(05-15-2014 06:19 AM)goofus Wrote:  

(05-14-2014 05:36 PM)CommuterBob Wrote:  Update:

Dennis Dodd ‏@dennisdoddcbs ·16 mins
Big 12/ACC legislation on deregulating conf championship games could be heard by NCAA board Aug. 7.

Does anyone have the exact language or a summary of what exactly has been proposed. There seems to be a lot of assumptions out there.

There have been a couple of articles written about it, but the exact language has not been published anywhere. The idea is that conferences would get their own autonomy to decide who plays in a CCG and the requirement for 12 members and divisional play would be rescinded.

(05-15-2014 10:13 AM)CommuterBob Wrote:  

(05-15-2014 06:19 AM)goofus Wrote:  

(05-14-2014 05:36 PM)CommuterBob Wrote:  Update:

Dennis Dodd ‏@dennisdoddcbs ·16 mins
Big 12/ACC legislation on deregulating conf championship games could be heard by NCAA board Aug. 7.

Does anyone have the exact language or a summary of what exactly has been proposed. There seems to be a lot of assumptions out there.

There have been a couple of articles written about it, but the exact language has not been published anywhere. The idea is that conferences would get their own autonomy to decide who plays in a CCG and the requirement for 12 members and divisional play would be rescinded.

Yes...I think it would also allow the B12 to host a championship game if they want to. All things indicate it will be passed. If not look for the P5 to break away.

(05-15-2014 10:44 AM)TexanMark Wrote:  

(05-15-2014 10:13 AM)CommuterBob Wrote:  

(05-15-2014 06:19 AM)goofus Wrote:  

(05-14-2014 05:36 PM)CommuterBob Wrote:  Update:

Dennis Dodd ‏@dennisdoddcbs ·16 mins
Big 12/ACC legislation on deregulating conf championship games could be heard by NCAA board Aug. 7.

Does anyone have the exact language or a summary of what exactly has been proposed. There seems to be a lot of assumptions out there.

There have been a couple of articles written about it, but the exact language has not been published anywhere. The idea is that conferences would get their own autonomy to decide who plays in a CCG and the requirement for 12 members and divisional play would be rescinded.

Yes...I think it would also allow the B12 to host a championship game if they want to. All things indicate it will be passed. If not look for the P5 to break away.

That's a bit extreme. I don't think the P5 are breaking away over that issue. Cap their autonomy over paying players, yeah they'll probably break away over that. But come on. Besides, it is a football decision and the P5 have enough votes on their own to pass it if they really wanted to. The doubt probably centers around other P5 conferences that may not want it to happen. The G5 certainly can't hold back the P5 from passing it, if they wanted to.

(05-15-2014 08:14 AM)jaminandjachin Wrote:  

(05-14-2014 07:42 PM)He1nousOne Wrote:  

(05-14-2014 08:32 AM)MWC Tex Wrote:  What is up with this?
'ACC teams mull scheduling OOC games vs other ACC teams'

http://espn.go.com/college-football/stor...-acc-teams

If they were so concerned about playing teams 1 every 11 years then go to 9 conference games...or even 10.

That is the most stupid idea, playing OOC game against yourself.

It allows some ACC schools to choose to play each other more and for some to maintain other out of conference games. It allows more flexibility.

I would have to believe that those extra ACC games couldn't be considered out of conference games. If I was doing the scheduling for a school and I was able to schedule an extra in conference game like that I would want it to count so that it could possibly benefit my program in the case of a tie.

8-1 beats 7-1. Go ahead and choose to play some lowly school at home instead but if schools can end up choosing to schedule an extra in conference game on their own then that could end up being a more free market method of pushing the conference to a 9 game schedule without having to pass a direct vote that forces everyone to play 9 conference games.

Those games would be considered OOC games. The ACC by-laws allow for this.

Those games could be considered OOC games. New regulations in regards to this issue can always be passed. Writing in stone is a thing of the past, just so ya know.

If you don't think major issues will arise if a game between two ACC teams is considered an OOC game, then you are wearing blinders.

