Step in the wrong direction. The 10 big pedophiles and the formerly great $ec are partners with those ranking the teams. same bull****, different day.
AllBuffs | Unofficial fan site for the University of Colorado at Boulder Athletics programs
This is a sample guest message. Register a free account today to become a member! Once signed in, you'll be able to participate on this site by adding your own topics and posts, as well as connect with other members through your own private inbox!
-
Prime Time. Prime Time. Its a new era for Colorado football. Consider signing up for a club membership! For $20/year, you can get access to all the special features at Allbuffs, including club member only forums, dark mode, avatars and best of all no ads ! But seriously, please sign up so that we can pay the bills. No one earns money here, and we can use your $20 to keep this hellhole running. You can sign up for a club membership by navigating to your account in the upper right and clicking on "Account Upgrades". Make it happen!
College Football News, Rumor & Humor
- Thread starter Darth Snow
- Start date
Yes the set number of autobids for the P4 conferences. I don't think there should be any automatic bids but fine, give the top 5 conference champs a bid and then just go with with the top 11 ranked teams after that.
The other part of the proposal that I find ridiculous is the conferences considering a mini play-in tournament to select their 4 automatic qualifiers.
College Football Playoff moving to straight seeding for 2025-26 postseason, but what does future hold?
The future format of the College Football Playoff is still uncertain, but the sport's brass has made a major change to this year's postseason.
I think the networks want this just as much as the conferences do.
Say the Sun Belt, MAC, and MWC all produce 11 or 12 win champs, maybe 2 of them are in that #12 to #16 area, the networks prefer #17 Ole Miss and #18 Wisconsin over Troy and Marshall
This is one aspect of a 16 team playoff I hadn’t heard being considered. Double byes?? That would be awful.
"Serious damage" is an extreme take when you consider that it has always been the top programs with the most resources and support that have been at the top with very few exceptions. Even last year the B1G and SEC had 7 of the 12 CFP teams in a down year for the SEC, so half the field doesn't seem crazy at all. Granted it would likely be 9 or 10 with 3 at-large spots in there. I do have an issue with the autobids as I said previously - the B1G and SEC don't NEED the autobids especially with a 16-team field. Just put the best teams in but apparently that makes too much sense. Unfortunately the autobids are all about the financial security for these conferences.
The double bye just seems like a case of overthinking this whole thing when you're talking about a perfect 16-team playoff. But just thinking out loud here, they could be doing that do keep importance on the regular season particularly late in the season when a team who already has a CFP spot essentially locked up from resting players and/or not putting as much importance on the game. Think rivalry weekend.
Too late Stewart. It’s already ****ed.
Coming to a court room near you, Big12, ACC, and G6 sue on anti-trust grounds that B1G and SEC constitute an illegal duopoly and are colluding to squeeze others out of the college football marketplace. I have said for a long time that the NCAA has no anti-trust protection and will eventually require federal legislation to govern it. Can see a potential remedy being the forced breakup of the conferences.
Not sure if this is based on current conference affiliation or conference affiliation at the time, but interesting that the 4-4-2-2-1-3 format would have actually cost the SEC some spots in the past. Sounds like it’s that vs 5 AQ + 11 At-Large
Yeah, this is clearly spin to cover for a terrible decision.
The cringiest commitment video I have ever seen just to decommit two weeks later. Embarrassing.
nm
Chip has a new friend
www.espn.com
Indiana taps cinematic reveal to announce return of bison mascot
The unveiling of the mascot's return featured cameo appearances from Curt Cignetti and Darian DeVries in teaser videos leading up to Tuesday's announcement.
This is not a LIVE mascot, it is a big guy in a suit that looks like an old school Bison, but dumb AFChip has a new friend
Indiana taps cinematic reveal to announce return of bison mascot
The unveiling of the mascot's return featured cameo appearances from Curt Cignetti and Darian DeVries in teaser videos leading up to Tuesday's announcement.
You're the one who posted it?
Yes, just them going all the way back to the 60's to get this Bison mascot back is lame, and while it is a Human Mascot, it feels like they could talk themselves into a live one in the future.
SEC going full cry baby mode today. Big 12 and ACC really need to just merge, while begging and enticing ND to join.
