The Big East is being rebuilt by Notre Dame, who is a member for everything but football - the conference has added ND's longest running yearly football opponent Navy, the conference is going after Air Force and BYU (who both appear on ND schedules), Temple (on the ND schedule) is now in the Big East. Notre Dame brought their television partners to the Big East table, which brought CBS, FOX, and ABC/ESPN back. Does any of that look like they appear to be walking away from the Big East anytime soon? We hear these arguments every spring, and yet they only continue to grow their partnership/leaderships within the conference.

(03-23-2012 02:01 PM)He1nousOne Wrote:  

(03-23-2012 01:53 PM)FloridaJag Wrote:  

(03-23-2012 01:49 PM)He1nousOne Wrote:  

(03-23-2012 01:48 PM)FloridaJag Wrote:  

(03-23-2012 01:26 PM)He1nousOne Wrote:  One of the five major conferences is in a slightly weaker position then the other four when it comes to the perception of their champion.

I thought there was 6 major conferences per the BCS.

ACC
Big East
BIG 10
Big 12
PAC 12
SEC

Which of these conferences did you eliminate from the group of five?

The Big East of course. They are no longer a Major. They are now the Gatekeepers to the Majors.

The era of the BCS is over.

What is the qualification to be in the Majors?

Good question. I guess first and foremost would be stability. Some might say that the Big 12 doesn't have that but I think they do as per all their new agreements. I used to think they were the blood in the water but that isn't the case anymore.

The Big East is not stable. It's TOP teams are taken from it on a regular basis. That makes it a gatekeeper. "You join the Big East then you too might someday be invited to a Major conference".

Also television contracts make a major. If the Big East can sign one with NBC of equivalent value as the other majors then yes I would say there is an argument to be made that they are a major but I do not see them getting that now with the line up they will have.

The ACC and Big 12 successfully reduced the number of Majors from six to five. Now they sit across from each other at the Majors table.

So if stability is what makes you a major why is the MAC not a AQ conference? And doesn't this criteria also eliminates the Big 12 because it has lost four teams and is a Texas away from becoming worse than the Big East.

And you have to got be kidding if you consider the ACC a major conference. They are an absolute joke vs all the other AQ conferences it's at the point to where FSU vs OU is an easy win for OU now.

(03-24-2012 03:27 PM)TrojanCampaign Wrote:  

(03-23-2012 02:01 PM)He1nousOne Wrote:  

(03-23-2012 01:53 PM)FloridaJag Wrote:  

(03-23-2012 01:49 PM)He1nousOne Wrote:  

(03-23-2012 01:48 PM)FloridaJag Wrote:  I thought there was 6 major conferences per the BCS.

ACC
Big East
BIG 10
Big 12
PAC 12
SEC

Which of these conferences did you eliminate from the group of five?

The Big East of course. They are no longer a Major. They are now the Gatekeepers to the Majors.

The era of the BCS is over.

What is the qualification to be in the Majors?

Good question. I guess first and foremost would be stability. Some might say that the Big 12 doesn't have that but I think they do as per all their new agreements. I used to think they were the blood in the water but that isn't the case anymore.

The Big East is not stable. It's TOP teams are taken from it on a regular basis. That makes it a gatekeeper. "You join the Big East then you too might someday be invited to a Major conference".

Also television contracts make a major. If the Big East can sign one with NBC of equivalent value as the other majors then yes I would say there is an argument to be made that they are a major but I do not see them getting that now with the line up they will have.

The ACC and Big 12 successfully reduced the number of Majors from six to five. Now they sit across from each other at the Majors table.

So if stability is what makes you a major why is the MAC not a AQ conference? And doesn't this criteria also eliminates the Big 12 because it has lost four teams and is a Texas away from becoming worse than the Big East.

And you have to got be kidding if you consider the ACC a major conference. They are an absolute joke vs all the other AQ conferences it's at the point to where FSU vs OU is an easy win for OU now.

What is with you people? Look at the F'n post. I list both stability AND television contracts. They go hand in hand and one often begets the other. The MAC is not a major because it is not a major money maker for its members. It makes decent money for them and keeps their travel costs low. It is only as stable as long as no better offers come to it's members, which for most of them is unlikely so it is decently stable. It is not stable on it's own though, only as long as bigger fish don't come looking for dinner there.

