Bio not provided
Old Dominion and UNC-Charlotte are also slated to join CUSA in the future, right?
1 month, 2 weeks ago on Remember When: Five Years Of Conference Realignment Has Changed The Football Landscape
Would it be reasonable to assume that any program with potential and the subsequent access to Power 5 money would become a decent expansion target? I can understand why a league might not be interested in developing an athletic program. It's much easier to get a guaranteed power school in a good market. Nonetheless, there is a formula that numerous programs have repeated over the years. If you can give a school an opportunity to increase their credibility by membership in your league then wouldn't that be a benefit in the long run?
I still have to think that East Carolina and Cincinnati would develop nicely with SEC money and exposure. That's assuming, of course, that the ACC will stick together in the long run. From what I understand, ECU's football attendance and ratings(within NC) are comparable to the 4 ACC schools. Their alumni base obviously wouldn't be as large, but if the other factors are true then a nice foundation has already been laid. The city they're located in would be less of a factor because of the SEC Network. We would just need enough fans around the state to pay the subscription.
Cincinnati, I see in a similar position. Mostly though, it's the size of the OH market and the recruiting base that intrigues me. UC also has a good basketball program and the SEC needs more of those.
1 month, 2 weeks ago on If Division IV Comes, Which Schools Might Be Thrown A Lifeline?
I think his point was that Houston was not particularly strong enough in any area to really catch anyone's attention, not that UH had poor academics.
Actually, I think if the ACC expands then some combo of Houston, SMU, Tulane, and Cincinnati would probably fill their needs quite well and would fit in with what they've done in the past.
Who do you believe could be a target of the SEC in this scenario? And would you think the addition would only be made if both of these standards are met? For example, maybe more power is needed, but a school won't be added unless it also brings a new market?
If I were the SEC looking at the lower ranks, I would be interested in Cincinnati, East Carolina, UCF, USF, Houston, and wildcards like Old Dominion or New Mexico. Could the concept of adding schools with potential that could be developed with Power 5 money all of a sudden become a good strategy?
1 month, 2 weeks ago on If A “Division IV” Is Created, Get Ready For More Conference Realignment
@DanHogan I don't think that would be the worst idea. Either that or make sure that the school guarantee's funding for a graduate degree in the future. That's the same vein of thought we're entering now by making sure undergrads have the same privileges.
1 month, 3 weeks ago on Dos, Don’ts And Should Have Dones From The SEC Meetings (Part Two)
Do you see the SEC and ACC forming an ever tighter alliance?
2 months, 1 week ago on Muschamp Open To Adding Miami To Florida’s Schedule
I agree wholeheartedly with this.
Also, one of the main reasons I support an 8 team playoff is that it gives each major conference champion a spot. That makes the conference championship race for each league much more interesting. In basketball, there really isn't even a true conference winner. One team wins the regular season and another may very well win the tournament and get the invite to the Big Dance. It makes no sense.
That along with giving 3 most likely deserving wildcard teams a shot as well. Under this format, there's really no reason that 2 SEC teams shouldn't make it into the field of 8 every single season. The stronger leagues will be fairly represented and the champions of the weaker leagues still get access. It's a perfect solution really.
The one thing I hope they don't do is try to make those 1st round games into bowl games. The 8 teams should be seeded and the top 4 host games on their campuses. To make fans travel to 3 neutral site "bowl games" in order to follow their team through the playoffs would be asinine. Actually, making them attend 2 as of right now is pretty bad.
2 months, 4 weeks ago on An Expanded College Football Playoff Would Not Hurt The Regular Season
Well, I overreacted. I shouldn't have been so harsh. I apologize for that. I have seen a few self-righteous people sounding off on this topic for quite some time now and they've come out of the woodwork on this most recent ruling. I guess I was trigger happy with that one.
I don't think the Ivy League model is necessarily bad, but I do think these kids deserve a scholarship for playing these sports. I think even if the Ivy League model takes hold then there will still be a lot of money generated by many major programs. Things would change obviously and the days of stadiums filled with 100K would probably be over. I don't know that the NFL or the NBA will ever come up with a viable player development plan that doesn't involve colleges doing most of the work for them so I think a lot of very talented athletes will still come up with some way of paying for college so they can get access.
