*** Official 2015 College Football Thread *** (2 Viewers)

[GDogg]

I didn't mean to suggest that the BCS schools were scheduling these games for altruistic reasons. I agree with you that they want the easy wins and the revenue that the home game generates with no fuss. The race to the bottom aspect is unfortunate. Maybe they could institute a minimum amount but that is probably more trouble than it's worth.

I know you weren't but I have seen the argument made many times in print and by some of my friends that are alums from other conferences (a friend who is a The SEC is really doing it to help out the FCS schools in their footprint, etc.

Many programs that schedule FBS opponents have no reason not to at this point. IMO the biggest influence that gets it stopped is Alum/Season Ticket Holder pushback...which is definitely happening. ADs are getting an earful about that these days.

None of this makes any sense. If you want to be playing for a national title in 2014 you better not have an FCS school on your schedule.

If that's really the case, then they won't be on the schedule. Not exactly sure how we're going to know in advance...but Im very sure it won't come to light by a team who currently schedules one not getting a playoff bid because of it.

I mean if Bama is 13-0 and has Furman on the schedule, then sure they're in. But if they're 12-1 and so is Oklahoma State and the worst team OSU has on it's docket is a MAC team...that committee is going to focus very hard on that.

Well...that's what we hope anyway. I'll believe it when I see it though.

Is there really a difference in playing Ball St or Furman?

Yes.

What is it besides uniform colors?

Ball St. is an FBS school. As such, they are required to maintain a certain minimum level of funding for the football program in accord with NCAA standards. In addition, they are permitted to award 85 scholarships to players on their football team per year. They also went 9-4 and appeared in a bowl game. Last year, they beat two BCS conference schools in Indiana (B1G member) and South Florida (Big East member). They also beat Toledo, who was ranked #25 in the country at the time.Furman is an FCS school. As such, they are in the subdivision of Division I football known as the "cost-containment" level of Division I football. They do not need to meet the minimum funding requirements of FBS level programs. They are permitted to award 63 total scholarships and can actually break them up (giving partial scholarships). Many are pointing out Southern Cal's lack of depth right now due to their scholarship limits, but they are limited to 75, which is obviously 12 more than Furman is able to award. Imagine how badly hurt Southern Cal would be if the NCAA took away an additional 12 scholarships.As a result, an FCS school, such as Furman is going to be hamstrung in finding the same quality of football players that FBS schools, such as Ball St. are able to sign. Furman also went 3-8 in FCS last year and failed to qualify for the playoffs. They were beaten by more than three touchdowns by fellow-FCS schools Chattanooga, Georgia Southern and the Citadel.Ball St. is most likely a much better football team/program than Furman.

 

[GDogg]

4. Uniforms must contrast field: Call it the Boise State rule.

What do they do for teams with full green uniforms (I think Oregon has a couple iterations of this)?

They have 47,963,672 other variations. I think they'll be okay.

Sure, but what about Tulane, Michigan St., Colorado St., Eastern Michigan, Marshall, North Texas (they are the Mean Green, for the love of pete), and Ohio, for example?

 

[Ramblin Wreck]

jesus, this thread is unreadible

Yep. I tried to change the subject. But most people just like pissing in each others' corn flakes.

The king of one liner hi-jacks here really just posted that. Good stuff.

 

[The Commish]

jesus, this thread is unreadible

Yep. I tried to change the subject. But most people just like pissing in each others' corn flakes.

Of all the posters here. Fine...let's talk about those uniform rules....that'll get this thread back on track!!!!!!

 

[gump]

Possible rule changes for 2013:1. Intentional helmet-to-helmet contact: 15 yard penalty. Plus, if the hit occurs in the first half the player is ejected from the game. But if the hit occurs in the second half or OT, the player is ejected from the game and has to miss the first half of the next game. The 15 yard penalty is not reviewable but the ejection is reviewable.

This is going cause chaos. At least it's reviewable....but it's been called pretty inconsistently from what I saw, even with reviews later leading to suspensions. I'd hope they at least lean to a non-intentional call to start.

 

[Christo]

4. Uniforms must contrast field: Call it the Boise State rule.

What do they do for teams with full green uniforms (I think Oregon has a couple iterations of this)?

They have 47,963,672 other variations. I think they'll be okay.

Sure, but what about Tulane, Michigan St., Colorado St., Eastern Michigan, Marshall, North Texas (they are the Mean Green, for the love of pete), and Ohio, for example?

If it passes, they'll have to abide by it too. This isn't very difficult.

 

[Christo]

jesus, this thread is unreadible

Yep. I tried to change the subject. But most people just like pissing in each others' corn flakes.

