Welcome to the Hardcore Husky Forums. Folks who are well-known in Cyberland and not that dumb.

Sacramento St tickets trading for $9

1356

Comments

  • RoadDawg55
    RoadDawg55 Member, Swaye's Wigwam Posts: 30,554 Swaye's Wigwam
    I'm kind of surprised school presidents sign off on these schedules. I know coaches and AD's like it because it pads win totals and can save jobs, but it's still ridiculous.

    Wouldn't it benefit everyone (Attendance, TV Ratings, Advertisements, Fan satisfaction) benefit from big time match ups?

    It's time for 4 power conferences. 64 teams. Tough shit for Boise State and others that don't get in. Allow one game each season to be scheduled with teams from outside the power conferences. Maybe once every four or five years, a power conference team could even schedule an FCS school.

    Have a 16 team playoff. If you really want to be diplomatic, allow one non power conference team in the playoff. Maybe even have the top two non power conference teams face off to get in. College football could be so much better.
    · Share on FacebookShare on Twitter
  • AZDuck
    AZDuck Member Posts: 15,468
    I'm down with this.

    How about relegation/promotion?

    Best team from the Group of 5 or whatever they're calling themselves gets advanced to the cool kids table, crappiest team from the Power conferences goes to the shit leagues.

    Give Boise a chance
    · Share on FacebookShare on Twitter
  • BallSacked
    BallSacked Member Posts: 3,279
    RoadDawg55 said:

    I'm kind of surprised school presidents sign off on these schedules. I know coaches and AD's like it because it pads win totals and can save jobs, but it's still ridiculous.

    Wouldn't it benefit everyone (Attendance, TV Ratings, Advertisements, Fan satisfaction) benefit from big time match ups?

    It's time for 4 power conferences. 64 teams. Tough shit for Boise State and others that don't get in. Allow one game each season to be scheduled with teams from outside the power conferences. Maybe once every four or five years, a power conference team could even schedule an FCS school.

    Have a 16 team playoff. If you really want to be diplomatic, allow one non power conference team in the playoff. Maybe even have the top two non power conference teams face off to get in. College football could be so much better.

    I don't think playing Sac State or EWU is a bad idea if it avoids giving fucking teams like BYU or Boise or Rice or Hawaii or SDSU a return trip. Fuck that. What's the point. Those teams don't draw much interest and you gotta give them a home game in return.

    I'd play two home scrimmages and then one real big challenger from a major conference every year.
    · Share on FacebookShare on Twitter
  • TierbsHsotBoobs
    TierbsHsotBoobs Member Posts: 39,680
    BallSacked said:

    RoadDawg55 said:

    I'm kind of surprised school presidents sign off on these schedules. I know coaches and AD's like it because it pads win totals and can save jobs, but it's still ridiculous.

    Wouldn't it benefit everyone (Attendance, TV Ratings, Advertisements, Fan satisfaction) benefit from big time match ups?

    It's time for 4 power conferences. 64 teams. Tough shit for Boise State and others that don't get in. Allow one game each season to be scheduled with teams from outside the power conferences. Maybe once every four or five years, a power conference team could even schedule an FCS school.

    Have a 16 team playoff. If you really want to be diplomatic, allow one non power conference team in the playoff. Maybe even have the top two non power conference teams face off to get in. College football could be so much better.

    I don't think playing Sac State or EWU is a bad idea if it avoids giving fucking teams like BYU or Boise or Rice or Hawaii or SDSU a return trip. Fuck that. What's the point. Those teams don't draw much interest and you gotta give them a home game in return.

    I'd play two home scrimmages and then one real big challenger from a major conference every year.
    Beating Texas in Jerry World with Jerry >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> anything UW has done OOC since 2000.
    · Share on FacebookShare on Twitter
  • BallSacked
    BallSacked Member Posts: 3,279
    TierbsHsotBoobs said:

    BallSacked said:

    RoadDawg55 said:

    I'm kind of surprised school presidents sign off on these schedules. I know coaches and AD's like it because it pads win totals and can save jobs, but it's still ridiculous.

    Wouldn't it benefit everyone (Attendance, TV Ratings, Advertisements, Fan satisfaction) benefit from big time match ups?

    It's time for 4 power conferences. 64 teams. Tough shit for Boise State and others that don't get in. Allow one game each season to be scheduled with teams from outside the power conferences. Maybe once every four or five years, a power conference team could even schedule an FCS school.

    Have a 16 team playoff. If you really want to be diplomatic, allow one non power conference team in the playoff. Maybe even have the top two non power conference teams face off to get in. College football could be so much better.

    I don't think playing Sac State or EWU is a bad idea if it avoids giving fucking teams like BYU or Boise or Rice or Hawaii or SDSU a return trip. Fuck that. What's the point. Those teams don't draw much interest and you gotta give them a home game in return.

    I'd play two home scrimmages and then one real big challenger from a major conference every year.
    Beating Texas in Jerry World with Jerry >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> anything UW has done OOC since 2000.
    Right. Play a Texas every year, but giving return trips to Boise, BYU, Memphis, Rice, Houston like UW and UCLA have done/will do...not worth it. Just plunger some retards from FCS at home instead.
    · Share on FacebookShare on Twitter
  • BallSacked
    BallSacked Member Posts: 3,279
    RoadDawg55 said:

    BallSacked said:

    TierbsHsotBoobs said:

    BallSacked said:

    RoadDawg55 said:

    I'm kind of surprised school presidents sign off on these schedules. I know coaches and AD's like it because it pads win totals and can save jobs, but it's still ridiculous.

