ACC, PAC-12, and BIG alliance / conference realignment | Page 397 | Syracusefan.com

ACC, PAC-12, and BIG alliance / conference realignment

Final TV window winners by Network

Noon
FOX has won 7 of 14 weeks. ABC has five, and ESPN has two.

330
ABC won 13 of 14 weeks. CBS has one.

Primetime
ABC has won all 14 weeks.


Have to think FOX is happy with Big Noon. You think CBS misses the SEC? Poor NBC where are your Notre Dame and B1G games? Not even a single W?


By conference only games, SEC has had 27 games win in their window. The ACC only has two. The Big 12 only has one. The B1G only has five.

There are 7 OOC games that won their window. In those an SEC team has appeared 6x, an ACC team 3x, a B1G team 3x, a B12 team once, and Notre Dame only once.

To be fair the TG Friday games could have won on Saturday and are left out (Texas/A&M and UGA/GA Tech).


By school:

9x - Bama (best out there)

8x - Oklahoma (they had a lot of tough games so no surprise)

7x - LSU (even with the bad season)

6x - UGA

4x - Ole Miss, Texas, Florida, Tennessee, Ohio State

3x - Michigan, Auburn

2x - Clemson, Miami, FSU, Vandy, Iowa, South Carolina, A&M, Arkansas, Mizzou (for A&M combo of no one caring and not playing anyone)

1x - Iowa State, GA Tech, Texas Tech, Utah, Notre Dame, Wisconsin, Kentucky, Penn State, Indiana, Oregon (Notre Dame and Indiana had few interesting games)


15 of the 16 SEC schools have a window win, only Miss State does not. And 14 of the 16 have more than one W. The Top 4 teams, and eight of the Top 9 teams are from the SEC.

7 of the 18 B1G schools have a window win. 4 of 17 ACC have a window win. 3 of 16 B12 schools, none with more than one.
 
WoadBlue said:
The SEC may have been aligned near fully with the BT earlier, but as Lord Palmerston publicly admitted of ht English, we have no permanent allies nor permanent enemies. Such an entity is always looking out become THE one and only MASTER. The SEC now thinks that it will always control the number of teams in the playoffs.

I have said since the beginning that THE one and omnoy way that the BT can ever fully equal the SEC in depth of top quality football is to expand ij. huge way into the South with ACC teams. To match the SEC, the BT MUST become a league with multiple teams from the South located in multiple states.

Those who think the SEC is in any way harmed by being restricted to the South just cannot see the obvious: the SEC is stating make BT football TV viewership seem like it may soon be close to the ACC than to the SEC.

And this is not new. Back in the 1990s when CBS showed the BT Game of e Week, ratings showed that even in NY and New England, the SEC game on CBS would outdraw the BE game on CBS most of the time. Nationally the SEC game of the week always out drew the BE game.
Expand...
The Lord Palmerston reference caught my attention. He is a central figure in a trilogy of David Morrell fictional Victorian age crime novels. The main character is Thomas DeQuincey, who was infamous for his insatiable appetite for laudanum.
 
What other sport has a playoffs without the conference champs? BBall has 32 champs and 36 at larges. Why can we not have 10 and 14 in FB?

Also the rankings should be used to see who is in the playoffs, but can we please then set the matchups where we don't have rematches or teams from the same conference like in BBall? No one wants Bama vs Oklahoma.

If there were 24 teams this year it would look something like (I made a few changes to the rankings based on common sense)...

1. Indiana
vs 15. Utah vs 20. Tulane
vs 8. Oklahoma
vs 10. Miami vs NA Western Michigan
2. UGA (they should be 2)
vs 16. USC vs 17. Michigan (I think B1G gets 5th team)
vs 7. Ole Miss (joke that they are 6)
vs 11. Notre Dame vs NA Duke
3. Ohio State
vs 14. Vandy vs 24. James Madison
vs 6. A&M
vs 9. Bama vs NA Kennesaw State
4. Texs Tech
vs 13. Texas vs NA UNLV (assuming MWC)
vs 5. Oregon
vs 12. BYU vs NA Boise State (PAC)


Left out
18. Zona (first team out, jumped by Michigan to get B1G #5)
19. UVA
21. Houston
22. GA Tech
23. Iowa
25. North Texas
 
HRE Otto IV said:
What other sport has a playoffs without the conference champs? BBall has 32 champs and 36 at larges. Why can we not have 10 and 14 in FB?

