(07-24-2012 02:53 PM)Wedge Wrote:  

(07-24-2012 02:16 PM)bitcruncher Wrote:  

(07-24-2012 02:07 PM)orangefan Wrote:  

(07-24-2012 01:59 PM)bitcruncher Wrote:  I'm sure Penn State wants Pitt on the schedule now. They need the Panthers to help them rebuild their rep, and the best way to do that is play the highest profile game they can get in the State of Pennsylvania. Although the folks at Penn State may be thinking playing WVU is the best way to accomplish that goal now...

As for the Brawl, I'd like to see it continue. It's a short drive for either fanbase, both schools consider the Brawl an important game - locally and nationally, and it's been played over 100 times. You don't just throw away that kind of history. Not if it ever meant anything...

Hopefully you guys will get back to it eventually. No reason you can't have a major OOC rivalry. Right now, though, WVU has UMD scheduled through 2017, and Pitt has ND scheduled through 2016. With 9 game conference schedules, it will take a brave AD and coach from each school to schedule a second major conference opponent OOC.

We'll see. I know Luck would like to keep the rivalry going. I think Pederson is of a similar mind. But it all depends on whether or not both schools want it to happen bad enough. With 9 game conference schedules, they're going to have to want it real bad...

Another reason 9-game conference schedules are not good for the game.

I know they're not going away anytime soon -- the SEC doesn't have them, but even Nick Saban thinks they should -- but the near-elimination of interesting non-conference games will make the sport less interesting for fans.

As a fan of a Pac-12 team, I'd much rather see 8 conference games and an annual Big Ten opponent rather than 9 conference games.

Well for a long time, Utah-BYU, Texas-Texas A&M, Georgia-Georgia Tech, S. Carolina-Clemson, TCU-SMU, were all in the same conference. Penn St. and Pitt were both independents as was WVU-and then Pitt and WVU were in the same conference. Miami and FSU were both independents. But the realignment over the last few decades and especially the last couple of years, has split up old rivals. Its not the 9 game schedules. Its the realignment.

(07-24-2012 08:40 PM)bullet Wrote:  

(07-24-2012 02:53 PM)Wedge Wrote:  

(07-24-2012 02:16 PM)bitcruncher Wrote:  

(07-24-2012 02:07 PM)orangefan Wrote:  

(07-24-2012 01:59 PM)bitcruncher Wrote:  I'm sure Penn State wants Pitt on the schedule now. They need the Panthers to help them rebuild their rep, and the best way to do that is play the highest profile game they can get in the State of Pennsylvania. Although the folks at Penn State may be thinking playing WVU is the best way to accomplish that goal now...

As for the Brawl, I'd like to see it continue. It's a short drive for either fanbase, both schools consider the Brawl an important game - locally and nationally, and it's been played over 100 times. You don't just throw away that kind of history. Not if it ever meant anything...

Hopefully you guys will get back to it eventually. No reason you can't have a major OOC rivalry. Right now, though, WVU has UMD scheduled through 2017, and Pitt has ND scheduled through 2016. With 9 game conference schedules, it will take a brave AD and coach from each school to schedule a second major conference opponent OOC.

We'll see. I know Luck would like to keep the rivalry going. I think Pederson is of a similar mind. But it all depends on whether or not both schools want it to happen bad enough. With 9 game conference schedules, they're going to have to want it real bad...

Another reason 9-game conference schedules are not good for the game.

I know they're not going away anytime soon -- the SEC doesn't have them, but even Nick Saban thinks they should -- but the near-elimination of interesting non-conference games will make the sport less interesting for fans.

As a fan of a Pac-12 team, I'd much rather see 8 conference games and an annual Big Ten opponent rather than 9 conference games.

Well for a long time, Utah-BYU, Texas-Texas A&M, Georgia-Georgia Tech, S. Carolina-Clemson, TCU-SMU, were all in the same conference. Penn St. and Pitt were both independents as was WVU-and then Pitt and WVU were in the same conference. Miami and FSU were both independents. But the realignment over the last few decades and especially the last couple of years, has split up old rivals. Its not the 9 game schedules. Its the realignment.

The 9 game conf schedule is the culprit. Utah is a very good example -- with a 9 game Pac schedule, they were uncomfortable committing to both BYU and a Big Ten opponent. With an 8 game Pac schedule, the Utes would be happy to play both.

I like the 9 game round robin schedule in the Big XII. It plays out nicely for a double round robin in basketball too...

I agree Bit. if you have 10 members 9 game conf is perfect.

The problem isn't 9 conference games... that's GOOD.
The problem is only 3 non-conference games... not enough
SOLUTION:
Begin the season one week earlier and play a 13-game schedule!

(now, which of you "insiders" can make this happen?)

Then add in the conference playoff, and the national playoff, once you expand things like everyone thinks, and with the 13 game season, it would give our national championship contenders a season comprised of 17 games. It would be 16 for the other playoff contenders, 15 for those involved in conference playoffs that didn't make the national playoff, and 14 for those who don't make the conference playoff, but still get a post season bid...

Don't you think a 17 game football schedule is a bit of a stretch for today's student athlete?

(07-25-2012 08:41 AM)bitcruncher Wrote:  Then add in the conference playoff, and the national playoff, once you expand things like everyone thinks, and with the 13 game season, it would give our national championship contenders a season comprised of 17 games. It would be 16 for the other playoff contenders, 15 for those involved in conference playoffs that didn't make the national playoff, and 14 for those who don't make the conference playoff, but still get a post season bid...

