Jump to content

Sugar Bowl


sangell2007

Recommended Posts

The biggest difference between our ideas is the number of teams involved, to say my idea wouldn't work because it's deals with the polls and bowl system is odd to me. I'm assuming you'd be using some type of poll/computer system to determine the 5 remaining schools and you're also involving the bowls. I would think the major bowls would be at least as willing to be involved in my system where they get a game that matters opposed to getting playoff leftovers.

There are two big differences.

1) Number of teams.

2) Selection of teams.

I would select the eleven conference champions and have a selection committee select the remaining five and do seeding. Just like in basketball.

I live in USC territory and have been following them for a long time, that's how I've been seeing Carroll talking about a playoff, I'm not sure if there's a bigger advocate for a playoff than him in the game. There's no doubt that they'd jump on board with a playoff system right now even if it meant they'd hurt the Rose Bowl, which many of the players are actually tired of going to anyway.

I'll take your word for it since, as you say, you are much closer to the situation. I just still find it a little hard to believe that they REALLY want a playoff when inside the sport there doesn't seem to be much support outside of the schools left out each year.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Replies 52
  • Created
  • Last Reply
I'll take your word for it since, as you say, you are much closer to the situation. I just still find it a little hard to believe that they REALLY want a playoff when inside the sport there doesn't seem to be much support outside of the schools left out each year.

Not sure why you think that.

AFAIK, most everybody wants it, except for a very few influential schools and conference prez's.

I think the short list consists of who doesn't want it.

For the most part, everybody I hear an answer from is in favor of it, including coaches too numerous to mention.

Who do you think doesn't want it? (This is a real question, not a smartass question.)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

There are two big differences.

1) Number of teams.

2) Selection of teams.

I would select the eleven conference champions and have a selection committee select the remaining five and do seeding. Just like in basketball.

I'll take your word for it since, as you say, you are much closer to the situation. I just still find it a little hard to believe that they REALLY want a playoff when inside the sport there doesn't seem to be much support outside of the schools left out each year.

Well I'm fine with a selection committee picking the 6 best teams.

They really want a playoff, so stop finding it a little hard to believe.

So do you now admit that the Rose Bowl would not be much of a road block to my plan, or are you still clinging to that? It's cool to want more teams, although I think anymore than 8 is absurd, but to say my plan is not feasible is simply wrong imo.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Not sure why you think that.

AFAIK, most everybody wants it, except for a very few influential schools and conference prez's.

I think the short list consists of who doesn't want it.

For the most part, everybody I hear an answer from is in favor of it, including coaches too numerous to mention.

Who do you think doesn't want it? (This is a real question, not a smartass question.)

Big Ten

ACC

SEC

Pac-10

Big East

Big 12

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Big Ten

ACC

SEC

Pac-10

Big East

Big 12

That's just a list of conferences who wanna hang on to all the money.

Different issue. That says nothing about who doesn't want a playoff.

Which actual football programs or coaches do you think don't want it?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

That's just a list of conferences who wanna hang on to all the money.

Different issue. That says nothing about who doesn't want a playoff.

Which actual football programs or coaches do you think don't want it?

The college presidents that run the conferences don't want a playoff.

This is like saying that everyone in the country feels a certain way, except for 545 people. 545 people who happen to be Congress, the President and the Supreme Court.

It isn't the number of people, it's who the people are.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The college presidents that run the conferences don't want a playoff.

This is like saying that everyone in the country feels a certain way, except for 545 people. 545 people who happen to be Congress, the President and the Supreme Court.

It isn't the number of people, it's who the people are.

We don't know what the college presidents think.

We only know the position they're currently rolling over about.

If there's one thing college presidents listen to about football, it's the alumni.

You know that's true.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

We don't know what the college presidents think.

We only know the position they're currently rolling over about.

If there's one thing college presidents listen to about football, it's the alumni.

You know that's true.

...and who's alumni have stopped donating because there is no college football playoff?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Archived

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


  • Posts

    • Yes. That’s less than 25 million a season on average. Even though the years are a bit long. That’s the going rate for these type of superstar players.  Maybe you can go more AAV in exchange for say a 12 year deal? But at age 22, even at 14 years he’s here until he’s what 37/38? In 10 years 25 mill per won’t be the valued at nearly the same dollar amount in terms of “paying an older possibly declining player”. That contract length also ensures that he is an Oriole for life basically. If Rubenstien’s goal is to restore the franchise’s glory instead of simply making it a competitive franchise. You cannot minimize the value of having these type of franchise cornerstone players/homegrown superstars. We basically haven’t had one (and retained) since Ripken. (Yes I know Machado was one but we let him walk and basically the same with Mussina.)
    • I was looking at the O’s stat page and noticing how high all the OPS+ numbers are.  For example, Cedric Mullins has a .736 OPS but that’s good for a 116 OPS+ right now.  So, I looked around.  Right now, the MLB average OPS is .698.  That’s down from .734 last year, and (for those thinking of a “cold weather” explanation) from .726 last April.    The O’s, on the other hand, have a .780 OPS, compared to .742 last year.  That’s 3rd in MLB and good for an MLB-leading 130 OPS+, compared to 107 last year.    I’m not sure if the hot hitting will continue, but the team has had one heck of a start offensively, in a year where the league has been pretty cold.    
    • I didn’t see Angel Hernandez listed in any of the box scores from yesterday so he may have been the replay official. That would actually be hilarious. 
    • @Tony-OH   It’s early but is Forret possibly a better prospect than DeLeon?  A year younger.  Sounds like velo is similar.  Better control?
    • I wouldn’t hesitate to give him the Witt deal. I would like to get 3 FA years.  That’s my best case scenario and after that, the opt outs start.
    • At this point Gunnar is the most valuable asset in baseball right? I guess you could argue Witt Jr or De La Cruz. I sure as heck wouldn’t trade him for anybody.
    • @Tony-OHhave you had a chance to see or hear anything about Cam Weston yet? Is there real upside or is this an older guy who's maybe more advanced than his league?
  • Popular Contributors

×
×
  • Create New...