Jump to content
THE BROWNS BOARD

Talk To Your Kids About the SEC Myth


MLD Woody

Recommended Posts

I'm sure Pumpkin Eater will come up with a long, intelligent response to Ag's post, which is fully accurate, to my knowledge.

 

Gip, you should stop the "who cares?"-type responses to posts that are in response to another poster that brought up the topic. Maybe address it with that person instead? As to your question, those schools are founding members (or at least joined very, very early) so they joined at the same time (I think).

The fact that you want me to stop the "Who cares" responses wants me to give many,many more of them.

 

Browns 149, there is no money in having two schools that are very close to each other and in the same state.

 

Cysko, I disagree with you, however I do think Ohio State would have made a real push had they made the playoff. We saw against Michigan and Notre Dame that when they're on, they're as good as anyone. Too bad they (and the coaching staff) took the day off against MSU. I really wanted to see a rematch.

Who care? It didn't happen. Quit dreaming.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Replies 330
  • Created
  • Last Reply

I mean except for the flukiest play I've seen all year (up until the browns kick six fiasco) MSU wouldn't have beaten Michigan and it wouldnt have mattered. Both OSU and (hate to say it) Michigan would have been better representatives to the playoffs but it is what it is.

 

The national title game was legit. It's the semis that I think was flawed. Again, this points to how the CFP should be at least 8 team and probably 16.

Sure. If FCS, D-II and D-III can have 16 team playoffs, why not FBS?

 

Oh, yea....to "preserve the integrity of the bowl system". What a laugh that is.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

It's more to preserve the integrity of the regular season as well as the health of players that aren't getting paid from what I can tell. I can go either way.

But, all that applies to the lower divisions......(who really are not getting paid.....unlike probably many of the FBS level players)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

They only play 15, which is where we are now in D1. Vast majority of those kids aren't going to the NFL either.

What has that got to do with it?

 

If the lower levels have a 16 team playoff, then D1 can have one too. Again.....they don't because they want to preserve the bowl system......though think about it.....what exactly are they preserving? A system where now 5-7 teams make bowl games.

 

I would say it is all about the money....which I guess it must be. But how much money can some of these bowls bring in? Some of these lesser bowls I assume have at best half filled stadiums....and almost no TV viewership. And some of them are not really in locations that you want to spend your holidays. Boise...and The Bronx?

And why do some places feel they deserve to host 2-3 bowls? Atlanta's Georgia Dome hosts 2.

And a few others.

Too many bowls. Sorry.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

What has that got to do with it?

 

If the lower levels have a 16 team playoff, then D1 can have one too. Again.....they don't because they want to preserve the bowl system......though think about it.....what exactly are they preserving? A system where now 5-7 teams make bowl games.

 

I would say it is all about the money....which I guess it must be. But how much money can some of these bowls bring in? Some of these lesser bowls I assume have at best half filled stadiums....and almost no TV viewership. And some of them are not really in locations that you want to spend your holidays. Boise...and The Bronx?

And why do some places feel they deserve to host 2-3 bowls? Atlanta's Georgia Dome hosts 2.

And a few others.

Too many bowls. Sorry.

 

 

http://www.usnews.com/news/blogs/data-mine/2014/12/23/the-money-behind-the-college-football-playoff-bowl-games

 

Don't guess, it's all about the money

Link to comment
Share on other sites

It just seems to me that the payoff from some of those lesser bowls may not even allow the schools to break even. I mean...out of that $500,000 don't they have to transport and feed like 200 people to the bowl site.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

It just seems to me that the payoff from some of those lesser bowls may not even allow the schools to break even. I mean...out of that $500,000 don't they have to transport and feed like 200 people to the bowl site.

 

 

You can fly and eat pretty well for $500,000, not to mention the conference splits some money

Link to comment
Share on other sites

What has that got to do with it?

 

If the lower levels have a 16 team playoff, then D1 can have one too. Again.....they don't because they want to preserve the bowl system......though think about it.....what exactly are they preserving? A system where now 5-7 teams make bowl games.