(05-15-2014 07:42 PM)He1nousOne Wrote:  

(05-15-2014 08:14 AM)jaminandjachin Wrote:  

(05-14-2014 07:42 PM)He1nousOne Wrote:  

(05-14-2014 08:32 AM)MWC Tex Wrote:  What is up with this?
'ACC teams mull scheduling OOC games vs other ACC teams'

http://espn.go.com/college-football/stor...-acc-teams

If they were so concerned about playing teams 1 every 11 years then go to 9 conference games...or even 10.

That is the most stupid idea, playing OOC game against yourself.

It allows some ACC schools to choose to play each other more and for some to maintain other out of conference games. It allows more flexibility.

I would have to believe that those extra ACC games couldn't be considered out of conference games. If I was doing the scheduling for a school and I was able to schedule an extra in conference game like that I would want it to count so that it could possibly benefit my program in the case of a tie.

8-1 beats 7-1. Go ahead and choose to play some lowly school at home instead but if schools can end up choosing to schedule an extra in conference game on their own then that could end up being a more free market method of pushing the conference to a 9 game schedule without having to pass a direct vote that forces everyone to play 9 conference games.

Those games would be considered OOC games. The ACC by-laws allow for this.

Those games could be considered OOC games. New regulations in regards to this issue can always be passed. Writing in stone is a thing of the past, just so ya know.

If you don't think major issues will arise if a game between two ACC teams is considered an OOC game, then you are wearing blinders.

There are no regulations stopping it right now so the schools can decide to do whatever they want. As for major issues, people back in the day thought 14 team leagues would cause major issues......well it was done anyway.

(05-15-2014 10:44 AM)TexanMark Wrote:  

(05-15-2014 10:13 AM)CommuterBob Wrote:  

(05-15-2014 06:19 AM)goofus Wrote:  

(05-14-2014 05:36 PM)CommuterBob Wrote:  Update:

Dennis Dodd ‏@dennisdoddcbs ·16 mins
Big 12/ACC legislation on deregulating conf championship games could be heard by NCAA board Aug. 7.

Does anyone have the exact language or a summary of what exactly has been proposed. There seems to be a lot of assumptions out there.

There have been a couple of articles written about it, but the exact language has not been published anywhere. The idea is that conferences would get their own autonomy to decide who plays in a CCG and the requirement for 12 members and divisional play would be rescinded.

Yes...I think it would also allow the B12 to host a championship game if they want to. All things indicate it will be passed. If not look for the P5 to break away.

No, all indicators do not point to such a rule passing through the new P5 governing structure. It might or it might not. It could. The whole P5 wont wish to break away over the big 12 and ACC being able to do away with divisions. That's pretty silly.

If you mean they would break away if they don't get their autonomy then that is correct but autonomy doesn't mean that The Big 12 or The ACC get to do whatever they want. They get to do it if it is voted upon by the new P5 council that will arise. I know you like to think the vote in favor is in the bag simply because officials from the other Three conferences havnt said anything negative about it so far but that doesn't mean it is in the bag. That just means there is no benefit for them to as of yet make such indications truly known. That is when politics between the P5 conferences begins, negotiations and such. Making such a definitive statement at this point would be stupid.

(05-15-2014 07:45 PM)jaminandjachin Wrote:  

(05-15-2014 07:42 PM)He1nousOne Wrote:  

(05-15-2014 08:14 AM)jaminandjachin Wrote:  

(05-14-2014 07:42 PM)He1nousOne Wrote:  

(05-14-2014 08:32 AM)MWC Tex Wrote:  What is up with this?
'ACC teams mull scheduling OOC games vs other ACC teams'

http://espn.go.com/college-football/stor...-acc-teams

If they were so concerned about playing teams 1 every 11 years then go to 9 conference games...or even 10.

That is the most stupid idea, playing OOC game against yourself.

It allows some ACC schools to choose to play each other more and for some to maintain other out of conference games. It allows more flexibility.

I would have to believe that those extra ACC games couldn't be considered out of conference games. If I was doing the scheduling for a school and I was able to schedule an extra in conference game like that I would want it to count so that it could possibly benefit my program in the case of a tie.

8-1 beats 7-1. Go ahead and choose to play some lowly school at home instead but if schools can end up choosing to schedule an extra in conference game on their own then that could end up being a more free market method of pushing the conference to a 9 game schedule without having to pass a direct vote that forces everyone to play 9 conference games.

