Big Ten and other Conference Expansion

[Buckeye86]

This is not true. The BCS had to have the federal government asking questions before they considered any changes that would benefit them. Even still, they made them temporary and still fairly impossible at given them a shot because there are 2 idiots for every rational person ranking these teams.

Some important people with a lot of power disagree with you.

Jim Delany Warns Non-AQ Leagues: Don't Expect More Than You're Getting

"Don't push it past this because if you push it past this, the Big 12's position is we'll just go back to the old (bowl) system," Big 12 commissioner Dan Beebe told FanHouse. "You're getting the ability to get to places you've never gotten before. We've Jerry-rigged the free market system to the benefit of those institutions and a lot are institutions that don't even fill their stadiums."

 

[Mike80]

Thank you! You've proven my point, finally. National championships, being the champion in the football bowl subdivision, are awarded based more on history and traditional than actual competitiveness.

Unless you say competitiveness among only those with history and tradition.

Either way, it is reserved for the few and the way the money goes around makes sure it stays that way.

Call me old fashioned, but I think any team, on any given Saturday, should have a shot. If they don't, why bother watching or playing?

IF you were truly old-fashioned, a team that has risen on the hype of EsPIN wouldn't even register with you.

what is boysee once ESPIN finds another flavor of the month? Marshall. Remember Marshall when they were espin's darlings in the late 90s??

 

[Buckeye Maniac]

This is not true. The BCS had to have the federal government asking questions before they considered any changes that would benefit them. Even still, they made them temporary and still fairly impossible at giving them a shot because there are 2 idiots for every rational person ranking these teams.

What chance does Boise have of getting into a major bowl game in the old system? They'd be stuck with the Poinsettia Bowl and the Hawaii Bowl as their ceiling.

The BCS has helped the non BCS schools too much.

 

[Mrstickball]

Was going off the first championship--which Boise State is seeking. I guess if we have the draft, another major world war, etc, they would have a shot? I don't know.



This is not true. The BCS had to have the federal government asking questions before they considered any changes that would benefit them. Even still, they made them temporary and still fairly impossible at giving them a shot because there are 2 idiots for every rational person ranking these teams.

Additionally, this is why we're even having expansion in the first place.

The big conferences know that the current system is unsustainable. Thus, why the Pac-10, Big Ten, SEC and ACC have added teams. They know that eventually we're going to have a big winner-takes-all playoff, and they want to negotiate as many spots as they can, in addition to as much money from TV and media rights as possible.

College football has a lot of tradition - I get that. But when that tradition a real crappy way of naming a national championship, I think things need to change. Additionally, most of the people as of late essentially believe that the winner of the Big Ten, Pac-12, SEC and ACC essentially take their best team, and that is who gets to the NC game, and that is insane. They believe that no other school in the next 20, 50, or 100 years will ever deserve a shot at an NC because they didn't make the cut of the super-conferences decades ago.


Look at UCF - they've gone from Division III to beating some great competition in FBS in just 30 years. D3 to beating Georgia in a bowl game in under 30 years.

Geography and demographics will change over the next 50 years, making new elite programs. To provide a list of teams that are locked for bowl play for the rest of history is just unfathomable to me. The excuse that "We can't let Ohio play for a national championship" is a straw man argument, because no one is arguing that there can't be a valve for letting crappy teams get weeded out. The argument is there is a system that even lets them have a shot at all - which is something most people here are against for some insane reason.

 

[kn1f3party]

Some important people with a lot of power disagree with you.

Jim Delany Warns Non-AQ Leagues: Don't Expect More Than You're Getting

You are quoting the pioneering conference commissioner that was just ousted for placating the wealthy and the powerful in his own conference...

IF you were truly old-fashioned, a team that has risen on the hype of EsPIN wouldn't even register with you.

what is boysee once ESPIN finds another flavor of the month? Marshall. Remember Marshall when they were espin's darlings in the late 90s??

I remember that, but it didn't last very long. I ignored Boise State too, but when they keep winning you can't call them the flavor of the month. Seasons turn to years turn to decades. At some point we have to respect what they've done. I think if you really look at their past it is even more incredible.

What chance does Boise have of getting into a major bowl game in the old system? They'd be stuck with the Poinsettia Bowl and the Hawaii Bowl as their ceiling.

The BCS has helped the non BCS schools too much.

Truth, but they could win a national championship. Bowls didn't always decide who the champion was, it was just a fun way to end the season.

Additionally, this is why we're even having expansion in the first place.

The big conferences know that the current system is unsustainable. Thus, why the Pac-10, Big Ten, SEC and ACC have added teams. They know that eventually we're going to have a big winner-takes-all playoff, and they want to negotiate as many spots as they can, in addition to as much money from TV and media rights as possible.

