U.S. CitiesCity-Data Forum Index
Go Back   City-Data Forum > General Forums > Sports > College Football
 [Register]
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
View detailed profile (Advanced) or search
site with Google Custom Search

Search Forums  (Advanced)
Reply Start New Thread
 
Old 10-06-2011, 03:06 PM
 
Location: Chicago
6,341 posts, read 6,770,298 times
Reputation: 5703

Advertisements

Quote:
Originally Posted by ncopus99 View Post
Please explain. Reminders...
UConn - 2011 National Champion - 29-9 who won the Big East (i.e. the best Basketball conference) tourney. They were paired in a division with last year's winner Duke. They never lost out-of-conference beating teams like Kentucky and Michigan St.

Duke - 2010 National Champion - 35-5.

Alot of these midmajors aren't as bad as people assume. Big teams, especially those from the Big East, always sleep on them looking ahead at the next game and end up losing. If they were that great, they wouldn't do that year in, year out (I am talking about you Villanova, especially).


Depending how that tournament is set up. If autobids exist, a true champion might still be excluded.
ncopus, i don't question that quality can win out. you're right that teams the quality you listed can make it through.

but the structure of a tournament with a need to win six games to take the championship means that "anything can happen". If you look at any of those champions you describe, you will find that each case there was a game, probably more than one, where it could have gone either way.

Six is a lot of games to win without suffering a loss. It is difficult to expect any team, no matter how good, to be able to pull off this feat.

So my concern is less for those individual champs you describe, but to the nature of a 64 team field (I say 64 because nobody past that 64 is going to win a thing).

Football, by the nature of the sport, would unlikely not go higher than a sweet sixteen and far more likely with an elite eight.

so, yes, I am prepared to accept a "championship status" for that one (elite) out of eight (elites) and give say, yes, you won it on your skills and earned it.

I'm not prepared to do the same out of a field of 64.

Please understand that I am not talking the quality of any given team; I'm talking strictly mathematics. And to me, the number 64 has crap shoot written all over it.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message

 
Old 10-06-2011, 03:21 PM
 
Location: Chicago
6,341 posts, read 6,770,298 times
Reputation: 5703
There's something I'd like to throw out here to those still reading, something we don't really think about:

culture.

and the culture I speak of, in the world of college football, the culture differs from place to place. In other words, people in different parts of the nation often have a different relationship with the game.

I'm in Chicago, smack dab in the middle of Big Ten country. I think if the Big Ten has a soul mate, it is the Pac Ten. These two have been linked since the Rose Bowl pact was first written. These two conferences held out the longest to join the BCS.

I would be willing to say that the culture of the Great Lakes region (Big Ten) and Pacific coast (Pac 12) finds a vast number of fans who would be perfectly happy to see the season end with the Big Ten playing the Pac 12 in Pasadena. Many hate the tinkering the BCS does with Rose Bowl scheduling. Many are happy with the two conferences working their own special end of the season goal without being part of the BCS.

I'll speak also for strictly the Big Ten. Those of us in the Big Ten footprint take as much (or even more) pride in conference academics as they do in athletics. Part of that academic issue is membership in the CIC, the conference's academic arm consoritum.

So the view of the conference differs from what other parts of the nation may experience.

The SEC has carved our a different path. No, I'm not going to be one to dump on the SEC for academics. Vanderbilt speaks for itself as a university. And there is not question that UF and UGa, among others, are quality instituitions. But there is more of emphasis on being a contender for a national championship and being elite programs than what the Big Ten experiences. The South has always been a rabid fanbase for college football. And, who knows, some of that madness may stem from the six NFL teams within the SEC's footprint and the nine in Big Ten country, most of which were in place long before the South got the majority of its franchises.

Go out to the Pacific coast and you'll find fans are rarely as rabid about college football as fans in other parts of the nation. Again, a different culture. I think in many ways, USC has been perfectly happy with the type of success it can gain on the coast without being troubled about not competing for a national championship.

I guess more than anything else, I'm trying to suggest that you don't look at the whole nation wanting the same thing. And I'm telling you that many, many fans (certainly not all) in Big Ten want the conference to be quality in both academics and athletics and to have a connection with them. they don't want it to be a super conference. and they don't want it to admit schools that don't make the academic grade. No knock against UNL, but its standards and ratings are lower than its B10 peers; many questioned its admission to the conference...for better or for worse.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 10-06-2011, 06:04 PM
 
Location: The "Rock"
2,551 posts, read 2,438,596 times
Reputation: 1322
Quote:
Originally Posted by edsg25 View Post
Our times are crass and commercial beyond endurance, not only in college football, but across the board. Money is the bottom line. And money kills creativity and dilutes the meaning of all. It happens on watered down t.v. that is designed to appeal to the lowest common denominator, same at the theatre, same in the professional sports built on the rich get richer and and uneven playing fields.....and it's the same as college football.