The ACC is still a Major. It's TV contracts are still very good despite the fact that they are somewhat lower than other Majors. While there is a lot of talk about raids on the ACC coming, there still have yet to be ANY. The ACC is a Major, period.

So how would you define a major? You are all about critiquing my attempt, so give us yours.

(03-24-2012 09:19 AM)TerryD Wrote:  

(03-24-2012 07:23 AM)buckaineer Wrote:  

(03-24-2012 01:43 AM)wildthing202 Wrote:  

(03-24-2012 12:33 AM)He1nousOne Wrote:  

(03-23-2012 11:05 PM)buckaineer Wrote:  If Im the BIG, PAC, ACC, SEC, BIG 12--why in the world would I make an independents clause? So I have to battle through a conference to make the playoff-but I just award ND or whoever a spot in the playoff? Why would they agree to this? No, if they make the deal conference champions that is all it will be. If they make it the top 4 teams it will be the top four, not the top 3 and then a special spot for a ND or someone else if they are ranked x spots around the top 4 or whatever.

Once again, the threat of Notre Dame joining a conference is greater than the threat of them actually reaching this tournament as an Independent. I do not know how I can make it any clearer than that.

I doubt that flies since only a minority of conferences would even care at this point. Right away the PAC and SEC(plus the smaller conferences) couldn't give a damn, the ACC would do it just for the fact that they are the odds on favorite to get ND since the ACC sponsors all the sports that ND has for the most part unlike the B1G and Big 12. ND hates the B1G so they would be just wasting their time and the Big 12 is never going to be a realistic option since it is known that ND wants an East coast presence that the Big 12 & B1G can't give them. The BE is not an option otherwise they would be in the conference already.

So anything that would cost conferences millions just for a pipe dream is not a realistic option.

ND doesn't just want an east coast presence, they want a national presence. With the proper additions, the BIG 12 is the conference most able to provide this.

Buck, you consider ND irrelevant then you "pimp" them to join the Big 12 because you know that they would be a tremendous addition and would benefit WVU.

I don't consider ND irrelevant, much of college football considers them irrelevant. WVU isn't concerned with ND joining the BIG 12 or not. I am not "pimping" anyone to the BIG 12-the league is fine not expanding or expanding with multiple programs-none of which "needs" to be ND. You on the other hand are becoming desperate in your hope that ND doesn't join the BIG 12 when they finally realize they won't have a free ride anymore.

ND is not going to join a conference in the prairie heartland of America unless it is a hybrid deal.

ND's administration will make the best choice for conference affiliation. What you mean to say is you-personally-HOPE ND won't join the BIG 12--which wouldn't be a conference in the "prairie heartland of America" but a national conference with programs all over east, west, south, Texas, etc.

You would go bananas if that happened. To see WVU leave one hybrid conference to get away from ND only to see their new conference welcome ND for all sports but football would be ironic.

(I don't see ND doing this, either, but it is fun to think about, just to see the angst it would create).

Unlike the BE, the BIG 12 is a power conference. If the membership decided to add ND in a partial format, it wouldn't concern me because there will never be another conference that allows ND to use them the way the BE has.

I know some Big 12 fans have a pipe dream concerning the "proper additions" (Florida State, Clemson, etc..). There is no evidence that it is likely to occur except on blogs and messages boards.

I know some anti BIG 12 posters have a pipe dream that no teams would be interested or investigate membership in the conference. That is just a pipe dream. The head of the committee FSU created to investigate changing conferences commented publicly they were investigating the "conferences" they might move to. They weren't investigating the PAC, the Big East, and probably not the SEC since the SEC has a gentlemans agreement not to add anyone from the same state. We'll hear from Clemson this summer as to what they are thinking or not.

If.....if ND was "forced" (Yes, it would be an unwilling addition to a conference at gunpoint--despite your dislike for that term) to join a football conference, it would likely be the ACC, not the Big 12.

And it's an unwilling allowance by most of college football to continue to give ND a free ride. ND isn't joining a southeastern based conference that will likely lose multiple members over the next several seasons.

I also think that you are wrong in that there will be no four conference only champions playoff in the foreseeable future.

It is not me that says there will be a four conference champions playoff. It is the heads of the conferences in power that are telling us this is likely.

In my opinion, ND will likely remain a football independent, renew the NBC contract before the 2015 for more money and help broker an NBC/Comcast contract for the Big East.

