The Big East Reasserts Its Stupidity With Pro-Playoff Vote | The Boneyard

The Big East Reasserts Its Stupidity With Pro-Playoff Vote

Status
Not open for further replies.
The NBE is doing a terrible job of fighting back. I am fairly certain that nobody, including the presidents, knows what the hell they are doing. It is a horrendous showing publicity wise.

Meanwhile, Swofford just talks like he is at the big boy table and he claws his way back up to it. We don't even have a commissioner yet the university presidents decided that hiring one is not an urgent matter. This despite BCS and playoff meetings occurring and constant opportunities for media attention due to BCS and realignment hubbub. I really hope there is something going on in the shadows.
 
I keep waiting for something good to happen to us. Seriously, ever since we won the 2010 BE Championship it has been one set of bad news after another. I keep waiting for something good to finally happen to us, to solidify our situation, but I am finding it harder and harder to wait for a life preserver. None of it is good.

I'm starting to think we need a miracle. How much worse can it get?
 
.-.
Rondogg said:
I keep waiting for something good to happen to us. Seriously, ever since we won the 2010 BE Championship it has been one set of bad news after another. I keep waiting for something good to finally happen to us, to solidify our situation, but I am finding it harder and harder to wait for a life preserver. None of it is good.

I'm starting to think we need a miracle. How much worse can it get?
Expand ...


This is on the list of bad things ~ Our Bowl tie ins are w/ other leagues 4th place team and below??
 
huskymedic said:
This is on the list of bad things ~ Our Bowl tie ins are w/ other leagues 4th place team and below??
Expand ...


The upside is we should win those games. The downside is, nobody will know we won---because nobody will care.
 
So if we have a dream season and go 12-0 and are ranked #11 we get left out of the 6 major bowls? Minus the 2 semi's of course.

If not then just win baby, just win.
 
.-.
ZLS asserts his stupidity by complaining about a playoff system that will even the playing field. Fan base will no longer be the determinant factor in a team's postseason.
 
nelsonmuntz said:
ZLS asserts his stupidity by complaining about a playoff system that will even the playing field. Fan base will no longer be the determinant factor in a team's postseason.
Expand ...

How do you base this this claim? You think that a 12-0 UConn would be ranked higher than a 11-1 Alabama or even a 10-2 LSU? Assuming those loses come against high quality teams, I can't see that happening. Then you're going to tell me that this committee will choose that 12-0 UConn team over the 11-1 Alabama even if UConn is ranked lower? I just can't see it. My assumption is that the committee will select from the Top 5 for the 4 game playoff. I haven't seen anything saying that they won't still use the polls to determine the playoff (with the committee being the final decision maker). Still too early to tell but this playoff only helps with the cream of the crop and sorting out who is #1. It's only 4 teams, not enough to allow teams from non-power conferences to have a legit shot. Not sure how it levels any playing field......
 
UCFBfan said:
How do you base this this claim? You think that a 12-0 UConn would be ranked higher than a 11-1 Alabama or even a 10-2 LSU? Assuming those loses come against high quality teams, I can't see that happening. Then you're going to tell me that this committee will choose that 12-0 UConn team over the 11-1 Alabama even if UConn is ranked lower? I just can't see it. My assumption is that the committee will select from the Top 5 for the 4 game playoff. I haven't seen anything saying that they won't still use the polls to determine the playoff (with the committee being the final decision maker). Still too early to tell but this playoff only helps with the cream of the crop and sorting out who is #1. It's only 4 teams, not enough to allow teams from non-power conferences to have a legit shot. Not sure how it levels any playing field......
Expand ...

Like many things that moves away from the status quo, and changes are or needed to be made you do it in small increments. Four will become 6/8...to possibly 16 eventually creating opprtunities for evreyone.
 
Duncan Idaho said:
Like many things that moves away from the status quo, and changes are or needed to be made you do it in small increments. Four will become 6/8...to possibly 16 eventually creating opprtunities for evreyone.
Expand ...
I was just going to post something like this. I agree. 3-4 years into the 4 game playoffs with teams like Boise & TCU going 12-0 ranked 6th or 7th there will be a clamoring to expand the playoffs - see NCAA Basketball March Madness. Football will expand to 6, 8 or 16 teams within 10 years. Someday ALL conference champions will get a berth as will at-large teams for 16 teams. As it should be.
 
Duncan Idaho said:
Like many things that moves away from the status quo, and changes are or needed to be made you do it in small increments. Four will become 6/8...to possibly 16 eventually creating opprtunities for evreyone.
Expand ...

I hope that happens but at this moment, we're at 4 for the next 12 years...that can easily change in 5 or so years if things aren't as rosy as they thought it would be
 
You can see they're already preparing for playoff expansion, by having the committee pick the teams for the top 6 bowls. It would be an easy switch to make that an 8-team playoff, 4 bowls for the first round, 2 bowls for the semis, then the NC game.
 
.-.
UCFBfan said:
How do you base this this claim? You think that a 12-0 UConn would be ranked higher than a 11-1 Alabama or even a 10-2 LSU? Assuming those loses come against high quality teams, I can't see that happening. Then you're going to tell me that this committee will choose that 12-0 UConn team over the 11-1 Alabama even if UConn is ranked lower? I just can't see it. My assumption is that the committee will select from the Top 5 for the 4 game playoff. I haven't seen anything saying that they won't still use the polls to determine the playoff (with the committee being the final decision maker). Still too early to tell but this playoff only helps with the cream of the crop and sorting out who is #1. It's only 4 teams, not enough to allow teams from non-power conferences to have a legit shot. Not sure how it levels any playing field......
Expand ...

because it's going to lead to an 8 team play off. anyone that's bemoaning this 4 team playoff is being shortsighted
 
pj said:
You can see they're already preparing for playoff expansion, by having the committee pick the teams for the top 6 bowls. It would be an easy switch to make that an 8-team playoff, 4 bowls for the first round, 2 bowls for the semis, then the NC game.
Expand ...


