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

[Tiger Fan]

These schools are printing money now so saying you need the extra home game to help pay the bills is awfully disingenuous.

I can see the argument about not taking a home game experience away from the fans, but I have to think most fans would prefer to see you play a Clemson or Ok State in a home and home or at a neutral site rather than pounding the Citadel by 80. Who can even sit through those games?

of course they don't "need" the money, but when you can bring in an extra $5M plus to help fund things for the university, the president and powers that be defnitely intervene if you take their money away.

the only schools that have that luxury are the ones where they know they will sell out season tickets regardless

 

[Politician Spock]

These schools are printing money now so saying you need the extra home game to help pay the bills is awfully disingenuous.

I can see the argument about not taking a home game experience away from the fans, but I have to think most fans would prefer to see you play a Clemson or Ok State in a home and home or at a neutral site rather than pounding the Citadel by 80. Who can even sit through those games?

The Citadel makes more money playing that away game than they do playing a home game.

 

[Premier]

These schools are printing money now so saying you need the extra home game to help pay the bills is awfully disingenuous.

I can see the argument about not taking a home game experience away from the fans, but I have to think most fans would prefer to see you play a Clemson or Ok State in a home and home or at a neutral site rather than pounding the Citadel by 80. Who can even sit through those games?

of course they don't "need" the money, but when you can bring in an extra $5M plus to help fund things for the university, the president and powers that be defnitely intervene if you take their money away. the only schools that have that luxury are the ones where they know they will sell out season tickets regardless

That's fine. It's all going to change when the fifth seed learns it didn't make the 4 team tourney because it had Savannah State on its schedule.

 

[Ramblin Wreck]

These schools are printing money now so saying you need the extra home game to help pay the bills is awfully disingenuous.

I can see the argument about not taking a home game experience away from the fans, but I have to think most fans would prefer to see you play a Clemson or Ok State in a home and home or at a neutral site rather than pounding the Citadel by 80. Who can even sit through those games?

of course they don't "need" the money, but when you can bring in an extra $5M plus to help fund things for the university, the president and powers that be defnitely intervene if you take their money away.the only schools that have that luxury are the ones where they know they will sell out season tickets regardless

That's fine. It's all going to change when the fifth seed learns it didn't make the 4 team tourney because it had Savannah State on its schedule.

I doubt someone that doesn't have a Savannah St game or two is in position to make a four team playoff. When the committee puts a 9-3 team with a killer schedule in over an 11-1 team with some cupcakes then I'll believe it. Just don't see that happening.

 

[gump]

These schools are printing money now so saying you need the extra home game to help pay the bills is awfully disingenuous.

I can see the argument about not taking a home game experience away from the fans, but I have to think most fans would prefer to see you play a Clemson or Ok State in a home and home or at a neutral site rather than pounding the Citadel by 80. Who can even sit through those games?

of course they don't "need" the money, but when you can bring in an extra $5M plus to help fund things for the university, the president and powers that be defnitely intervene if you take their money away. the only schools that have that luxury are the ones where they know they will sell out season tickets regardless

That's fine. It's all going to change when the fifth seed learns it didn't make the 4 team tourney because it had Savannah State on its schedule.

If\when all conferences get to 10 good games....the number Saban keeps bringing up...those Savannah St games will still be there. But there will only be 2.

 

[Tiger Fan]

These schools are printing money now so saying you need the extra home game to help pay the bills is awfully disingenuous.

I can see the argument about not taking a home game experience away from the fans, but I have to think most fans would prefer to see you play a Clemson or Ok State in a home and home or at a neutral site rather than pounding the Citadel by 80. Who can even sit through those games?

of course they don't "need" the money, but when you can bring in an extra $5M plus to help fund things for the university, the president and powers that be defnitely intervene if you take their money away. the only schools that have that luxury are the ones where they know they will sell out season tickets regardless

That's fine. It's all going to change when the fifth seed learns it didn't make the 4 team tourney because it had Savannah State on its schedule.

that would be awesome

 

[Slapdash]

These schools are printing money now so saying you need the extra home game to help pay the bills is awfully disingenuous.

I can see the argument about not taking a home game experience away from the fans, but I have to think most fans would prefer to see you play a Clemson or Ok State in a home and home or at a neutral site rather than pounding the Citadel by 80. Who can even sit through those games?

of course they don't "need" the money, but when you can bring in an extra $5M plus to help fund things for the university, the president and powers that be defnitely intervene if you take their money away. the only schools that have that luxury are the ones where they know they will sell out season tickets regardless

That's fine. It's all going to change when the fifth seed learns it didn't make the 4 team tourney because it had Savannah State on its schedule.

I'd guess the committee is going to take the schedule as a whole instead of focusing on the weakest games like posters on the Internet do.

 

[cheese]

These schools are printing money now so saying you need the extra home game to help pay the bills is awfully disingenuous.

I can see the argument about not taking a home game experience away from the fans, but I have to think most fans would prefer to see you play a Clemson or Ok State in a home and home or at a neutral site rather than pounding the Citadel by 80. Who can even sit through those games?

of course they don't "need" the money, but when you can bring in an extra $5M plus to help fund things for the university, the president and powers that be defnitely intervene if you take their money away.the only schools that have that luxury are the ones where they know they will sell out season tickets regardless

That's fine. It's all going to change when the fifth seed learns it didn't make the 4 team tourney because it had Savannah State on its schedule.

