Note to USC. you dumb fucks schedule ND when you should have played Mercer

[Mistaken4193]

I believe Socal is saying theres a differential between a neutral site OOC season opener.And a home and home against a top tier opponent.I liked SC and Bama scheduling each other.But a home and home would have been more impressive.I get Saban is for a 9 game conference schedule.Hopefully the rest of the conference passes it at some point

I want home and home too, but its financially better for the schools to do a 1 off Neutral site game.

 

[Shanemansj13]

The year Ohio St didn’t get in and they had shit schedule too, I guess sometimes you get lucky everyone else is losing too. Still have to schedule more than FCS opponents, gets pretty embarrassing when you have a cupcake on the 2nd to last game

 

[TheRobotDevil]

I want home and home too, but its financially better for the schools to do a 1 off Neutral site game.

I know SC has played home and homes with SEC schools Auburn in 02 and 03.Arkansas in 05 and 06.A lot of talent on the field.Theyve played home and home with OSU.And I really liked the OSU/OU home and homes etc.I can understand the finances to a point.But teams like SC and Bama are going to make money.Having them play home and homes is much more appealing to fans.And the games hold much more difficulty.Not a fan of neutral site

 

[TheRobotDevil]

The year Ohio St didn’t get in and they had shit schedule too, I guess sometimes you get lucky everyone else is losing too. Still have to schedule more than FCS opponents, gets pretty embarrassing when you have a cupcake on the 2nd to last game

Y'all have had some great home and homes too.SC and OSU were top tier last time they went home and home.And it was a great series.Not sure about you but I see a major difference between home and home and neutral site

 

[4down20]

I guess sometimes you get lucky everyone else is losing too.

Winner! It's all relative to what the other teams do. You best try and build the best resume you can because you never know what's going to be needed at the end of the year. Or if you get fucked by a team like FSU.

Still have to schedule more than FCS opponents, gets pretty embarrassing when you have a cupcake on the 2nd to last game

Doesn't bother me. I hate FCS teams because they provide no usable data for comparing teams. Outside that, it's not much different from playing some shitty G5 team or whatever. When you can name the score, then you can name the score no matter what division the team is in.

 

[Mistaken4193]

I know SC has played home and homes with SEC schools Auburn in 02 and 03.Arkansas in 05 and 06.A lot of talent on the field.Theyve played home and home with OSU.And I really liked the OSU/OU home and homes etc.I can understand the finances to a point.But teams like SC and Bama are going to make money.Having them play home and homes is much more appealing to fans.And the games hold much more difficulty.Not a fan of neutral site

Trust me, I would love to watch Bama in the Horseshoe , the Big house,or the Coliseum. Ive already seen them in Pasadena,Norman,and Happy Valley and it was awesome to see Bama in those venues.

 

[Sgt Brutus]

As long as this continues you're going to start to see more teams backing out of tough OOC games.

I disagree. I think tough OOC games still matter to the committee. And more importantly it is a big money maker and great recruiting tool. Ohio State wants to be on prime time ABC/FOX vs. Oklahoma win or loss.

I also think the committee gave Alabama credit for playing a better FSU team then their record shows taking into account the QB injury. That seems to be getting overlooked.

 

[Sgt Brutus]

Having them play home and homes is much more appealing to fans.And the games hold much more difficulty.Not a fan of neutral site

agree, but neutral site games are better than nothing I guess

 

[4down20]

Every SEC coach but Saban wants 8-game schedule


Saban backs up his words with action, every other SEC coach is to blame not Nick.

I think 9 game conference schedules are a bad idea personally. Need more OOC P5 opponents, that's what needs to be pushed for, 2 minimum P5 OOC.

Oh and as far as Saban goes, he's on record as saying he wants P5 schedules only.

 

[TheRobotDevil]

agree, but neutral site games are better than nothing I guess

Better than nothing but just not the same.Its much harder for a team to win on the road imo.

 

[rmilia1]

I disagree. I think tough OOC games still matter to the committee. And more importantly it is a big money maker and great recruiting tool. Ohio State wants to be on prime time ABC/FOX vs. Oklahoma win or loss.

I also think the committee gave Alabama credit for playing a better FSU team then their record shows taking into account the QB injury. That seems to be getting overlooked.

Sure and as OSU you have a better shot of getting in with a loss so you're less likely to cancel those types of games but don't kid yourself . You'd be in the playoff today if you hadn't scheduled OU. Many teams aren't brand programs so they don't have the luxury of a "free" loss. That means there's no point in scheduling a game you could easily lose .

