Realignment talk not going away

[Richard Kimball 1495]

3 hours ago, Uncle Nate said:

ASU president is doubling-down on his stupidity.  Did no one have the talk with him after the last time?

 

 

Why is that motherfucker wearing two watches?

[CustersDoctor 584]

Some posters are acting like realignment is like the NCAA basketball tournament. Like we're trying to have playoffs down to a sweet sixteen. The consolidation won't go below 60 in three major conferences and may be as high as 66. It is very very hard to thin the heard. It has only come through mergers (Like leaving SMU, TCU & UH behind) (Like leaving OST, WSU, CAL & STAN behind). I just don't see the ACC, SEC or B1G being able to rid themselves of their bottom feeders.

[USC Traveler 488]

58 minutes ago, bullet said:

Reads like something Wilner would write.  Source must be out of Kliavcoff's office, blaming the presidents, not the conference office.  We have heard it from enough sources to know ESPN offered $24-25 million at first.  That $30 million has come out lately, but it could be all from the same source.  The source seems to think they could have gotten upper $30s from ESPN, but at least $35.  Assuming the $30 really happened, I suspect $30 was ESPN's final offer, looking at the meager TV ratings of the Pac 10.  I think ESPN would have done both Big 12 and Pac 10, but with neither above $32 million.  With the market getting difficult and the Pac 10 difficult, ESPN decided not to do $30 million or even $25 million and walked away.  The Pac's exclusive window closed October 7th.  Doesn't say exactly when they got that offer.  Big 12 signed on October 30th and had already been talking since August.

The source also doesn't seem to understand how wrong it was for Kliavcoff to conspire with regents to try to force UCLA to stay.  Or getting schools to sign a GOR without even having any idea what the deal would be.

The three sources cited in the article are Klownkoff, Klownkoff's law school buddy who worked on the media deal, and Clownzano.

I'm surprised the LAT remembered to take Klownkoff's email header off this piece before they published it.

I'm not surprised at a shit article in the LAT, though.  The LAT is trash, and has been for years.

[ztejas 43452]

42 minutes ago, statsman said:

Sure, if college football stays like it was in 2022. 
 
If the SEC and B10 SP2 conferences have a lot more money to pay in NIL, a lot more TV exposure, and are known as the path to the NFL, a gap will open up between the SP2 and the P2/3 greater than the current gap between the B12 and the AAC. 

Yep. I'm not sure some people understand how big the gulf is right now between B10/SEC and the rest. Maybe because they haven't seen USC play Wisconsin in conference play yet. Or Texas or OU play LSU or Alabama.

There is no P5. There is no "top 64 teams". There are two superconferences, there are two solid conferences, and there will be a 5th conference bridging the gap that should usually put in a solid dark horse. 

That is how it will work until the CFP gets shuffled again. 

Maybe stuff gets realigned further into a tight nfl-lite style package but until then, under the current or even predicted conference alignments, the B12 and ACC are going to be lucky to get 2 teams in every year. If you think 11-2 Kansas State is getting into the playoffs over 10-2 Texas or Ohio State you're delusional. We've had two SEC teams make the fucking four team playoff - how many times now?

Edited August 16, 2023 by ztejas

[Uncle Nate 2097]

29 minutes ago, Richard Kimball said:

Why is that motherfucker wearing two watches?

He needs to keep track of both mountain and pacific time. 
 

If only we could make watches or phones capable of showing multiple time zones. That’s probably 22nd century Star Trek technology. 

[Uncle Nate 2097]

5 minutes ago, ztejas said:

Yep. I'm not sure some people understand how big the gulf is right now between B10/SEC and the rest. Maybe because they haven't seen USC play Wisconsin in conference play yet. Or Texas or OU play LSU or Alabama.

There is no P5. There is no "top 64 teams". There are two superconferences, there are two solid conferences, and there will be a 5th conference bridging the gap that should usually put in a solid dark horse. 

That is how it will work until the CFP gets shuffled again. 

Maybe stuff gets realigned further into a tight nfl-lite style package but until then, under the current or even predicted conference alignments, the B12 and ACC are going to be lucky to get 2 teams in every year. If you think 11-2 Kansas State is getting into the playoffs over 10-3 Texas or Ohio State you're delusional. We've had two SEC teams make the fucking four team playoff - how many times now?

So the same teams get into the playoffs every year. That sounds so exciting. So entertaining. Yes let’s watch the same 20 teams every year battle it out. Sounds like fun. 
 

Again, this mindset ignores why college football is unique from the NFL and why it will lose viewership if this becomes the reality. 
 