Either that or a lot of schools are going to start forking over cash from their general budget in order to keep the most popular sports going. Of course, that could also involve discontinuing many of the non-revenue sports to save money. I'm just afraid of a Pandora's box being opened that at the end of the day leaves no one any better off than they are now while stripping away much of what is beneficial.
4 months ago on The End Is Nigh (For College Sports As We Knew Them); What The NLRB’s Ruling Means For The SEC
Sorry, but it's the self-righteous do-gooders like you that get on my nerves. Does it really affect your life whether or not major college sports is a multi-million dollar industry or not? Does it really bother you that all of these college athletes fall all over themselves to get a scholarship at major programs that "exploit" them? Never mind the fact that participating in collegiate athletics is a purely voluntary endeavor and the only reason these kids sign up for it is because they know it will benefit them...
Or are you one of these people who cares for nothing in life other than an elitist academic culture and the thought of athletes leaving college with a degree that has your school's name on it(something that will benefit them tremendously in life, help them get jobs, provide for their families, become better citizens of the community) just stick in your craw? Could you tell me how a university's mission is devalued because they invest in major athletics? Does a degree from Vanderbilt or any school for that matter really mean very little in the practical world because they spend millions of dollars every year on a football team(something that does little else other than promote their university and generate funds)?
If you prefer the Ivy League model, that's fine. Everyone has their own preferences. The people who have such disdain for major college athletics as though it's the bane of our society, however, floor me.
So what are the chances that the NCAA adopts the Ivy League model where there are no scholarships...no nothing? I think college sports would still exist, just as they exist at the Ivy League schools, but would it all essentially turn into a glorified high school organization?
It would be an interesting idea. I doubt it will ever happen, but if major realignment is over then that may be another way to reach into markets that the SEC otherwise wouldn't get into. I like these options because they are all in new markets:
VCU(large public school, good academics, Virginia market)
George Washington(large private school, good academics, DC market)
4 months, 2 weeks ago on The SEC Pays The Price For Bad Hoops On Selection Sunday (Again)
I have a wild idea. Perhaps SEC schools should start looking to Europe for some of its answers. The European pro leagues tend to play a more fundamentals-focused kind of game. Maybe, some of the coaches there would be interested in good paying jobs in America that offer quality competition and national exposure. Too much of a culture shock? Maybe, but it would be interesting.
Also, I think one of the problems is that SEC coaches are all trying to out-athlete each other. I can say Bama has essentially had that philosophy for a long time now even before Grant was the coach. The NBA has done that for a long time and the quality of the game has suffered. I don't just think it's the one-and-done rule that is hurting college basketball so much even though that's part of it. I think the general departure from fundamentals and set offenses are hurting the game. Coaches need to look for players that understand the game and play fundamentally sound ball. It seems like coaches today are only looking at physical stature and overall athletic ability meanwhile overlooking really good players who don't measure up in raw potential. Think about Kobe Bryant...he's a great athlete no doubt, but what makes him special is his dedication to the fundamentals of the game. And think about this...Kobe grew up in Europe where they teach a completely different type of game to the youth players.
Just something to gnaw on.
Makes perfect sense. When I first heard O'Brien was leaving, Franklin was the first name to come to mind.
7 months ago on Report: James Franklin Tops List Of Penn State Coaching Candidates
I honestly don't know what Saban was supposed to do. Is the implication here that if Saban had been more adamant recently then Mack Brown wouldn't have been forced out? Mack was on his way out whether Saban was available for/interested in Texas or not. Would Texas really base their decision on the iffy prospect of Saban leaving Bama? The two situations were completely separate.
Is the criticism over the idea that Saban DID in fact have the ability to cull the storm by saying they were working on a contract rather than handling it all behind closed doors? The thought then being that his criticism of media reports was deceitful posturing rather than a genuine expression of frustration. Well, I know Saban criticizes the media too much, but how was Saban supposed to quell the rumors? Gus Malzahn recently agreed to a new deal with Auburn although apparently it hasn't been signed. Everybody knows about it. There were press releases even, and people still think there's a shot of him going to Texas. Heck, there are still a couple of outlets that consider Saban a possibility even though the contract has already been signed. Saban is obviously a more high profile candidate so naturally there is more buzz and speculation around him compared to others, but still.
