Official 2011-2012 NCAA Football Thread

[GoSox05]

@AlabamaLoyal AlabamaLoyal

 

BREAKING NEWS: LSU is stuck in #NOLA, someone painted a 50 yd line in front of their bus!

[zenryan]

@AlabamaLoyal AlabamaLoyal

 

BREAKING NEWS: LSU is stuck in #NOLA, someone painted a 50 yd line in front of their bus!

 

 

 

lol

[clyons]

I know plenty of Domers who won't be happy with this:

 

http://espn.go.com/chicago/ncf/story/_/id/...tract-extension

 

He's contractually their coach until 2016. That's one year beyond the expiration of the last guy's extended contract.

[danman31]

People already don't like Kelly? Surely he's done OK.

[Kyyle23]

People already don't like Kelly? Surely he's done OK.

 

His coaching has been on par with his predecessors, but things not W-L related have put him in a bad spot with ND fans. The kids death at practice, the girls suicide after she was supposedly raped by a player(nothing proved), his sideline demeanor and foul language being caught on camera constantly. Kelly has had a rough go his first few seasons.

 

I also think the fanbase does not like his little quarterback rotation game either.

[IlliniKrush]

He did have a decent game, although he missed a few throws that could have clinched it early. Just amazes me these teams can recruit NFL-quality D-lines, yet they miss so badly on QBs and kickers.

College kickers suck. You can't really hit or miss anything.

[danman31]

His coaching has been on par with his predecessors, but things not W-L related have put him in a bad spot with ND fans. The kids death at practice, the girls suicide after she was supposedly raped by a player(nothing proved), his sideline demeanor and foul language being caught on camera constantly. Kelly has had a rough go his first few seasons.

 

I also think the fanbase does not like his little quarterback rotation game either.

Good points. ND needs to change its image as coach ruiners though.

[Rex Hudler]

Thought some of you may find this interesting, some may not. I did a comparison of Alabama and Michigan's last 5 recruiting classes which would have comprised of the players on this year's roster. I am only guessing that other teams would show similar numbers but I'll leave that up to anyone that wants to check another team.

 

This is in regard to the constant complaints of oversigning I keep reading. Please note I am not saying there are zero situations that I or most people feel would be unethical, but it may be much less than people want to think.

 

The correct comparison for this year's team should be 2007-2011.

 

Alabama signed 133 kids in that 5 yr period, an average of 26.8/year. Note that is under the limit that Michigan can take should they choose.

-- of those 133 (Quinton Dial went to JUCO initially so he was signed twice. I counted him once), 82 were on this year's current roster, well under the limit. This is an attrition rate of 38%. Keep in mind that 5 players left early for the NFL.

 

Michigan on the other hand signed 114 kids, an average of 22.8/year.

-- of those 114, only 68 were still on the roster this year. This is an attrition rate of 40%. Michigan has had one player leave early for the NFL out of those classes.

 

What those #'s tell me is that Michigan screwed up by not signing enough kids. I don't see a hell of a lot of difference here other than Michigan is way under the limit with players from those classes.

 

These numbers can easily been found on either Scout's "commitment lists" or Rivals, along with current roster.

 

 

[danman31]

Honestly, I think you read the rivals or scout boards too much if you think stuff like that is a huge problem. It's a problem because of how awful of a thing it is, but I don't think it happens all that often.

[southsider2k5]

Thought some of you may find this interesting, some may not. I did a comparison of Alabama and Michigan's last 5 recruiting classes which would have comprised of the players on this year's roster. I am only guessing that other teams would show similar numbers but I'll leave that up to anyone that wants to check another team.

 

This is in regard to the constant complaints of oversigning I keep reading. Please note I am not saying there are zero situations that I or most people feel would be unethical, but it may be much less than people want to think.

 

The correct comparison for this year's team should be 2007-2011.

 

Alabama signed 133 kids in that 5 yr period, an average of 26.8/year. Note that is under the limit that Michigan can take should they choose.

-- of those 133 (Quinton Dial went to JUCO initially so he was signed twice. I counted him once), 82 were on this year's current roster, well under the limit. This is an attrition rate of 38%. Keep in mind that 5 players left early for the NFL.

 

Michigan on the other hand signed 114 kids, an average of 22.8/year.

-- of those 114, only 68 were still on the roster this year. This is an attrition rate of 40%. Michigan has had one player leave early for the NFL out of those classes.

 

What those #'s tell me is that Michigan screwed up by not signing enough kids. I don't see a hell of a lot of difference here other than Michigan is way under the limit with players from those classes.

