Jump to content

Realignment talk not going away


The Tower

Recommended Posts

4 minutes ago, Texas Wahoo said:

Number 2 clearly depends on what you consider a "power conference."  The Big 12 basically collapsed and any power conference who wanted any of those teams could have had them.  However, that was before the Pac 12 started to collapse, so that might be different now.  The Pac 12 is on the verge of collapsing and clearly the Big 10/SEC do not want any of those teams, at least for now.  However, if the Big 12 is still a power conference team, then it seems like they would take most of the Pac 12 teams.

Washington State, Oregon State, and potentially Cal could be odd men out. Stanford would be more likely to go independent in football than join the B12. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

14 hours ago, Trey3216 said:

Charlie’s recruiting rankings, and Tom’s were significantly higher than those we both mentioned.   Yes, recruiting rankings are flawed and a bit arbitrary  to some degree, but the difference in results of recruiting rankings and results are pretty marked.  

As noted, bluebloods recruits tend to be overrated simply because the blueblood is looking at them.  And Charlie's big recruiting year was because he got 4 top players from Florida at the last minute.  The highlight was John Burt who was never a regular starter.  2 never even showed up on campus and a 3rd left after the first week of practice.  Dropping those 3 would have dropped UT down into the 20s or 30s.

  • Hook 'Em 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

11 hours ago, Trey3216 said:

Then fucking recruit better players.   Stop giving offers on players after OSU and Baylor give out offers on them.   Go find mother fuckers that play football because they love it, not because they need their ego stroked.  You think the pressure to win is worse at Texas than Alabama or LSU?  C’mon man.  
 

And about scheduling, there’s shit to that as well.  Those things are made far out in advance.  Baylor finally got past in the last 2 years the shittastic schedule that Briles’ ass wanted.  Rhule/Aranda have put together a schedule going forward out of conference thats as sturdy as any “P5” OOC.  And with Aranda around, I don’t think they’re scared of playing anyone in the land.  But those games aren’t as easy to schedule for a “midget school” as they are for UT because there’s nothing in it for the Blue Blood.  I guess it suck’s getting beat by “scrubby little Baylor”, but they’re in the top 15.   It’s a fucking regarded double standard.  
 

It’s the same double standard you’re talking about re-recruiting bumps but in reverse.  
 

and one more thing, not all of the fucking dudes rating recruits are idiots.  I know personally at least 3 of them that were in that game on paid sites that are now working as recruiting coordinators at big programs.  A lot of them were great athletes that got hurt and couldn’t continue playing, or try hard guys that were destined to be coaches rather than players.  
 

and one last thing, I have dozens of friends who are HS football coaches, many of them who went to UT, cheer for UT, or had parents that went to and played for UT, and they’re fed up with the development and “entitlement” aspects there and have pushed kids to OSU, TCU, Baylor, Tech and other places because of it   

 

There are thousands of football players just in Texas.  Its impossible to be really thorough on evaluating them.  Recruiting services use shortcuts like who is looking at them.  There are what, 500-600 high school games just in Texas playing every weekend?  200 games in the top two divisions?  Even if they could watch every game, its still not a science.

  • Hook 'Em 1
  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 minutes ago, Texas Wahoo said:

 

 

This is the equivalent of the assembly line ass kicking that Hartzell had to endure in the State Legislature. They are all going to take their pound of flesh in a public tongue lashing and then go fuck off back to the dens of uselessness.  

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

14 hours ago, Mitch Cumsteen said:

all these big 12 clown teams followed the Bill Snyder model of scheduling to get bowl eligible and cash checks while Texas and OU did the heavy lifting

ou plays one P5 non-con game a year and 2 scrubs. Has done so for years. That's "heavy lifting"?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

16 hours ago, Trey3216 said:

The Big 10 was retarded for taking Rutgers.  They already had that recruiting ground and the NY market is chock full of Big 10 grads they got cute, fast and loose with that play

Actually, it was likely one of the largest revenue grabs in all of realignment.   It doesn't even matter so much if Rutgers ever fields a team worth a shit.   It doesn't matter if they never have a game played on TV.   What mattered was the Big Ten Network got $0.25/household prior to Rutgers and $1.50/household after.  Rutger's DMA has 7.5 million households in it.  That's a $112.5m addition in yearly affiliate fees for BTN alone, not including advertising, not including a premium for Ohio State/Michigan/Penn State to play in NYC for Fox/Mouse.    Maryland added $55m and UCLA/USC added around $90m.     Now, you can argue that not everyone in the market watches and, yes, clearly, that is the case.   But it also doesn't matter.   The BTN now brings these households to the negotiating table.   The Top 5 are NYC/LA/Chicago/Philly/Dallas, and BTN basically has the top four locked up.

