Pat Forde's realignment plan.

[MAIZEandBLUE09]

Why because you think thats what will happen?
we have seen time and time again where the team people think will win doesn't.
Last year LSU pretty much blasted everyone, that doesnt mean that will happen every year.

But in a playoff format, it would require a team like the Boise State's of the past to beat multiple teams in a multi-game playoff format. So their chances are 0. Once in a blue moon one of those teams is sneaky good. They're never good enough to shoot the gauntlet of P5 teams. And even if by some chance every half century one does win it, is that really worth keeping them in the league? We're talking one of what 70 g5 teams? Maybe they have a 1 in 70 shot every 50 years? Those odds are worth keeping them in the same competition?

 

[LawDawg]

7 of the 11 would suck on the surface but there is no reason to believe that the other 4 would be that much better or that the 7 will in fact suck.
as mentioned before UCF has beat UGA before and the other time they played UGA only won by 1 point.
USF has beat Miami and FSU in the past.

Your assumption that only Florida, Miami, Florida State and GT would be worth watching while Florida has destroyed FSU the past few games and before that you 1 out of 5 that was remotely close while FSU was on top.
and no one outside of Georgia probably thought the UGA vs GT games were worth watching the last 3 seasons.

FFS, I already told you that UCF beat us in a bowl game with our worst team in 20 years. None of the teams I mentioned would be better than the SEC teams we play. They have no tradition, they haven't been playing for 100 years. We do not give a shit about them - how many times do I have to type this. Don't. Give. A. Shit. About. G5.

Why do you think that watering down college football with shitty teams would be a good thing? Why do you want to get rid of tradition when that is what separates CFB from Pro?

 

[Olyduck]

As I've pointed out, that's not how it works. I went to Vandy undergrad. We have zero chance of winning the SEC, let alone the NC. We've been in the SEC forever. We aren't getting kicked to the curb. We provide balance in the SEC for football, have historically been good in basketball, and are best in the SEC at baseball and women's bowling (I wish I was kidding). The conferences don't need other low end teams to balance the conference. And no conference wants to have too many great teams. The SEC has the Big 6 - AU, UA, UGA, UTjr, LSU and UF. We have some teams that are decent from time to time - Mizzou, TAMU, USCjr, Ole Miss, MSU and even Arky until recently. Then we have Vandy and Ky. Vandy is the flagship academic school, and Ky is great at basketball. All the teams are good at baseball, and most get good at hoops from time to time. We aren't going to replace our bottom 8 with other teams that would be bottom 8 or worse.

I would also point out that if you look at money, the P5 teams you mention do far better money wise than do UCF, BSU, and Houston. Sorry, money talks.

under the current system of course they make better money but like i said change the system and things can shift.

 

[Olyduck]

But in a playoff format, it would require a team like the Boise State's of the past to beat multiple teams in a multi-game playoff format. So their chances are 0. Once in a blue moon one of those teams is sneaky good. They're never good enough to shoot the gauntlet of P5 teams. And even if by some chance every half century one does win it, is that really worth keeping them in the league? We're talking one of what 70 g5 teams? Maybe they have a 1 in 70 shot every 50 years? Those odds are worth keeping them in the same competition?

again blow up the current system and have a different one things will change.

 

[LawDawg]

under the current system of course they make better money but like i said change the system and things can shift.

Serious question ... in what world do the people with the money actively help the competitors make more money? This is why this is so dumb ... the Haves don't give a fuck about the Have Nots. Not sure how many times I have to type that to get through to you ... don't give a fuck about G5.

 

[Olyduck]

FFS, I already told you that UCF beat us in a bowl game with our worst team in 20 years. None of the teams I mentioned would be better than the SEC teams we play. They have no tradition, they haven't been playing for 100 years. We do not give a shit about them - how many times do I have to type this. Don't. Give. A. Shit. About. G5.