 

These numbers can easily been found on either Scout's "commitment lists" or Rivals, along with current roster.

Coach changes put a big dent in retention numbers.

 

[Rex Hudler]

Honestly, I think you read the rivals or scout boards too much if you think stuff like that is a huge problem. It's a problem because of how awful of a thing it is, but I don't think it happens all that often.

 

I think you may be right. lol

[Balta1701]

NCAA President endorses a 2 game, 4 team playoff.

[Soxbadger]

So lets see how this works.

 

4 spots-

 

SEC gets 1, PAC gets 1, Big gets 1....

 

Everyone else gets 1?

 

If people were complaining about lack of access to the BCS, just imagine how bad the complaining is going to be when the deal is that 3 of the 4 teams are guaranteed to be power conference champions.

 

No way does the Pac/Big/SEC sign any deal where their conference is left out because their best team finishes 5th.

[danman31]

Even with just 10 teams the Big 12 is the second best conference in the country. Texas, OU, TCU, Ok State, heck even West Virginia just won a BCS bowl.

 

I'd like to see the bowls return to the way they were before the BCS and then have a title game that picks the top two teams that won bowl games. That's probably more effective at getting the best two teams in the title than a contrived 4-team playoff.

[IlliniKrush]

Even with just 10 teams the Big 12 is the second best conference in the country. Texas, OU, TCU, Ok State, heck even West Virginia just won a BCS bowl.

 

I'd like to see the bowls return to the way they were before the BCS and then have a title game that picks the top two teams that won bowl games. That's probably more effective at getting the best two teams in the title than a contrived 4-team playoff.

That could still leave plenty of room for b****ing and moaning.

[danman31]

That could still leave plenty of room for b****ing and moaning.

Yeah, but it's better than cutting everyone off at 4. It allows for more information about the teams because bowl games are generally good matchups so everyone has an extra chance for a quality win and you can't b**** about being left off when you don't win your bowl game. Honestly, I think a 4-team playoff is a mistake and I'm very pro playoffs.

 

And wtf was with the NCAA president saying a 16-team playoff is too many games on the players' bodies? FCS champ North Dakota State played 15 games this year. Somehow their bodies are more able to handle that? They seriously say the dumbest things all to avoid a playoff.

[Soxbadger]

Danman,

 

It doesnt matter about how good the conference is, what matters is money.

 

Big10/Pac10 have the most of it and if Delaney is in favor now so you know its only because the Big10 is going to make more money. Right now the Big10 has had 2 BCS teams every single year, it isnt because the Big10 had the best teams, its because the Big10 have a ton of alumni who travel to games.

 

Also Big10/Pac10 just signed a cooperation agreement, and I just cant imagine them agreeing to any deal where they arent guaranteed a spot in the final 4.

[Heads22]

Danman,

 

It doesnt matter about how good the conference is, what matters is money.

 

Big10/Pac10 have the most of it and if Delaney is in favor now so you know its only because the Big10 is going to make more money. Right now the Big10 has had 2 BCS teams every single year, it isnt because the Big10 had the best teams, its because the Big10 have a ton of alumni who travel to games.

 

Also Big10/Pac10 just signed a cooperation agreement, and I just cant imagine them agreeing to any deal where they arent guaranteed a spot in the final 4.

 

If that's the case, then it won't get done.

[danman31]

If that's the case, then it won't get done.

Pretty much. There won't be that many automatic spots in any scenario.

[Soxbadger]

It depends.

 

If the ACC/Big12 wants the SEC/Big/Pac money they will agree.

 

There is already talk of Big East losing its automatic bid, so if Big12/ACC agree to split a bid thats 4 bids for 4 playoff spots. If they dont agree, I can see Pac/Big/SEC making a deal outside of the BCS, for a 6 team playoff (2 from each conference) with the top 2 seeds getting buys. You could use the Rose Bowl, Coliseum, Jerry World, etc for the games and those 3 conferences would make a killing in money.

 

 

[Heads22]

It depends.

 

If the ACC/Big12 wants the SEC/Big/Pac money they will agree.

 

There is already talk of Big East losing its automatic bid, so if Big12/ACC agree to split a bid thats 4 bids for 4 playoff spots. If they dont agree, I can see Pac/Big/SEC making a deal outside of the BCS, for a 6 team playoff (2 from each conference) with the top 2 seeds getting buys. You could use the Rose Bowl, Coliseum, Jerry World, etc for the games and those 3 conferences would make a killing in money.

 

You do that and it opens up an epic s***storm in college football for which no one would be prepared. There's enough power brokers between the ACC and Big 12 to discourage that.