  • Hook 'Em 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, Hurtlocker said:

Actually, it was likely one of the largest revenue grabs in all of realignment.   It doesn't even matter so much if Rutgers ever fields a team worth a shit.   It doesn't matter if they never have a game played on TV.   What mattered was the Big Ten Network got $0.25/household prior to Rutgers and $1.50/household after.  Rutger's DMA has 7.5 million households in it.  That's a $112.5m addition in yearly affiliate fees for BTN alone, not including advertising, not including a premium for Ohio State/Michigan/Penn State to play in NYC for Fox/Mouse.    Maryland added $55m and UCLA/USC added around $90m.     Now, you can argue that not everyone in the market watches and, yes, clearly, that is the case.   But it also doesn't matter.   The BTN now brings these households to the negotiating table.   The Top 5 are NYC/LA/Chicago/Philly/Dallas, and BTN basically has the top four locked up.

And this is still the dumbest metric of all time and the people involved should be ashamed for not seeing how it would play out.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, bullet said:

There are thousands of football players just in Texas.  Its impossible to be really thorough on evaluating them.  Recruiting services use shortcuts like who is looking at them.  There are what, 500-600 high school games just in Texas playing every weekend?  200 games in the top two divisions?  Even if they could watch every game, its still not a science.

This, so much this.   Recruiting rankings are clickbait.   

Rant number two, why are the ratings calculated off total score and not recruit average?!   That drives me nuts.   Someone with 20 outranking someone with 10, just because of 20.   Dumb.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 minutes ago, 'stache said:

And this is still the dumbest metric of all time and the people involved should be ashamed for not seeing how it would play out.

Yeah, and the Big 12 fucked it sideways in 2007 when they didn't linear when it was laid in front of them.    This is basically how all cable channels work.   Its why ESPN can spend this money on realignment and the SEC.   ESPN, as a whole, doesn't generate that many eyeballs.   Games and a prime SC, but the vast majority is bullshit filler that gets watched by 20 people.   But because they have live sports they're demanding around $8/household.   60% of their total revenues come from affiliate fees, even with the massive drop in the past decade.     Same with BTN, same with SECN.

  • Hook 'Em 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Sandman said:

ou plays one P5 non-con game a year and 2 scrubs. Has done so for years. That's "heavy lifting"?

OU playing Notre Dame, Florida State, and Ohio State, home and home, is not the same as someone else scheduling Arizona, Cal, Mississippi State, or Boise to fill the P5 conference obligation.  

  • Hook 'Em 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Hurtlocker said:

This, so much this.   Recruiting rankings are clickbait.   

Rant number two, why are the ratings calculated off total score and not recruit average?!   That drives me nuts.   Someone with 20 outranking someone with 10, just because of 20.   Dumb.

Recruiting rankings aren't perfect but they're more than clickbait.  They consistently tell us that Bama, Georgia, and Ohio State out-recruit everyone else and the results back that up.  You can also sort classes based on player average, too.  

The problem with recruiting, at a place like Texas, Miami, SC, etc., is that when you sell the location, and all the things there that have nothing to do with football, as a part of your recruiting pitch, you tend to self-select the recruits who have interests other than football.  Getting those types of guys to put in the work is more difficult due to all the enticements you sold them on.  When people talk about a "culture problem" this is the root of it.  It's harder to find a coach who excels in this environment.      

Edited by camel at sea
  • Hook 'Em 1
  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

https://www.msn.com/en-us/news/us/hotline-mailbag-best-guess-on-survival-scenarios-pac-12-vs-big-12-valuation-expansion-options-newsom-e2-80-99s-involvement-and-more/ar-AAZCnJs

Wilner:

 

"...What we believe at this moment could be rendered moot by developments an hour from now, but here’s our guess on the outcomes:

— The remaining 10 schools are given a compelling reason to stick together but with either expansion or a partnership with the ACC or Big 12. Likelihood: 40 percent

— At least eight schools merge with the Big 12 to form a western division of a super-conference. (In this scenario, Oregon State and Washington State could be left behind.) Likelihood: 30 percent

— The remaining 10 schools are given a compelling reason to stick together without mergers, acquisitions or partnerships. Likelihood: 20 percent

— Six schools (Arizona, ASU, Colorado, Utah, Oregon and Washington) are poached by the Big 12, sparking the complete dissolution of the conference. Likelihood: 10 percent

The situation could get resolved in the next few days. But multiple sources have indicated the more likely outcome is a prolonged process — at least weeks and perhaps months...."

