Real Change - Pac 10 Expansion to 16 Teams?

Mott the Hoople said:
You're seriously wrong. UT has one of the largest market shares for TV in all of college football. The Pac 10 would welcome them and NB and TT and OK with open arms. The Big 10 would gladly take ND, Pitt, Mizzou (or NB or TX) and Syracuse (or even OK State) That would force the SEC to raid the SEC for UNC, Miami, Va Tech and Ga Tech. The rest of college football would then have to kiss those 3 conferences asses.
Click to expand...

I didn't say pac10, I said USC. And USC will not want an SEC caliber team in the conference.
 
Topspin said:
I didn't say pac10, I said USC. And USC will not want an SEC caliber team in the conference.
Click to expand...

Since USC now has Monte Kiffin, I see them being able to stop the high flying, high scoring offenses well enough.

Lane Kiffin is a joke, but his Dad is a genius.
 
Mott the Hoople said:
There is no legitimate reason for the Pac 10 to expand beyond 12 teams necessary for a Pac 10 conference championship game (Same with the Big 10). This is purely a power play by the Big 10 and the Pac 10. The SEC, to its credit, has stead fastly maintained that they would prefer a playoff system. It has been the Big 10, Pac 10 and the Big 12 who have most adamently opposed a play off. It now appears that the Big 10 and Pac 10 dupped the Big 12 commisioners and plan on raiding them to create two 16 team super conferences.

If the Big 12 was smart they would join in a coalition with the SEC, ACC and Big East and create their own National Champion ship game. If the Big 10 and Pac 10 hold out, fine, they can just send their recruiters to Cleveland, Chicago, LA, Frisco and Detroit. I promise you the Big 10 and Pac 10 would cave.

I may be a Big 10 fan but I oppose this power play by the Big 10. It's not about football, tradition or even money. It's about power and the ability of two conferences to call the shots for the rest of college football.
Click to expand...

Actually for the Pac 10 it really is about money. Look at the network contracts for the Big 10 and SEC. The Pac 10's contract is nowhere near that. Without a change the conference was only going to fall further behind. For a change the conference is actually being pro-active and has a conference commissioner who knows what he is doing.
 
cawacko said:
Actually for the Pac 10 it really is about money. Look at the network contracts for the Big 10 and SEC. The Pac 10's contract is nowhere near that. Without a change the conference was only going to fall further behind. For a change the conference is actually being pro-active and has a conference commissioner who knows what he is doing.
Click to expand...

Being about the money is not necessarily bad.

The SEC grabbed a big contract in the last year to catch up with the Big 10, and now the PAC10 wants to get in on the game.


But I still want an actual championship via a playoff.
 
cawacko said:
Actually for the Pac 10 it really is about money. Look at the network contracts for the Big 10 and SEC. The Pac 10's contract is nowhere near that. Without a change the conference was only going to fall further behind. For a change the conference is actually being pro-active and has a conference commissioner who knows what he is doing.
Click to expand...

duh!!! nobody wants to see high school caliber football on TV
 
Topspin said:
his dad is very good, but you want to see Genius look at Saban.
Click to expand...

Please, you're embarrassing yourself. Monte created the Tampa 2. That's one of the best defenses at the highest level of competition. What did Saban do in the NFL? Saban is a great college coach but it's not the league.
 
Topspin said:
his dad is very good, but you want to see Genius look at Saban.
Click to expand...

I have to agree. I think Saban is the best coach in college football right now.

But Monte Kiffin stopped us last year and held us to 4 field goals and only 245yards of total offense. We won our games last season by following Saban's philosophy of "Make Them Quit". TN didn't quit and came closer than anyone else to beating us.
 
Playoff's
Top 8 teams with plus two. 4 Traditional bowls as qtrs, a semi final week and a championship game.
 
Topspin said:
Playoff's
Top 8 teams with plus two. 4 Traditional bowls as qtrs, a semi final week and a championship game.
Click to expand...

NO.

While that would be slightly better than the current system, it still leaves the majority of the 'who is in' to writers.

Make it 8 conference champs and then four at large at least with the top four rated champs getting a bye the first week.

