BigRedBuster

That's pretty much what I've always said. conference championship games are basically the first round of the playoff. 8 team play off including winners of Power 5 CCG and 3 wild cards including teams like UCF this year. The first round of playoffs are before Christmas with higher seed getting home field advantage, second round on New Years and the championship a week later. It's really not a difficult concept.

I'm concerned that the new QB offers mean the staff know another one is leaving.

If my counting is correct, the Big 10 only played 12 games in non-con against other power 5 teams. The SEC only played 8. Most of those were against the bottom of the power 5 conferences. There is no way in hell this shows us what conference is toughest to then determine that a loss to Iowa is so much worse than a loss to Auburn that you leave OSU out and put Alabama in.

Here is a big issue I have with including two teams from one conference and none from another (especially another power 5 conference). We are down now to only playing 3 non-con games each year. Of those, maybe....we might play one other power 5 team. There is no way to clearly tell what conference is toughest with that small of a sample size. So....we go all season with "experts" trying to tell us what conference is the strongest. This many times gets so blown out of proportion that it's not a valid indication of anything. So....then, we get to the playoffs. One conference has been blown up to be the most amazing conference in the world based on.....really....nothing valid. What proof is there that the SEC is tougher than the Big 10? At best, you can only point to maybe a couple games early in the year to try to prove your point. It's a pathetic system. We got to 4 teams in the playoffs because of the last time the committee deemed Alabama to be God's gift to college football on a farce of a decision. Now...maybe we will get to 8 teams because of the same crap.

When I click "edit", the little circle spins like it's trying to work....but it never does anything. FYI....I'm using Safari.

Can't edit posts.

I'd +1 this but.....it's not working.

This is shaping up to be an amazing set of midterm elections. Today, we had two republicans announce they are retiring. Hatch and Shuster. Here is the most comprehensive list I could find. (I would post a link to this list if the fricken board was working) By my count, this is 18 Republicans and 5 Democrats who are retiring or resigning. A bunch more are planning to run for a different office.

Sure.....But, the way it's being done puts way more ridiculous obscurity into the system that just doesn't need to be there.

You made your point.

I would have MUCH less problem with two teams from the same conference in the playoffs if....say....two teams go into the CCG with one loss or less and they play the CCG to an extremely competitive close game at the end to where it's clear the game really could have gone either way. That is a huge difference between letting in a third place team that didn't even play in the CCG......just because you think they are good.

Yes, but, let's be clear about those other leagues. Let's take MLB. To be a wild card, there still is a clear cut way that is determined. It is determined on the field of play and in no way is the third best team in a division all of a sudden put into the playoffs just because some random group of people in a conference room thinks they deserve it.

This board needs fixed....bad.

Will have to disagree. To make the rest of college football put up with this type of system only because of a very fluke deal with Wisconsin winning the conference in 2012 as an example of why not to....well....that's just not logical. The only reason Wisconsin won that year is because OSU was on probation and couldn't play for it. That scenario is very rare. And....even if it happened 1 out of 10 years like in your post, I'm fine with that. If those "double digit winning teams" want in the playoffs, win your conference.

I thought this exact same thing. Idiot!!!!

It really is a pretty simple concept that just about every other sports authority has been able to figure out. Again...if you didn't even play for your conference championship...let alone actually win it.....you don't deserve to be playing for the NC.

I went to his feed to read them. I'm becoming so numb to his idiotic twitter rants that after reading 2 or 3, my eyes just gloss over. The moment I read, "fake news media" my mind just turns off.

I finally found a thread where maybe it's a good thing tweets aren't showing up on the site right now.

So....my belief is that if Duval would have been under the previous staffs over the last 10-15 years, he eventually would have left with many fans believing he sucked. Am I excited to see what he can do? Sure....but the much bigger change is going to have to be within the football staff and the mentality within the team towards workouts. I believe Duval will eventually end up being looked at as a genius by Husker fans. However, that will be in large part due to changes in people outside the S&C staff.

Sorry....total and complete brain fart on my part. I meant Epley. Epley has been over seeing Philip for the last few years. Do you think he has totally forgotten how to train football players and what the system should look like?

I personally believe that if there is a tough decision between two programs, you should always error on the side of a) no two teams from same conference....and .....b) if you didn't even play for your conference championship, you shouldn't probably be in the national championship discussion.

Have to admit, this one surprised me. First, I didn't think any of our O linemen did anything that would prove they were prepared for the NFL. Also....I would think they would want to come back with the new staff and prove they are better than they showed this year. I guess not for him.

And Elliott???

That's my point. Every time we have a coaching change, there is a group of people who want to complain about the S&C staff. Over the last 10-15 years, we have had some very competent S&C coaches go through Lincoln and it always ends the same way. People claiming the S&C coaches suck and they let them slack off and "no accountability"....bla bla bla..... Coaching staffs come and go. S&C staffs come and go. What remains the same? Same problems within the team. That tells me there is something within the mentality of the team that keeps getting passed down from upper classmen to incoming Freshmen that is bad. Hopefully, the new staff can break that cycle and change the attitude.

When you put his back ground which includes USC in along with working under Bob Elliott (who knows a thing or two about running a S&C program for college football), I have a hard time believing the S&C staff just thought it was perfectly fine to slack off in the weight room and didn't give a crap if players skipped workouts.