Hello There, Guest! (LoginRegister)

Post Reply 
B10-balance-or mediocrity?
Author Message
bullet Offline
Legend
*

Posts: 66,923
Joined: Apr 2012
Reputation: 3317
I Root For: Texas, UK, UGA
Location:
Post: #1
B10-balance-or mediocrity?
Looking at the standings today.

10 of the 14 Big 10 teams have exactly 2 wins. Two are 2-2, one is 2-3, five are 2-4 and two are 2-5.

3 have 5 and Indiana has 6.
12-12-2020 10:40 AM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
Advertisement


IWokeUpLikeThis Offline
Hall of Famer
*

Posts: 13,891
Joined: Jul 2014
Reputation: 1484
I Root For: NIU, Chicago St
Location:
Post: #2
RE: B10-balance-or mediocrity?
Ohio St & Indiana are head and shoulders above the rest of the league. Indiana’s on its 3rd string QB now and probably comes back down to Earth because of it, but still squeezed out a win over Wisconsin.
12-12-2020 10:57 AM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
bill dazzle Offline
Craft beer and urban living enthusiast
*

Posts: 10,744
Joined: Aug 2016
Reputation: 985
I Root For: Vandy/Memphis/DePaul/UNC
Location: Nashville
Post: #3
RE: B10-balance-or mediocrity?
Seems the Big Ten is very average this year. But the sample size (fewer games than typical) limits the assessment accuracy.
12-12-2020 12:04 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
quo vadis Offline
Legend
*

Posts: 50,231
Joined: Aug 2008
Reputation: 2443
I Root For: USF/Georgetown
Location: New Orleans
Post: #4
RE: B10-balance-or mediocrity?
(12-12-2020 10:40 AM)bullet Wrote:  Looking at the standings today.

10 of the 14 Big 10 teams have exactly 2 wins. Two are 2-2, one is 2-3, five are 2-4 and two are 2-5.

3 have 5 and Indiana has 6.

With no OOC games, it's just impossible to tell. Same with the SEC and PAC.
12-12-2020 12:19 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
IWokeUpLikeThis Offline
Hall of Famer
*

Posts: 13,891
Joined: Jul 2014
Reputation: 1484
I Root For: NIU, Chicago St
Location:
Post: #5
RE: B10-balance-or mediocrity?
Rutgers officially finishes ahead of Michigan.
12-12-2020 05:28 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
JRsec Offline
Super Moderator
*

Posts: 38,360
Joined: Mar 2012
Reputation: 8051
I Root For: SEC
Location:
Post: #6
RE: B10-balance-or mediocrity?
(12-12-2020 12:19 PM)quo vadis Wrote:  
(12-12-2020 10:40 AM)bullet Wrote:  Looking at the standings today.

10 of the 14 Big 10 teams have exactly 2 wins. Two are 2-2, one is 2-3, five are 2-4 and two are 2-5.

3 have 5 and Indiana has 6.

With no OOC games, it's just impossible to tell. Same with the SEC and PAC.

Same with the SEC? What it is the same with is the ACC. Alabama is clearly another solid Alabama team. Texas A&M has improved greatly since their loss to the Tide.

Notre Dame and Clemson have both had close games with weaker ACC teams. Miami who had benefitted from a weaker schedule was torched today by an above average but not elite North Carolina team which is also improving each week.

I bring up the ACC for this reason. Just like the Big 10 they have some competitive teams in the top 6 or 7 and a bunch of weaker ones below. Clemson and Notre Dame may very well be worthy of the CFP but they haven't played anyone of note but each other and then Clemson was absent its starting QB. Ohio State like Alabama has owned everyone. But unlike Ohio State Alabama has had some decent teams on its SEC schedule to go along with some weaker ones.

But Quo, the SEC's past record speaks for itself, as does its recruiting. I've no doubt that the top SEC schools have better talent than most they will face. If you want to give an underhanded slight to the SEC that has merit then I think the head coaching is deserving of such. But to compare the SEC to the PAC? You know where you can stick that analogy!

Nobody compares with the PAC. The PAC has no discernable top team, let alone upper tier of teams.
(This post was last modified: 12-12-2020 09:21 PM by JRsec.)
12-12-2020 09:03 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
Advertisement


bullet Offline
Legend
*

Posts: 66,923
Joined: Apr 2012
Reputation: 3317
I Root For: Texas, UK, UGA
Location:
Post: #7
RE: B10-balance-or mediocrity?
(12-12-2020 09:03 PM)JRsec Wrote:  
(12-12-2020 12:19 PM)quo vadis Wrote:  
(12-12-2020 10:40 AM)bullet Wrote:  Looking at the standings today.

10 of the 14 Big 10 teams have exactly 2 wins. Two are 2-2, one is 2-3, five are 2-4 and two are 2-5.

3 have 5 and Indiana has 6.

With no OOC games, it's just impossible to tell. Same with the SEC and PAC.

Same with the SEC? What it is the same with is the ACC. Alabama is clearly another solid Alabama team. Texas A&M has improved greatly since their loss to the Tide.

Notre Dame and Clemson have both had close games with weaker ACC teams. Miami who had benefitted from a weaker schedule was torched today by an above average but not elite North Carolina team which is also improving each week.

I bring up the ACC for this reason. Just like the Big 10 they have some competitive teams in the top 6 or 7 and a bunch of weaker ones below. Clemson and Notre Dame may very well be worthy of the CFP but they haven't played anyone of note but each other and then Clemson was absent its starting QB. Ohio State like Alabama has owned everyone. But unlike Ohio State Alabama has had some decent teams on its SEC schedule to go along with some weaker ones.

But Quo, the SEC's past record speaks for itself, as does its recruiting. I've no doubt that the top SEC schools have better talent than most they will face. If you want to give an underhanded slight to the SEC that has merit then I think the head coaching is deserving of such. But to compare the SEC to the PAC? You know where you can stick that analogy!

Nobody compares with the PAC. The PAC has no discernable top team, let alone upper tier of teams.

We don't know that anybody other than Alabama is good in the SEC.