ND may stay with the Big East. They may remain independent. It is 50/50 whether they'll be a major program anymore or have access to the national championship whether they have an NBC contract or not.

No desperation here, Buck. I am pretty certain that ND will not join the Big 12 and that Notre Dame will always be in an advantageous situation, better than most college football programs.

The Big 12 is not going to be a "national conference". It is going to be what it is right now, perhaps with the additions of Louisville and BYU some day.

Much of college football doesn't consider ND irrelevant, only haters and wishful thinkers.

Lots of people like you are going to be disappointed when no four team playoff results and ND is still sitting in a pretty good situation as an independent.

Good luck to WVU in the Big 12, Buck.

College football programs, conferences, etc. that decide the free ride for ND is over, that ND will have to compete just as they do for the big prize--these aren't "haters" any more than ND hates the rest of college football by expecting special treatment.

The BIG 12 may not expand, they may expand with a couple of programs, perhaps more. They already are more than a "prairie" league. They have programs in the east, midwest and southwest already. They are one of the top two football conferences in the nation and one of the top basketball conferences in the nation-with two teams remaining currently in the final 8 teams in the nation. If BIG 12 expansion goes in a certain direction which it well might, they will be the only major conference closest to being a national conference.

Right now the power conferences are all in favor of a four team playoff, and the majority of those in favor of a conference champs only format.
They might go with a top four--either way ND's days of being eligible for national championships could soon draw to a close. The powers that be will be deciding soon and as the writer said, ND's AD, rather than being a power broker might as well have been representing the MAC.

Keep believing all of that, Buck. Have a good evening.

(03-24-2012 04:03 PM)He1nousOne Wrote:  

(03-24-2012 03:27 PM)TrojanCampaign Wrote:  

(03-23-2012 02:01 PM)He1nousOne Wrote:  

(03-23-2012 01:53 PM)FloridaJag Wrote:  

(03-23-2012 01:49 PM)He1nousOne Wrote:  The Big East of course. They are no longer a Major. They are now the Gatekeepers to the Majors.

The era of the BCS is over.

What is the qualification to be in the Majors?

Good question. I guess first and foremost would be stability. Some might say that the Big 12 doesn't have that but I think they do as per all their new agreements. I used to think they were the blood in the water but that isn't the case anymore.

The Big East is not stable. It's TOP teams are taken from it on a regular basis. That makes it a gatekeeper. "You join the Big East then you too might someday be invited to a Major conference".

Also television contracts make a major. If the Big East can sign one with NBC of equivalent value as the other majors then yes I would say there is an argument to be made that they are a major but I do not see them getting that now with the line up they will have.

The ACC and Big 12 successfully reduced the number of Majors from six to five. Now they sit across from each other at the Majors table.

So if stability is what makes you a major why is the MAC not a AQ conference? And doesn't this criteria also eliminates the Big 12 because it has lost four teams and is a Texas away from becoming worse than the Big East.

And you have to got be kidding if you consider the ACC a major conference. They are an absolute joke vs all the other AQ conferences it's at the point to where FSU vs OU is an easy win for OU now.

What is with you people? Look at the F'n post. I list both stability AND television contracts. They go hand in hand and one often begets the other. The MAC is not a major because it is not a major money maker for its members. It makes decent money for them and keeps their travel costs low. It is only as stable as long as no better offers come to it's members, which for most of them is unlikely so it is decently stable. It is not stable on it's own though, only as long as bigger fish don't come looking for dinner there.

The ACC is still a Major. It's TV contracts are still very good despite the fact that they are somewhat lower than other Majors. While there is a lot of talk about raids on the ACC coming, there still have yet to be ANY. The ACC is a Major, period.

So how would you define a major? You are all about critiquing my attempt, so give us yours.

So because some TV network is willing to throw a few more million $ at a conference that's what makes it a major conference? What if NBCS decided to pay the Sun Belt more than the SEC and we lost no members, would we instantly gain AQ status?

I think the South fan who originally quoted you was correcting your message board non sense of using the term "Big Five" like the Big East somehow magically was not part of the AQ cartel anymore.

I think the BCS RULES define what an AQ conference is and the Big East exceeds those rules. You must have x teams in top 25 over x years, winning BCS bowls awards x amount of points, conference must have x amount of teams.

