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.
Well... to get away from that lil' argument for a while, I decided to go back on what was mentioned earlier, about splitting the playoffs, one for 4 conferences each.
One would be the BCS Playoffs, for the 4 "major" conferences of the ACC, PAC 16, SEC, and B1G.
This would be an 8-team tournament that would start the week after Conference Championship Week. More than likely, the #1 and 2 teams would be from the 4 major conferences. However, if one of the mid-major schools is #1 or 2 in the nation, then that school would participate in this playoff instead of the Mid-Major Playoff. There would by 5 conferences represented with 3 selected teams.
This playoff follows the same format that I originally posted where the conference champion would play a selected school in the 1st round. The winner of this playoff would win the AFCA Trophy, the crystal ball.
This is the Mid-Major Playoff. I'm only calling it that because I don't have a better name for it. "Mid-Major" just seems... demeaning. The E.U.S.A.C., W.U.S.A.C. Sun Belt, and Rust Belt conferences would be involved.
This is an 8-team playoff that would begin during Conference Championship Week as the 1st round would be the conference championship games of the remaining 4 conferences. Obviously, this playoff's national championship game would come before the BCS game.
To the bold, you totally contradict yourself, backpeddled, and regurgitated my own words pertaining to the SEC not wanting Oklahoma State. Thanks!
The rest of your post has nothing to do with the dialogue. You're just trying to make OU look bad when it's one of the top programs of all-time. You talk more about the dynamics of the Big XII than the Sooners, specifically. Sorry Skipster you're changing your tune mid-stride because you were exposed. You made it easy.
As for Ohio St. with the same/even tradition as Oklahoma? You're wrong again. Ohio State might be around 4-5, but you're not at the top with the Sooners and Bammer. This actually has been kinda fun to see someone so ridiculously off-base. We've had a few on here from time to time (one was a West Virginia fan I believe), but you're quickly replacing him.
Again. Read. It helps. Good tidings to your reassessment of your own false assertions:
Yawn. You said Oklahoma turned down an invite to join the SEC all by themselves. Then you post a link that says the SEC commish talked to the President of OU. The SEC basically asked if there was anyway to get rid of Okie State. OU said no that Okie would have to come along. The SEC said see ya. So your link proves I was correct all along. OU never turned down an invite from the SEC. It's hard to turn something down when it doesn't exist.
The Big 12 appeared it was going to implode any day. Every school in the conference was scrambling to make sure they landed in a BCS conference. Here comes the SEC. The most stable and wealthiest conference in the country. And OU says no thanks, we don't want stability and money. We'd rather stay in a conference that is falling apart. Talk to Missouri, I heard they are shopping.......That is what people are supposed to believe if you are right. Lol. The OU President would have been forced the next day if he had turned down the SEC art the time you said he did.
I know your manhood somehow depends on OU football and you take it all personally when you find out maybe they can't go anywhere with permission from Austin. (The SEC woulda brought Okie State along if it meant getting Texas). But you'll be alright. If you wanna define yourself by what a bunch of 20-year olds (from Texas) do on a football field that's your business.
Yawn. You said Oklahoma turned down an invite to join the SEC all by themselves. Then you post a link that says the SEC commish talked to the President of OU. The SEC basically asked if there was anyway to get rid of Okie State. OU said no that Okie would have to come along. The SEC said see ya. So your link proves I was correct all along. OU never turned down an invite from the SEC. It's hard to turn something down when it doesn't exist.
The Big 12 appeared it was going to implode any day. Every school in the conference was scrambling to make sure they landed in a BCS conference. Here comes the SEC. The most stable and wealthiest conference in the country. And OU says no thanks, we don't want stability and money. We'd rather stay in a conference that is falling apart. Talk to Missouri, I heard they are shopping.......That is what people are supposed to believe if you are right. Lol. The OU President would have been forced the next day if he had turned down the SEC art the time you said he did.
I know your manhood somehow depends on OU football and you take it all personally when you find out maybe they can't go anywhere with permission from Austin. (The SEC woulda brought Okie State along if it meant getting Texas). But you'll be alright. If you wanna define yourself by what a bunch of 20-year olds (from Texas) do on a football field that's your business.
