fro daddy

also on this statement alone, I dont know that things would change. Its not like NE or Mizzou are going to say " you know what, since all we have to do is win our 8 game conference schedule, lets go out and schedule the best and toughest games we can to get ready" Coaches will still go light for a number of reasons. Warmups & injuries and depth are the biggest two. Lets just say that mich goes all out. They go bama, nd, lsu and SC. Ne plays idaho, UCLA, school of the deaf & school of the blind. WHen NE and MIch meet Mich has played 8 staight games against BCS talent. They are tired, sore, have some injured players. Meanwhile Ne has played 5 BCS teams and had some light duty game where they got to rest, They are not yet tired and have little to no injuries. Ne wins the game and wins the big10. Nobody will do more than they have too. You play one, maybe two BCS level teams to test yourself or out of need. Then you play teams you should beat. this is the model for all good teams. Get ready, get warm, and try to get on a good roll. Do all that without putting yourself in a position to lose games, and surely not lose multiple games

Alot of the schedule really has to do with TV. If you put big conference games in nearly every week and spread them out from week 1 through the last week over thanksgiving your tv packages are valuable. We all know that ESPN is more likely to pick up a conference game then they are any of the 50 dog whippins that would be happening over that same weekend. Yes it does possibly lighten your NOV load, depending on what team you are looking at. But not all the non cons played in Nov are light. Some of the teams play their OCC rivals during that time. And others still play BCS teams like Mizzou. But I do see what your saying with losses as percetion. But I think alot of us also see it another way. I have always felt its not a benifit in my eyes. Ne winning a tight game over PSU is better that beating georiga southern by 40. I do see what your saying though, because its not always that way with the voters. But I do truely beleive its about the tv and money that goes with it. here are some of the games in the first 4 weeks of the sec while other are playing their puffs Georgia @ Mizzou Mizzou @ SC Fl @ aTm Fl @ Tenn UK @ Fl Vandy @ Georgia SC @ vandy Bama @ Arky Aub @ Miss St LSU @ Aub obviously this doesnt include a number of good OCC games aswell through those weeks Its a wierd set up for me, we play non con in our first, third, fifth & eleventh games of the season. Also though we know about the NOV booms, you have to think about the opposite also. How many SEC teams may take a loss or even two, compared to how many undefeated teams from others who play just 1 opp who is even close to their level? Its all perception. Georgia lost to Boise and SC in consecutive weeks last year. They started the year at #19 and played what was basically their two toughest games (minus the neutral site game with florida) in the first two weeks of the year. The fell to #29 after lossing to #5 Boise in week 1. Then they fell to #37 after lossing to #12 SC by 3. They didnt get back under the 30's until week 7 when they were #29. at #24 after week 8. By week 10 they were back to #18, around where they started. By playing tough games at the start they got hurt in the rankings.

Your implying that this is a trick to make they look better? Thats kinda what it sounds like. Here is a little heads up for you Joe, EVERY team/conference does this. There that been plenty of years where the big10/big12/Pac12 power teams played a bunch of puffs and never left the home state. Every coach or conference commish is out to do whatever it takes to better their team/group. Secondly, yes, 12 of the SEC teams play 9 BSC opps this year. 2 play 10. But I guess what I am confused about is your point here. Nearly every team in the big10 plays 9 BCS level teams, about another 7 or 8 teams out of the pac12&big12 only play 9, only half of the ACC plays more than 9.... I guess I just dont get what your saying? Do you feel the same about the big10, big12 or pac12? What about the ACC? Or is it because you have a bias against the SEC? And an FYI, you cant blame a setup schedule, or favortism, or a design to cheat the system when their conference has done what they have done in BCS games. They have clear and away the best winning percentage and total wins of the major conferences and have won 8 of the 14 BCS championships (big12 is second best with 2). I am no SEC homer, but I am also not a hater. The fact is that every little dig or reason that anyone of you have said is either false or applies to everyone else if college football. ANd they all fail to see that regardless of all those excuses, they then still kick everyones butt on the field. AF yes florida never leaves. I think thats pretty punk of them, But they also play Miami and FL ST in their non con. What they do is not that different from a number of other teams. But yes I am sure there are a number of fans that would like to see them leave the state, and I am one of them. But 1 team does not make a conference. And FYI Vandy and MIss St are not crappy teams. They are actually decent teams that are on the rise. Vandy really has a great coach so they could be getting pretty good. And frankly Mizzou is about as crappy as Ne is.....so i'm cool with it as long as you are .

