Jump to content

rickyspub

Full Members
  • Posts

    1162
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Everything posted by rickyspub

  1. I too am leaning towards the Big 12 surviving more or less as is. I think the live sports media market isn't as weak as ESPN's recent issues suggest. The Big 12 may end up doing what it did on its last contract by getting Fox into college football and sell part of the rights for a premium to a new entrant in the live sports media game. I think there will be competitive money for the Big 12, maybe in conjunction with a scheduling relationship with another conference.
  2. Indeed. Just like if Huckleberry's system came into being and the G5 never won a title, but the at-large teams regularly did, I could say that system is illegitimate because it forces too many unqualified teams into the picture and leaves out too many teams that could have won if given the chance. I would be in the minority, just like Huckleberry and I are now regarding the legitimacy of the current title.
  3. It is largely an argument over semantics, so I'll be hard-headed about definitions! A playoff, by definition, doesn't have to have any particular backing or certification to be a playoff. You want to insist that the definition be expanded to include what you believe it should have. I believe it is just what the definition is, no more no less. Now we might be closer when it comes to whether we view the current set up as legitimate. I am still inclined to view it as an MNC. But just because the NCAA doesn't sanction the current playoff or set the rules doesn't mean that the majority of college football fans find the winner illegitimate. I find problems with the current playoff's "legitimacy" are based more on the selection process and the small number of teams chosen compared to the number of competitors (even just looking at the P5 teams) rather than the need to have hard rules governing it. There are too many teams with too much disparity in the quality of competition to hold to what I believe would be ideal. If you want to have hard rules then I believe you have to deal with level of competition first. Our views of legitimacy aside, the reality is that UCF claims a title for last season and I believe the NCAA said they could claim it just like Bama does. aggy can claim a title in 1922 by the rules of the NCAA, even though no one between that season and a few years ago considered that team a National Champion. We have the right to claim more titles under the current rules than we claim, but we haven't claimed them and I am glad we haven't. I would rather it be decided on the field, but that has to include the regular season and I just can't agree to a system that views UCF's season in the same way that Texas's season is viewed. To me it is akin to the NBA adding the G-League division winners as a third of the playoff spots.
  4. You are conflating the issues. Show me the NCAA bylaw that guarantees an undefeated team access to the current playoff. There is only your belief that it should be so. The current division is an anachronism and it is 'real business' that keeps it that way. The G5 is well within their rights to drop down to 'Football Championship Subdivision' where the NCAA's rules for inclusion to the championship would guarantee a slot to an undefeated team. They don't drop down because they are happy to take the P5's money. Why does the G5 get more of the playoff money than any individual P5 conference, even though we all acknowledge they have no shot at being included? If fairness were so important, why would they take a bribe? The system is a marriage of convenience, probably more for the G5 than the P5. It is still called Football Bowl Subdivision because that is the promise...a bowl game. I feel confident we will see a split before we see a playoff that includes the G5 as a third of the participants.
  5. But what about your other socks? Do they have 247 accounts?
  6. By definition the current FBS college playoff is indeed a playoff. It is your definition that requires inclusion of a team who didn't lose but who played a schedule of a completely different quality from the teams chosen to participate in the playoff. I doubt if you polled college football fans you find a majority who say Bama's title last season wasn't earned, even if you biased the question by noting UCF.
  7. I am not going to apply it to any particular circumstance unless there is some evidence that is why a player left. I am merely saying that I imagine some coaches and staffs will promise to use those 4 games to get a guy to sign and pay the cost if they don't deliver. Other coaching staffs will be able to win a recruit by guaranteeing them playing time as a freshman because they have the stats to back it up compared to the competition.
  8. I think we are going to see the downside of this rule for the next couple of seasons. Some redshirting players are going to expect they will get to play in 3 or 4 games, especially if the coaches promised it. We played down to our opponents, especially late in the season, which made it hard to give snaps to players that aren't likely ready to be on the field with the game in doubt. I wonder what the statistics look like across the P5 on using the 4-game window. I bet teams that teams who use it liberally could gain some recruiting advantages over time, especially against teams in their own recruiting band. I am not saying Texas or OU is going to lose recruits to Kansas over this, but we could get a leg up over OU or aggy if we show we get our redshirts on the field.