    Wouldn't it benefit everyone (Attendance, TV Ratings, Advertisements, Fan satisfaction) benefit from big time match ups?

    It's time for 4 power conferences. 64 teams. Tough shit for Boise State and others that don't get in. Allow one game each season to be scheduled with teams from outside the power conferences. Maybe once every four or five years, a power conference team could even schedule an FCS school.

    Have a 16 team playoff. If you really want to be diplomatic, allow one non power conference team in the playoff. Maybe even have the top two non power conference teams face off to get in. College football could be so much better.

    I don't think playing Sac State or EWU is a bad idea if it avoids giving fucking teams like BYU or Boise or Rice or Hawaii or SDSU a return trip. Fuck that. What's the point. Those teams don't draw much interest and you gotta give them a home game in return.

    I'd play two home scrimmages and then one real big challenger from a major conference every year.
    Beating Texas in Jerry World with Jerry >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> anything UW has done OOC since 2000.
    Right. Play a Texas every year, but giving return trips to Boise, BYU, Memphis, Rice, Houston like UW and UCLA have done/will do...not worth it. Just plunger some retards from FCS at home instead.
    Going to Boise or Provo is better entertainment than playing FCS dreck at home.
    Agree to disagree. It's marginal if anything AND you gotta play on the road. I just think that's a bad trade off. Play power 5 home n homes or play FCS dreck only at home.
    · Share on FacebookShare on Twitter
  • HuskyInAZ
    HuskyInAZ Member Posts: 1,733
    RoadDawg55 said:

    I'm kind of surprised school presidents sign off on these schedules. I know coaches and AD's like it because it pads win totals and can save jobs, but it's still ridiculous.

    Wouldn't it benefit everyone (Attendance, TV Ratings, Advertisements, Fan satisfaction) benefit from big time match ups?

    It's time for 4 power conferences. 64 teams. Tough shit for Boise State and others that don't get in. Allow one game each season to be scheduled with teams from outside the power conferences. Maybe once every four or five years, a power conference team could even schedule an FCS school.

    Have a 16 team playoff. If you really want to be diplomatic, allow one non power conference team in the playoff. Maybe even have the top two non power conference teams face off to get in. College football could be so much better.

    I could not agree more with nearly everything you've laid out. 4 conferences (bye bye B12), 16 teams per conference, 11 conference games, 1 non-conference game. To avoid stretching out the season, I'd use the conference championship games as the round of 8. P12 vs B1G and SEC vs ACC as the round of 4. The stupid fucking media voting and the stupid fucking BCS committee would go away.
    · Share on FacebookShare on Twitter
  • dnc
    dnc Member Posts: 56,855
    HuskyInAZ said:

    RoadDawg55 said:

    I'm kind of surprised school presidents sign off on these schedules. I know coaches and AD's like it because it pads win totals and can save jobs, but it's still ridiculous.

    Wouldn't it benefit everyone (Attendance, TV Ratings, Advertisements, Fan satisfaction) benefit from big time match ups?

    It's time for 4 power conferences. 64 teams. Tough shit for Boise State and others that don't get in. Allow one game each season to be scheduled with teams from outside the power conferences. Maybe once every four or five years, a power conference team could even schedule an FCS school.

    Have a 16 team playoff. If you really want to be diplomatic, allow one non power conference team in the playoff. Maybe even have the top two non power conference teams face off to get in. College football could be so much better.

    I could not agree more with nearly everything you've laid out. 4 conferences (bye bye B12), 16 teams per conference, 11 conference games, 1 non-conference game. To avoid stretching out the season, I'd use the conference championship games as the round of 8. P12 vs B1G and SEC vs ACC as the round of 4. The stupid fucking media voting and the stupid fucking BCS committee would go away.
    How would they lay out the 16 team conferences? It's hard to imagine anyone on board with completely blowing up the current allegiances, though that might make the most sense. If you don't blow it up, it would get pretty crazy trying to slot everyone in somewhere.

    My best guesses:

    Big 10
    Current 14 minus Pedo State, Maryland and Rutgers (to ACC)
    Plus Kansas schools, Oklahoma schools and Iowa State
    Net win for the Big 10 though not huge

    SEC
    Current 14
    Plus old SEC schools Georgia Tech and Clemson
    Big win for the SEC taking two of the four best football schools from the ACC, but you already know they're not taking a loss. In this event they'd move Missouri to the west where it belongs and the divisions are taken care of.

    ACC
    Current 14 minus Georgia Tech and Clemson (to SEC)
    Plus Pedo State, Maryland, Rutgers and West Virginia
    Somebody has to be the SEC's bitch in this, the ACC is the obvious choice. Net loss for the ACC on the field, but gaining Pennsylvania's TV market (along with getting Maryland's back) probably makes up for losing Georgia's and South Carolina's.

    Pac
    Current 12
    Plus Texas, Texas Dreck, Baylor, TCU
    I wouldn't expect the Pac to be the big winners in this, but nobody else has room for all four Big XII Texas schools and we know they're not breaking up.

    New 8 team east division has the Texas schools, Arizona schools and mountain schools, with everyone else in the west.

    This would be a home run for UW. This is why it will probably never happen.
    · Share on FacebookShare on Twitter