If\when all conferences get to 10 good games....the number Saban keeps bringing up...those Savannah St games will still be there. But there will only be 2.

In that number, is he calling all conference games good games? Whether he should or not is a different debate, but if he is, that means playing 2 real teams out of 4. Doesn't seem that difficult even given the constraints of trying to play home games. H&H with 2 really good teams a yr, 2 buy games, 8 conference games leaves you with 7 home dates per yr. Now if he's saying playing the Indiana, Kentucky, Washington State's of the world don't count toward your 10, then thats a harder task.

 

[Tiger Fan]

cant wait for the SEC to have 3 teams in next year

 

[gump]

These schools are printing money now so saying you need the extra home game to help pay the bills is awfully disingenuous.

I can see the argument about not taking a home game experience away from the fans, but I have to think most fans would prefer to see you play a Clemson or Ok State in a home and home or at a neutral site rather than pounding the Citadel by 80. Who can even sit through those games?

of course they don't "need" the money, but when you can bring in an extra $5M plus to help fund things for the university, the president and powers that be defnitely intervene if you take their money away.the only schools that have that luxury are the ones where they know they will sell out season tickets regardless

That's fine. It's all going to change when the fifth seed learns it didn't make the 4 team tourney because it had Savannah State on its schedule.

If\when all conferences get to 10 good games....the number Saban keeps bringing up...those Savannah St games will still be there. But there will only be 2.

In that number, is he calling all conference games good games? Whether he should or not is a different debate, but if he is, that means playing 2 real teams out of 4. Doesn't seem that difficult even given the constraints of trying to play home games. H&H with 2 really good teams a yr, 2 buy games, 8 conference games leaves you with 7 home dates per yr. Now if he's saying playing the Indiana, Kentucky, Washington State's of the world don't count toward your 10, then thats a harder task.

Everyone refers to conference games as good ones....reference the Big 12s schedule strength rankings. Saban wants 9 conf games and 1 big OOC.

 

[Slapdash]

These schools are printing money now so saying you need the extra home game to help pay the bills is awfully disingenuous.

I can see the argument about not taking a home game experience away from the fans, but I have to think most fans would prefer to see you play a Clemson or Ok State in a home and home or at a neutral site rather than pounding the Citadel by 80. Who can even sit through those games?

of course they don't "need" the money, but when you can bring in an extra $5M plus to help fund things for the university, the president and powers that be defnitely intervene if you take their money away.the only schools that have that luxury are the ones where they know they will sell out season tickets regardless

That's fine. It's all going to change when the fifth seed learns it didn't make the 4 team tourney because it had Savannah State on its schedule.

If\when all conferences get to 10 good games....the number Saban keeps bringing up...those Savannah St games will still be there. But there will only be 2.

In that number, is he calling all conference games good games? Whether he should or not is a different debate, but if he is, that means playing 2 real teams out of 4. Doesn't seem that difficult even given the constraints of trying to play home games. H&H with 2 really good teams a yr, 2 buy games, 8 conference games leaves you with 7 home dates per yr. Now if he's saying playing the Indiana, Kentucky, Washington State's of the world don't count toward your 10, then thats a harder task.

Everyone refers to conference games as good ones....reference the Big 12s schedule strength rankings. Saban wants 9 conf games and 1 big OOC.

If Saban wants ten strong games so bad, maybe he should schedule them.

 

[Premier]

These schools are printing money now so saying you need the extra home game to help pay the bills is awfully disingenuous.

I can see the argument about not taking a home game experience away from the fans, but I have to think most fans would prefer to see you play a Clemson or Ok State in a home and home or at a neutral site rather than pounding the Citadel by 80. Who can even sit through those games?

of course they don't "need" the money, but when you can bring in an extra $5M plus to help fund things for the university, the president and powers that be defnitely intervene if you take their money away. the only schools that have that luxury are the ones where they know they will sell out season tickets regardless

That's fine. It's all going to change when the fifth seed learns it didn't make the 4 team tourney because it had Savannah State on its schedule.

I'd guess the committee is going to take the schedule as a whole instead of focusing on the weakest games like posters on the Internet do.

Yea of course they will. Who said anything otherwise.

 

[Slapdash]

These schools are printing money now so saying you need the extra home game to help pay the bills is awfully disingenuous.

I can see the argument about not taking a home game experience away from the fans, but I have to think most fans would prefer to see you play a Clemson or Ok State in a home and home or at a neutral site rather than pounding the Citadel by 80. Who can even sit through those games?

of course they don't "need" the money, but when you can bring in an extra $5M plus to help fund things for the university, the president and powers that be defnitely intervene if you take their money away. the only schools that have that luxury are the ones where they know they will sell out season tickets regardless

That's fine. It's all going to change when the fifth seed learns it didn't make the 4 team tourney because it had Savannah State on its schedule.

I'd guess the committee is going to take the schedule as a whole instead of focusing on the weakest games like posters on the Internet do.

