Realignment talk not going away

[Hurtlocker 2208]

29 minutes ago, Jabberwocky said:

I still can't believe that the Colorado AD was quote tweeting this rando "MHver3" person on twitter. 

 

That guy has thrown so much shit against the wall that he was bound to be right eventually, including saying UCLA/USC to the B1G in like April of last year,

Also, that may be the only one he got right.

[Francisco 2.0 32347]

7 hours ago, billfromlaketravis said:

So what’s the best case scenario for the PAC? 60% on Ion and 40% on Apple? It would look bad initially, but it could work out. 

 

 

I'd imagine Pluto TV has some time slots available.   

[mdmost 42869]

I'm happy to see MHver3 embarrassed on the internet at the highest level. He then deleted his tweet, like the absolute bitch he is. I will not miss the WVU contingent. 

[gatormarc 904]

11 hours ago, elfenix said:

totally on brand for the SEC.

As soon as I'm allowed more reactions, you've got a hook 'em coming your way.

['stache 21778]

Nobody is voting to leave until they know exactly what the best contract offer is, so best to ignore the realignment bros who pretend to know things, because they have proven over and over again that they don’t know shit.

Edited April 13, 2023 by 'stache

[BurntOrange&White 39699]

8 minutes ago, 'stache said:

Nobody is voting to leave until they know exactly what the best contract offer is, so best to ignore the realignment bros who pretend to know things, because they have proven over and over again that they don’t know shit.

shut up bitch. they voting to leave as soon as the big 12 says come on.

[Uncle Nate 2097]

12 hours ago, BurntOrange&White said:

no board meets on a monday

Most normal boards.

I've decided the CU Board of Regents is a different breed of cat.  Like Hurtlocker says, they meet a lot.  Way more than I've ever seen a Board meet.  So either CU has a lot of real estate, legal, and employment issues to discuss that can't wait for the quarterly board meetings, or this Board is much more hands-on than a normal BOR.

[TrashMaster G 17395]

22 hours ago, gatormarc said:

Long time lurker, first time poster. Had to create an account to point out that this is 100% incorrect. 

The 10 Team SEC played a 6 game conference schedule up until 1988 and played a 7 game schedule from 1989-1991.

I'm fairly certain everyone had 5 permanent rivals and the other 4 teams would rotate with the final 1 or 2 games, and there was usually 5-7 years between home-home series.

 

So there is a really deep history in the SEC of pussy-level conference schedules... Hmmmm.....

No wonder there is still so much resistance to the 9-game schedule.

 

18 hours ago, 'stache said:

I think ESPN was more to blame back in 2011. The Pac's media deal was Fox heavy and they didn't want to lose OU or UT, so they gave UT a network as a way to funnel them an extra $15 mil a year. It appears now that it was a long term strategy to get them into the SEC. With OU just following along of course, as the PAC did reject them when they later asked to join without UT. The PAC however should have pounced on the 8 schools left after OU/TX announced more recently (or possibly just 6 leaving out WVU and BU). They still would have lost USC and UCLA but would then be what the Big XII is now. It may end up working out better for us, but despite the media contract, I still hate being in a conference with UCF and Cincinnati despite their recent spotty successes.

Even with LHN, the PAC could have and SHOULD have take Texas and the others from the Big XII.

As I said pages ago, when the history is written the PAC is going to be the Cautionary Tale of early 21st century Realignment.

[Hurtlocker 2208]

24 minutes ago, TrashMaster G said:

Even with LHN, the PAC could have and SHOULD have take Texas and the others from the Big XII.

As I said pages ago, when the history is written the PAC is going to be the Cautionary Tale of early 21st century Realignment.

Yeah this may be, without a doubt, the single dumbest move by a conference, ever.   Worse than the Big 12s blunders or the current ACC deal.

The Pac literally had the only brand in college football that could rival USC in their hands, coming with enough friends to own Texas and California, and the only two things you had to give up is one team's T3 rights for like the next contract, and take OU?

Idiocy.

[gatormarc 904]

1 hour ago, TrashMaster G said:

So there is a really deep history in the SEC of pussy-level conference schedules... Hmmmm.....

