approach scheduling in an era increasingly dominated by playoff considerations, media rights deals, and the transfer portal. As conferences realign and the landscape continues to shift, decisions around scheduling will remain a key factor in program success and public perception.
As the 2025 season approaches, all eyes will be on Penn State to see how they perform against their current non-conference slate and whether the criticism from figures like Finebaum leads to adjustments in future scheduling philosophies. For now, the discussion serves as a reminder that in college football, what you play — and when — can be just as important as how well you play.