Those games would be considered OOC games. The ACC by-laws allow for this.

Those games could be considered OOC games. New regulations in regards to this issue can always be passed. Writing in stone is a thing of the past, just so ya know.

If you don't think major issues will arise if a game between two ACC teams is considered an OOC game, then you are wearing blinders.

There are no regulations stopping it right now so the schools can decide to do whatever they want. As for major issues, people back in the day thought 14 team leagues would cause major issues......well it was done anyway.

Talking about back in the day and today as if the situation is the same is just silly. College football used to be very regional. Back then no one else would care. Now, if a loss within the ACC doesn't make or break a team making it to their conference championship based upon the CURRENT rules which require it to be the two division champions then yes it would cause a national situation.

You say they could as if it is a major point and yet no one is doing it so its not a major point. It may be in the bylaws but they aren't stupid...trying to pass off an ACC game as an OOC game that doesn't count will just cause a major scene and bad publicity for the conference as a whole.

It's not going to happen.

(05-15-2014 07:49 PM)He1nousOne Wrote:  

(05-15-2014 07:45 PM)jaminandjachin Wrote:  

(05-15-2014 07:42 PM)He1nousOne Wrote:  

(05-15-2014 08:14 AM)jaminandjachin Wrote:  

(05-14-2014 07:42 PM)He1nousOne Wrote:  It allows some ACC schools to choose to play each other more and for some to maintain other out of conference games. It allows more flexibility.

I would have to believe that those extra ACC games couldn't be considered out of conference games. If I was doing the scheduling for a school and I was able to schedule an extra in conference game like that I would want it to count so that it could possibly benefit my program in the case of a tie.

8-1 beats 7-1. Go ahead and choose to play some lowly school at home instead but if schools can end up choosing to schedule an extra in conference game on their own then that could end up being a more free market method of pushing the conference to a 9 game schedule without having to pass a direct vote that forces everyone to play 9 conference games.

Those games would be considered OOC games. The ACC by-laws allow for this.

Those games could be considered OOC games. New regulations in regards to this issue can always be passed. Writing in stone is a thing of the past, just so ya know.

If you don't think major issues will arise if a game between two ACC teams is considered an OOC game, then you are wearing blinders.

There are no regulations stopping it right now so the schools can decide to do whatever they want. As for major issues, people back in the day thought 14 team leagues would cause major issues......well it was done anyway.

Talking about back in the day and today as if the situation is the same is just silly. College football used to be very regional. Back then no one else would care. Now, if a loss within the ACC doesn't make or break a team making it to their conference championship based upon the CURRENT rules which require it to be the two division champions then yes it would cause a national situation.

You say they could as if it is a major point and yet no one is doing it so its not a major point. It may be in the bylaws but they aren't stupid...trying to pass off an ACC game as an OOC game that doesn't count will just cause a major scene and bad publicity for the conference as a whole.

It's not going to happen.

And the B1G is considering the same thing. I guess it must not be that far fetched.

(05-15-2014 07:50 PM)jaminandjachin Wrote:  

(05-15-2014 07:49 PM)He1nousOne Wrote:  

(05-15-2014 07:45 PM)jaminandjachin Wrote:  

(05-15-2014 07:42 PM)He1nousOne Wrote:  

(05-15-2014 08:14 AM)jaminandjachin Wrote:  Those games would be considered OOC games. The ACC by-laws allow for this.

Those games could be considered OOC games. New regulations in regards to this issue can always be passed. Writing in stone is a thing of the past, just so ya know.

If you don't think major issues will arise if a game between two ACC teams is considered an OOC game, then you are wearing blinders.

There are no regulations stopping it right now so the schools can decide to do whatever they want. As for major issues, people back in the day thought 14 team leagues would cause major issues......well it was done anyway.

Talking about back in the day and today as if the situation is the same is just silly. College football used to be very regional. Back then no one else would care. Now, if a loss within the ACC doesn't make or break a team making it to their conference championship based upon the CURRENT rules which require it to be the two division champions then yes it would cause a national situation.

You say they could as if it is a major point and yet no one is doing it so its not a major point. It may be in the bylaws but they aren't stupid...trying to pass off an ACC game as an OOC game that doesn't count will just cause a major scene and bad publicity for the conference as a whole.