Like others have said, Saban(and his wife) had already said he had no interest in Texas. I don't see any material difference in those statements and throwing a bone to the media in the final week saying there was a contract on the verge of being signed. Either way, the officials at UA knew what was happening. They knew they were going to be leveraged the day the first rumor of Saban going to Texas came out. And we all know they were going to give in. The only question was what the price tag was going to be. I don't see how Saban playing the leverage game with UA officials behind closed doors has any real impact on what the media reports or doesn't report...as far as rumors go that is.
And don't you think the same leverage game would have been played whether the media ever took seriously the notion of Saban going to Texas? Hypothetically speaking, if the media had completely ignored the story then Jimmy Sexton and the other relevant figures would have all taken the same course of action.
7 months, 2 weeks ago on Sanctimonious Saban Lays It On Way Too Thick About His Non-Move To Texas
Joe my boy,
Just because the AP poll didn't vote Bama #1 in certain years doesn't mean that no one else did. Again, who is to say that one national poll is better than another?
And when you say Auburn could do the same thing and claim 9 titles? Please. Not claiming a title for years like '93 when your team was ineligible for postseason isn't a matter of being classy. It's a matter of realizing how much of a laughing stock the program would be for doing so. Same thing with that "People's Championship" nonsense from '04. If the AP poll had awarded a split title in '04, for example, then there's nothing wrong with claiming it, but that's not what happened. Like I said, there are years in which Bama was voted #1 by certain polls yet UA refuses to claim those. Do a little research.
I forgot to mention earlier this issue about SEC championships. Your breakdown of how Bama won their titles is, of course, based on hearsay. Yes, Bama played a lot against MSU and Vandy over the years. We, however, have NEVER played Kentucky very much. Which message board did you get that gem from? Also, it's true that we've never played Florida very much, but(maybe you're too young to remember) Florida was no powerhouse until Spurrier showed up in 1990. I don't see how "avoiding" them in most years invalidates conference titles. Also, you have no idea what you're talking about when you say we "avoided" Georgia. Bama played Georgia most every year until the 1980s came around. We haven't played them regularly since, but that's mostly to do with the new East/West lineup. It's the same reason Auburn doesn't play Florida very often anymore. I also might add that we played Georgia Tech a lot in the old days and maybe you didn't know this either, but GT was pretty good in the old days before they left the conference. That's why it took AU until 2010 to surpass GT in the SEC title department despite the fact GT hadn't been a part of the conference for nearly 50 years. I suppose though that's because Auburn played Georgia and Florida so much...just a tougher schedule every year, right? Sure.
I might also mention that conference titles could be split until the advent of the conference championship game in '92. Bama won titles in years in which other schools also won them. Why? Because there wasn't a setup for determining a true champion. There were only 6 conference games back in the old days so please don't give me this nonsense about soft schedules. Auburn had just as easy a road historically.
And why does Bama only have a 7 game lead over Auburn? I never said Auburn had a sucky program. They've obviously won a fair bit over the years. Guess what though, that still qualifies you for #2 in the state.
7 months, 3 weeks ago on Auburn’s Malzahn Skirts Texas Talk, But SI.com Writer Is Right – He Should Go If Offered
I'm not going to get drawn into a argument about which national titles Bama claims and which ones are valid. Anyone who wants to do a little research can dig and find out why Bama claims the titles that they do and why they are perfectly reasonable to claim. The only exception might be 1941, but there are years in which Bama has gone undefeated and been voted #1 even though Bama doesn't claim those. It all events out.
The reality is that it's ridiculous to say that claiming titles before a certain poll was established make the title invalid. It's as ridiculous as claiming that titles won before the BCS era don't count. The NCAA doesn't recognize champions so who really has the right to decide?
The AP poll was actually established in 1934...bet you didn't know that did you? I also bet you didn't know that Bama only claims 3 titles before that time? You probably believe whatever hearsay you find on an Auburn message board when it comes to these sorts of things. That's ok though, I don't expect better.
And actually, the vast majority of Michigan's titles came before WWII. Then, of course, there is every single other program that won a title from that era...Notre Dame, Minnesota, Army, Navy, Stanford. They all claim their titles. In fact, I dare you to do a little research and find a program from that era that doesn't claim their title. Just because it happened a long time ago and they didn't do things the way we do them now doesn't mean it was invalid.
