Re: Conference Realignment 2014 edition
Quote:
Originally Posted by
GatorDawg
You are dead wrong on that. I know for a fact that they do not. If they did then it already would be 8.
I've heard the SEC, bigxii and ACC commissioner all on Brando's show all three say that they feel that it will grow to 8 before the current contract is up, more than likely within 5 years -
The Pac12 commissioner basically said the same thing on Arute's show
If that is not an endorsement to 8 then I don't know what is?
Re: Conference Realignment 2014 edition
SEC and PAC 12 have no desire to get rid of their games
Re: Conference Realignment 2014 edition
Quote:
Originally Posted by
Dwayne From Minden
I've heard the SEC, bigxii and ACC commissioner all on Brando's show all three say that they feel that it will grow to 8 before the current contract is up, more than likely within 5 years -
The Pac12 commissioner basically said the same thing on Arute's show
If that is not an endorsement to 8 then I don't know what is?
None of them want to deal with it. They may think it is a good idea, most people do. But it creates too much headache. Slive may come out big time for it. But it is because he doesn't have to deal with the ramifications.
What sites host the quarterfinals? When are they played? How late do you let the championship occur? How are the teams determined?
That's just a sample. Instead you are missing the boat. The quarterfinals will be the conference championship game. There will be 4 16 team power conferences. Get ready. This is really what they meant to Brando. I've heard enough to know barring some unforeseen issue, this is the direction they are going. They get a true quarterfinal without any of the mess.
Re: Conference Realignment 2014 edition
Quote:
Originally Posted by
GatorDawg
That's just a sample. Instead you are missing the boat. The quarterfinals will be the conference championship game. There will be 4 16 team power conferences. Get ready. This is really what they meant to Brando. I've heard enough to know barring some unforeseen issue, this is the direction they are going. They get a true quarterfinal without any of the mess.
Semantics - believe it or not I agree with you on the later of those two points 100% and the other one about 70%
BUT - it would still be an 8 team PLAYOFF and it would NOT be any better for us little guys
Re: Conference Realignment 2014 edition
Quote:
Originally Posted by
Dwayne From Minden
SEC and PAC 12 have no desire to get rid of their games
...until the game knocks them completely out of the playoffs.
Re: Conference Realignment 2014 edition
Quote:
Originally Posted by
maddawg
...until the game knocks them completely out of the playoffs.
As it has probably the Big 12.
Re: Conference Realignment 2014 edition
Quote:
Originally Posted by
maddawg
...until the game knocks them completely out of the playoffs.
No one is worried about that at the conference level. Individual schools may have that fear towards the end of the season. But if they losing then they are not deserving. It is as simple as that and those schools know this.
Re: Conference Realignment 2014 edition
Quote:
Originally Posted by
Dwayne From Minden
Semantics - believe it or not I agree with you on the later of those two points 100% and the other one about 70%
BUT - it would still be an 8 team PLAYOFF and it would NOT be any better for us little guys
Unfortunately there is nothing we could've done to stop this either. Strong power play by the big boys. Give the little guys a guaranteed seat at the table to the big non playoff bowls. Give us access to some of the money. It was a much better option than the BCS and one that we had to take or we would be even further behind. But I don't think we will see a little guy ever crack this playoff no matter how large they make it. Because we can't forget that they still make the rules (i.e. the rankings). That was the one area where the BCS was good.
Re: Conference Realignment 2014 edition
Quote:
Originally Posted by
GatorDawg
Unfortunately there is nothing we could've done to stop this either. Strong power play by the big boys. Give the little guys a guaranteed seat at the table to the big non playoff bowls. Give us access to some of the money. It was a much better option than the BCS and one that we had to take or we would be even further behind. But I don't think we will see a little guy ever crack this playoff no matter how large they make it. Because we can't forget that they still make the rules (i.e. the rankings). That was the one area where the BCS was good.
Just to be clear, I'm not concerned about the "little guys". That will take care of itself as it did with the BCS. The playoff WILL go to 8 because of egos. The money from a playoff and/or NC shot is NOTHING compared to a boring game in Atlanta.
Re: Conference Realignment 2014 edition
Quote:
Originally Posted by
maddawg
Just to be clear, I'm not concerned about the "little guys". That will take care of itself as it did with the BCS. The playoff WILL go to 8 because of egos. The money from a playoff and/or NC shot is NOTHING compared to a boring game in Atlanta.
The CFP is based on the assumption that conference champions will advance. I fully expect the final 4 to be only conference champions. The conference championship games are not going anywhere. The CFP will see to that by rewarding the winners. That is why the Big 12 will soon be pressured to add one. Without a championship game, there is no true champion. The entire concept is built on the premise.
Re: Conference Realignment 2014 edition
I also see all participating P5 schools mandated to a 9 game conference schedule and no divisions
all teams in one division top 2 square off in championship game - which preserves that CASH COW for the conferences (SEC)...
Re: Conference Realignment 2014 edition
Quote:
Originally Posted by
GatorDawg
The CFP is based on the assumption that conference champions will advance.
By now CFB should know what happens when you ASSume things. Needless to say, this is a faulty assumption.
Re: Conference Realignment 2014 edition
Quote:
Originally Posted by
GatorDawg
Without a championship game, there is no true champion of that championship game.
fify
I'd argue that a round-robin champion is more of a "true" champion than a one-off championship game winner based on divisions. But I'm not sure the actual competition part has ever weighed as heavy as the money part in the bowl world. Like, ever.
Quote:
Originally Posted by
Dwayne From Minden
I also see all participating P5 schools mandated to a 9 game conference schedule and no divisions
all teams in one division top 2 square off in championship game - which preserves that CASH COW for the conferences (SEC)...
We're almost at the point where our current "divisions" are basically what we used to called "conferences." Conferences get much bigger and they'll turn in conferences in the NFL sense of the word.
Re: Conference Realignment 2014 edition
Quote:
Originally Posted by
maddawg
The money from a playoff and/or NC shot is NOTHING compared to a boring game in Atlanta.
Well now that the first year of the "college playoff" is in the books it looks as if ESPN has found it's Super Bowl. The Championship game was the highest rated program ever on cable tv.
Maybe this was ESPNs plan all along with scooping up all of those bowl games. Now they have the infrastructure to create their own playoff. One thing is for sure is that it won't stay at four teams for much longer.
Re: Conference Realignment 2014 edition
I just hope they give the G5 a slot if they go to 8. If they do we would at least start every season with a chance. It might be 1 in 5 million, but it would be a chance.