  • Hook 'Em 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

11 minutes ago, bullet said:

https://www.msn.com/en-us/news/us/hotline-mailbag-best-guess-on-survival-scenarios-pac-12-vs-big-12-valuation-expansion-options-newsom-e2-80-99s-involvement-and-more/ar-AAZCnJs

Wilner:

 

"...What we believe at this moment could be rendered moot by developments an hour from now, but here’s our guess on the outcomes:

— The remaining 10 schools are given a compelling reason to stick together but with either expansion or a partnership with the ACC or Big 12. Likelihood: 40 percent

— At least eight schools merge with the Big 12 to form a western division of a super-conference. (In this scenario, Oregon State and Washington State could be left behind.) Likelihood: 30 percent

— The remaining 10 schools are given a compelling reason to stick together without mergers, acquisitions or partnerships. Likelihood: 20 percent

— Six schools (Arizona, ASU, Colorado, Utah, Oregon and Washington) are poached by the Big 12, sparking the complete dissolution of the conference. Likelihood: 10 percent

The situation could get resolved in the next few days. But multiple sources have indicated the more likely outcome is a prolonged process — at least weeks and perhaps months...."

I understand the appeal of a partnership with the ACC.  I just don't see how it makes the PAC financially competitive  The ACC raiding the PAC, growing its network, improving its Tier 1 inventory?  That makes some sense for the ACC.  But once you include the rest of the PAC, too, then it's all way too diluted.  How is that adding value to either side?  

A "partnership" with the Big 12 is the same thing, except that the PAC presidents would despise their partners. 

  • Haha 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, camel at sea said:

OU playing Notre Dame, Florida State, and Ohio State, home and home, is not the same as someone else scheduling Arizona, Cal, Mississippi State, or Boise to fill the P5 conference obligation.  

Do you think there's tons of blue bloods that want to play us? We've won 8 or more games in 8 of the past 10 years. Why would Ohio St want to play us? They can play ou or texas for more viewers/cred, which eases the blow if they lose. It's a lose-lose to play us. They're supposed to win, so the win doesn't mean much. A loss is a disaster. Frankly, it's like OSU playing Tulsa. I hate it, there's no upside. 

(Also, we played Florida State in 2014, lost by 6)

  • Hook 'Em 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

59 minutes ago, Sandman said:

Do you think there's tons of blue bloods that want to play us? We've won 8 or more games in 8 of the past 10 years. Why would Ohio St want to play us? They can play ou or texas for more viewers/cred, which eases the blow if they lose. It's a lose-lose to play us. They're supposed to win, so the win doesn't mean much. A loss is a disaster. Frankly, it's like OSU playing Tulsa. I hate it, there's no upside. 

(Also, we played Florida State in 2014, lost by 6)

OSU can get a big name on the OOC slate.  They've had Georgia when BPS opened and had the one game with Florida State you mentioned (when the Noles were elite.)  Oregon, Nebraska, and Bama are on the future OSU schedule home/away.  The problem for most of the last decade has been that Gundy didn't want those types of games on the OOC slate and that most of the Big 12 shared his scheduling philosophy.   

Should be a different story in the future, though.  OSU is stepping up.  WVU always schedules tough and it looks like Baylor is stepping way up going forward, too.  

Link to comment
Share on other sites

P5 is determined by media contracts and NY6 Bowl/playoff access. The range of media contracts was $20M - $30M per year, right?

Now, the SEC and B10 are going north of $50M per year? Higher? And the ACC, B12 and PAC are going to be half that, or less?

AD budgets for P5 schools range from $80M to $180M? The difference in media contracts will be significant, but not by enough to really drive changes. And the NIL money that is significant in roster construction comes from fanbases, not ADs. Still, I expect the playoffs to expand (because that’s where the money is), with the SEC and B10 dominating slots. 
 
How long will it take for the US to get comfortable with a three loss SEC team making the playoffs ahead of a one loss B12 team? Because that’s where this is headed. 
Will the B12 and PAC both survive? If I were the PAC, I would approach TT and OSU and say, “Let’s give the B12 the kill shot. All those schools recruit the same territory you do. Drop them.” 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 minutes ago, statsman said:

P5 is determined by media contracts and NY6 Bowl/playoff access. The range of media contracts was $20M - $30M per year, right?