As far as the overall quality of UA versus AU, believer what you will.
I'll conclude by saying I enjoyed discussing with an Aubie that didn't immediately refer to me as trailer trash because I'm a Bama fan. We should do it more often.
Is it wrong of me that what I actually enjoy is that comments like mine get under the skin of you folks? I'll let you decide.
In seriousness though, Thamel's point is completely logical. It has nothing to do with how many coaches have come through Tuscaloosa or haven't and vice-versa with Auburn. It's the nature of their stay and their departure. Terry Bowden started off like gangbusters, but was essentially run out of town due to unmet expectations...same with Tuberville...same with Chizik. Now a coach being fired for unmet expectations isn't anything unusual, but what matters is are the expectations realistic? In Auburn's case, competing for championships year in and year out is an unreasonable expectation. Why? Because they've never done it before.
Winning 7-9 games on an annual basis with the occasional big year should be Auburn's expectation until someone comes in there and proves that something more than that can be done. Until that time, Auburn's expectations are based on what big brother has accomplished. 15 national titles...23 SEC titles...3 national titles in the last 4 years...these are the marks of a program capable of greatness. That's not opinion, that's a fact proven on the field. It's perfectly reasonable for the Bama brass to be less patient with their coaches because history and circumstances have proven that excellence is imminently achievable.
What speaks volumes is the fact that Auburn's expectations are based on the accomplishments of Bama rather than their own history or vision. What does that tell you? Alabama is the superior program, always has been, and probably always will be. Whether the Auburn folks want to admit it or not, their entire athletic philosophy revolves around that fact. You know as well as I do that the real goal at Auburn is to be better than Bama on an annual basis. If championships come along with it then that's just gravy, but the only intolerable situation is one where Auburn is taking a back seat to Bama.
And let's not forget that every coaching change at Bama over the last 30 years has not been your run of the mill guy getting fired after bad performances. Mike Price never coached a game and got himself into hot water, that had nothing to do with the program. In fact, it's a tribute to the program that they fired Price rather than covering up his behavior. Certainly Bama was setting themselves up for nothing but heartache in firing a brand new coach in the middle of May. Subsequently, hiring Shula in such a unique situation was always a temporary solution. He was never qualified for the job, but Bama was forced to make a difficult decision. After all that, Bama lands the best coach in the country and builds another dynasty. Auburn wins a title around the same time and the program collapses shortly thereafter. That my friend is instability.
Meanwhile, Ray Perkins left for a job in the NFL. How is that a sign of instability? Stallings won a national title before retiring. Instability there? DuBose...I'll give you that one. Franchione...I don't know how to explain that one. He didn't leave for a better job. He left because the AD was not giving him the facilities upgrades that he wanted and honestly needed. Instability? I'll call that a push. Curry on the other hand was essentially run out of town as is the M.O. at Auburn. The difference of course is that that happened 20 plus years ago...it's not a recurring theme.
In short, my thesis is this: Bama presents opportunities for qualified coaches that few other programs in America can. Texas is an equal, but not a superior program. Auburn is an above average program, albeit run by a good ole boy network that is stuck with an insecure mindset that drives them to compare the program to Alabama at every turn.
John, it looks like you struck a nerve with the Aubies. Which isn't surprising as the typical(not all) Auburn fan is completely delusional about the nature of their program. John writes a completely logical piece about where the Auburn job stands in the grand scheme of things and the knee jerk reaction from Aubs is to compare their troubles to that of Alabama's. I have to say, it entertains me.
Anyway, Malzahn would be foolish to turn down the Texas job if he's indeed offered. Deep down, the Aubs know that and it drives them crazy.
@Farris @the_voice Compared to Texas, yes, Auburn is a stepping stone job. If Malzahn is offered that job then he should take it. Remember when Chizik left for the same position at Texas that he had at Auburn. There's no difference.
I wish Nussmeier well. UW is a decent job so if that is what he wants then I think it would be a good opportunity for him.
7 months, 3 weeks ago on Franklin, Pinkel, Nussmeier… SEC Coaches Keep Getting Tied To Open Washington Job
One of the best ways to make the schedules more fair is to add conference games. 9 games would make for more fair rotations. Heck, 10 games would be outstanding and that way you could have 5 home and 5 away. Of course, the whiners don't like that either because that's too many "tough" games.