Kill the traditions if you like, GE, but in the process, eventually nobody will give a darn.
This is just a difference in our core philosophy and outlook on life... I'm not one to embrace the past and tradition as it is mired in contradiction, oppression, violence, and plain ignorance. I believe I wasn't born in old times for a reason. I think the world is a much better place than it was years ago in all aspects so i completely disagree with you... especially this country. So to not continue to move forward in thinking is not an option to me...

An associate of mine sent this to me today... It was something Steve Jobs wrote. And she said it reminded her of me.

Here’s to the crazy ones.
The misfits, the rebels, the troublemakers.
The round pegs in the square holes.
The ones who see things differently.
They’re not fond of rules.
And they have no respect for the status quo.
You can quote them, disagree with them, glorify or vilify them.
About the only thing you can’t do is ignore them.
Because they change things.
They push the human race forward.
While some may see them as the crazy ones, we see genius.
Because the people who think they are crazy enough to change the world…
are the ones who do.


This is EXACTLY how I approach life... I'm all about moving forward. Understanding the past but not living in it.

College Football is no different... it needs to move forward.


PS: I never said I was for Super Conferences... I just said moving forward. I don't care about super conferences. I just want a playoff. But i think the super conferences are way to accomplish that sooner. In addition, I certainly dont think 64 teams in acceptable in football. 16 at most but really 8 is a better as you pointed out. so im in agreement with you there. And you mentioned the NFL in a lot of references... but the NFL is machine that constantly changes and expands. It is light years ahead of major college football in its innovators. Just think if Rozell thought the Super Bowl hurt tradition... merging the NFL and AFL hurt the traditions. 16 games hurt tradition. 32 teams hurt tradition. Just saying...

Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 10-07-2011, 05:28 AM
 
Location: Chicago
6,341 posts, read 6,770,298 times
Reputation: 5703
Quote:
Originally Posted by Mr. GE View Post
This is just a difference in our core philosophy and outlook on life... I'm not one to embrace the past and tradition as it is mired in contradiction, oppression, violence, and plain ignorance. I believe I wasn't born in old times for a reason. I think the world is a much better place than it was years ago in all aspects so i completely disagree with you... especially this country. So to not continue to move forward in thinking is not an option to me...

An associate of mine sent this to me today... It was something Steve Jobs wrote. And she said it reminded her of me.

Here’s to the crazy ones.
The misfits, the rebels, the troublemakers.
The round pegs in the square holes.
The ones who see things differently.
They’re not fond of rules.
And they have no respect for the status quo.
You can quote them, disagree with them, glorify or vilify them.
About the only thing you can’t do is ignore them.
Because they change things.
They push the human race forward.
While some may see them as the crazy ones, we see genius.
Because the people who think they are crazy enough to change the world…
are the ones who do.


This is EXACTLY how I approach life... I'm all about moving forward. Understanding the past but not living in it.

College Football is no different... it needs to move forward.


PS: I never said I was for Super Conferences... I just said moving forward. I don't care about super conferences. I just want a playoff. But i think the super conferences are way to accomplish that sooner. In addition, I certainly dont think 64 teams in acceptable in football. 16 at most but really 8 is a better as you pointed out. so im in agreement with you there. And you mentioned the NFL in a lot of references... but the NFL is machine that constantly changes and expands. It is light years ahead of major college football in its innovators. Just think if Rozell thought the Super Bowl hurt tradition... merging the NFL and AFL hurt the traditions. 16 games hurt tradition. 32 teams hurt tradition. Just saying...

You stress "moving forward". Problem is, it is changing, not moving forward and what is happening is regressive. It is based on monetary consideration and has nothing to do with making a better game.

This is a game loaded today with cupcake games in the non-conference part of the schedule merely so the big and powerful programs can get endless home games without the return game at the other stadium.

Geez, GE, did I ever give the impression I'm against "progress"? that change isn't constant and necessary. Of course it is. But the type of change that happens in college football has nothing to do with real progress. It is not designed to make things better, but to make them more profitable.

I am the last person in the world who wants to see a static, unchanging world. I embrace the good changes. I believe we do need to progress. I believe when the technology or other portions of our lives show a better path, to take that path. I've been an avid reader my whole live and I love books...including the print, the object itself, the way it feels when I hold and read it. But I have an e-reader, a Nook, and love its convenience, the price of books and everything about it.