Don't you think a 17 game football schedule is a bit of a stretch for today's student athlete?

How many games do teams in the FCS play when they get to the Championship game? 24 team playoff. 16 games (12 plus 4 playoff).

And, those players are actually in school for an education.

(07-25-2012 08:48 AM)curtis0620 Wrote:  

(07-25-2012 08:41 AM)bitcruncher Wrote:  Then add in the conference playoff, and the national playoff, once you expand things like everyone thinks, and with the 13 game season, it would give our national championship contenders a season comprised of 17 games. It would be 16 for the other playoff contenders, 15 for those involved in conference playoffs that didn't make the national playoff, and 14 for those who don't make the conference playoff, but still get a post season bid...

Don't you think a 17 game football schedule is a bit of a stretch for today's student athlete?

How many games do teams in the FCS play when they get to the Championship game? 24 team playoff. 16 games (12 plus 4 playoff).

And, those players are actually in school for an education.

How is making college players play more games than their professional counterparts in the NFL a good thing? It's absurd.

(07-25-2012 08:41 AM)bitcruncher Wrote:  Then add in the conference playoff, and the national playoff, once you expand things like everyone thinks, and with the 13 game season, it would give our national championship contenders a season comprised of 17 games. It would be 16 for the other playoff contenders, 15 for those involved in conference playoffs that didn't make the national playoff, and 14 for those who don't make the conference playoff, but still get a post season bid...

Don't you think a 17 game football schedule is a bit of a stretch for today's student athlete?

No, when you play as many baseball and basketball games as they do and have playoffs in those sports! It is lame excuse to keep from , having the so call big boys exposed as frauds in a true playoff.

(07-25-2012 08:57 AM)Hokie4Skins Wrote:  

(07-25-2012 08:48 AM)curtis0620 Wrote:  

(07-25-2012 08:41 AM)bitcruncher Wrote:  Then add in the conference playoff, and the national playoff, once you expand things like everyone thinks, and with the 13 game season, it would give our national championship contenders a season comprised of 17 games. It would be 16 for the other playoff contenders, 15 for those involved in conference playoffs that didn't make the national playoff, and 14 for those who don't make the conference playoff, but still get a post season bid...

Don't you think a 17 game football schedule is a bit of a stretch for today's student athlete?

How many games do teams in the FCS play when they get to the Championship game? 24 team playoff. 16 games (12 plus 4 playoff).

And, those players are actually in school for an education.

How is making college players play more games than their professional counterparts in the NFL a good thing? It's absurd.

With all the debates about the risk and damage of concussions, I think you guys are barking up the wrong tree in your zest to turn college football into the NFL...

(07-25-2012 08:57 AM)Hokie4Skins Wrote:  

(07-25-2012 08:48 AM)curtis0620 Wrote:  

(07-25-2012 08:41 AM)bitcruncher Wrote:  Then add in the conference playoff, and the national playoff, once you expand things like everyone thinks, and with the 13 game season, it would give our national championship contenders a season comprised of 17 games. It would be 16 for the other playoff contenders, 15 for those involved in conference playoffs that didn't make the national playoff, and 14 for those who don't make the conference playoff, but still get a post season bid...

Don't you think a 17 game football schedule is a bit of a stretch for today's student athlete?

How many games do teams in the FCS play when they get to the Championship game? 24 team playoff. 16 games (12 plus 4 playoff).

And, those players are actually in school for an education.

How is making college players play more games than their professional counterparts in the NFL a good thing? It's absurd.

There are only 2 teams that would play 16 games.
4 that would play 15 games
8 that would play 14 games
16 that would play 13 games.

The NFL, all play 16 games, where 2 play 19 games.

The NFL is also currently fighting lawsuits from former players who insist the NFL knew about the risk of concussions and concealed that information from the players...

(07-25-2012 09:48 AM)bitcruncher Wrote:  The NFL is also currently fighting lawsuits from former players who insist the NFL knew about the risk of concussions and concealed that information from the players...

The concussion damage to NFL players would be there even if they played 14 games instead of 16. Former Patriots linebacker Ted Johnson "only" played in the NFL for 10 years, only played about 13 games a year (due to injuries), and still suffered severe long-term damage. Read about him here: http://www.5280.com/magazine/2009/08/ted-johnsons-brain

They've found severe brain damage from concussions in high school and college kids too, and they've never played a down in the NFL. That tells us what?

That tells us that the concussion risk comes from playing football and not from the NFL per se.

And every extra game, every extra down, puts more risk on these kids. So the folks saying all the extra games are no problem are deluding themselves...

(07-25-2012 07:26 AM)goodknightfl Wrote:  I agree Bit. if you have 10 members 9 game conf is perfect.

I am probably alone on this, but I would love to see a 10 game conference schedule (6 divisional, 1 perm and 3 rotational) with 2 OOC games per year. LSU's OOC schedule last year (WVU, Oregon) was an anomaly. This year we get 4 OOC games with the murderer's row of North Texas, Towson State and Idaho...no thanks.

Let's go back to a 10 game schedule, no bowls, and let the sportswriters and coaches polls crown the national champion.

That will greatly reduce concussion injury exposure and give these scholar-athletes more time to concentrate on academics.

It worked in the Sixties, except it will be better with no bowl games at all.

It's not practical for the Big XII, since teams would have to play a conference member twice...