Yea of course they will. Who said anything otherwise.

You did.

 

[timschochet]

So play North Texas. Play Western Kentucky or Buffalo. Play whatever lower rated FBS schools you want. Just stop playing non-FBS opponents.

 

[whoknew]

So play North Texas. Play Western Kentucky or Buffalo. Play whatever lower rated FBS schools you want. Just stop playing non-FBS opponents.

Why do you care whether a team plays the 108th ranked FBS team v a top 20 FCS team?

Also - Michigan plays App State in 2014. You telling me you don't want to see that game?

 

[Ramblin Wreck]

So play North Texas. Play Western Kentucky or Buffalo. Play whatever lower rated FBS schools you want. Just stop playing non-FBS opponents.

There's no difference in low end FBS schools and FCS teams. In fact, many of the FCS teams are actually better.

 

[Politician Spock]

These schools are printing money now so saying you need the extra home game to help pay the bills is awfully disingenuous.

I can see the argument about not taking a home game experience away from the fans, but I have to think most fans would prefer to see you play a Clemson or Ok State in a home and home or at a neutral site rather than pounding the Citadel by 80. Who can even sit through those games?

of course they don't "need" the money, but when you can bring in an extra $5M plus to help fund things for the university, the president and powers that be defnitely intervene if you take their money away.the only schools that have that luxury are the ones where they know they will sell out season tickets regardless

That's fine. It's all going to change when the fifth seed learns it didn't make the 4 team tourney because it had Savannah State on its schedule.

I'd guess the committee is going to take the schedule as a whole instead of focusing on the weakest games like posters on the Internet do.

Yea of course they will. Who said anything otherwise.

You did.

I bolded and underlined where he did it.

 

[cheese]

It's getting harder every year to get a WKY or Buffalo to just take a buy game. They have been getting 2 for 1's and even H&H's with BCS teams. Not with Alabama, but not everyone can be Alabama.

FCS teams will always take the payday.

 

[Premier]

These schools are printing money now so saying you need the extra home game to help pay the bills is awfully disingenuous.

I can see the argument about not taking a home game experience away from the fans, but I have to think most fans would prefer to see you play a Clemson or Ok State in a home and home or at a neutral site rather than pounding the Citadel by 80. Who can even sit through those games?

of course they don't "need" the money, but when you can bring in an extra $5M plus to help fund things for the university, the president and powers that be defnitely intervene if you take their money away.the only schools that have that luxury are the ones where they know they will sell out season tickets regardless

That's fine. It's all going to change when the fifth seed learns it didn't make the 4 team tourney because it had Savannah State on its schedule.

I'd guess the committee is going to take the schedule as a whole instead of focusing on the weakest games like posters on the Internet do.

Yea of course they will. Who said anything otherwise.

You did.

I bolded and underlined where he did it.

You guys really aren't very smart.

 

[The Commish]

Just separate from the NCAA...stop pretending this isn't a business and dump all the revenues into a huge pool ala the NFL and be done with it. That gets us away from hiding behind the "loss of revenue" argument. It wouldn't matter where you played. Cut yourself off from the "lesser" conferences and move on and stop with the pretending.

 

[timschochet]

So play North Texas. Play Western Kentucky or Buffalo. Play whatever lower rated FBS schools you want. Just stop playing non-FBS opponents.

There's no difference in low end FBS schools and FCS teams. In fact, many of the FCS teams are actually better.

Could be true, but there needs to be a cutoff somewhere, and this is the logical place. My point is that Alabama, LSU, and Florida et al compete year in and year out to be in the National Championship game. If along the way they beat the Citadel by 60 points, that shouldn't contribute to their record. It's a meaningless accomplishment. The BCS should simply ignore that game as if it had never taken place.

 

[Politician Spock]

These schools are printing money now so saying you need the extra home game to help pay the bills is awfully disingenuous.

I can see the argument about not taking a home game experience away from the fans, but I have to think most fans would prefer to see you play a Clemson or Ok State in a home and home or at a neutral site rather than pounding the Citadel by 80. Who can even sit through those games?

of course they don't "need" the money, but when you can bring in an extra $5M plus to help fund things for the university, the president and powers that be defnitely intervene if you take their money away.the only schools that have that luxury are the ones where they know they will sell out season tickets regardless

That's fine. It's all going to change when the fifth seed learns it didn't make the 4 team tourney because it had Savannah State on its schedule.

I'd guess the committee is going to take the schedule as a whole instead of focusing on the weakest games like posters on the Internet do.

Yea of course they will. Who said anything otherwise.

You did.

I bolded and underlined where he did it.

You guys really aren't very smart.

If you had said, "it's all going to change when the fifth seed learns it didn't make the 4 team tourney because it had a weaker schedule", then I would agree with you.

But when you say, "it's all going to change when the fifth seed learns it didn't make the 4 team tourney because it had Savannah State on its schedule", you're focusing on the weakest game.

 

[cheese]

Just separate from the NCAA...stop pretending this isn't a business and dump all the revenues into a huge pool ala the NFL and be done with it. That gets us away from hiding behind the "loss of revenue" argument. It wouldn't matter where you played. Cut yourself off from the "lesser" conferences and move on and stop with the pretending.