11 months, 1 week ago on That Didn’t Take Long: Whines About “Unfair” SEC Schedule in 2014 Begin
It's even harder to build a big fan base at a small private school for football than it is for basketball. It's easier to build a successful bball program over a long period of time in the first place...recruiting a solid 12 players versus a solid 85. You add to that the financial commitment a school needs to make in order to play good football...coaches salaries, facilities, and recruiting.
The only small private school I can think of that has really achieved this is Notre Dame. That comes from their affiliation with the Catholic church as well as a century of consistent success. Miami is private and has had success in the last 30 years, but they really don't draw big crowds except for FSU and other huge games. It's a tough road to hoe.
11 months, 2 weeks ago on Lack Of “Sidewalk Alums” Hurts Vandy At The Ticket Office
Others have touched on it, but I would like to see the averages when you factor out the cupcake games. Improving the quality of the schedule could only help attendance.
12 months ago on SEC Football Attendance Declines For Three Straight Years, But…
I see a maximum of 8 wins on the schedule, but 6 is a very real possibility. AU, Arkansas, and Ole Miss are the toss ups, but I think State wins at least one of them. Oklahoma State, not sure what they've got, but it should be winnable.
1 year ago on MSU’s Mullen: “Eight Wins Have Kind Of Become The Norm”
I think the biggest question is will the Big 12 schools re-up their grant of rights agreement as it comes time for the current one to expire? There is a serious chance the B12 could become unstable again in a few years.
1 year ago on Big XII’s Bowlsby Says 10 Is “The Right Number For Us”
Texas also wants to maintain control. Any addition that would weaken their authority will be nixed.
I could see one day maybe USF getting an invite if their program continues to progress.
Flagging much less ejecting Clowney for that hit is patently absurd.
The way things are going, football as we know it is going to end up being banned one day. Some of these rules they are coming up with are nothing short of ridiculous. We see it in the NFL all the time now, regardless of where contact is made you basically can't hit someone hard anymore. Has anyone ever told these officials that the object of the game is to tackle the ball carrier. It is by nature a physical game.
And in actuality, there are about a hundred crazy/radical things you could do to the game that would make more sense than what they're doing these days in the name of "safety." 1) Get rid of helmets...studies show physical sports like rugby and Aussie rules football have fewer head injuries despite their physical nature. 2) Height and weight limits...make sure everyone playing the game is about the same size...can't be too small or too large. 3) Regulate how athletes work out...athletes are bigger, faster, stronger than they've ever been so keep their bodies at more natural sizes rather than allowing them to put on muscle mass.
Any of those things would be huge changes, but would not be antithetical to the nature of the game. The point is to tackle the ball carrier...how can you flag someone for tackling?
1 year ago on New Ejection Rule Will Be The Most Controversial Rule Change In Ages
I thought FOX was just converting Speed into the new FS1? I figured Speed already had pretty universal coverage or do they have to go back to the drawing board with a change of format?
1 year ago on Afternoon SEC Headlines – 7/15/13
I can see the true talent difference not being 49-0. Of course, that doesn't mean the talent difference wasn't 21-0 or something like that. Auburn was an unusually bad football team last year. They'll probably be better this year, but I don't think the difference will be that significant. I could see them going 5-7 or 6-6, but still being blown out by the best teams they face. They have a long way to go after what Chizik did to the program plus a lot of those highly rated prospects from those great recruiting years didn't stick around very long so that creates another hole to dig out of.
1 year ago on Steele: Talent Level Between Bama, Auburn “Not A 49-0 Difference”
I don't think any of the new coaches will reach 7 wins this year, but I do believe Jones and Bielema could get 6 wins and be in the postseason. UK has a lot of rebuilding to do and AU was almost as bad last year. Malzahn will be an improvement, but they've got a long way to go.
1 year ago on Fearless Predictions: 5 Things That Will Happen In The SEC This Fall
Interesting set of predictions. I have to disagree with #5 as well. I think if any program around the country is going to knock off the SEC champ it's going to be Oregon or another talent laden team that runs an up-tempo offense. Oregon might have a rebuilding year this year, but the transition shouldn't take long with most of that staff being intact. I might also cast a vote for an undefeated FSU team depending on how much progress they make. I don't think the streak is going to end this year, but I think those are the programs that have a legitimate shot.