Edited August 16, 2023 by Uncle Nate

[ztejas 43452]

Just now, Uncle Nate said:

So the same teams get into the playoffs every year. That sounds so exciting. So entertaining. Yes let’s watch the same 20 steams every year battle it out. Sounds like fun. 
 

Again, this mindset ignores why college football is unique from the NFL and why it will lose viewership if this becomes the reality. 
 

What on earth are you talking about. I'm talking about the distribution of teams that will make it in every year. I didn't say it would be the same teams.

You don't think a playoff with 4 SEC teams, 4 B10 teams, 1 ACC team, 1 B12 team, and two total wildcards is entertaining? That sounds fucking awesome. And some years the B12 or ACC will absolutely get a couple teams in. 

[Uncle Nate 2097]

Just now, ztejas said:

What on earth are you talking about. I'm talking about the distribution of teams that will make it in every year. I didn't say it would be the same teams.

You don't think a playoff with 4 SEC teams, 4 B10 teams, 1 ACC team, 1 B12 team, and two total wildcards is entertaining? That sounds fucking awesome. And some years the B12 or ACC will absolutely get a couple teams in. 

If a 3 loss SEC or BIG team consistently gets in over a 1-2 loss ACC or BIG12 team, then yeah, I and a lot of others will eventually check out. 

[tonedeaf 56]

18 hours ago, bullet said:

I've got a number of Baylor friends and they aren't anything like you say.  They are horribly embarrassed by what Baylor did.

Penn St. is a pretty shitty conference mate.  After Sandusky, they hired Franklin, the guy who tried to cover up a rape at Vanderbilt (yeah, Vandy does it too).  And any conference would take Penn St.  As for cheating, future SEC mates A&M and Auburn join SMU among the cheatingest programs in NCAA history.  On top of that, aggy is a cult.

Baylor's got a pretty bad history.  Not sure Dave Bliss wasn't worse than Briles.  After all, someone got murdered.  But if you want pristine, you join the Ivy League.  Wait, didn't they take bribes to admit rich people's kids as fake athletes?  Kind of the opposite of normal where they bring in fake students to be athletes (see Oklahoma St. and Dexter Manley,  North Carolina and Mary Willingham, Georgia and Jan Kemp).

So what's it got to do with conference realignment?  Absolutely nothing.  Its about dollars.

You need new friends.  We're here to help.  

[ztejas 43452]

16 minutes ago, Uncle Nate said:

If a 3 loss SEC or BIG team consistently gets in over a 1-2 loss ACC or BIG12 team, then yeah, I and a lot of others will eventually check out. 

You realize the B12 and ACC champs get a bye, correct? Which puts them in pole position to win a national championship. And you can have a nice season and not win your conference and still make the playoff. I just doubt that we're going to see 4 ACC and B12 teams every season. 

How that still isn't a massive improvement over the 4 team joke of a playoff I'm not sure. Like I said - how many times has the SEC gotten half of the 4-team CFP bids? You like that system? As a Tech fan? A system where you have zero fucking chance of ever winning a national title?

As currently constructed the new CFP format is so much better for non-traditional powers and middling former-P5 teams (like my own alma-mater). Like - light years better. 

We'll see if that system sticks.

[Uncle Nate 2097]

6 minutes ago, ztejas said:

You realize the B12 and ACC champs get a bye, correct? Which puts them in pole position to win a national championship. And you can have a nice season and not win your conference and still make the playoff. I just doubt that we're going to see 4 ACC and B12 teams every season. 

How that still isn't a massive improvement over the 4 team joke of a playoff I'm not sure. Like I said - how many times has the SEC gotten half of the 4-team CFP bids? You like that system? As a Tech fan? A system where you have zero fucking chance of ever winning a national title?

As currently constructed the new CFP format is so much better for non-traditional powers and middling former-P5 teams (like my own alma-mater). Like - light years better. 

We'll see if that system sticks.

My friend, I think we are taking about two different things.

What you are talking about, which is what will be in existence for 2024 and 2025, is great.  Yes, I love it.  

What I'm talking about is the idea that has been voiced in this thread that eventually it will be just SEC and BIG, with maybe token invites to Big12 and ACC (after 2025).  That mindset, that a 3 loss SEC or BIG team will get in over a 1-2 loss Big12 or ACC team, is what I'm talking about.  I want something more in line of what we have in basketball (not 64 teams, but just the idea of a more even distribution of access).

Hope that makes sense.