Progress is good.

But what has "progressed" in college football. Again, it's change. Not progress. You seem to forget that those of previous generations who embraced what those in the generations had set in motion before them did so because it added to the color and the beauty of the game. That, as noted, is what makes MLB work.

Progress means "advancing forward." But what exactly do you think is an "advancement", an added benefit to what we have done to this game. No, the game hardly has to be static, it can by dynamic. But there is nothing in the moves that have been made that would meet that criteria. How on earth are we served by a system merely designed to create a national champion when the notion that every other school but one leaves the field at the end of the year as a "loser" (not because championships are bad....they're not and I am for a national championship......but because the game will be loaded to deliver that notion.)

Again, each to his own liking, but having a "super conference" where schools don't even relate to each other any more because they are in "the other division" and they play each infrequently makes no sense. Either does the notion that with the super conference, many schools won't ever have a chance to win their conference. The elites, "The Programs" will control everything and with so many teams, the chance of your school winning a conference title is small.

Geez, man, these are colleges. I realize we've played a fiction for ages about this being an "amateur sport", but the reality is that playing the route we are now going, the one you seem to embrace, will definitely not serve the universities, their students, and the public that depend on them. Well more than half a century back, the University of Chicago, a founding member of the Big Ten, gave up football because the size of the game, they felt, compromised their mission as a serious academic and research institution. The great universities of the Ivy League abandoned big time football ages ago for many of the same reasons.

What is happening now is bad for universities, the crass commercializaiton of the game is to their detriment. They are not money making institutions but ones that are there to serve and better society through the education and research they provide.

You talk progress, GE, when in fact much of what is happening today in college football is regressive. A step backwards. Part of the very thinking today that is regressive. That says (wink. wink.) that science and face don't matter, that things like global climate change is not real so we can continue to drill, drill, drill and continue to make a bundle off of fossil fuels. Why do I mention that here in a discussion of sports? Because it is all interrelated, its all part of the same fabric, all part of putting a price tag on everything, all part of making the goal line in college football far less important, and making the bottom line the real focus of what the game is about.

So if you enjoy the notion of The Rice (Krisspies) Owls, The Alabama Crimson Tide Detergent, The Nebraska Cornhuskers presented by Kellogg's, and the USC Trojans nicely packaged for your comfort, be my guest.

As for me, I'll take a pass, one that is hardly a forward one because there is nothing forward about it.

No matter what you think, I have spent my whole life including up to this very moment, thinking ahead, thinking forward, always asking how do I expect what is playing out today to affect tomorrow. I am anything but rooted in the past; indeed I consider myself some 180° removed from that. That's why I am interested in college football...like all institutions...to progress which is to go forward, not just make changes.

Today's game is a lot more aobut change than it is about progress. We live in a totally unsustainable nation and world, GE, way too big and too overtaxing on resources to survive. The whole thing that is college football today is part of that world I described.

Geez, man, do you really consider that to be "progress"?????????????

So when it comes to...

Because they change things.
They push the human race forward.
While some may see them as the crazy ones, we see genius.
Because the people who think they are crazy enough to change the world…
are the ones who do.


......I'd say what we are doing is the exact opposite. it's not visionary, it is not sustainable, and it's strictly about crass commercialism and chasing the buck. The men making the decisions of the nature of the game are small minded, unexpansive in thinking folks who are hardly the visionaries you suggest.

Last edited by edsg25; 10-07-2011 at 05:39 AM..
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 10-07-2011, 08:48 AM
 
Location: The "Rock"
2,551 posts, read 2,438,596 times
Reputation: 1322
You write a lot saying the same things... That's too much to respond too... and whats with all the "Geez man"? relax buddy... dont get your panties in a bunch. It's just healthy conversation. dont get so emotional because someone doesn't agree with you.

you are no more correct than I am... You dont know if what is happening is regressive, you just THINK it is. big difference. And you did state you like things the way the USE to be so dont backtrack now. U don't want change... in what universe is that wanting things to move forward?

it is what it is... i'm just happy the powers at be dont seem to agree with you.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 10-07-2011, 09:29 AM
 
Location: Lake Arlington Heights, IL
5,481 posts, read 10,487,854 times
Reputation: 2794
Quote:
Originally Posted by Mr. GE View Post
You write a lot saying the same things... That's too much to respond too... and whats with all the "Geez man"? relax buddy... dont get your panties in a bunch. It's just healthy conversation. dont get so emotional because someone doesn't agree with you.

you are no more correct than I am... You dont know if what is happening is regressive, you just THINK it is. big difference. And you did state you like things the way the USE to be so dont backtrack now. U don't want change... in what universe is that wanting things to move forward?