While I apprieciate the effort, your approach is all wrong. Because unlike every other conference the SEC plays conference games in the first weeks of the year. Meaning they have to spread out OOC games. While the big10 and everyone playing warmups the SEC is playing full on games. So frankly that little dig your trying to make is flawed and 100% incorrect. In comparison, while ne plays 2 high school teams, 1 decent mid and an avg BSC school in their first four games, Missouri would have played 1 HS team, 1 avg BSC school and 2 top 10 conference opponents. so.......i guess that "powerhouse week" comment looks just a little different now? huh?! And frankly calling out SEC schools for their noncon is kinda silly. Because they play decent teams out of conference. As good or better than any other collective conference. Then when you consider the quality of conference opponent it just adds to it. Consider that Indiana and Minnisota are two of the worst BCS confernce teams their are. If you know you have creampuffs on your schedule its your job to schedule teams around that to beef it up. Yes certain teams can catch a load in any conference, nebraskas has a much harder sched. than say mich or wisc this year. But you or I just cant write it off that in the SEC you are likely to play in minnimum of 4 to 5 ranked teams. Then if you play 1 good non con that is 9 BCS games and nearly half you scheduled would be ranked teams. And again, let me say, yes the SEC is it right now, but it likely wont be that way forever. I like the 4 best teams things because I like it. Not because my old and new conference both like it. Not because some secret SEC newsletter told me too. BUt because I like it that way. And maybe one day if the big10 raises again, I will still like it. I will still think you take the best teams and play them. And its not perfect, but you can use some knowledge and common sense to help you make the picks, you can use as SOS, games agasint ranked teams, losses to ranked and unranked opps, head to head wins, wins agasint teams with winning records, margin of victory and so on. Neither way is perfect. The first time a 1 loss team gets left out some team that hasnt beaten anybody wins their first game against a team with a winning record and its for a conf. title and that team that has the loss is 5-1 against ranked teams, people will flip. And before you say that cant happen, ku was #2 in the country and 1 game away from playing for a big12 title and 2 from a MNC and they had not beaten a winning team all year. Infact until the bowl games went final and some 6-6 teams picked up that 7th win, they only beat 1 team with a winning record all year and that was VT in the orange bowl. they made a BCS game with ZERO wins over teams with winning records... Teams will get the shaft either way. But for me personally I want that #5 team that gets left out, to be ranked #5 or higher.