Now, the SEC and B10 are going north of $50M per year? Higher? And the ACC, B12 and PAC are going to be half that, or less?

AD budgets for P5 schools range from $80M to $180M? The difference in media contracts will be significant, but not by enough to really drive changes. And the NIL money that is significant in roster construction comes from fanbases, not ADs. Still, I expect the playoffs to expand (because that’s where the money is), with the SEC and B10 dominating slots. 
 
How long will it take for the US to get comfortable with a three loss SEC team making the playoffs ahead of a one loss B12 team? Because that’s where this is headed. 
Will the B12 and PAC both survive? If I were the PAC, I would approach TT and OSU and say, “Let’s give the B12 the kill shot. All those schools recruit the same territory you do. Drop them.” 

I get the idea, but I do not see losing OSU and Tech as a "kill-shot" in any meaningful way.  Would it decrease the Big 12's media deal, probably a little, but probably not a ton.  The good news for the Big 12 is that with the additions coming, they are a pretty even league without any top schools, so 1-2 leaving probably has a negligible effect.  To be honest, the current Pac 12 is probably the same, although a little worse, as they would drop below 10 schools if they lost 1-2.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 minutes ago, closetohumping said:

I can’t see any of the big 12 schools leaving unless it’s for the sec, b1g and maybe the acc?

I can't see anyone leaving for the ACC. Everyone knows that conference is going to be raided at some point.  It could be in a year or it could be 2036, but they aren't going to make it. And the bottom half of that conference is maybe the most worthless of all the Power 5 Conferences.

The top half of the conference is very solid.

For the Big 12, it's pretty much take the best PAC12 schools, merge the best of both conferences, or no expansion.

  • Hook 'Em 1
  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 hours ago, camel at sea said:

I understand the appeal of a partnership with the ACC.  I just don't see how it makes the PAC financially competitive  The ACC raiding the PAC, growing its network, improving its Tier 1 inventory?  That makes some sense for the ACC.  But once you include the rest of the PAC, too, then it's all way too diluted.  How is that adding value to either side?  

A "partnership" with the Big 12 is the same thing, except that the PAC presidents would despise their partners. 

none of the ACC schools that have out of conference games with the SEC ( GT, Louisville, Clemson, FSU, Miami) are going to give up those games to play the fucking pac10 on the road at either Cal, WSU, or OSU.  it would be idiotic. 

  • Hook 'Em 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

7 minutes ago, Sandbagging Steve said:

I can't see anyone leaving for the ACC. Everyone knows that conference is going to be raided at some point.  It could be in a year or it could be 2036, but they aren't going to make it. And the bottom half of that conference is maybe the most worthless of all the Power 5 Conferences.

The top half of the conference is very solid.

For the Big 12, it's pretty much take the best PAC12 schools, merge the best of both conferences, or no expansion.

depending on how it rolls, WVU would def jet to the ACC if it doesnt fold and remains pseudo relevant

Edited by Gidnik
Link to comment
Share on other sites

20 minutes ago, statsman said:

As for NY6 bowl access- how many teams in the current B12 and PAC are the NY6 bowls even interested in inviting?

In the CFP era, nBig12 schools are 6-6 in NY6 bowls.  I believe its 6 different schools.  Pac 10 are 2-7 with 5 different schools.

When you throw in the BCS era, nBig12 are 13-12 with 10 schools.  Pac 10 are 11-14 with 8 schools.

  • Hook 'Em 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, Gidnik said:

depending on how it rolls, WVU would def jet to the ACC if it doesnt fold and remains pseudo relevant

If the Big 12 raids the PAC 12, or the two conferences make some kind of merger, I could see the Big 12 raiding the best leftovers of the ACC one day. Maybe 2 or 3 programs to add to the eastern side? Georgia Tech? NC State? Miami? Virginia Tech? Louisville? Pitt? Any of those programs could be left out and good additions. I see Oregon, Washington and maybe Stanford all moving the B1G at some point. It could be a while but I think it will eventually happen.

If West Virginia is smart, they see the long play here. That's if the Big 12 raids the PAC or they merge.