The king of one liner hi-jacks here really just posted that. Good stuff.

jesus, this thread is unreadible

Yep. I tried to change the subject. But most people just like pissing in each others' corn flakes.

Of all the posters here. Fine...let's talk about those uniform rules....that'll get this thread back on track!!!!!!

I can only lead you horses to water.

 

[The Commish]

I can only lead you horses to water.

Let's do this...let's talk about the new uniform rules...you start

 

[The Commish]

How about the rumors about the B1G and B12 offering undisclosed schools in the ACC spots in their conferences. Are we allowed to talk about that in here Christo, decider of all things important and pertinent??Rumors from the B1G are UVA and either UNC or GT. Not sure about the B12.

 

[shader]

Possible rule changes for 2013:1. Intentional helmet-to-helmet contact: 15 yard penalty. Plus, if the hit occurs in the first half the player is ejected from the game. But if the hit occurs in the second half or OT, the player is ejected from the game and has to miss the first half of the next game. The 15 yard penalty is not reviewable but the ejection is reviewable.

This is going cause chaos. At least it's reviewable....but it's been called pretty inconsistently from what I saw, even with reviews later leading to suspensions. I'd hope they at least lean to a non-intentional call to start.

Yeah this could be ugly. I'm looking forward to seeing how it plays out.

 

[shader]

How about the rumors about the B1G and B12 offering undisclosed schools in the ACC spots in their conferences. Are we allowed to talk about that in here Christo, decider of all things important and pertinent??Rumors from the B1G are UVA and either UNC or GT. Not sure about the B12.

Virginia and Ga tech seem like perfect fits for the Big Ten.

 

[shader]

There's plenty of talk about the strength of the conference in the first couple pages, yet not one reference to how stupid it is to talk about that.

It's not like you should expect it though, Plasma. The last time we had this discussion when I went back and did my little exercise on how they treated the subject when the conference was better in football in 2006 told me everything I needed to know. Page upon page of people touting Big 10 conference pride even as far as multiple Michigan fans bragging about how they couldn't wait to see OSU pound Florida, followed by the cries of "caring about a conference is stupid" that magically became relevant after Michigan/OSU got pounded in their bowl games.

I'm not sure why the subject is being changed. I don't think I've ever admonished anyone for talking about the strength of teams in a conference...ever. I've always talked about how stupid it was for fans of other schools to pull for rivals or other teams in their conference. I've talked about how stupid it is for a fan base to be chanting conference nonsense instead of celebrating their team. I've never had a problem with people discussing the merits of teams within the conference.I'm pretty confident I could name the handful of posters who were doing what you claim, and I know at least one of them was doing so in a mocking fashion. I'd like to see the list of Michigan fans pulling for OSU though...I'm not saying you're lying, but I'll believe it when you show me.

You guys equate discussion of the conference and it's teams with conference pride. There are several posters in that very thread that aren't even fans of B1G schools contributing to the discussion and there's a TON of piling on teams when they lose with the mocking and jabbing expected from rivals. Nowhere do I see rivals pulling for each other to show conference unity. Nowhere do I see rivals hoping teams win OOC so the conference looks strong. Nowhere do I see fans of the crappy teams hoping on the conference bandwagon taking credit for others' success and assigning it to themselves. All THOSE things are what I talk about and generally mock.

To be fair, Alabama fans don't pull for Auburn in general. The Michigan OSU comparison is a poor example. I read Auburn boards after the NC game and they were catatonic. No celebrations.

Pick whatever "rivals" you want FWIW...I know several Auburn fans who took complete pride in the Alabama "championship" this year....they were all over my facebook page.

If love to find them. Care sharing the links? Also stop putting championship in quotes. It's annoying.

Yeah...I'm not sure I need you on my facebook page...sorry.ETA: You can go out to the ESPN and CBS message boards and find all the evidence you need though.

Don't worry I'm actually a pretty nice guy. Not really the stalker type. Plus I don't even have a Facebook account. So I'll take your word for it. Still never met an Auburn person who is happy about Bamas championship, but I suppose there's one of everything.

 

[The Commish]

There's plenty of talk about the strength of the conference in the first couple pages, yet not one reference to how stupid it is to talk about that.

It's not like you should expect it though, Plasma. The last time we had this discussion when I went back and did my little exercise on how they treated the subject when the conference was better in football in 2006 told me everything I needed to know. Page upon page of people touting Big 10 conference pride even as far as multiple Michigan fans bragging about how they couldn't wait to see OSU pound Florida, followed by the cries of "caring about a conference is stupid" that magically became relevant after Michigan/OSU got pounded in their bowl games.

