*** Official 2015 College Football Thread *** (5 Viewers)

[Premier]

What conference did the Cocks come from? The Metro?

 

[Moe.]

What conference did the Cocks come from? The Metro?

I believe they were independent in football for a number of years before joining the SEC.

 

[The Commish]

What conference did the Cocks come from? The Metro?

I believe they were independent in football for a number of years before joining the SEC.

They went independent after leaving the ACC? Did not know that.

 

[PlasmaDogPlasma]

What conference did the Cocks come from? The Metro?

I believe they were independent in football for a number of years before joining the SEC.

They went independent after leaving the ACC? Did not know that.

According to Wiki they were independent in football and men's soccer and in the Metro for other sports.

 

[The Commish]

The always innovative Steve Spurrier is expected to have a new proposal this week at the SEC meetings....for Division winners to be determined on Division record only. Its an obvious shot at UGA's schedule the last two years. Interesting but no chance of happening.

When conferences routinely increase to 16-18 teams, you will essentially have two football conferences instead of one anyway, at which point Spurrier's idea is hard to dispute.

Conferences may then go to 4 divisions. Either way, I doubt it ever happens in the SEC with inter-division rivalries as big as they are.

my hope is...if they are going to these gigantic conferences that the "conference games" on the schedule will be those of your division and the rest are out of conference minus your largest rival in the other division.

Personally I wouldn't like that...but it'll be impossible to please everyone. We would keep Tennessee, but lose rotating games with Florida and UGA.

If the conferences continue to grow as they are, it's pointless to keep 8 games in conference. If a playoff comes to be and a committee is picking the teams for it, we'll want all the data we can get for rankings....at least that's my thinking on it.

 

[The Commish]

What conference did the Cocks come from? The Metro?

I believe they were independent in football for a number of years before joining the SEC.

They went independent after leaving the ACC? Did not know that.

According to Wiki they were independent in football and men's soccer and in the Metro for other sports.

Good to know.

 

[gump]

http://m.espn.go.com/ncf/story?storyId=7994532

People are upset about Diddys son getting a scholly.

 

[gump]

Ohio State backs out of home-and-home with UGA due to PAC 12 series:

http://m.espn.go.com/ncf/story?storyId=7993698

 

[The Commish]

I thought the P12/B1G games were starting in 2013 or 2014 for some reason

 

[Premier]

http://m.espn.go.com/ncf/story?storyId=7994532People are upset about Diddys son getting a scholly.

So stupid. He earned that scholarship. Who cares what his dad is worth.

 

[BigJohn]

I thought the P12/B1G games were starting in 2013 or 2014 for some reason

Cancelled games would have been in 2020 and 2021.

 

[The Commish]

I thought the P12/B1G games were starting in 2013 or 2014 for some reason

Cancelled games would have been in 2020 and 2021.

The Big Ten/Pac-12 partnership, which ultimately will have 12 annual matchups between conference teams, is set to begin in 2017

 

[gump]

http://m.espn.go.com...storyId=7994532

People are upset about Diddys son getting a scholly.

So stupid. He earned that scholarship. Who cares what his dad is worth.

California...

 

[BigJohn]

I thought the P12/B1G games were starting in 2013 or 2014 for some reason

Cancelled games would have been in 2020 and 2021.

The Big Ten/Pac-12 partnership, which ultimately will have 12 annual matchups between conference teams, is set to begin in 2017

Sorry, I misunderstood what you misunderstood.

 

[The Commish]

I thought the P12/B1G games were starting in 2013 or 2014 for some reason

Cancelled games would have been in 2020 and 2021.

The Big Ten/Pac-12 partnership, which ultimately will have 12 annual matchups between conference teams, is set to begin in 2017

Sorry, I misunderstood what you misunderstood.

No worries. I thought the games started earlier than 2017

 

[The Commish]

TOP FOUR TEAMS!!!!

 

[Moe.]

Phil Steele is predicting an OU-FSU title game.

 

[Christo]

http://m.espn.go.com/ncf/story?storyId=7994532People are upset about Diddys son getting a scholly.

Those people have waaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaayyyy too much time on their hands.

 

[GDogg]

I thought the P12/B1G games were starting in 2013 or 2014 for some reason

From what I know, there is no start date. They can start now if they want. The agreement is that all schools must have a Big 10 school on the non-conference schedule by 2017.The 2013 or 2014 start date was for plans for a preseason game at the Rose Bowl.

 

[GDogg]

http://m.espn.go.com/ncf/story?storyId=7994532People are upset about Diddys son getting a scholly.

So ridiculous and pretty jacked up for the kid. I feel bad for him.

 

[GoFishTN]

http://m.espn.go.com/ncf/story?storyId=7994532People are upset about Diddys son getting a scholly.