No wonder there is still so much resistance to the 9-game schedule.

Definitely a bad combo of always being the largest major conference while playing the fewest conference games. 

It sounds like most of the SEC is good with the 9 game schedule and the extra $$ it brings.

Kentucky is the loudest program having gone public with their 8 game push. They want to drop Louisville if we go to a 9 game schedule, so I think they are pushing the SEC to drop the P5 OOC requirement as a concession to give their vote.

Edited April 13, 2023 by gatormarc

[Hurtlocker 2208]

17 minutes ago, gatormarc said:

Definitely a bad combo of always being the largest major conference while playing the fewest conference games. 

It sounds like most of the SEC is good with the 9 game schedule and the extra $$ it brings.

Kentucky is the loudest program having gone public with their 8 game push. They want to drop Louisville if we go to a 9 game schedule, so I think they are pushing the SEC to drop the P5 OOC requirement as a concession to give their vote.

The problem usually isn't that Kentucky can't play 10, its that when they play 10 and no one else does, they're at a disadvantage.

• Step one: Remove all FCS games from the schedule to qualify for the CFP.   Absolutely should not count as a win for that purpose.   Those should be paid Spring Games.   The fact that you're allowed to play someone who doesn't even qualify for your championship AND it doesn't hurt you, is bullshittery.
• Step two: Require 10 games from P5, if you're P5.   
• Step three: require the final two games to be FBS opponents.

Everyone makes more regular season money.   CFP is a bit more balanced from strength of schedule.   And everyone is relatively even in the slog they need to fight through.   If they promise people more post season money and don't put requirements on it, they should be prison raped to start each day.

You're welcome CFP.

Edited April 13, 2023 by Hurtlocker

[gatormarc 904]

3 minutes ago, Hurtlocker said:

The problem usually isn't that Kentucky can't play 10, its that when they play 10 and no one else does, they're at a disadvantage.

Honestly, I'm not sure if Kentucky has ever played 10 P5 teams in the regular season.

[Richard Kimball 1492]

8 minutes ago, gatormarc said:

Definitely a bad combo of always being the largest major conference while playing the fewest conference games. 

It sounds like most of the SEC is good with the 9 game schedule and the extra $$ it brings.

Kentucky is the loudest program having gone public with their 8 game push. They want to drop Louisville if we go to a 9 game schedule, so I think they are pushing the SEC to drop the P5 OOC requirement as a concession to give their vote.

SEC was a bad example of how conferences used to be. I was thinking in the SWC and Big 8 mindset. However, it got you on the board and started some convos, so, like with the youtube guys that predict conference realignment, you don't have to be right, you just have to be interesting. 

What I'm also wondering about is that you're going to have some teams that have a permanent rival of something like Vanderbilt, Kentucky and Mizzery. Then someone else will have Bama, LSU and Georgia. Those examples may not play out exactly, but there's going to be some serious bitching about the schedules, and somebody's going to be convinced they're getting screwed. Those scheduling meetings better be held in offices without breakable furniture. 

[Hurtlocker 2208]

14 minutes ago, gatormarc said:

Honestly, I'm not sure if Kentucky has ever played 10 P5 teams in the regular season.

then they should STFU

[TrashMaster G 17395]

34 minutes ago, gatormarc said:

Definitely a bad combo of always being the largest major conference while playing the fewest conference games. 

It sounds like most of the SEC is good with the 9 game schedule and the extra $$ it brings.

Kentucky is the loudest program having gone public with their 8 game push. They want to drop Louisville if we go to a 9 game schedule, so I think they are pushing the SEC to drop the P5 OOC requirement as a concession to give their vote.

aggy is right there with them.

[Hurtlocker 2208]

3 minutes ago, TrashMaster G said:

aggy is right there with them.

And still can only manage 8 wins a season

[gatormarc 904]

12 minutes ago, Richard Kimball said:

SEC was a bad example of how conferences used to be. I was thinking in the SWC and Big 8 mindset. However, it got you on the board and started some convos, so, like with the youtube guys that predict conference realignment, you don't have to be right, you just have to be interesting. 

Yup. You got me looking back and it seems that smaller conferences with round robin schedules was the standard for about half of the power conferences for decades.