I'm not sure why the subject is being changed. I don't think I've ever admonished anyone for talking about the strength of teams in a conference...ever. I've always talked about how stupid it was for fans of other schools to pull for rivals or other teams in their conference. I've talked about how stupid it is for a fan base to be chanting conference nonsense instead of celebrating their team. I've never had a problem with people discussing the merits of teams within the conference.I'm pretty confident I could name the handful of posters who were doing what you claim, and I know at least one of them was doing so in a mocking fashion. I'd like to see the list of Michigan fans pulling for OSU though...I'm not saying you're lying, but I'll believe it when you show me.

You guys equate discussion of the conference and it's teams with conference pride. There are several posters in that very thread that aren't even fans of B1G schools contributing to the discussion and there's a TON of piling on teams when they lose with the mocking and jabbing expected from rivals. Nowhere do I see rivals pulling for each other to show conference unity. Nowhere do I see rivals hoping teams win OOC so the conference looks strong. Nowhere do I see fans of the crappy teams hoping on the conference bandwagon taking credit for others' success and assigning it to themselves. All THOSE things are what I talk about and generally mock.

To be fair, Alabama fans don't pull for Auburn in general. The Michigan OSU comparison is a poor example. I read Auburn boards after the NC game and they were catatonic. No celebrations.

Pick whatever "rivals" you want FWIW...I know several Auburn fans who took complete pride in the Alabama "championship" this year....they were all over my facebook page.

If love to find them. Care sharing the links? Also stop putting championship in quotes. It's annoying.

Yeah...I'm not sure I need you on my facebook page...sorry.ETA: You can go out to the ESPN and CBS message boards and find all the evidence you need though.

Don't worry I'm actually a pretty nice guy. Not really the stalker type. Plus I don't even have a Facebook account. So I'll take your word for it. Still never met an Auburn person who is happy about Bamas championship, but I suppose there's one of everything.

You can go out to espn and cbs if you really want to see it but we should probably stop talking about this or the thread Nazis might get upset.

 

[PlasmaDogPlasma]

If there's one thing we need more of, it's huge game-altering judgement calls by college refs.

 

[gump]

@ByTimReynolds: AP Source: Miami has received notice of allegations from NCAA

@ByTimReynolds: AP Source: Notice of allegations against Miami includes the dreaded "lack of institutional control" charge.

University of Miami President Donna E. Shalala made this statement concerning the external Enforcement Review Report the NCAA issued earlier today regarding the improper handling of its investigation of the University of Miami.

"The University takes full responsibility for the conduct of its employees and student-athletes. Where the evidence of NCAA violations has been substantiated, we have self-imposed appropriate sanctions, including unilaterally eliminating once-in-a-lifetime opportunities for our students and coaches over the past two years, and disciplining and withholding players from competition.

"We believe strongly in the principles and values of fairness and due process. However, we have been wronged in this investigation, and we believe that this process must come to a swift resolution, which includes no additional punitive measures beyond those already self-imposed.

"In September 2010—two and a half years ago—the University of Miami advised the NCAA of allegations made by a convicted felon against former players and, at that time, we pledged our full cooperation with any investigation into the matter. One year later, in August 2011, when the NCAA's investigation into alleged rules violations was made public, I pledged we would 'vigorously pursue the truth, wherever that path may lead' and insisted upon 'complete, honest, and transparent cooperation with the NCAA from our staff and students.'

"The University of Miami has lived up to those promises, but sadly the NCAA has not lived up to their own core principles. The lengthy and already flawed investigation has demonstrated a disappointing pattern of unprofessional and unethical behavior. By the NCAA leadership's own admission, the University of Miami has suffered from inappropriate practices by NCAA staff. There have also been damaging leaks to the media of unproven charges. Regardless of where blame lies internally with the NCAA, even one individual, one act, one instance of malfeasance both taints the entire process and breaches the public's trust.

"There must be a strong sense of urgency to bring this to closure. Our dedicated staff and coaches, our outstanding student-athletes, and our supporters deserve nothing less."

 

[roadkill1292]

How about the rumors about the B1G and B12 offering undisclosed schools in the ACC spots in their conferences. Are we allowed to talk about that in here Christo, decider of all things important and pertinent??Rumors from the B1G are UVA and either UNC or GT. Not sure about the B12.

Virginia and Ga tech seem like perfect fits for the Big Ten.

I dunno. C-USA could use a presence in Atlanta.

