Jump to content

junior4949

Members
  • Content Count

    6,822
  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won

    3

junior4949 last won the day on March 31 2011

junior4949 had the most liked content!

Community Reputation

660 Excellent

About junior4949

  • Rank
    The Bobfather

Recent Profile Visitors

The recent visitors block is disabled and is not being shown to other users.

  1. Notre Dame is the crown jewel. The B1G should try to land Notre Dame and OU. Then, they could tell Texass to pound sand.
  2. junior4949

    B10: East vs West Disparity?

    When we belonged to the Big 12, there were three blue blood programs. With an odd number, it stands to reason why it was lopsided. In the B1G, there are four blue blood programs. I've always wondered why they put three in one division and one in the other? If the B1G is successful in getting OU and Texas, this will all work itself out. If they don't, then it would stand to reason to move Michigan. At the end of the day, I'd say we're in a good spot if they leave things the way they are. Winning this division is easier than the other one. Take Wisconsin last year. They didn't even have to play a couple of the better teams in the B1G. If they would have taken care of business in the title game, they were in the playoff.
  3. junior4949

    B1G Looking to Change CCG Criteria?

    If you go back to my first post in this thread, you will read I specifically said two best records. I didn't say anything about two best teams. You said I forgot about this year. I didn't because I specifically said two best records which Northwestern had this year. Until each and every B1G teams plays one another head-to-head, it's going to be difficult to say who the best two teams are. Last year, are we sure the two best teams played in the B1G title game? I mean Wisconsin didn't play either Penn State or Michigan State. Arguing whether the two teams in the conference championship need to be the best two teams or have the best conference records really doesn't matter that much to me. If they change the rules and the format, it just solidifies my thought how they're basically catering to one or two programs in the B1G. Isn't this one of the major reasons we left the Big 12?
  4. junior4949

    1-9-1-0

    Washington really didn't have a very good season. They lost three games all at the hands of teams that finished unranked. The only team they beat that finished ranked was Utah. Yet, we're willing to give them a playoff spot because they happened to be the champion of a very weak conference this year? This is why I have a bit of a problem with this format. Michigan loses to teams ranked in the top 10. They stay home. Washington loses to just about every team they play with a pulse, but they get into the playoff. If this doesn't diminish the regular season, I don't know what does. Bama vs. Washington in the first round would pretty much just be giving Bama a bye.
  5. junior4949

    B1G Looking to Change CCG Criteria?

    Two best teams, two best records; there is a difference. Northwestern only had one conference loss heading into the title game which was to Michigan. They beat the same Purdue team that blasted Ohio State. Michigan is the same team that got drilled by Ohio State one week before the conference title game. I didn't forget about 2018. Northwestern had the same conference record as Michigan. Northwestern hadn't played Ohio State. I'm not sure why anyone would want to watch a rematch of Ohio State and Michigan when they just played the week before. This is why I think it would be dumb to change things from how they currently are.
  6. junior4949

    B1G Looking to Change CCG Criteria?

    This is what happens when the conference misses out on it's second playoff in a row. Are we trying to reinvent the wheel here? Division realignment sounds like a good idea until it doesn't. College football is cyclical. Take the Big 12 for example. When it was first formed, the strength of the conference was in the North. A little less than a decade later, it was clearly in the South. Since we've belonged to the B1G, there has only been two years where teams with the best records didn't play in the conference title game. One was 2012, but that was because of sanctions. The other was 2016. In 2016, both Penn State and Ohio State were one loss conference teams while Wisconsin was a two loss team. It just doesn't make a lot of sense to me to change things.
  7. Yes to the bolded. However, it's also going to warm Harbaugh's seat up pretty good if Michigan doesn't take over the East next year. The next two to three years could be very interesting in the B1G especially if Franklin bolts for USC.
  8. Yep, I can see this happening as well. Once Dabo leaves the ACC, it will be prime for the taking by Urb.
  9. Urb's been pretty consistent. He goes to a conference that for the most part has been underachieving with not so marque coaches. If he's coaching in the next five years, this is how I see it playing out. Saban retires at Bama, Bama hires Dabo. Urb goes to Clemson. The USC job almost fits the bill, but I'm not sure Urb wants to butt heads with Chip year in and year out.
  10. junior4949