1 year ago on Fearless Predictions: 5 Things That Will Not Happen In The SEC This Fall
I agree completely. One more thing I'll add as far as Malzahn goes. He's not going to match up with Saban in most years, if ever. That alone might give him the shortest leash. Chizik lost 3 of 4 to Bama. Tuberville on the other hand had won 6 in a row before a total collapse to Bama in year 7. Despite every good thing Tuberville had done, his program had fallen behind Saban's and that was unacceptable to the AU brass. If Malzahn doesn't beat Bama at least 50% of the time then he's done regardless of what else he accomplishes.
1 year, 1 month ago on Of The SEC’s New Football Coaches, Who’ll Be The First Man Gone?
I might be mistaken, but don't baseball players get the option of returning to college post-draft as long as they don't sign an agent? I'm sure I've heard stories of kids not being drafted very highly so they decide to either go to college or come back for their senior year. It makes a lot of sense. If that were allowed for basketball or football for that matter then a kid making a mistake would have a chance to improve their stock for the future. Of course, if you're highly drafted then you become highly paid so the decision is made for you.
1 year, 1 month ago on SEC Coaches Sound Off About The NBA’s One-And-Done Rule
It really is a punch in the gut that a player for Bama is leaving the current coach to go play for the former coach at NC State.
1 year, 1 month ago on SEC Headlines 6/19/2013
And people think Bama and Tennessee shouldn't play every year...
1 year, 1 month ago on Security “Beefed Up” Ahead Of Saban Speech In Vol Country
Yeah, I would bet a large percentage of OSU students and alumni are Catholic. Of all the comments, that one made the least sense.
1 year, 2 months ago on OSU’s Gee Takes Shots At The SEC, Notre Dame, Catholics, And Everything Else Under The Sun
I would like to see a rule where each conference has to face each other at least once. Add to that that conferences can't face each other more than 2 times. I am hopeful though that the new playoff and feature bowl rotation will create a lot of new and interesting match-ups we wouldn't normally see.
If I were king for a day I'd like to see the Big Ten in the Capital One and Music City Bowls, the ACC in the Belk and the Outback Bowls, the Big 12 in the Meineke Car Care and the Liberty Bowls, and the Pac-12 in whatever the bowl in Tempe, AZ is called(easy to fly to Phoenix). Even if that was the rotation though, the SEC would probably never fill it. I'm betting the SEC has at least 3 teams every year between the playoff and the new feature bowls.
1 year, 2 months ago on SEC Bowl Goals Should Include More Variety
Yeah, it's the leverage aspect of negotiations that I think would equal the windfall in profits. The size and the quality both would aid the cause.
Along with that, the SEC and ACC in many ways share the same footprint. No other 2 conferences are as close to each other as these 2. If the 2 had some sort of merger then the geographical and cultural ties would not be strained in order to make it work. That's assuming 2 or 3 Northern teams were cut out of the deal...their properties aren't worth as much anyway. If ever a super-conference was going to work then it would be this one because it wouldn't require the inclusion of multiple regions.
1 year, 2 months ago on Big Ten Still Focused On The East, Commish Says
If an alliance was ever made. I don't see any reason the contracts would have to be guaranteed long term. If conferences want an out, just make the alliance a 2 year or 4 year deal. If one conference wants out then they have to exercise the option 2 years in advance for example. That way everyone gets enough time to find other scheduling options. I don't think either league would be particularly interested in the breaking an agreement at the last minute as both leagues would be scrambling to find new games.
I think one of the biggest problems in forming this sort of alliance is making sure that each school got enough home games. It might be hard to set things up to work that way being that each school has different needs and ongoing commitments.
1 year, 2 months ago on Conference Scheduling Alliances Are Great In Theory, Hard To Pull Off In Reality
I'm in my 30s. For me, it's not so much about what I want as much about what I think is going to happen. Ultimately I just want the SEC to end up on top and I don't think conference realignment is over. The factors driving realignment haven't changed so as far as my suggestion goes I'm just interested in blocking the Big Ten from gaining an advantage.