That is why there are AQ conferences and Non AQ conferences. Only one non AQ conference has even had top ten teams winning BCS bowls and they are long gone.

I love notre dame but they've been falling fast for years. They've lost touch with the blue collar fans and just been focused on the bougeiouse elitists. Pains me cause ive been a fan since I could watch Tv.

Notre Dame should not be given any perks; either join a conference or get treated like teams from a nonbcs league.

(03-24-2012 11:04 PM)TrojanCampaign Wrote:  So because some TV network is willing to throw a few more million $ at a conference that's what makes it a major conference? What if NBCS decided to pay the Sun Belt more than the SEC and we lost no members, would we instantly gain AQ status?

Well, the Sun Belt schools would have a huge opportunity for as long as that contract ran (and as long as NBC stayed out of Chapter 11). You'd be able to compete with SEC schools, and frankly anyone in the nation, for top shelf recruits. Facilities would spring up like weeds across the SBC, coaches would sign big money contracts to come coach at South Alabama. And finally, if NBC is dropping that kind of money on the Sun Belt regular season, I don't see why they wouldn't buy you a big-money bowl to go with it.

AQ status is going away, but if NBC dropped $15M a school on the Sun Belt, you'd suddenly have the equivalent. You'd be a power conference, until the money ran out (or until you grew a big enough audience for NBC to make money.)

Quote:I think the South fan who originally quoted you was correcting your message board non sense of using the term "Big Five" like the Big East somehow magically was not part of the AQ cartel anymore.

Well, after Chuck Neinas said that AQ was probably going away, and DElaney said that he didn't care if AQ went away, that was a pretty clear signal that the power conferences were done protecting the Big East and pretending that there were 6 roughly equal conferences.

Quote:I think the BCS RULES define what an AQ conference is and the Big East exceeds those rules. You must have x teams in top 25 over x years, winning BCS bowls awards x amount of points, conference must have x amount of teams.

No, the Big East is an AQ conference because they're listed in the BCS rules as an AQ conference. The numerical formulas were a sop to the Mountain West, who hoped to someday be added as a seventh AQ
conference.

Quote: That is why there are AQ conferences and Non AQ conferences. Only one non AQ conference has even had top ten teams winning BCS bowls and they are long gone.

(03-24-2012 11:04 PM)TrojanCampaign Wrote:  

(03-24-2012 04:03 PM)He1nousOne Wrote:  

(03-24-2012 03:27 PM)TrojanCampaign Wrote:  

(03-23-2012 02:01 PM)He1nousOne Wrote:  

(03-23-2012 01:53 PM)FloridaJag Wrote:  What is the qualification to be in the Majors?

Good question. I guess first and foremost would be stability. Some might say that the Big 12 doesn't have that but I think they do as per all their new agreements. I used to think they were the blood in the water but that isn't the case anymore.

The Big East is not stable. It's TOP teams are taken from it on a regular basis. That makes it a gatekeeper. "You join the Big East then you too might someday be invited to a Major conference".

Also television contracts make a major. If the Big East can sign one with NBC of equivalent value as the other majors then yes I would say there is an argument to be made that they are a major but I do not see them getting that now with the line up they will have.

The ACC and Big 12 successfully reduced the number of Majors from six to five. Now they sit across from each other at the Majors table.

So if stability is what makes you a major why is the MAC not a AQ conference? And doesn't this criteria also eliminates the Big 12 because it has lost four teams and is a Texas away from becoming worse than the Big East.

And you have to got be kidding if you consider the ACC a major conference. They are an absolute joke vs all the other AQ conferences it's at the point to where FSU vs OU is an easy win for OU now.

What is with you people? Look at the F'n post. I list both stability AND television contracts. They go hand in hand and one often begets the other. The MAC is not a major because it is not a major money maker for its members. It makes decent money for them and keeps their travel costs low. It is only as stable as long as no better offers come to it's members, which for most of them is unlikely so it is decently stable. It is not stable on it's own though, only as long as bigger fish don't come looking for dinner there.

The ACC is still a Major. It's TV contracts are still very good despite the fact that they are somewhat lower than other Majors. While there is a lot of talk about raids on the ACC coming, there still have yet to be ANY. The ACC is a Major, period.

So how would you define a major? You are all about critiquing my attempt, so give us yours.

