huzkerbob Posted December 16, 2009 Share Posted December 16, 2009 So you advocate a system where maybe 18 schools would have football teams in the BCS and if any one of them had a few bad years they would be eliminated, correct? Not exactly. I advocate a system where only about 40, max, schools have "Division I" ranking. There would be no other schools, and playing teams from other schools would not count toward your win/loss record in the Big Division. I would make that division up of schools that have shown a sincere willingness over the long haul of making their team not only relevant, but competitive in college football. It would include teams like: Florida State Miami (FL) Virginia Tech Nebraska Oklahoma State Oklahoma Texas Texas A&M Notre Dame Michigan Michigan State Ohio State Penn State California USC UCLA Washington Oregon Tennessee Florida LSU Georgia Arkansas Auburn Ole Miss This is, of course, a partial list. I'm sure I'm forgetting some, and arguments could be made for and against others. But this is a good core, and would make compelling games on a weekly basis. There's a ton more I could say here, but I've gotta go. I'll expound later on this pipe dream if you want. Pipe dream is right. This is about as likely as that dumbass Dan Beebe supporting a playoff system! Quote Link to comment
Vince from ShamWOW Posted December 16, 2009 Share Posted December 16, 2009 So you advocate a system where maybe 18 schools would have football teams in the BCS and if any one of them had a few bad years they would be eliminated, correct? Not exactly. I advocate a system where only about 40, max, schools have "Division I" ranking. There would be no other schools, and playing teams from other schools would not count toward your win/loss record in the Big Division. I would make that division up of schools that have shown a sincere willingness over the long haul of making their team not only relevant, but competitive in college football. It would include teams like: Florida State Miami (FL) Virginia Tech Nebraska Oklahoma State Oklahoma Texas Texas A&M Notre Dame Michigan Michigan State Ohio State Penn State California USC UCLA Washington Oregon Tennessee Florida LSU Georgia Arkansas Auburn Ole Miss This is, of course, a partial list. I'm sure I'm forgetting some, and arguments could be made for and against others. But this is a good core, and would make compelling games on a weekly basis. There's a ton more I could say here, but I've gotta go. I'll expound later on this pipe dream if you want. Pipe dream is right. This is about as likely as that dumbass Dan Beebe supporting a playoff system! Yes he is. Gutless as well. Quote Link to comment
KingBlank Posted December 16, 2009 Share Posted December 16, 2009 Will NEVER EVER happen, absolutely guarantee that Nebraska will not move. Your speculation is amusing to the masses. Quote Link to comment
HuskerTrucker Posted December 16, 2009 Share Posted December 16, 2009 Iowa State would jump to the Big 10 before Nebraska would ever be considered or consider it. Makes more sense. Another School they could look at is Northern Iowa. Quote Link to comment
HuskerTrucker Posted December 16, 2009 Share Posted December 16, 2009 What is the definition of committment to football execellence though, is it paying your head coach 5 million a year or cancelling a week of your semester to attend bowl games or is it doing your best to quality kids and hoping to educate them? I think it's pretty obvious that it means having a quality team more often than not, having a solid tradition of excellence and reasonable expectations to compete on a yearly basis with your contemporaries. I don't think the majority of college football's top division truly expects these things from their football teams. I think a fair portion of these schools have teams because it's traditional, or because they can make some money from the program to fund their other sports. EDIT - and tack on what Vince is saying as well. Good point, V-Man. So you advocate a system where maybe 18 schools would have football teams in the BCS and if any one of them had a few bad years they would be eliminated, correct? A few bad years? CU has had more than just a few bad years of Football. But again, what else does CU bring to the Big 12 Atheltic table? Hey, their Student Section obviously knows how to throw a party, the drunken bastards!! Quote Link to comment
tattooedhusker Posted December 16, 2009 Share Posted December 16, 2009 I disagree - that makes no sense. why would the Ant-Hill West have BCS status? Because Colorado joined? Good point, and it also begs the question - should Colorado be a BCS school in the first place? As opposed to who? BYU, Utah, TCU...not trying to rile anything up, just saying Quote Link to comment
husker98 Posted December 16, 2009 Share Posted December 16, 2009 You can't do that! They're our rival. comment of the year? i loled Quote Link to comment
Fuzzy Posted December 17, 2009 Share Posted December 17, 2009 I don't know where you guys are hearing that someone is looking to leave the Big 12 for the Big 10. The majority of the news i have heard is that they are CONSIDERING expanded, which could take up to a year before they come to the conclusion and the teams that are likely to be looked at are Notre Dame, Cincy, Pitt, or maybe TCU. Quote Link to comment
irafreak Posted December 17, 2009 Share Posted December 17, 2009 The sports stations here in kc have been buzzing about missouri being a possibility. Course there's not much else to discuss during the dead time.... Quote Link to comment
Never Skerd' Posted December 17, 2009 Share Posted December 17, 2009 The Big 10 is weak sauce... ZzZzZzzzzz Quote Link to comment
cscott2win Posted December 17, 2009 Share Posted December 17, 2009 Just think of the negotiations between Notre Dame and the Big 10! Unless the Irish keep on the losing skid they are currently on I'm betting they think the Big 10 should join them!! Quote Link to comment
NEBRASKANHEAT Posted December 17, 2009 Share Posted December 17, 2009 Perhaps someone can help me out here. Why would the Big ten prefer Mizzou over us? Yes, population wise, we can't compete, but fan base - television ratings I'm quite sure are in our favor, yes? Plus we pack our bowl games, Mizzou doesn't travel.. We have more non nebraska resident Husker fans than we do Nebraska resident (I'm originally a california man myself) fans. So why does the state population matter to them? If "money" is their main concern, and I think we can all accept that it is, Nebraska should be head and shoulders above Mizzou, Pitt and Rutgers on their wish list. Not to metion the legacy, our national championships and heisman winners are immediatley added to the confrence list of past championship teams.. (obviously not won in their confrence, but the big 12 boasts Texas's championships before they became a big 12 team.) Perhaps I'm missing a huge piece to the puzzle.. But I just can't see any confrence that had their choice of adding Rutgers, Mizzou or us to their confrence, not beating down our door. Quote Link to comment
irafreak Posted December 17, 2009 Share Posted December 17, 2009 I think it would be a disadvantage to add more texas schools to the big12 from a recruiting standpoint. Right now we are the major conference for any kid in texas. The 4 schools there now can't take them all but you add TCU and Houston to a more powerful conference then suddenly kids that were looking at north schools may think "hey I can stay close to home and play in the big 12" Quote Link to comment
miamihrrcns2001 Posted December 17, 2009 Share Posted December 17, 2009 My solution should MIZZOU leave: NORTH: -Nebraska -Kansas -Kansas State -Iowa State -Colorado -Oklahoma SOUTH: -Texas -Texas A&M -Texas Tech Texas school for illegal immigrants Texas State North Texas West Texas East Texas South Texas UTEP -Baylor -Arkansas TCU Houston Dallas/Fortworth University ITT Tech Campus of Lubbock City -Oklahoma State - means serious. Quote Link to comment
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.