[ztejas 43452]

6 minutes ago, Uncle Nate said:

My friend, I think we are taking about two different things.

What you are talking about, which is what will be in existence for 2024 and 2025, is great.  Yes, I love it.  

What I'm talking about is the idea that has been voiced in this thread that eventually it will be just SEC and BIG, with maybe token invites to Big12 and ACC (after 2025).  That mindset, that a 3 loss SEC or BIG team will get in over a 1-2 loss Big12 or ACC team, is what I'm talking about.  I want something more in line of what we have in basketball (not 64 teams, but just the idea of a more even distribution of access).

Hope that makes sense.

I was never addressing that scenario. I was discussing how the CFP will be giving bids out starting next season. Go back and read the first comment you replied to. There will absolutely be B10 or SEC teams that get in over B12 or ACC teams with better records. I mean I'd bet a fucking kidney on it. 

If you have an issue with that then surely you've had an issue with the entire history of college football because that's always how it's worked. 

Edited August 17, 2023 by ztejas

[TKthunder2 4991]

1 minute ago, Uncle Nate said:

My friend, I think we are taking about two different things.

What you are talking about, which is what will be in existence for 2024 and 2025, is great.  Yes, I love it.  

What I'm talking about is the idea that has been voiced in this thread that eventually it will be just SEC and BIG, with maybe token invites to Big12 and ACC (after 2025).  That mindset, that a 3 loss SEC or BIG team will get in over a 1-2 loss Big12 or ACC team, is what I'm talking about.  I want something more in line of what we have in basketball (not 64 teams, but just the idea of a more even distribution of access).

Hope that makes sense.

You’re arguing both sides here.

Basketball teams with good records miss the NCAA tournament all the time. You say that’s what you want but you’re actually arguing the opposite. Iowa State made the NCAA men’s basketball tournament as a 6 seed with a record of 19-13, meanwhile North Texas missed the tournament with a record of 26-7.

The SEC and Big Ten will have a far more difficult strength of schedule (like Big 12 basketball did last year) and will be rewarded for it. I doubt you’ll see a 1 loss Big12/ACC team passed over for a 3 loss SEC/B1G team but I damn sure hope a 2 loss non conference champion for the B12/ACC doesn’t get in over a 3 loss SEC/B1G team. That is more in line with how the basketball tournament operates and is likely how this will shake out unless you are trying to get the SEC/B1G to breakaway.

[bullet 1597]

38 minutes ago, TKthunder2 said:

You’re arguing both sides here.

Basketball teams with good records miss the NCAA tournament all the time. You say that’s what you want but you’re actually arguing the opposite. Iowa State made the NCAA men’s basketball tournament as a 6 seed with a record of 19-13, meanwhile North Texas missed the tournament with a record of 26-7.

The SEC and Big Ten will have a far more difficult strength of schedule (like Big 12 basketball did last year) and will be rewarded for it. I doubt you’ll see a 1 loss Big12/ACC team passed over for a 3 loss SEC/B1G team but I damn sure hope a 2 loss non conference champion for the B12/ACC doesn’t get in over a 3 loss SEC/B1G team. That is more in line with how the basketball tournament operates and is likely how this will shake out unless you are trying to get the SEC/B1G to breakaway.

Well I hope that isn't how it is determined.  It should be based on the team, not their conference.  Sometimes there just isn't a strong schedule in a tough conference.  For example, there are a lot of teams that could start 10-0 on Georgia's schedule next year.

Sat, Sep 2	vsUT Martin	6:00 PM		Tickets as low as $57
Sat, Sep 9	vsBall State	12:00 PM		Tickets as low as $44
Sat, Sep 16	vsSouth Carolina	3:30 PM	CBS	Tickets as low as $189
Sat, Sep 23	vsUAB	TBD		Tickets as low as $55
Sat, Sep 30	@Auburn	TBD		Tickets as low as $142
Sat, Oct 7	vsKentucky	TBD		Tickets as low as $170
Sat, Oct 14	@Vanderbilt	TBD		Tickets as low as $132
Sat, Oct 28	vsFlorida *	3:30 PM	CBS	Tickets as low as $199
Sat, Nov 4	vsMissouri	TBD		Tickets as low as $114
Sat, Nov 11	vs22 Ole Miss	TBD		Tickets as low as $149
Sat, Nov 18	@12 Tennessee	TBD		Tickets as low as $258
Sat, Nov 25	@Georgia Tech	TBD		Tickets as low as $102

[Al_4_ISU 12463]

34 minutes ago, TKthunder2 said:

You’re arguing both sides here.

