(02-21-2012 01:26 AM)HawaiiMongoose Wrote:  

(02-21-2012 12:06 AM)10thMountain Wrote:  There will be no playoff until the Big 5 are allowed to split off into their own division and don't have to be forced to share the money or TV appeal they generate with the other Johnny-come-latelies.

Just which "Johnny-come-latelies" would those be? Wyoming, which started playing college football in 1892, two years before Texas A&M? Or perhaps New Mexico and Colorado State, which also began play in 1892? Do you mean Tulane, which played its first game in 1893? Or Tulsa or Marshall, which fielded their first teams in 1895?

There are plenty of schools outside the "Big 5" with over 100 years of college football history. Disrespect them if you want to for their small budgets or small fan bases compared to the mega-programs, but not for being late to the party.

Agreed. Most are not "johnny-come-latelies". But playing devil's advocate - most are programs that did not make the huge investments to make college football the second most popular sport in America today. Keep in mind, the $$$ wasn't always what it is now when these programs started investing and taking the major risks.

And yes, I know, not investing is true for a minority of the programs in the "protected" conferences as well. But assuming that the Big East somehow manages to remain "protected" (and with Navy and possibly Air Force coming on board they just might), what does that leave in terms of number of programs who did (or have invested) outside the "protected" conferences now?

Just food for thought.

Cheers,
Neil

(02-21-2012 06:52 AM)hawghiggs Wrote:  I think the process is still years away. We need to see what the NCAA does with this so called "Alliance" first. If they allow them to have a semi-final game and a championship game. Then all bets are off. The ACC and SEC will quickly merge and do the same.

If the "Alliance" get's to have semis and finals within the conference I think it is more likely that the SEC, ACC and possibly other conferences, will just expand. There is no reason for the ACC and SEC to merge. Heck, since each conference already has 14 schools merging would be a bad idea. Why try to manage a 28 school, or more, conference when only 16 are necessary to get the benefit of the new rules. If they are even passed. We don't know that the NCAA is going to allow ANY conference to have semis.

(02-22-2012 06:20 AM)joe4psu Wrote:  

(02-21-2012 06:52 AM)hawghiggs Wrote:  I think the process is still years away. We need to see what the NCAA does with this so called "Alliance" first. If they allow them to have a semi-final game and a championship game. Then all bets are off. The ACC and SEC will quickly merge and do the same.

If the "Alliance" get's to have semis and finals within the conference I think it is more likely that the SEC, ACC and possibly other conferences, will just expand. There is no reason for the ACC and SEC to merge. Heck, since each conference already has 14 schools merging would be a bad idea. Why try to manage a 28 school, or more, conference when only 16 are necessary to get the benefit of the new rules. If they are even passed. We don't know that the NCAA is going to allow ANY conference to have semis.

Some folks just don't quite understand the business end of all of this. You are very likely correct that the major conferences do not wish to give up their brands. They have made very significant investments in their brands and by brands I mean their conferences. There is no reason for the SEC to dilute their brand by mixing it with the ACC brand. They will get to 16 and then have their conference playoff and make a ton of money off of it without having to almost cut the profit in half by splitting it with the lesser watched ACC.

We do not know that the NCAA will allow such but when this idea will greatly benefit the major institutions that hold the most sway over the NCAA, it is not all that far out there to assume that there will be major powers pushing the NCAA to write new rules or at least provide a waiver for the Alliance.

That way no one will be able to say that the new rules were written in favor of the Majors because officially they would have been written for The Alliance.

if the new rules require 6 team divisions in order to have the extra game then it'd make more sense to merge than get teams one at a time.

I don't think the SEC/ACC will ever merge, but I CAN see a strategic alliance ala what the B1G and PAC have where both conferences are seperate and unique but support each other to promote themselves together. I could easily see the following eventually happening:

* Sugar Bowl permanently becomes top SEC vs top ACC

* Preseason Basketball tournament

* Preseason Baseball tournament (epic)

The point about a ACC/SEC merger is this. If the ACC side could have a semi-final round and then a championship game. And the SEC could do the same. Thats an eight team playoff. The reason that a playoff doesn't work in college football is due to the fact that their are to many teams. But if you had a set limit of teams like 28 or 32. Then you could easily do one.

(02-22-2012 03:45 PM)4x4hokies Wrote:  if the new rules require 6 team divisions in order to have the extra game then it'd make more sense to merge than get teams one at a time.

(02-22-2012 05:18 PM)10thMountain Wrote:  I don't think the SEC/ACC will ever merge, but I CAN see a strategic alliance ala what the B1G and PAC have where both conferences are seperate and unique but support each other to promote themselves together. I could easily see the following eventually happening:

* Sugar Bowl permanently becomes top SEC vs top ACC

* Preseason Basketball tournament

* Preseason Baseball tournament (epic)

If 24 school conferences were required then I could see the B1G and Pac-12 merging to take advantage of the rules instead of expanding. Neither conference seems to be in too much of a hurry to expand beyond 12 so they likely won't want to double in size over night.

(02-22-2012 05:33 PM)hawghiggs Wrote:  The point about a ACC/SEC merger is this. If the ACC side could have a semi-final round and then a championship game. And the SEC could do the same. Thats an eight team playoff. The reason that a playoff doesn't work in college football is due to the fact that their are to many teams. But if you had a set limit of teams like 28 or 32. Then you could easily do one.

