Jump to content


Conference Realignment Again


Recommended Posts

 

 

We only play the good, meaningful teams (OK and UT) outside our division like once every 3-4 years, the conference is TOO BIG! The only game in our division that I care a little bit about is Wiscy, Colorado, just because I hate Wiscy, Colorado, and to a lesser degree jNU Mizzou or IA, KSU, but I could really care less if we played IA KSU or not.

 

Fixed it for you circa 1996-2010.

 

So I'm all "Whatever" and like "why again do you want to go back to that"

Link to comment

 

The best way to realign, if that's really the push, would be to organize 8 "super conferences" of 16 teams each based mainly on geography. That's 96 teams, and each conference would have an 8 team division. You'd have no cross conference play. Each conference would produce a single winner which would go to an 8-team playoff (random seeding). The rest of the teams would go to bowls against cross conference opponents.

 

That'd be the simplest, cleanest way to break things up, but I highly doubt it would go that way any time soon.

 

I also don't like the idea of reducing athletic scholarship opportunities for kids at schools 97-116 or whatever it is now.

 

Wait, you are disagreeing about something? Never seen that before.

 

Dittos to everything I have ever said about anything here! Mattyice has nothing constructive to say. Repeat that everywhere as well. LOL

  • Fire 1
Link to comment

Even though it isn't going to happen, here's what pod-type divisions might look like:

 

Plains (with protected yearly crossover)

Nebraska (Wisc)

Iowa (Minn)

Kansas

Oklahoma

 

Northwest

Minnesota (Iowa)

Wisconsin (Nebraska)

Illinois

Northwestern

 

Atlantic

Penn St (MSU)

Maryland

Rutgers

Ohio State (Michigan)

 

Lakes

Michigan (OSU)

Michigan State (PSU)

Purdue

Indiana

Link to comment

The best way to realign, if that's really the push, would be to organize 8 "super conferences" of 16 teams each based mainly on geography. That's 96 teams, and each conference would have an 8 team division. You'd have no cross conference play. Each conference would produce a single winner which would go to an 8-team playoff (random seeding). The rest of the teams would go to bowls against cross conference opponents.

 

That'd be the simplest, cleanest way to break things up, but I highly doubt it would go that way any time soon.

 

I also don't like the idea of reducing athletic scholarship opportunities for kids at schools 97-116 or whatever it is now.

There is no chance that it will expand to 96 schools. Ever.

Link to comment

The best way to realign, if that's really the push, would be to organize 8 "super conferences" of 16 teams each based mainly on geography. That's 96 teams, and each conference would have an 8 team division. You'd have no cross conference play. Each conference would produce a single winner which would go to an 8-team playoff (random seeding). The rest of the teams would go to bowls against cross conference opponents.

 

That'd be the simplest, cleanest way to break things up, but I highly doubt it would go that way any time soon.

 

I also don't like the idea of reducing athletic scholarship opportunities for kids at schools 97-116 or whatever it is now.

 

umm,

 

8 X 16 = 96 :blink:

 

110px-Chinesische.Zahl.Eins.jpgChinesische.Zahl.Acht.jpg115px-Chinesische.Zahl.Drei.jpg

514PC72vvSL._SY450_BO1,204,203,200_.jpg

  • Fire 4
Link to comment

 

The best way to realign, if that's really the push, would be to organize 8 "super conferences" of 16 teams each based mainly on geography. That's 96 teams, and each conference would have an 8 team division. You'd have no cross conference play. Each conference would produce a single winner which would go to an 8-team playoff (random seeding). The rest of the teams would go to bowls against cross conference opponents.

 

That'd be the simplest, cleanest way to break things up, but I highly doubt it would go that way any time soon.

 

I also don't like the idea of reducing athletic scholarship opportunities for kids at schools 97-116 or whatever it is now.

 

umm,

 

8 X 16 = 96 :blink:

 

110px-Chinesische.Zahl.Eins.jpgChinesische.Zahl.Acht.jpg115px-Chinesische.Zahl.Drei.jpg

 

 

Glad someone else caught that. I guess we can all agree that going against the grain is cm's strong suit. Math, not so much.

Link to comment

 

 

 

 

The best way to realign, if that's really the push, would be to organize 8 "super conferences" of 16 teams each based mainly on geography. That's 96 teams, and each conference would have an 8 team division. You'd have no cross conference play. Each conference would produce a single winner which would go to an 8-team playoff (random seeding). The rest of the teams would go to bowls against cross conference opponents.

 

That'd be the simplest, cleanest way to break things up, but I highly doubt it would go that way any time soon.

 

I also don't like the idea of reducing athletic scholarship opportunities for kids at schools 97-116 or whatever it is now.

Wait, you are disagreeing about something? Never seen that before.

Dittos to everything I have ever said about anything here! Mattyice has nothing constructive to say. Repeat that everywhere as well. LOL

Husker84Law! Don't be so rude. We're just here to talk about the huskers and how much we love them! This isn't huskerhaterboard

  • Fire 1
Link to comment

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.

Visit the Sports Illustrated Husker site



×
×
  • Create New...