Do you even remember your original point? = That Oklahoma was not enough on its own to get into the SEC! From your perspective, Oklahoma didn't have the TV sets or didn't bring enough revenue, or was too good of a team for the Vandy's and Kentucky's of the world, etc. I'd be happy to post your own words to confirm this much that OU did not bring enough value.
Now you're changing your tune and conceding that the SEC, in fact, DID want the Sooners but then the talks were halted when OU tried to bring along Oklahoma State. OU said "no" to Slive by giving stipulations. The SEC said we'll be around later on if you change your mind, which is why the offer was still open when A&M jumped ship and Boren started to get publicly chippy towards Beebe and the Big XII.
Better luck next time. Again, do a tad more research before you get into a dialogue and defend a position which is indefensible.
I'm available if you need help posting actual FACTS and not just giving your misguided and clearly uninformed opinion. Thanks Yank!
Sun Belt
- East // Charlotte, Mid Tenn St., FIU, FAU, Georgia St., Troy, USA, Southern Miss.
- West // New Mexico, Texas St., Louisiana, ULM, Arkansas St., N. Texas, NMSU, Sam Houston St.
Just made an edit.
It just made more sense to swap San Jose State with New Mexico.
Also, no way UCONN gets in a major conference. They have nothing of value to offer. The ACC and B1G are not interested in "project" schools.
I know this quote has been up here for a few months, but just saw it again and decided to comment.
I always get a kick about how some people get their panties up in bunch about UConn.
Other than the Florida schools and perhaps VaTech, what does ANY school in the ACC offer for football? Help me out here. Syracuse? BC? Wake? Duke (one nice season nothwithstanding)? UNC?
UConn has a winning record against most of those schools. And one more BCS appearance than Pitt, Cuse, Duke, Wake, among others.
Seems to me L'Ville goes to the head of the class right alongside FSU.
The B1G just took Rutgers.
Rutgers!
You cannot seriously suggest that was about football. Or even about capturing the NYC market.
This isn't about how great UConn is or that they deserve a place in a major conference, but at least they give you hoops championships, soccer final fours and the occasional baseball world series appearance. Do you guys realize how BAD most of the ACC is in football over the past decade-plus? And most are not so hot in other sports anyone cares about.
To say UConn offers nothing while at the same time declaring a lot of the other ACC schools as deserving of a place in a BCS conference is pretty silly. UConn, as the only major state school in CT is a monopoly. They own the eyeballs in their territory. And own more eyeballs in the NYC metro than Syracuse. If you want carriage fees, they're one of the best targets a conference could pursue. If you want the NYC market, they're one of the top five schools to get a piece (higher than Syracuse). If you want football... well, you're probably better off looking at BYU and Idaho St than ANY ACC school not in Florida or Kentucky.
When you get right down to it, if you wanted to break football into elite conferences and also-rans, you'd really only be looking at 30 schools to put in the elite group - those 30 that have been to more than one BCS Bowl. There are another 21 schools that have been to one BCS Bowl (and UConn is one of those). Any other criterion is arbitrary. We've had 15 years of BCS to understand what programs are good and not good.
Once you get past those top 30 and start getting into Syracuse, BC, UConn, Wake, Duke, UNC, Rutgers, Maryland, et. al. you're no longer talking about teams with a snowball's chance in hell of seriously competing for a title. They're all just fodder. Why pick on just one for being inadequate?
For S&G sake, here's a list of teams that have NEVER been to a BCS Bowl Game:
ACC: BC, Duke, UNC, UVA
B1G: Indiana, Minnesota, Northwestern, Rutgers
SEC: Kentucky, Mississippi, Miss St., Mizzou, South Carolina, Vandy
P12: Arizona, Arizona St., Cal
B12: Iowa St., Kansas, Texas Tech
That's 20 teams y'all are putting in power conferences that have no reason to be in one other than that they've been grandfathered in. They haven't earned a thing in 15 years.
I know this quote has been up here for a few months, but just saw it again and decided to comment.
I always get a kick about how some people get their panties up in bunch about UConn.
Other than the Florida schools and perhaps VaTech, what does ANY school in the ACC offer for football? Help me out here. Syracuse? BC? Wake? Duke (one nice season nothwithstanding)? UNC?