 

[The Commish]

@ByTimReynolds: AP Source: Miami has received notice of allegations from NCAA

@ByTimReynolds: AP Source: Notice of allegations against Miami includes the dreaded "lack of institutional control" charge.

University of Miami President Donna E. Shalala made this statement concerning the external Enforcement Review Report the NCAA issued earlier today regarding the improper handling of its investigation of the University of Miami.

"The University takes full responsibility for the conduct of its employees and student-athletes. Where the evidence of NCAA violations has been substantiated, we have self-imposed appropriate sanctions, including unilaterally eliminating once-in-a-lifetime opportunities for our students and coaches over the past two years, and disciplining and withholding players from competition.

"We believe strongly in the principles and values of fairness and due process. However, we have been wronged in this investigation, and we believe that this process must come to a swift resolution, which includes no additional punitive measures beyond those already self-imposed.

"In September 2010—two and a half years ago—the University of Miami advised the NCAA of allegations made by a convicted felon against former players and, at that time, we pledged our full cooperation with any investigation into the matter. One year later, in August 2011, when the NCAA's investigation into alleged rules violations was made public, I pledged we would 'vigorously pursue the truth, wherever that path may lead' and insisted upon 'complete, honest, and transparent cooperation with the NCAA from our staff and students.'

"The University of Miami has lived up to those promises, but sadly the NCAA has not lived up to their own core principles. The lengthy and already flawed investigation has demonstrated a disappointing pattern of unprofessional and unethical behavior. By the NCAA leadership's own admission, the University of Miami has suffered from inappropriate practices by NCAA staff. There have also been damaging leaks to the media of unproven charges. Regardless of where blame lies internally with the NCAA, even one individual, one act, one instance of malfeasance both taints the entire process and breaches the public's trust.

"There must be a strong sense of urgency to bring this to closure. Our dedicated staff and coaches, our outstanding student-athletes, and our supporters deserve nothing less."

@ NCAAWhat a brutal group of idiots.

 

[fasteddie_21]

Can Miami just tell the NCAA to go #### themselves? I mean, what would the consequences be? Can the NCAA really keep them out of playing CFB and CBB, etc? I mean, there's no doubt that there was a lot of shady #### going on in Miami, but after the way the NCAA handled all of it, I don't blame Miami telling them to go get bent.Also, I think how this eventually plays out has huge bearing on both the Oregon 'situation' and the NCAA and it's relevance as a whole, going forward.

 

[FreeBaGeL]

Commish, hypothetical on the FCS/FBS thing.Elminating what we learned from the bowl games, if we went back in time to December 2nd, 2012, who would your choice for a 4-team playoff be?

 

[FreeBaGeL]

1. Intentional helmet-to-helmet contact: 15 yard penalty. Plus, if the hit occurs in the first half the player is ejected from the game. But if the hit occurs in the second half or OT, the player is ejected from the game and has to miss the first half of the next game. The 15 yard penalty is not reviewable but the ejection is reviewable.

This one seems especially scary. It seems that a good 20% of the time they call helmet-to-helmet in the NFL there actually wasn't any helmet to helmet contact at all. Another 40% of the time the contact is really initiated by the offensive player who ducks right into the helmet of a defensive player who has already committed low.It's brutal enough to penalize the defense in these situations, but now we're taking the massive step to ejections as well?

Disclaimer: Percentages are entirely made up.

5. Feigning injury: 10 second run-off.

Good, but I wonder how they will enforce this. How do they determine if someone is faking an injury?

6. No spiking the ball with less than 3 seconds on the play clock.

What's the reasoning behind this one?

I know it's for player protection, but I think they should get rid of the rule requiring a player to leave the field if his helmet comes off.

I like this rule. Too many players going lax on their chin straps. If you want to stay on the field, tighten that thing up.

 

[Slapdash]

Yeah, the helmet to helmet contact rule is terrible and there is going to be a lot of false ejections.

 

[The Commish]

Commish, hypothetical on the FCS/FBS thing.Elminating what we learned from the bowl games, if we went back in time to December 2nd, 2012, who would your choice for a 4-team playoff be?

Wow...no idea. I'd have to go back and look at all of it and have criteria in place to determine. I'm not sure I could answer this fully simply because I would have a legit SOS and MOV component. I'm not sure I could find that as a reliable stat. For sake of argument, if I fell back on "best teams in the country should be in the playoff" to simplify, I'd have to say Alabama, Texas A&M, Stanford and Florida maybe?? KSU and Oregon would probably be in the conversation as well.If I were to get a more comprehensive list of requirements, the list would probably look much different.