Let it all be decided on the field.
 
cawacko said:
Please, you're embarrassing yourself. Monte created the Tampa 2. That's one of the best defenses at the highest level of competition. What did Saban do in the NFL? Saban is a great college coach but it's not the league.
Click to expand...

Monte got raped at Tenn, you'll see this year as you guy lie on your back week after week and Lane comes up with excuse after excuse.

Saban has 2 NC at different schools, monte isn't stable enough to be a HC anywhere.
 
Superfreak said:
NO.

While that would be slightly better than the current system, it still leaves the majority of the 'who is in' to writers.

Make it 8 conference champs and then four at large at least with the top four rated champs getting a bye the first week.

Let it all be decided on the field.
Click to expand...

No Mr Masigil, your still leaving it to writers. And why do the 8 conferences get automatic. What if they suck like the pac10 or ACC?
 
Topspin said:
No Mr Masigil, your still leaving it to writers. And why do the 8 conferences get automatic. What if they suck like the pac10 or ACC?
Click to expand...

1) I stated 8 conference champs... I did not designate WHICH conferences.

2) I would prefer an all out playoff, thus I was simply altering your scenario to where it was less of an influence by writers... ie... conference championships are decided on the field.
 
cawacko said:
Actually for the Pac 10 it really is about money. Look at the network contracts for the Big 10 and SEC. The Pac 10's contract is nowhere near that. Without a change the conference was only going to fall further behind. For a change the conference is actually being pro-active and has a conference commissioner who knows what he is doing.
Click to expand...
I can't agree with you. If it was about the money then the PAC 10 would be all for a tournament which conservatively would bring in about 3 to 4 times the profits the NCAA is currently making. This is definately a power play.
 
Topspin said:
Playoff's
Top 8 teams with plus two. 4 Traditional bowls as qtrs, a semi final week and a championship game.
Click to expand...
The so called "Plus One" format. I bet you see a bunch of lobbying for that in the near future now that the Big/Pac 10 power play has become apparent.
 
Superfreak said:
NO.

While that would be slightly better than the current system, it still leaves the majority of the 'who is in' to writers.

Make it 8 conference champs and then four at large at least with the top four rated champs getting a bye the first week.

Let it all be decided on the field.
Click to expand...
I agree but it's a start, it sets a precedent for a play off system and would open the door in the future to a broader play off system when fans show their dissatisfaction with it. I'd take that over the BCS anyday.
 
Mott the Hoople said:
I can't agree with you. If it was about the money then the PAC 10 would be all for a tournament which conservatively would bring in about 3 to 4 times the profits the NCAA is currently making. This is definately a power play.[/QUOTE

Even if there was a tournament the Pac 10 would still be getting its butt kicked on its TV contract which is what this is about. A tournament isn't going to help make the Pac 10 any more competitive than it already is. Bringing in Texas and Oklahoma will.
Click to expand...
 
cawacko said:
Mott the Hoople said:
I can't agree with you. If it was about the money then the PAC 10 would be all for a tournament which conservatively would bring in about 3 to 4 times the profits the NCAA is currently making. This is definately a power play.[/QUOTE

Even if there was a tournament the Pac 10 would still be getting its butt kicked on its TV contract which is what this is about. A tournament isn't going to help make the Pac 10 any more competitive than it already is. Bringing in Texas and Oklahoma will.
Click to expand...

I agree. The tv contracts are a solid money maker. The playoff is an iffy affair that may never happen.


Here is what needs to happen. We consolidate it into 3 conferences with all the teams that matter. Then after 2 years we combine those 3 into one Monster Conference and have a playoff for the conference title. (a.k.a. National Championship)
Click to expand...
 
The Pac 10 current TV contract pays each school $9 million. The Big 10 and SEC pay $20 million or just over (maybe $22) to each school.

From the Texas site, "Scott, who took over as Pac-10 commissioner in 2009 and earns $1.7 million annually after running the Women's Tennis Association for six years, appears ready to show he's worth every penny by making a splash. He will recommend to the presidents and chancellors on Sunday that they invite six Big 12 teams and move forward with a 16-team conference network that projects to pay out $20 million per school."

It's not about a power play it's about more than doubling the amount of revenue per school with a new TV contract.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top