It's not going to happen.

And the B1G is considering the same thing. I guess it must not be that far fetched.

It's called a negotiation point. You know...there ARE backroom negotiations going on right now between P5 and everyone else? The public threat is to take their ball and go home to play with themselves.

Seriously folks....

(05-15-2014 07:52 PM)He1nousOne Wrote:  

(05-15-2014 07:50 PM)jaminandjachin Wrote:  

(05-15-2014 07:49 PM)He1nousOne Wrote:  

(05-15-2014 07:45 PM)jaminandjachin Wrote:  

(05-15-2014 07:42 PM)He1nousOne Wrote:  Those games could be considered OOC games. New regulations in regards to this issue can always be passed. Writing in stone is a thing of the past, just so ya know.

If you don't think major issues will arise if a game between two ACC teams is considered an OOC game, then you are wearing blinders.

There are no regulations stopping it right now so the schools can decide to do whatever they want. As for major issues, people back in the day thought 14 team leagues would cause major issues......well it was done anyway.

Talking about back in the day and today as if the situation is the same is just silly. College football used to be very regional. Back then no one else would care. Now, if a loss within the ACC doesn't make or break a team making it to their conference championship based upon the CURRENT rules which require it to be the two division champions then yes it would cause a national situation.

You say they could as if it is a major point and yet no one is doing it so its not a major point. It may be in the bylaws but they aren't stupid...trying to pass off an ACC game as an OOC game that doesn't count will just cause a major scene and bad publicity for the conference as a whole.

It's not going to happen.

And the B1G is considering the same thing. I guess it must not be that far fetched.

It's called a negotiation point. You know...there ARE backroom negotiations going on right now between P5 and everyone else? The public threat is to take their ball and go home to play with themselves.

Seriously folks....

Frankly, it doesn't bother me either way. I don't think my school needs to do it, but I can see how others can benefit.

(05-15-2014 07:56 PM)jaminandjachin Wrote:  

(05-15-2014 07:52 PM)He1nousOne Wrote:  

(05-15-2014 07:50 PM)jaminandjachin Wrote:  

(05-15-2014 07:49 PM)He1nousOne Wrote:  

(05-15-2014 07:45 PM)jaminandjachin Wrote:  There are no regulations stopping it right now so the schools can decide to do whatever they want. As for major issues, people back in the day thought 14 team leagues would cause major issues......well it was done anyway.

Talking about back in the day and today as if the situation is the same is just silly. College football used to be very regional. Back then no one else would care. Now, if a loss within the ACC doesn't make or break a team making it to their conference championship based upon the CURRENT rules which require it to be the two division champions then yes it would cause a national situation.

You say they could as if it is a major point and yet no one is doing it so its not a major point. It may be in the bylaws but they aren't stupid...trying to pass off an ACC game as an OOC game that doesn't count will just cause a major scene and bad publicity for the conference as a whole.

It's not going to happen.

And the B1G is considering the same thing. I guess it must not be that far fetched.

It's called a negotiation point. You know...there ARE backroom negotiations going on right now between P5 and everyone else? The public threat is to take their ball and go home to play with themselves.

Seriously folks....

Frankly, it doesn't bother me either way. I don't think my school needs to do it, but I can see how others can benefit.

Well I pointed out how it could benefit and how it could hurt. It's just allowing schools to decide for themselves to have another conference game but in THIS DAY AND AGE trying to pass off a conference game as a non-conference game is just silly. If a team loses one and if that game would cause them to not make the conference championship if considered a conference game but instead they go to the conference championship because it wasn't a sanctioned ACC match up? Oh yeah, the ACC would be getting hammered for that in the public and in the press. No way anyone, including The Big Ten, takes that chance.

Where I CAN see it used is if in new divisional systems, two schools that end up in different divisions want to make sure they play each other every year then I can see that as a reason for this. What I cant see though is that game being able to be passed off as a non-conference game. Maybe back in the day when conference records only mattered in regards to whom goes to the likes of the Rose Bowl for the Big Ten or the Orange Bowl for the ACC but those days are over.