One one extreme, you have the SEC, which never did it.

On the other extreme, Texas was always a member of a round-robin schedule except for the 15 years of the original Big 12 setup.

Quote

What I'm also wondering about is that you're going to have some teams that have a permanent rival of something like Vanderbilt, Kentucky and Mizzery. Then someone else will have Bama, LSU and Georgia. Those examples may not play out exactly, but there's going to be some serious bitching about the schedules, and somebody's going to be convinced they're getting screwed. Those scheduling meetings better be held in offices without breakable furniture. 

It sounds like they are struggling to balance rivalries with SOS.

The closest I could see to what you having above would be if they really stuck with "rivalries are the most important" which would give Tennessee something like Bama, Vandy and Kentucky while Auburn would get Bama, Georgia and Florida.

They've already been proactively reminding everyone that this is only 1/3 of your conference schedule and that this is probably just an 8 year agreement and that they will reevaluate after a couple rotations.

[USC Traveler 488]

1 hour ago, gatormarc said:

Honestly, I'm not sure if Kentucky has ever played 10 P5 teams in the regular season.

So they’ve always been pussies.

“We’ll have to drop Louisville”, but Stoops wants to puff out his chest and say UK is a football school- what a fucking joke.  
 

Dear Stoops and UK admin: STFU about 10 P5 games- USC and UT have been playing at least 10 P5 games for over a decade.  
 

USC had years with 11 P5 games, and will again next year, with a BIG schedule, ND and LSU.

But UK has to drop Louisville ?  Drop down to FCS you fucking pussies.

[BurntOrange&White 39699]

Ha!

 

 

[YouLoveMyPenises 79]

Quick question that I'm sure has been answered somewhere in the past 500 or so pages.

 

What exactly is the point of an SEC or Big 10 Conference Championship game in a 12 team playoff era? Unless something catastrophic has happened, all four teams in those games should be already qualified to be in the playoff, regardless of the outcome. Is there any incentive (other than pride) in playing your starters in that game?

[gatormarc 904]

3 minutes ago, YouLoveMyPenises said:

Quick question that I'm sure has been answered somewhere in the past 500 or so pages.

 

What exactly is the point of an SEC or Big 10 Conference Championship game in a 12 team playoff era? Unless something catastrophic has happened, all four teams in those games should be already qualified to be in the playoff, regardless of the outcome. Is there any incentive (other than pride) in playing your starters in that game?

Money.

[YouLoveMyPenises 79]

3 minutes ago, gatormarc said:

Money.

Sure, but wouldn't it make more sense to rest your starters for the more meaningful games ahead? I get Seeding and whatnot, but playing as a 1- 4 seed shouldn't be much of a difference, compared to risking injury.

Edited April 13, 2023 by YouLoveMyPenises

[gatormarc 904]

39 minutes ago, USC Traveler said:

So they’ve always been pussies.

“We’ll have to drop Louisville”, but Stoops wants to puff out his chest and say UK is a football school- what a fucking joke.  

Stoops is super defensive about his accomplishments.

Last summer he was taking shots at South Carolina's Shane Beamer for making a video lip-syncing to Soulja Boy because it's apparently not possible to be a successful coach unless you have no personality.

https://www.wltx.com/article/sports/throwing-shade-mark-stoops-shane-beamer/101-dbc13bfe-d95a-417c-88bb-a33b97e25e7e

South Carolina did beat Kentucky a couple months later in Lexington.

[gatormarc 904]

5 minutes ago, YouLoveMyPenises said:

Sure, but wouldn't it make more sense to rest your starters for the more meaningful games ahead? I get Seeding and whatnot, but playing as a 1- 4 seed shouldn't be much of a difference, compared to risking injury.

I'm sure you'll see it some if some guys are already hurt and healing they'll sit but it's still a big deal to win the conference and seeding could make a big difference.

I wonder if NIL deals are worded such that playing in those games would give a bonus similarly to how coaches' contracts are written.

Edited April 13, 2023 by gatormarc

[hook me 2080]

9 minutes ago, YouLoveMyPenises said:

Quick question that I'm sure has been answered somewhere in the past 500 or so pages.

