Regarding 9 conference Game schedule

[gamalielkid]

Get ready - its coming - but so is another big change - one that will make even more sense! First, stop the non sense of 24 or 30 team conferences - just stop it! 16 is enough. Go back to 3 permanent league foes and then rotate the other 12 teams in the conference to every other year home and away - 4 years you play everyone home and away! IMO - Kentucky's permanent 's should be Tennessee, Florida and South Carolina. We want to beat those teams more than any other! Plus when was the last time you saw Texas A & M play in Lexington NEVER! - and how many times have we played them period? ONE! This allow every team to be seen once in a 4 year span.

Here is the big one coming. 64 team playoff - yes - 64 in the NEW NCFA league. The teams not in this league can still have their own playoff! It totally makes sense! Then records are not as important - every team participates in the new 64 Team Football only conference. Early season losses or injuries doesn't eliminate you! The NCAA will remain for all other sports. Every team will play 10 regular season games with 9 being the most you play from your conference affiliation. Teams then get to keep their rivalry non conference games - many of those exist all over the country.

The 64 teams are seeded. Use similar format as basketball - creating four 16 team regions. Higher seeds are home team. One week bye before games begin. Winners advance to second round - again higher seeded team plays at home. another bye week. So total from opening day to final sixteen is 14 weeks - same as today! Now you are down to 16 teams. Re seed those 16 teams to be the same format as the current 12 team (16 in 2026) format is to be done. Winners of the round of 16 will fill the the six major bowl games as done now and final championship game. No team will play more than 15 games in the season - that will actually be the same as the format was this past year. Other bowl games go on as they do now. Every team still plays 12 games. Bowl teams chosen still play that game. The teams that make the final 16 still play the same amount of games also. Season is not made longer. All teams share equally in first two rounds of playoff games they participate in.

This model will work. It puts all 64 teams in play for the national championship - no matter which league they play in. No one gets left out! All games during the season will still be meaningful. An 8-4 SEC team could/should still be seeded very high compared to a lesser league team that is 9-1.

Let the bickering begin - but something needs to happen to save college football - and this looks like a reasonable solution - at least to me!

Go Big Blue!

 

[backinky2018]

The problem with a 64 team playoff is that you're introducing a TON of extra postseason games. Can you ask college players to play 18 games?

Also, I'm not convinced that a 9 game conference slate is coming, but I acknowledge that it's definitely probable. If the SEC can't get extra money out of ESPN for this, then why do it? You're going to make life awfully tough for the SEC's middle and lower classes.

Even for the upper class, it could be the difference between 10-2 and a playoff berth and 9-3 and the citrus bowl.

 

[Grumpyolddawg]

OP is that something you have read somewhere or your option of what you want to happen? I think the motion for the 30-35 team super conferences are already in motion. The Big10 and SEC commissioners didn't have a meeting to discuss GPA. I think they met to discuss how they divide up the other 2 conferences, who stays in Big Boy league and who doesn't. I think the triggering of it will be when FSU decides to make the move out of ACC.

Big and SEC decide if they want to keep all its members and then decide how to divide up the ACC, Big12 and who if any get added from the group cluster.

64 teams in the playoff? That just isn't feasible, the 12 team playoff is a stretch of time and why would anyone want a playoff where everyone gets in, why play the season? Everyone gets a trophy today i guess..

College football is changing, none of the things you suggested is altering NIL or transfer portal. Unless big changes occur in our judicial system the college football from as late 3 years ago is gone forever.

 

[gamalielkid]

OP is that something you have read somewhere or your option of what you want to happen? I think the motion for the 30-35 team super conferences are already in motion. The Big10 and SEC commissioners didn't have a meeting to discuss GPA. I think they met to discuss how they divide up the other 2 conferences, who stays in Big Boy league and who doesn't. I think the triggering of it will be when FSU decides to make the move out of ACC.

Big and SEC decide if they want to keep all its members and then decide how to divide up the ACC, Big12 and who if any get added from the group cluster.

64 teams in the playoff? That just isn't feasible, the 12 team playoff is a stretch of time and why would anyone want a playoff where everyone gets in, why play the season? Everyone gets a trophy today i guess..

College football is changing, none of the things you suggested is altering NIL or transfer portal. Unless big changes occur in our judicial system the college football from as late 3 years ago is gone forever.

Grumpy - why not let all the big dogs in? If the other poster read what I wrote the season would not be any longer. None of the 64 teams would play LESS games or MORE games that they played this past season. I gave it some thought and just didn't pull this idea out of a hat! 15 games would only be played by the final 2 and 14 games would only be played be played by the 2 other final 4 teams. 13 games would be the maximum, including bowl games of all the other teams. I proposed a 10 game regular schedule with two guaranteed post season games for every team as the 32 first round losers would play "consolation" games. That way no one plays less than 12 games. To make it more interesting those 32 losers could be kind of natural rivalry games. Like Indiana play Kentucky - no matter how they were rated - if they both lost. You could even say the the two closest teams, distance wise, would play in the consolation bracket. Those games could become real interesting to the people who cared - the fans of the schools involved! This concept would blow March Madness away. The TV money would be astronomical!

In essence the last week of the season and conference championship games are really playoff games now. The winners of the conference championship games basically made the four team playoff - isn't that what happened? Alabama had to beat Auburn to get to the SEC title and then had to beat Georgia to get into the playoffs. As to why play the Season - well doesn't Georgia want to Beat Alabama when they play them? Doesn't Florida want to beat Georgia when they play them? What I am suggesting lets all the big boys in - new huge super conferences don't have to be created! Like you said the SEC and Big 10 will drive who and how many teams can get in it this new super football association. Remember, those teams eliminated will still be trying to get to the same bowl games they try to get to now. Old Outback, Citrus, Gator, etc.

Sankey and others have said limiting the number of teams eligible will hurt college football rather than help it in the long run. This plan will encourage more teams and more championships. Why shouldn't Western Kentucky and James Madison, as examples, have an opportunity to play for a National Championship on a level playing field against their equals? The next 64 teams could become a part of that group and host their own playoffs and championships. This is NOT giving everyone a trophy - this is giving everyone a chance to WIN the trophy!