  9. The point is that the opponent matters when it comes to media valuation. (You know that.) A G5 playoff opponent isn't going to draw like a P5, it will get even worse over time if the G5 participants don't consistently punch above their weight. Sure, as a playoff game, there will be more value than a regular season game, but the same rules apply. A 16-team, CFB committee selected playoff would guarantee better TV ratings and money than a 16-team, 10 CCG champs and 6-at large teams. Is any media partner going to risk paying out a large additional sum for the second over the first? Is there even enough value to consider it over an 8-team playoff? For better or worse, the system is venal. They aren't going to expand to 16 unless the payoff is worth it. Also, a playoff doesn't have to include every group to be a playoff. It is just a series of contests to determine the winner of a championship. The selection process can be completely arbitrary or tightly regulated, the basic definition doesn't require one or the other. I say the G5 are only in the same division out of convenience, so I don't see why that convenience sets up a threshold for 'deserving' full access to the championship. The rules for FBS inclusion are largely arbitrary and are set at some minimal number to not seem too restrictive, but not so low as to encourage every second tier college to jump up. It certainly wasn't devised on the concept of establishing a minimal quality of play. And I believe the rules were created pre-BCS, though perhaps they have tweaked them more recently.
  10. We will have to disagree there. The value of Northern Illinois being down by 35 to Bama at half is going to be zilch. OU being down by 21 is going to draw better numbers and you at least keep some casual viewers through halftime. The reality is that even a true Cinderella game probably only draws a crowd in the 4th quarter when it looks like there might be an upset. Advertisers aren't going to pay a premium for that. There's a reason the G5 games aren't worth crap. It's the same reason T3 content of P5 teams is worth much less than T1. The Big 12 can't even go down to 8 conference games because of the risk that too much of that inventory is wasted on G5 games.
  11. Over time you will have 5 or your 8 first round games being dogshit. People won't watch and you can't cover them up by having dozens of other games to show like the basketball tournament. The value of an 8-game playoff using any of the methods discussed here will have almost as many high quality games as a 16 team playoff with G5s. I just don't think any media partner is going to pay the needed premium to add another round of playoffs just to include the G5 champs. Adding that extra round will also increase the discussions around shortening the regular season. I imagine that will get everyone off the 16-team bandwagon quickly as the majority of teams, even the G5s won't want to lose a regular season game so that Fresno State can get destroyed by Bama in the first round of the playoffs.
  12. I largely agree with your second statement, though I think that model pairs just fine with how other leagues set up their playoffs in terms of numbers invited to overall membership. (16 is even a low percentage if you just consider the 65+ P5-level teams.) I am never going to get behind a system that decides that Fresno State deserves a limited playoff spot over a Texas team that won 9 games. The basketball tournament is so huge now, taking autobids from all conferences gets lost in the fact that the Top 30-40 teams also get in. Here we are talking about 16 spots for 120+ teams and, in many years, you are giving almost a 3rd of the spots to teams that aren't even in the Top 30 of any metric, human or computer. Anyway, 16 with G5 champs won't ever happen because it would be a money loser compared to 8.
  13. So a three-loss P5 team is undeserving, but UAB or Fresno State is? I think we would offer fans a much better game than them or Northern Illinois. I am not even convinced that UCF is a better team than we are.
  14. The point is the idea that BYU or BSU somehow increased overall interest in college football with their Cinderella seasons. I don't see any proof. When Texas came back and was relevant, we moved the needle in a big way. Our national title is still one of the most watched college football games. Bama regularly tops the charts on viewership. UCF's games barely register along with BYU and BSU games. If UCF getting a chance to make the playoffs and it increases there attendance, so what? How has that in any appreciable way increased overall interest in college football? It is less than a rounding error.
  15. So basically you are saying that if a team wins a big game they will get fans in the seats...well, duh. What about all the other G5/Independent programs? Did Idaho see a huge uptick in fan support after the BYU win? What you are talking about is ultimately noise.
  16. Who's still talking about it? Bama and SEC fans are certainly talking about how much they have dominated the MNC over the past decade, if not any particular game. I imagine most have forgotten that Auburn lost to UCF in a meaningless bowl game last season. Who outside of UT and Boise State fans talk about some bowl game upset with OU? I am UT fan and I hadn't thought about it until LadiesChoice mentioned it. I would imagine we would have seen a noticeable uptick in TV viewers and overall fan attendance in the seasons following those events...otherwise is just some blowhard bullshit.
  17. Would like to see your evidence for this.
  18. Come on guys, I am sure that aggy isn't just some static, uninterested face on the other side of the gloryhole. You would certainly get one 'Whoop' and a 'Howdy'.
  19. I am calling 2 more Shhhhs before signing day.
  20. fify
  21. They loved Jimbo's wife...
  22. But the problem is there are only 16 teams. 4 or 5 teams get that 1 vs 16 type matchup while teams in slots 6-8 get a matchup that is more comparable to a regional final.
  23. What the hell? HE destroyed his marriage, HE cost himself every job he's ever had, and now he is paying the cost. Karma rarely comes around to those who are so shitty, but he earned his trip down to cleaning toilets. He has also been a complete troll and asshole on the internet and deserves whatever the intertubes dish out.
  24. Lol. Machinator would drink'em like Bender on Futurama.
×
×
  • Create New...