 

What exactly is the point of an SEC or Big 10 Conference Championship game in a 12 team playoff era? Unless something catastrophic has happened, all four teams in those games should be already qualified to be in the playoff, regardless of the outcome. Is there any incentive (other than pride) in playing your starters in that game?

Only conference champions can get a bye week & there's no guarantee that the loser of the title game would be a 5-8 seed which play the first round game at home. Also, conference championships usually come with a nice bonus for the HC as well as recruiting usefulness and, as always, bragging rights.

[BurntOrange&White 39699]

12 minutes ago, YouLoveMyPenises said:

Sure, but wouldn't it make more sense to rest your starters for the more meaningful games ahead? I get Seeding and whatnot, but playing as a 1- 4 seed shouldn't be much of a difference, compared to risking injury.

Bye in first round goes to conference champs

[YouLoveMyPenises 79]

1 minute ago, hook me said:

Only conference champions can get a bye week & there's no guarantee that the loser of the title game would be a 5-8 seed which play the first round game at home. Also, conference championships usually come with a nice bonus for the HC as well as recruiting usefulness and, as always, bragging rights.

Say you're the clear #1 going into the SEC Championship game. Been throttling everyone all year long, NC is all but inevitable. Then in the 4th quarter in a close game, your star QB gets his knee blown out, done for the playoffs.

You're still going to the playoffs, but now with almost no chance to win.

Is the fanbase happy?

[Magus Ossis 2784]

I don't know about you guys, but conference championships matter to me. Effectively throwing a CCG to improve odds in the NCG would make me ragey.

[BurntOrange&White 39699]

5 minutes ago, YouLoveMyPenises said:

Say you're the clear #1 going into the SEC Championship game. Been throttling everyone all year long, NC is all but inevitable. Then in the 4th quarter in a close game, your star QB gets his knee blown out, done for the playoffs.

You're still going to the playoffs, but now with almost no chance to win.

Is the fanbase happy?

Injuries are part of the game don’t be a pussy. Teams will want that bye week and teams will want that home field advantage. 

[hook me 2080]

2 minutes ago, YouLoveMyPenises said:

Say you're the clear #1 going into the SEC Championship game. Been throttling everyone all year long, NC is all but inevitable. Then in the 4th quarter in a close game, your star QB gets his knee blown out, done for the playoffs.

You're still going to the playoffs, but now with almost no chance to win.

Is the fanbase happy?

Well I'd imagine no one will be happy if your star QB blows his knee out but if you're worried about injuries then you follow the wrong sport. That injury could happen during any play of any game or any rep of any practice before that. If he's hurt going into the game then I'd understand resting him, but if he's healthy then he plays just like he would against the cupcakes earlier in the season when you wouldn't have needed him to win. 

[hook me 2080]

3 minutes ago, Magus Ossis said:

I don't know about you guys, but conference championships matter to me. Effectively throwing a CCG to improve odds in the NCG would make me ragey.

100%

[Texas Wahoo 3383]

25 minutes ago, YouLoveMyPenises said:

Say you're the clear #1 going into the SEC Championship game. Been throttling everyone all year long, NC is all but inevitable. Then in the 4th quarter in a close game, your star QB gets his knee blown out, done for the playoffs.

You're still going to the playoffs, but now with almost no chance to win.

Is the fanbase happy?

Is the fanbase happy if you basically forfeit the conference championship to a rival and they get a bye and you do not?

[YouLoveMyPenises 79]

Dunno. To me it seems that winning the playoff is the #1 priority. While I get winning the conference championship is a big deal right now, I don't know if that'll be the case in a few years. I get seeding and home field advantage, but is the SEC seeded #1 playing against the #12 at large (probably SEC or Big 10) any different than being the SEC #7 playing at a g5 seeded #7 if winning the whole thing is your objective?

[gatormarc 904]

11 minutes ago, YouLoveMyPenises said:

Dunno. To me it seems that winning the playoff is the #1 priority. While I get winning the conference championship is a big deal right now, I don't know if that'll be the case in a few years. I get seeding and home field advantage, but is the SEC seeded #1 playing against the #12 at large (probably SEC or Big 10) any different than being the SEC #7 playing at a g5 seeded #7 if winning the whole thing is your objective?