It's 8 teams now. They just don't have the chutzpah to say it.

The Division Champs of the 4 Power Conferences meet each other for a 99.9% guaranteed Semi-Final Play Off Spot in something called a Conference Championship game. That's the round of 8.

At the end of this contract, what percentage of the 4 semi finalists will come from that round of 8? Of 48 semi-final slots I figure 5 might go to outsiders like the ACC or BE in 12 years. No more than that. 90% or better will come from the Round of 8.
 
UCFBfan said:
Then you're going to tell me that this committee will choose that 12-0 UConn team over the 11-1 Alabama even if UConn is ranked lower? I just can't see it.
Expand ...

Precisely. Especially when it's selected by a committee of people who have spent their entire lives knowing about the power of the SEC and Alabama. You, and they, can say that doesn't matter, but it does and it will.
 
UCFBfan said:
How do you base this this claim? You think that a 12-0 UConn would be ranked higher than a 11-1 Alabama or even a 10-2 LSU? Assuming those loses come against high quality teams, I can't see that happening. Then you're going to tell me that this committee will choose that 12-0 UConn team over the 11-1 Alabama even if UConn is ranked lower? I just can't see it. My assumption is that the committee will select from the Top 5 for the 4 game playoff. I haven't seen anything saying that they won't still use the polls to determine the playoff (with the committee being the final decision maker). Still too early to tell but this playoff only helps with the cream of the crop and sorting out who is #1. It's only 4 teams, not enough to allow teams from non-power conferences to have a legit shot. Not sure how it levels any playing field......
Expand ...

How do you base the claim that a playoff structure where the four participants are selected by a committee, just like the NCAA Basketball Tournament, is really just a front to pick the same big conference, large fan base, programs? If they were just going to go by the polls, they would have just gone by the polls.

And this is a first step to a 16 team playoff.

I actually see a significant problem for the SEC in particular. They load up their non-conference schedule on really terrible teams, with over half their OOC games against Sun Belt, MAC, WAC or FCS. The current BCS system actually punished teams for playing road games because they got no credit for winning a road game. If the Committee uses basketball as a guide, you will see a lot more neutral field and road games over the next years, which will mean more losses for the SEC.
 
nelsonmuntz said:
How do you base the claim that a playoff structure where the four participants are selected by a committee, just like the NCAA Basketball Tournament, is really just a front to pick the same big conference, large fan base, programs? If they were just going to go by the polls, they would have just gone by the polls.

And this is a first step to a 16 team playoff.

I actually see a significant problem for the SEC in particular. They load up their non-conference schedule on really terrible teams, with over half their OOC games against Sun Belt, MAC, WAC or FCS. The current BCS system actually punished teams for playing road games because they got no credit for winning a road game. If the Committee uses basketball as a guide, you will see a lot more neutral field and road games over the next years, which will mean more losses for the SEC.
Expand ...

I guess we'll see in two years....my guess, you'll rarely see them pull a team into the playoffs that's not in the Top 5.
 
.-.
Well yesterday the talking heads on ESPN (I forget which ones) were towing the SEC line that the SEC conference schedule was difficult enough, but for the ACC / Big East to get taken seriously they'd have to upgrade their nonconference schedule. Sheeesh.
 
junglehusky said:
Well yesterday the talking heads on ESPN (I forget which ones) were towing the SEC line that the SEC conference schedule was difficult enough, but for the ACC / Big East to get taken seriously they'd have to upgrade their nonconference schedule. Sheeesh.
Expand ...

While I'd agree with this, who are they going to get to schedule them to increase their strength of schedule? Unfortunately, College Football is still a system where if you lose one, maybe two games, you're out of the National Title picture. 4 team playoff isn't going to change that. Since the SEC, B1G, and Big-12 already have a stacked conference schedule, what power teams are left to schedule? This is where the Big East and ACC are going to run into problems....
 
This contract is for 12 years. At this pace an 8 or 16 team playoff may not be in some of our lifetime.

Just let the season start already
 
RS9999X said:
The Division Champs of the 4 Power Conferences meet each other for a 99.9% guaranteed Semi-Final Play Off Spot in something called a Conference Championship game. That's the round of 8.

At the end of this contract, what percentage of the 4 semi finalists will come from that round of 8? Of 48 semi-final slots I figure 5 might go to outsiders like the ACC or BE in 12 years. No more than that. 90% or better will come from the Round of 8.
Expand ...

while i agree there won't be a lot of participation by the BE or ACC, but over the last decade there's been very few BE/ACC teams that deserved to be in the top 4, so it's kind of silly for us to bellyache about it. where i disagree is about the big4 conference championships acting as a de facto first round b/c i think more often than not only 3 of them will be represented. the other day i looked and over the last decade there were only 1 or 2 times when the top 4 represented 4 different conferences, and the MWC was in there more than the BE/ACC. obviously with a committee they could take a #5 or 6 team, but i think they'll be pretty hard pressed to pass over an SEC team that's ranked #3 for the top team from the B1G/B12 if they're only ranked #6.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Forum statistics

Threads
168,287
Messages
4,561,455
Members
10,455
Latest member
UConnGabby


Top Bottom