Also the rankings should be used to see who is in the playoffs, but can we please then set the matchups where we don't have rematches or teams from the same conference like in BBall? No one wants Bama vs Oklahoma.

If there were 24 teams this year it would look something like (I made a few changes to the rankings based on common sense)...

1. Indiana
vs 15. Utah vs 20. Tulane
vs 8. Oklahoma
vs 10. Miami vs NA Western Michigan
2. UGA (they should be 2)
vs 16. USC vs 17. Michigan (I think B1G gets 5th team)
vs 7. Ole Miss (joke that they are 6)
vs 11. Notre Dame vs NA Duke
3. Ohio State
vs 14. Vandy vs 24. James Madison
vs 6. A&M
vs 9. Bama vs NA Kennesaw State
4. Texs Tech
vs 13. Texas vs NA UNLV (assuming MWC)
vs 5. Oregon
vs 12. BYU vs NA Boise State (PAC)


Left out
18. Zona (first team out, jumped by Michigan to get B1G #5)
19. UVA
21. Houston
22. GA Tech
23. Iowa
25. North Texas
Expand...
I love this idea. Revamp the current bowl system. Get rid of the lower tier bowls that have your 6-6, 7-5 teams and have the upper tier bowls be your playoff games. In this scenario, every bowl game is important.

With all of the opt-outs, these lesser bowls that have 100 people in the stands are now meaningless. Also, mediocre teams should not be rewarded with postseason play.
 
Atlcuse44 said:
I love this idea. Revamp the current bowl system. Get rid of the lower tier bowls that have your 6-6, 7-5 teams and have the upper tier bowls be your playoff games. In this scenario, every bowl game is important.

With all of the opt-outs, these lesser bowls that have 100 people in the stands are now meaningless. Also, mediocre teams should not be rewarded with postseason play.
Expand...

24 is a bit much as Utah, USC, and Michigan (or Zona) have no business in a playoff. But to get all conference champs in, we would have to concede a few bad apples.
 
HRE Otto IV said:
24 is a bit much as Utah, USC, and Michigan (or Zona) have no business in a playoff. But to get all conference champs in, we would have to concede a few bad apples.
Expand...
FCS had had a 16-team playoff for almost 40 years and expanded to 24 about 10-12 years ago.

FBS is currently stuck in the fifedom of bowl games and megalomaniacs.

Fans want meaningful postseason games aka expand!
 
HRE Otto IV said:
What other sport has a playoffs without the conference champs? BBall has 32 champs and 36 at larges. Why can we not have 10 and 14 in FB?

Also the rankings should be used to see who is in the playoffs, but can we please then set the matchups where we don't have rematches or teams from the same conference like in BBall? No one wants Bama vs Oklahoma.

If there were 24 teams this year it would look something like (I made a few changes to the rankings based on common sense)...

1. Indiana
vs 15. Utah vs 20. Tulane
vs 8. Oklahoma
vs 10. Miami vs NA Western Michigan
2. UGA (they should be 2)
vs 16. USC vs 17. Michigan (I think B1G gets 5th team)
vs 7. Ole Miss (joke that they are 6)
vs 11. Notre Dame vs NA Duke
3. Ohio State
vs 14. Vandy vs 24. James Madison
vs 6. A&M
vs 9. Bama vs NA Kennesaw State
4. Texs Tech
vs 13. Texas vs NA UNLV (assuming MWC)
vs 5. Oregon
vs 12. BYU vs NA Boise State (PAC)


Left out
18. Zona (first team out, jumped by Michigan to get B1G #5)
19. UVA
21. Houston
22. GA Tech
23. Iowa
25. North Texas
Expand...
I think AQ for basketball is much more interesting because a team has to win a tournament to get in. Football is just one game, frequently without even the certainty that it is the two best teams in the conference. See ACC and SEC this year.