I think you take what's in front of you.

[BurntOrange&White 39699]

13 minutes ago, YouLoveMyPenises said:

Dunno. To me it seems that winning the playoff is the #1 priority. While I get winning the conference championship is a big deal right now, I don't know if that'll be the case in a few years. I get seeding and home field advantage, but is the SEC seeded #1 playing against the #12 at large (probably SEC or Big 10) any different than being the SEC #7 playing at a g5 seeded #7 if winning the whole thing is your objective?

Obtaining a bye and getting an extra week of rest after a long season is more than enough reason to want to win the conference. No one remembers regular season champions in basketball but everyone celebrates the conference tourney champion. In conclusion, eat shit with your beta cuck attitude. 

Edited April 13, 2023 by BurntOrange&White

[USC Traveler 488]

28 minutes ago, BurntOrange&White said:

Obtaining a bye and getting an extra week of rest after a long season is more than enough reason to want to win the conference. No one remembers regular season champions in basketball but everyone celebrates the conference tourney champion. In conclusion, eat shit with your beta cuck attitude. 

Mark Stoops burner account ?

edit:  Maybe not- Stoops will never have to worry about whether to rest his players in an SEC CCG.

Edited April 13, 2023 by USC Traveler

[Jabberwocky 1666]

 

[Uncle Nate 2097]

2 hours ago, YouLoveMyPenises said:

Quick question that I'm sure has been answered somewhere in the past 500 or so pages.

 

What exactly is the point of an SEC or Big 10 Conference Championship game in a 12 team playoff era? Unless something catastrophic has happened, all four teams in those games should be already qualified to be in the playoff, regardless of the outcome. Is there any incentive (other than pride) in playing your starters in that game?

If you are going to get rid of crowing a conference champion, then what's the point of even having conferences?  TV slots?

College football regular season intensity is already taking a bit of a hit with the expanded playoff (which I'm fine with, don't misread what I'm saying).  But if you take away the conference championship variable, then you take away even more of the appeal and fervor towards the college football season.  At that point, might as well just start the 64 team bracket in September and turn the entire season into one big tournament bracket.

Conferences matter for more than just TV and revenue.  That championship means something.

[Trojan Man 429]

3 hours ago, YouLoveMyPenises said:

Say you're the clear #1 going into the SEC Championship game. Been throttling everyone all year long, NC is all but inevitable. Then in the 4th quarter in a close game, your star QB gets his knee blown out, done for the playoffs.

You're still going to the playoffs, but now with almost no chance to win.

Is the fanbase happy?

Remember when this happened to Ohio State the week before their CCG, then third string QB Cardale Jones stomped Wisconsin and Alabama and Oregon to win the title?

[bullet 1596]

16 hours ago, Hurtlocker said:

They didn't get a bonus, the Big 12 was in a shitty situation, very similar to the ACC now.

They had updated their T2 deal, but their T1 deal, where most of the big games go and the big money flows in, was sooooo old and extremely outdated and, to make it worse, wasn't due to be updated for a while so they were under market.   Much like how CBS was paying the SEC $85m for what ESPN is paying $300m today.   What happened was basically what the same as what happened last August.   They agreed to resign at an updated market rate, giving an extension on the contract to match as a return to when the T2 expired next year.

These two contracts are what they reworked to sidestep the Pac12 last summer, updating them to market with an extension.

Well Fox called it a signing bonus, probably for their own accounting purposes, but it was basically giving them the new rate early.

[bullet 1596]

9 hours ago, mdmost said:

I'm happy to see MHver3 embarrassed on the internet at the highest level. He then deleted his tweet, like the absolute bitch he is. I will not miss the WVU contingent. 

Although he did apologize for deleting it and claimed his source asked him to delete the tweet!

[bullet 1596]

6 hours ago, Hurtlocker said:

Yeah this may be, without a doubt, the single dumbest move by a conference, ever.   Worse than the Big 12s blunders or the current ACC deal.

The Pac literally had the only brand in college football that could rival USC in their hands, coming with enough friends to own Texas and California, and the only two things you had to give up is one team's T3 rights for like the next contract, and take OU?