Georgia, prior to Daniel as QB was not a particularly good team. Maybe top 15, but they would have lost to Miss. St. without Daniel.

Florida is struggling against LSU. A&M got stomped by Alabama and beat Florida.
Auburn is not that good.
12-12-2020 09:33 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
JRsec Offline
Super Moderator
*

Posts: 38,360
Joined: Mar 2012
Reputation: 8051
I Root For: SEC
Location:
Post: #8
RE: B10-balance-or mediocrity?
(12-12-2020 09:33 PM)bullet Wrote:  
(12-12-2020 09:03 PM)JRsec Wrote:  
(12-12-2020 12:19 PM)quo vadis Wrote:  
(12-12-2020 10:40 AM)bullet Wrote:  Looking at the standings today.

10 of the 14 Big 10 teams have exactly 2 wins. Two are 2-2, one is 2-3, five are 2-4 and two are 2-5.

3 have 5 and Indiana has 6.

With no OOC games, it's just impossible to tell. Same with the SEC and PAC.

Same with the SEC? What it is the same with is the ACC. Alabama is clearly another solid Alabama team. Texas A&M has improved greatly since their loss to the Tide.

Notre Dame and Clemson have both had close games with weaker ACC teams. Miami who had benefitted from a weaker schedule was torched today by an above average but not elite North Carolina team which is also improving each week.

I bring up the ACC for this reason. Just like the Big 10 they have some competitive teams in the top 6 or 7 and a bunch of weaker ones below. Clemson and Notre Dame may very well be worthy of the CFP but they haven't played anyone of note but each other and then Clemson was absent its starting QB. Ohio State like Alabama has owned everyone. But unlike Ohio State Alabama has had some decent teams on its SEC schedule to go along with some weaker ones.

But Quo, the SEC's past record speaks for itself, as does its recruiting. I've no doubt that the top SEC schools have better talent than most they will face. If you want to give an underhanded slight to the SEC that has merit then I think the head coaching is deserving of such. But to compare the SEC to the PAC? You know where you can stick that analogy!

Nobody compares with the PAC. The PAC has no discernable top team, let alone upper tier of teams.

We don't know that anybody other than Alabama is good in the SEC.

Georgia, prior to Daniel as QB was not a particularly good team. Maybe top 15, but they would have lost to Miss. St. without Daniel.

Florida is struggling against LSU. A&M got stomped by Alabama and beat Florida.
Auburn is not that good.

SEC schools didn't all go bad since last season. L.S.U. lost oodles of players. Alabama reloaded. Florida would struggle with L.S.U. if you and I were the starting QB and RB at L.S.U. Georgia is running into newbie coaching issues. But the talent is still there along with the size and speed. So get real with that one. Since Alabama has looked strong defensively against everyone but Ole Miss where Kiffen knew Saban's defensive approach, I'll give the Tide the benefit of the doubt because they have hammered everyone else. Auburn has stunk it up all year with Chad Morris directing the offense where Soph Bo Nix hasn't shown an ounce of maturity or skill sets improvement over his Freshman year. Pathetic coaching!

My point, which you missed, is that comparing the PAC to the SEC is a piss poor comparison. The PAC has no clear front runner in an abbreviated season. Alabama to Ohio State would have been fair. But comparing the Big 10 to the ACC would have been the better initial comparison as both are very weak at the bottom and have about 6 or 7 schools who are average to strong.

The 2020 COVID season has been putrid all the way around. So when we wind up with Alabama, Ohio State, Clemson and Notre Dame don't be surprised if in the 3 games to be played 2 of them are blowouts and which two could be anyone's guess. We might even have 3 blowouts.
12-12-2020 09:48 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
TerryD Offline
Hall of Famer
*

Posts: 15,007
Joined: Feb 2006
Reputation: 938
I Root For: Notre Dame
Location: Grayson Highlands
Post: #9
RE: B10-balance-or mediocrity?
(12-12-2020 09:03 PM)JRsec Wrote:  
(12-12-2020 12:19 PM)quo vadis Wrote:  
(12-12-2020 10:40 AM)bullet Wrote:  Looking at the standings today.

10 of the 14 Big 10 teams have exactly 2 wins. Two are 2-2, one is 2-3, five are 2-4 and two are 2-5.

3 have 5 and Indiana has 6.

With no OOC games, it's just impossible to tell. Same with the SEC and PAC.

Same with the SEC? What it is the same with is the ACC. Alabama is clearly another solid Alabama team. Texas A&M has improved greatly since their loss to the Tide.

Notre Dame and Clemson have both had close games with weaker ACC teams. Miami who had benefitted from a weaker schedule was torched today by an above average but not elite North Carolina team which is also improving each week.

I bring up the ACC for this reason. Just like the Big 10 they have some competitive teams in the top 6 or 7 and a bunch of weaker ones below. Clemson and Notre Dame may very well be worthy of the CFP but they haven't played anyone of note but each other and then Clemson was absent its starting QB. Ohio State like Alabama has owned everyone. But unlike Ohio State Alabama has had some decent teams on its SEC schedule to go along with some weaker ones.

But Quo, the SEC's past record speaks for itself, as does its recruiting. I've no doubt that the top SEC schools have better talent than most they will face. If you want to give an underhanded slight to the SEC that has merit then I think the head coaching is deserving of such. But to compare the SEC to the PAC? You know where you can stick that analogy!

Nobody compares with the PAC. The PAC has no discernable top team, let alone upper tier of teams.

Not lately, JR.


10/24 @ Pittsburgh W 45-3
10/31 @ Georgia Tech W 31-13
11/07 #1 Clemson W 47-40
11/14 @ BC W 45-31
11/27 @ #19 NC W 31-17
12/05 Syracuse W 45-21
12-13-2020 12:38 AM
Visit this user's website Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
JRsec Offline
Super Moderator
*

Posts: 38,360
Joined: Mar 2012
Reputation: 8051
I Root For: SEC
Location:
Post: #10
RE: B10-balance-or mediocrity?
(12-13-2020 12:38 AM)TerryD Wrote:  
(12-12-2020 09:03 PM)JRsec Wrote:  
(12-12-2020 12:19 PM)quo vadis Wrote:  
(12-12-2020 10:40 AM)bullet Wrote:  Looking at the standings today.