Good to see they've kept his feet on the ground.

When Combs turned 16 two years ago, his father bought him a $360,000 Maybach.

 

[GDogg]

I thought the P12/B1G games were starting in 2013 or 2014 for some reason

Cancelled games would have been in 2020 and 2021.

The Big Ten/Pac-12 partnership, which ultimately will have 12 annual matchups between conference teams, is set to begin in 2017

I don't believe this is completely accurate. The goal is to have all 12 schools from each conference playing a school from the other conference by 2017.

 

[Premier]

Phil Steele is predicting an OU-FSU title game.

Let's do this. He has FSU going undefeated.

 

[Christo]

Phil Steele is predicting an OU-FSU title game.

Let's do this. He has FSU going undefeated.

I don't see OU there having lost all of the WRs and having to run the WVA, OSU, TCU gauntlet to end the year. But if OU pulls it off with one of the toughest schedules in the nation they will deserve to be there.

 

[GDogg]

Oklahoma State : Savannah State, Arizona, Louisiana (not LSU)

Oklahoma : UTEP, Florida A&M, Notre Dame

Texas : Wyoming, New Mexico, Mississippi,

Michigan : Alabama, Air Force, UMASS, Notre Dame

Ohio State : Miami (OH), Central Florida, UAB, California

Oregon : Arkansas State, Fresno State, Tennessee Tech

FSU : Murray State, Savannah State, South Florida, Florida

Miami : Kansas State, Bethune-Cookman, Notre Dame, South Florida

USC : Hawaii, Syracuse, Notre Dame

Now of all these teams, who really stands out? Miami and Michigan. Both stepped up and played 2 solid non-conference games. The other 8 teams follow a pretty basic path. One solid team and a bunch of pansies. Texas and Oklahoma State seem to have the biggest jokes of schedules, but I guess it's hard to know when the schedules are made how good the teams will be. Oregon also has a pretty easy schedule, but usually Oregon steps up so perhaps this is an aberration.

Sorry for the formatting. I know it's ugly.

Southern Cal stands out, as well. They are playing Notre Dame, which is essentially a BCS program and Syracuse, who is from a BCS conference. Then, throw in Hawaii who has been a pretty decent program the past decade (though they were down last year).I'm starting to see where we have a disconnect. Am I wrong in saying that you think the tough (good) teams to schedule are big name and/or BCS opponents and that everyone else is put in the "pansy" category?

The bottom line is that scheduling is a joke for most teams. A few stand out, and I applaud those that do.

I still wish and have always wished that the NCAA would take over scheduling and force great teams to play each other, but it will never happen.

I don't see a HUGE difference in the SEC and the rest of the league. In fact, I bet that the Big 12 is comparable, aside from the fact that the SEC has one extra OOC game and doesn't fill it with a good team (which is why the Big 12 SOS is better. That one game probably makes all the difference).

That being said, if "number of games vs FCS schools" is part of your criteria, perhaps the SEC is worst in that category.

A tweet from today regarding 2012 schedulesave Bartoo ‏@cfbmatrix

Toughest NON-Conf Sked 1. #PAC12 2. Big East 3. ACC 4. B1G 5. BIG12 6. SEC

 

[gump]

The Big 12 announced yesterday that their 2011 split per school was $19M.The SEC also announced theirs at $20M.

 

[gump]

More detail on the SEC numbers:

The Southeastern Conference will distribute approximately $241.5 million to the 12 league institutions in the revenue sharing plan for the 2011-12 fiscal year, which ends Aug. 31, 2012. The average amount distributed to each school was $20.1 million.

The record $241.5 million is a 9.8 percent increase from the $219.9 million distributed from 2010-11.

Broken down by categories and rounded off, the $241.5 million was derived from $116.6 million from football television, $34.2 million from bowls, $15.3 million from the SEC Football Championship, $31.2 million from basketball television, $4.9 million from the SEC Men's Basketball Tournament, $24.9 million from NCAA Championships, and $14.4 million in a supplemental distribution.

 

[madhatter]

Who is the Gamecocks permanent rival now? Arkansas?

Yep...since they both joined the conference at the same time.

Starting 2012, S Carolina's cross divisional rival is aTm.

 

[The Commish]

Commissioners arrive in Chicago today Let the wild speculation begin

I don't expect anything "earth shattering" until a week from now though. They love the attention. If I had to guess, they'll go with 3 and 1 model. Top 3 conference champs in the top 6 with the fourth wildcard. That would be the compromise between Slive and Delaney. Who else wants to guess?

 

[shader]

Commissioners arrive in Chicago today Let the wild speculation begin I don't expect anything "earth shattering" until a week from now though. They love the attention. If I had to guess, they'll go with 3 and 1 model. Top 3 conference champs in the top 6 with the fourth wildcard. That would be the compromise between Slive and Delaney. Who else wants to guess?