Basketball teams with good records miss the NCAA tournament all the time. You say that’s what you want but you’re actually arguing the opposite. Iowa State made the NCAA men’s basketball tournament as a 6 seed with a record of 19-13, meanwhile North Texas missed the tournament with a record of 26-7.

The SEC and Big Ten will have a far more difficult strength of schedule (like Big 12 basketball did last year) and will be rewarded for it. I doubt you’ll see a 1 loss Big12/ACC team passed over for a 3 loss SEC/B1G team but I damn sure hope a 2 loss non conference champion for the B12/ACC doesn’t get in over a 3 loss SEC/B1G team. That is more in line with how the basketball tournament operates and is likely how this will shake out unless you are trying to get the SEC/B1G to breakaway.

Your argument applies to the SEC, but most of the Big 10 is worse on the field than the Big 12.  Their position is based on brand and fanbase size, not results for the most part.

The Big 10 champ lost to a Big 12 team in the playoffs.  The last place team in the Big 12 beat an 8 win Big 10 team on the road.  It’s a wealthier more prestigious conference.  It hasn’t really been better than the Big 12 on the field.

[Uncle Nate 2097]

58 minutes ago, TKthunder2 said:

You’re arguing both sides here.

Basketball teams with good records miss the NCAA tournament all the time. You say that’s what you want but you’re actually arguing the opposite. Iowa State made the NCAA men’s basketball tournament as a 6 seed with a record of 19-13, meanwhile North Texas missed the tournament with a record of 26-7.

The SEC and Big Ten will have a far more difficult strength of schedule (like Big 12 basketball did last year) and will be rewarded for it. I doubt you’ll see a 1 loss Big12/ACC team passed over for a 3 loss SEC/B1G team but I damn sure hope a 2 loss non conference champion for the B12/ACC doesn’t get in over a 3 loss SEC/B1G team. That is more in line with how the basketball tournament operates and is likely how this will shake out unless you are trying to get the SEC/B1G to breakaway.

I disagree wholeheartedly.  The creation of the "P2" will give the illusion that they have a far more difficult strength of schedule and thus a self-fulfilling prophesy.  Kind of like the whole "well, these teams have better TV ratings" while leaving out the fact they were given the prime TV timeslots.

If you go to the "premiere" league model, you are basically relegating these other teams that very well could be better than half or more of the teams in the P2 conferences.  But you've manipulated matchups in a way that says these are the best teams regardless when in fact they may not be....but if you "relegate" certain teams, you will never actually know.

But in the end, regardless, if you tell 2/3 - 3/4 of the college fanbases in the country that their teams are on the outside looking in, you will not have the product that you think you are achieving with a P2 model.  That's my point that seems to be getting missed here.

[Jabberwocky 1666]

4 hours ago, DanTheHorn said:

I am putting my marker down since eventually all the names will come out. It was Crow and his buddy professor that came up with the $50M and Oregon and Washington latched on to the number to delay the contract in hopes of getting to B1G.

This sounds like Stanford and Cal bullshit to me.

Just look at them sending Condoleezza Rice and George W Bush to push the ACC to accept them today. It is just an unending stream of delusional nonsense coming from those campuses when it comcerns the business of sports. If they want to keep playing A4 football, wouldn't the Big 12 be a more viable path to persue? Instead, they want to politic for membership in a conference that exists on the opposite side of the continent.

[BurntOrange&White 39933]

8 minutes ago, Jabberwocky said:

This sounds like Stanford and Cal bullshit to me.

Just look at them sending Condoleezza Rice and George W Bush to push the ACC to accept them today. It is just an unending stream of delusional nonsense coming from those campuses when it comcerns the business of sports. If they want to keep playing A4 football, wouldn't the Big 12 be a more viable path to persue? Instead, they want to politic for membership in a conference that exists on the opposite side of the continent.

Fuck Cal and Stanford. Hope they shut their football programs down. 

[Jabberwocky 1666]

9 minutes ago, Jabberwocky said:

This sounds like Stanford and Cal bullshit to me.

Just look at them sending Condoleezza Rice and George W Bush to push the ACC to accept them today. It is just an unending stream of delusional nonsense coming from those campuses when it comcerns the business of sports. If they want to keep playing A4 football, wouldn't the Big 12 be a more viable path to persue? Instead, they want to politic for membership in a conference that exists on the opposite side of the continent.

 

[The Original Greaser Bob 2834]

21 minutes ago, Jabberwocky said:

This sounds like Stanford and Cal bullshit to me.