10 of the 14 Big 10 teams have exactly 2 wins. Two are 2-2, one is 2-3, five are 2-4 and two are 2-5.

3 have 5 and Indiana has 6.

With no OOC games, it's just impossible to tell. Same with the SEC and PAC.

Same with the SEC? What it is the same with is the ACC. Alabama is clearly another solid Alabama team. Texas A&M has improved greatly since their loss to the Tide.

Notre Dame and Clemson have both had close games with weaker ACC teams. Miami who had benefitted from a weaker schedule was torched today by an above average but not elite North Carolina team which is also improving each week.

I bring up the ACC for this reason. Just like the Big 10 they have some competitive teams in the top 6 or 7 and a bunch of weaker ones below. Clemson and Notre Dame may very well be worthy of the CFP but they haven't played anyone of note but each other and then Clemson was absent its starting QB. Ohio State like Alabama has owned everyone. But unlike Ohio State Alabama has had some decent teams on its SEC schedule to go along with some weaker ones.

But Quo, the SEC's past record speaks for itself, as does its recruiting. I've no doubt that the top SEC schools have better talent than most they will face. If you want to give an underhanded slight to the SEC that has merit then I think the head coaching is deserving of such. But to compare the SEC to the PAC? You know where you can stick that analogy!

Nobody compares with the PAC. The PAC has no discernable top team, let alone upper tier of teams.

Not lately, JR.


10/24 @ Pittsburgh W 45-3
10/31 @ Georgia Tech W 31-13
11/07 #1 Clemson W 47-40
11/14 @ BC W 45-31
11/27 @ #19 NC W 31-17
12/05 Syracuse W 45-21

The BC and Louisville scores are suspect Terry D and Louisville was not playing well when you played them. We'll see soon enough.
12-13-2020 12:53 AM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
Fighting Muskie Offline
Senior Chief Realignmentologist
*

Posts: 11,973
Joined: Sep 2016
Reputation: 829
I Root For: Ohio St, UC,MAC
Location: Biden Cesspool
Post: #11
RE: B10-balance-or mediocrity?
I’ll say this much, there needs to be more parity within each of the the P5 conferences. I think fans are getting weary of Alabama, Clemson, Ohio St, and Oklahoma always being in the playoffs.
12-13-2020 08:53 AM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
Advertisement


TerryD Offline
Hall of Famer
*

Posts: 15,007
Joined: Feb 2006
Reputation: 938
I Root For: Notre Dame
Location: Grayson Highlands
Post: #12
RE: B10-balance-or mediocrity?
(12-13-2020 12:53 AM)JRsec Wrote:  
(12-13-2020 12:38 AM)TerryD Wrote:  
(12-12-2020 09:03 PM)JRsec Wrote:  
(12-12-2020 12:19 PM)quo vadis Wrote:  
(12-12-2020 10:40 AM)bullet Wrote:  Looking at the standings today.

10 of the 14 Big 10 teams have exactly 2 wins. Two are 2-2, one is 2-3, five are 2-4 and two are 2-5.

3 have 5 and Indiana has 6.

With no OOC games, it's just impossible to tell. Same with the SEC and PAC.

Same with the SEC? What it is the same with is the ACC. Alabama is clearly another solid Alabama team. Texas A&M has improved greatly since their loss to the Tide.

Notre Dame and Clemson have both had close games with weaker ACC teams. Miami who had benefitted from a weaker schedule was torched today by an above average but not elite North Carolina team which is also improving each week.

I bring up the ACC for this reason. Just like the Big 10 they have some competitive teams in the top 6 or 7 and a bunch of weaker ones below. Clemson and Notre Dame may very well be worthy of the CFP but they haven't played anyone of note but each other and then Clemson was absent its starting QB. Ohio State like Alabama has owned everyone. But unlike Ohio State Alabama has had some decent teams on its SEC schedule to go along with some weaker ones.

But Quo, the SEC's past record speaks for itself, as does its recruiting. I've no doubt that the top SEC schools have better talent than most they will face. If you want to give an underhanded slight to the SEC that has merit then I think the head coaching is deserving of such. But to compare the SEC to the PAC? You know where you can stick that analogy!

Nobody compares with the PAC. The PAC has no discernable top team, let alone upper tier of teams.

Not lately, JR.


10/24 @ Pittsburgh W 45-3
10/31 @ Georgia Tech W 31-13
11/07 #1 Clemson W 47-40
11/14 @ BC W 45-31
11/27 @ #19 NC W 31-17
12/05 Syracuse W 45-21

The BC and Louisville scores are suspect Terry D and Louisville was not playing well when you played them. We'll see soon enough.



I didn't list Louisville. The ND offense (and Ian Book) clicked after Louisville (and at Pitt).

I listed the last 60% of the season. No ND struggles there.

BC game result suspect? ND was ahead 31-16 at halftime.

ND was leading BC by 22 points late in the fourth quarter until BC scored a TD and a two point conversion with little time left and ND's reserves in.

Anyway, nobody has the resume that ND has.

I know that lots of people like to instinctively and reflexively downplay any success that Notre Dame has, but nobody has a better resume right now.

No one has the 10-0 record and a win versus the #1 team that ND has.

Anyway, I am just glad that we had the season to enjoy, Covid and all.
(This post was last modified: 12-13-2020 09:43 AM by TerryD.)
12-13-2020 09:42 AM
Visit this user's website Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
CliftonAve Offline
Heisman
*

Posts: 21,937
Joined: May 2012
Reputation: 1183
I Root For: Jimmy Nippert
Location:
Post: #13
RE: B10-balance-or mediocrity?
(12-13-2020 08:53 AM)Fighting Muskie Wrote:  I’ll say this much, there needs to be more parity within each of the the P5 conferences. I think fans are getting weary of Alabama, Clemson, Ohio St, and Oklahoma always being in the playoffs.