Notre Dame
Clemson
FSU
Miami
UNC
Virginia
VT
GT
Colorado
Utah
Kansas
KSU
Oklahoma State
Baylor
TCU
ASU
Arizona
BYU
UCF
SMU
(Add Pitt and WVU if they feel like going to 22)
That's a conference that would compete with the B1G and SEC
Notre Dame
Clemson
FSU
Miami
UNC
Virginia
VT
GT
Colorado
Utah
Kansas
KSU
Oklahoma State
Baylor
TCU
ASU
Arizona
BYU
UCF
SMU
(Add Pitt and WVU if they feel like going to 22)
That's a conference that would compete with the B1G and SEC
Big 12/ACC merger with ND would be a great conference
It would still not have as much at the top.
ND is a top 10 program.
FSU, Miami and Clemson are top 20.
So, we're talking about 4 of the top 20 when the SEC & B1G have 16.
Where it would be strong is that it would have 20 teams in the top 50 since it would not have to take programs along for the ride because they are existing conference members.
(I just looked at the all-time rankings of programs by AP poll votes following the 2024 season, which is where this comes from.)
The question becomes whether that prestige matters as the #1 factor or if it's less important today than having the booster resources to go big. I think it's a balance of both, so you have to look at whether a prestige program in the top 35 or so like Pitt is actually a lesser choice than one that is below 60 like a Louisville, Texas Tech or Utah.
That's a nice plan, good luck with that happening
Of course not because it makes too much sense.
It's not like groups of schools have never banded together, left a conference, and formed a new one before.
If enough conference members are leaving in coordination, they can dictate the terms of their departure.
Historically, when that's happened, it's been a group of schools that have a long history and trust built up.
That might exist with some schools in the ACC; maybe. But they'll have to shank some schools with which they also have history and trust. And the big names they need in the group, are (relatively speaking) Johnny come latelies, so they don't necessarily have the long trusting relationship.
The truck stop 12 has some schools with that long history, but not any big enough groups to do it. And, as with the ACC, some of the members of those groups need to be left behind, while some new to the party ones need to be in.
From a financial sense, the universities that would break away probably should do it. But they're universities, and they don't always do the financially optimal thing (although more and more, they are).
Of course, the cynical part of me looks at that last patenthetical and isn't willing to completely write off the idea.
Agree that this would make a ton of sense in theory and as Yak said you'd have enough name recognition/top level programs to be on par with the B1G and close to the SEC. My big issue with it never happening is getting ND to be part of this. Although I will say that if these parties did agree to join forces then it would leave ND without a home for all its other sports. But even in that situation I think they'd go to a lesser conference for non-football just to maintain their arrogant football independent status.
ESPN reportedly willing to increase payments to SEC if conference goes to a 9-game schedule
SEC football teams currently play eight regular-season games a year against conference opponents.
It's imperative that the SEC goes to a 9 game conference schedule. If not, I guarantee you that the BIG12 and ACC will get screwed come time when schools are selected to the future 16 team playoff.
I read that with a 9 game conference schedule, computer models predict on average that 5.7 SEC teams would make the playoffs, while with 8 conference games the SEC would average 7.2 teams would make the playoffs. The 8 game schedule will steal one spot from either the ACC or BIG12 or both.
Klatt made a case for the 3-3-2-2-1-3 model over the 5-11 model, calling the latter a disaster for the Big 12 and ACC, basically saying that in the 5-11 model, the Big 12 and ACC would be at the mercy of a committee to put a second team in, which almost assuredly isn’t going to happen. He thinks those two conferences should be banging the table for 3-3-2-2-1-3 while also trying to negotiate for a 3rd autobid for either Big12/ACC (whichever conference has the next highest rated team) that would effectively create a 3-3-2.5-2.5-1-2 system.
This was all based on removing the impact of a committee and keeping the B12 and ACC relevant moving forward.
This was all based on removing the impact of a committee and keeping the B12 and ACC relevant moving forward.
I just listened to one if the recent GameDay podcasts with Rece Davis and Pete Thamel and Rece said he would like the 5-11 model with the at-large bids being a combination of the committee's rankings along with a set agreed upon formula that would consist of strength of schedule and SOR combination. I believe he said the weighting would be two-thirds committee ranking and one third the SOS/SOR ranking.
He also added that a format which consists of too many autobids, like a 4-4-2-2-1-3 would make it too cut and dried which is not what college football is or has ever been.