Grumpy - what good is a 24 SEC league in football. With only 14 teams in the SEC, Kentucky has never played Texas A & M at home and only played them once period! A&M has been in the SEC for 13 football seasons! Enough is enough. I would rather see Kentucky play them than Miami of Ohio,, Bowling Green, Oho U, etc. all of them have played in Lexington several times in that time span! Isn't it better for Georgia to play Florida, Tennessee and Auburn every year - than to play them occasionally. In reality the regular season games don;t mean much to many of the teams after the 6th game of the season currently - think about what I just said - would you not agree with that? Why not give every team a chance? The success of the NCAA basketball tournament being expanded is actually proof positive of this concept! Why should football be the only sport that is not decided by playing in a playoff? We now know that this is not amateur sports anymore. Soon the players will probably not be going to classes anyway - wonder how many actually don't go now - lol?

Anyway, if you take the time to look at what I proposed - college football would become even more popular than professional football. Thats why it will not happen - its the professional teams that don't really want this kind of format it would cut into their future value and earnings.

Go Big Blue!

 

[Grumpyolddawg]

So you are talking about cutting regular season back to 10 games? That would make every game important. And mentioned 3 teams you like UK playing every year in Lexington. Sponsors are not wanting to see those matchups, they aren't going to be willing to pay top advertising dollar for those kinds of games. They love highly competitive games that keep viewers attention. No one outside of UK fans are interested in those, as a UGA fan its hard to watch UGA play teams like that.

We have different visions of college football's future. I see it going to more an NFL model with 30-32 team leagues and each league broken into divisions. Every court ruling is going against what we have had for 125 years. You are right its going to be more business than college sports, but the court system has done that. Each division will have a champion and make the playoffs and each league would have a wildcard team, 8 teams, roughly 12% making the playoffs. 100% is rec league where everyone gets a trophy. Why watch the first 2 rounds? Unlike BB those 16 seeds who are at best 7-5 teams have less than 1% against the top teams.

I don't see how it would become more popular. I agree the professional teams won't be happy losing their free farm system they have enjoyed for a century. I am just wondering how long it is before someone challenges the 4 years of active eligibility, thought it was happening this year but Tua's little brother didn't go through with it.

I don't know what's going to take place, likely not what either of us think but its good to read others thoughts and try to see how it would work.

 

[truebluewildcat]

Not a big fan of the permanent foes. Outside of really big national brand rivalries, having permanent games doesn't do a whole lot. We talk about getting rid of UL all the time on here. They're more of a rival than anyone in the SEC. However, let's be honest, nobody outside of Kentucky/Ohio Valley region is really interested in the rivalry. Again, we barely are, as evidenced by the willingness to drop them. We ourselves would just as soon replace them with at least something that's different, if not more interesting, entertaining...consumable...

Same goes for puff OOCs...which will be the next thing to go in this ever-changing landscape dictated by money, interests, ratings. At some point the media conglomerates paying the money they're paying are going to realize they can make even more money by axing Citadel week(s) with more competitive bigger name brand opponents.

To have real conference rankings in which you are deciding who is who...1, 2, 3, etc...and where they may be placed/seeded in a playoff everyone has to play everyone. That's all there is to it.

Play offs needed to expand, and they may even expand again to 16 maybe 20-24. However, 64 is unrealistic.

Football is not basketball. On any given day, regular season or post season. Teams 26-64 and beyond can compete with and beat the top tier P5 programs in basketball.

Mid-tier P5 programs are struggling to compete with upper tier programs in football.

Football is just different.

Basketball by structure, lends itself to being more competitive and a more even playing field. You need 1 maybe 2 guys.

A kid who hustles and/or hits a high percentage of 3s, can keep you in the game, advance you in the tourney.

In football there is not hustle/hardworking or specific skill set (sharpshooter) position that can overcome a talent disparity. Even with in the top 25, let alone a team outside playing a Bama in a big, expanded tournament.

In football, not only is it about on field talent, but coaching/staff talent. Both are congregating at 20, give or take, schools. There's a lot more strategy across 3 different departments in football. You have to have dudes who can scheme and play call.

This idea of a "super league" that is out there is just based on what is naturally evolving. There are 40-50ish, give or take, athletic departments that make legitimate money. Then, even within 5 "power conferences" 2 seemingly make a lion's share of money because TV/ratings/media deals etc. are favoring said conferences.

Throw into that NIL/portal, and we have the makings of a professional system in which the handful (40-50ish), most likely 20ish even with that small group, will continue to separate.

 

[rick64]

I could see the SEC going to a 9-game regular season schedule. So does that mean teams will go to a 13 game schedule, or drop an OOC game to keep it at 12?

 

[gamalielkid]

So you are talking about cutting regular season back to 10 games? That would make every game important. And mentioned 3 teams you like UK playing every year in Lexington. Sponsors are not wanting to see those matchups, they aren't going to be willing to pay top advertising dollar for those kinds of games. They love highly competitive games that keep viewers attention. No one outside of UK fans are interested in those, as a UGA fan its hard to watch UGA play teams like that.

We have different visions of college football's future. I see it going to more an NFL model with 30-32 team leagues and each league broken into divisions. Every court ruling is going against what we have had for 125 years. You are right its going to be more business than college sports, but the court system has done that. Each division will have a champion and make the playoffs and each league would have a wildcard team, 8 teams, roughly 12% making the playoffs. 100% is rec league where everyone gets a trophy. Why watch the first 2 rounds? Unlike BB those 16 seeds who are at best 7-5 teams have less than 1% against the top teams.

I don't see how it would become more popular. I agree the professional teams won't be happy losing their free farm system they have enjoyed for a century. I am just wondering how long it is before someone challenges the 4 years of active eligibility, thought it was happening this year but Tua's little brother didn't go through with it.

I don't know what's going to take place, likely not what either of us think but its good to read others thoughts and try to see how it would work.

I just hate to see it go to what you are suggesting as well. I like the SEC the way it is NOW. I don;t want Florida State, Clemson or any other teams. As to those games - Kentucky/Florida have had really competitive games for a long time now- even when Florida had the streak 8 of the last 10 losses were very close games. Same thing with South Carolina and even Tennessee is usually close - but we just can't seem to beat them - lol!