I think the B1G has it right that play-in games are the way to go. What is more interesting... Indiana v Ohio State to decide seeding or... Michigan v USC to see who goes to the playoffs and who stays home? And imagine if that was known heading into the game... winner goes to Texas A&M.

They for CCG weekend is for it to be a true play-in game... winner gets in, loser goes home. No loser gets a potential AQ spot.

So imagine this... each P4 conference's highest ranking team gets in... Ohio State, Georgia, Texas Tech, Miami.
Then the COMMITTEE decides 6 at-large spots and determine which conference play-in games they need to see to fill in the spots the final 6 spots.

In the B1G... they could exempt Indiana and Oregon... teams 5 and 6.
In the SEC... they could exempt A&M and Ole Miss... teams 7 and 8
In the B12... they could exempt BYU... team 9
In the ACC... ND steals exemption for team 10.

Then to fill out the final 6:
SEC CCG Weekend Game: Oklahoma v Vandy...team 11
SEC CCG Weekend Game Bonus: Alabama v Texas... team 12
B1G CCG Weekend Game: USC v Michigan... team 13
ACC CGG Weekend Game: Virginia v Ga Tech... Team 14
B12 CCG Weekend Game: Utah v Arizona... Team 15
G5: Tulane v James Madison... Team 16.

Then... create the field trying to avoid rematches and seed relatively fairly:
#1 Ohio State v winner of G5 game
#2 Georgia v winner of ACC CCG game
#3 Indiana v winner of B12 CCG game
#4 Texas Tech v winner of B1G CCG game
#5 Oregon v winner of SEC CCG1 Alabama v Texas
#6 A&M v BYU
#7 Ole Miss v Notre Dame
#8 Miami v SEC CCG 2 Oklahoma v Vandy

This is just an example. Some years... it might be 11 P4 teams and 4 play-in games.

Keys: always 1 exemption per conference, plus one play-in game per conference AND 1 G5 play-in AND Notre Dame if 10+ wins. The rest gets filled in.
 
HRE Otto IV said:
24 is a bit much as Utah, USC, and Michigan (or Zona) have no business in a playoff. But to get all conference champs in, we would have to concede a few bad apples.
Expand...
That will never fly in football. Why? Money.

First, the NCAA does NOT in any sense run/administer the post-season of 1A (FBS) football. That has always been done by the schools and conference's themselves, working with private groups and individuals. And the money for the playoffs is HUGE. So the last thing any Major/Power conference or program wants is a playoff that makes the CUSA and MAC champs auto bids.

If the NCAA ran this for 1A CFB, it would follow its basketball policy: all champs of any league at that level are guaranteed in, And basically any teams that want to move up into that division get to do so, which means that the post-season will keep getting watered down by schools moving up to get a piece of a pie that they and leagues never built up. It is like a giant welfare scam. And the SEC and BT will bolt, fully secede, before they allow the NCAA or any other entity to start ordering them to share with Mac and CUSA and MWC and a string of current 1AA (FCS) leagues.

And all that is why we have so much talk about the disparities in ability to spend requiring a new Top Tier for CFB. I do think that is coming. It is just a matter of when. I think many in SEC and BT would prefer it be just their 2 leagues, but more than a few of their people also would prefer it be 3 or 4 leagues. I think the political powers of both parties will be drawn into the arrangement phase unless there are 3 and maybe 4 conferences with a total 50 or more schools involved.
 
If they don't go to 24 and all conference champs, I would like to see 16 teams with auto bids to Top 25 conference champs and to Top 25 Indies (ND, UConn). That gives you this year something like (moved some teams around)...

1. Indiana vs 24. James Madison (Cignetti playing former school)
2. UGA vs 20. Tulane
3. Ohio State vs 14. Vandy
4. Texas Tech vs 13. Texas (old SWC/B12 battle)
5. Oregon vs 12. BYU (Western battle)
6. A&M vs 11. Miami (had to move Miami to avoid repeat ND vs A&M)
7. Oklahoma vs 10. Notre Dame
8. Ole Miss vs 9. Bama (Ole Miss doesn't belong ahead of A&M and should be punished for losing Kiffin)


First team out #15 Utah. I think that is where the line should be this year. They aren't deserving. Had UVA won they would have knocked out Vandy.
 