The end of the BCS, the CFP era, and the mega media deals caused all this. It’s only made the rich, richer. All because people wanted to create further divide between the autonomous and non-autonomous schools.

Keep this in mind, as all of you sit around and fantasize about a “break away” of 32-64 schools. Yeah you sure put schools like Boise and Cincinnati and their place—- but unless you are one of 10 schools your favorite team will be destined for mediocrity forever.
12-13-2020 10:00 AM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
JRsec Offline
Super Moderator
*

Posts: 38,360
Joined: Mar 2012
Reputation: 8051
I Root For: SEC
Location:
Post: #14
RE: B10-balance-or mediocrity?
(12-13-2020 10:00 AM)CliftonAve Wrote:  
(12-13-2020 08:53 AM)Fighting Muskie Wrote:  I’ll say this much, there needs to be more parity within each of the the P5 conferences. I think fans are getting weary of Alabama, Clemson, Ohio St, and Oklahoma always being in the playoffs.

The end of the BCS, the CFP era, and the mega media deals caused all this. It’s only made the rich, richer. All because people wanted to create further divide between the autonomous and non-autonomous schools.

Keep this in mind, as all of you sit around and fantasize about a “break away” of 32-64 schools. Yeah you sure put schools like Boise and Cincinnati and their place—- but unless you are one of 10 schools your favorite team will be destined for mediocrity forever.

You are directing your hostility at the wrong source, and that is like many people here, and in this nation do regularly, and quite frankly it's doing everyone harm. Face it, none of us can direct our anger where it really belongs because we don't see the CEO's at Disney, CBS, FOX, and NBC. Muskie isn't fantasizing about the destruction of the G5, or FCS or any of it. In fact your anger in this case should be directed at 2 sources only.

1. The NCAA which until 1984 essentially soaked up TV revenue for college football the way they do for college basketball today. The consumer wanted more college football games to be televised. The University of Oklahoma and the University of Georgia joined lawsuits against the NCAA's monopoly over college football which did exactly as it does today only in microcosm showed you 1 or if you were lucky occasionally 2 games per week. And who the hell it was on the tube? Alabama, Notre Dame, Ohio State and U.S.C.. with Michigan tossed in with Texas for good measure. The only way anyone else got on the tube is if they were playing one of those in a big game and even then you would readily recognize U.C.L.A., Michigan State, Washington, Arkansas, Tennessee, and Auburn. No there wasn't any Penn State or Florida State regularly per se as they were growing up as programs and Miami was only just emerging as a power in the early 80's.

As with all things success walks hand in hand with doom. Thanks to OU/UGA's lawsuit there was a great demand for games and some networks, like ESPN which was just getting rolling were able to secure rights to broadcast games with schools that had never been seen on the tube. Sports rights money grew the G5 which wouldn't have ever developed as football powers without initial TV money, and more importantly TV to advertise their schools' names, mascots, and games.

The MAC was the best recognized minor conference along with the WAC in those days. And CUSA grew directly as a brain child of marketing as a way to reach advertising demographics in cities. And it was a network executive at Raycom if I remember correctly who first introduced the concept of a super conference (16 schools) to maximize commercial value.

This concept would prove to be revolutionary and the main catalyst for expansion. It is why the Big 10 took an emerged Penn State and why the SEC grew into Arkansas and South Carolina. More market reach meant more money.

Sleepy old college football commissioners who only handled officiating problems and scheduling issues for there respective conferences found themselves confronted by TV executives and they botched the first sets of deals signed because they didn't understand the industry and just how valuable their product was.

Networks soon learned that you could manipulate these conferences by offering their member institutions more and more money. Then as technology changed we moved from brand and national draw to the market footprint model which grew all of the conferences and as the demand for the product rose the Sun Belt started being able to sell its games and pretty soon a pecking order of the newly emerging conferences came about and as some conferences were raided and died and others were reformed all the reshuffling accelerated. And the big brand conferences which had expanded their scope for more money suddenly found themselves in an arms race to keep the most money and the strongest of these regional conferences were the Big 10 and SEC. The ACC raided the Big East more in a survival mode than one of greed. ESPN had all of their rights so they used them to acquire product that old line ACC fans didn't necessarily want but the conference took to get wealthier. ESPN owned part of the SEC rights by then so they used them to do the same with the old SWC product and eventually Missouri from the Big 8 turned Big 12.

Nobody in the SEC sat around dreaming of adding Missouri. Nobody in the ACC sat around dreaming of adding Syracuse, and nobody out of the SWC / Big 12 sat around thinking they should add West Virginia.

The fans got involved the way people do when watching a natural disaster head their way on the horizon. Some realized the danger to their conference and raged against change, some tried to cope with it by understanding it, and some just tuned out while millions in this social phenomenon took to the newly created message boards to talk about it.

But sport nobody here is to blame for it. And now that the market footprint model is being replaced by the streaming model which once again wants highly recognized brands playing to draw national eyeballs to boost advertising rates the change is happening again, only unfortunately because they want this, the games everyone will watch (at least the casual fans nationally) are the ones involving Ohio State, Alabama, Notre Dame, and U.S.C. and those brands that they play in big games.

Only now instead of those being the "Game of the Week" on ABC's Wide World of Sports they are the season finale, the CFP selections. Too many networks now make weekly money from the vast number of games on the tube. So we'll keep the right to broadcast virtually all of the FBS games in form or the other and now that people expect to see them on the tube we yawn over the marvel that they are available where we once couldn't believe our eyes. So now they network that owns the CFP knows it can realize Super Bowl like revenue (not that anything is touching the Super Bowl) if the right teams are in the CFP.

So how do you accomplish that? With a damned committee paid to do your bidding and comprised of big name people whose credibility you don't doubt. And this Clifton Ave is a creation of the networks, not the conferences. The P5 is a designation given the conferences by the Networks, not by the conferences themselves. The conferences don't buck it because to be under that label means the networks are setting them up for more money. If we wanted a fairer system we would have a P4 but we don't. We don't because controlling those selections makes the network millions more.

