Welcome to the HornSports Forum

By registering with us, you'll be able to discuss, share and private message with other members of our Texas Longhorns message board community.

SignUp Now!

Non-SEC Football

I visited with a customer today who is a Baylor grad and season ticket holder for many years. He told me today that he wasn't going to do season tickets for the coming season or even after that.

He complained that tthe games he was driving to see were "meh" games against teams in the conference. He complained that there was no longer Texas and OU to play each year.

He also said that the AD who was going to fire Aranda was himself fired for having several affairs with Waco ISD teachers. So Aranda didn't get fired and they're stuck with him.

Interesting times . . .
 
I thought this video was very interesting, mostly I think his proposals make sense.

Move the portal window out. He gives a good explanation of why this would be beneficial to the players, the coaches and the post season.

One transfer per student, unless a change in coach, or graduation. If they transfer a 2nd time they sit a year, they can get that year of eligibility back only if they graduate.

Another proposal he makes, that sounds interesting, but I suspect may be legally problematic is to make the players invest most of the big money, and only have access to when they graduate or turn 25 , whichever is later.

 
I thought this video was very interesting, mostly I think his proposals make sense.

Move the portal window out. He gives a good explanation of why this would be beneficial to the players, the coaches and the post season.

One transfer per student, unless a change in coach, or graduation. If they transfer a 2nd time they sit a year, they can get that year of eligibility back only if they graduate.

Another proposal he makes, that sounds interesting, but I suspect may be legally problematic is to make the players invest most of the big money, and only have access to when they graduate or turn 25 , whichever is later.



Makes total sense to me. I hope these ideas are moved forward.
 
CDC wants playoffs expanded. Implies that's a requirement for marquee matchups after OSU and Michigan.

He isn't specific on how big the expansion should be, or what the selection criteria should be.

He proposes that all teams play in week 0, and no more conference championship games, instead ccg week would be the start of the playoffs.

I'm personally good with eliminating the conference championship games. With the big conferences who makes it to the conference championship game can be a bit convoluted. I also like the proposals to make the ccg week have some additional play in games, but eliminating all of it to start the playoffs certainly helps the scheduling without the top teams playing extra games.

 
CDC wants playoffs expanded. Implies that's a requirement for marquee matchups after OSU and Michigan.

He isn't specific on how big the expansion should be, or what the selection criteria should be.

He proposes that all teams play in week 0, and no more conference championship games, instead ccg week would be the start of the playoffs.

I'm personally good with eliminating the conference championship games. With the big conferences who makes it to the conference championship game can be a bit convoluted. I also like the proposals to make the ccg week have some additional play in games, but eliminating all of it to start the playoffs certainly helps the scheduling without the top teams playing extra games.


I would like to see them stop at 16. The greed is getting out of hand..

I want to know who the conference champion is. Either find a way for everybody in the conference to play everybody, or have a title game. Conferences need to mean something.
 
I would like to see them stop at 16. The greed is getting out of hand..

I want to know who the conference champion is. Either find a way for everybody in the conference to play everybody, or have a title game. Conferences need to mean something.

I also would like to see a 16 game playoffs, so not more then 16.

The conference defines 9 of the 12 regular season games. With the 3-6-6 scheduling model you play everybody in the conference at least every other year. That's obviously not nothing.

As far as a conference champion, I appreciate your take, but it's not really settled on the field when you don't have 2 teams with records better then everybody else, instead you get some mostly arbitrary tie breaker, that potentially excludes the team that is the best team entering the playoffs.

The team that separates in the playoffs can reasonably be considered the champion. I guess the conference champion will be more like the national championship, pre BCS. So we use to have smaller conferences with a true champion, but the national championship was based on a poll. Without a CCG it's reversed. Obviously not ideal, but IMHO a reasonable solution.
 
Last edited:
I also would like to see a 16 game playoffs, so not more then 16.

The conference defines 9 of the 12 regular season games. With the 3-6-6 scheduling model you play everybody in the conference at least every other year. That's obviously not nothing.

As far as a conference champion, I appreciate your take, but it's not really settled on the field when you don't have 2 teams with records better then everybody else, instead you get some mostly arbitrary tie breaker, that potentially excludes the team that is the best team entering the playoffs.

The team that separates in the playoffs can reasonably be considered the champion. I guess the conference champion will be more like the national championship, pre BCS. So we use to have smaller conferences with a true champion, but the national championship was based on a poll. Without a CCG it's reversed. Obviously not ideal, but IMHO a reasonable solution.

Then why have a conference at all? Let every team be independent and create their own schedule, as Notre Dame does. Shouldn't matter since conferences really don't matter.
 
Then why have a conference at all? Let every team be independent and create their own schedule, as Notre Dame does. Shouldn't matter since conferences really don't matter.

If we went independent would our schedule be as compelling? Would the school be as attractive to recruits? Would the TV money be at least as good? would our access to the playoffs be at least as good?

If the answer to those questions were all yes, then IMHO the SEC wouldn't have any real advantages.
 
If we went independent would our schedule be as compelling? Would the school be as attractive to recruits? Would the TV money be at least as good? would our access to the playoffs be at least as good?

If the answer to those questions were all yes, then IMHO the SEC wouldn't have any real advantages.

Chit, put Hawaii on the schedule. The recruits would be all over that. lol

For Texas, I'm sure the TV money would rock. We have a known, humongous following and we provide great ratings. Maybe not the case for other schools.

If were to schedule a couple or three games against top tier programs and litter the rest of the schedule with Ball States and of course Hawaii. lol You'd be in the thick of the playoffs when the time comes.
 
If we went independent would our schedule be as compelling? Would the school be as attractive to recruits? Would the TV money be at least as good? would our access to the playoffs be at least as good?

If the answer to those questions were all yes, then IMHO the SEC wouldn't have any real advantages.
Dude,

You didn't make any sense on your statements in the portal tread, and now even less. Our profit would be awesome with no conference sharing unbelievable. You are incredibly dumb or just stupid. Every answer would be yes, and their is no deal advantage of a fake conferecne like the SEC. Only 5 teams would hate to play us. Gaggy, misery, Colorado. Everyone else would have no problem.
 
Last edited:
Back
Top Bottom