College Football Armegeddon - Dallas-Mavs.com Forums

Dooby · 05-13-2003, 09:06 AM

Maybe I have brought this up on this forum before, maybe not.

In a few years, the ABC contract for the national championship game, commonly referred to as the "BCS Contract", expires. After that happens, all hell will break loose. There will be a big push for a playoff.

But that change will pale in comparison to the two other changes that will occur as a result. First, there will be massive realignment. The realignment will equal, perhaps dwarf, the realignment that happened when the SWC broke up. Second, the criteria for being a major college football program will change dramatically. IMO, the NCAA will develop a "Super Division 1" made up of roughly 64 teams. The remaining schools that have fought to stay in division 1 these many years, rarely going to bowls and always losing money, will be left behind and be relegated to meaningless games that get shown on ESPN2 if they are lucky. Or the programs may fold altogether.

Want proof of all this? Here:

http://www.charlotte.com/mld/charlot...es/5845885.htm

http://www.neworleans.net/tulane/

http://www.syracuse.com/orangefootba...2851612835.xml

http://www.collegefootballnews.com/2...ly_Top_Ten.htm

http://the.honoluluadvertiser.com/ar.../sp/sp02a.html

http://www.chron.com/cs/CDA/story.ht...ertson/1804893

jayC · 05-14-2003, 12:12 AM

Bring the super conferences on. I love college football but could only care about one game in the postseason. Every level of football has a postseason except Division one.

Nebraska vs. Michigan, Flast. vs. Miami, Texas vs. penn st. There are so many bowl games anyway that going to a bowl doesn't mean much anymore. You could still have the bowl games except the top 16 or 8 whatever duke it out in a playoff.

I am all for it.

Just211 · 05-14-2003, 12:40 AM

I say make it all super conferences with 12 teams (Big 12, big 10, {which is 11 teams then add Notre Dame} Pac 10 plus fresno ST. and Hawaii, the new ACC, SEC, Mtn West plus 4, and create 2 new conferences from the best of the rest{VT, PITT, Marshall, E.Carolina,Louisville,S.Miss,TCU,Tulane, Boise ST, etc.}

That's 8 conferences of 12. now make the schedule just the 8 week conference schedule, plus the conference championship. Then you have a 8 team playoff of conference champs, which would take 4 weeks. That makes it a 13 week schedule for the to best teams(which most teams play now any ways) and a 8 game schedule for the biggest losers. and even better, there could be like a NIT and the 8 teams that lost the conference championship can have a playoff too.

and if the guys who whine about only having 8 games don't like it, then they can have a big ole we sucked fat ass tourney. or they can make the season longer, and the good teams that make the playoffs will suffer(although HS's play for a lot more weeks than 13, counting playoffs, and they seem to do fine)

[img]i/expressions/face-icon-small-happy.gif[/img] [img]i/expressions/face-icon-small-happy.gif[/img] [img]i/expressions/face-icon-small-happy.gif[/img] Sounds like a winner to Me, whatcha think [img]i/expressions/face-icon-small-happy.gif[/img] [img]i/expressions/face-icon-small-happy.gif[/img] [img]i/expressions/face-icon-small-happy.gif[/img]

Dooby · 05-14-2003, 06:38 AM

I know I am in the minority, but I have no interest in a playoff and think it will ruin the game of college football. But then I went to one of the schools that will be left out in the cold.

But specifically, blowing up college football as we know it will be all about money. Therefore, suggesting 8 12-team conferences is too many. College administrators won't want to share the playoff money with 90+ teams. Texas and OU won't want to share with Baylor or SMU.

Second, 8 regular season games is far too few. The lifeblood of the financially sound programs is attendance and 4 home games won't allow most teams to break even. They don't build 70,000 seat stadiums to be used 4 times a year. And again, if you are splitting playoff revenue among 90+ teams, that just isn't viable with only 4 home dates a year.

Finally, at some level, college sports are about the fan, and even sometimes the student. Most fans can afford to travel once to a bowl game (and tourism revenue is the real point of a bowl game, anyway), but I question the ability of the average college football fan or student to travel on an extended basis. And without the fan, there isn't much point in tradition, and without tradition, college football is just the minor leagues.

Big Boy Laroux · 05-14-2003, 11:30 AM

isn't there some way to incorporate both the BCS and a playoff?

for the top 8 teams in the BCS, have them duke it out in a small playoff. 1 vs 8, 2 vs 7, 3 vs 6, 4 vs 5. and then the next round, and so on. hell, even if it's just the top 4 in a playoff, that's better than what we currently have.

still have as many bowl games as you do now, so "lesser" schools have the chance to play in a bowl.

Dooby · 05-14-2003, 11:39 AM

Well, you have the same problem that you have now. With 8 teams selected by the BCS, you will still have the same stupid strength of schedule debate for the first 7 teams and you will always have to include Notre Dame.

Just211 · 05-14-2003, 11:51 AM

thats why it'd be easier to have the 8 12 teams conferences. No debate about who gets in. and as far as only having 8 games, I'm sure it could be 10 games, then only 2 teams would play 15 times. and they could use the 2 extra games as either more conference games, rivarly games, or just a pansy ass opponent to get a win.

and as far as traveleing, as long as all the conferences are equal in strength, then the conferences closest to each other will play the playoff games at a nuetral site in between conferences. Then it would only be a far "bowl game " travel if they made it really far in the play off, and if that's the case then the fans will want to make the trip.

and each playoff games between different conferences would have a bowl name. It would only take 4 or 5 years before every bowl would start to build a tradition.

And as far as revenue, 5 home games is plenty, and I'm sure if the playoffs were ever approved, some network(or networks) would hand out a ton of loot to get the rights to it.

