If you're a fan of college football, why wouldn't you be all in for this?

2 hours ago, bugatti said:

College football sold its soul for the almighty dollar back a few decades. People just bought the warm and fuzzy narratives.

Amen to that.

On 7/24/2021 at 12:00 PM, Walter said:

Ohio State getting on board for a move like this @John Anthony? 

They only want to admit schools with AAU academic accreditation.  This membership provides insane amounts of research/funding for AAU accredited schools.

Iowa State and Kansas are AAU members, that’s the easy way out.  However the B1G has poor leadership at the top right now, so I expect them to move slow.  The PAC12 has several AAU schools, I could see the B1G and PAC12 being the last ones at the bar.

They would like North Carolina and Virginia but I don’t think the ACC is imploding.

14 hours ago, bugatti said:

If you're a fan of college football, why wouldn't you be all in for this?

Off the cuff...

1) Scheduling.  I like that teams are able to play out-of-conference games.  But, with a 16 team conference, you're likely looking at 7 annual division games, and what, 4 cross-division games?  That already puts you at 11 games, without even leaving the conference.  And if you cut it down to 2 cross-division games, that means you're only playing half your conference once every four years.  So...either you get one out-of-conference game a year, or you have schools that your team (as a player) faced one-time (even though they were in your conference) during your time in school.  Not a fan of that.  

2) Playoffs.  I don't need/want 6 teams in a 12 team playoff to come from the same conference.  And because of their inability to play each other during the regular season, there's always going to be a case being made for multiple teams within the conference to make the playoffs, even though they didn't even make it to their conference championship.  Honestly, I'd be much happier with more smaller-sized conferences being able to send a "true" champion (and maybe a runner-up) because they've actually played each other, than a larger-sized conference and have to theorize who deserves to be in, just because they couldn't play each other.

39 minutes ago, CincySportsFan said:

Off the cuff...

1) Scheduling.  I like that teams are able to play out-of-conference games.  But, with a 16 team conference, you're likely looking at 7 annual division games, and what, 4 cross-division games?  That already puts you at 11 games, without even leaving the conference.  And if you cut it down to 2 cross-division games, that means you're only playing half your conference once every four years.  So...either you get one out-of-conference game a year, or you have schools that your team (as a player) faced one-time (even though they were in your conference) during your time in school.  Not a fan of that.  

2) Playoffs.  I don't need/want 6 teams in a 12 team playoff to come from the same conference.  And because of their inability to play each other during the regular season, there's always going to be a case being made for multiple teams within the conference to make the playoffs, even though they didn't even make it to their conference championship.  Honestly, I'd be much happier with more smaller-sized conferences being able to send a "true" champion (and maybe a runner-up) because they've actually played each other, than a larger-sized conference and have to theorize who deserves to be in, just because they couldn't play each other.

I hear what you are saying, but if this means I get an Alabama/Texas or Auburn/OU game we normally wouldn't get, then I am here for that.

College football builds their product around the regular season. College basketball builds their product  around a 16 day (8 days of actual games) inverted pyramid of excitement. The landscape of college football has the power residing with a handful of teams, super conference or not. I want to see those teams in action against high caliber competition as much as I can. Watching Clemson waltz through the ACC is no fun.

16 hours ago, bugatti said:

College football sold its soul for the almighty dollar back a few decades. People just bought the warm and fuzzy narratives.

Still enjoy watching it more than the NFL.  

7 minutes ago, sportsfan41 said:

Still enjoy watching it more than the NFL.  

CFB and NFL are completely different products, IMO. I like the NFL, but I'm with you, I much prefer college football over the NFL. 

I think a 12 team playoff is coming.  With these super conferences, place teams in pods, 4 pods and they rotate and play one or two divisions every few years.  

3 hours ago, TheDeuce said:

CFB and NFL are completely different products, IMO. I like the NFL, but I'm with you, I much prefer college football over the NFL. 

It seems that the majority of my friends that prefer the NFL, do so primarily because of fantasy football.  

9 hours ago, CincySportsFan said:

Off the cuff...