So because some TV network is willing to throw a few more million $ at a conference that's what makes it a major conference? What if NBCS decided to pay the Sun Belt more than the SEC and we lost no members, would we instantly gain AQ status?

I think the South fan who originally quoted you was correcting your message board non sense of using the term "Big Five" like the Big East somehow magically was not part of the AQ cartel anymore.

I think the BCS RULES define what an AQ conference is and the Big East exceeds those rules. You must have x teams in top 25 over x years, winning BCS bowls awards x amount of points, conference must have x amount of teams.

That is why there are AQ conferences and Non AQ conferences. Only one non AQ conference has even had top ten teams winning BCS bowls and they are long gone.

The Big East isnt the same Big East that won those games over the years. That is just silly. The Big East is no longer a Major in football. It is just a rebranded Conference USA.

You talk about my posts being nonsense yet you hold on to this silliness that today's Big East should be given consideration for what the Big East did up to 25 years ago? That is dumb and that is why the BCS is going away. Realignment has changed the rules because it has changed the landscape.

As far as the SBC getting a big contract and "instantly" becoming a major. Look, I do not mind at all having an honest debate but you aren't even trying. The SBC will not land a big contract because they do not have the national following for such. MAJOR conferences have that kind of following, that is why they are majors. You are purposefully being obtuse. You know you can try so hard to refute someone's point that you actually have no explanation for the things you say in that attempt. That is definitely the case with you.

Notre Dame will get some kind of in to a 4 team playoff because it's a low risk, high reward move for the conferences to do so.

The Irish are obviously not what they were from 1988-1993, their most recent period of national prominence. Unlike a number of teams in conferences, the Irish do not have a realistic ability to "game" their schedule to go 11-1 easily as an independent. Their TV contract which requires them to at least make an effort to play good teams, combined with their rivalries and you get next season's Miami, Michigan, Michigan State, Oklahoma, USC and Stanford games as an example. The only other teams that could make a similar case to a difficult schedule this far out are likely in the SEC West and the Irish don't recruit or coach at a level of a LSU or Alabama at this point to make it through unscathed.

Because of this, they are not a serious threat to take a bid most seasons. The slim possibility that they would be in the playoff is worth $$$ to whoever wins the rights to show the games, as a ND playoff game would likely set a ratings record from both their fans and "haters." So, they'll be given an in.

(03-25-2012 06:23 PM)bronconick Wrote:  Notre Dame will get some kind of in to a 4 team playoff because it's a low risk, high reward move for the conferences to do so.

The Irish are obviously not what they were from 1988-1993, their most recent period of national prominence. Unlike a number of teams in conferences, the Irish do not have a realistic ability to "game" their schedule to go 11-1 easily as an independent. Their TV contract which requires them to at least make an effort to play good teams, combined with their rivalries and you get next season's Miami, Michigan, Michigan State, Oklahoma, USC and Stanford games as an example. The only other teams that could make a similar case to a difficult schedule this far out are likely in the SEC West and the Irish don't recruit or coach at a level of a LSU or Alabama at this point to make it through unscathed.

Because of this, they are not a serious threat to take a bid most seasons. The slim possibility that they would be in the playoff is worth $$$ to whoever wins the rights to show the games, as a ND playoff game would likely set a ratings record from both their fans and "haters." So, they'll be given an in.

Agreed. It will come about when the compromise between conference champions only and the Top 4 ranked teams is made.

Cheers,
Neil

(03-25-2012 06:50 PM)omniorange Wrote:  

(03-25-2012 06:23 PM)bronconick Wrote:  Notre Dame will get some kind of in to a 4 team playoff because it's a low risk, high reward move for the conferences to do so.

The Irish are obviously not what they were from 1988-1993, their most recent period of national prominence. Unlike a number of teams in conferences, the Irish do not have a realistic ability to "game" their schedule to go 11-1 easily as an independent. Their TV contract which requires them to at least make an effort to play good teams, combined with their rivalries and you get next season's Miami, Michigan, Michigan State, Oklahoma, USC and Stanford games as an example. The only other teams that could make a similar case to a difficult schedule this far out are likely in the SEC West and the Irish don't recruit or coach at a level of a LSU or Alabama at this point to make it through unscathed.

Because of this, they are not a serious threat to take a bid most seasons. The slim possibility that they would be in the playoff is worth $$$ to whoever wins the rights to show the games, as a ND playoff game would likely set a ratings record from both their fans and "haters." So, they'll be given an in.