Case in point, last week Texas A&M was next in if something happened to Clemson. Now that U.S.C. managed to beat a woeful UCLA and suddenly a West Coast ratings darling is available (if the # of games is waived as a criteria) ESPN ran some bogus poll last night saying that USC would be most likely to get the last spot over the Clemson / Notre Dame loser. How did this new data point magically appear to jump a heretofore distant USC all the way to #4? Money from tying in the West Coast viewers instead of having two teams from the Southeast even if both were deserving and Alabama has a stronger national draw than Clemson. Notre Dame pulls a national demographic as does Ohio State.

So we are right back to 1975 where if we are ABC and we have two major bowls we show on New Years we can put Alabama and Notre Dame in one, Ohio State and USC in the other and rake in the dough!

Now I want you to think about all of that when you attack Fighting Muskie and anyone else who is fascinated by the natural disaster on the horizon and they talk across the fence with their neighbor while both speculate on how the disaster will play out. While you shake your fist at the sky and scream at your neighbor to relieve your stress they speculate to relieve theirs, but either way we all face the same damn storm and that storm is Corporate Greed which not only impacts our football, but has been the impetus behind the destruction of family business which erodes the middle class and the main driver behind media bias and the furor over the last election.

But when you get ready to curse Disney and ESPN remember this, Cincinnati and Louisville and the other initial members of the old Metro conference or later members of CUSA and now the AAC would be nothing in athletics without the OU/UGA lawsuit and the Networks. That which you now curse as being the cause of your limitations lifted you out of obscurity and made your school's name a household word. Your world expanded from a region around Cincinnati to the nation because of them.
12-13-2020 02:21 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
TerryD Offline
Hall of Famer
*

Posts: 15,007
Joined: Feb 2006
Reputation: 938
I Root For: Notre Dame
Location: Grayson Highlands
Post: #15
RE: B10-balance-or mediocrity?
(12-13-2020 02:21 PM)JRsec Wrote:  
(12-13-2020 10:00 AM)CliftonAve Wrote:  
(12-13-2020 08:53 AM)Fighting Muskie Wrote:  I’ll say this much, there needs to be more parity within each of the the P5 conferences. I think fans are getting weary of Alabama, Clemson, Ohio St, and Oklahoma always being in the playoffs.

The end of the BCS, the CFP era, and the mega media deals caused all this. It’s only made the rich, richer. All because people wanted to create further divide between the autonomous and non-autonomous schools.

Keep this in mind, as all of you sit around and fantasize about a “break away” of 32-64 schools. Yeah you sure put schools like Boise and Cincinnati and their place—- but unless you are one of 10 schools your favorite team will be destined for mediocrity forever.

You are directing your hostility at the wrong source, and that is like many people here, and in this nation do regularly, and quite frankly it's doing everyone harm. Face it, none of us can direct our anger where it really belongs because we don't see the CEO's at Disney, CBS, FOX, and NBC. Muskie isn't fantasizing about the destruction of the G5, or FCS or any of it. In fact your anger in this case should be directed at 2 sources only.

1. The NCAA which until 1984 essentially soaked up TV revenue for college football the way they do for college basketball today. The consumer wanted more college football games to be televised. The University of Oklahoma and the University of Georgia joined lawsuits against the NCAA's monopoly over college football which did exactly as it does today only in microcosm showed you 1 or if you were lucky occasionally 2 games per week. And who the hell it was on the tube? Alabama, Notre Dame, Ohio State and U.S.C.. with Michigan tossed in with Texas for good measure. The only way anyone else got on the tube is if they were playing one of those in a big game and even then you would readily recognize U.C.L.A., Michigan State, Washington, Arkansas, Tennessee, and Auburn. No there wasn't any Penn State or Florida State regularly per se as they were growing up as programs and Miami was only just emerging as a power in the early 80's.

As with all things success walks hand in hand with doom. Thanks to OU/UGA's lawsuit there was a great demand for games and some networks, like ESPN which was just getting rolling were able to secure rights to broadcast games with schools that had never been seen on the tube. Sports rights money grew the G5 which wouldn't have ever developed as football powers without initial TV money, and more importantly TV to advertise their schools' names, mascots, and games.

The MAC was the best recognized minor conference along with the WAC in those days. And CUSA grew directly as a brain child of marketing as a way to reach advertising demographics in cities. And it was a network executive at Raycom if I remember correctly who first introduced the concept of a super conference (16 schools) to maximize commercial value.

This concept would prove to be revolutionary and the main catalyst for expansion. It is why the Big 10 took an emerged Penn State and why the SEC grew into Arkansas and South Carolina. More market reach meant more money.

Sleepy old college football commissioners who only handled officiating problems and scheduling issues for there respective conferences found themselves confronted by TV executives and they botched the first sets of deals signed because they didn't understand the industry and just how valuable their product was.

Networks soon learned that you could manipulate these conferences by offering their member institutions more and more money. Then as technology changed we moved from brand and national draw to the market footprint model which grew all of the conferences and as the demand for the product rose the Sun Belt started being able to sell its games and pretty soon a pecking order of the newly emerging conferences came about and as some conferences were raided and died and others were reformed all the reshuffling accelerated. And the big brand conferences which had expanded their scope for more money suddenly found themselves in an arms race to keep the most money and the strongest of these regional conferences were the Big 10 and SEC. The ACC raided the Big East more in a survival mode than one of greed. ESPN had all of their rights so they used them to acquire product that old line ACC fans didn't necessarily want but the conference took to get wealthier. ESPN owned part of the SEC rights by then so they used them to do the same with the old SWC product and eventually Missouri from the Big 8 turned Big 12.

Nobody in the SEC sat around dreaming of adding Missouri. Nobody in the ACC sat around dreaming of adding Syracuse, and nobody out of the SWC / Big 12 sat around thinking they should add West Virginia.

The fans got involved the way people do when watching a natural disaster head their way on the horizon. Some realized the danger to their conference and raged against change, some tried to cope with it by understanding it, and some just tuned out while millions in this social phenomenon took to the newly created message boards to talk about it.