Also, as MrSEC has written about, the top leagues are probably going to split off into their own division. Add to that that fans are tired of seeing cupcake games. When the split happens, schools will most likely play each other pretty exclusively. So if we have larger leagues then I don't see why we can't have 11 or 12 conference games. If done correctly we can play traditional rivals often and rotate in new blood fairly regularly. If 24 teams, for example, come under the same conference umbrella for mutual benefit in the new order of doing things then I don't think that's a bad thing.
The Big 12 will face another round of defections when their GOR is up as their agreement expires first. What happens to the ACC, I don't know.
I still think a good conclusion to all this would be for the SEC to cut a deal with about 10 ACC schools and form a super-conference. It might have to happen at the end of the GOR, but a 24 school league could work. Take everyone in the ACC except Pitt, Syracuse, Wake, and BC. The amount of content generated by that sort of league would be unmatched by anyone else.
John, you said West Virginia probably wouldn't be in the Big 12 after the end of the current GOR agreement. Do you think there's a legitimate chance they end up in the SEC or is there better fit elsewhere? I know it's too far out to make a good prediction on that, but I'm just picking your brain.
1 year, 2 months ago on Big Ten’s Delany On Realignment: “Schools On The Perimeter Haven’t Held Together”
Charlie Weis is one of the worst coaches in the NCAA. The fact that he said the SEC isn't so special is essentially proof of the opposite.
1 year, 2 months ago on Kansas’ Weis Backs Stoops’ Criticism Of SEC
Did they comment on whether or not the syndicated SEC Network would still exist?
1 game on CBS, 3 games on SEC Network, I imagine at least 2 games on ESPN/ESPN2? That would leave maybe 1 more game for syndication? Outside of OOC match-ups and cupcake games, you're only going to get a max of 7 SEC games a week.
1 year, 2 months ago on SEC Network Unveiled: Our Quick Takes, Our Rapid Responses
The only problem with that is that all the schools with OOC rivals are in the same division, but they don't host their OOC rival in the same years. You'd have to alter that schedule somehow to make it work. It makes it harder because the other schools are in another conference naturally.
I'd still love to see 9 SEC games though.
1 year, 3 months ago on You Watching, SEC? The Big Ten Gets It Right On Scheduling
The above scenario is why I think the playoff will be expanded before long. Especially if conference championships are going to be emphasized, there's going to need to be more room for schools at the top of the ladder.
1 year, 3 months ago on Teams & Leagues Will Play A Guessing Game With Schedule Strength In New Playoff
What I'm really talking about though is a change in the order of business. I would love it if all the power conferences did nothing but play each other for 12 games a year. More quality football all the way around.
I understand your bball comparison, but it's a different sport. There are far more basketball games to be played and a different goal in mind. 68 teams make the tournament in bball whereas only 4 will make it in football. That means any team's chances of making the playoff in a given year are pretty small. Meanwhile, there could be more quality games for everyone if the cupcakes were dropped across the board.
1 year, 3 months ago on SEC Schedule Debate: What Does “Strength Of Schedule” Mean?
I agree that we should go to a division-less format if we're going to stick at 14.
1 year, 3 months ago on The Battle Over SEC Scheduling Heats Up… But There’s No Such Thing As A “Fair” Schedule
Trouble is coming to Alabama basketball.
1 year, 3 months ago on Trevor Lacey Granted Release From Alabama
"and I'm not sure that's what anyone wants."
Do you really want to see your team play cupcakes every year, especially 2 or 3 of them? I understand the desire to get to a bowl game, but what is the fun of a bowl game if it's not one of the big ones? You get to see your team play a mediocre opponent from another conference in a destination that most people won't even travel to in order to see the game. And most of the destinations for the lower tier of bowls aren't anything special either. Wouldn't it be more fun to play that same team from another conference during the regular season in your own home stadium or as a road game to a another school's campus that's probably at least as interesting as a bowl site? And maybe play 2 or 3 of them in one year depending on how many conference games there are? Bama has had its days where small time bowls were the only option at the end of the year and I would take extra quality games in a heartbeat over bowl games in Shreveport any day.
Not to mention how many more quality games there would be on Sat for the casual fan to watch. Also, the opportunity to see more conference-mates more often. As it stands with 8, we'll see each other once every 6 years at best. I just don't see the downside of more SEC games and more quality games on top of that.