Replies: 17
| visibility 1
|
Legend [16439]
TigerPulse: 100%
Posts: 14914
Joined: 1/26/99
|
dsgriff"s terrible p5 scheduling idea
Sep 19, 2019, 8:14 AM
|
|
As indicated in the title, this plan is logistically almost impossible, and has several glaring flaws, but this is a discussion board, so here goes:
Each Power 5 team plays 8 conference games, 4 home, 4 away Each Power 5 team plays one opponent from each of the other Power 5 conferences, 2 home, 2 away Each team is allowed (but not required) to have ONE permanent out of conference Power 5 opponent
Obvious positives: 1) Would force Notre Dame to join a conference 2) Would balance the schedules 3) Would create some cool intraregional matchups and more compelling games overall 4) Would preserve existing out of conference rivalries and may restore others (e.g. Texas-TAMU)
Obvious negatives: 1) Would cost most teams one or two home games, somewhat mitigated by better competition 2) People would cry that we get to play the easiest SEC opponent every year 3) Would block Group of 5 path to playoffs 4) Would cost lower division schools guaranteed payouts as sacrificial lambs
Have at it, boys!
Message was edited by: dsgriff®
|
|
|
|
CU Guru [1544]
TigerPulse: 100%
Posts: 3020
Joined: 6/21/05
|
Re: dsgriff"s terrible p5 scheduling idea
Sep 19, 2019, 8:41 AM
|
|
As a fan of college football, I like it... I'd rather see Clemson play teams like Iowa or Oregon etc instead of Charlotte or Wofford even if it means losing a 7th home game.
|
|
|
|
|
Heisman Winner [105574]
TigerPulse: 100%
Posts: 44178
Joined: 12/22/08
|
I agree with you that it's a terrible idea
Sep 19, 2019, 8:45 AM
|
|
The smaller schools would have to drop football because those payouts you mentioned keeps their programs alive. Also, it would be pointless for non-P5 schools to have a football season.
|
|
|
|
|
CU Medallion [65467]
TigerPulse: 100%
Posts: 33257
Joined: 12/3/03
|
Unfortunately, the only thing that would force ND to
Sep 19, 2019, 8:45 AM
|
|
join a conference is for TV networks to stop giving them a bunch of money as an independent.
|
|
|
|
|
CU Medallion [67844]
TigerPulse: 100%
Posts: 115473
Joined: 11/30/98
|
Re: Unfortunately, the only thing that would force ND to
Sep 19, 2019, 8:51 AM
|
|
they have expressed the attitude they would never join. I believe that. Had the toothless ACC deal required them to by a date certain it would have been better. Since it didnt they arent going to unless many bad years tank their tv contract
|
|
|
|
|
CU Medallion [64590]
TigerPulse: 100%
Posts: 88995
Joined: 3/27/01
|
Let them keep their contract with NBC...
Sep 19, 2019, 9:11 AM
|
|
and give them two options;
1 - Share it and their bowl money with the rest of the league, or
2 - ND's share of conference revenue is reduced by the amount paid to ND by bowl games and NBC
Notre Dame's television deal with NBC runs through 2025 and pays them $15 million annually.
|
|
|
|
|
Orange Blooded [2836]
TigerPulse: 100%
Posts: 3053
Joined: 2/2/11
|
Re: Unfortunately, the only thing that would force ND to
Sep 19, 2019, 2:02 PM
[ in reply to Re: Unfortunately, the only thing that would force ND to ] |
|
You haven't heard, Swofford said a few months back that ND was a full member of the ACC and I believe they get some of the football revenues that the rest of the conference has to share. So no, they could lose every game for 10 years and still get bowl and Network revenue from the ACC. I may be wrong but I remember that discussion a few months ago on here and the complaints from almost everyone.
|
|
|
|
|
CU Medallion [64590]
TigerPulse: 100%
Posts: 88995
Joined: 3/27/01
|
Even with this type of format...
Sep 19, 2019, 8:47 AM
|
|
I think you would still see match-ups remain largely regionalized. Teams like Georgia and Clemson aren't likely to make very many, if any, trips to the west coast to play Southern Cal, Utah, or Oregon.
|
|
|
|
|
Hall of Famer [24477]
TigerPulse: 100%
Posts: 13968
Joined: 7/3/01
|
Every plan has similar pros and cons. The major con
Sep 19, 2019, 8:55 AM
|
|
in this one seems to be that it continues to add weight to a 4 team playoff, which cheapens all all other play. Nobody cares about even the Cotton Bowl if its not part of the playoffs, to the degree that players are opting out of bowl games. We wanted playoffs, we got 'em, and as the saying goes, "If you want it bad, you get it bad."
The pros of your plan are clear, and I like those. The con is that while adding objectivity to how playoff teams would be chosen it has the con of adding further weight to what has become a 4 team post season. Perhaps the objectives of your plan could be reached by broadening the playoffs by pushing the first round to the conference level. Something like: - 7 eligible conferences - 11 game season - mandatory conference championship game, which is first round of playoffs - 1 at large team is selected for 8 team playoff.