I think all games in the format I suggested will be important - because of seeding. Do I expect 64 to beat 1 - no! But upsets will occur - and the first two rounds gives the better teams more advantage as to easier opponent and being a home game as well. What I suggested means your team is really never out of it. People from Georgia, Alabama, LSU, Auburn and many others have never had that frustration. I have been a Kentucky fan for over 60 years - and we have never really had but one or two teams to even be considered for anything major. That is why I think you and many others miss the point. 300 million people's teams never have a chance - now let those people feel like they have a chance and see what happens as to TV ratings, attendance, etc..

I know I'm a dreamer and a college loving guy- so my views are biased with those feelings!

Go Big Blue!

 

[UKWildcats1987]

Not a big fan of the permanent foes. Outside of really big national brand rivalries, having permanent games doesn't do a whole lot. We talk about getting rid of UL all the time on here. They're more of a rival than anyone in the SEC. However, let's be honest, nobody outside of Kentucky/Ohio Valley region is really interested in the rivalry. Again, we barely are, as evidenced by the willingness to drop them. We ourselves would just as soon replace them with at least something that's different, if not more interesting, entertaining...consumable...

Same goes for puff OOCs...which will be the next thing to go in this ever-changing landscape dictated by money, interests, ratings. At some point the media conglomerates paying the money they're paying are going to realize they can make even more money by axing Citadel week(s) with more competitive bigger name brand opponents.

To have real conference rankings in which you are deciding who is who...1, 2, 3, etc...and where they may be placed/seeded in a playoff everyone has to play everyone. That's all there is to it.

Play offs needed to expand, and they may even expand again to 16 maybe 20-24. However, 64 is unrealistic.

Football is not basketball. On any given day, regular season or post season. Teams 26-64 and beyond can compete with and beat the top tier P5 programs in basketball.

Mid-tier P5 programs are struggling to compete with upper tier programs in football.

Football is just different.

Basketball by structure, lends itself to being more competitive and a more even playing field. You need 1 maybe 2 guys.

A kid who hustles and/or hits a high percentage of 3s, can keep you in the game, advance you in the tourney.

In football there is not hustle/hardworking or specific skill set (sharpshooter) position that can overcome a talent disparity. Even with in the top 25, let alone a team outside playing a Bama in a big, expanded tournament.

In football, not only is it about on field talent, but coaching/staff talent. Both are congregating at 20, give or take, schools. There's a lot more strategy across 3 different departments in football. You have to have dudes who can scheme and play call.

This idea of a "super league" that is out there is just based on what is naturally evolving. There are 40-50ish, give or take, athletic departments that make legitimate money. Then, even within 5 "power conferences" 2 seemingly make a lion's share of money because TV/ratings/media deals etc. are favoring said conferences.

Throw into that NIL/portal, and we have the makings of a professional system in which the handful (40-50ish), most likely 20ish even with that small group, will continue to separate.

I agree 24 is the max I'd go. Like IAA.

And another thing different with basketball vs football is you get your top tier pro players 3 years and your very good players 4 years in football. Less chance for parity as the top programs are gonna get the best players and classes year after year.

NIL and transfer won't impact football much as same teams are gonna win that always will. I think the 2023 ncaa tourney is going to be more the norm for basketball going forward.

 

[jerrycat75]

Bad for our conference ! Too greedy , you are defeating yourself !

 

[Grumpyolddawg]

I just hate to see it go to what you are suggesting as well. I like the SEC the way it is NOW. I don;t want Florida State, Clemson or any other teams. As to those games - Kentucky/Florida have had really competitive games for a long time now- even when Florida had the streak 8 of the last 10 losses were very close games. Same thing with South Carolina and even Tennessee is usually close - but we just can't seem to beat them - lol!

I think all games in the format I suggested will be important - because of seeding. Do I expect 64 to beat 1 - no! But upsets will occur - and the first two rounds gives the better teams more advantage as to easier opponent and being a home game as well. What I suggested means your team is really never out of it. People from Georgia, Alabama, LSU, Auburn and many others have never had that frustration. I have been a Kentucky fan for over 60 years - and we have never really had but one or two teams to even be considered for anything major. That is why I think you and many others miss the point. 300 million people's teams never have a chance - now let those people feel like they have a chance and see what happens as to TV ratings, attendance, etc..

I know I'm a dreamer and a college loving guy- so my views are biased with those feelings!

Go Big Blue!

But reality is some teams will be out of it and have zero business being in a playoff the NC. That is just the hard facts. You aren't talking about an 8 or 9 win team on a 12 game regular season, you are talking about 6-7 win teams if you have 64 teams in it.

Attendance want change, can only put so many people in the stadium or fire marshal shuts it down. The 64 team field turns it into regular season games, will fans of teams normally not in playoffs turn in to watch if their team is in, probably but it won't approach that 300m number.

What i am against is rewarding mediocre teams by putting them in a playoff when their seasons haven't shown they deserved being there.

I am not suggesting the 2 leagues with divisions like the NFL, but the commish from the 2 big dogs didn't meet without the other 2 commish for fun, they were planning something. Right now college football can't survive if things continue the way it's going. You will have 4-5 teams dominating unless some kind of enforceable rules are applied to NIL, porta. And not a one of those are in the southeast.

 

[law1127]

NIL has put college sports on a slow road to self destruction! Greed kills!

 

[gamalielkid]

But reality is some teams will be out of it and have zero business being in a playoff the NC. That is just the hard facts. You aren't talking about an 8 or 9 win team on a 12 game regular season, you are talking about 6-7 win teams if you have 64 teams in it.

Attendance want change, can only put so many people in the stadium or fire marshal shuts it down. The 64 team field turns it into regular season games, will fans of teams normally not in playoffs turn in to watch if their team is in, probably but it won't approach that 300m number.

What i am against is rewarding mediocre teams by putting them in a playoff when their seasons haven't shown they deserved being there.

I am not suggesting the 2 leagues with divisions like the NFL, but the commish from the 2 big dogs didn't meet without the other 2 commish for fun, they were planning something. Right now college football can't survive if things continue the way it's going. You will have 4-5 teams dominating unless some kind of enforceable rules are applied to NIL, porta. And not a one of those are in the southeast.