Just look at them sending Condoleezza Rice and George W Bush to push the ACC to accept them today. It is just an unending stream of delusional nonsense coming from those campuses when it comcerns the business of sports. If they want to keep playing A4 football, wouldn't the Big 12 be a more viable path to persue? Instead, they want to politic for membership in a conference that exists on the opposite side of the continent.

That's a not very bright take.  You have no idea what their discussions were with the Big12 or what their preferences are. 

Why would a school with as many resources as Stanford not use them?

 

12 minutes ago, BurntOrange&White said:

Fuck Cal and Stanford. Hope they shut their football programs down. 

Sorry about our baseball field's lights.

[Jabberwocky 1666]

14 minutes ago, The Original Greaser Bob said:

That's a not very bright take.  You have no idea what their discussions were with the Big12 or what their preferences are. 

Why would a school with as many resources as Stanford not use them?

 

Sorry about our baseball field's lights.

Exhibit B

[statsman 5470]

The SP2 will not be annointed as the top conferences. It will happen organically, as they will have more money to spend. College football is a professional game, after all, and there is no salary cap and there are few restrictions on player movement. 
 
The UK has the FA cup where every professional club enters the same tournament. In 1980, West Ham won. That was the last time that a team not in the top division won the FA Cup. Now, there can be, and are, interdivision upsets. But the Premiere League alway wins the championships. 
 
And yet, the British are great sports fans and the teams from all towns and divisions have fans. 

Edited August 17, 2023 by statsman

[The Original Greaser Bob 2834]

[LTtxfan 49188]

44 minutes ago, Uncle Nate said:

But in the end, regardless, if you tell 2/3 - 3/4 of the college fanbases in the country that their teams are on the outside looking in, you will not have the product that you think you are achieving with a P2 model.  That's my point that seems to be getting missed here.

Not sure the new 12 team CFP will such a terrible thing for 2/3's of the fanbases outside of the B10/SEC compared to the past 4team CFP. 

Last year tcu and k-state would have made the 12 team CFP if it was in place.  

Below is the future likely 12 team CFP breakdown...

• 1 to 2 teams from B12 and ACC
• 3 to 4 teams from B10 and SEC
• 1 to 2 from other conferences

Plus the B12 and ACC conf champ game winners likely get 1st round byes, so they will be at least 25% of the 8team qtr finals field.

This would seem to keep more CFB fans interested in the CFP playoffs since both the ACC and B12 are in the quarterfinals...

 

[Hurtlocker 2212]

4 hours ago, statsman said:

Sure, if college football stays like it was in 2022. 
 
If the SEC and B10 SP2 conferences have a lot more money to pay in NIL, a lot more TV exposure, and are known as the path to the NFL, a gap will open up between the SP2 and the P2/3 greater than the current gap between the B12 and the AAC. 

You make that sound like its even now.   Texas makes more on football than most schools make for their entire athletics department.   

[Hurtlocker 2212]

2 hours ago, TKthunder2 said:

You’re arguing both sides here.

Basketball teams with good records miss the NCAA tournament all the time. You say that’s what you want but you’re actually arguing the opposite. Iowa State made the NCAA men’s basketball tournament as a 6 seed with a record of 19-13, meanwhile North Texas missed the tournament with a record of 26-7.

The SEC and Big Ten will have a far more difficult strength of schedule (like Big 12 basketball did last year) and will be rewarded for it. I doubt you’ll see a 1 loss Big12/ACC team passed over for a 3 loss SEC/B1G team but I damn sure hope a 2 loss non conference champion for the B12/ACC doesn’t get in over a 3 loss SEC/B1G team. That is more in line with how the basketball tournament operates and is likely how this will shake out unless you are trying to get the SEC/B1G to breakaway.

Eh....you're talking about teams outside the top 25 at this point.   If you want to keep it comparable, you're really only talking the top 3 seed lines in the NCAA Tourney.    The further down the rankings you go the more wacky the positions become.   

In this case, you're really talking about who is making it in the top 10 as at least one champ won't be in the top ten and another could be low enough to start stealing spots.   Consolidation is going to greatly help the SEC and B1G, but its going to help the B12 too.   To do that, its rarely a 3 loss team regardless of brand.  A 3 loss Washington isn't jumping a 2 loss Utah.   BUT a 3 loss Bama would jump a 3 loss UNC.   Its in those sections where the benefit will occur and those are fractional in the overall top ten.

