The 4-4-2-2-1 would lock the SEC and Big Ten into being the top dogs FOREVER. Although unlikely, the at-large structure would keep the door open for Big 12 and ACC to get to the top. We absolutely need the at-large structure.
Ross Dellenger report on SEC spring meetings
- Thread starter JP4CY
- Start date
Agreed. All the other conferences should counter that they can remove their worst lost conference game from the record while the sec can only remove their worst loss out of conference game. Or something like that. Basically level out the game comparisons that your comparing 8 conference games and 3 out of conference games.
I feel like this or something similar could come up if the SEC goes another year without winning a Natty. Pre NIL their aren’t was flawed but their just wasn’t a great counter argument with the on field success. Post NIL and post Saban I imagine we will get more push back to their light conference scheduling.
I disagree. I think what you are missing is what the Big 12 needs to happen is they need to create new blue bloods. It is my opinion that the best way for this to happen is to have the same team or teams consistently make the playoffs. While that could still happen in 5+11 scenario, it's not very likely
Think Gonzaga basketball (or Creighton, or a dozen other schools). Could Gonzaga have became what it is today without an automatic bid into the NCAA tournament? Furthermore, if instead of 1 AQ the WAC had 2, wouldn't it be far more likely today that a second team or a group of 2 or 3 teams would have emerged if not on Gonzaga's level then a tier below it?
I think the Big 12 is cutting off it's nose to spite its face. They're allowing short term marketing problems to get in the way of what should be the league's primary mission: build programs that replace what was lost in realignment.
On top of that, one of the primary constraints these bigger leagues faced was that were only so many playoff spots to go around. If Oklahoma has to finish in the top four of the SEC each year to make the playoffs (or win a conference playoff game to make the playoffs each year) that's a lot harder than finishing in the top 6 of the SEC each year and using their brand name to get inside the top 16 of the rankings.
Making the playoffs is not good enough. We need teams to be able to win in the playoffs. That's how the Big 12 legitimizes itself.
Agreed, get a couple good wins or have a team make a push and the credibility goes up, especially if it can be a team that can have some sustained success. Recruiting also needs to pick up pretty dramatically, only 1 team in the top 35 for the 2025 class (KSU is 35 so that might be 2) while the ACC has 5, 6 if you count ND.
The first step is consistently being there, then you build up the roster to compete to win them. You're trying to get to step 5 of the plan while skipping steps 1-4. I suppose it could work but it's not the best strategy.
I don't follow how allowing less access for your teams is a benefit. That makes zero sense.
Is 2 more than 1? I thought it was but now your post has me rethinking my math.
This x1000. Well said.
The ONLY path to survival is winning. It still amazes me how many fans we have that say stupid sh*t like “ugh I just could never root for Baylor!!” (Or insert whoever else in the conference.
Ummm yeah, ya better friggin root for Baylor. And Tang. And Kansas. Etc. Etc. Your moral superiority means d*ck. Winner is all that matters. Ya better root for Deion and hope like hell his teams become good and he keeps the media attention. We all better hope ALL Big 12 teams win games against other P4 schools. Consistently.
That’s just regular season, those wins are great but they always usually carry a massive * as they happen so early in the season, make noise in the playoffs and that’s what people latch on to.
Problem is the less opportunities for the big 12 and ACC in the non conference hurts opportunities to even get a foot in the door for the playoffs and to get top players, as well as putting us further behind in revenue. It’s a vicious circle.
Agreed. Hopefully the league avoids more screw jobs like the tx v. ASU game.
Last edited:
Last edited:
That quote has two parts to it.
Kelly is saying “yeah…we’ll go to a 9 game conference schedule, so long as we can play a Big10 team as part of our non-conference slate.”
Think of the ripple effect.
You think if Iowa is forced to play Mississippi State in the non-con, they are going to be all gung ho about keeping Iowa State on the schedule? The SEC isn’t going to drop their game with The Citadel in this scenario. They will drop their early game with Miami (or name another P4 school) instead.
If no Cy-Hawk game (for example), because of SEC/Big10 collusion, who do Big12 and ACC teams schedule in the non-conference?
Maybe. But the B1G has 4 more teams than the SEC. Maybe some teams will get exempted out, at least some of the time.
Sure is. You think the Big 12 is more likely to get 3 teams in or 1 team in in the 11 at large format?