 

[FreeBaGeL]

Commish, hypothetical on the FCS/FBS thing.Elminating what we learned from the bowl games, if we went back in time to December 2nd, 2012, who would your choice for a 4-team playoff be?

Wow...no idea. I'd have to go back and look at all of it and have criteria in place to determine. I'm not sure I could answer this fully simply because I would have a legit SOS and MOV component. I'm not sure I could find that as a reliable stat. For sake of argument, if I fell back on "best teams in the country should be in the playoff" to simplify, I'd have to say Alabama, Texas A&M, Stanford and Florida maybe?? KSU and Oregon would probably be in the conversation as well.If I were to get a more comprehensive list of requirements, the list would probably look much different.

Here are the BCS rankings at that point, it may have some of the stuff you're talking about: http://espn.go.com/college-football/bcsI guess maybe a better question would be, if there were a 4-team playoff in 2012, who do you think would have been in it?

 

[Moe.]

Commish, hypothetical on the FCS/FBS thing.Elminating what we learned from the bowl games, if we went back in time to December 2nd, 2012, who would your choice for a 4-team playoff be?

Wow...no idea. I'd have to go back and look at all of it and have criteria in place to determine. I'm not sure I could answer this fully simply because I would have a legit SOS and MOV component. I'm not sure I could find that as a reliable stat. For sake of argument, if I fell back on "best teams in the country should be in the playoff" to simplify, I'd have to say Alabama, Texas A&M, Stanford and Florida maybe?? KSU and Oregon would probably be in the conversation as well.If I were to get a more comprehensive list of requirements, the list would probably look much different.

Here are the BCS rankings at that point, it may have some of the stuff you're talking about: http://espn.go.com/college-football/bcsI guess maybe a better question would be, if there were a 4-team playoff in 2012, who do you think would have been in it?

What's your point? As you know it would have been pretty much impossible to come up with a 4-team bracket that didn't include at least two schools that played an FCS team.

 

[The Commish]

Commish, hypothetical on the FCS/FBS thing.Elminating what we learned from the bowl games, if we went back in time to December 2nd, 2012, who would your choice for a 4-team playoff be?

Wow...no idea. I'd have to go back and look at all of it and have criteria in place to determine. I'm not sure I could answer this fully simply because I would have a legit SOS and MOV component. I'm not sure I could find that as a reliable stat. For sake of argument, if I fell back on "best teams in the country should be in the playoff" to simplify, I'd have to say Alabama, Texas A&M, Stanford and Florida maybe?? KSU and Oregon would probably be in the conversation as well.If I were to get a more comprehensive list of requirements, the list would probably look much different.

Here are the BCS rankings at that point, it may have some of the stuff you're talking about: http://espn.go.com/college-football/bcsI guess maybe a better question would be, if there were a 4-team playoff in 2012, who do you think would have been in it?

What are the criteria being used to determine the playoff? For simplicity sake, take the top four in the BCS rankings I guess. It's crap, but the best we have at the moment. What I'd like to see going forward is a focus on schedule (both SOS and MOV). I'd like to see rewards for better schedules and penalties for scheduling patsies. The part that I look forward to most is the "eye test" component, which the committee hopefully brings.

 

[FreeBaGeL]

Commish, hypothetical on the FCS/FBS thing.

Elminating what we learned from the bowl games, if we went back in time to December 2nd, 2012, who would your choice for a 4-team playoff be?

Wow...no idea. I'd have to go back and look at all of it and have criteria in place to determine. I'm not sure I could answer this fully simply because I would have a legit SOS and MOV component. I'm not sure I could find that as a reliable stat. For sake of argument, if I fell back on "best teams in the country should be in the playoff" to simplify, I'd have to say Alabama, Texas A&M, Stanford and Florida maybe?? KSU and Oregon would probably be in the conversation as well.If I were to get a more comprehensive list of requirements, the list would probably look much different.

Here are the BCS rankings at that point, it may have some of the stuff you're talking about: http://espn.go.com/college-football/bcsI guess maybe a better question would be, if there were a 4-team playoff in 2012, who do you think would have been in it?

What's your point? As you know it would have been pretty much impossible to come up with a 4-team bracket that didn't include at least two schools that played an FCS team.

I guess my point was, it's extremely likely that it would have been four of these five teams...Notre Dame

Alabama

Florida

Oregon

Kansas State

Notre Dame would have been a lock. The other four all played FCS teams. Most likely it would have been Notre Dame, Alabama, Florida, and Oregon, with KSU getting the shaft.