Pretty terrible idea IMO, but I'm very biased. As a fan of a lesser conference team, why would I watch whatever league you are forming?

Those teams still have fans and churn out students that follow college football.

 

[Ramblin Wreck]

So play North Texas. Play Western Kentucky or Buffalo. Play whatever lower rated FBS schools you want. Just stop playing non-FBS opponents.

There's no difference in low end FBS schools and FCS teams. In fact, many of the FCS teams are actually better.

Could be true, but there needs to be a cutoff somewhere, and this is the logical place. My point is that Alabama, LSU, and Florida et al compete year in and year out to be in the National Championship game. If along the way they beat the Citadel by 60 points, that shouldn't contribute to their record. It's a meaningless accomplishment. The BCS should simply ignore that game as if it had never taken place.

I'm pretty sure no one has ever made the BCS championship because of beating the worst team on their schedule.

 

[timschochet]

So play North Texas. Play Western Kentucky or Buffalo. Play whatever lower rated FBS schools you want. Just stop playing non-FBS opponents.

There's no difference in low end FBS schools and FCS teams. In fact, many of the FCS teams are actually better.

Could be true, but there needs to be a cutoff somewhere, and this is the logical place. My point is that Alabama, LSU, and Florida et al compete year in and year out to be in the National Championship game. If along the way they beat the Citadel by 60 points, that shouldn't contribute to their record. It's a meaningless accomplishment. The BCS should simply ignore that game as if it had never taken place.

I'm pretty sure no one has ever made the BCS championship because of beating the worst team on their schedule.

It contributes. Every win contributes.

 

[The Commish]

Just separate from the NCAA...stop pretending this isn't a business and dump all the revenues into a huge pool ala the NFL and be done with it. That gets us away from hiding behind the "loss of revenue" argument. It wouldn't matter where you played. Cut yourself off from the "lesser" conferences and move on and stop with the pretending.

Pretty terrible idea IMO, but I'm very biased. As a fan of a lesser conference team, why would I watch whatever league you are forming?

Those teams still have fans and churn out students that follow college football.

I'm not sure I can answer that for you. Only you'd be able to answer it. Why do you watch it now? Is it because these BCS teams schedule FCS schools or schools from non-BCS conferences? I watch the games because I like football and creating the various "leagues" really wouldn't change that for me personally. I go to more FCS games than anything.

 

[Premier]

These schools are printing money now so saying you need the extra home game to help pay the bills is awfully disingenuous.

I can see the argument about not taking a home game experience away from the fans, but I have to think most fans would prefer to see you play a Clemson or Ok State in a home and home or at a neutral site rather than pounding the Citadel by 80. Who can even sit through those games?

of course they don't "need" the money, but when you can bring in an extra $5M plus to help fund things for the university, the president and powers that be defnitely intervene if you take their money away.the only schools that have that luxury are the ones where they know they will sell out season tickets regardless

That's fine. It's all going to change when the fifth seed learns it didn't make the 4 team tourney because it had Savannah State on its schedule.

I'd guess the committee is going to take the schedule as a whole instead of focusing on the weakest games like posters on the Internet do.

Yea of course they will. Who said anything otherwise.

You did.

I bolded and underlined where he did it.

You guys really aren't very smart.

If you had said, "it's all going to change when the fifth seed learns it didn't make the 4 team tourney because it had a weaker schedule", then I would agree with you.

But when you say, "it's all going to change when the fifth seed learns it didn't make the 4 team tourney because it had Savannah State on its schedule", you're focusing on the weakest game.

Oh. I guess the phrase "write at a third grade level" is true.

 

[cheese]

Just separate from the NCAA...stop pretending this isn't a business and dump all the revenues into a huge pool ala the NFL and be done with it. That gets us away from hiding behind the "loss of revenue" argument. It wouldn't matter where you played. Cut yourself off from the "lesser" conferences and move on and stop with the pretending.

Pretty terrible idea IMO, but I'm very biased. As a fan of a lesser conference team, why would I watch whatever league you are forming?

Those teams still have fans and churn out students that follow college football.

I'm not sure I can answer that for you. Only you'd be able to answer it. Why do you watch it now? Is it because these BCS teams schedule FCS schools or schools from non-BCS conferences? I watch the games because I like football and creating the various "leagues" really wouldn't change that for me personally. I go to more FCS games than anything.

I watch now because of a connection to the sport through my alma mater. I watch all of my teams games and a lot of other games for their small amount of impact on my team.

 

[Ramblin Wreck]

So play North Texas. Play Western Kentucky or Buffalo. Play whatever lower rated FBS schools you want. Just stop playing non-FBS opponents.

There's no difference in low end FBS schools and FCS teams. In fact, many of the FCS teams are actually better.

Could be true, but there needs to be a cutoff somewhere, and this is the logical place. My point is that Alabama, LSU, and Florida et al compete year in and year out to be in the National Championship game. If along the way they beat the Citadel by 60 points, that shouldn't contribute to their record. It's a meaningless accomplishment. The BCS should simply ignore that game as if it had never taken place.

I'm pretty sure no one has ever made the BCS championship because of beating the worst team on their schedule.