 

 

[Satchel 6938]

2 hours ago, Al_4_ISU said:

Your argument applies to the SEC, but most of the Big 10 is worse on the field than the Big 12.  Their position is based on brand and fanbase size, not results for the most part.

The Big 10 champ lost to a Big 12 team in the playoffs.  The last place team in the Big 12 beat an 8 win Big 10 team on the road.  It’s a wealthier more prestigious conference.  It hasn’t really been better than the Big 12 on the field.

Remember when prior to the game, a Michigan player smugly asked what conference TCU played in? 

[Hurtlocker 2212]

2 hours ago, bullet said:

Well I hope that isn't how it is determined.  It should be based on the team, not their conference.  Sometimes there just isn't a strong schedule in a tough conference.  For example, there are a lot of teams that could start 10-0 on Georgia's schedule next year.

Sat, Sep 2	vsUT Martin	6:00 PM		Tickets as low as $57
Sat, Sep 9	vsBall State	12:00 PM		Tickets as low as $44
Sat, Sep 16	vsSouth Carolina	3:30 PM	CBS	Tickets as low as $189
Sat, Sep 23	vsUAB	TBD		Tickets as low as $55
Sat, Sep 30	@Auburn	TBD		Tickets as low as $142
Sat, Oct 7	vsKentucky	TBD		Tickets as low as $170
Sat, Oct 14	@Vanderbilt	TBD		Tickets as low as $132
Sat, Oct 28	vsFlorida *	3:30 PM	CBS	Tickets as low as $199
Sat, Nov 4	vsMissouri	TBD		Tickets as low as $114
Sat, Nov 11	vs22 Ole Miss	TBD		Tickets as low as $149
Sat, Nov 18	@12 Tennessee	TBD		Tickets as low as $258
Sat, Nov 25	@Georgia Tech	TBD		Tickets as low as $102

If they have less than a 30 point difference in a game, it should be counted as a loss.

[TKthunder2 4991]

I started multi quoting you guys but was concerned it would long cat.

4 hours ago, Uncle Nate said:

What I'm talking about is the idea that has been voiced in this thread that eventually it will be just SEC and BIG, with maybe token invites to Big12 and ACC (after 2025).  That mindset, that a 3 loss SEC or BIG team will get in over a 1-2 loss Big12 or ACC team, is what I'm talking about.  I want something more in line of what we have in basketball (not 64 teams, but just the idea of a more even distribution of access).

My ENTIRE post was about these two points above.

In basketball we do NOT judge teams ONLY by their record. We judge them by record AND strength of schedule. While we talk about SOS commonly in college football it’s mostly around deciding which is the best 1 loss or 2 loss team, unlike college basketball which emphasizes SOS more so than simple wins and losses.

Most of the time, I could give you the record of the teams in college football and you could slot them in order based on record, conference affiliation, and brand name with only an exception for G5 teams (that have depressed rankings) and conference champions (who get elevated rankings). That is NOT the case with college basketball.

You don’t consolidate this many brands/powers together to continue business as usual, because business as usual had bluebloods in every power conference. With the consolidation of power in the P2 the expectations around just stack ranking by record is going to be wildly outdated.

It’s already widely accepted that the SEC and Big Ten had the best team BEFORE this round of realignment and ranked them that way accordingly. Now the gap between the SEC/B1G has grown and you guys think that that will not have any effect on the rankings or playoff selection?

The obvious next step in that evolution is to take strength of schedule into consideration when the Big 12/ACC take a step back in perception while the SEC/B1G take a step forward and realize that a 1 loss SEC/B1G team most likely (but not always) should outrank an undefeated Big12/ACC team, or 3 loss is most likely better than a 2 loss.

Start this video at the 3 minute mark if you still don’t get my point.

 

[Satchel 6938]

4 hours ago, statsman said:

The SP2 will not be annointed as the top conferences. It will happen organically, as they will have more money to spend. College football is a professional game, after all, and there is no salary cap and there are few restrictions on player movement. 
 
The UK has the FA cup where every professional club enters the same tournament. In 1980, West Ham won. That was the last time that a team not in the top division won the FA Cup. Now, there can be, and are, interdivision upsets. But the Premiere League alway wins the championships. 
 
And yet, the British are great sports fans and the teams from all towns and divisions have fans. 

I’m curious. What will they spend their more money on that other well resourced schools can’t?

[notre dame joe 187]

5 hours ago, Satchel said:

Remember when prior to the game, a Michigan player smugly asked what conference TCU played in? 

little sisters of the poor. 