Grumpy, I think the big difference between what you think and I think is this. I grew up in Kentucky. Our high school football was something we had before basketball season here. Why do I bring that up? Kentucky High School basketball is huge - most Kentuckians think it is the best in all of the country! Indiana will argue that - but in reality those two states are pretty close. Do you know how Kentucky has done the high school tournament for ever? Every team gets a chance to win its district, region and then advance to the state. Many schools in 100 years have never made the state tournament! But everyone talks about that goal. In Kentucky, in the first round even the district runner up advances to the regional for a second chance - and many of them have ended up winning the region and going to the state tournament.

The gyms are packed. The state tournament is 16 regional winners teams from all over the state - and schools of all sizes compete against each other - not just the huge schools! A few have made the state tournament with losing records! How does that relate to college football you say? Well, I have been a part of those little tiny schools trying to make it. One of our smaller local schools made it to the state and won it my senior year of high school. Not my school - but the star player on that team played at my high school for 3 years - he was recruited away and played on that championship team (kind of like NIL and transferring now?). Just having the chance is a big deal!

You don;t realize that going to games other than Georgia and big time SEC schools - the stadiums are not full. Look at attendance for all of the power 5 schools. They are not selling out and the enthusiam really goes down once they lose a few games. But this will help fill the stadiums and keep the interest up! It will creat better games. All of the games aren;t going to be televised all over the country - but being televised in the local markets is another big deal. The interest will be even greater! And all games will be against power 5 programs - all 12. You mentioned a 10 game regular season - yes that is correct. But the two playoff games, the way I have them - will provide 2 more power 5 games for every school No small patsies! Yes some teams will get crushed at the end of the season - but again - you don;t realize how big it would be for some teams to have the opportunity to play a Georgia or Alabama ANY time. Coaches can tell their local kids when they recruit them they will have the opportunity to play against those teams and schools.

Kentucky doesn;t produce that many great football players - I. know that. But it is frustrating when you recruit a local kid, who has great talent, for 4 years and then you see the Alabama private jet fly in, Nick Saban go in and that kid signs with Alabama. His reason - he wants to have the chance to play for a National Championship. He basically knows that he has little if any chance at doing that at UK. With NIL we are seeing kids go places they wouldn;t have gone. We see transfers get the opportunity to start at a top 20 school rather than sit the bench at Georgia or Alabama. The game is changing - some good and some not so good for sure. But letting everyone have an opportunity has worked well for Kentucky and Indiana high school basketball. I think it would work for college football. I know the cream will come to the top in the bucket - but if you aren't in the bucket - it can not happen period! Thats why we have so many different perspectives - because we do see things differently!

Go Big Blue!

 

[Girthang]

The NCAA has put itself on a slow road to self destruction! Greed kills!

Fify imo

 

[Girthang]

Twelve team playoff is too many. 4 is too few. 8 is the max. 6 would be just right if the two top teams (toughest CONF SOS) got a first round bye. 64 is insane.

Teams with weaker conference schedules would have an extreme advantage if the playoff field gets too wide. This isn't basketball. It will never, I hope, be basketball. "Can't compare basketball/checkers to football/chess." As my friend always says.

 

[vhcat70]

Not season tick holder any longer, but would you rather watch a SEC opponent or Youngstown State?

 

[Grumpyolddawg]

Grumpy, I think the big difference between what you think and I think is this. I grew up in Kentucky. Our high school football was something we had before basketball season here. Why do I bring that up? Kentucky High School basketball is huge - most Kentuckians think it is the best in all of the country! Indiana will argue that - but in reality those two states are pretty close. Do you know how Kentucky has done the high school tournament for ever? Every team gets a chance to win its district, region and then advance to the state. Many schools in 100 years have never made the state tournament! But everyone talks about that goal. In Kentucky, in the first round even the district runner up advances to the regional for a second chance - and many of them have ended up winning the region and going to the state tournament.

The gyms are packed. The state tournament is 16 regional winners teams from all over the state - and schools of all sizes compete against each other - not just the huge schools! A few have made the state tournament with losing records! How does that relate to college football you say? Well, I have been a part of those little tiny schools trying to make it. One of our smaller local schools made it to the state and won it my senior year of high school. Not my school - but the star player on that team played at my high school for 3 years - he was recruited away and played on that championship team (kind of like NIL and transferring now?). Just having the chance is a big deal!

You don;t realize that going to games other than Georgia and big time SEC schools - the stadiums are not full. Look at attendance for all of the power 5 schools. They are not selling out and the enthusiam really goes down once they lose a few games. But this will help fill the stadiums and keep the interest up! It will creat better games. All of the games aren;t going to be televised all over the country - but being televised in the local markets is another big deal. The interest will be even greater! And all games will be against power 5 programs - all 12. You mentioned a 10 game regular season - yes that is correct. But the two playoff games, the way I have them - will provide 2 more power 5 games for every school No small patsies! Yes some teams will get crushed at the end of the season - but again - you don;t realize how big it would be for some teams to have the opportunity to play a Georgia or Alabama ANY time. Coaches can tell their local kids when they recruit them they will have the opportunity to play against those teams and schools.

Kentucky doesn;t produce that many great football players - I. know that. But it is frustrating when you recruit a local kid, who has great talent, for 4 years and then you see the Alabama private jet fly in, Nick Saban go in and that kid signs with Alabama. His reason - he wants to have the chance to play for a National Championship. He basically knows that he has little if any chance at doing that at UK. With NIL we are seeing kids go places they wouldn;t have gone. We see transfers get the opportunity to start at a top 20 school rather than sit the bench at Georgia or Alabama. The game is changing - some good and some not so good for sure. But letting everyone have an opportunity has worked well for Kentucky and Indiana high school basketball. I think it would work for college football. I know the cream will come to the top in the bucket - but if you aren't in the bucket - it can not happen period! Thats why we have so many different perspectives - because we do see things differently!

Go Big Blue!

I understand everyone wanting a chance to the playoffs, but you just can't compare the 2 sports. BB, teams can rest overnight and play at a high level the next day. FB just can't do that, you have RB who can barely move the next day, QBs with sore arms from throwing so much.