It contributes. Every win contributes.

LOL

 

[The Commish]

Just separate from the NCAA...stop pretending this isn't a business and dump all the revenues into a huge pool ala the NFL and be done with it. That gets us away from hiding behind the "loss of revenue" argument. It wouldn't matter where you played. Cut yourself off from the "lesser" conferences and move on and stop with the pretending.

Pretty terrible idea IMO, but I'm very biased. As a fan of a lesser conference team, why would I watch whatever league you are forming?

Those teams still have fans and churn out students that follow college football.

I'm not sure I can answer that for you. Only you'd be able to answer it. Why do you watch it now? Is it because these BCS teams schedule FCS schools or schools from non-BCS conferences? I watch the games because I like football and creating the various "leagues" really wouldn't change that for me personally. I go to more FCS games than anything.

I watch now because of a connection to the sport through my alma mater. I watch all of my teams games and a lot of other games for their small amount of impact on my team.

Then I'm not sure there's a problem...you can continue to do that if you want. It will just be different games than what you watch today.

 

[cheese]

Just separate from the NCAA...stop pretending this isn't a business and dump all the revenues into a huge pool ala the NFL and be done with it. That gets us away from hiding behind the "loss of revenue" argument. It wouldn't matter where you played. Cut yourself off from the "lesser" conferences and move on and stop with the pretending.

Pretty terrible idea IMO, but I'm very biased. As a fan of a lesser conference team, why would I watch whatever league you are forming?

Those teams still have fans and churn out students that follow college football.

I'm not sure I can answer that for you. Only you'd be able to answer it. Why do you watch it now? Is it because these BCS teams schedule FCS schools or schools from non-BCS conferences? I watch the games because I like football and creating the various "leagues" really wouldn't change that for me personally. I go to more FCS games than anything.

To your second point, I might still go watch my school if they were in FCS, maybe not. Most wouldn't. I sure as heck wouldn't spend my Saturdays watching FBS teams that essentially kicked us out. So you crush the brand of the schools that move down and lose overall viewers for the "bigger" conferences.

 

[cheese]

Just separate from the NCAA...stop pretending this isn't a business and dump all the revenues into a huge pool ala the NFL and be done with it. That gets us away from hiding behind the "loss of revenue" argument. It wouldn't matter where you played. Cut yourself off from the "lesser" conferences and move on and stop with the pretending.

Pretty terrible idea IMO, but I'm very biased. As a fan of a lesser conference team, why would I watch whatever league you are forming?

Those teams still have fans and churn out students that follow college football.

I'm not sure I can answer that for you. Only you'd be able to answer it. Why do you watch it now? Is it because these BCS teams schedule FCS schools or schools from non-BCS conferences? I watch the games because I like football and creating the various "leagues" really wouldn't change that for me personally. I go to more FCS games than anything.

I watch now because of a connection to the sport through my alma mater. I watch all of my teams games and a lot of other games for their small amount of impact on my team.

Then I'm not sure there's a problem...you can continue to do that if you want. It will just be different games than what you watch today.

Right. But what fans does the SEC or B10 or ACC or any other conference gain by splitting to offset all the MAC, AAC, MWC, etc fans that no longer care about the bigger conference games?

 

[Christo]

So play North Texas. Play Western Kentucky or Buffalo. Play whatever lower rated FBS schools you want. Just stop playing non-FBS opponents.

Do you think before you post? There are some decent FCS teams out there. Just look at last year's final Sagarin. Plenty of FCS ahead of FBS. So just throwing out FBS v FCS doesn't address the relative strength of opponents.

Montana State, Eastern Washington, South Dakota State, Georgia Southern, Sam Houston State & North Dakota State were ranked ahead of the three teams you listed. Another 13 FCS teams were ranked ahead of North Texas. And another 5 were ranked ahead of Buffalo.

 

[Politician Spock]

Just separate from the NCAA...stop pretending this isn't a business and dump all the revenues into a huge pool ala the NFL and be done with it. That gets us away from hiding behind the "loss of revenue" argument. It wouldn't matter where you played. Cut yourself off from the "lesser" conferences and move on and stop with the pretending.

There's a chance that what is formed would eventually turn into the NFL's psuedo equivalent of MLB's AAA leagues, just without the teams being associated to a specific major club. Instead of being drafted before playing professional minor league ball, you get drafted after playing professional minor league ball.

Perhaps if MLB had their draft occur after players play professional minor league ball, people would start to give a crap who wins AAA league championships.

Or perhaps the opposite occurs. Eventually this new NCAA business formation loses it's luster because people realize it's not much different than who wins the AAA league championships.

There's a lot of different directions it could go in with such a significant change to the system.

 

[Christo]

Just separate from the NCAA...stop pretending this isn't a business and dump all the revenues into a huge pool ala the NFL and be done with it. That gets us away from hiding behind the "loss of revenue" argument. It wouldn't matter where you played. Cut yourself off from the "lesser" conferences and move on and stop with the pretending.

That would be nice but for the fact that it would be like herding cats.

 

[Slapdash]

These schools are printing money now so saying you need the extra home game to help pay the bills is awfully disingenuous.