College football has a lot of tradition - I get that. But when that tradition a real crappy way of naming a national championship, I think things need to change. Additionally, most of the people as of late essentially believe that the winner of the Big Ten, Pac-12, SEC and ACC essentially take their best team, and that is who gets to the NC game, and that is insane. They believe that no other school in the next 20, 50, or 100 years will ever deserve a shot at an NC because they didn't make the cut of the super-conferences decades ago.


Look at UCF - they've gone from Division III to beating some great competition in FBS in just 30 years. D3 to beating Georgia in a bowl game in under 30 years.

Geography and demographics will change over the next 50 years, making new elite programs. To provide a list of teams that are locked for bowl play for the rest of history is just unfathomable to me. The excuse that "We can't let Ohio play for a national championship" is a straw man argument, because no one is arguing that there can't be a valve for letting crappy teams get weeded out. The argument is there is a system that even lets them have a shot at all - which is something most people here are against for some insane reason.

This is all I'm saying. If we're going to keep Indianas then teams like TCU and Boise State need a way to compete for a championship too. Maybe FBS needs to be split in half, but I like the allure of it being the size it is with a playoff system and ways for mid-majors to get in on the post season.

 

[DallasHusker]

They weren't even 1A 16 years ago. They've arguably gone as fast as they can to get where they are. And 10 years ago if someone said the Mountain West was legit you'd die of laughter.

Geography is a bitch, but who is going to take them that is legit.

There is unfair and then there is [censored]ed up.

Life is unfair, I can accept that. But a team that has an argument for being in the mix for a championship being completely left out year after year, with no chance of joining a bigger conference because of population density, geography, and academics, is [censored]ed up.

This... How many of the players playing for Truck Driver U. would be academically ineligible in any of the BCS AQ conferences, EVEN the SEC??? They need to play by the same rules in addition to playing similar caliber of competition. Otherwise, this is trying to add oranges (blueberrys?) to the barrel of apples.

 

[PlanetFrnd]

The big conferences know that the current system is unsustainable. Thus, why the Pac-10, Big Ten, SEC and ACC have added teams. They know that eventually we're going to have a big winner-takes-all playoff, and they want to negotiate as many spots as they can, in addition to as much money from TV and media rights as possible.

This is not necessarily true at all - the current system is definitely sustainable. Superconferences are the result of conferences learning they can make money off of their own networks - and tons of it. There is nothing stopping from Boise - why you love them so much, I'll never know - from advocating itself to a "major" conference or pushing the WAC (or whatever conference they're in) to create its own conference channel... there really is no reason they won't - I'd bet they could even get deals from carriers if they were willing to take a low-revenue deal... I'm guessing they don't do this because they don't give two shits about their current confercen and can make more money taking Thursday night out-of-conference away games against teams with better TV contracts and keep the money for themselves, rather than share it with their crap conference.

No one really cares if the Boise States of the world have a "chance" to play for the championships... oh, except those who might have an interest in drumming up viewers for early-season Thursday and Friday night college football games on blue turf... who might want something like that... hmmm...

 

[Buckeye86]

You are quoting the pioneering conference commissioner that was just ousted for placating the wealthy and the powerful in his own conference...

Read the article, the commissioners are unanimous in their feelings about this, I apologize for being lazy and pulling the first quote I found.

 

[PlanetFrnd]

This is all I'm saying. If we're going to keep Indianas then teams like TCU and Boise State need a way to compete for a championship too. Maybe FBS needs to be split in half, but I like the allure of it being the size it is with a playoff system and ways for mid-majors to get in on the post season.

No, No, No.

We keep the Indianas of the world because they have millions of alumni and are the flagship school of the state of Indiana. Additionally they are a research institute that is tied to other flagship univerisities of various states which also have millions of alumni. Billions of research dollars tie these schools together, and hundreds of millions of dollars tie their athletic departments together because of the literal tens of millions (more?) of B1G alumni that have a real interest in their alma maters. It has nothing to do with giving Indiana a "chance." No one cares if Indiana competes for a national championship ever (ok, maybe some delusional Hoosier fans think it could happen).

If Boise State really cared about competing for a national championship (it doesn't) with the big boys, it would stop complaining about not being allowed to back-door itself into a system that it's not really even part of. It 100% has the ability to 1) lobby itself to other conferences, 2) become independent, 3) pressure its existing conference to create a better athletic product... but it doesn't do any of these things because they might require the school 1) improving its academics to become a viable conference partner(nothing shows me it wants to do this), 2) becoming a team player to its own conference (nope, it would rather take one-off paychecks for playing the big-boys to keep money for itself and, yes, BCS bowl money), or 3) take some real scheduling risk as an independent (nope, would rather have 8 guaranteed games against shit opponents, not to mention, how would it ever schedule non-football sports)...