But sport nobody here is to blame for it. And now that the market footprint model is being replaced by the streaming model which once again wants highly recognized brands playing to draw national eyeballs to boost advertising rates the change is happening again, only unfortunately because they want this, the games everyone will watch (at least the casual fans nationally) are the ones involving Ohio State, Alabama, Notre Dame, and U.S.C. and those brands that they play in big games.

Only now instead of those being the "Game of the Week" on ABC's Wide World of Sports they are the season finale, the CFP selections. Too many networks now make weekly money from the vast number of games on the tube. So we'll keep the right to broadcast virtually all of the FBS games in form or the other and now that people expect to see them on the tube we yawn over the marvel that they are available where we once couldn't believe our eyes. So now they network that owns the CFP knows it can realize Super Bowl like revenue (not that anything is touching the Super Bowl) if the right teams are in the CFP.

So how do you accomplish that? With a damned committee paid to do your bidding and comprised of big name people whose credibility you don't doubt. And this Clifton Ave is a creation of the networks, not the conferences. The P5 is a designation given the conferences by the Networks, not by the conferences themselves. The conferences don't buck it because to be under that label means the networks are setting them up for more money. If we wanted a fairer system we would have a P4 but we don't. We don't because controlling those selections makes the network millions more.

Case in point, last week Texas A&M was next in if something happened to Clemson. Now that U.S.C. managed to beat a woeful UCLA and suddenly a West Coast ratings darling is available (if the # of games is waived as a criteria) ESPN ran some bogus poll last night saying that USC would be most likely to get the last spot over the Clemson / Notre Dame loser. How did this new data point magically appear to jump a heretofore distant USC all the way to #4? Money from tying in the West Coast viewers instead of having two teams from the Southeast even if both were deserving and Alabama has a stronger national draw than Clemson. Notre Dame pulls a national demographic as does Ohio State.

So we are right back to 1975 where if we are ABC and we have two major bowls we show on New Years we can put Alabama and Notre Dame in one, Ohio State and USC in the other and rake in the dough!

Now I want you to think about all of that when you attack Fighting Muskie and anyone else who is fascinated by the natural disaster on the horizon and they talk across the fence with their neighbor while both speculate on how the disaster will play out. While you shake your fist at the sky and scream at your neighbor to relieve your stress they speculate to relieve theirs, but either way we all face the same damn storm and that storm is Corporate Greed which not only impacts our football, but has been the impetus behind the destruction of family business which erodes the middle class and the main driver behind media bias and the furor over the last election.

But when you get ready to curse Disney and ESPN remember this, Cincinnati and Louisville and the other initial members of the old Metro conference or later members of CUSA and now the AAC would be nothing in athletics without the OU/UGA lawsuit and the Networks. That which you now curse as being the cause of your limitations lifted you out of obscurity and made your school's name a household word. Your world expanded from a region around Cincinnati to the nation because of them.


Yep, Back To The Future.

After a 45 year journey, we are back to what was the natural order of things in college football back when I was 18 years old.

Everyone else has got more games on TV, though. That, and some nice new facilities.
12-13-2020 02:36 PM
Visit this user's website Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
Fighting Muskie Offline
Senior Chief Realignmentologist
*

Posts: 11,973
Joined: Sep 2016
Reputation: 829
I Root For: Ohio St, UC,MAC
Location: Biden Cesspool
Post: #16
RE: B10-balance-or mediocrity?
Well said JR. The networks are the enemy here and they are the ones ruining college football. The BCS and the farce that is the playoff committee were all their creations. It’s not like the NCAA was doing any better prior to the 1984 ruling—keeping all the money for themselves.

The networks have been meddling with college football for 3 decades now and the results have not been for the better.

It’s one thing for conferences to be pitted against each other to win bowl games but the networks have created an expansion arms race were conferences are vying to stay financially competitive and in some cases fighting for their very existence.

I often get labeled as an Ohio St fan on here but I’m a UC Bearcats fan too and have a family connection to Xavier and just about every Ohio MAC school. I recognize the merits of the G5 and am a big advocate of a 5-1-2 playoff that guarantees a seat at the table for the schools in conferences that aren’t financial juggernauts.

This new SEC contract is dangerous and is going to have a long term destabilizing impact on the sport.
12-13-2020 02:57 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
Advertisement


XLance Offline
Hall of Famer
*

Posts: 14,436
Joined: Mar 2008
Reputation: 794
I Root For: Carolina
Location: Greensboro, NC
Post: #17
RE: B10-balance-or mediocrity?
(12-13-2020 09:42 AM)TerryD Wrote:  
(12-13-2020 12:53 AM)JRsec Wrote:  
(12-13-2020 12:38 AM)TerryD Wrote:  
(12-12-2020 09:03 PM)JRsec Wrote:  
(12-12-2020 12:19 PM)quo vadis Wrote:  With no OOC games, it's just impossible to tell. Same with the SEC and PAC.

Same with the SEC? What it is the same with is the ACC. Alabama is clearly another solid Alabama team. Texas A&M has improved greatly since their loss to the Tide.

Notre Dame and Clemson have both had close games with weaker ACC teams. Miami who had benefitted from a weaker schedule was torched today by an above average but not elite North Carolina team which is also improving each week.

I bring up the ACC for this reason. Just like the Big 10 they have some competitive teams in the top 6 or 7 and a bunch of weaker ones below. Clemson and Notre Dame may very well be worthy of the CFP but they haven't played anyone of note but each other and then Clemson was absent its starting QB. Ohio State like Alabama has owned everyone. But unlike Ohio State Alabama has had some decent teams on its SEC schedule to go along with some weaker ones.

But Quo, the SEC's past record speaks for itself, as does its recruiting. I've no doubt that the top SEC schools have better talent than most they will face. If you want to give an underhanded slight to the SEC that has merit then I think the head coaching is deserving of such. But to compare the SEC to the PAC? You know where you can stick that analogy!

Nobody compares with the PAC. The PAC has no discernable top team, let alone upper tier of teams.

Not lately, JR.


