If A and M joins plus another Big 12 who goes to the east ?

#26
#26
Get over the fact that A&M want to be in a stable conference. Shut the hell up with the bs. If another school comes in, it'll probably be an eastern team anyways (ie WVU or NC State).

Damn. Who pissed in your Cheerios this morning? :cray:




:zeitung_lesen:
 
#27
#27
Get over the fact that A&M want to be in a stable conference. Shut the hell up with the bs. If another school comes in, it'll probably be an eastern team anyways (ie WVU or NC State).

I bet your keyboard saves you from loosing teeth everyday.
 
#29
#29
Has much as I hate the idea of a 16 team super conference; I completely understand the reason. Do you have any idea who the other teams may be besides A&M?

I wish someone would explain why the super conferences are needed. Around here we are winning crystal balls already! Will the SC's help everyone catch up to us? If so, how does it help us? It appears that except for TCU and Utah that everyone who potentially joins a 'SC' already had a shot at the title game just by winning their games. Please enlighten me someone, cuz I don't see why college football 'has' to do this. I respect the fact that is happening, but I don't get it at all. Thanks guys and gals!!!!!!
Posted via VolNation Mobile
 
#30
#30
i hate the idea

Me too. One thing that makes the SEC special is the fact that -with the exception of ARK- you can drive to most every away game. In the PAC 10 you need an airline ticket. As an airline pilot, that is good for MY business, but as a football fan, I prefer to tailgate...
 
#31
#31
i wish someone would explain why the super conferences are needed. Around here we are winning crystal balls already! Will the sc's help everyone catch up to us? If so, how does it help us? It appears that except for tcu and utah that everyone who potentially joins a 'sc' already had a shot at the title game just by winning their games. Please enlighten me someone, cuz i don't see why college football 'has' to do this. I respect the fact that is happening, but i don't get it at all. Thanks guys and gals!!!!!!
posted via volnation mobile

money
 
#32
#32
I wish someone would explain why the super conferences are needed. Around here we are winning crystal balls already! Will the SC's help everyone catch up to us? If so, how does it help us? It appears that except for TCU and Utah that everyone who potentially joins a 'SC' already had a shot at the title game just by winning their games. Please enlighten me someone, cuz I don't see why college football 'has' to do this. I respect the fact that is happening, but I don't get it at all. Thanks guys and gals!!!!!!
Posted via VolNation Mobile

Nope. It's ALL about the money.
 
#34
#34
This will change the SEC as we know it! Not to mention our rivalry with Alabama. I absolutely hate this crap!!
Posted via VolNation Mobile
 
#35
#35
its amazing that people are so blind they forget the one overriding factor of all business

Yes. And I would hope "super conferences" would establish a more organized power, and would be able to influence the NCAA into a more organized scale of punishments to eliminate favoritism towards richer athletic departments (I.E. Ohio State).
 
#36
#36
I believe that there is something that hasn't been talked about that I believe is the underlining purpose for super leagues and that is to junk the AA and create another governed body. More updated and hopefully more consistence.
 
#37
#37
The deal with this whole super conference discussion could actually bring forth a somewhat forced playoff system, but it would require five or so super conferences in total (ACC, Big East, Big Ten, PAC-x, SEC).

With a maximum of 16 schools per conference, that would cover 80 of the 120 schools that presently comprise of the FBS or Div. 1-A. 40 schools would inevitably be potentially left out in the cold aside from some sort of play-in contingency. Presently there are 66 teams in BCS conferences.

If this happens, and the money seems to be speaking to this direction, then hopefully this makes the transition to a vintage playoff system a bit easier versus the current organizational structure.

Ultimately, it's not about fairness nor logic, it will always be about money.

do you really think the Big East and ACC will survive? the moneys is in football,it could well be 3 Super conferences,i personally think dark days are ahead for football,with the super Conferences but what ESPN wants,with there money,they will get
 
#40
#40
do you really think the Big East and ACC will survive? the moneys is in football,it could well be 3 Super conferences,i personally think dark days are ahead for football,with the super Conferences but what ESPN wants,with there money,they will get

I'm honestly not sure. I suppose it all depends on the pool of TV money and who gets it first. I imagine that the networks will want the PAC-x and the SEC while the rest of the conferences scramble to get a deal, much less a respectable network promoting and displaying their games.
 
#41
#41
I think we will have 4 "super conferences". The PAC-12 will add Texas, Oklahoma, Ok St, and Tx Tech. SEC will add A&M, Missouri, West Va. and another team (rumors are Va Tech may not want to come). Big 10 will raid left over B12 teams and/or northeast teams. I think then the leftover Big East football schools will join the ACC.


16 team SEC may look like this

Division A
Team X
Georgia
USC east
Florida

Division B
Kentucky
Vandy
Tennessee
West Va

Division C
Alabama
Auburn
Ole Miss
Miss St

Division D
LSU
Arky
A&M
Mizzou

Each team plays each team in their division plus 2 teams from the other east or west division(a vs b, c vs d) plus one team from each west or east division, plus their rival
Example: Tennessee
Vandy, West Va, Kentucky
2 teams from division A
Team from division C
Team from division D
Alabama

But I think we will have 14 team conference, playing a 9 game(rumor of Oregon game being cancelled) conference schedule; 6 teams in division plus 2 games from other division plus rival.
 