Because his teams would have possible got a spot in 2010. And really that format is the only one where most big10 teams have a shot lately. He is pushing it hard, that with the whole Rose bowl thing. Its my opinion as to why he is pushing it. Same reason why the big12 and sec dont care for it, because they would put multiple teams in nearly every year without it. WHOA!! Slow down there buddy. NO WHERE did I ever go on some SEC rant. Mizzou has yet to play a single game in the SEC and simply put I grew up hating other big8/12 teams, Im not on the whole conference pride/cheer for your brethren train yet. NOR have I every acted like it, claim it, or pretended to be a part of it. Dont be pissed at me because the big10 has been avg for years. Dont be pissed at me because the cfb nation doenst believe your better than maybe 3rd or 4th best conference. Darn near every husker fan on this board would have echoed those thoughts more than 2 years ago, up until the day you became part of it. And your right, I dont have special powers and cant see the future, so I cant for sure say that bama would have beat OSU or Wisc. BUT i did watch nearly every OSU, Bama & Wisc game and I DO fully beleive bama would have won by no less than 2 scores. Maybe thats because they are just better than those teams. I didnt know it was illegal to say what you think would happen. I guess you better warn all those posters picking nebraskas record for next year. OR is it just me who cant pick games?? And for the record I would have loved for bama and OSU to play, because I fully believe i would have made alot of money on that game. What do you think is more likely. OSU #3 O scoring on Bamas #1 D and one the best college team defenses in the history of the game, or bamas #31 O scoring on OSU's #107th ranked D? Bama allowed 10 or more pts only 5 times and more than 14 once. Meanwhile they scored 30 or more 9 times, 5 of those they scored over 40. OSU scored 30 or more 13 times, 9 times over 40. However the allowed 24 or more 10 times of those 5 where 30+ points allowed. Given the recent sucess of the SEC teams against big12 offenses and other top O's (OU 08', TX 09' & Oregon 10' for MNC) and the fact that I believe and the stats show that its very likely that bama would have scored 30+ on OSU, and I believe and the stats show that Bama would have held OSU to well below their avgs. Is why I feel the way I do about that game. BUt then again instead of using my opinions formed over watching nearly all the games, and stats, and football knowledge, and a good track record of picking games and common thought, I bet you thought I just put on my saturday best, raised my conference flag (for a conference that were not in yet) and started chanting SEC SEC SEC SEC SEC SEC SEC SEC SEC SEC.

Which is a great reason why they should ban pre-season polls, and any poll before at least a week or two into conference play. I think that is the ONLY thing the BCS gets right - they hold off on their initial poll until we have something to base the poll on, not just hype. And for the record, we didn't deserve to be in that 2001 game. But that's long, long ago. You and I have agreed on this point for a while now, probably since the first offseason I was here. Pre polls and polls in the first weeks are just dumb, not to mention the do hinder a true ranking. waiting to week 7 or 8 would be ideal. and i didnt bring up 2001, so no need to rehash that one. And yet, you and I both helped make the HuskerBoard preseason poll. We did it to pass the time, though, while many of these polls are intended to be taken seriously. What a world, huh? Your right, for us its for poops and giggles not used to make it eaiser or harder for teams to get high rankings. But your also leaving out that as 2/3 of the trifecta, leaving our awsomeness out of such a poll it would automatically make it void. We HAD to be included.

Which is a great reason why they should ban pre-season polls, and any poll before at least a week or two into conference play. I think that is the ONLY thing the BCS gets right - they hold off on their initial poll until we have something to base the poll on, not just hype. And for the record, we didn't deserve to be in that 2001 game. But that's long, long ago. You and I have agreed on this point for a while now, probably since the first offseason I was here. Pre polls and polls in the first weeks are just dumb, not to mention the do hinder a true ranking. waiting to week 7 or 8 would be ideal. and i didnt bring up 2001, so no need to rehash that one.

Agreed, fro. I think once the $$ and the appeal of the four-team playoff becomes obvious to the power-that-be, that the next go-around even may be an 8-team playoff. And I really think that you'll probably see the four-four split. I would have said six-two originally, but I'll be surprised if the ACC or the Big East have the clout regardiing football at that time to make much of a push. When we get to 8 take the big 4 of SEC, Big12, Pac12 & Big12 (Big 5 with ACC if Florida State and Clemson stay) Then take the 3 highest ranked teams left. Its not perfect and still leaves the possibility of a team getting screwed, but I doubt they go to 12 or more for a long time, if ever. And anyway there will always be a 9th or 11th or 13th team that doesnt get in. I would also say, just IMHO, that there should be a cap on the ranking of a conference winner. Say for example if your conference winner is ranked outside of the top 8, then your auto bid is void.

