Conference realignment "Rumors" "tweets" "etc"

[GaUSFBull]

38 minutes ago, Triple B said:

 

But they won't. They've been playing 9 conference games, 3 ooc games for several years now as a 10 team conference. I don't see them changing that even if they have to go to 5 team divisions .... at least I'd hope they wouldn't change it.

Then it sounds to me like you just debunked that entire assertion.  As bored as I've been at work today, I hadn't been interested enough to research how many conference games each team had been playing in the B12.  

[SANJAY]

31 minutes ago, Triple B said:

Shocked if I wasn't and trifocals ...

And not that I don't trust you or anything but is there a succinct breakdown somewhere on the Internet on what specifically is going to be voted on in Jan .... or has it even been decided on what exactly the vote's to be on.

 

The date Big 12 fans need to circle on their calendars is Jan. 15, as a vote at the NCAA Convention could provide a trigger for change. The 10 FBS conferences will vote on the Big 12's proposed legislation to waive the requirement that a conference can only stage a championship game if it has 12 or more member schools. For a few months, there was a general expectation the deregulation legislation would pass.

But the Big Ten added a wrinkle with a recent amendment to the Big 12's proposal. The amendment states that a championship game must be played between the winners of two divisions, meaning the Big 12 could only hold a title game so long as it also splits up into divisions. The rationale behind the Big Ten amendment is that it would prevent leagues from potentially manipulating the system by placing their top two teams into the title game regardless of division to increase their chances at landing a College Football Playoff bid. The thought from the Big Ten wasn't to stymie the Big 12 from having a title game with 10 teams, but rather to maintain consistency and avoid unintended consequences. (The amendment may be more targeted toward the ACC, which has floated some funky division formats.)

http://www.campusrush.com/big-12-conference-questions-future-expansion-1528668401.html

[Triple B]

50 minutes ago, SANJAY said:

 

The date Big 12 fans need to circle on their calendars is Jan. 15, as a vote at the NCAA Convention could provide a trigger for change. The 10 FBS conferences will vote on the Big 12's proposed legislation to waive the requirement that a conference can only stage a championship game if it has 12 or more member schools. For a few months, there was a general expectation the deregulation legislation would pass.

But the Big Ten added a wrinkle with a recent amendment to the Big 12's proposal. The amendment states that a championship game must be played between the winners of two divisions, meaning the Big 12 could only hold a title game so long as it also splits up into divisions. The rationale behind the Big Ten amendment is that it would prevent leagues from potentially manipulating the system by placing their top two teams into the title game regardless of division to increase their chances at landing a College Football Playoff bid. The thought from the Big Ten wasn't to stymie the Big 12 from having a title game with 10 teams, but rather to maintain consistency and avoid unintended consequences. (The amendment may be more targeted toward the ACC, which has floated some funky division formats.)

http://www.campusrush.com/big-12-conference-questions-future-expansion-1528668401.html

Saw that in the Thamel article but wasn't real clear on the outcome of the vote as it pertains to the B12 holding a ccg. Here's what I get :

• The B12 can't hold a ccg now because they only have 10 members
• If the proposal fails, they still can't hold a ccg for that reason
• If the proposal passes, they can have a ccg with the current membership but the only way is to divide into 5 team divisions with the division winners playing each other
• Nothing is being voted on that would give the B12 the option of playing a ccg that doesn't include two division winners

[Sellular1]

3 hours ago, BDYZR said:

In reference to your "#31 ranked G5 Champion" and the playoffs in an 8 team system. Obviously ANY scenario is possible, but having the highest rated G5 should never be a problem.

Well there are 17 teams ahead of the highest rated G5 team this season.  I'd imagine the teams in front would be pissed at the free pass to the "tallest midget", but I'd be fine with it.

[namuh-bull]

If it was 8 team with the p5 champs (all with a championship game win) and the highest rated G5 champ (again, with a championship game win), with 2 at large, the playoffs really start with the championship games.  That would in effect be not an 8 team playoff, but 14 teams.   

 

Go Bulls! 

[Sellular1]

12 hours ago, namuh-bull said:

If it was 8 team with the p5 champs (all with a championship game win) and the highest rated G5 champ (again, with a championship game win), with 2 at large, the playoffs really start with the championship games.  That would in effect be not an 8 team playoff, but 14 teams.   

 

Go Bulls! 

I count13 really, the G5 could come from another conference so it's CCG isn't a playoff spot.  Ie Houston loses against Temple and Marshall is then the highest rated G5 champ.  

[Bullschmutz]

If the P5 refuses to play the G5, and rankings are based on strength of schedule, I have no problems with a G5 champion jumping a P5 non-champion. 

This is really a collusion/anti-trust issue, however college football resides in a legal twilight zone.

[Bull Matrix]

8 hours ago, Bullschmutz said:

If the P5 refuses to play the G5, and rankings are based on strength of schedule, I have no problems with a G5 champion jumping a P5 non-champion. 

This is really a collusion/anti-trust issue, however college football resides in a legal twilight zone.

Hope G5 unites together and keeps P5 out of a true playoff someday 

[MMW]

On 12/30/2015 at 7:21 PM, Sellular1 said:

Well there are 17 teams ahead of the highest rated G5 team this season.  I'd imagine the teams in front would be pissed at the free pass to the "tallest midget", but I'd be fine with it.

The P5 can complain all they want. Win your division or STFU.

 

[Sellular1]

1 hour ago, mark_my_words said:

The P5 can complain all they want. Win your division or STFU.

 

They would complain in the "fantasy" scenario created in this thread where a crappy G5 team gets an auto-bid to the playoffs.  P5 conferences get 2 votes compared to 1 for G5.  Amendment fails.  Sux for us.