Why do you think that watering down college football with shitty teams would be a good thing? Why do you want to get rid of tradition when that is what separates CFB from Pro?

tradition doesnt win games. doting the i isnt why Ohio State wins. touching the stone or sign isnt why Clemson or Notre Dame win.

 

[Olyduck]

Serious question ... in what world do the people with the money actively help the competitors make more money? This is why this is so dumb ... the Haves don't give a fuck about the Have Nots. Not sure how many times I have to type that to get through to you ... don't give a fuck about G5.

the Haves have invited teams from G5 up to P5. there are agreements that guarantee G5 get money and access to higher tier bowls. G5 conferences have helped FCS teams move up.

 

[Olyduck]

FFS, I already told you that UCF beat us in a bowl game with our worst team in 20 years. None of the teams I mentioned would be better than the SEC teams we play. They have no tradition, they haven't been playing for 100 years. We do not give a shit about them - how many times do I have to type this. Don't. Give. A. Shit. About. G5.

Why do you think that watering down college football with shitty teams would be a good thing? Why do you want to get rid of tradition when that is what separates CFB from Pro?

so its never a possibility that Georgia could have another down season?

 

[Olyduck]

But in a playoff format, it would require a team like the Boise State's of the past to beat multiple teams in a multi-game playoff format. So their chances are 0. Once in a blue moon one of those teams is sneaky good. They're never good enough to shoot the gauntlet of P5 teams. And even if by some chance every half century one does win it, is that really worth keeping them in the league? We're talking one of what 70 g5 teams? Maybe they have a 1 in 70 shot every 50 years? Those odds are worth keeping them in the same competition?

in that scenario Boise already came out ahead of their conference. they would have beat Arizona, Arizona State, BYU, Utah and Colorado along with the rest of their mountain conference like Air Force and Wyoming. assume a non conference game with a Pac team.
im sure if they already did that they could handle a few more.

never good enough to shoot the gauntlet? until they are given the resources and a chance. as i said before Utah and TCU moved up and have looked good doing so.

 

[LawDawg]

so its never a possibility that Georgia could have another down season?

Of course we could. What does that have to do with anything? You keep throwing a 10 year loss in a bowl game in my face as a way to say UCF would be a good team to play. It means nothing. We would beat the crap out of UCF at least 9 our of 10 years.

Let me turn the discussion here to look at it differently.

If UGA had a current OOC of:

GaState
GaSouthern
FAU
FIU

we would rightfully get destroyed here. That would totally suck as an OOC. Fans would be pissed and not buy season tickets.

Now you want us to also play:
UAB
UCF
USF

No one wants to see that. Why do you? Why would this be a terrible OOC now, but suddenly be a good schedule with the new conferences? Why do you want to make CFB worse, with far more terrible games? Seems like an odd thing to advocate for.

 

[LawDawg]

the Haves have invited teams from G5 up to P5. there are agreements that guarantee G5 get money and access to higher tier bowls. G5 conferences have helped FCS teams move up.

Which is a billion miles from the proposed conference changes here. You see that right ... a few teams moving up, and a few getting into bowls, and a few winning, isn't the same as having UGA play 7 G5 teams in a year. How is that a good thing?

 

[LawDawg]

under the current system of course they make better money but like i said change the system and things can shift.

Not better money, a shit ton more money. How long to shift. UGA playing 7 G5 teams a year for what, 10 years, 20 years before things might get better? Why would anyone want that?

 

[podsox]

That would blow. Nd would be in the playoffs regularly but woof at that schedule

 

[Thiefery]

but some of the G5 schools are proven to be constantly better than P5. I would take UCF, Boise, Houston year in and year out over Rutgers, Kansas, and right now as of late over Arkansas and Colorado. on given years those teams have beat Oregon, Stanford, Georgia, Oklahoma as well as others

As a Texas fan, I wouldn't. I wouldn't care if Boise St/UCF or Coog high was undefeated, it would pale in comparison playing Arkansas in a home and home, even if they suck. Maybe out west it's a different story? UCF? Coog High? I'll pass. Rather play a series vs SMU

 

[Blackshirts BLVD]

I wish you were right...because I'm definitely a traditionalist. I used to think the same way but money is the almighty driver now.