    1-9-1-0

    At the end of the day, they're going to do what they're going to do. However, there is a bit of a problem with auto-qualifiers. It has long been told that the reason it took so long to even get a playoff was because D1 didn't want to diminish the regular season. If we had auto-qualifiers this year, 10-3 Washington would be in the playoff. They lost to 7-5 Auburn in the regular season. Auburn finished 5th in the SEC West. By putting Washington in the playoff, I would think it would greatly diminish the regular season. Another reason it took so long to get a playoff was because of the extra games. By playing a conference title game and then having an eight team playoff, there would be more games for a couple of teams. I have no doubt that going to an eight team playoff will be fought tooth and toenail by the Power 5 Commissioners unless there are auto-qualifiers. Yet, they're still going to have to have a committee that picks the three at-large teams. The exact same committee that has in the past chose teams in the current four team playoff that didn't even win their conference. I've long thought an eight team playoff was the best and doing away with conference championship games. However, I just don't we're going to see it because of butthurt Power 5 Commissioners. It appears that an eight team playoff is still quite a ways off.
  11. junior4949

    1-9-1-0

    On the bolded, under the current format? Not so fast. Last year, Wisconsin smacked down the West teams and played in Indy. Guess what? Neither them nor the team that beat them made it into the playoff. Considering the most recent teams the B1G has brought into the conference, I'm not sure one could argue it was to make the conference better. We were brought in for the same reason at Rutgers and Maryland.
  12. junior4949

    1-9-1-0

    Does the bolded really matter? It really isn't any different than before the B1G even had a championship game. One of Iowa's claimed B1G titles was a year when their conference record was the same as Ohio State's even though Ohio State won the NC. Currently, we have conferences that don't have the same amount of teams. Heck, we even have one playoff qualifier that doesn't belong to a conference. Given those parameters, it seems completely doing away with the conference championship game would be best. The playoff committee already ranks the teams. Make the conference title game week the first round of the playoffs. The Big 12 even having a conference championship game seems ridiculous considering every teams plays one another during the season. If the playoff committee isn't going to reward or penalize a team based on a conference championship game, why even play them?
  13. junior4949

    1-9-1-0

    How do you impress the playoff committee by beating 7-5 unranked Pitt? You don't, and it has nothing to do with Clemson being in the playoff. For the most part, the ACC Championship game was absolutely meaningless. If the playoff committee has been anything, they've been consistent. It matters little whether you win your conference or not. The only way you're getting into the playoff is if you have one loss or less. Some experts are saying the committee got it wrong by leaving Georgia out of the playoff. Apparently, these same experts have been asleep the last few years. Georgia had no chance once they secured their second loss. Rather than watching a bunch of meaningless conference championship games this past weekend, I would have rather watched Bama vs. UCF; Clemson vs. Michigan; Notre Dame vs. Ohio State; and Georgia vs. OU.
  14. junior4949

    1-9-1-0

    I wondered how long it would be before someone would bring up the fact that for the second straight year the B1G missed out on the playoff. I read an article last week that pretty much summed up how I've viewed the playoff with regards to college football. This past weekend, we pretty much had a bunch of games that essentially meant little. Even if Clemson would have lost, they probably still make the playoff. Even if Bama loses, they probably still make the playoff. It was a foregone conclusion that it really didn't matter who won the Pac 12 because the winner wasn't getting into the playoff. As it turns out, the B1G Championship really didn't matter with regards to the playoff either. This past weekend would have been perfect for the start of the playoff in an eight team field. Let's do away with the conference championship games and use that weekend to start the eight team playoff.
  15. junior4949

    Ozigbo to Play in East-West Shrine Game

    When's the last time we had a RB rush for 1,000 yards without a single fumble? Ever?
×