Online Now 1460

Horns247 Board

The place to talk about the Texas Longhorns

On this Board 873
Record: 4156 (12/1/2012)

Online now 1394
Record: 7224 (2/22/2012)

Boards ▾

Horns247 Board

The place to talk about the Texas Longhorns

6th Street

The place for off topic discussion on Hookem

Reply

Ex ND AD talks playoffs

  • Notre Dame football: Ex-AD Corrigan discusses looming playoff talks

    Time for radical ideas?

    www.southbendtribune.com

    textex ●

  • Going to pin this. Worth a read for those who like to follow the realignment saga.

    Follow on Twitter: http://twitter.com/BobbyBurton247

    BobbyBurton ●

  • "Those 80 teams in the super-conferences would secede from the NCAA."

    The most important quote from the article, IMO...

    mcb0703 ●

  • Who says you HAVE to have a conference championship game.
    - More important to have highest ranked team(s) in playoffs than determine conference championship (benefits B12 & SEC who usually have more high ranked teams)
    - If strength of schedule is made a greater factor, could be determined by highest final regular season ranking;
    - Doesn't pay the participating teams enough for the risk of losing their high ranking and much higher-paying slot in playoffs;
    - Public much more interested in seeing playoffs than conference championship games.

    detly wepun

  • I remember the game before the BCS well.

    I disagree with the basic premise of "at least we have #1 vs. #2".

    You have the BCS #1 vs #2. However, it's simply impossible to use the BCS ranking system to fairly identify the top two teams. It's pure speculation because of the tremendous variance in schedule, and IMO, it's impossible to rank teams from conferences who don't play each other.

    You just can't tell how good Bosie St. is for example, because they don't play in a tough conference. However, playing a tougher schedule does NOT mean you are the better team than a team that plays a weak schedule.

    You need a playoff to fairly determine the best team.

    signature image signature image

    TulsaHorn

  • mcb0703 said...

    "Those 80 teams in the super-conferences would secede from the NCAA."

    The most important quote from the article, IMO...

    First secede and then change scholarship limits. The big schools can support more than 85.

    signature image
    signature image
     signature image

    GetHooked ●

  • TulsaHorn said...

    I remember the game before the BCS well.

    I disagree with the basic premise of "at least we have #1 vs. #2".

    You have the BCS #1 vs #2. However, it's simply impossible to use the BCS ranking system to fairly identify the top two teams. It's pure speculation because of the tremendous variance in schedule, and IMO, it's impossible to rank teams from conferences who don't play each other.

    You just can't tell how good Bosie St. is for example, because they don't play in a tough conference. However, playing a tougher schedule does NOT mean you are the better team than a team that plays a weak schedule.

    You need a playoff to fairly determine the best team.

    exactly. Biggest farce in sports was you have the 2 best teams playing for the NC. Not necessarily true. But you do have the #1 and #2 ranked teams which by chance, bias and personal opinion are voted there.

    signature image signature image signature image

    A. Morgan. USWNT

    JeezGuy ●

  • TulsaHorn said...

    I remember the game before the BCS well.

    I disagree with the basic premise of "at least we have #1 vs. #2".

    You have the BCS #1 vs #2. However, it's simply impossible to use the BCS ranking system to fairly identify the top two teams. It's pure speculation because of the tremendous variance in schedule, and IMO, it's impossible to rank teams from conferences who don't play each other.

    You just can't tell how good Bosie St. is for example, because they don't play in a tough conference. However, playing a tougher schedule does NOT mean you are the better team than a team that plays a weak schedule.

    You need a playoff to fairly determine the best team.

    Ive given up on fair. The people making decisions are focused on dollars. They could care less about fairly picking a champ. They talk about keeping the importance of the regular season but they really dont want that. If they really did, they would allow each conference to send a champ to a playoff. That would make the regular season more important than ever before. But opinions get in the way. This guy is right with 16 team playoffs, but using the bowls is not the way. Home campus sites is the way to go. They have to get out of the mindset of somebody getting left out and worry about how to settle it on the field. Even with a selection panel, that wont happen. But again, they are all for money.

    You want parody and excitement, make it conference champ or bust. 8 conferences, 8 champs, 8 teams in the playoff.

    There is nothing more dangerous in this world than a man with nothing to lose.

    bruthaman ●

  • Decent interview. He's stuck in the past but that's not unusual for someone in his position.

    The only thing I really took out of that interview is that they did discuss breaking away from the NCAA. This is the best long term scenario for a school like Texas. The enforcement mechanism in the NCAA is corrupt and broken. If there was an enforcement agency that only had to monitor 64 schools football programs and each member institution agreed to the rules then much of the shit we see now would come to a stop quickly.

    maninblack1 ●

  • I am not really shocked that a Notre Dame guy likes the BCS. After all, they have a special rule in it just for them. How about this: we have an eight team playoff selected by a selection committee, and I volunteer to be that committee. My first rule would be that at least one of the eight participants must have burnt orange and white as school colors. Sounds fair to me. Can I get a second?