Agreed. It will come about when the compromise between conference champions only and the Top 4 ranked teams is made.

Cheers,
Neil

Im sorry but the LAST thing anyone in the B1G, PAC and Big 12 want to see is Notre Dame in the ACC. That is what will happen if they are excluded from the National Championship picture as an Independent.

There will be an Independents clause and it is in the best interests of the B1G, PAC and Big 12 to have it in place.

As far as it just being a top 4 ranked teams, have you not paid attention to the strong statements made by certain commissioners as well as a vote by the PAC Presidents made public? Yeah you dont do that unless you have a very strong position to take advantage of. To ignore all that and believe that the tournament would be decided in the same manner that our system has been decided previously would be to miss the point of why this is being done. It is being done because everyone bent over backwards to have "the best two teams" play and that resulted in a flop. Oklahoma State vs LSU would have been a better game, unfortunately that can never be proven but a system can be made to make sure the National Championship remains National and doesn't flop because it turned into a Regional championship.

(03-25-2012 07:25 PM)He1nousOne Wrote:  Im sorry but the LAST thing anyone in the B1G, PAC and Big 12 want to see is Notre Dame in the ACC. That is what will happen if they are excluded from the National Championship picture as an Independent.

There will be an Independents clause and it is in the best interests of the B1G, PAC and Big 12 to have it in place.

As far as it just being a top 4 ranked teams, have you not paid attention to the strong statements made by certain commissioners as well as a vote by the PAC Presidents made public? Yeah you dont do that unless you have a very strong position to take advantage of. To ignore all that and believe that the tournament would be decided in the same manner that our system has been decided previously would be to miss the point of why this is being done. It is being done because everyone bent over backwards to have "the best two teams" play and that resulted in a flop. Oklahoma State vs LSU would have been a better game, unfortunately that can never be proven but a system can be made to make sure the National Championship remains National and doesn't flop because it turned into a Regional championship.

I believe you misunderstood my post. I agreed with the previous poster that ND would get access without having to join a conference, imho, through the compromise that will come in effect between those who want a champions only Final Four and those that simply want the Top 4 teams.

And I take it you have missed at least 5 other posts by me in different threads on this board that said the likely compromise will be the three highest rated conference champions and either the fourth highest rated conference champion or an at-large who is ahead of that fourth champion by 'x' spots in the ranking. The value of 'x' still to be determined. The exception will be to address last year's Wisconsin getting in over Alabama but it would be enough to keep ND indy for the rest of this decade.

But even with said access, ultimately ND at some point in the next decade will join a conference because by then, the "bigger picture" will basically be set.

Cheers,
Neil

(03-25-2012 08:33 PM)omniorange Wrote:  

(03-25-2012 07:25 PM)He1nousOne Wrote:  Im sorry but the LAST thing anyone in the B1G, PAC and Big 12 want to see is Notre Dame in the ACC. That is what will happen if they are excluded from the National Championship picture as an Independent.

There will be an Independents clause and it is in the best interests of the B1G, PAC and Big 12 to have it in place.

As far as it just being a top 4 ranked teams, have you not paid attention to the strong statements made by certain commissioners as well as a vote by the PAC Presidents made public? Yeah you dont do that unless you have a very strong position to take advantage of. To ignore all that and believe that the tournament would be decided in the same manner that our system has been decided previously would be to miss the point of why this is being done. It is being done because everyone bent over backwards to have "the best two teams" play and that resulted in a flop. Oklahoma State vs LSU would have been a better game, unfortunately that can never be proven but a system can be made to make sure the National Championship remains National and doesn't flop because it turned into a Regional championship.

I believe you misunderstood my post. I agreed with the previous poster that ND would get access without having to join a conference, imho, through the compromise that will come in effect between those who want a champions only Final Four and those that simply want the Top 4 teams.

And I take it you have missed at least 5 other posts by me in different threads on this board that said the likely compromise will be the three highest rated conference champions and either the fourth highest rated conference champion or an at-large who is ahead of that fourth champion by 'x' spots in the ranking. The value of 'x' still to be determined. The exception will be to address last year's Wisconsin getting in over Alabama but it would be enough to keep ND indy for the rest of this decade.

But even with said access, ultimately ND at some point in the next decade will join a conference because by then, the "bigger picture" will basically be set.