This may blow your mind, but I didn't think we deserved it in 2001, and was sure we'd get murdered. You're placing more value on your opinion, than actual on the field results. CFB is largely played in a vacuum, and there's little overlap from conference to conference. The problem is, there is no way to quantifiably prove who the best teams are. We want the same thing....we just want it done differently. And as far as 2001, that is the perfect example of the the one and only thing that can flaw the voting system. teams like tx, ne, nd, fsu and a few others who get the benifit of the doubt because of what they did years ago and not being judged on what they have done lately. Constantly starting the year ranked or ranked highly only to finish unranked or barely ranked at all. OR WORSE, being ranked ahead of teams that they should not be ahead of, but are based on their name alone

Because a playoff is good for business that why.... And I never claimed to know it all, but there is clearly a reason why Delany is pushing this plan. And I fully believe he knows his teams would have been left out if the four best were taken. And I would say the voters do a pretty bang up job for the most part in the top 5 to 8. I guess the question to you is why do you feel the need to circumvent a system that uses 2 polls done by humans, a number of computer generated rankings & SOS to rank teams fairly TOO INSTEAD use a system that gives teams an auto bid not based on who they beat, or how hard their SOS is, but instead on how old and rich their conference is??

I think 8 will happen and probably sooner rather than later

maybe it will just take nebraska getting really good again then getting left out for a team that is not as good for sauders to change his mind. To each their own i guess. I just think you take the best teams, regardless of possible rematches. Why punish teams because there good. It just seems silly to me. Lets not reward the best teams, lets put these lesser teams in so that we dont have rematches. But thats just me, i bet you probably think im crazy or wrong for thinking that way.

Link too bad for Delany that his conference champs would still be left out in this model each of the last 4 years....(atleast if you did it right) Also you still researving positions for teams that are conference champs. And who or what determines the merits of a conference winner. The ranking of that conference winner? Or just based on the conference? To me an undefeated team in a mid major conference that played 2 Majors and destroyed every team they played winning nearly every game by 30 or 40+ points is better than a major co-champ who has a loss and played 5 teams within their conference that had 3 or less conference wins. But who gets the call in Delany's model. Im sure his big dog big10 team, not the TCU team that beat his big dog in Delany's own bowl game. So who gets the shaft if that is what happenes in 2010? Well that would be #4 Stanford, who was 12-1. That is unless you forget about taking a big 3 or 4 conf. winners (which is what I fully beleive Delany is after) and you do the right thing and take Auburn (conf winner), Oregon (conf winner), TCU (conf. winner) & Stanford (wild card) and leave the big10 out. So I would ask Delany, are we supposed to take the a higher ranked team out and put a lower ranked one in based on the bias of a major conference?

Frankly, LSU & BAMA would have run **adult content** all over any other conference out there. Yes a rematch isnt as great as a game featuring two team that have yet to play. But there is no doubt in my mind those were the two best teams. OSU was good. Even sometimes very good. BUT not top 2 great. They just were not. They lost to ISU, who was lead by a first time starter. The same ISU who beat northern iowa by 1, Uconn by 4 & ku by 3. The same ISU that lost by 23 to 6th place texas, lost by 23 to baylor, 35 to missouri, 16 to aTm & 20 to OU. And please for the love of god dont tell me that 85 kids 18-23 years old were just devistated by a woman bb coach and assistant that died. Yes the deaths were tragic, but lets be real here. How many of those boys even knew who those coaches were. Were not talking about fb coaches or MBB.