 

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 hours ago, bullet said:

https://www.msn.com/en-us/news/us/hotline-mailbag-best-guess-on-survival-scenarios-pac-12-vs-big-12-valuation-expansion-options-newsom-e2-80-99s-involvement-and-more/ar-AAZCnJs

Wilner:

 

— At least eight schools merge with the Big 12 to form a western division of a super-conference. (In this scenario, Oregon State and Washington State could be left behind.) Likelihood: 30 percent

This would make sense if they both dissolve their conference and form a new one dropping the Eastern wing (WVU/Cincy who could get an ACC invite, and UCF who would go back to the AAC) and BYU

UW, UO, Cal, Stanford

AZ, ASU, Utah, CU

Tech, TCU, Baylor, UH

OkSU, KSU, KU, ISU

  • Hook 'Em 2
  • Like 2
  • Fuck You 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

5 minutes ago, TKthunder2 said:

This would make sense if they both dissolve their conference and form a new one dropping the Eastern wing (WVU/Cincy who could get an ACC invite, and UCF who would go back to the AAC) and BYU

UW, UO, Cal, Stanford

AZ, ASU, Utah, CU

Tech, TCU, Baylor, UH

OkSU, KSU, KU, ISU

If this happens, I may die of laughter. Stanford in the Big 12 would take the cake as the most wtf move in the history of realignment.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

43 minutes ago, bullet said:

In the CFP era, nBig12 schools are 6-6 in NY6 bowls.  I believe its 6 different schools.  Pac 10 are 2-7 with 5 different schools.

When you throw in the BCS era, nBig12 are 13-12 with 10 schools.  Pac 10 are 11-14 with 8 schools.

I don’t think the NY6 bowls care about competitiveness of games. I think they care about ratings and attendance. Which schools are best at that? The blue bloods. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

21 minutes ago, Sandbagging Steve said:

If West Virginia is smart, they see the long play here. That's if the Big 12 raids the PAC or they merge.

The ACC has plenty of semi-quality options located in the geographic region if they get raided.

WVU, Cincy, Memphis, Temple, UConn, plus UCF/USF if they lose the Florida schools and maybe Army/Navy as fb only.

Even if they lost their best 8 (FSU, Clemson, UNC, Miami, UVA, VT, NCSU, Louisville) they could still survive with respectable conference that’s still above any nonP5 conference.

BC, Syracuse, Cincy, Pitt, WVU, WF, Duke, GT, UCF, USF + Army/Navy fb only

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, TKthunder2 said:

The ACC has plenty of semi-quality options located in the geographic region if they get raided.

WVU, Cincy, Memphis, Temple, UConn, plus UCF/USF if they lose the Florida schools and maybe Army/Navy as fb only.

Even if they lost their best 8 (FSU, Clemson, UNC, Miami, UVA, VT, NCSU, Louisville) they could still survive with respectable conference that’s still above any nonP5 conference.

BC, Syracuse, Cincy, Pitt, WVU, WF, Duke, GT, UCF, USF + Army/Navy fb only

I don't think that conference is worth as much as the Big 12 raiding the PAC. Why wouldn't the Big 12++ offer Pitt, Georgia Tech, Louisville, Memphis or maybe one of the others gets left out (NC State, VT, Miami.) 

I could see it if the Big 12/PAC merge and leave WVU, Cincy and UCF out of it. I think your scenario is more likely under these circumstances.

If it's the Big 12 raiding the PAC, then later down the road adding Pitt, Georgia Tech, Louisville, Memphis and/or maybe another with WVU, Cincy and UCF makes a lot of sense.

I just don't know if Oregon, Washington and maybe Stanford are long term options for the Big 12. I think the B1G may come calling at some point. It may be a short term answer but not for the long haul? 

Big 12 teams + 4 or 5 PAC schools + 4 or 5 ACC schools to get to 20 or 21. Play an eleven or thirteen game conference schedule.

20 teams + 11 conference games: 

PLAY:

3 teams in your division + 2 teams in Division B + 2 teams in Division C + 2 teams in Division D + 2 teams in Division E

4 best teams in the playoff

You play every team in your conference twice every four years.

OR

21 teams + 13 conference games:

PLAY:

6 teams in your division + 4 teams in Division B + 3 teams in Division C

4 best teams in the playoff

You play every team in your conference twice every four years.

This stops the cupcake games and leaves the schedule in the hands of the conference. I could see one OOC games to be played against a rival in the Power 2.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

10 minutes ago, billfromlaketravis said:

Groan. This thread has gotten so f***ing stupid. The Big 12, ACC, and PAC will have access to the playoffs. They just won't get as many spots because they don't have as many teams. 