Cheers,
Neil

Neil:

What bigger picture is that? The only thing that I can see forcing ND into a conference is a "conference champs only" playoff.

(03-25-2012 08:33 PM)omniorange Wrote:  

(03-25-2012 07:25 PM)He1nousOne Wrote:  Im sorry but the LAST thing anyone in the B1G, PAC and Big 12 want to see is Notre Dame in the ACC. That is what will happen if they are excluded from the National Championship picture as an Independent.

There will be an Independents clause and it is in the best interests of the B1G, PAC and Big 12 to have it in place.

As far as it just being a top 4 ranked teams, have you not paid attention to the strong statements made by certain commissioners as well as a vote by the PAC Presidents made public? Yeah you dont do that unless you have a very strong position to take advantage of. To ignore all that and believe that the tournament would be decided in the same manner that our system has been decided previously would be to miss the point of why this is being done. It is being done because everyone bent over backwards to have "the best two teams" play and that resulted in a flop. Oklahoma State vs LSU would have been a better game, unfortunately that can never be proven but a system can be made to make sure the National Championship remains National and doesn't flop because it turned into a Regional championship.

I believe you misunderstood my post. I agreed with the previous poster that ND would get access without having to join a conference, imho, through the compromise that will come in effect between those who want a champions only Final Four and those that simply want the Top 4 teams.

And I take it you have missed at least 5 other posts by me in different threads on this board that said the likely compromise will be the three highest rated conference champions and either the fourth highest rated conference champion or an at-large who is ahead of that fourth champion by 'x' spots in the ranking. The value of 'x' still to be determined. The exception will be to address last year's Wisconsin getting in over Alabama but it would be enough to keep ND indy for the rest of this decade.

But even with said access, ultimately ND at some point in the next decade will join a conference because by then, the "bigger picture" will basically be set.

Cheers,
Neil

Wait a minute...wait a freaking minute. So Alabama loses to LSU in the season but because of opinion and opinion only they are considered the second best team in the country and are given a shot over the team that won the Big 12 which was considered ON PAR with the SEC. Alabama then wins the rematch and is considered the NATIONAL CHAMPION by breaking even with LSU. Wisconsin loses to Michigan State by a last second pass then comes back to beat them in the Conference Championship yet they are still considered a joke?

If Alabama can have redemption then why not Wisconsin? That pass could have gone the other way and we easily have a one loss Wisconsin that suddenly there is no argument about them earning a place in such a Tournament. You people are so win loss focused. Wisconsin won the Big Ten and they came back to make up for their loss against Michigan State. If it works for Alabama then it works for Wisconsin. To disagree is to show just how biased the system is for the SEC and why a National Championship tournament needs to give equal consideration across the board instead of stacking the chips in the SEC's favor.

Alabama did not deserve to be in that championship and the only reason Wisconsin was rated down at #10 was because a highly talented Ohio State squad that underachieved all year came to play against the Kings of the Big Ten last season while at home. The Michigan State loss doesn't matter because it was made up for and Alabama provides the precedent for that judgement. We will all see this coming season just how talented that Ohio State team was when Urban Meyer provides them the leadership needed.

Another reason for Wisconsin being rated 10th is the overwhelming bias shown to the SEC with how many teams they had ranked in the top ten. Instead of having the Big Ten champion face one of them in the National Tournament some of you would like to shallowly point at those two losses and say they didn't deserve to be there.

Wisconsin had the hardware to be there and they had the fourth highest ranking of any conference champion. The SEC flopped the national championship. You had your chance to show you could run the show and you failed. Now we get some structure to the system so that teams like Oklahoma State don't get screwed by SEC bias.

For that matter if the four teams brought in are determined by rankings then everyone gets screwed by SEC bias and the National Championship will forever be tarnished just like it was last year. Is the SEC afraid of going into the tournament equally with the rest of the conferences that make up the National spectrum? It is starting to seem that way.

(03-25-2012 09:22 PM)He1nousOne Wrote:  Wait a minute...wait a freaking minute. So Alabama loses to LSU in the season but because of opinion and opinion only they are considered the second best team in the country and are given a shot over the team that won the Big 12 which was considered ON PAR with the SEC. Alabama then wins the rematch and is considered the NATIONAL CHAMPION by breaking even with LSU. Wisconsin loses to Michigan State by a last second pass then comes back to beat them in the Conference Championship yet they are still considered a joke?