I am with you on this one chris. And too me its not even close. The conferences that push this the hardest are just telling me they know they cant compete with the best and they know their champions are not as good as the 2nd or even 3rd place finishers in others. Frankly I feel like had this been brought up when NE was still in the big12 there is no question people would want the best teams in alone. Now as a part of the big10 i truely am surprised to see the number folks that are behind a conference champion only format. Maybe thats because in the big12 you could lose the big12 championship game and still be ranked just as high or higher than other conference winners. The big10 is all about just conference winners. Probably because over the last few year they would be shut out without it. But confence champs alone are the best team according to Delany...Lord knows everyone here thinks that the 96 Texas team that was 8-5 deserved to be in a final 4 championship playoff.... I can just see it now. For the first time in a while the big10 will have multiple top level dominant teams and a one loss 11-1 team will be left out for a 2 or 3 or 5 loss team who won a weak conference or had a once in a million game and Deleny will poop his pants in outrage. Take the best 4 that way you atleast know you got the best four teams. And counter points to the"If you're not the best team in your conference, you're not the best team in the country" 1. It doest mean you not one of the 4 best teams in the country though. 2. Just because you won your conference as a 2 or 3 loss team doest mean you better than a number of other teams in better conference. If you want your conference winner to be guarenteed a spot....QUIT HAVING 2 & 3 LOSS CONFERENCE CHAMPIONS!!! Quit playing low end schedules, quit lining up and playing rounds of pansy noncons if you know you have 2 of the worst BCS conference team in your conference as opponents.

comparing bama and boise teams last year to a bama team 3 years ago is definatly applicable here...

Any team in particular? Say one in awrence-Lay ansas-Kay? yeah, but to tell you the truth the game I have/will miss most is nebraska. I felt like over the last 7-8 or so years it had really started to became a good series. There was some hate, it was an important game for both teams and most importantly the series was evenly played. Some wins, some losses. you loved winning and hated losing. ku is fun and all, but really not on the level of many other big12 football games. in the past 2 seasons i may be giving ku too much credit in saying they had 7000 fans total combined at the arrowhead game. they only care about mbb. when its the last fb game possibly ever for your biggest rival and the 2nd most played rivalry game in all of college football and like 2k ku fans even bother to show up...its just not as big as other games. NE fans obviously love FB and they love watching it. Being a part of games where fans show up & care is more fun

Chuck - Thats the way I think I will feel about it. I think the move has the real potential to do great things for Mizzou. But it will be strange not playing any of those old teams. I thought we would atleast have a little taste of the big12 in aTM. We are cross rivals set to play every year. But that lasted for a few months and they have now already switched it to arkansas before we even became official. So after this year it will be all new teams

True, but there's a certain...unfamiliarity with the landscape that comes with changing conferences that can stick in one's craw. Don't be shocked if, at some point, you feel like a stranger in a strange land watching Mizzou battle SEC teams. And don't take this as regret for our decision--I'm still 100% behind the move. But it still feels weird at times. A good weird, but weird nevertheless. I believe it. It was weird enough last year with no Nebraska or Colorado for the first time in my life. Now this year its Georgia, Tenn, Florida, SC, Kentucky, Vandy & Alabama. obviously I grew up with the big8 teams, the big12 was around for nearly 1/2 my life. Its gonna be different but it should be fun. I just thought about it, with the new games, new field, new broadcast teams and brand new uniforms and helmets, it might take me a minute to realize I am watching Mizzou and not someone else

I will be able to get down for a few games this year. Pretty excited to see the new teams. The move is not even official yet, but everything just feels different. I am sure you guys experianced the same thing last year. There is just a clear difference between the big12 and others. I will miss some of the old games, but I am really excited to see some of the new matchups.

thats true. Being middle of the pack in the big12 in spending, revenue, facilities & staduim size is good enough for about 11 or 12th out of 14 in the SEC. The influx in money from the SEC & the increase in staduim revenue will help to reach middle again in income and spending. And the improvement plans that are in place, to improve every sports fields/staduims/areas will bring up the facilities to par. The fans have been really excited and I have heard that donations have gone up close to 50%. Now its really all just about the results. If they are able to perform well I think the university is in a really good spot.

Only them and 13 of their closest friends. Its called the $EC. This... and walmart

agreed. That concrete looks pretty dingy

They are expected to announce the plans around the end of june. Its rumored to be 200 million worth of work over 3 years done in stages. From everything I have heard they have the majority of the money already raised by some of the larger boosters.