The point was, if you then looked at KSU and replaced Missouri State with South Alabama on their schedule, would it have affected that at all? I don't think there's any way you can say that it would, nor that it should have affected it at all. In comparison to the rest of their schedules, it makes absolutely zero difference in determining whether KSU deserves that spot over Oregon/Florida.

 

[Abraham]

Commish, hypothetical on the FCS/FBS thing.Elminating what we learned from the bowl games, if we went back in time to December 2nd, 2012, who would your choice for a 4-team playoff be?

Wow...no idea. I'd have to go back and look at all of it and have criteria in place to determine. I'm not sure I could answer this fully simply because I would have a legit SOS and MOV component. I'm not sure I could find that as a reliable stat. For sake of argument, if I fell back on "best teams in the country should be in the playoff" to simplify, I'd have to say Alabama, Texas A&M, Stanford and Florida maybe?? KSU and Oregon would probably be in the conversation as well.If I were to get a more comprehensive list of requirements, the list would probably look much different.

Here are the BCS rankings at that point, it may have some of the stuff you're talking about: http://espn.go.com/college-football/bcsI guess maybe a better question would be, if there were a 4-team playoff in 2012, who do you think would have been in it?

What are the criteria being used to determine the playoff? For simplicity sake, take the top four in the BCS rankings I guess. It's crap, but the best we have at the moment. What I'd like to see going forward is a focus on schedule (both SOS and MOV). I'd like to see rewards for better schedules and penalties for scheduling patsies. The part that I look forward to most is the "eye test" component, which the committee hopefully brings.

That would be great. But the penalties for scheduling cupcakes have to be severe enough that a loss is possibly less-punative. Put another way, let's say Bama plays the SEC and four OOC games against FBS schools. They go undefeated. Let's say Notre Dame plays its schedule and has no FBS OOC games. They go undefeated as well. And let's say Oklahoma plays no FBS OOC schools, loses the first week at Oregon (who goes 10-2) and then roundly beats everyone they play the rest of the way.Who is in the title game?

 

[Slapdash]

I think the four would have been: Bama, ND, Stanford, and Florida.

 

[The Commish]

Commish, hypothetical on the FCS/FBS thing.

Elminating what we learned from the bowl games, if we went back in time to December 2nd, 2012, who would your choice for a 4-team playoff be?

Wow...no idea. I'd have to go back and look at all of it and have criteria in place to determine. I'm not sure I could answer this fully simply because I would have a legit SOS and MOV component. I'm not sure I could find that as a reliable stat. For sake of argument, if I fell back on "best teams in the country should be in the playoff" to simplify, I'd have to say Alabama, Texas A&M, Stanford and Florida maybe?? KSU and Oregon would probably be in the conversation as well.If I were to get a more comprehensive list of requirements, the list would probably look much different.

Here are the BCS rankings at that point, it may have some of the stuff you're talking about: http://espn.go.com/college-football/bcsI guess maybe a better question would be, if there were a 4-team playoff in 2012, who do you think would have been in it?

What's your point? As you know it would have been pretty much impossible to come up with a 4-team bracket that didn't include at least two schools that played an FCS team.

I guess my point was, it's extremely likely that it would have been four of these five teams...Notre Dame

Alabama

Florida

Oregon

Kansas State

Notre Dame would have been a lock. The other four all played FCS teams. Most likely it would have been Notre Dame, Alabama, Florida, and Oregon, with KSU getting the shaft.

The point was, if you then looked at KSU and replaced Missouri State with South Alabama on their schedule, would it have affected that at all? I don't think there's any way you can say that it would, nor that it should have affected it at all. In comparison to the rest of their schedules, it makes absolutely zero difference in determining whether KSU deserves that spot over Oregon/Florida.

Until you know the formulas and how things will factor in, no, there is no way to say one way or the other if they would be affected.

 

[Moe.]

Commish, hypothetical on the FCS/FBS thing.

Elminating what we learned from the bowl games, if we went back in time to December 2nd, 2012, who would your choice for a 4-team playoff be?

Wow...no idea. I'd have to go back and look at all of it and have criteria in place to determine. I'm not sure I could answer this fully simply because I would have a legit SOS and MOV component. I'm not sure I could find that as a reliable stat. For sake of argument, if I fell back on "best teams in the country should be in the playoff" to simplify, I'd have to say Alabama, Texas A&M, Stanford and Florida maybe?? KSU and Oregon would probably be in the conversation as well.If I were to get a more comprehensive list of requirements, the list would probably look much different.

Here are the BCS rankings at that point, it may have some of the stuff you're talking about: http://espn.go.com/college-football/bcsI guess maybe a better question would be, if there were a 4-team playoff in 2012, who do you think would have been in it?