Don't feel bad for Boise, they're not willing to do the work to become viable... they'd rather pose as a university and athletic department, when really they're just a football team with blue turf that beats one or two good teams a year and complains through the other months (with help from ESPiN)

 

[kn1f3party]

Read the article, the commissioners are unanimous in their feelings about this, I apologize for being lazy and pulling the first quote I found.

It is still irrational, they have everything to lose and nothing to gain by changing it. I expect them to say this sort of thing, they aren't doing their job if they aren't.

We'll see how things play out, but we have the inevitibility of a playoff pending and now this sudden need to bolster conferences and consolidate.

 

[FCollinsBuckeye]

I've felt that from the B1G's standpoint, while the motivation is likely finacial/athletic, conference expansion must also be about academics. These are Universities after all, not sporting franchises. All this knashing of teeth about Boise being left out seems to neglect that fact.

The most 'fair' way to structure a NCAA D1A football system would be to have the current top 64 teams in 4 16-team leagues, with an 8 team playoff after each season. The lower tier teams would have a similar setup and each year, the bottom team from each 16-team league drops into the lower division and the upper 4 teams from the lower division are promoted. This rewards overachieving smaller schools by placing them in the divisions in which they could play for a NC.

The problem with that scenario is, it's a professional system. Academics don't want musical conferences, given the teams are University-sponsored.

As has been beat to death in the playoff vs. BCS thread(s), if you don't like the way the mNC is won in CFB each year, too bad. Go follow the NFL.

 

[jlb1705]

 

[kn1f3party]

We keep the Indianas of the world because they have millions of alumni and are the flagship school of the state of Indiana. Additionally they are a research institute that is tied to other flagship univerisities of various states which also have millions of alumni. Billions of research dollars tie these schools together, and hundreds of millions of dollars tie their athletic departments together because of the literal tens of millions (more?) of B1G alumni that have a real interest in their alma maters. It has nothing to do with giving Indiana a "chance." No one cares if Indiana competes for a national championship ever (ok, maybe some delusional Hoosier fans think it could happen).

The argument is about the equity of the postseason in football. I won't dispute their contributions to the conference in other arenas, but this marriage of the two is kind of ridiculous.

If Boise State really cared about competing for a national championship (it doesn't) with the big boys, it would stop complaining about not being allowed to back-door itself into a system that it's not really even part of. It 100% has the ability to 1) lobby itself to other conferences, 2) become independent, 3) pressure its existing conference to create a better athletic product... but it doesn't do any of these things because they might require the school 1) improving its academics to become a viable conference partner(nothing shows me it wants to do this), 2) becoming a team player to its own conference (nope, it would rather take one-off paychecks for playing the big-boys to keep money for itself and, yes, BCS bowl money), or 3) take some real scheduling risk as an independent (nope, would rather have 8 guaranteed games against [Mark May] opponents, not to mention, how would it ever schedule non-football sports)...

Don't feel bad for Boise, they're not willing to do the work to become viable... they'd rather pose as a university and athletic department, when really they're just a football team with blue turf that beats one or two good teams a year and complains through the other months (with help from ESPiN)

1) How does it do this exactly? The Pac-12 is the only one that regionally makes sense and academically they'll never be up to standard. Which begs the question, if they are classified as a FBS school, why should academics preclude their ability to compete for a championship.

2) This doesn't get you a shot at the national championship.

3) They're newcomers to the Mountain West. They've barely been a FBS school long enough to have any kind of history with any of these people. They aren't any kind of authority or influencer in their conference. Even still, it would take decades to see this to fruition, if not longer.

All I am saying, and what the debates are failing to adequately dispute, is:

If you belong to an athletic league, you should be able to compete for the championship of your athletic league.

It bewilders me that people think this is not the case, that teams should be a part of a league and never have a legitemate chance at competing for a championship.

It shouldn't take decades and they shouldn't have to jump through a mountain of hoops.

 

[PlanetFrnd]

The argument is about the equity of the postseason in football. I won't dispute their contributions to the conference in other arenas, but this marriage of the two is kind of ridiculous.

No, the argument for "equity" in the college football postseason is ridiculous, as is the premise that Boise, somehow, deserves a "chance."

 

[LovelandBuckeye]

Yeah I really don't have any inclination to watch Purdue play Kansas in the Orange Bowl anytime soon....

or Syracuse playing Vanderbilt in the Sugar Bowl....

Or USF playing Washington State anywhere.....

What!!!!!!!!! USF vs WSU would be EPIC!!! with 3 exclamation points.