Realignment News, HOLY CRAP!

[ForkEmBucky]

The +1, if conference championship is a qualifier, essentially forces this though.

I guess I can see why that would be.

 

[bone3421]

Not that big time, but teams with National Titles and BCS births may be left out.

dang it so they are going to let oregon in

 

[bone3421]

- Texas and OU still are fighting hard behind the scenes to keep the Big 12 at only 12 teams
- FSU is done and has been a done deal for a while.
- Lots of options for the 12th school and those are still being sorted out

AND......

.......after all of my talk about how Texas and OU would NEVER allow the Texas and Oklahoma schools to be split up, he said that Texas and OU are now open to exploring different divisional alignments in which the Texas and/or Oklahoma schools are split up. He didn't explain why - and I wish he had because I look silly after really ripping some people on this board over this very issue. Oh well.....


read this on the shag...guy says he knows a guy...who knows??

 

[Forty_Sixand2]

ACC is having their meetings this week.

 

[sparko]

The +1, if conference championship is a qualifier, essentially forces this though.

Let's face it. Less than 64 teams in the country have a realistic shot at winning a natty. So, creating four quasi-conferences of 16 each is very doable. For those left out << should've delivered .. BUT .. it would be nice (but messy) to have some kind of provision built in where every X number of years (no more than 5), programs are evaluated (by RPI/total wins/losses) or something and they possibly drop out of the fold and teams that have built solid programs (but aren't in the 64) have a way of making it in. It would be messy .. but I think this could be done.

I hope that a conference qualifier is part of this. It'll keep one conference from getting too powerful and over time, the cream will rise that should rise. It evens the playing field. If you can't win your conference, you have no business playing in the national championship game. It makes EVERY game in the regular season crucial and that's what needs to be saved .. the regular season

 

[herky]

ACC is having their meetings this week.

The B1G is also.

 

[Jack_John_Mark]

This is sickening me the more I think about how wrong it all is.

I say we turn recruiting into a lottery. Throw the top however many recruits in the nation into a hat, and each school gets to draw 1 by 1. Whoever you end up with is who you have.

Now everyone should have a fairly even team. Create 10 (or so) team conferences, winners of each conference advance to the playoffs. Winner of playoffs is National Champion.

 

[Forty_Sixand2]

This is sickening me the more I think about how wrong it all is.

I say we turn recruiting into a lottery. Throw the top however many recruits in the nation into a hat, and each school gets to draw 1 by 1. Whoever you end up with is who you have.

Now everyone should have a fairly even team. Create 10 (or so) team conferences, winners of each conference advance to the playoffs. Winner of playoffs is National Champion.

Umm, athletes should be able to choose where they go to college since 95% of them won't be playing pro. In addition these athletes have families who would like to travel to see them.

 

[Jack_John_Mark]

I was joking en sech.

But in all honesty, it would fix everything.

All cutting out major Universities from having a shot at winning a National Title does is make 64 other programs look like spoiled little bitches.

 

[MattB4VT]

Let's face it. Less than 64 teams in the country have a realistic shot at winning a natty. So, creating four quasi-conferences of 16 each is very doable. For those left out << should've delivered .. BUT .. it would be nice (but messy) to have some kind of provision built in where every X number of years (no more than 5), programs are evaluated (by RPI/total wins/losses) or something and they possibly drop out of the fold and teams that have built solid programs (but aren't in the 64) have a way of making it in. It would be messy .. but I think this could be done.

I hope that a conference qualifier is part of this. It'll keep one conference from getting too powerful and over time, the cream will rise that should rise. It evens the playing field. If you can't win your conference, you have no business playing in the national championship game. It makes EVERY game in the regular season crucial and that's what needs to be saved .. the regular season

This is something similar to what the English Premier League does with relegation of the worst teams to the league below, and the best from the league below get brought up to the top league. It works well, and at least adds some motivation to teams on both sides of the bubble.