Major pros - winning the conf becomes uber important - the selection committee has control of only one invitee, diminishing their importance - the playoff settles the matter of conference strength - 4 more bowl games have meaning - we dont have to hear the term 'sos' nearly as much
Major cons Loss of a regular season game (probably a deal breaker) All other bowl games are still meaningless, but that comes with playoffs.
Could do all the above with the existing 12 game season, adding the con of a 16 game season for two teams.
|
|
|
|
|
Legend [16439]
TigerPulse: 100%
Posts: 14914
Joined: 1/26/99
|
Good points, all. There is no perfect, or easy, plan
Sep 19, 2019, 9:09 AM
|
|
I know any major changes are infeasible and unlikely, but at least it creates thoughtful exchange of ideas. Thanks for your response. I look forward to others. I saved you and others the trouble of calling me a dumba$$ by doing it myself.
I agree, I get so tired of hearing all of the talk about schedule and conference strength. Just spitballing.
|
|
|
|
|
All-TigerNet [11478]
TigerPulse: 100%
Posts: 9412
Joined: 10/3/12
|
Re: dsgriff"s terrible p5 scheduling idea
Sep 19, 2019, 10:11 AM
|
|
The biggest issue with your plan is that it takes away money from the smaller programs as others have mentioned.
My biggest problem with taking money from the smaller programs is that it is literally taking education away from thousands of young people.
Those paychecks to small schools not only hurt the football programs but the other athletic programs for smaller schools as well.
Many student athletes are not able to attend college without their athletic scholarship.
It really isn't the most exciting thing to see Clemson beat an FCS school by 50 every season, but knowing that Clemson is paying the way for their athletes to get an education makes it completely worth it.
For that reason I am not in favor of any college football plan that takes those paychecks away from the smaller schools.
|
|
|
|
|
Legend [16853]
TigerPulse: 100%
Posts: 9372
Joined: 11/1/14
|
Two points
Sep 19, 2019, 10:17 AM
|
|
1. Bowls are dead with the advent of the CFP. Dead as a door nail. Attendance is abysmal. A fix is needed...and can be had. We watch them on television because they're our fix before the semis.
2. Money for the smaller programs can also be had...and likely in a more equitable fashion than exists presently.
|
|
|
|
|
Heisman Winner [105574]
TigerPulse: 100%
Posts: 44178
Joined: 12/22/08
|
Bowls are not dead, more are being added***
Sep 19, 2019, 11:15 AM
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Legend [16853]
TigerPulse: 100%
Posts: 9372
Joined: 11/1/14
|
Which one you want to attend?
Sep 19, 2019, 11:19 AM
|
|
You're smart...you know what I meant.
Then again...maybe I missed on both...
|
|
|
|
|
Orange Blooded [3639]
TigerPulse: 100%
Posts: 5124
Joined: 4/23/19
|
Re: dsgriff"s terrible p5 scheduling idea
Sep 19, 2019, 10:26 AM
|
|
I think P5 teams should be allowed one cupcake per season, just not 2 or 3. Completely eliminating FBS vs. FCS matchups is too severe.
The season should also be reduced from 12 to 11 games. The CFP increased to 8 with all P5 champs qualifying and one Group of 5 member guaranteed, leaving 2 at-large.
Two days of scrimmaging in August against an opponent should be allowed. This is long overdue.
While I'm open-minded on the number of conference games, 8 should be enough.
|
|
|
|
|
Hall of Famer [22127]
TigerPulse: 100%
Posts: 5026
Joined: 2/25/13
|
Re: dsgriff"s terrible p5 scheduling idea
Sep 19, 2019, 2:28 PM
|
|
I know what you mean when referring to cupcakes (OIC cupcakes) but there are also cupcakes in the P5 conferences and many people are pointing to Clemson having an advantage in the ACC because of cupcakes.
|
|
|
|
|
Orange Blooded [3639]
TigerPulse: 100%
Posts: 5124
Joined: 4/23/19
|
Re: dsgriff"s terrible p5 scheduling idea
Sep 19, 2019, 2:43 PM
|
|
Valid point, but a team can't be held responsible for how good conference opponents are. Only thing that can be legislated is how many conference games. The out of conference schedule is what's open for debate.
I'm so tired of the "weak ACC" argument, mainly because of the reaction of many here who let it bother them.
We can't let jealous SEC fanatics diminish winning 2 or the last 3 CFPs. When you take care of business, that proves you belonged.
Signed,
30-3 & 44-16!
|
|
|
|
|
Mascot [15]
TigerPulse: 100%
Posts: 60
Joined: 9/23/16
|
Re: dsgriff"s terrible p5 scheduling idea
Sep 19, 2019, 2:31 PM
|
|
I'm all for Notre Dame finally joining a conference
|
|
|
|
Replies: 17
| visibility 1
|
|
|