it is what it is... i'm just happy the powers at be dont seem to agree with you.
Perhaps what you miss is the threat to tradition we older fans feel. The tradition that took decades to build that is now, seemingly, being tossed aside solely for greed.
I don't mind change. I think TCU going to the Big12 is better than Big East.
I just shake my head and laugh at CO being in the Pac 12 and the talk of TX and OK doing the same thing. Sure, I think Pacific Coast when CO, TX or OK are mentioned Oh yeah, they have a lot in common with that part of the country
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 10-07-2011, 10:02 AM
 
Location: The "Rock"
2,551 posts, read 2,438,596 times
Reputation: 1322
Quote:
Originally Posted by cubssoxfan View Post
Perhaps what you miss is the threat to tradition we older fans feel. The tradition that took decades to build that is now, seemingly, being tossed aside solely for greed.
I don't mind change. I think TCU going to the Big12 is better than Big East.
I just shake my head and laugh at CO being in the Pac 12 and the talk of TX and OK doing the same thing. Sure, I think Pacific Coast when CO, TX or OK are mentioned Oh yeah, they have a lot in common with that part of the country

I don't think I'm missing that at all... I just feel like its been this way for a while so a change is good. And to say its bad JUST because its foreign is short-sighted. No one knows if a change is good or bad UNTIL you see what happens with the change.

And I'm not arguing any specific conference alignments/expansions. So you will hear no rebuttal or rebuke on your specific statements there. I'm simply arguing the "idea" of the conferences changing is good. The "idea" that major college football's landscape will be different as a whole is good. I am embracing the changes. It moves the game forward. To get into the specific changes is too detailed to me. I'm speaking very high-level (pie in the sky thinker). Which is maybe why I don't have emotion in the discussion. I just like the idea... I can't wait to see where everyone ends up and how they end up. I'm more of a spectator about that as its not important to me where pgms end up. You all as traditionalist seem to be very connected to a specific part of the changes. I'm open to ALL scenarios so I'm not...
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 10-07-2011, 10:54 AM
 
Location: Chicago
6,341 posts, read 6,770,298 times
Reputation: 5703
Quote:
Originally Posted by Mr. GE View Post
You write a lot saying the same things... That's too much to respond too... and whats with all the "Geez man"? relax buddy... dont get your panties in a bunch. It's just healthy conversation. dont get so emotional because someone doesn't agree with you.

you are no more correct than I am... You dont know if what is happening is regressive, you just THINK it is. big difference. And you did state you like things the way the USE to be so dont backtrack now. U don't want change... in what universe is that wanting things to move forward?

it is what it is... i'm just happy the powers at be dont seem to agree with you.
you're right; it was a bit of a rant. sorry about that. nothing was directed at you, Mr. GE.

But it does all boil down to I am totally pissed by the nature of money in the game. Again, I link it to how it parallels society in genral.

I say it is regressive (admittedly an opinion) because I don't see any advancement coming out of it short of the money aspect. Don't you think that that is the bottom line of the decision making.

it's ruled everything. Do you realize, for example, the real reason for all those 12 team conferences was that was the magic money to run a conference championship game. And that championship was never looked at as a good move competitively in the conference but as a major money maker. There was a real price to pay by breaking down into those two divisions and affecting conference solidarity.

You you honestly tell me that the folks running the game couldn't come with a simple notion that a 12 team conference would work if it played an 11 game round robin and only had a championship game to break a tie at season's end. You know, get rid of those darned cupcake games that are nothing more than revenue makers that can gererate those wonderful 58-0 scores (but a nice chunk of cash to bring home for the losing Christians turned to the lions.....er.....visiting team).

Doesn't progressive have to show something progressive? If so, where is the progress that you speak of, not mere change, but real progress?
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 10-07-2011, 11:02 AM
 
Location: Chicago
6,341 posts, read 6,770,298 times
Reputation: 5703
Quote:
Originally Posted by cubssoxfan View Post
Perhaps what you miss is the threat to tradition we older fans feel. The tradition that took decades to build that is now, seemingly, being tossed aside solely for greed.
I don't mind change. I think TCU going to the Big12 is better than Big East.
I just shake my head and laugh at CO being in the Pac 12 and the talk of TX and OK doing the same thing. Sure, I think Pacific Coast when CO, TX or OK are mentioned Oh yeah, they have a lot in common with that part of the country
cubssoxfan, you know whereof you speak just through your name. people think baseball in our town revolves around ivied walls, lovable loses, a superstitiously charged goat, and Harry Carry slurring his words and beer.