But the teams that are playoff contenders will have full stadiums, kids that choose to attend the group of schools realize those chances are remote so I don't see that as anything to point to.

UK feels they need 8 home games, or many fans do, but you are talking about cutting that back to 5 and to make up for the lost 2 regular season games with playoff games that could be home or away.

IMO, you just can't compare scheduling football and basketball, making the playoffs should be everyone's goal, but if everyone is in the playoffs, making them is no big deal.

 

[gamalielkid]

I understand everyone wanting a chance to the playoffs, but you just can't compare the 2 sports. BB, teams can rest overnight and play at a high level the next day. FB just can't do that, you have RB who can barely move the next day, QBs with sore arms from throwing so much.

But the teams that are playoff contenders will have full stadiums, kids that choose to attend the group of schools realize those chances are remote so I don't see that as anything to point to.

UK feels they need 8 home games, or many fans do, but you are talking about cutting that back to 5 and to make up for the lost 2 regular season games with playoff games that could be home or away.

IMO, you just can't compare scheduling football and basketball, making the playoffs should be everyone's goal, but if everyone is in the playoffs, making them is no big deal.

So is it all about the playoff games or is it about the season.? What i propose is 12 power 5 games and conference games that mean something to the teams in the conferences. Grump - it may not last much longer - but I drive 13-14 hours to watch Kentucky play home games. 3 of those games are against teams I really don;t care to see. The stadium is about 85 - 90% full for those games - not bad. But we have standing room crowds for the conference games - other than Vandy sometimes. Those 3 games tickets are $35 or so. The conference games are $80 or so. I was looking at going to the Texas game this year. Cheapest seats are $136 at UK on line. Its easy to see why the big boys like it the way it is.

I also ask myself this question - are UK's chances any better at 12 teams as it is now? Answer - I doubt it. So, if you play the same number of games - why be against it. 5 conference/power 5 home games and half of the gate of the 2 playoff games means more money to our program - mabye not to Texas and Georgia - but it is to Kentucky!

As to recovery. Teams still play once a week and no extra games. The good teams will usually win - I understand that - but who is really afraid of this schedule - Kentucky - or Georgia? I guarantee you it is not the fans of Kentucky!

Finally as to my basketball reference. Remember the movie "Hoosier's" well it was pretty realistic. I know of a couple of Kentucky teams that made it to the finals and won! Both from the small region my high school was in! It was the best thing that happened to Kentucky HS basketball. Schools with a few 100 kids playing and beating schools with 2,000 plus kids!

Go Big Blue!

P.S. If it was up to many the only teams that should be in football championships are Oho State, Michigan, Notre Dame, Alabama, Georgia, LSU, Auburn, Oklahoma, Florida State and Florida. I think that covers the last 30 National Champions or so - lol! Its lot more interesting to the other 40 plus states if some other teams are in it!

 

[Grumpyolddawg]

So is it all about the playoff games or is it about the season.? What i propose is 12 power 5 games and conference games that mean something to the teams in the conferences. Grump - it may not last much longer - but I drive 13-14 hours to watch Kentucky play home games. 3 of those games are against teams I really don;t care to see. The stadium is about 85 - 90% full for those games - not bad. But we have standing room crowds for the conference games - other than Vandy sometimes. Those 3 games tickets are $35 or so. The conference games are $80 or so. I was looking at going to the Texas game this year. Cheapest seats are $136 at UK on line. Its easy to see why the big boys like it the way it is.

I also ask myself this question - are UK's chances any better at 12 teams as it is now? Answer - I doubt it. So, if you play the same number of games - why be against it. 5 conference/power 5 home games and half of the gate of the 2 playoff games means more money to our program - mabye not to Texas and Georgia - but it is to Kentucky!

As to recovery. Teams still play once a week and no extra games. The good teams will usually win - I understand that - but who is really afraid of this schedule - Kentucky - or Georgia? I guarantee you it is not the fans of Kentucky!

Finally as to my basketball reference. Remember the movie "Hoosier's" well it was pretty realistic. I know of a couple of Kentucky teams that made it to the finals and won! Both from the small region my high school was in! It was the best thing that happened to Kentucky HS basketball. Schools with a few 100 kids playing and beating schools with 2,000 plus kids!

Go Big Blue!

P.S. If it was up to many the only teams that should be in football championships are Oho State, Michigan, Notre Dame, Alabama, Georgia, LSU, Auburn, Oklahoma, Florida State and Florida. I think that covers the last 30 National Champions or so - lol! Its lot more interesting to the other 40 plus states if some other teams are in it!

We just see things differently. I feel each game is part of making the playoff, why play them and risk injury? I just feel participation trophies need to end after t-ball.

BB has been used as a reference, there are 351 D1 men's basketball teams, 64 get in the Big Show. Roughly one sixth of the teams, why not invite all of them?

 

[RDF922]

We just see things differently. I feel each game is part of making the playoff, why play them and risk injury? I just feel participation trophies need to end after t-ball.

BB has been used as a reference, there are 351 D1 men's basketball teams, 64 get in the Big Show. Roughly one sixth of the teams, why not invite all of them?

64 for football WAY too many.

But to answer your question Grumpy, all basketball teams are invited. They have a chance to win their conference tourney which gets them in the Big Dance.

 

[truebluewildcat]

Grumpy, I think the big difference between what you think and I think is this. I grew up in Kentucky. Our high school football was something we had before basketball season here. Why do I bring that up? Kentucky High School basketball is huge - most Kentuckians think it is the best in all of the country! Indiana will argue that - but in reality those two states are pretty close. Do you know how Kentucky has done the high school tournament for ever? Every team gets a chance to win its district, region and then advance to the state. Many schools in 100 years have never made the state tournament! But everyone talks about that goal. In Kentucky, in the first round even the district runner up advances to the regional for a second chance - and many of them have ended up winning the region and going to the state tournament.