That's what I expect will happen actually

 

[The Commish]

Commissioners arrive in Chicago today Let the wild speculation begin I don't expect anything "earth shattering" until a week from now though. They love the attention. If I had to guess, they'll go with 3 and 1 model. Top 3 conference champs in the top 6 with the fourth wildcard. That would be the compromise between Slive and Delaney. Who else wants to guess?

That's what I expect will happen actually

What's not clear is what happens if there aren't three conference champs in the top 6. I assume that it will go to the "at large" teams in order, which is probably a good thing if there's any hope that we grow this larger than 4 teams. But again...if they keep these polls as they are, it's really not a change for the better...it's just a change.

 

[The Commish]

Can't Say I'm Surprised

The presidents are now mucking things up.

 

[GoFishTN]

Can't Say I'm Surprised

The presidents are now mucking things up.

"If the Big Ten and Pac-12 presidents had embraced the four-team playoff, then I think there would have been a place where everyone was on the same page, and then ready to fill in all the gaps," the source said.

Nebraska chancellor Harvey Perlman has said his Big Ten peers favor A) the status quo, then B) a plus-one before considering a four-team playoff. Big Ten commissioner Jim Delany has been sufficiently ambiguous supporting the best four teams, but adding that conference championships should matter.

The Big 10 needs to GTFO and then the Pac-12 needs to decide if it's staying in 1950 or moving ahead with everyone else.

 

[The Commish]

Can't Say I'm Surprised

The presidents are now mucking things up.

"If the Big Ten and Pac-12 presidents had embraced the four-team playoff, then I think there would have been a place where everyone was on the same page, and then ready to fill in all the gaps," the source said.

Nebraska chancellor Harvey Perlman has said his Big Ten peers favor A) the status quo, then B) a plus-one before considering a four-team playoff. Big Ten commissioner Jim Delany has been sufficiently ambiguous supporting the best four teams, but adding that conference championships should matter.

The Big 10 needs to GTFO and then the Pac-12 needs to decide if it's staying in 1950 or moving ahead with everyone else.

Won't happen. Moving on without ANY of the big conferences much less two. It would make things dumber than they are now. I'm still predicting three top conference champs (in the top 6) plus an at large.

 

[jurb26]

Clemson signs top recruit for 2013, Robert Nkemdiche

 

[RnR]

Clemson signs top recruit for 2013, Robert Nkemdiche

Big difference in a June commit and a signature in February.

 

[jurb26]

Clemson signs top recruit for 2013, Robert Nkemdiche

Big difference in a June commit and a signature in February.

True. I think it sticks though. Clemson is an impressive school and should have a great season this year.

 

[gump]

Can't Say I'm Surprised

The presidents are now mucking things up.

So who was Delaney speaking for when he sounded ready to move forward? You would think he'd know what his bosses wanted.

 

[The Commish]

Can't Say I'm Surprised

The presidents are now mucking things up.

So who was Delaney speaking for when he sounded ready to move forward? You would think he'd know what his bosses wanted.

The fans. Which is an interesting turn of events. He knows what his bosses want. He also knows what is best for the conference from a athletic perspective. The problem, (at least in the B1G) is the presidents don't need the revenue from CFB to keep doing what they're doing. It's a piece of the puzzle for them not the whole enchilada. If anyone can afford to sit on this, it's the B1G and sadly, they are.

 

[gump]

Can't Say I'm Surprised

The presidents are now mucking things up.

So who was Delaney speaking for when he sounded ready to move forward? You would think he'd know what his bosses wanted.

The fans. Which is an interesting turn of events. He knows what his bosses want. He also knows what is best for the conference from a athletic perspective. The problem, (at least in the B1G) is the presidents don't need the revenue from CFB to keep doing what they're doing. It's a piece of the puzzle for them not the whole enchilada. If anyone can afford to sit on this, it's the B1G and sadly, they are.

Then they can be the bad guys. I know it's supposed to be cyclical....but I don't see the power shifting on the field anytime soon...so I'm sure the SEC is fine with everything as is.And this will make another all-SEC champ game much more popular nationally.

 

[The Commish]

Can't Say I'm Surprised

The presidents are now mucking things up.

So who was Delaney speaking for when he sounded ready to move forward? You would think he'd know what his bosses wanted.

The fans. Which is an interesting turn of events. He knows what his bosses want. He also knows what is best for the conference from a athletic perspective. The problem, (at least in the B1G) is the presidents don't need the revenue from CFB to keep doing what they're doing. It's a piece of the puzzle for them not the whole enchilada. If anyone can afford to sit on this, it's the B1G and sadly, they are.

Then they can be the bad guys. I know it's supposed to be cyclical....but I don't see the power shifting on the field anytime soon...so I'm sure the SEC is fine with everything as is.