I can see the argument about not taking a home game experience away from the fans, but I have to think most fans would prefer to see you play a Clemson or Ok State in a home and home or at a neutral site rather than pounding the Citadel by 80. Who can even sit through those games?

of course they don't "need" the money, but when you can bring in an extra $5M plus to help fund things for the university, the president and powers that be defnitely intervene if you take their money away.the only schools that have that luxury are the ones where they know they will sell out season tickets regardless

That's fine. It's all going to change when the fifth seed learns it didn't make the 4 team tourney because it had Savannah State on its schedule.

I'd guess the committee is going to take the schedule as a whole instead of focusing on the weakest games like posters on the Internet do.

Yea of course they will. Who said anything otherwise.

You did.

I bolded and underlined where he did it.

You guys really aren't very smart.

 

[Christo]

So play North Texas. Play Western Kentucky or Buffalo. Play whatever lower rated FBS schools you want. Just stop playing non-FBS opponents.

There's no difference in low end FBS schools and FCS teams. In fact, many of the FCS teams are actually better.

Could be true, but there needs to be a cutoff somewhere, and this is the logical place. My point is that Alabama, LSU, and Florida et al compete year in and year out to be in the National Championship game. If along the way they beat the Citadel by 60 points, that shouldn't contribute to their record. It's a meaningless accomplishment. The BCS should simply ignore that game as if it had never taken place.

I'm pretty sure no one has ever made the BCS championship because of beating the worst team on their schedule.

It contributes. Every win contributes.

LOL

He is right to the extent the first thing people see is the overall record. But he's nuts if he thinks that it makes a difference whether the 60 point win came over Buffalo as opposed to Chattanooga.

 

[timschochet]

interested quotes from saban re: scheduling FBS schools - http://www.saturdaydownsouth.com/2013/saban-fcs-opponents/

You're listing exceptions. In general, FBS schools are distinctly better.

I wouldn't care about this except for how a teams record helps determine its ranking at the end of the year. If Alabama has 12 wins, and Oklahoma has 12 wins, and all things are equal except that one of those 12 wins was the Tide beating the crap out of the Furman Paladins, then Alabama should be regarded as only having 11 wins.

If we can get 10 quality opponents on our schedule look, Ive said this before, nobody wants to hear this, but I was in the NFL for eight years where every team you played was in the NFL. So if somebody wants to take the leadership and say, Okay, here are the five conferences that are the top conferences, and were going to play all our games amongst those people, Id be fine with that. But until somebody says that, its going to be impossible to schedule all your games with those teams. So we will have to continue to play some of those games. Now, do I think thats what the fans want to see? Probably not. Its a great experience for those players that are going to have the opportunity to play at Alabama this year. Its a great experience for them. Im not trying to take that away from them. But I think in the world that we live in, it is impossible to schedule more than 10 games with real quality opponents. Its very difficult. Its very difficult from a financial business standpoint because everybody wants to play more home games for business reasons, which means financial reasons. The more games you play with quality opponents, youre going to have to play home and home. So youre going to have less home games. Theres a lot of issues involved in all that. Its not all about just what the coach wants to do. Its about the business of college football. So I dont feel responsible to have to make that decision, so I dont really feel comfortable answering that question.

So play North Texas. Play Western Kentucky or Buffalo. Play whatever lower rated FBS schools you want. Just stop playing non-FBS opponents.

Do you think before you post? There are some decent FCS teams out there. Just look at last year's final Sagarin. Plenty of FCS ahead of FBS. So just throwing out FBS v FCS doesn't address the relative strength of opponents.Montana State, Eastern Washington, South Dakota State, Georgia Southern, Sam Houston State & North Dakota State were ranked ahead of the three teams you listed. Another 13 FCS teams were ranked ahead of North Texas. And another 5 were ranked ahead of Buffalo.

 

[The Commish]

Just separate from the NCAA...stop pretending this isn't a business and dump all the revenues into a huge pool ala the NFL and be done with it. That gets us away from hiding behind the "loss of revenue" argument. It wouldn't matter where you played. Cut yourself off from the "lesser" conferences and move on and stop with the pretending.

Pretty terrible idea IMO, but I'm very biased. As a fan of a lesser conference team, why would I watch whatever league you are forming?

Those teams still have fans and churn out students that follow college football.

I'm not sure I can answer that for you. Only you'd be able to answer it. Why do you watch it now? Is it because these BCS teams schedule FCS schools or schools from non-BCS conferences? I watch the games because I like football and creating the various "leagues" really wouldn't change that for me personally. I go to more FCS games than anything.

I watch now because of a connection to the sport through my alma mater. I watch all of my teams games and a lot of other games for their small amount of impact on my team.

Then I'm not sure there's a problem...you can continue to do that if you want. It will just be different games than what you watch today.

Right. But what fans does the SEC or B10 or ACC or any other conference gain by splitting to offset all the MAC, AAC, MWC, etc fans that no longer care about the bigger conference games?

I'm not sure it's necessary. Meaning, I'm not sure there are enough folks with your approach that would cause a noticeable difference. I could be wrong.

