****The official NEW new conference realignment thread.****

[Saul Good]

the second thread has been pronounced dead.

[alnorth]

Originally Posted by eazyb81

Two of the three metrics in the current BCS formula are based on human rankings, the same human rankings that pushed Alabama ahead of Okie Light last year. There's no indication that the new playoff will only use computers so I have no idea what your point is.

Many of the voters also heavily consider strength of schedule. "so what ya got a good record, you ain't played nobody!", etc. So, 1/3 is strictly analytical, then out of the voters they are heavily influenced by analytical considerations.

Overall its at least half, if not more.

[Bambi]

Originally Posted by PGM

Dear Lord. Rename him Repeatson and get it over with.

Rename you Wickedstalkerson and you're on to something.

[Bambi]

Originally Posted by Bo's Pelini

In sports that don't count.

It's good to know it's about money though you couldn't tell by looking at KU's stadium.

The facilities at Kansas rival that of any program in America. Could the stadium use upgrades? Sure. But moving one thing at a time is the responsible thing to do.

[alnorth]

Originally Posted by Saul Good

Kansas, Iowa State, Tech, and Baylor are 40% of the conference.

Yeah, I forgot Tech, but I don't understand why you included Baylor.

Here, take a look at last year's sagarin.

If you don't want to be destroyed by the computers, you need an SOS at least around the 30's. Notice how everyone in each conference seems to have roughly the same SOS, give or take 10 spots? Obviously, because of 8 or 9 conference games.

http://www.usatoday.com/sports/sagarin/fbc11.htm

Big 12 was strong last year, so they are in single digits, SEC mostly in the teens which is plenty good enough to be rewarded. PAC 12 and Big 10 hanging in there. Then you see the horrid (for a supposed BCS conference) ACC, and take a look at whats coming with Pitt and Syracuse.

Want to see what happens to a 1-loss ACC team? Take Houston's BCS finish and bump them up, at most, maybe 11 or 12 spots. An ACC team would need to go undefeated with that horrible conference schedule to be top-4.

[PGM]

Originally Posted by Wickedson

Rename you Wickedstalkerson and you're on to something.

I point out board asshattery. It's not my fault you're among the biggest clowns.

[Saul Good]

Originally Posted by Wickedson

KU has made more money being associated with Texas than they could have ever hoped for.

They prime the Hawks well for their NC title runs.

Runs? IIRC, KU has won only a single NC since the Big 12 was formed.

Since then, there are 5 teams that have won multiple NCs.

Basketball national titles since the formation of the Big 12:
ACC: 5
SEC: 4
BEAST: 3
PAC, B1G, and 12: 1 each

[Bambi]

Originally Posted by PGM

I point out board asshattery. It's not my fault you're among the biggest clowns.

Is that what you do?

To me you're just a weirdo that needs to chill out.

[Saul Good]

Originally Posted by alnorth

Yeah, I forgot Tech, but I don't understand why you included Baylor.

Because Baylor has been among the worst major conference teams in both football and basketball since the inception of the Big 12.

[Guru]

Originally Posted by Saul Good

Runs? IIRC, KU has won only a single NC since the Big 12 was formed.

Since then, there are 5 teams that have won multiple NCs.

Basketball national titles since the formation of the Big 12:
ACC: 5
SEC: 4
BEAST: 3
PAC, B1G, and 12: 1 each

That is why I would rather KU be in the ACC.

[HolyHandgernade]

Originally Posted by eazyb81

Well first off, the all conference champs plan likely sets the NCAA up for antitrust issues if it excludes independents like ND or BYU, or non-power conference teams like Boise. ND is in the playoff committee along with conference commissioners. If no one valued ND they would have been excluded.

Second, any playoff that could potentially not include teams ranked #2 or #3 would not be acceptable to the public. The point of this entire process is to improve the system of crowning a champion.

I think we will see a straight 1-4 ranking system, but the Big Ten and Pac want to ensure that they have access to the Rose Bowl.

The thing that speaks most loudly to networks are ratings and the public spoke loud and clear on the all SEC matchup: didn't want to watch it.

I think you'll see something like the three highest rated conference winners and a "wildcard" who is the highest rated once the three conference winners are identified. That gives an independent a chance, a fourth conference champion a chance, or a second conference team rated in the top four who wasn't a conference champion.

Now, maybe you add another qualifier, like a conference team must be in the top 6 or that spot could be given to another at-large.

Perhaps they put qualifiers on the said "at large" in that a conference cannot have more than two representatives.

Who knows. But, if last year, Alabama played OSU and Stanford played LSU, and then Alabama and LSU advanced, I bet the ratings would have been much better.

[Bambi]

Just listened to that guy from FSU Petro had on today. He put KU Bball on par with UT and OU football. How dare he.

[Saul Good]

Originally Posted by HolyHandgernade

The thing that speaks most loudly to networks are ratings and the public spoke loud and clear on the all SEC matchup: didn't want to watch it.

I think you'll see something like the three highest rated conference winners and a "wildcard" who is the highest rated once the three conference winners are identified. That gives an independent a chance, a fourth conference champion a chance, or a second conference team rated in the top four who wasn't a conference champion.

Now, maybe you add another qualifier, like a conference team must be in the top 6 or that spot could be given to another at-large.

Perhaps they put qualifiers on the said "at large" in that a conference cannot have more than two representatives.

Who knows. But, if last year, Alabama played OSU and Stanford played LSU, and then Alabama and LSU advanced, I bet the ratings would have been much better.

The San Francisco Texas World Series had terrible ratings. They should have had the Yankees play the Red Sox instead.

[Bo's Pelini]

Originally Posted by Wickedson

The facilities at Kansas rival that of any program in America. Could the stadium use upgrades? Sure. But moving one thing at a time is the responsible thing to do.

Indeed.

I see ESPN released a pre-season top 25 a few weeks ago. I bet you miss having Nebraska in the conference knowing at the end of the year you can atleast count on them and Oklahoma being ranked.

[alnorth]

Originally Posted by Wickedson

Why do you keep responding to him?

Just a quick sidetrack.

I keep responding because we're having a conversation. He's talking to me like a civil human being. I try to understand his point and where he's coming from, if I disagree then I make a good faith attempt to respond, without heated emotion, with just facts and my opinion.

At some point if we reach an impasse where we can't even agree on a set of facts, we'll probably just call it a draw and move on. Saul Good is a good poster who I respect.

[Bambi]

Originally Posted by Bo's Pelini

Indeed.

I see ESPN released a pre-season top 25 a few weeks ago. I bet you miss having Nebraska in the conference knowing at the end of the year you can atleast count on them and Oklahoma being ranked.

I think the Big 12 will manage on having a few teams ranked at the end of the year. I mean the Big 12 is the last conference to have a National Title winner outside of the SEC. They play some pretty good football.