It won't stay as is. I'm waiting for the presidents to come out and say things are fine as they are, all they have to do is change the polling system and how it works. The light's been taken off Delaney and is now on the presidents. We'll see how long they last under the spot light. I don't suspect it will be long.ETA: To your edit, I'm not sure popularity will change, however, blame will shift. All the talk after the snooze fest this year was about the system. If the B1G presidents prevent progress, the next all SEC champ game won't necessarily be more popular, but the focus of the anger will absolutely shift from the system to the B1G presidents.

 

[shader]

If they screw this up it could get ugly.

 

[PlasmaDogPlasma]

Remember it was the Pac 10 and Big 10 that sat out the Bowl Alliance as well. It wasn't until it cost them multiple title shots that they deigned to join the other conferences.

 

[GDogg]

Remember it was the Pac 10 and Big 10 that sat out the Bowl Alliance as well. It wasn't until it cost them multiple title shots that they deigned to join the other conferences.

It didn't cost them any title shots. Do you not recall the split championship in this era (and almost multiple split titles)? Michigan was the AP champion in 1997.What it did do was show that you couldn't have a single, somewhat legitimate champion without the Big 10 and the Pac-10.

 

[The Commish]

Remember it was the Pac 10 and Big 10 that sat out the Bowl Alliance as well. It wasn't until it cost them multiple title shots that they deigned to join the other conferences.

The B10 and P10 didn't have automatic tie ins to that agreement (which was all of three or four years. 95-97 somewhere around there) but they could have at large bids. I think either PSU or OSU made it a couple times. Michigan won the "championship" in 1997. Not sure what you mean here. The champs of each were tied to the Rose Bowl so they couldn't if they wanted to. After that alliance was over, they added the Rose Bowl to begin the crap fest we have today.

 

[The Commish]

Suffice it to say, I am bored out of my gourd with no CFB and I'm jonesing for it already. It's going to be a long summer. I decided to start looking at Alabama's squad and was trying to get some historic recruiting numbers. gump (or any other Alabama fan for that matter) can you tell me if this is correct? It's not as current as I'd like, but is it accurate?

2006 - 23 players in class

2007 - 25 players in class

2008 - 32 players in class

2009 - 27 players in class

That's over 100 players recruited isn't it?

 

[Mile High]

Remember it was the Pac 10 and Big 10 that sat out the Bowl Alliance as well. It wasn't until it cost them multiple title shots that they deigned to join the other conferences.

It didn't cost them any title shots. Do you not recall the split championship in this era (and almost multiple split titles)? Michigan was the AP champion in 1997.What it did do was show that you couldn't have a single, somewhat legitimate champion without the Big 10 and the Pac-10.

I agree it could be back to the days of split NCs. This is push coming to shove on 4 conference champions or top 4 rated. Lot of it depends on where the conferences outside the big 4 side with.

 

[The Commish]

Remember it was the Pac 10 and Big 10 that sat out the Bowl Alliance as well. It wasn't until it cost them multiple title shots that they deigned to join the other conferences.

It didn't cost them any title shots. Do you not recall the split championship in this era (and almost multiple split titles)? Michigan was the AP champion in 1997.What it did do was show that you couldn't have a single, somewhat legitimate champion without the Big 10 and the Pac-10.

I agree it could be back to the days of split NCs. This is push coming to shove on 4 conference champions or top 4 rated. Lot of it depends on where the conferences outside the big 4 side with.

Once the AP was kicked out of the BCS we were back to split "championships". The unity didn't last very long

 

[gump]

Suffice it to say, I am bored out of my gourd with no CFB and I'm jonesing for it already. It's going to be a long summer. I decided to start looking at Alabama's squad and was trying to get some historic recruiting numbers. gump (or any other Alabama fan for that matter) can you tell me if this is correct? It's not as current as I'd like, but is it accurate?2006 - 23 players in class2007 - 25 players in class2008 - 32 players in class2009 - 27 players in classThat's over 100 players recruited isn't it?

Those numbers are right....then 26, 22, and 26. The Shula-Saban transition was just before the 07 class.

 

[gump]

Remember it was the Pac 10 and Big 10 that sat out the Bowl Alliance as well. It wasn't until it cost them multiple title shots that they deigned to join the other conferences.

It didn't cost them any title shots. Do you not recall the split championship in this era (and almost multiple split titles)? Michigan was the AP champion in 1997.What it did do was show that you couldn't have a single, somewhat legitimate champion without the Big 10 and the Pac-10.

I agree it could be back to the days of split NCs. This is push coming to shove on 4 conference champions or top 4 rated. Lot of it depends on where the conferences outside the big 4 side with.

Will Notre Dame be pro '4 of 6' or 'top 4'?