(05-15-2014 08:02 PM)He1nousOne Wrote:  

(05-15-2014 07:56 PM)jaminandjachin Wrote:  

(05-15-2014 07:52 PM)He1nousOne Wrote:  

(05-15-2014 07:50 PM)jaminandjachin Wrote:  

(05-15-2014 07:49 PM)He1nousOne Wrote:  Talking about back in the day and today as if the situation is the same is just silly. College football used to be very regional. Back then no one else would care. Now, if a loss within the ACC doesn't make or break a team making it to their conference championship based upon the CURRENT rules which require it to be the two division champions then yes it would cause a national situation.

You say they could as if it is a major point and yet no one is doing it so its not a major point. It may be in the bylaws but they aren't stupid...trying to pass off an ACC game as an OOC game that doesn't count will just cause a major scene and bad publicity for the conference as a whole.

It's not going to happen.

And the B1G is considering the same thing. I guess it must not be that far fetched.

It's called a negotiation point. You know...there ARE backroom negotiations going on right now between P5 and everyone else? The public threat is to take their ball and go home to play with themselves.

Seriously folks....

Frankly, it doesn't bother me either way. I don't think my school needs to do it, but I can see how others can benefit.

Well I pointed out how it could benefit and how it could hurt. It's just allowing schools to decide for themselves to have another conference game but in THIS DAY AND AGE trying to pass off a conference game as a non-conference game is just silly. If a team loses one and if that game would cause them to not make the conference championship if considered a conference game but instead they go to the conference championship because it wasn't a sanctioned ACC match up? Oh yeah, the ACC would be getting hammered for that in the public and in the press. No way anyone, including The Big Ten, takes that chance.

Where I CAN see it used is if in new divisional systems, two schools that end up in different divisions want to make sure they play each other every year then I can see that as a reason for this. What I cant see though is that game being able to be passed off as a non-conference game. Maybe back in the day when conference records only mattered in regards to whom goes to the likes of the Rose Bowl for the Big Ten or the Orange Bowl for the ACC but those days are over.

It's only meant for teams to play each other that don't normally get to because of the size of the conference. NC State and Duke are 30 mins apart and hardly ever play each other. Who cares if they want to schedule a game. This is done in other sports, is it crazy if football chooses to do this too?

(05-15-2014 08:11 PM)jaminandjachin Wrote:  

(05-15-2014 08:02 PM)He1nousOne Wrote:  

(05-15-2014 07:56 PM)jaminandjachin Wrote:  

(05-15-2014 07:52 PM)He1nousOne Wrote:  

(05-15-2014 07:50 PM)jaminandjachin Wrote:  And the B1G is considering the same thing. I guess it must not be that far fetched.

It's called a negotiation point. You know...there ARE backroom negotiations going on right now between P5 and everyone else? The public threat is to take their ball and go home to play with themselves.

Seriously folks....

Frankly, it doesn't bother me either way. I don't think my school needs to do it, but I can see how others can benefit.

Well I pointed out how it could benefit and how it could hurt. It's just allowing schools to decide for themselves to have another conference game but in THIS DAY AND AGE trying to pass off a conference game as a non-conference game is just silly. If a team loses one and if that game would cause them to not make the conference championship if considered a conference game but instead they go to the conference championship because it wasn't a sanctioned ACC match up? Oh yeah, the ACC would be getting hammered for that in the public and in the press. No way anyone, including The Big Ten, takes that chance.

Where I CAN see it used is if in new divisional systems, two schools that end up in different divisions want to make sure they play each other every year then I can see that as a reason for this. What I cant see though is that game being able to be passed off as a non-conference game. Maybe back in the day when conference records only mattered in regards to whom goes to the likes of the Rose Bowl for the Big Ten or the Orange Bowl for the ACC but those days are over.

It's only meant for teams to play each other that don't normally get to because of the size of the conference. NC State and Duke are 30 mins apart and hardly ever play each other. Who cares if they want to schedule a game. This is done in other sports, is it crazy if football chooses to do this too?

I just explained. I don't see a problem with them being able to schedule outside of the regular ACC 8 game schedule BUT trying to pass that game off as an out of conference game is just ridiculous. I say let them schedule it but live and die with the results of it being an extra ACC game in regards to their conference records.