The gyms are packed. The state tournament is 16 regional winners teams from all over the state - and schools of all sizes compete against each other - not just the huge schools! A few have made the state tournament with losing records! How does that relate to college football you say? Well, I have been a part of those little tiny schools trying to make it. One of our smaller local schools made it to the state and won it my senior year of high school. Not my school - but the star player on that team played at my high school for 3 years - he was recruited away and played on that championship team (kind of like NIL and transferring now?). Just having the chance is a big deal!

You don;t realize that going to games other than Georgia and big time SEC schools - the stadiums are not full. Look at attendance for all of the power 5 schools. They are not selling out and the enthusiam really goes down once they lose a few games. But this will help fill the stadiums and keep the interest up! It will creat better games. All of the games aren;t going to be televised all over the country - but being televised in the local markets is another big deal. The interest will be even greater! And all games will be against power 5 programs - all 12. You mentioned a 10 game regular season - yes that is correct. But the two playoff games, the way I have them - will provide 2 more power 5 games for every school No small patsies! Yes some teams will get crushed at the end of the season - but again - you don;t realize how big it would be for some teams to have the opportunity to play a Georgia or Alabama ANY time. Coaches can tell their local kids when they recruit them they will have the opportunity to play against those teams and schools.

Kentucky doesn;t produce that many great football players - I. know that. But it is frustrating when you recruit a local kid, who has great talent, for 4 years and then you see the Alabama private jet fly in, Nick Saban go in and that kid signs with Alabama. His reason - he wants to have the chance to play for a National Championship. He basically knows that he has little if any chance at doing that at UK. With NIL we are seeing kids go places they wouldn;t have gone. We see transfers get the opportunity to start at a top 20 school rather than sit the bench at Georgia or Alabama. The game is changing - some good and some not so good for sure. But letting everyone have an opportunity has worked well for Kentucky and Indiana high school basketball. I think it would work for college football. I know the cream will come to the top in the bucket - but if you aren't in the bucket - it can not happen period! Thats why we have so many different perspectives - because we do see things differently!

Go Big Blue!

I think the state championship models are interesting to look at and could provide the way forward.

Kentucky separated football and basketball. There are 6 different play offs for football. Class A up to 6A. For a reason.

Hazard doesn't need to be in the same division/tier as Male and the other 6As. Class A is just as fun, passionate, competitive, and meaningful to those fans, programs, etc. The post season is just as important, entertaining, etc.

It's going to get that way in basketball as well. The Sweet 16 is starting to be the same programs from the upper classes. Kentucky
Country day (1A in football) has no shot really at coming out of the same region as Trinity, Eastern, Male, St X in basketball. I think last year's finale 4 was a 5a and 6As.

The irony of all this is that there is already a model for what everyone keeps talking about how to change.

NCAA literally has a "subdivision" model with the D1-aa. NDSU has a rich football culture, is passionate. That play off means something, is competitive, and is televised.

All the bodies (NCAA/bcs/p5s) whoever is drawing things up and deciding how to proceed, need to do is SUBDIVIDE again have a play off for that, then maybe even SUBDIVIDE again, if necessary, based on level of competition/money/resources/tv deals/ratings, etc...All the things that separate programs and divisions.

Euro soccer kind of does the same thing. Tier system, and each has their championships. The lower are just as competitive, passionate, rich in culture, have mass/global appeal...but they don't need to, nor can they compete with the Chelsea, Man U types...

 

[Grumpyolddawg]

64 for football WAY too many.

But to answer your question Grumpy, all basketball teams are invited. They have a chance to win their conference tourney which gets them in the Big Dance.

Isn't it the same for football?

 

[Grumpyolddawg]

I think the state championship models are interesting to look at and could provide the way forward.

Kentucky separated football and basketball. There are 6 different play offs for football. Class A up to 6A. For a reason.

Hazard doesn't need to be in the same division/tier as Male and the other 6As. Class A is just as fun, passionate, competitive, and meaningful to those fans, programs, etc. The post season is just as important, entertaining, etc.

It's going to get that way in basketball as well. The Sweet 16 is starting to be the same programs from the upper classes. Kentucky
Country day (1A in football) has no shot really at coming out of the same region as Trinity, Eastern, Male, St X in basketball. I think last year's finale 4 was a 5a and 6As.

The irony of all this is that there is already a model for what everyone keeps talking about how to change.

NCAA literally has a "subdivision" model with the D1-aa. NDSU has a rich football culture, is passionate. That play off means something, is competitive, and is televised.

All the bodies (NCAA/bcs/p5s) whoever is drawing things up and deciding how to proceed, need to do is SUBDIVIDE again have a play off for that, then maybe even SUBDIVIDE again, if necessary, based on level of competition/money/resources/tv deals/ratings, etc...All the things that separate programs and divisions.

Euro soccer kind of does the same thing. Tier system, and each has their championships. The lower are just as competitive, passionate, rich in culture, have mass/global appeal...but they don't need to, nor can they compete with the Chelsea, Man U types...

The GHSA does the same thing, a huge conflict in class A because the private schools recruit so much, they were winning all the state championships in blowouts most of the time and were the state tournaments in the country club sports. Then the private schools complained, so their kids are now counted as 1 and 1/2 i think. Now travel is an issue, state legislature got involved and now things are a mess. Dropped a class for super sized schools because the Ga legislature pass a bill that for more than an hour travel the GHSA had to pay for transportation. So now we have schools in the same region with 1400 competing with schools with 4500+ .

I don't have a solution, just an opinion like everyone else. Maybe we need a division between subdivide and P4 for schools not interested in the bidding wars. That is the division i would want to play in.

 

[gamalielkid]

The GHSA does the same thing, a huge conflict in class A because the private schools recruit so much, they were winning all the state championships in blowouts most of the time and were the state tournaments in the country club sports. Then the private schools complained, so their kids are now counted as 1 and 1/2 i think. Now travel is an issue, state legislature got involved and now things are a mess. Dropped a class for super sized schools because the Ga legislature pass a bill that for more than an hour travel the GHSA had to pay for transportation. So now we have schools in the same region with 1400 competing with schools with 4500+ .

I don't have a solution, just an opinion like everyone else. Maybe we need a division between subdivide and P4 for schools not interested in the bidding wars. That is the division i would want to play in.