People always say, "Get rid of the lower tier bowl games." Here are some of the problems that the advocates of doing that face:
1. Teams from the "other conferences" in FBS play in them and their fans would like to go to a bowl game, too.
2. Those lower tier bowl games represent filled hotel rooms and restaurant seats that would have been empty otherwise (how else would the hoteliers and restauranteurs get a couple of thousand people to go to Shreveport in December?)
3. The biggest barrier to getting rid of them IMO - most of the minor bowls are either owned outright by ESPN or ESPN is a major partner, and they need the original content to fill the time space. Short of making a near-basketball-sized playoff, it would be hard to come up with the number of games to replace the minor bowls that fill ESPN's airtime.
 
Hoo's That said:
People always say, "Get rid of the lower tier bowl games." Here are some of the problems that the advocates of doing that face:
1. Teams from the "other conferences" in FBS play in them and their fans would like to go to a bowl game, too.
2. Those lower tier bowl games represent filled hotel rooms and restaurant seats that would have been empty otherwise (how else would the hoteliers and restauranteurs get a couple of thousand people to go to Shreveport in December?)
3. The biggest barrier to getting rid of them IMO - most of the minor bowls are either owned outright by ESPN or ESPN is a major partner, and they need the original content to fill the time space. Short of making a near-basketball-sized playoff, it would be hard to come up with the number of games to replace the minor bowls that fill ESPN's airtime.
Expand...
I can respect the concerns. I personally draw the line at teams must have a winning record, not 5-7 nor 6-7. They must have seven wins under the present scheme to play in a bowl. Scale the number back to accommodate only teams with 7 wins or more and I can agree to that. Besides, that virtually assures everyone that Rutgers will not go bowling.

There should be zero teams with losing records in bowls. There should be no way to end with a losing record if you lose the bowl, hence the seven win requirement.

Obviously, this is a personal point of view. Everyone is free to disagree.
 
Hoo's That said:
People always say, "Get rid of the lower tier bowl games." Here are some of the problems that the advocates of doing that face:
1. Teams from the "other conferences" in FBS play in them and their fans would like to go to a bowl game, too.
2. Those lower tier bowl games represent filled hotel rooms and restaurant seats that would have been empty otherwise (how else would the hoteliers and restauranteurs get a couple of thousand people to go to Shreveport in December?)
3. The biggest barrier to getting rid of them IMO - most of the minor bowls are either owned outright by ESPN or ESPN is a major partner, and they need the original content to fill the time space. Short of making a near-basketball-sized playoff, it would be hard to come up with the number of games to replace the minor bowls that fill ESPN's airtime.
Expand...

Less fans are going to watch and less fans are going to attend. Which makes the games less profitable.

The schools used to be willing to take a financial hit when the games meant something. Half of these Bowls will need to double their payouts to make it worth while. Which is hard to do given the first point.
 
Atlcuse44 said:
With all of the opt-outs, these lesser bowls that have 100 people in the stands are now meaningless. Also, mediocre teams should not be rewarded with postseason play.
Expand...
But, TV networks like them. Football fans, especially those who like to bet, watch those games.. at least in the background.
 
Moontan said:
But, TV networks like them. Football fans, especially those who like to bet, watch those games.. at least in the background.
Expand...
we all say they're lousy, but they still draw better ratings than most other things on TV. As long as people watch the games, they'll still push them.
 
HRE Otto IV said:
If they don't go to 24 and all conference champs, I would like to see 16 teams with auto bids to Top 25 conference champs and to Top 25 Indies (ND, UConn). That gives you this year something like (moved some teams around)...