[Mitch Cumsteen 18549]

Three loss SEC teams will absolutely 100% get in the playoff over 1 and 2 loss big 12 non-champions. And they should. If the big 12 teams want to avoid that happening, they better step the fuck up in their non conference scheduling but I promise you tcu isn't ditching smu to schedule Georgia or Ohio State. And it's not like SMU is a rolling ball of butcher knives either. But that's a losable game for them.

You know what's going to happen? They are going to line up the biggest slate of patsies they can find, and then whine and bitch when they get passed over by 3 loss Texas who will have played probably 5-6 teams that are better than the best team on tcu's schedule. Our first year in the sec we got an "easy" draw and will face Georgia, Florida, OU, A&M, Arkansas and Kentucky. And on the road against Michigan non conference plus Colorado State. Three losses against that slate should get in the playoffs. 

[statsman 5470]

8 hours ago, Hurtlocker said:

You make that sound like its even now.   Texas makes more on football than most schools make for their entire athletics department.   

This must have been fun to write. Ha-ha! Texas has so much money! And OSU beats them!

The difference is, now that money can be used to pay players. I know some schools already paid players, and reaped success for it. Texas didn’t. 
 
Have you been following recruiting the last couple of years? The transfer portal?

 Look, don’t worry about it. I’m just talking out my ass. OSU will be fine. Gundy will continue to take those overlooked three stars and develop and scheme them into giant killers. Texas will continue to languish in mediocrity. The results of the last ten years are the die cast of the future. 

[statsman 5470]

5 hours ago, Satchel said:

I’m curious. What will they spend their more money on that other well resourced schools can’t?

Seriously? Players. 
 
You’re a Tech fan, right? Tech is doing a good job with NIL. You should be top level in the B12 at $25k year as a floor payment. Texas is at four times that. 

[Dnaguy 11964]

36 minutes ago, Mitch Cumsteen said:

Three loss SEC teams will absolutely 100% get in the playoff over 1 and 2 loss big 12 non-champions. And they should. If the big 12 teams want to avoid that happening, they better step the fuck up in their non conference scheduling but I promise you tcu isn't ditching smu to schedule Georgia or Ohio State. And it's not like SMU is a rolling ball of butcher knives either. But that's a losable game for them.

You know what's going to happen? They are going to line up the biggest slate of patsies they can find, and then whine and bitch when they get passed over by 3 loss Texas who will have played probably 5-6 teams that are better than the best team on tcu's schedule. Our first year in the sec we got an "easy" draw and will face Georgia, Florida, OU, A&M, Arkansas and Kentucky. And on the road against Michigan non conference plus Colorado State. Three losses against that slate should get in the playoffs. 

 

To make things even more fun on our schedule, all our rival games are also road games to boot...well Oklahoma is neutral but you get my drift.

 

Edited August 17, 2023 by Dnaguy

[BurntOrange&White 39933]

Sad and pathetic

 

 

 

[Al_4_ISU 12463]

At large playoff bids will come down to brand, like they always do.

A 1 loss TCU is getting in over a 3 loss Ole Miss.  They aren't getting in over a 3 loss Bama.

Same applies to the Big 10.  If it's Minnesota, Iowa, Purdue, etc with 3 losses, they have almost no chance of getting in over a 1 loss Big 12 non-champ.  3 loss Ohio State and 3 loss Michigan will always get consideration.  It has nothing to do with strength of schedule or quality of wins.

[Longboard Horn 40325]

On 8/16/2023 at 12:07 AM, bullet said:

As for cheating, future SEC mates A&M and Auburn join SMU among the cheatingest programs in NCAA history.  

You forgot Oklahoma. 

[Hurtlocker 2212]

13 minutes ago, statsman said:

This must have been fun to write. Ha-ha! Texas has so much money! And OSU beats them!

The difference is, now that money can be used to pay players. I know some schools already paid players, and reaped success for it. Texas didn’t. 
 
Have you been following recruiting the last couple of years? The transfer portal?

 Look, don’t worry about it. I’m just talking out my ass. OSU will be fine. Gundy will continue to take those overlooked three stars and develop and scheme them into giant killers. Texas will continue to languish in mediocrity. The results of the last ten years are the die cast of the future. 

The point is it's never been even between schools.    CFB isn't like the NFL with spending caps and collective bargaining.   The top ten programs have always had a massive advantage over the remaining programs.   At one point they were basically the only programs you ever saw on TV for decades.

The current situation has new aspects to work with, but it is literally no difference.   The advantage exists.   