It is complicated Grumpy. But I still don't understand your trophy reference? I guess you are saying allowing them to play in the playoff is a trophy for them? Answer me this. - what is the difference with Georgia playing Vanderbilt in week 3 or week 11? By only having power 5 teams in the 64 team field I am discussing - that is exactly who you would be playing. Look at most everyone's schedule - around the end of the season many teams are playing one of the weaker teams on their schedule.

Change is hard for everyone to accept. As we get older we don;t like change - we like the way it is. Doesn't matter if most people think change is good- we want it our way! So, I understand people not wanting to change - I agree. But I have hated how college football has named its champion all my life. 8 people say this team is the best, another 7 say a different team is the best. Then 6 more people say a third team is the best. So, the ones who the most people like play for the championship! No wonder UCF claimed a National Championship a few years ago. Because they were not Clemson or Georgia or USC they weren't considered good enough to make the limited playoff. So whats wrong with letting everyone have an opportunity to prove they are the best.

Those guys talking about basketball and the little schools having a disadvantage - its true. I was in HIgh School when Glasgow won the Kentucky High School Basketball Championship. I remember Edmonson County winning the state championship. Those were two very small town rural schools! It's rare for sure - but both of them won! Kentucky fans dream of a chance to get what Alabama and now Georgia almost take for granted - the opportunity to try!

Its not the same anymore and never will be again. College is now truly pro ball for the power 5 teams. NIL, transfer as often as you want. College basketball was ruined a few years ago - one and done - look at us (Kentucky) we have half the NBA all star team participants - do you think Kentucky fans give a crap about John Calipari bragging about all those NBA stars? I can tell you - if you read our boards you will find out very quickly how they fill. We want National Championships - we don't care about the NBA! We want to play to win - not to see how high our players get drafted. Whats wrong with a half the teams competing for the title- not a dang thing - its just change and people think the games will be worse. Again, I'm telling you two or three of every teams games are blowouts or against non competetive teams every year - and its every team! As a whole the games will be better - as it will be against more equal opponents. They still only play once a week - no extra games at all either. It's just a CHANGE. After two or three seasons everyone will be saying - why haven;t we done it like this all along!

I love this board and I appreciate your comments on football and your experience Grumpy. We are a lot more a like than different for sure. I think we both would like to see many things that we had in the past. Not all changes are good - I have pointed out some in this last posting - but change can be good or at least different - lol!

Go Big Blue!

 

[Girthang]

Someone asked who you'd rather see UK play...

I'm a UK Football fan, a Wildcat fan, UK fan and a fan of the game formerly known as football and the field as "the grid iron" (for a reason now mostly lost).

I don't care who UK plays. I want to see them play football. I'm just as interested in watching them play a scrimmage as I am any opponent.

 

[Grumpyolddawg]

It is complicated Grumpy. But I still don't understand your trophy reference? I guess you are saying allowing them to play in the playoff is a trophy for them? Answer me this. - what is the difference with Georgia playing Vanderbilt in week 3 or week 11? By only having power 5 teams in the 64 team field I am discussing - that is exactly who you would be playing. Look at most everyone's schedule - around the end of the season many teams are playing one of the weaker teams on their schedule.

Change is hard for everyone to accept. As we get older we don;t like change - we like the way it is. Doesn't matter if most people think change is good- we want it our way! So, I understand people not wanting to change - I agree. But I have hated how college football has named its champion all my life. 8 people say this team is the best, another 7 say a different team is the best. Then 6 more people say a third team is the best. So, the ones who the most people like play for the championship! No wonder UCF claimed a National Championship a few years ago. Because they were not Clemson or Georgia or USC they weren't considered good enough to make the limited playoff. So whats wrong with letting everyone have an opportunity to prove they are the best.

Those guys talking about basketball and the little schools having a disadvantage - its true. I was in HIgh School when Glasgow won the Kentucky High School Basketball Championship. I remember Edmonson County winning the state championship. Those were two very small town rural schools! It's rare for sure - but both of them won! Kentucky fans dream of a chance to get what Alabama and now Georgia almost take for granted - the opportunity to try!

Its not the same anymore and never will be again. College is now truly pro ball for the power 5 teams. NIL, transfer as often as you want. College basketball was ruined a few years ago - one and done - look at us (Kentucky) we have half the NBA all star team participants - do you think Kentucky fans give a crap about John Calipari bragging about all those NBA stars? I can tell you - if you read our boards you will find out very quickly how they fill. We want National Championships - we don't care about the NBA! We want to play to win - not to see how high our players get drafted. Whats wrong with a half the teams competing for the title- not a dang thing - its just change and people think the games will be worse. Again, I'm telling you two or three of every teams games are blowouts or against non competetive teams every year - and its every team! As a whole the games will be better - as it will be against more equal opponents. They still only play once a week - no extra games at all either. It's just a CHANGE. After two or three seasons everyone will be saying - why haven;t we done it like this all along!

I love this board and I appreciate your comments on football and your experience Grumpy. We are a lot more a like than different for sure. I think we both would like to see many things that we had in the past. Not all changes are good - I have pointed out some in this last posting - but change can be good or at least different - lol!

Go Big Blue!

I can respect everyone's opinion even those aren't the same as mine, and you certainly do as well. In Georgia, a small school is certainly capable of winning an all classification state championship. A private school of 100 kids could and has trotted multiple 6'8"+ exchange students out. But not often, entire AAU teams transfer to a school who has a coach that is pals with AAU coach.

My everyone gets a trophy is when no one keeps score, supposedly, no one wins or loses and everyone gets a trophy.

Not following when we would play Vandy would make a difference. But every team is competing for a national championship today. Every game counts, win your games, you are in, lose 3 and you likely are not and no one will think you have a team capable of winning a NC.The chane you are asking for has taken place. We have gone from 2 to 12 teams, of course 13 isn't going to be happy, but that 69 in BB isn't going to be happy either. A 64 in football will have 5-6 losses and a team struggling to get to 50% hasn't done enough to get in a playoff.

But I think this is a useless debate, I think Big10 and SEC are about to split from NCAA and form a new organization. Will grab some teams from big12, ACC, ND and a couple from the group. Then follow a NFL model 2 big conferences dividen into 3 divisions. Each division champion, 6, and 6-10 wildcards.