LRB · 05-14-2003, 12:49 PM

Sounds like a plan Just211. You're elected. [img]i/expressions/face-icon-small-wink.gif[/img]

Big Boy Laroux · 05-15-2003, 12:34 PM

well, i agree that the input into the BCS is bogus. but have some other way of determining the top 8 teams. then have those go into a playoff, the rest play bowl games. it'd be nice to have something to have a championship game for the big teams and still have a postseason for the smaller schools.

LRB · 05-15-2003, 12:49 PM

<< it'd be nice to have something to have a championship game for the big teams and still have a postseason for the smaller schools. >>

Split the Division. Both have playoffs. The Big Schools would have a chance to get in the playoffs every year and so would the small schools.

Dooby · 09-23-2003, 04:38 PM

Article with Tulane President.

CUSA looks to Expand

quietly leaking from C-USA is the following 12 team format:

SMU, Marshall, Central Fla and [Tulsa or Rice] are going to be added to CUSA. This is the word out of the CUSA Presidents meeting in Chicago.

1. Marshall
2. East Carolina
3. South Fla.
4. Central Fla.
5. UAB
6. So. Miss

1. Houston
2. Tulsa
3. TCU
4. Memphis
5. SMU
6. Tulane

Murphy3 · 09-23-2003, 04:56 PM

they should throw in UNT..one of the new football powerhouses in the Southwest.... take out SMU. Throw SMU in with ACU and Hardin Simmons. They could be some part of a super Christian Alliance Conference or somesuch. Winner gets the Holy Grail for a year. You might as well throw in Bayler while you're at it.

Big Boy Laroux · 09-23-2003, 05:00 PM

dooby, is that going to be for all sports? seems to me c-usa is already chock full of teams for basketball...

Marquette
Louisville
Saint Louis
Cincinnati
DePaul
Charlotte
East Carolina
Memphis
Tulane
UAB
USF
Houston
Southern Miss
TCU

damn, that's a lot of schools... i hope it's not for basketball, too.

also, does cincinatti not play football in C-USA?

Big Boy Laroux · 09-23-2003, 05:06 PM

oh, guess i should have read the article...

this is to replace schools that might leave the conference. got it.

Dooby · 09-23-2003, 05:08 PM

Quote:

Originally posted by: Murphy3
they should throw in UNT..one of the new football powerhouses in the Southwest.... take out SMU. Throw SMU in with ACU and Hardin Simmons. They could be some part of a super Christian Alliance Conference or somesuch. Winner gets the Holy Grail for a year. You might as well throw in Bayler while you're at it.

I have never heard of UNT. Heard of NTSU once. Once.

In all honesty, most likely UNT needs to be competitive in a range of sports. UNT still has attendance problems worse than SMU's.

Murphy3 · 09-23-2003, 05:26 PM

UNT's averaging 30,000 for their home games this season. And, they are competitive in women's soccer as well as football.

Impressive, huh?

please note the sarcasm

LordOfTheMavs · 09-23-2003, 09:26 PM

I think the SWC needs to come back. The texas big12 left outs need to form a new SWC. Not a super powerhouse at first, but due to great regional rivalries, an abundance of texas high school players that want to stay close to home and lots of local media coverage in the DFW & Houston areas, it could really grow into a good mid-major fast.

UNT
TCU
Rice
Houston
SMU
UTEP
Baylor
???

Big12 picks up CSU or maybe Arkansas???

That gives some good regional rivalries and attendance should pick up due to proximity and natural rivalries. This new conference could maybe even pick up some Louisiana schools like ULaLa or Tulane or LaTech.

Whada think?

Dooby · 09-24-2003, 08:27 AM

SMU to C-USA? Go for it

SMU's wish: geographic rivals

Well, how about that? Dooby says it and it gets in the DMN the next day. Also an SMU mention in the Orlando paper.

UCF and SMU enjoy the most support

Dooby · 10-15-2003, 02:19 PM

Without posting the link, C-USA yesterday formally voted to extend invitations to expand, including SMU, which UNT notwithstanding solidifies the Dallas market for C-USA. Also to be added are Marshall, Tulsa, Rice and one other.

The ACC is expected to extend an invite to Boston College this weekend and the Big East will add more teams by the end of the month.

dirno2000 · 10-15-2003, 02:34 PM

This should help SMU's recruiting and attendance. It's hard to get up for Hawaii and Boise State. Does the WAC even have an automatic NCAA tournament bid? They didn't after the last conference split and I haven't heard anything about it since then.

Dooby · 10-15-2003, 02:58 PM

One of the oddest things is that the western conferences have remained conspicuously silent through all of this. The PAC-10 is mum.

TCU fans have this notion that the Mountain West Conference will expand and include them and then join the BCS, but I can't find a single statement by anyone that says the MWC is even discussing expansion.

XERXES · 10-15-2003, 03:59 PM

Quote:

Originally posted by: Murphy3
they should throw in UNT..one of the new football powerhouses in the Southwest.... take out SMU. Throw SMU in with ACU and Hardin Simmons. They could be some part of a super Christian Alliance Conference or somesuch. Winner gets the Holy Grail for a year. You might as well throw in Bayler while you're at it.

As a man with an undergrad from Hardin Simmons - I take offense to being lumped in with those other heretical schools! [img]i/expressions/devil.gif[/img]

Drbio · 10-15-2003, 04:15 PM

Dooby- UCF is being mentioned as a possibility for the Big East. You could lose them.

Dooby · 11-04-2003, 06:00 PM

Louisville, Cincinnati, South Florida, DePaul and Marquette to Big East.

UCF, Marshall, SMU, Tulsa and Rice all accepted full CUSA membership today.

Mountain West may or may not expand, which may or may not include TCU.

I told you all of this was going to happen back in May. Ain't I something?