#42
#42
can someone explain to me how the playoffs wouldn't be more money? more games, more excitement, more money right?
 
#43
#43
I think we will have 4 "super conferences". The PAC-12 will add Texas, Oklahoma, Ok St, and Tx Tech. SEC will add A&M, Missouri, West Va. and another team (rumors are Va Tech may not want to come). Big 10 will raid left over B12 teams and/or northeast teams. I think then the leftover Big East football schools will join the ACC.


16 team SEC may look like this

Division A
Team X
Georgia
USC east
Florida

Division B
Kentucky
Vandy
Tennessee
West Va


Division C
Alabama
Auburn
Ole Miss
Miss St

Division D
LSU
Arky
A&M
Mizzou

Each team plays each team in their division plus 2 teams from the other east or west division(a vs b, c vs d) plus one team from each west or east division, plus their rival
Example: Tennessee
Vandy, West Va, Kentucky
2 teams from division A
Team from division C
Team from division D
Alabama

But I think we will have 14 team conference, playing a 9 game(rumor of Oregon game being cancelled) conference schedule; 6 teams in division plus 2 games from other division plus rival.

Dream division for us.
 
#44
#44
The SEC will either adjust and adapt to the changing circumstances of the CFB world, or diminish. Sucks, but it's true. After all, the SEC started all this in going to 12 teams and having a Championship game, if they do not continue to evolve they will get passed on the food chain.
 
#45
#45
can someone explain to me how the playoffs wouldn't be more money? more games, more excitement, more money right?

More expenses, less butts in seats (harder for fans to travel week to week with little notice), less payout that is if the bowls even survive.

Again, its all about the money. If there were more net money by moving to playoff it would already be in place.
 
#46
#46
can someone explain to me how the playoffs wouldn't be more money? more games, more excitement, more money right?

I think the issue has always come down to the sponsorship for the bowls. In all other sports with a playoff system you don't have a corporation fronting money for each round of the playoffs so its excess revenue that you don't get from the TV deals and ticket sales. If you could somehow rank the bowls and include them as the playoff games then maybe that would work. How would you do the locations for the games in a playoff system though?
 
#47
#47
can someone explain to me how the playoffs wouldn't be more money? more games, more excitement, more money right?

IMO a playoff would make a ton more money. The problem is the politics of ending the Bowls. The cities, and areas around them that host the bowl games get a big rush of tourists at a time of year that is usually dead. The bowls pump millions into local economys. I want a playoff too, but I understand why there is a problem with implementing one.
 
#48
#48
IMO a playoff would make a ton more money. The problem is the politics of ending the Bowls. The cities, and areas around them that host the bowl games get a big rush of tourists at a time of year that is usually dead. The bowls pump millions into local economys. I want a playoff too, but I understand why there is a problem with implementing one.

Ok saying your correct that it would make a ton more money. How much would it cost?

Considering that every road trip consist of hauling an entire football team + coaches + hotel rooms + food everyday. Then add is a band and the cost of each trip rises dramatically. Very easily upwards of $300,000-$500,000 each trip.

Making tons of money is great as long as the cost stay consistant. Have to look at both sides of the equation, not just one side.
 
#49
#49
The deal with this whole super conference discussion could actually bring forth a somewhat forced playoff system, but it would require five or so super conferences in total (ACC, Big East, Big Ten, PAC-x, SEC).

With a maximum of 16 schools per conference, that would cover 80 of the 120 schools that presently comprise of the FBS or Div. 1-A. 40 schools would inevitably be potentially left out in the cold aside from some sort of play-in contingency. Presently there are 66 teams in BCS conferences.

If this happens, and the money seems to be speaking to this direction, then hopefully this makes the transition to a vintage playoff system a bit easier versus the current organizational structure.

Ultimately, it's not about fairness nor logic, it will always be about money.

Are there more than 64 schools that would ever seriously compete for a NC?

I am looking for a new football division made up of four 16 team conferences. The first task is to win your division. The second task will be to win a two round playoff.

Under this structure, scheduling tough OOC games won't prevent championships so we'll see more good games. Though Bama and UT might not end up in the same division, they could continue their series as a non-conference game.

In some ways, this would be the best of all scenarios for most teams. Boise St and the other up and coming Rocky Mtn region teams better find a home quick.
 
#50
#50
IMO a playoff would make a ton more money. The problem is the politics of ending the Bowls. The cities, and areas around them that host the bowl games get a big rush of tourists at a time of year that is usually dead. The bowls pump millions into local economys. I want a playoff too, but I understand why there is a problem with implementing one.

No need to end the bowls. Let them still invite as they do now. Let the two playoff games and NC game rotate between several bowls. The bowls would still have the same relevance that most have now plus the incentive of occasionally hosting a NC series game.
 

VN Store



Back
Top