 

There will be a merge or two, but they can still get in with an expanded playoff. I'm not sure that many are arguing otherwise. I could be wrong.

  • Hook 'Em 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

7 hours ago, bullet said:

https://www.msn.com/en-us/news/us/hotline-mailbag-best-guess-on-survival-scenarios-pac-12-vs-big-12-valuation-expansion-options-newsom-e2-80-99s-involvement-and-more/ar-AAZCnJs

Wilner:

 

"...What we believe at this moment could be rendered moot by developments an hour from now, but here’s our guess on the outcomes:

— The remaining 10 schools are given a compelling reason to stick together but with either expansion or a partnership with the ACC or Big 12. Likelihood: 40 percent

— At least eight schools merge with the Big 12 to form a western division of a super-conference. (In this scenario, Oregon State and Washington State could be left behind.) Likelihood: 30 percent

— The remaining 10 schools are given a compelling reason to stick together without mergers, acquisitions or partnerships. Likelihood: 20 percent

— Six schools (Arizona, ASU, Colorado, Utah, Oregon and Washington) are poached by the Big 12, sparking the complete dissolution of the conference. Likelihood: 10 percent

The situation could get resolved in the next few days. But multiple sources have indicated the more likely outcome is a prolonged process — at least weeks and perhaps months...."

Every time I see "Wilner" I think of Wilbur and read the article in Mr. Ed's voice.

 

Quote

Groan. This thread has gotten so f***ing stupid.

And I'm reminded of when Mr. Ed hit an inside the park homer against the Dodgers, complete with a slide.

 

Edited by clapclapclap
  • Hook 'Em 1
  • Like 1
  • Haha 7
Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, Sandbagging Steve said:

There will be a merge or two, but they can still get in with an expanded playoff. I'm not sure that many are arguing otherwise. I could be wrong.

Imo if nothing changes, in a 12 team playoff b1g and sec get at least 7 each year.  To me, this went from crazy exciting to jumping the shark.    There needs to be some consistency

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just now, closetohumping said:

Imo if nothing changes, in a 12 team playoff b1g and sec get at least 7 each year.  To me, this went from crazy exciting to jumping the shark.    There needs to be some consistency

1. I'm in favor of a six team playoff with the first two seeds getting a bye. I would like to see 11 conference games (3+4+2+2) in Big 16 type conferences and one OOC game against the P2 (or rival). If they wanted to expand the regular season beyond twelve with even more conference games, I wouldn't complain.

2. If it takes an eight team playoff to get everyone to start playing more competitive games, I wouldn't have an issue with it.

I agree, twelve teams is too much. You can save the importance of the regular season and solve many of these issues by just playing more conference games and/or expanding beyond twelve games.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 hours ago, billfromlaketravis said:

Groan. This thread has gotten so f***ing stupid. The Big 12, ACC, and PAC will have access to the playoffs. They just won't get as many spots because they don't have as many teams. 

Yeah it’s crazy why would this ever be a topic of conversation…

https://www.si.com/fannation/college/cfb-hq/ncaa-football/sec-considering-its-own-college-football-playoff

Link to comment
Share on other sites

7 hours ago, DFW Horn said:

Yeah, I have a difficult time believing the UC Board of Regents didn't already sign off on this move. Typical politics, covering your asses once the public finds out.

I doubt you get appointed to the California Board of Regents because you are known for dissent and independent thought. 

  • Hook 'Em 1
  • Like 1
  • Haha 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I can’t see any of the big 12 schools leaving unless it’s for the sec, b1g and maybe the acc?

They’re only leaving for the Big 10 or SEC, and those leagues aren’t taking any of the Big 12 schools, so I see these 12 schools being tethered by default.
  • Hook 'Em 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

12 hours ago, TKthunder2 said:

This would make sense if they both dissolve their conference and form a new one dropping the Eastern wing (WVU/Cincy who could get an ACC invite, and UCF who would go back to the AAC) and BYU

UW, UO, Cal, Stanford

AZ, ASU, Utah, CU

Tech, TCU, Baylor, UH

OkSU, KSU, KU, ISU

Why would they drop BYU?  It's the biggest brand outside of OU and Texas in the Big 12 with a national following.  And they actually also bring the SLC market.  

Edited by FartingDreamer
  • Hook 'Em 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.



×
×
  • Create New...