Big Ten - Pac 12 Alliance dissolves...

Being that the PAC has gone from a 10-team con with a round-robin format to a 12-team con with a CCG I don't seee why they continue with the 9-game sched.

 
Haspula said:
Good. Don't want to see Colorado
Click to expand...
I would love to see Colorado. The Buffs hate us and I loved beating them. I agree with you zoogies. I would love to go back and play teams like Missouri or Texas or Kansas State again...oh how I loved beating them.

 
Last edited by a moderator:
I am still wading through the B1G to decide what teams to hate. Michicken, at least for me, was an easy choice. Other than them and Penn St (L shaped end zone) I really have no hate for them. Now talk about, UT, OU, Mizzou, Colorado etc.............

 
I really don't care how it happens but I would really prefer to see more major teams playing each other. I get tired of the money games against FCS teams etc. Even teams like Fresno St and Wyoming are better than Idaho St, University of the Pacific, South Dakota St (I know they almost beat us but I don't care). I liked the idea of pairing up with a another conference to assure there would be decent match ups regularly. I know we usually get a bigger name team in the noncon but if they set it up in a rotation then you could plan ahead as you would know what teams would be rotating on in the years to come and get excited for potential match ups. If it didn't hurt our chances to make it to the championship playoff I say go to a 9 game conf schedule or set up the match up with another BCS conference to maximize the amount of better games out there. In case you are asking I do consider even Nebraska vs Indiana as a better game than Nebraska vs McNeese St just saying.

 
Jaybird said:
I really don't care how it happens but I would really prefer to see more major teams playing each other. I get tired of the money games against FCS teams etc. Even teams like Fresno St and Wyoming are better than Idaho St, University of the Pacific, South Dakota St (I know they almost beat us but I don't care). I liked the idea of pairing up with a another conference to assure there would be decent match ups regularly. I know we usually get a bigger name team in the noncon but if they set it up in a rotation then you could plan ahead as you would know what teams would be rotating on in the years to come and get excited for potential match ups. If it didn't hurt our chances to make it to the championship playoff I say go to a 9 game conf schedule or set up the match up with another BCS conference to maximize the amount of better games out there. In case you are asking I do consider even Nebraska vs Indiana as a better game than Nebraska vs McNeese St just saying.
Click to expand...
Perhaps we're seeing the first wave of answers to last month's question, "Will teams schedule tougher opponents so they will make the playoff?" Does this mean the PAC decided that it's more important to get to 11-1 than to reach 11 or 10 wins with a quality SOS?

 
The problem is that no one knows exactly how much SOS will be weighted in the new playoff world for another 2 years - given historical precedent it's safer to assume that wins will trump SOS until the results show otherwise...so my answer to that question will be that no major changes will occur until 2020 or so

 
exswoo said:
The problem is that no one knows exactly how much SOS will be weighted in the new playoff world for another 2 years - given historical precedent it's safer to assume that wins will trump SOS until the results show otherwise...so my answer to that question will be that no major changes will occur until 2020 or so
Click to expand...
I would say tie goes to SOS. Two 11-1 teams. One with SOS of 15 and the other with a SOS of 98. give it to the one with 15

 
Why have we had two threads about the same subject titled nearly the exact same thing linking to the same article for almost two days now?

 
Last edited by a moderator:
Danimal said:
Being that the PAC has gone from a 10-team con with a round-robin format to a 12-team con with a CCG I don't seee why they continue with the 9-game sched.
Click to expand...
Because of the California Four.

USC, UCLA, Cal and Stanford were split up with two in each division (allowing the California recruiting to still be equally advantageous to the other non-California based teams in both divisons) BUT all four still want to play each other every year. To accommodate that, the conference uses a 9 game schedule.

 
Jaybird said:
I really don't care how it happens but I would really prefer to see more major teams playing each other. I get tired of the money games against FCS teams etc. Even teams like Fresno St and Wyoming are better than Idaho St, University of the Pacific, South Dakota St (I know they almost beat us but I don't care). I liked the idea of pairing up with a another conference to assure there would be decent match ups regularly. I know we usually get a bigger name team in the noncon but if they set it up in a rotation then you could plan ahead as you would know what teams would be rotating on in the years to come and get excited for potential match ups. If it didn't hurt our chances to make it to the championship playoff I say go to a 9 game conf schedule or set up the match up with another BCS conference to maximize the amount of better games out there. In case you are asking I do consider even Nebraska vs Indiana as a better game than Nebraska vs McNeese St just saying.
Click to expand...
The game sucked, but no. They did not "almost beat us." Not even close.

 
Blackshirt316 said:
Danimal said:
Being that the PAC has gone from a 10-team con with a round-robin format to a 12-team con with a CCG I don't seee why they continue with the 9-game sched.
Click to expand...
Because of the California Four.

USC, UCLA, Cal and Stanford were split up with two in each division (allowing the California recruiting to still be equally advantageous to the other non-California based teams in both divisons) BUT all four still want to play each other every year. To accommodate that, the conference uses a 9 game schedule.
Click to expand...
2 [NCAA mandated] halves of the conference with 4 teams having 2 protected cross-over rivalries. It makes as much sense as the NFL's sense of geography.

 
Last edited by a moderator:
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top