Idiocy.

Well in 1990 all they had to do was get 10 yes votes and they got Texas without baggage.  Stanford voted no.  Changed their mind later, but too late.

[bullet 1596]

They could have had Texas in 1993 had they simply taken the sand aggies as baggage.  OU probably follows.

[bullet 1596]

6 hours ago, gatormarc said:

Honestly, I'm not sure if Kentucky has ever played 10 P5 teams in the regular season.

Well UK's best team since the 50s, 1977, went 10-1 and played 6 SEC games, North Carolina, West Virginia, Virginia Tech, Penn St. and, their one loss, Baylor.

That was pre- P5, but it was all 11 majors.

[bullet 1596]

5 hours ago, USC Traveler said:

So they’ve always been pussies.

“We’ll have to drop Louisville”, but Stoops wants to puff out his chest and say UK is a football school- what a fucking joke.  
 

Dear Stoops and UK admin: STFU about 10 P5 games- USC and UT have been playing at least 10 P5 games for over a decade.  
 

USC had years with 11 P5 games, and will again next year, with a BIG schedule, ND and LSU.

But UK has to drop Louisville ?  Drop down to FCS you fucking pussies.

UK isn't an Ohio St., Texas or USC.  Talk to Alabama playing FCS opponents.  Vandy, MSU and UK get a pass.  Alabama's 2009 team went unbeaten playing 8 SEC games and Chattanooga, North Texas, FIU and Virginia Tech.  They usually don't even play good FCS teams.  The last couple of years have been Mercer and Austin Peay.

[bullet 1596]

4 hours ago, hook me said:

Well I'd imagine no one will be happy if your star QB blows his knee out but if you're worried about injuries then you follow the wrong sport. That injury could happen during any play of any game or any rep of any practice before that. If he's hurt going into the game then I'd understand resting him, but if he's healthy then he plays just like he would against the cupcakes earlier in the season when you wouldn't have needed him to win. 

Georgia lost QB Aaron Murray in a routine sack against Kentucky in the next to last game of the 2013 season.  They weren't playing for a championship that year, but injuries can happen any time.

[bullet 1596]

1 hour ago, Uncle Nate said:

If you are going to get rid of crowing a conference champion, then what's the point of even having conferences?  TV slots?

College football regular season intensity is already taking a bit of a hit with the expanded playoff (which I'm fine with, don't misread what I'm saying).  But if you take away the conference championship variable, then you take away even more of the appeal and fervor towards the college football season.  At that point, might as well just start the 64 team bracket in September and turn the entire season into one big tournament bracket.

Conferences matter for more than just TV and revenue.  That championship means something.

Well I think some intensity has been lost with the big NFL $$s.  How often do you see a RB run out of bounds and not get the extra yard for the first down, even in the 4th quarter?  There are no Earl Campbells.

[Crockett 489]

2 hours ago, Uncle Nate said:

If you are going to get rid of crowing a conference champion, then what's the point of even having conferences?  TV slots?

College football regular season intensity is already taking a bit of a hit with the expanded playoff (which I'm fine with, don't misread what I'm saying).  But if you take away the conference championship variable, then you take away even more of the appeal and fervor towards the college football season.  At that point, might as well just start the 64 team bracket in September and turn the entire season into one big tournament bracket.

Conferences matter for more than just TV and revenue.  That championship means something.

BYU being the undefeated Pac 12 conference champs in 2021 was awesome. 

[Huckleberry 32710]

1 hour ago, bullet said:

Well UK's best team since the 50s, 1977, went 10-1 and played 6 SEC games, North Carolina, West Virginia, Virginia Tech, Penn St. and, their one loss, Baylor.

That was pre- P5, but it was all 11 majors.

Calling West Virginia and Virginia Tech majors in 1977 is a stretch, right? 

[Deej 76584]

7 hours ago, YouLoveMyPenises said:

Sure, but wouldn't it make more sense to rest your starters for the more meaningful games ahead? I get Seeding and whatnot, but playing as a 1- 4 seed shouldn't be much of a difference, compared to risking injury.

Institute a running clock during injuries and the SEC would no longer have injuries.