Texas and Texas A&M first played each other in 1894. That 100+ years of tradition got ditched and kicked straight ass to the curb. How's that tradtion working now?

And I never thought I would see the day that Oklahoma and Nebraska wouldn't play each other every year.

A) Exactly. Might not have "meant" much, but when Nebraska was in the Big8/12, the Neb/KU game was the longest running annual game and still would be if we never left. But that money was calling.

B) If I remember correctly, 6 of the Big 8 members voted to bring in the SWC bums. The only nays were Nebraska and Kansas (again IIRC). So even though I like to put blame on Texas for everything, Oklahoma definitely has fault here too. They were getting destroyed in the 90's by Nebraska so they did what they thought they had to to bring Neb down and give themselves a leg up.

In my opinion, up until Switzer left, the Nebraska/Oklahoma game was the biggest rivalry in the nation. Damn near ever year (with literally very few exceptions) this game decided the conference winner and often times had national title implications as well. I mean for crying out loud, how many rivalries from within the same conference are invited to play in a bowl game?

Switzer and Osbornes reactions are priceless

 

[Thiefery]

A) Exactly. Might not have "meant" much, but when Nebraska was in the Big8/12, the Neb/KU game was the longest running annual game and still would be if we never left. But that money was calling.

B) If I remember correctly, 6 of the Big 8 members voted to bring in the SWC bums. The only nays were Nebraska and Kansas (again IIRC). So even though I like to put blame on Texas for everything, Oklahoma definitely has fault here too. They were getting destroyed in the 90's by Nebraska so they did what they thought they had to to bring Neb down and give themselves a leg up.

In my opinion, up until Switzer left, the Nebraska/Oklahoma game was the biggest rivalry in the nation. Damn near ever year (with literally very few exceptions) this game decided the conference winner and often times had national title implications as well. I mean for crying out loud, how many rivalries from within the same conference are invited to play in a bowl game?

Switzer and Osbornes reactions are priceless

those bums had better teams than the North Division..

 

[Blackshirts BLVD]

man.. the horns down hand gesture would be the official sign of the conference.

 

[Blackshirts BLVD]

those bums had better teams than the North Division..

Uh.... you sure about that? Missouri and ISU were bad, Kansas was mostly bad, but Baylor and TTech were nothing incredible. Texas had a couple decent seasons in the 90's leading up to the formation, but A&M was the best team at the time. Meanwhile CU won a recent national title and strung together more 10+ winning seasons than Baylor, TTech, and Texas combined. In fact CU and A&M both at 4 seasons with 10+ wins. Between 93-00 K-St never had less than 9 wins. Kansas even dropped a 10 win season in the 90's where Baylor and TTech never did. All this and were not even talking about Nebraska.

 

[Thiefery]

Uh.... you sure about that? Missouri and ISU were bad, Kansas was mostly bad, but Baylor and TTech were nothing incredible. Texas had a couple decent seasons in the 90's leading up to the formation, but A&M was the best team at the time. Meanwhile CU won a recent national title and strung together more 10+ winning seasons than Baylor, TTech, and Texas combined. In fact CU and A&M both at 4 seasons with 10+ wins. Between 93-00 K-St never had less than 9 wins. Kansas even dropped a 10 win season in the 90's where Baylor and TTech never did. All this and were not even talking about Nebraska.

So what happened once they started playing as conference foes?

 

[Blackshirts BLVD]

So what happened once they started playing as conference foes?

Well the short version is that Texas came in and got everyone to vote to change shit in their favor. But I am sure there were other slimey behind the scenes tacits - I mean that is what the SWC was all about.