Are you sure you're a football fan? It wasn't just the polls that placed Alabama #2, but the computers had them #3, behind the team I, and others, believe should have been in the NC game, Oklahoma State.

Quote:If Alabama can have redemption then why not Wisconsin? That pass could have gone the other way and we easily have a one loss Wisconsin that suddenly there is no argument about them earning a place in such a Tournament. You people are so win loss focused. Wisconsin won the Big Ten and they came back to make up for their loss against Michigan State. If it works for Alabama then it works for Wisconsin. To disagree is to show just how biased the system is for the SEC and why a National Championship tournament needs to give equal consideration across the board instead of stacking the chips in the SEC's favor.

The fact you would compare a 15th computer ranked Wisconsin team beating a 22nd computer ranked Michigan State team to Alabama's situation is ludicrous. And the fact that the media is using the fact that Wisconsin would have taken Alabama's slot if a champions only Final Four model were in play this past football season as a reason WHY it shouldn't be champions only, basically ends the discussion on this point.

Notice that Oregon taking Stanford's slot in a champions' model only vs. strictly Top 4 is not mentioned.

And, for the record, in case you didn't read another reply of mine to yours, I've been talking about a champions only Plus One off-and-on since 2007 when most thought I was daft and insisted it would be an unseeded Plus One free-for-all.

Cheers,
Neil

(03-25-2012 10:26 PM)omniorange Wrote:  

(03-25-2012 09:22 PM)He1nousOne Wrote:  Wait a minute...wait a freaking minute. So Alabama loses to LSU in the season but because of opinion and opinion only they are considered the second best team in the country and are given a shot over the team that won the Big 12 which was considered ON PAR with the SEC. Alabama then wins the rematch and is considered the NATIONAL CHAMPION by breaking even with LSU. Wisconsin loses to Michigan State by a last second pass then comes back to beat them in the Conference Championship yet they are still considered a joke?

Are you sure you're a football fan? It wasn't just the polls that placed Alabama #2, but the computers had them #3, behind the team I, and others, believe should have been in the NC game, Oklahoma State.

Quote:If Alabama can have redemption then why not Wisconsin? That pass could have gone the other way and we easily have a one loss Wisconsin that suddenly there is no argument about them earning a place in such a Tournament. You people are so win loss focused. Wisconsin won the Big Ten and they came back to make up for their loss against Michigan State. If it works for Alabama then it works for Wisconsin. To disagree is to show just how biased the system is for the SEC and why a National Championship tournament needs to give equal consideration across the board instead of stacking the chips in the SEC's favor.

The fact you would compare a 15th computer ranked Wisconsin team beating a 22nd computer ranked Michigan State team to Alabama's situation is ludicrous. And the fact that the media is using the fact that Wisconsin would have taken Alabama's slot if a champions only Final Four model were in play this past football season as a reason WHY it shouldn't be champions only, basically ends the discussion on this point.

Notice that Oregon taking Stanford's slot in a champions' model only vs. strictly Top 4 is not mentioned.

And, for the record, in case you didn't read another reply of mine to yours, I've been talking about a champions only Plus One off-and-on since 2007 when most thought I was daft and insisted it would be an unseeded Plus One free-for-all.

Cheers,
Neil

Yes ashole I am a football fan and no I dont give a damn about the polls or computers. Alabama lost it's chance when they did not win their division. If you want divisions to not matter then push for all divisions in conferences to be scrapped. Divisions are made for a reason and they should be honored. So you had the best two teams according to opinion in the same division. To bad for them, the winner between the two gets to go on and prove the opinionated rankings then. The computer rankings do give sway to polls as well so dont cite them as if they are a completely different thing.

As a football fan I would like to see these conference championships we have unanimously approved of to actually mean something. So sorry you didnt beat LSU and make it to your conference championship Alabama. That is Alabama's fault, no one else's. They did not deserve a mulligan no matter what polls or computers say. They did not win their division and those division games should matter. In this case, it didn't matter at all because LSU's win in it gained them nothing.

I consider seeing the possibility of Wisconsin winning their way into the National Championship as a much better solution than Alabama getting to ignore the fact that they lost to their division rival during the season and showing how LSU's perfect season mattered for nothing because their biggest win of the season was basically nullified by Alabama bias.