 

[sparko]

Yep -- you're right Matt and it does work as well as any system could. You have basically three tiers, the top tier (64 teams or however many are decided) comprised of teams who have a legitimate shot at being the best of the land. At the end of 2 or 3 or 5 years, the bottom team in an 8-team division over that time (however THAT is determined -- I'd prefer strictly division record) is demoted to tier 2. Likewise, you could immediately promote a handful of FCS teams up to FCS tier 2 and make it a 64-team league. Top dog in each division every 2,3,5 years gets promoted up .... or something like that .... We sent a man to the moon .. We could figure this out

And I understand your sentiment JJM but let's get real. My Hokies are a long shot to ever win a natty. Do you really think that Marshall ever will? Indiana, while a good university, has no business playing B1G football. They're doing themselves, their fans, and the B1G a disservice. If they can prove that they're ready to play big-boy football, in a few years, they move up and will get their shot. It would realistically take a program AT LEAST 3-5 years to go from nothing to a potential contender (more like 20 years but for the sake of argument). There hasn't been a first-time national champion in how long? Put someone in there who can compete with B1G schools and pair Indiana up with schools that will make for better competition ... I'm speaking as a CFB fan wanting to see GOOD games for ALL teams ... but I realize that it's all about the money, not about good competition.

 

[Jack_John_Mark]

A good example is Kansas.

Couple years ago they damn near went undefeated. In the 90's they were a top tier team a few times. But most of the time they are not going to be contenders. So, now we are going to exclude Kansas completely...

This is obviously more about money than anything else. It takes away from everything that makes college football the best sport in the history of the world.

 

[potzer25]

A good example is Kansas.

Couple years ago they damn near went undefeated. In the 90's they were a top tier team a few times. But most of the time they are not going to be contenders. So, now we are going to exclude Kansas completely...

This is obviously more about money than anything else. It takes away from everything that makes college football the best sport in the history of the world.

You are blowing this out of proportion.

How many teams ranked > 64 would really be missed?

Team Quarter Century Rankings

By creating a mid tier you actually give those schools - that are NOT going to be losing talent because they aren't getting 4-5 star recruits NOW - a chance to win a national title.

 

[Forty_Sixand2]

You are blowing this out of proportion.

How many teams ranked > 64 would really be missed?

Team Quarter Century Rankings

By creating a mid tier you actually give those schools - that are NOT going to be losing talent because they aren't getting 4-5 star recruits NOW - a chance to win a national title.

1975-1999?

 

[potzer25]

1975-1999?

1900-1924 would be filled with Harvard, Princeton, etc. I would think if Cornell was included but Oklahoma left out it would cause issues...

I'm not suggesting that criteria be necessarily be used...

 

[yeodonie]

dang it so they are going to let oregon in

...grrr...

 

[Forty_Sixand2]

1900-1924 would be filled with Harvard, Princeton, etc. I would think if Cornell was included but Oklahoma left out it would cause issues...

I'm not suggesting that criteria be necessarily be used...

I was just kidding around. i was hoping they had an adjustable ruler so you could do 1988-2012.

 

[potzer25]

I was just kidding around. i was hoping they had an adjustable ruler so you could do 1988-2012.

what do you want from me!!! sheesh...





Yea, that would be nice...but looking at the most recent available 1/4 century, there aren't even 6 teams left out that would be worth debating...

 

[tabascojet]

16 team conferences are a bad idea. Hell 14 is too many but it is already here. The next pieces to shake things out will have to be ND or FSU. But i think the regardless of what else happens i see the pac12 holding on to their elitism and not adding just for expansion's sake (sorry bsu fans). If i was in charge id sign off on these changes.....


mizzou florida
aTm georgia
lsu south carolina
alabama tenn
ole miss vandy
miss st auburn
arkansas kentucky

minn wisc
michigan ohio st
mich st illinois
nebraska penn st
nw indiana
iowa purdue
nd maryland

texas kansas
tx tech iowa st
baylor wvu
tcu va tech
oklahoma fsu
ok state clemson
kansas st louisville

oregon az state
oregon st arizona
stanford usc
california ucla
wash utah
wash st colo

unc pitt
ga tech miami
nc state syracuse
uva boston college
wf rutgers
duke uconn
usf cincy

 

[tabascojet]

id let this league have a seat at the table too but then i dont write the checks for tv contracts....


colo st fresno st
new mexico hawaii
air force sdsu
wyoming unlv
utah st nevada
byu san jose st
utep boise st