10/24 @ Pittsburgh W 45-3
10/31 @ Georgia Tech W 31-13
11/07 #1 Clemson W 47-40
11/14 @ BC W 45-31
11/27 @ #19 NC W 31-17
12/05 Syracuse W 45-21

The BC and Louisville scores are suspect Terry D and Louisville was not playing well when you played them. We'll see soon enough.



I didn't list Louisville. The ND offense (and Ian Book) clicked after Louisville (and at Pitt).

I listed the last 60% of the season. No ND struggles there.

BC game result suspect? ND was ahead 31-16 at halftime.

ND was leading BC by 22 points late in the fourth quarter until BC scored a TD and a two point conversion with little time left and ND's reserves in.

Anyway, nobody has the resume that ND has.

I know that lots of people like to instinctively and reflexively downplay any success that Notre Dame has, but nobody has a better resume right now.

No one has the 10-0 record and a win versus the #1 team that ND has.

Anyway, I am just glad that we had the season to enjoy, Covid and all.

As much as I would like nothing more than to disagree with TerryD, I would have to say that the Irish and Clemson are on a different level than the rest of the ACC and neither of those teams have had to struggle. Even when they haven't been playing at their best both are supremely confident and embody team.
I can't speak to the SEC as I have not watched any SEC games this year.
12-13-2020 03:02 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
JRsec Offline
Super Moderator
*

Posts: 38,360
Joined: Mar 2012
Reputation: 8051
I Root For: SEC
Location:
Post: #18
RE: B10-balance-or mediocrity?
(12-13-2020 02:36 PM)TerryD Wrote:  
(12-13-2020 02:21 PM)JRsec Wrote:  
(12-13-2020 10:00 AM)CliftonAve Wrote:  
(12-13-2020 08:53 AM)Fighting Muskie Wrote:  I’ll say this much, there needs to be more parity within each of the the P5 conferences. I think fans are getting weary of Alabama, Clemson, Ohio St, and Oklahoma always being in the playoffs.

The end of the BCS, the CFP era, and the mega media deals caused all this. It’s only made the rich, richer. All because people wanted to create further divide between the autonomous and non-autonomous schools.

Keep this in mind, as all of you sit around and fantasize about a “break away” of 32-64 schools. Yeah you sure put schools like Boise and Cincinnati and their place—- but unless you are one of 10 schools your favorite team will be destined for mediocrity forever.

You are directing your hostility at the wrong source, and that is like many people here, and in this nation do regularly, and quite frankly it's doing everyone harm. Face it, none of us can direct our anger where it really belongs because we don't see the CEO's at Disney, CBS, FOX, and NBC. Muskie isn't fantasizing about the destruction of the G5, or FCS or any of it. In fact your anger in this case should be directed at 2 sources only.

1. The NCAA which until 1984 essentially soaked up TV revenue for college football the way they do for college basketball today. The consumer wanted more college football games to be televised. The University of Oklahoma and the University of Georgia joined lawsuits against the NCAA's monopoly over college football which did exactly as it does today only in microcosm showed you 1 or if you were lucky occasionally 2 games per week. And who the hell it was on the tube? Alabama, Notre Dame, Ohio State and U.S.C.. with Michigan tossed in with Texas for good measure. The only way anyone else got on the tube is if they were playing one of those in a big game and even then you would readily recognize U.C.L.A., Michigan State, Washington, Arkansas, Tennessee, and Auburn. No there wasn't any Penn State or Florida State regularly per se as they were growing up as programs and Miami was only just emerging as a power in the early 80's.

As with all things success walks hand in hand with doom. Thanks to OU/UGA's lawsuit there was a great demand for games and some networks, like ESPN which was just getting rolling were able to secure rights to broadcast games with schools that had never been seen on the tube. Sports rights money grew the G5 which wouldn't have ever developed as football powers without initial TV money, and more importantly TV to advertise their schools' names, mascots, and games.

The MAC was the best recognized minor conference along with the WAC in those days. And CUSA grew directly as a brain child of marketing as a way to reach advertising demographics in cities. And it was a network executive at Raycom if I remember correctly who first introduced the concept of a super conference (16 schools) to maximize commercial value.

This concept would prove to be revolutionary and the main catalyst for expansion. It is why the Big 10 took an emerged Penn State and why the SEC grew into Arkansas and South Carolina. More market reach meant more money.

Sleepy old college football commissioners who only handled officiating problems and scheduling issues for there respective conferences found themselves confronted by TV executives and they botched the first sets of deals signed because they didn't understand the industry and just how valuable their product was.

Networks soon learned that you could manipulate these conferences by offering their member institutions more and more money. Then as technology changed we moved from brand and national draw to the market footprint model which grew all of the conferences and as the demand for the product rose the Sun Belt started being able to sell its games and pretty soon a pecking order of the newly emerging conferences came about and as some conferences were raided and died and others were reformed all the reshuffling accelerated. And the big brand conferences which had expanded their scope for more money suddenly found themselves in an arms race to keep the most money and the strongest of these regional conferences were the Big 10 and SEC. The ACC raided the Big East more in a survival mode than one of greed. ESPN had all of their rights so they used them to acquire product that old line ACC fans didn't necessarily want but the conference took to get wealthier. ESPN owned part of the SEC rights by then so they used them to do the same with the old SWC product and eventually Missouri from the Big 8 turned Big 12.

Nobody in the SEC sat around dreaming of adding Missouri. Nobody in the ACC sat around dreaming of adding Syracuse, and nobody out of the SWC / Big 12 sat around thinking they should add West Virginia.

The fans got involved the way people do when watching a natural disaster head their way on the horizon. Some realized the danger to their conference and raged against change, some tried to cope with it by understanding it, and some just tuned out while millions in this social phenomenon took to the newly created message boards to talk about it.

But sport nobody here is to blame for it. And now that the market footprint model is being replaced by the streaming model which once again wants highly recognized brands playing to draw national eyeballs to boost advertising rates the change is happening again, only unfortunately because they want this, the games everyone will watch (at least the casual fans nationally) are the ones involving Ohio State, Alabama, Notre Dame, and U.S.C. and those brands that they play in big games.