 

[hmt5000]

It's all money. The SEC might stop at 16 because of money but if the big and big end up drawing more eyeballs they will expand quicker than John Wall.

Also.... it's all money.... Why split the pie 64 ways when 40 teams will get the same amount of eyeballs? If they can reduce it to 32 they would.... LOL. I think we end up in the 40's for teams in the P4. Not even sure acc stays together for that either.... if fsu figures out a way to leave then Clemson and NC st are gone too... then it all collapses.


There is only so much money floating around and it's already obvious it's too diluted. 16 players got more money than nfl dudes in the superbowl but most of the players on the playoff teams were getting a couple grand.

 

[truebluewildcat]

It is complicated Grumpy. But I still don't understand your trophy reference? I guess you are saying allowing them to play in the playoff is a trophy for them? Answer me this. - what is the difference with Georgia playing Vanderbilt in week 3 or week 11? By only having power 5 teams in the 64 team field I am discussing - that is exactly who you would be playing. Look at most everyone's schedule - around the end of the season many teams are playing one of the weaker teams on their schedule.

Change is hard for everyone to accept. As we get older we don;t like change - we like the way it is. Doesn't matter if most people think change is good- we want it our way! So, I understand people not wanting to change - I agree. But I have hated how college football has named its champion all my life. 8 people say this team is the best, another 7 say a different team is the best. Then 6 more people say a third team is the best. So, the ones who the most people like play for the championship! No wonder UCF claimed a National Championship a few years ago. Because they were not Clemson or Georgia or USC they weren't considered good enough to make the limited playoff. So whats wrong with letting everyone have an opportunity to prove they are the best.

Those guys talking about basketball and the little schools having a disadvantage - its true. I was in HIgh School when Glasgow won the Kentucky High School Basketball Championship. I remember Edmonson County winning the state championship. Those were two very small town rural schools! It's rare for sure - but both of them won! Kentucky fans dream of a chance to get what Alabama and now Georgia almost take for granted - the opportunity to try!

Its not the same anymore and never will be again. College is now truly pro ball for the power 5 teams. NIL, transfer as often as you want. College basketball was ruined a few years ago - one and done - look at us (Kentucky) we have half the NBA all star team participants - do you think Kentucky fans give a crap about John Calipari bragging about all those NBA stars? I can tell you - if you read our boards you will find out very quickly how they fill. We want National Championships - we don't care about the NBA! We want to play to win - not to see how high our players get drafted. Whats wrong with a half the teams competing for the title- not a dang thing - its just change and people think the games will be worse. Again, I'm telling you two or three of every teams games are blowouts or against non competetive teams every year - and its every team! As a whole the games will be better - as it will be against more equal opponents. They still only play once a week - no extra games at all either. It's just a CHANGE. After two or three seasons everyone will be saying - why haven;t we done it like this all along!

I love this board and I appreciate your comments on football and your experience Grumpy. We are a lot more a like than different for sure. I think we both would like to see many things that we had in the past. Not all changes are good - I have pointed out some in this last posting - but change can be good or at least different - lol!

Go Big Blue!

I think in a group of 30ish you know who the best is and there is no post season debate.

Again, see the pro model. There are 32 teams, you pretty much know who the best is. Also, more importantly and specific to this convo, about half the league gets into the post season. The other half doesn't bitch because they sucked and know it. Also, they all played an NFL schedule. Even though everyone doesn't play everyone, there is at least commonality in the fact that everyone played 14 professional teams, and 3 teams twice.

NFL, NBA, MLB...never have issues with so and so didn't get in.

The problem with CFB and probably college sports in general is the fact that there's too many. There is no commonality in level of opponent. Which is why there is always debate and disappointment come post season time.

The issue isn't that not enough programs are getting a crack at the post season, the issue is there aren't enough post seasons.

Again, see high school model. Kentucky has 6 football post seasons.

We don't need a 64-team football playoff. We need teams 33-64 to have their own division and play off.

For all the mythos around March Madness, how fair is it that Cinderella St Tech gets to play other Cinderella St Techs all season long, waltz in, get hot from 3 and end up in the S16 or further over Kansas, UK, etc...

Or maybe a bigger program with a tougher reg and conference season advances because they draw YMCA Tuesday Night League, Sister Mary Katherine's Online, and Tufts University.

Meanwhile somebody else got Duke, Kansas, North Carolina...

Honestly, I'm tired of seeing that shit.

 

[Grumpyolddawg]

I think in a group of 30ish you know who the best is and there is no post season debate.

Again, see the pro model. There are 32 teams, you pretty much know who the best is. Also, more importantly and specific to this convo, about half the league gets into the post season. The other half doesn't bitch because they sucked and know it. Also, they all played an NFL schedule. Even though everyone doesn't play everyone, there is at least commonality in the fact that everyone played 14 professional teams, and 3 teams twice.

NFL, NBA, MLB...never have issues with so and so didn't get in.

The problem with CFB and probably college sports in general is the fact that there's too many. There is no commonality in level of opponent. Which is why there is always debate and disappointment come post season time.

The issue isn't that not enough programs are getting a crack at the post season, the issue is there aren't enough post seasons.

Again, see high school model. Kentucky has 6 football post seasons.

We don't need a 64-team football playoff. We need teams 33-64 to have their own division and play off.

For all the mythos around March Madness, how fair is it that Cinderella St Tech gets to play other Cinderella St Techs all season long, waltz in, get hot from 3 and end up in the S16 or further over Kansas, UK, etc...

Or maybe a bigger program with a tougher reg and conference season advances because they draw YMCA Tuesday Night League, Sister Mary Katherine's Online, and Tufts University.

Meanwhile somebody else got Duke, Kansas, North Carolina...

Honestly, I'm tired of seeing that shit.

I think most states have basically the same model for their state championships. In Ga, we had 8 classes of GHSA sports including a private school class. State is divided into 8 regions, top 4 make playoffs, so 32 per class roughly 45% of the teams. First rounds have awful blowouts when 3-4 or less win teams get in.

I don't have any answers or know the future, but everyone, including our favorite teams, will squeeze every penny it can out of the playoff.