 

I would say it is all about the money....which I guess it must be. But how much money can some of these bowls bring in? Some of these lesser bowls I assume have at best half filled stadiums....and almost no TV viewership. And some of them are not really in locations that you want to spend your holidays. Boise...and The Bronx?

And why do some places feel they deserve to host 2-3 bowls? Atlanta's Georgia Dome hosts 2.

And a few others.

Too many bowls. Sorry.

 

A 16 team playoff in D1 would mean teams have to play 17 games. The powers that be have deemed that too many since it's longer than an NFL season. Maybe that'll change. The D2-3 folks play less regular season games.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

 

A 16 team playoff in D1 would mean teams have to play 17 games. The powers that be have deemed that too many since it's longer than an NFL season. Maybe that'll change. The D2-3 folks play less regular season games.

17 games? How do you figure....unless teams are playing 13 games. Perhaps. If teams play a 12 game regular season...then a Conf. title game, then 4 playoff games for just 2 teams in the nation.

I suspect that the Athletic Budget Directors of those 2 teams would be happy to see them play those 17 games.

As far as that goes, since most of these guys are semipro anyway....the extra games would not hurt them.

 

Of course...one other solution would be to limit the regular season to just 11 games......but God forbid that the big schools give up a cash cow with one of their cupcake games.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

You answered your own question. Of course folks would like the money. NFL owners would like the money of a 20 game season too, and yet it's been 16 for (you can look it up) years.

 

Personally, I don't want a big playoff. But I would be intrigued by how good the OOC matchups would become if we had a 16 team playoff where teams were really scrambling to boost their RPI and get in "the tourney."

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 2 weeks later...
  • 7 months later...

I wish this thread would die.

The performance of the SEC this past week certainly won't make it die. They were 7-7 (and there was one conference game....South Carolina vs. Vanderbilt) so you might look at it more like 6-6. Some really bad losses as well.....and at least 3 more games in which they could easily have lost: Tenn to an FCS school, Ark. won by 1 pt. vs. La. Tech. The OT win....with the terrible college OT rule....of Txam over UCLA.

Its a good thing the SEC has a fairly full schedule of cupcakes this week.....a lot of FCS schools. though there are a couple of league games, and a couple of tough non-conf. games: Tenn. vs. Va Tech (neutral site game) and Arkansas vs. TCU

They were 3-4 vs. the other P5 leagues.

 

But, yes, they have Alabama. I think between them and Georgia that is fairly it as far as high quality teams go.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Ole Miss is a high quality team. Auburn may be. I will bet that LSU, Tennessee, and Florida are just fine down the stretch and if Arkansas does their normal thing, that's a tough out too.

They aren't even doing that great against the cupcakes. So. Alabama, So. Miss.

I think the ACC has owned the SEC the last several years.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

They aren't even doing that great against the cupcakes. So. Alabama, So. Miss.

I think the ACC has owned the SEC the last several years.

 

They owned it one year. 2014. That's it. I only went back to 2005, but the SEC has a winning record against the ACC in all but 2014 and 2008 where it was .500. So no, they haven't owned the SEC over the last several years.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

 

They owned it one year. 2014. That's it. I only went back to 2005, but the SEC has a winning record against the ACC in all but 2014 and 2008 where it was .500. So no, they haven't owned the SEC over the last several years.

What was their record last year vs. ACC. I thought ACC won more. (though I may be thinking of 2014)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I would like to come up with a formula that factors in the strength of the teams involved in these non-con matchups. I mean, FSU is a legit national championship contender this year. Ole Miss was only ranked 10 or so. It's very shallow analysis to dock the latter for losing that game at a neutral site, especially by so little. Same with Auburn. Technically the same with Georgia/UNC (UNC was ranked higher), but I think most people know Georgia is the stronger program with much more talent. By the same token, App State should get credit for going into UT's house and playing them close. But I'm not sure how to factor it. If anyone has any ideas, I'd be willing to do the research.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.


×
×
  • Create New...