I'm not sure that I'm following you. Are talking about a playoff just between the ACC and SEC? If the idea is that the champion between the two would move on to an NCAA playoff then it still doesn't make sense. Both conferences would still be better off with 16 schools, possibly even 24, and a playoff within the conference. That way both conferences still get to send a team to the NCAA playoff.

The big conferences would make more money by effectively internalizing the opening rounds of the playoff. If they make it so conference champs advance and you are allowed semi-final games, you could match up the ACC champ vs the SEC champ with three other teams and do a plus one model.

(02-22-2012 05:33 PM)hawghiggs Wrote:  The point about a ACC/SEC merger is this. If the ACC side could have a semi-final round and then a championship game. And the SEC could do the same. Thats an eight team playoff. The reason that a playoff doesn't work in college football is due to the fact that their are to many teams. But if you had a set limit of teams like 28 or 32. Then you could easily do one.

I'm not sure that I'm following you. Are talking about a playoff just between the ACC and SEC? If the idea is that the champion between the two would move on to an NCAA playoff then it still doesn't make sense. Both conferences would still be better off with 16 schools, possibly even 24, and a playoff within the conference. That way both conferences still get to send a team to the NCAA playoff.
[/quote]
The point I'm trying to make(and have failed to do so)is that. If the NCAA allows two seperate conferences to hold a semi-final round and a championship game. Then whats to stop 2 huge conferences from basically seperating themselves from everyone else. These two conferences are covered in some of the biggest markets in america and a playoff system that would allow them to crown their champion would be huge. It wouldn't matter what a teams win-lose record or BCS ranking was. It would only matter that the where able to get into the playoff.

(02-22-2012 11:53 PM)hawghiggs Wrote:  The point I'm trying to make(and have failed to do so)is that. If the NCAA allows two seperate conferences to hold a semi-final round and a championship game. Then whats to stop 2 huge conferences from basically seperating themselves from everyone else. These two conferences are covered in some of the biggest markets in america and a playoff system that would allow them to crown their champion would be huge. It wouldn't matter what a teams win-lose record or BCS ranking was. It would only matter that the where able to get into the playoff.

Anything is possible.

(02-22-2012 11:53 PM)hawghiggs Wrote:  The point I'm trying to make(and have failed to do so)is that. If the NCAA allows two seperate conferences to hold a semi-final round and a championship game. Then whats to stop 2 huge conferences from basically seperating themselves from everyone else. These two conferences are covered in some of the biggest markets in america and a playoff system that would allow them to crown their champion would be huge. It wouldn't matter what a teams win-lose record or BCS ranking was. It would only matter that the where able to get into the playoff.

There's nothing stopping it now, Hawg, except for a reluctance to do so, and that's fading...

Why would the SEC have any desire to merge with the weak ACC? That would simply dilute their product and money for no reason at all.

If you go back just months really, the major powers have been talking about all of this.

The top 64 schools forming four 16 team superconferences--probably divided into "pods" of four each. These pods would have a "champion" which would then meet another pods designated champion. The champion of this "pod semifinal" would then meet the champion of the other side of the conferences pod semifinal to play the conference championship game. After this, the four conference champions would meet in the four team "playoff" for the MNC.

This isn't an idea the alliance is coming up with, they are simply working on the idea already proposed in the hopes that the champion of their larger conference would be deemed eligible for the big playoff for the MNC or BCS bowls if the system has those.

(02-23-2012 08:14 AM)buckaineer Wrote:  Why would the SEC have any desire to merge with the weak ACC? That would simply dilute their product and money for no reason at all.

If you go back just months really, the major powers have been talking about all of this.

The top 64 schools forming four 16 team superconferences--probably divided into "pods" of four each. These pods would have a "champion" which would then meet another pods designated champion. The champion of this "pod semifinal" would then meet the champion of the other side of the conferences pod semifinal to play the conference championship game. After this, the four conference champions would meet in the four team "playoff" for the MNC.

This isn't an idea the alliance is coming up with, they are simply working on the idea already proposed in the hopes that the champion of their larger conference would be deemed eligible for the big playoff for the MNC or BCS bowls if the system has those.

WVU wins one bowl game and now they are God's gift to football. Get over yourselves. You are joining the worst rated academic conference after you begged to get into every other conference and they wouldn't have you. Hope you have fun playing 1k miles from home...nobody else cares to hear about it all the time though.

(02-23-2012 10:42 AM)4x4hokies Wrote:  WVU wins one bowl game and now they are God's gift to football.

WVU is 3-0 in BCS bowls. What's Virginia Tech's record in BCS bowls again?

(02-23-2012 11:13 AM)bitcruncher Wrote:  

(02-23-2012 10:42 AM)4x4hokies Wrote:  WVU wins one bowl game and now they are God's gift to football.

WVU is 3-0 in BCS bowls. What's Virginia Tech's record in BCS bowls again?

Apparently that's the only thing WVU has going for it. I am aware you won some BCS games...the whole world is the way you go on about it. WVU fans are turning into ******** on this board. Act like you've done it before.

It wasn't me you were having the argument with. Act like you've had discussions in large groups before...

(02-23-2012 11:33 AM)bitcruncher Wrote:  It wasn't me you were having the argument with. Act like you've had discussions in large groups before...

You are the one jumping into it with the tired BCS comment. I assume from that that you are now trying to talk smack as well.

Not trying, succeeding. Virginia Tech has made 6 BCS bowl appearances and have a total of ONE win to show for it...

In case you missed the memo, WVU is 3 for 3...