Only now instead of those being the "Game of the Week" on ABC's Wide World of Sports they are the season finale, the CFP selections. Too many networks now make weekly money from the vast number of games on the tube. So we'll keep the right to broadcast virtually all of the FBS games in form or the other and now that people expect to see them on the tube we yawn over the marvel that they are available where we once couldn't believe our eyes. So now they network that owns the CFP knows it can realize Super Bowl like revenue (not that anything is touching the Super Bowl) if the right teams are in the CFP.

So how do you accomplish that? With a damned committee paid to do your bidding and comprised of big name people whose credibility you don't doubt. And this Clifton Ave is a creation of the networks, not the conferences. The P5 is a designation given the conferences by the Networks, not by the conferences themselves. The conferences don't buck it because to be under that label means the networks are setting them up for more money. If we wanted a fairer system we would have a P4 but we don't. We don't because controlling those selections makes the network millions more.

Case in point, last week Texas A&M was next in if something happened to Clemson. Now that U.S.C. managed to beat a woeful UCLA and suddenly a West Coast ratings darling is available (if the # of games is waived as a criteria) ESPN ran some bogus poll last night saying that USC would be most likely to get the last spot over the Clemson / Notre Dame loser. How did this new data point magically appear to jump a heretofore distant USC all the way to #4? Money from tying in the West Coast viewers instead of having two teams from the Southeast even if both were deserving and Alabama has a stronger national draw than Clemson. Notre Dame pulls a national demographic as does Ohio State.

So we are right back to 1975 where if we are ABC and we have two major bowls we show on New Years we can put Alabama and Notre Dame in one, Ohio State and USC in the other and rake in the dough!

Now I want you to think about all of that when you attack Fighting Muskie and anyone else who is fascinated by the natural disaster on the horizon and they talk across the fence with their neighbor while both speculate on how the disaster will play out. While you shake your fist at the sky and scream at your neighbor to relieve your stress they speculate to relieve theirs, but either way we all face the same damn storm and that storm is Corporate Greed which not only impacts our football, but has been the impetus behind the destruction of family business which erodes the middle class and the main driver behind media bias and the furor over the last election.

But when you get ready to curse Disney and ESPN remember this, Cincinnati and Louisville and the other initial members of the old Metro conference or later members of CUSA and now the AAC would be nothing in athletics without the OU/UGA lawsuit and the Networks. That which you now curse as being the cause of your limitations lifted you out of obscurity and made your school's name a household word. Your world expanded from a region around Cincinnati to the nation because of them.


Yep, Back To The Future.

After a 45 year journey, we are back to what was the natural order of things in college football back when I was 18 years old.

Everyone else has got more games on TV, though. That, and some nice new facilities.

It is worse than that I fear Terry D. I'm not going to go political but I am going to make the observation that we are fast headed back to the coal mining and lumber days of the company store, only this time the company is a conglomerate and the setting is global. So in football we may well be witnessing a cycle that is taking us back to our fathers' days.
12-13-2020 03:04 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
JRsec Offline
Super Moderator
*

Posts: 38,360
Joined: Mar 2012
Reputation: 8051
I Root For: SEC
Location:
Post: #19
RE: B10-balance-or mediocrity?
(12-13-2020 02:57 PM)Fighting Muskie Wrote:  Well said JR. The networks are the enemy here and they are the ones ruining college football. The BCS and the farce that is the playoff committee were all their creations. It’s not like the NCAA was doing any better prior to the 1984 ruling—keeping all the money for themselves.

The networks have been meddling with college football for 3 decades now and the results have not been for the better.

It’s one thing for conferences to be pitted against each other to win bowl games but the networks have created an expansion arms race were conferences are vying to stay financially competitive and in some cases fighting for their very existence.

I often get labeled as an Ohio St fan on here but I’m a UC Bearcats fan too and have a family connection to Xavier and just about every Ohio MAC school. I recognize the merits of the G5 and am a big advocate of a 5-1-2 playoff that guarantees a seat at the table for the schools in conferences that aren’t financial juggernauts.

This new SEC contract is dangerous and is going to have a long term destabilizing impact on the sport.

You raise a point that I want to amplify. Yes the SEC's new contract is extremely destabilizing. It is the networks way of taking us back to the ABC / NCAA collusion that featured 36 to 48 teams over a few years time but it is going to do much more damage than just consolidation. Think about the number of schools that went into debt to improve the facilities that Terry mentions as being part of the good. Raise the stakes on investing in the sport and then exclude a fair % of those who had thought they were working their way up the ladder and you pull the financial rug right out from under them. COVID will only accelerate the debt load and rate at which some programs will fail. The timing of the SEC's deal with COVID was purely accidental but the impact of it will be stunning within the next decade.
12-13-2020 03:10 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
Fighting Muskie Offline
Senior Chief Realignmentologist
*

Posts: 11,973
Joined: Sep 2016
Reputation: 829
I Root For: Ohio St, UC,MAC
Location: Biden Cesspool
Post: #20
RE: B10-balance-or mediocrity?
JR—do you think the ESpn is trying to force the best of other 4 into:

1. Independence with a contract with ESPN

2. Forced into an ESPN controlled SEC on onerous terms
(This post was last modified: 12-13-2020 03:18 PM by Fighting Muskie.)
12-13-2020 03:18 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
Post Reply 




User(s) browsing this thread: 1 Guest(s)


Copyright © 2002-2024 Collegiate Sports Nation Bulletin Board System (CSNbbs), All Rights Reserved.
CSNbbs is an independent fan site and is in no way affiliated to the NCAA or any of the schools and conferences it represents.
This site monetizes links. FTC Disclosure.
We allow third-party companies to serve ads and/or collect certain anonymous information when you visit our web site. These companies may use non-personally identifiable information (e.g., click stream information, browser type, time and date, subject of advertisements clicked or scrolled over) during your visits to this and other Web sites in order to provide advertisements about goods and services likely to be of greater interest to you. These companies typically use a cookie or third party web beacon to collect this information. To learn more about this behavioral advertising practice or to opt-out of this type of advertising, you can visit http://www.networkadvertising.org.
Powered By MyBB, © 2002-2024 MyBB Group.