What's your point? As you know it would have been pretty much impossible to come up with a 4-team bracket that didn't include at least two schools that played an FCS team.

I guess my point was, it's extremely likely that it would have been four of these five teams...Notre Dame

Alabama

Florida

Oregon

Kansas State

Notre Dame would have been a lock. The other four all played FCS teams. Most likely it would have been Notre Dame, Alabama, Florida, and Oregon, with KSU getting the shaft.

The point was, if you then looked at KSU and replaced Missouri State with South Alabama on their schedule, would it have affected that at all? I don't think there's any way you can say that it would, nor that it should have affected it at all. In comparison to the rest of their schedules, it makes absolutely zero difference in determining whether KSU deserves that spot over Oregon/Florida.

I don't think there is any generalization to be taken from that. You are forgetting Stanford, who as far as I can tell is the only other top 15 team that didn't play an FCS school. At the time I would have said Oregon deserved a spot but after reading arguments others made in this thread I think Stanford would have been the better pick. I agree with you that as far as the big schools are concerned, the difference between a bad FBS team and a good FCS team aren't really significant as far as their chances of winning go. I don't think that whether or not a school played an FCS team should be the end all be all as far as placing them in a playoff is concerned, it should just be one of the many factors that the committee considers. There would be some situations (like the one you outlined above) where it wouldn't really matter, but it could still come into play. That's the beauty of having a committee that's full of humans with critical thinking skills, we don't need to come up with these hard and fast rules that they have to stick to, they can use their discretion based on the specifics of each situation.

 

[The Commish]

Commish, hypothetical on the FCS/FBS thing.

Elminating what we learned from the bowl games, if we went back in time to December 2nd, 2012, who would your choice for a 4-team playoff be?

Wow...no idea. I'd have to go back and look at all of it and have criteria in place to determine. I'm not sure I could answer this fully simply because I would have a legit SOS and MOV component. I'm not sure I could find that as a reliable stat. For sake of argument, if I fell back on "best teams in the country should be in the playoff" to simplify, I'd have to say Alabama, Texas A&M, Stanford and Florida maybe?? KSU and Oregon would probably be in the conversation as well.If I were to get a more comprehensive list of requirements, the list would probably look much different.

Here are the BCS rankings at that point, it may have some of the stuff you're talking about: http://espn.go.com/college-football/bcsI guess maybe a better question would be, if there were a 4-team playoff in 2012, who do you think would have been in it?

What are the criteria being used to determine the playoff? For simplicity sake, take the top four in the BCS rankings I guess. It's crap, but the best we have at the moment. What I'd like to see going forward is a focus on schedule (both SOS and MOV). I'd like to see rewards for better schedules and penalties for scheduling patsies. The part that I look forward to most is the "eye test" component, which the committee hopefully brings.

That would be great. But the penalties for scheduling cupcakes have to be severe enough that a loss is possibly less-punative. Put another way, let's say Bama plays the SEC and four OOC games against FBS schools. They go undefeated. Let's say Notre Dame plays its schedule and has no FBS OOC games. They go undefeated as well. And let's say Oklahoma plays no FBS OOC schools, loses the first week at Oregon (who goes 10-2) and then roundly beats everyone they play the rest of the way.Who is in the title game?

Absolutely...and we'd have to get away from the timing of the loss mattering. Today, a loss at the beginning of the season isn't close to being the same as one at the end of the season. I'd REALLY like to see what would happen if we flipped the current scheduling format and put all OOC games at the end of the year instead of the beginning.

 

[FreeBaGeL]

I'd REALLY like to see what would happen if we flipped the current scheduling format and put all OOC games at the end of the year instead of the beginning.

I don't mind the patsy games being early on, as it lets teams work out the kinks a bit and gives a better indication of who's really a better team when we get to the real matchups. I remember too many opening day Miami/FSU games where the winner was just whichever team could fumble fewer snaps. It didn't really give a good indication of which was a better team once they got those things ironed out a couple weeks in.That said, quite a few teams do play their "real" OOC games at the end. Clemson/South Carolina, Georgia/Georgia Tech, and Florida/FSU are all in the last week of the season.

 

[fasteddie_21]

Let me preface that this is the exception, not the rule when it comes to scheduling Div II teams...BUT, what about in cases like what happened to Oregon this year (I'm sure there are a handful of other big-time teams that this happened to this year alone), where Division I schools opt out of the contracted games? I mean, you can't penalize teams that had to scramble to fill those game dates with patsies, the same as having had them scheduled all along, right?What do you do in that case?