Not sure why you chose Oklahoma State, but let's take that example.   There will be a media difference between Texas and OkSt with the conference changes, but even while they were in the B12 together, Oklahoma State would have had to get paid almost 2.5 B1G shares, per year, to match Texas' revenue.    They can't.   And it really makes no difference if Oklahoma State was in the B1G or the SEC or the NFL.

On the brand side of things, Texas will always get the premier television window over OkSt, always be known more by recruits, transfers, etc etc.

None of this is new.

[Longboard Horn 40325]

16 minutes ago, BurntOrange&White said:

Sad and pathetic

 

 

 

SMU should worry about winning the AAC first before jumping ship to another conference. With UCF, Cincy and Houston out of the way, Tulane is one of the very few teams that stand in the way. 

[Hurtlocker 2212]

5 hours ago, Satchel said:

I’m curious. What will they spend their more money on that other well resourced schools can’t?

All the well-resourced will get there, but at some point....players.   

Edited August 17, 2023 by Hurtlocker

[BurntOrange&White 39933]

8 minutes ago, Longboard Horn said:

SMU should worry about winning the AAC first before jumping ship to another conference. With UCF, Cincy and Houston out of the way, Tulane is one of the very few teams that stand in the way. 

Wonder what Tulane could had been if they never left the SEC?

[Longboard Horn 40325]

5 minutes ago, BurntOrange&White said:

Wonder what Tulane could had been if they never left the SEC?

A powerhouse that could give LSU a run for their money

[BurntOrange&White 39933]

1 minute ago, Longboard Horn said:

A powerhouse that could give LSU a run for their money

Would LSU be what they are if that never happened? or would LSU be what Tulane currently is/was?

[Hurtlocker 2212]

11 minutes ago, BurntOrange&White said:

Wonder what Tulane could had been if they never left the SEC?

Vandy?

[The Hot Dog Buffet 1291]

21 hours ago, statsman said:

If conferences go to ten games, why do the best nonconference games have to go away? Why not the FCS?

(I may be regarded o this subject because in my senior year, Texas’ nonconference schedule was Bo Jackson’s Auburn, PSU (coming off a NC) and OU. 

FCS games are always home games. It's about ticket sales and revenue to local businesses.

[Hurtlocker 2212]

15 minutes ago, The Hot Dog Buffet said:

FCS games are always home games. It's about ticket sales and revenue to local businesses.

I'm with statsman on this one, FCS games can't go away fast enough.   They should be Spring games, or like post camp, pre-season, warmups or something.   

I get that some places have another state FCS state school that gets a boost, but they shouldn't count towards W/L or even be a part of the season.   Its like if the Cowboys had an XFL game on the schedule.   

 

[thunderlounge 7834]

8 minutes ago, Hurtlocker said:

Its like if the Cowboys had an XFL game on the schedule.   

Be better if it were the LFL. Just sayin. 

[gatormarc 911]

1 hour ago, Dnaguy said:

Our first year in the sec we got an "easy" draw and will face Georgia, Florida, OU, A&M, Arkansas and Kentucky. And on the road against Michigan non conference plus Colorado State. Three losses against that slate should get in the playoffs. 

Unless it's one those scenarios where you're competing with other 3 loss SEC teams. Just a totally ridiculous scenario below. Don't check my math or anything.

Bama - 12-1 SEC Champs (loss to UGA regular season)
Georgia - 12-1 SEC Runner Up (loss to Bama SECCG)
Florida - 9-3 (losses: UGA, UTn, LSU; notable wins: UTx, Miami, FSU, UCF, A&M, Ole Miss)
Texas - 9-3 (losses: UF, UGA, OU; notable wins: UMich, Arky, A&M)
Tennnessee - 9-3 (losses: UGA, Bama, OU; notable wins: UF, Arky)
Oklahoma - 9-3 (losses: Bama, LSU, Ole Miss; notable wins: UTx, UTn, AU)
LSU - 9-3 (losses: Bama, Arkansas, USCw; notable wins: UF, OU, UCLA, Ole Miss)

[Al_4_ISU 12463]

I would love to get rid of FCS games, but I believe our BOR, which governs all 3 of Iowa's public universities (ISU, Iowa, and Northern Iowa) puts a ton of pressure on ISU and Iowa to make sure Northern Iowa plays at least one of them (some years both of them) on annual basis.  Mostly to help subsidize UNI's athletic department with the buy game.

My guess is Campbell and Ferentz would love to quit playing the Panthers.  Being as they always play us tough (actually win about 30% of the time lately), and my wife/in-laws are huge UNI fans/alumni, I would personally be fine with never playing them again in anything.