UConn has a winning record against most of those schools. And one more BCS appearance than Pitt, Cuse, Duke, Wake, among others.
Seems to me L'Ville goes to the head of the class right alongside FSU.
The B1G just took Rutgers.
Rutgers!
You cannot seriously suggest that was about football. Or even about capturing the NYC market.
This isn't about how great UConn is or that they deserve a place in a major conference, but at least they give you hoops championships, soccer final fours and the occasional baseball world series appearance. Do you guys realize how BAD most of the ACC is in football over the past decade-plus? And most are not so hot in other sports anyone cares about.
To say UConn offers nothing while at the same time declaring a lot of the other ACC schools as deserving of a place in a BCS conference is pretty silly. UConn, as the only major state school in CT is a monopoly. They own the eyeballs in their territory. And own more eyeballs in the NYC metro than Syracuse. If you want carriage fees, they're one of the best targets a conference could pursue. If you want the NYC market, they're one of the top five schools to get a piece (higher than Syracuse). If you want football... well, you're probably better off looking at BYU and Idaho St than ANY ACC school not in Florida or Kentucky.
When you get right down to it, if you wanted to break football into elite conferences and also-rans, you'd really only be looking at 30 schools to put in the elite group - those 30 that have been to more than one BCS Bowl. There are another 21 schools that have been to one BCS Bowl (and UConn is one of those). Any other criterion is arbitrary. We've had 15 years of BCS to understand what programs are good and not good.
Once you get past those top 30 and start getting into Syracuse, BC, UConn, Wake, Duke, UNC, Rutgers, Maryland, et. al. you're no longer talking about teams with a snowball's chance in hell of seriously competing for a title. They're all just fodder. Why pick on just one for being inadequate?
For S&G sake, here's a list of teams that have NEVER been to a BCS Bowl Game:
ACC: BC, Duke, UNC, UVA
B1G: Indiana, Minnesota, Northwestern, Rutgers
SEC: Kentucky, Mississippi, Miss St., Mizzou, South Carolina, Vandy
P12: Arizona, Arizona St., Cal
B12: Iowa St., Kansas, Texas Tech
That's 20 teams y'all are putting in power conferences that have no reason to be in one other than that they've been grandfathered in. They haven't earned a thing in 15 years.
Actually, the University of Kansas went to the 2008 Orange Bowl...beating Virginia Tech.
OU's football program currently and historically, is on par with any SEC school. The issue they have is that the state of Oklahoma isn't much different than most of the other states that form the SEC: smaller, less populated, rural. You don't have a lot of eyeballs for TV sets.
Texas has tradition but also has several large population centers that rival anything in the SEC. If you put OU's A+ tradition with Texas' "A" tradition and A++ demographics and size...the SEC would be unstoppable. The SEC West would be insane if you had the Texas schools, OU, LSU, Alabama etc.
Too many teams in the playoffs. MLB has become watered down, just like the other sports. The regular season needs to count for something. I could go for an 8 team playoff, but I'd like to see a couple of non BCS teams in it- that's what makes March Madness so interesting.
Too many teams in the playoffs. MLB has become watered down, just like the other sports. The regular season needs to count for something. I could go for an 8 team playoff, but I'd like to see a couple of non BCS teams in it- that's what makes March Madness so interesting.
There are over 120 schools Division I-A football and 16 is too many?
(And please, tell me exactly how a 16-team playoff would make the regular season any less interesting or meaningful when only about 14% of the entire subdivision could make it in)
The playoff should include all conference champions (either 10 or 11 teams). The highest ranked non conference champion (probably an SEC or sometimes a Big 12 school) would be like a "wildcard" team. The playoffs would have 12 teams and play out like the NFL. Four teams would get first round byes while the other eight would play on the first weekend.
The regular season counts because you have to win your conference to guarantee a shot at a title.
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.
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.
Thanks!
= That Oklahoma was not enough on its own to get into the SEC! From your perspective, Oklahoma didn't have the TV sets or didn't bring enough revenue, or was too good of a team for the Vandy's and Kentucky's of the world, etc. I'd be happy to post your own words to confirm this much that OU did not bring enough value.