 

[The Commish]

Oklahoma is getting a hell of a recruiter in Montgomery

 

[Christo]

Oklahoma is getting a hell of a recruiter in Montgomery

They picked up 2 with the addition of Bedenbaugh too.

 

[Premier]

This is the greatest thing ever:http://m.deadspin.com/5988378/leaked-memo-how-texas-tech-could-craft-the-image-of-its-new-coach-and-become-the-hippest-school-in-the-game

 

[gump]

This is the greatest thing ever:http://m.deadspin.co...ool-in-the-game

Wow....they're going to put Kliff in an Under Armour hoodie and bring down Nike and Texas!

 

[gump]

FSU and Boise agree to a home and home in '19 and '20...

 

[Premier]

This is the greatest thing ever:http://m.deadspin.co...ool-in-the-game

Wow....they're going to put Kliff in an Under Armour hoodie and bring down Nike and Texas!

And then he's going to be invited to the Oscars.

 

[gump]

This is the greatest thing ever:

http://m.deadspin.co...ool-in-the-game

Wow....they're going to put Kliff in an Under Armour hoodie and bring down Nike and Texas!

And then he's going to be invited to the Oscars.

Probably dating Jennifer Lawrence by then.

 

[The Commish]

I get why Delaney's running the B1G from a money standpoint, but this dude is a blowhard. I wish he'd just shut up with this nonsense. I wouldn't mind seeing him go. Anyone been following the O'Bannon lawsuit?

 

[FreeBaGeL]

I get why Delaney's running the B1G from a money standpoint, but this dude is a blowhard. I wish he'd just shut up with this nonsense. I wouldn't mind seeing him go. Anyone been following the O'Bannon lawsuit?

He's bluffing.

 

[The Commish]

I get why Delaney's running the B1G from a money standpoint, but this dude is a blowhard. I wish he'd just shut up with this nonsense. I wouldn't mind seeing him go. Anyone been following the O'Bannon lawsuit?

He's bluffing.

If I had to bet, I'd bet he is, but it's very possible he really believes what he's saying. The problem is, I doubt the schools agree. It's probably one of the few ways he'd get fired from his position. I'm so tired of the guy...drives me nuts.

 

[The Commish]

Divisions almost settled in new B1G.

Looks like they're getting away from that stupid leaders/legends nonsense. It also looks like whoever wins the east wins the conference too. Not sure I like most of the talent in one division.

 

[Ramblin Wreck]

Divisions almost settled in new B1G.

Looks like they're getting away from that stupid leaders/legends nonsense. It also looks like whoever wins the east wins the conference too. Not sure I like most of the talent in one division.

Hasn't Wisconsin won three in a row?

 

[The Commish]

Divisions almost settled in new B1G.

Looks like they're getting away from that stupid leaders/legends nonsense. It also looks like whoever wins the east wins the conference too. Not sure I like most of the talent in one division.

Hasn't Wisconsin won three in a row?

forgot I was in the FFA and needed to add "will usually"...apologies

 

[Ramblin Wreck]

Divisions almost settled in new B1G.

Looks like they're getting away from that stupid leaders/legends nonsense. It also looks like whoever wins the east wins the conference too. Not sure I like most of the talent in one division.

Hasn't Wisconsin won three in a row?

forgot I was in the FFA and needed to add "will usually"...apologies

Well, the truth is the truth. You may as well have said it looks like Wisconsin or Ohio St will win it every year. Glad they are on opposite sides of the divisions.

 

[The Commish]

Divisions almost settled in new B1G.

Looks like they're getting away from that stupid leaders/legends nonsense. It also looks like whoever wins the east wins the conference too. Not sure I like most of the talent in one division.

Hasn't Wisconsin won three in a row?

forgot I was in the FFA and needed to add "will usually"...apologies

Well, the truth is the truth. You may as well have said it looks like Wisconsin or Ohio St will win it every year. Glad they are on opposite sides of the divisions.

Not sure what you're talking about here. What's the "truth"? The reality is, the teams in the east division have won 84 of the conference championships. The teams in the west division have won 51 with one of the biggest contributors to that 51 (Minny) not having won one since the 60s. I really didn't think it was all that controversial a statement

 

[BigJohn]

I get why Delaney's running the B1G from a money standpoint, but this dude is a blowhard. I wish he'd just shut up with this nonsense. I wouldn't mind seeing him go. Anyone been following the O'Bannon lawsuit?

The. Man. Is. An. Idiot.

 

[strykerpks]

Wisconsin vs Bama at Cowboys stadium in 2015