 

[The Commish]

Just separate from the NCAA...stop pretending this isn't a business and dump all the revenues into a huge pool ala the NFL and be done with it. That gets us away from hiding behind the "loss of revenue" argument. It wouldn't matter where you played. Cut yourself off from the "lesser" conferences and move on and stop with the pretending.

That would be nice but for the fact that it would be like herding cats.

If a guy can do it in Mallory Square every night at sunset I think money can do it for the BCS cats

 

[cheese]

Just separate from the NCAA...stop pretending this isn't a business and dump all the revenues into a huge pool ala the NFL and be done with it. That gets us away from hiding behind the "loss of revenue" argument. It wouldn't matter where you played. Cut yourself off from the "lesser" conferences and move on and stop with the pretending.

Pretty terrible idea IMO, but I'm very biased. As a fan of a lesser conference team, why would I watch whatever league you are forming?

Those teams still have fans and churn out students that follow college football.

I'm not sure I can answer that for you. Only you'd be able to answer it. Why do you watch it now? Is it because these BCS teams schedule FCS schools or schools from non-BCS conferences? I watch the games because I like football and creating the various "leagues" really wouldn't change that for me personally. I go to more FCS games than anything.

I watch now because of a connection to the sport through my alma mater. I watch all of my teams games and a lot of other games for their small amount of impact on my team.

Then I'm not sure there's a problem...you can continue to do that if you want. It will just be different games than what you watch today.

Right. But what fans does the SEC or B10 or ACC or any other conference gain by splitting to offset all the MAC, AAC, MWC, etc fans that no longer care about the bigger conference games?

I'm not sure it's necessary. Meaning, I'm not sure there are enough folks with your approach that would cause a noticeable difference. I could be wrong.

You think that because you think those teams don't have fans or because you think those teams fans will start following the higher league without their team in it?

 

[The Commish]

Just separate from the NCAA...stop pretending this isn't a business and dump all the revenues into a huge pool ala the NFL and be done with it. That gets us away from hiding behind the "loss of revenue" argument. It wouldn't matter where you played. Cut yourself off from the "lesser" conferences and move on and stop with the pretending.

Pretty terrible idea IMO, but I'm very biased. As a fan of a lesser conference team, why would I watch whatever league you are forming?

Those teams still have fans and churn out students that follow college football.

I'm not sure I can answer that for you. Only you'd be able to answer it. Why do you watch it now? Is it because these BCS teams schedule FCS schools or schools from non-BCS conferences? I watch the games because I like football and creating the various "leagues" really wouldn't change that for me personally. I go to more FCS games than anything.

I watch now because of a connection to the sport through my alma mater. I watch all of my teams games and a lot of other games for their small amount of impact on my team.

Then I'm not sure there's a problem...you can continue to do that if you want. It will just be different games than what you watch today.

Right. But what fans does the SEC or B10 or ACC or any other conference gain by splitting to offset all the MAC, AAC, MWC, etc fans that no longer care about the bigger conference games?

I'm not sure it's necessary. Meaning, I'm not sure there are enough folks with your approach that would cause a noticeable difference. I could be wrong.

You think that because you think those teams don't have fans or because you think those teams fans will start following the higher league without their team in it?

I think most (or a lot of) folks watch football because it's football. I have a lot of App State fans as friend and now UNCC has a football team, but that doesn't preclude them from following the BCS because they love college football. So if I had to select from your options above, I'd have to go with "watching the higher league without their team in it" I guess. The way things are today, the reality is there are only a handful of teams that will be in consideration for the "championship" anyway even if they are a BCS school. My team's not had a shot of being in consideration the last several years, but that doesn't prevent me from watching the season as a whole.

 

[Ramblin Wreck]

Just separate from the NCAA...stop pretending this isn't a business and dump all the revenues into a huge pool ala the NFL and be done with it. That gets us away from hiding behind the "loss of revenue" argument. It wouldn't matter where you played. Cut yourself off from the "lesser" conferences and move on and stop with the pretending.

Pretty terrible idea IMO, but I'm very biased. As a fan of a lesser conference team, why would I watch whatever league you are forming?

Those teams still have fans and churn out students that follow college football.

I'm not sure I can answer that for you. Only you'd be able to answer it. Why do you watch it now? Is it because these BCS teams schedule FCS schools or schools from non-BCS conferences? I watch the games because I like football and creating the various "leagues" really wouldn't change that for me personally. I go to more FCS games than anything.

I watch now because of a connection to the sport through my alma mater. I watch all of my teams games and a lot of other games for their small amount of impact on my team.

Then I'm not sure there's a problem...you can continue to do that if you want. It will just be different games than what you watch today.

Right. But what fans does the SEC or B10 or ACC or any other conference gain by splitting to offset all the MAC, AAC, MWC, etc fans that no longer care about the bigger conference games?

I'm not sure it's necessary. Meaning, I'm not sure there are enough folks with your approach that would cause a noticeable difference. I could be wrong.

If the power five broke away and only played each, you're going to have a lot of schools that are used to 8-4 seasons now having 6-6 seasons and a lot of teams that normally celebrate 6 wins going 2-10 every year. Fan support might eventually fade except for the truly elite schools.

 

[Tom Servo]

These schools are printing money now so saying you need the extra home game to help pay the bills is awfully disingenuous.