[Soxbadger]

How would it be an epic s*** storm?

 

In the precursor to the BCS (The Bowl Alliance and The Bowl Coalition) the top Big/Pac team played in the Rose Bowl still. The only reason the BCS ever worked was that the Big/Pac were given the Rose Bowl concession and the Rose Bowl was guaranteed that it would at worst only have to take a non-AQ 1 time every 4 years.

 

I just cant see any incentive for the Big10 to agree to any playoff where they are not guaranteed a spot. Can anyone give me a good one? The Big10 has consistently made it clear it only cares about money. In 2012 the Big10 got over $40 mil from their 2 BCS games and another 10mil+ from other bowl games.

 

Thats 50mil, in order for the Big10 to agree to any playoff it would need a guaranteed payout of $50mil annually (similar with the SEC). In a 4 team playoff, that would mean that the contract at minimum would have to be $200mil per year(and thats only if its being split 4 ways). If you were to add in 2 more conferences and non-aqs, now you are talking about 4 games for $350mil plus per year.

 

It sucks for the fans, but right now money is driving this ship.

 

[Heads22]

How would it be an epic s*** storm?

 

In the precursor to the BCS (The Bowl Alliance and The Bowl Coalition) the top Big/Pac team played in the Rose Bowl still. The only reason the BCS ever worked was that the Big/Pac were given the Rose Bowl concession and the Rose Bowl was guaranteed that it would at worst only have to take a non-AQ 1 time every 4 years.

 

I just cant see any incentive for the Big10 to agree to any playoff where they are not guaranteed a spot. Can anyone give me a good one? The Big10 has consistently made it clear it only cares about money. In 2012 the Big10 got over $40 mil from their 2 BCS games and another 10mil+ from other bowl games.

 

Thats 50mil, in order for the Big10 to agree to any playoff it would need a guaranteed payout of $50mil annually (similar with the SEC). In a 4 team playoff, that would mean that the contract at minimum would have to be $200mil per year(and thats only if its being split 4 ways). If you were to add in 2 more conferences and non-aqs, now you are talking about 4 games for $350mil plus per year.

 

It sucks for the fans, but right now money is driving this ship.

 

 

And television money (especially ESPN, who has a lot of money tied up in the Big 12 and ACC) probably doesn't want to see it's product devalued by not having a guaranteed spot. ESPN is expected to make a pretty damn big bid for Tier 1 football rights for the Big 12 (for the purpose of keeping NBC out of the CFB market) and I can't see how they'd let that same conference not be guaranteed a spot.

[Soxbadger]

ESPN has money tied to all the conferences.

 

Their real fear for ESPN is watching the Big/Pac keep moving things off of ESPN to their own networks and to FOX. The Big12 almost fell apart, they basically have no negotiating power with the other power conferences. Now, if ESPN wants to bankroll the Big12 and was willing to offer Big10 a 50mil guarantee every year, regardless of whether or not a team makes the "final 4", I am sure the Big10 will listen.

 

And I said that likely ACC/Big12 would get to split a spot (both ESPN contracts), thats basically the same representation that they receive in the BCS. Every year SEC/Big have had 2 BCS spots, the ACC/Big12 generally only get 1 spot. So half a spot compared to a full spot, is 1:2 ratio, pretty much what is going on now.

[Heads22]

ESPN has money tied to all the conferences.

 

Their real fear for ESPN is watching the Big/Pac keep moving things off of ESPN to their own networks and to FOX. The Big12 almost fell apart, they basically have no negotiating power with the other power conferences. Now, if ESPN wants to bankroll the Big12 and was willing to offer Big10 a 50mil guarantee every year, regardless of whether or not a team makes the "final 4", I am sure the Big10 will listen.

 

And I said that likely ACC/Big12 would get to split a spot (both ESPN contracts), thats basically the same representation that they receive in the BCS. Every year SEC/Big have had 2 BCS spots, the ACC/Big12 generally only get 1 spot. So half a spot compared to a full spot, is 1:2 ratio, pretty much what is going on now.

 

I really don't think you're giving ESPN enough credit in how much they will drive all of this.

 

Also, Fox paid out the ass to make sure that the Big 12 survived as well. You can say whatever you want about the stability of the conference, but the television money (which is what's going to drive all of this) has shown that it will make an investment in the Big 12's survival and I just don't see them allowing a product which they invested in quite heavily to be devalued by some of their other properties.

 

EDIT: Plus, with something like that, it could very easily trigger more conference realignment at the highest levels, which, again, both ESPN and FOX have paid to not see happen.