1) Scheduling.  I like that teams are able to play out-of-conference games.  But, with a 16 team conference, you're likely looking at 7 annual division games, and what, 4 cross-division games?  That already puts you at 11 games, without even leaving the conference.  And if you cut it down to 2 cross-division games, that means you're only playing half your conference once every four years.  So...either you get one out-of-conference game a year, or you have schools that your team (as a player) faced one-time (even though they were in your conference) during your time in school.  Not a fan of that.  

2) Playoffs.  I don't need/want 6 teams in a 12 team playoff to come from the same conference.  And because of their inability to play each other during the regular season, there's always going to be a case being made for multiple teams within the conference to make the playoffs, even though they didn't even make it to their conference championship.  Honestly, I'd be much happier with more smaller-sized conferences being able to send a "true" champion (and maybe a runner-up) because they've actually played each other, than a larger-sized conference and have to theorize who deserves to be in, just because they couldn't play each other.

The most discussed proposal so far has been 4 team scheduling pods. You play the other three in your pod yearly, then two from each of the other three pods...for a 9 game conference schedule.  Under this plan every two years you would play every team in the conference and every four years you would play each team in the league both home and away. 

How the pods are divided up will be interesting. I expect UK to be in a pod with SC, UGA and Florida. Tennessee, Vanderbilt, Alabama and Auburn together. Ole Miss, Mississippi State, LSU and Texas A&M in a pod. Then Texas, Oklahoma, Arkansas and Missouri in the final pod. That would put two "Traditional" powers in each pod.

 

16 hours ago, Jumper_Dad said:

The most discussed proposal so far has been 4 team scheduling pods. You play the other three in your pod yearly, then two from each of the other three pods...for a 9 game conference schedule.  Under this plan every two years you would play every team in the conference and every four years you would play each team in the league both home and away. 

How the pods are divided up will be interesting. I expect UK to be in a pod with SC, UGA and Florida. Tennessee, Vanderbilt, Alabama and Auburn together. Ole Miss, Mississippi State, LSU and Texas A&M in a pod. Then Texas, Oklahoma, Arkansas and Missouri in the final pod. That would put two "Traditional" powers in each pod.

 

Okay, that makes more sense than two divisions.  However, are they going to split up the two "traditional" powers, as you put it, in the cross-pod scheduling?  I mean, if you're a UK fan, facing Tennessee, Vandy, Ole Miss, Mississippi State, Arkansas and Missouri is a heck of a lot different than facing Bama, Auburn, LSU, A&M, Texas and Oklahoma.  That's a pretty wide spectrum in the SOS.

7 hours ago, CincySportsFan said:

Okay, that makes more sense than two divisions.  However, are they going to split up the two "traditional" powers, as you put it, in the cross-pod scheduling?  I mean, if you're a UK fan, facing Tennessee, Vandy, Ole Miss, Mississippi State, Arkansas and Missouri is a heck of a lot different than facing Bama, Auburn, LSU, A&M, Texas and Oklahoma.  That's a pretty wide spectrum in the SOS.

The discussion that I heard was that you'd only play one pod power per year. Example UK would play Bama but not Auburn, Texas but not OU and A&M but not LSU in a given year.

That said, the Pods could be completely different. 

I don't think this is a route Bowlsby wants to take.... Especially if he's trying to save the B12 with expansion. 

If ESPN wants OU/TX in the SEC in 2022, it's happening. They're saving $150 million by getting rid of the LHN. They can finance the early exit fees for those two with no problem.... While also telling the ACC to add West VA and UC to diminish the B12 even more than it already is. 

 

 

On 7/29/2021 at 8:28 PM, Jumper_Dad said:

The discussion that I heard was that you'd only play one pod power per year. Example UK would play Bama but not Auburn, Texas but not OU and A&M but not LSU in a given year.

That said, the Pods could be completely different. 

Gotcha.  Makes sense.

My next question is, how are they going to determine who's the conference champion.  I think it'd be possible that you end up with multiple teams with an identical record and no head-to-head to break the tie.  No way they're going to have a semi-finals with each of the four pod winners, are they?

Apparently FSU and Clemson have also reached out to the SEC.