 

[Sgt Brutus]

Outside that, it's not much different from playing some shitty G5 team or whatever.

At least they are division 1 programs

I think 9 game conference schedules are a bad idea personally. Need more OOC P5 opponents, that's what needs to be pushed for, 2 minimum P5 OOC.

Oh and as far as Saban goes, he's on record as saying he wants P5 schedules only.

I'd like that. But I think you'd have to have a system where teams can move in and out of the P5 conferences. You have good programs like Boise St, BYU, Houston, UCF, SF for example that deserve a chance while places like Kansas, Oregon St that shouldn't be P5. And then you'd have to make the playoffs 5 conference champs plus 3 at large from the P5.

Better than nothing but just not the same.Its much harder for a team to win on the road imo.

Plus it's so much better for the fans. The atmosphere can't be beat at college stadiums.

 

[4down20]

Sure and as OSU you have a better shot of getting in with a loss so you're less likely to cancel those types of games but don't kid yourself . You'd be in the playoff today if you hadn't scheduled OU. Many teams aren't brand programs so they don't have the luxury of a "free" loss. That means there's no point in scheduling a game you could easily lose .

The OU loss barely hurt Ohio St.

The Iowa loss is what killed them.

 

[TheRobotDevil]

At least they are division 1 programs

I'd like that. But I think you'd have to have a system where teams can move in and out of the P5 conferences. You have good programs like Boise St, BYU, Houston, UCF, SF for example that deserve a chance while places like Kansas, Oregon St that shouldn't be P5. And then you'd have to make the playoffs 5 conference champs plus 3 at large from the P5.


Plus it's so much better for the fans. The atmosphere can't be beat at college stadiums.

I agree I've seen both.SC/Syracuse at Giants stadium just didn't feel the same. The noise and environment involved in the teams actual venues. Is just on a whole other level.

 

[4down20]

I'd like that. But I think you'd have to have a system where teams can move in and out of the P5 conferences. You have good programs like Boise St, BYU, Houston, UCF, SF for example that deserve a chance while places like Kansas, Oregon St that shouldn't be P5. And then you'd have to make the playoffs 5 conference champs plus 3 at large from the P5.

The system exists now because of anti-trust type laws(I'm not a lawyer, so I don't know specifics). Basically, the NCAA can not tell any school/team they can't be in a certain division or whatever in the sport. The only thing it can do is create a basic set of requirements. I think stadium size/attendance is one of them for example. If a team meets those requirements, they are free to move up to the next level if they want, and they must maintain it obviously.

So the NCAA would have to come in, make a new set of standards etc for it to happen and all P5 schools would have to meet them and any non-P5 school could also meet them as well, unless the P5 conferences just decided among themselves to cock block the others.

And that's also why it will probably never happen.

 

[rmilia1]

The OU loss barely hurt Ohio St.

The Iowa loss is what killed them.

If OSU had played Kansas instead of OU they'd be in the playoff . You know, so does everyone here

 

[4down20]

If OSU had played Kansas instead of OU they'd be in the playoff . You know, so does everyone here

No they wouldn't.

 

[Rolltide94]

Sure and as OSU you have a better shot of getting in with a loss so you're less likely to cancel those types of games but don't kid yourself . You'd be in the playoff today if you hadn't scheduled OU. Many teams aren't brand programs so they don't have the luxury of a "free" loss. That means there's no point in scheduling a game you could easily lose .

And they would have been home last year if they hadn't scheduled and beat OU, it's a double edged sword.

 

[fishinabarrel]

People need to relax. Clemson-Bama and Georgia-Oklahoma are awesome matchups. You are talking about 3 teams the committee could have chosen. I'm sorry, UCF simply does not have a good enough defense to play in the playoffs. Any of the four teams in the playoffs would destroy them. All three of the teams the committee had to choose from fucked up and didn't take care of their business at some point in the season. No one to blame but themselves.

 

[fishinabarrel]

Sure and as OSU you have a better shot of getting in with a loss so you're less likely to cancel those types of games but don't kid yourself . You'd be in the playoff today if you hadn't scheduled OU. Many teams aren't brand programs so they don't have the luxury of a "free" loss. That means there's no point in scheduling a game you could easily lose .

No, we'd be in the playoff if we didn't lose by 31 to your mediocre team. Oklahoma has nothing to do with it.