I can see the argument about not taking a home game experience away from the fans, but I have to think most fans would prefer to see you play a Clemson or Ok State in a home and home or at a neutral site rather than pounding the Citadel by 80. Who can even sit through those games?

of course they don't "need" the money, but when you can bring in an extra $5M plus to help fund things for the university, the president and powers that be defnitely intervene if you take their money away.the only schools that have that luxury are the ones where they know they will sell out season tickets regardless

That's fine. It's all going to change when the fifth seed learns it didn't make the 4 team tourney because it had Savannah State on its schedule.

I'd guess the committee is going to take the schedule as a whole instead of focusing on the weakest games like posters on the Internet do.

Yea of course they will. Who said anything otherwise.

You did.

I bolded and underlined where he did it.

You guys really aren't very smart.

Stop stealing Christo's shtick.

 

[Tom Servo]

If - as many have suggested (advocated?) - the big football schools separate into 4-16 team conferences, does this mean that all of the OOC games come from within that pool? I mean, playing 8 or 9 out of 15 in your conference of the future is going to leave you 3-4 games to choose some tasty matchups from the other 48 teams, would it not? Or would we just see more of the same? Just spitballing here...

 

[timschochet]

It's an issue of entertainment too. I turn on TV on a Saturday morning in September. I'm hungry for college football because I've had to wait so many months for it. I WANT to watch Alabama and LSU and Florida- these are the best teams in the nation, so I'm eager to see them play. But what do I get? Alabama vs. Georgia St. LSU vs. the Citadel. Etc.

It's boring. I turn it off after the 1st quarter. And all too often, almost every matchup in September is some sort of wipeout. There's very little entertaining football until later in the season. I want to see intriguing matchups from day 1.

 

[Slapdash]

These schools are printing money now so saying you need the extra home game to help pay the bills is awfully disingenuous.

I can see the argument about not taking a home game experience away from the fans, but I have to think most fans would prefer to see you play a Clemson or Ok State in a home and home or at a neutral site rather than pounding the Citadel by 80. Who can even sit through those games?

of course they don't "need" the money, but when you can bring in an extra $5M plus to help fund things for the university, the president and powers that be defnitely intervene if you take their money away.the only schools that have that luxury are the ones where they know they will sell out season tickets regardless

That's fine. It's all going to change when the fifth seed learns it didn't make the 4 team tourney because it had Savannah State on its schedule.

I'd guess the committee is going to take the schedule as a whole instead of focusing on the weakest games like posters on the Internet do.

Yea of course they will. Who said anything otherwise.

You did.

I bolded and underlined where he did it.

You guys really aren't very smart.

Stop stealing Christo's shtick.

 

[The Commish]

It's an issue of entertainment too. I turn on TV on a Saturday morning in September. I'm hungry for college football because I've had to wait so many months for it. I WANT to watch Alabama and LSU and Florida- these are the best teams in the nation, so I'm eager to see them play. But what do I get? Alabama vs. Georgia St. LSU vs. the Citadel. Etc.

It's boring. I turn it off after the 1st quarter. And all too often, almost every matchup in September is some sort of wipeout. There's very little entertaining football until later in the season. I want to see intriguing matchups from day 1.

And you believe Alabama playing Central Michigan is intriguing? You've arbitrarily drawn a line at FCS schools but it's been shown to you that this might not be the best approach. The reality is, there is little difference between the worst division 1 schools and the best/better FCS schools.

 

[Slapdash]

It's an issue of entertainment too. I turn on TV on a Saturday morning in September. I'm hungry for college football because I've had to wait so many months for it. I WANT to watch Alabama and LSU and Florida- these are the best teams in the nation, so I'm eager to see them play. But what do I get? Alabama vs. Georgia St. LSU vs. the Citadel. Etc.

It's boring. I turn it off after the 1st quarter. And all too often, almost every matchup in September is some sort of wipeout. There's very little entertaining football until later in the season. I want to see intriguing matchups from day 1.

Yet none of the schools you mentioned are playing FCS opponents in September. Instead there are games like LSU @ Georgia, Bama @ A&M, and UF @ Miami. If you find those boring, maybe football isn't the sport for you.

Please actually know what the #### you are talking about before polluting this thread.

 

[timschochet]

It's an issue of entertainment too. I turn on TV on a Saturday morning in September. I'm hungry for college football because I've had to wait so many months for it. I WANT to watch Alabama and LSU and Florida- these are the best teams in the nation, so I'm eager to see them play. But what do I get? Alabama vs. Georgia St. LSU vs. the Citadel. Etc.

It's boring. I turn it off after the 1st quarter. And all too often, almost every matchup in September is some sort of wipeout. There's very little entertaining football until later in the season. I want to see intriguing matchups from day 1.

And you believe Alabama playing Central Michigan is intriguing? You've arbitrarily drawn a line at FCS schools but it's been shown to you that this might not be the best approach. The reality is, there is little difference between the worst division 1 schools and the best/better FCS schools.

It's just a logical place to draw a line because it has to be drawn somewhere. But yes, in general I think that Central Michigan would give Alabama more of a game than the Citadel. As Christo pointed out, there are exceptions to this. But in most cases its true enough.