1. Indiana vs 24. James Madison (Cignetti playing former school)
2. UGA vs 20. Tulane
3. Ohio State vs 14. Vandy
4. Texas Tech vs 13. Texas (old SWC/B12 battle)
5. Oregon vs 12. BYU (Western battle)
6. A&M vs 11. Miami (had to move Miami to avoid repeat ND vs A&M)
7. Oklahoma vs 10. Notre Dame
8. Ole Miss vs 9. Bama (Ole Miss doesn't belong ahead of A&M and should be punished for losing Kiffin)


First team out #15 Utah. I think that is where the line should be this year. They aren't deserving. Had UVA won they would have knocked out Vandy.
Expand...

This is what I'd like to see right here (although you need to update your seeds on JMU and Tulane). Each P4 champ should be in, assuming the ACC will be smart enough to make CFP ranking their tiebreaker.

Yes Utah is first out, and they are a very good team, but no one is going to kick up a lot of dust over them. Very few outside of the state of Utah would think they have a realistic chance of winning it all.

Two G5 champs, but they have to have some kind of constraint, like CFP Top 25. And the rest are just at larges.

No bye weeks. Top 8 all get a game on campus. And it doesn't stretch out the playoffs.
 
Chip said:
This is what I'd like to see right here (although you need to update your seeds on JMU and Tulane). Each P4 champ should be in, assuming the ACC will be smart enough to make CFP ranking their tiebreaker.

Yes Utah is first out, and they are a very good team, but no one is going to kick up a lot of dust over them. Very few outside of the state of Utah would think they have a realistic chance of winning it all.

Two G5 champs, but they have to have some kind of constraint, like CFP Top 25. And the rest are just at larges.

No bye weeks. Top 8 all get a game on campus. And it doesn't stretch out the playoffs.
Expand...

I was using rankings and not seeds.

UGA is a conference champ and IMO deserve to be ranked 2nd. I dropped Ole Miss to 8th, it is a joke IMO for them to be 6th. Might even argue that 8th is too high. I suppose I should have put Miami ranked 10th but the 11 seed. Not that it matters.
 
HRE Otto IV said:
I was using rankings and not seeds.

UGA is a conference champ and IMO deserve to be ranked 2nd. I dropped Ole Miss to 8th, it is a joke IMO for them to be 6th. Might even argue that 8th is too high. I suppose I should have put Miami ranked 10th but the 11 seed. Not that it matters.
Expand...

Gotcha.

I still think it's the right set of teams, and I think 16 is the best number.
 
24 team playoff (1-24). If your ranked, you deserve to me in the playoff. If you not ranked, doesn’t matter if you won your conference.

24 team NIT Playoff (25-48).

24 team CBI playoff (49-72)


There were 82 bowl eligible teams this year. This would only kick our 10 teams. which I’m sure some would drop out and be replaced. Regular season conference champs and championship game conference champs all make one of the playoffs.
 
FloridaCuse said:
The ACC Champion won't be left out of the CFP in the future. (So maybe there is no need to change the ACC CG tiebreaker rules.)

sports.yahoo.com

College Football Playoff will change next year ... due to an agreement made 18 months ago

The playoff would look a bit different if next year's rules were in place for this season.
sports.yahoo.com sports.yahoo.com
Expand...
The league should still want to have the best possible auto-qualifier. The conference champ game tie breaker really needs to be best CFP ranking.
 

Similar threads

IthacaMatt
    • Like
What if Basketball Had Driven Conference Re-Alignment?
Replies
12
Views
654
orangefog
orangefog
adk(roc)CUSE
    • Like
So, is the ACC wide open?
Replies
14
Views
981
HyattsCuse
HyattsCuse
MadNY3
    • Like
ACC Viewer$hip | #9
Replies
12
Views
993
OttoinGrotto
OttoinGrotto
A
Bowls in this era
2
Replies
36
Views
2K
MGDCuse
MGDCuse
Eric15
    • Like
Why don't we play at MSG anymore?
2
Replies
35
Views
2K
Capt. Tuttle
Capt. Tuttle

Forum statistics

Threads
175,559
Messages
5,248,235
Members
6,187
Latest member
lou ease

Online statistics

Members online
182
Guests online
4,381
Total visitors
4,563
Totals may include hidden visitors.


P
Top Bottom