    "I've heard some of our fans say, 'We were always an SEC school. We just didn't know it," athletic director Bill Byrne said.

    Bevo52

  • maninblack1 said...

    The enforcement mechanism in the NCAA is corrupt and broken. If there was an enforcement agency that only had to monitor 64 schools football programs and each member institution agreed to the rules then much of the shit we see now would come to a stop quickly.

    I don't think that necessarily follows. Someone recently posted a very long article that laid out the history of college football (off the field) and the NCAA. The article pointed out that the NCAA exists at the whim of the member institutions. They have little leverage when it comes to investigative powers, and are reluctant to administer harsh penalties for fear that the members will simply dissolve the NCAA.

    This makes even more sense when you consider that the NCAA derives the majority of its funding from March Madness. The general consensus seems to be that cheating in basketball is far worse than in football, but even less is done about basketball transgressions than those in football.

    Only a governing body with complete independence, separate funding, and the total support of all member institutions when it came to enforcement would be able to actually clean up the big sports. Conversely, cleaning up the sports and killing off high profile programs would damage the marketability of the product. It seems the beast is uncontrollable.

    texaztom

  • I think the conferences need to be broken down into divisions. Division champs play a round (1 seed vs 4 seed, 2 vs 3) the winners play CCG. Then seed into the 8 team playoff.

    I'd limit out of conference games except for marquee matchups like previous NC teams. I think you could play the out of division teams within the conference based on how they finish the previous year instead of rotating. Making the worst teams play the lighter schedules to create some parity. With the higher ratio of talent with 64-80 teams it would be highly competitive.

    This doesn't make a loss the end for a NC hopeful, but it makes the regular season even more important IMO. You could even realign the divisions every 4 years or so just to keep it fresh.

    This post was edited by wbrom42 on 6/10/2012 at 4:17 PM

    wbrom42

  • wbrom42 said...

    I think the conferences need to be broken down into divisions. Division champs play a round (1 seed vs 4 seed, 2 vs 3) the winners play CCG. Then seed into the 8 team playoff.

    I'd limit out of conference games except for marquee matchups like previous NC teams. I think you could play the out of division teams within the conference based on how they finish the previous year instead of rotating. Making the worst teams play the lighter schedules to create some parity. With the higher ratio of talent with 64-80 teams it would be highly competitive.

    This doesn't make a loss the end for a NC hopeful, but it makes the regular season even more important IMO. You could even realign the divisions every 4 years or so just to keep it fresh.

    8 Conferences, 8 Champs, 8 Champs in the playoff. Nobody can claim they have been left out because at the beginning of your conference schedule, youre in it. Its all up to you to win your conference to make it in. But, that makes people responsible for their own actions, so they wont ever do it.

    There is nothing more dangerous in this world than a man with nothing to lose.

    bruthaman ●

  • bruthaman said...

    But, that makes people responsible for their own actions, so they wont ever do it.

    Subtle yet funny and effective jab

    signature image signature image signature image

    A. Morgan. USWNT

    JeezGuy ●

  • bruthaman said...

    8 Conferences, 8 Champs, 8 Champs in the playoff. Nobody can claim they have been left out because at the beginning of your conference schedule, youre in it. Its all up to you to win your conference to make it in. But, that makes people responsible for their own actions, so they wont ever do it.

    In my scenario you have 4 or 5 conference champs with 3 or 4 "wild cards". It allows for expansion of the playoff as well. Then the conference champ is just getting a bye and a better seed.

    wbrom42

  • wbrom42 said...

    In my scenario you have 4 or 5 conference champs with 3 or 4 "wild cards". It allows for expansion of the playoff as well. Then the conference champ is just getting a bye and a better seed.

    Wild cards brings opinions into the picture. I dont like that. People want to put absolutes on things that havent happened yet. They always assume that such and such will beat them because of the conference they play in. Thats what I want to get rid of. No byes either. Let FG% and extra point percentage decide the seedings or even punts killed inside the 20.

    My way leaves nobody out of the playoff. Everybody is in from day one of conference play begins. From there, they play themselves in or out of the playoff. Its all on them and their name, tradition, facilities or money wont matter one bit. Dream scenario, but thats the most fair and logical way to do it. But people will cry because the MAC champ is in and the #2 SEC or B12 team isnt. Well, we are trying to find the best team. If you cant win your own conference, you obviously arent the best team.

    There is nothing more dangerous in this world than a man with nothing to lose.

    bruthaman ●

Texas
247Sports
Features
Resources
Connect

247Sports In partnership with CBS Sports