They don't understand what really makes Chicago baseball tick, despite the lack of success on the field over a century, is that tradition of being the only city that has always had a team in the NL and AL every year of their existence. It's all about tradition: North Side vs. South Side, Madison Street being the battle line, yuppies vs. blue collars, Cubbie blue vs. Real Men Wear Black.

It's that tradition that has endured us and without it, without the long heritage, baseball would hardly measure up the same way.

Meanwhile, back on the gridiron, I'm hoping that NU gets over a couple of close loses (particularly that really painful one in Champaign), and does well under the lights in Evanston against Michigan on Saturday. Go Cats!

And for heaven sakes, Cubsox, stop trying to run me down with your roller blades when you make the Buffalo Grove Road curve around the lake. I got to keep an eye open to see if you're the guy with the Sox cap and the Cub t-shirt. Meet you at the gazebo (best place to be when a thunderstorm hits)
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 10-07-2011, 11:28 AM
 
Location: The "Rock"
2,551 posts, read 2,438,596 times
Reputation: 1322
Quote:
Originally Posted by edsg25 View Post
you're right; it was a bit of a rant. sorry about that. nothing was directed at you, Mr. GE.
coo, No worries...

Quote:
Originally Posted by edsg25 View Post
I say it is regressive (admittedly an opinion) because I don't see any advancement coming out of it short of the money aspect.
We'll just have to wait and see...

Quote:
Originally Posted by edsg25 View Post
Don't you think that that is the bottom line of the decision making.
I never said it wasn't... but it has been about money for much longer than you think... as its been about money for the past 30 years. So i don't care that money is the bottomline. what ever the catalyst for change is ok with me.


Quote:
Originally Posted by edsg25 View Post
You you honestly tell me that the folks running the game couldn't come with a simple notion that a 12 team conference would work if it played an 11 game round robin and only had a championship game to break a tie at season's end. You know, get rid of those darned cupcake games that are nothing more than revenue makers that can gererate those wonderful 58-0 scores (but a nice chunk of cash to bring home for the losing Christians turned to the lions.....er.....visiting team).
You are obviously fundamentally against playoffs/tournaments. The setup makes perfect logical sense to me with a 12 team conference... In addition, as I eluded to in a previous post, the long seasons and championship games evolved because no NCAA tourney was in place. It essentially became a conference's way to have its own mini tourney/playoff. So Obviously schools wanted it.

I never said I was for the 12 teams conferences or 16 team conferences. I just think the conferences have be at 12 or 16 to get to a playoff now because of where we are. If we had not gon to 12 team conferences that would have been a better way in my opinion to get to a playoff (similar to I-AA).

If teams had stayed at 8-10 teams and playing no more than 10 regular season games. And then the NCAA select the top 16 to play in tourney like they do in basketball. Two teams would have played 14 games, 4 teams 13, 8 teams 12, and 16 teams 11 and thats it. But since no playoff was in sight, the conferences took matters in their own hands. Again a direct result of the game being static with its tradition of bowl games. Thus why I'm for change... I do not like the system. I believe in tournaments. I believe in settling a sport by head to head competiton. Major college Football is basically won like ice-skating, gymnastics, and cheerleading... not like every other sport. that's not acceptable to me.

Quote:
Originally Posted by edsg25 View Post
Doesn't progressive have to show something progressive? If so, where is the progress that you speak of, not mere change, but real progress?
I think the changes up to this point have been band-aids, patches. Not changes in the entire philosophy and landscape of college football. Thus why there has not been much progress. That's why I'm an advocate for a complete change... expanding conferences and consolidating the best programs into a 96 or 64 team field is the only way I see that happening from where we are.

But to say no progress has been made is completely false. Each conference with a championship game finds a TRUE champion because they settle it on the field. And having 1 and 2 play is much better than anything we ever had in the 80's and most of the 90's. I rather argue about who should play in the national title game than not having a national championship game like we use too.... thats progress!
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.

Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.


Reply
Please update this thread with any new information or opinions. This open thread is still read by thousands of people, so we encourage all additional points of view.

Quick Reply
Message:

Over $104,000 in prizes was already given out to active posters on our forum and additional giveaways are planned!

Go Back   City-Data Forum > General Forums > Sports > College Football
Similar Threads
Follow City-Data.com founder on our Forum or

All times are GMT -6. The time now is 05:17 PM.

© 2005-2019, Advameg, Inc. · Please obey Forum Rules · Terms of Use and Privacy Policy · Bug Bounty

City-Data.com - Archive 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20, 21, 22, 23, 24, 25, 26, 27, 28, 29, 30, 31, 32, 33, 34, 35 - Top