AAC and Mountain West merget would solve the P5 dilema.

[Superhippy]

It could happen, and if after everything is said and done a 10-2 team wins a 24 team conference, then they will get into the Cotton, Fiesta, or Orange Bowl and miss out on the playoff.  It's still much better though then having an AAC team potentially go 12-0 and still be left out of the playoff.

A 10-2 AAC conference winner can just as easily go to a Cotton, Fiesta, or Orange Bowl now and a 12-0 Mega Conference team could just as easily be left out of the playoffs.

 

I think the rule right now states that the best Non-P5 team has to be placed in a New Years Day game.

 

So aren't we essentially in a Mega-Conference already with the Mountain West, Sunbelt, MAC, and C-USA,.   A 10-2 AAC team could get left out in favor of an 11-1 Mountain West team or a 12-0 MAC team.   The way the rules are rigged right now they have placed the 62 remaining teams in one big grouping anyways.  We might as well just create one official 24 team conference and call it a day.

[Bull94]

no need to combine conferences.

 

just let our 2 champs play each other

 

I think it would help. say last year #9 and #13 play.

 

the winner is sure to move up rankings.

 

it's no guarantee of a playoff spot but the winner most certainly will move up every time and it would give them a better chance.

Edited August 21, 2014 by Bull94

[Superhippy]

Looks desperate to create more relevancy, but like others have pointed out, a mega-conference may actually do the opposite. Even when it had consistent top 10 teams, the BE was thought to be second-tier in CFB because of all the lower-end. Still think the best way to get relevant is win & get invite up. This looks to be our admins' approach too, but everything is predicated on wins.

That approach terrifies me though.    We could win three conference titles in a row and have 3 10-win seasons in a row, and it's not like we would win some award placing us in the Big 12.     They could still say, "No Thanks, we want Cincy, Boise, and BYU. thanks for trying."

 

The Big East was second-tier because in an 8 team league and we just beat up on eachother.  The numbers just tell you that you will have 1 great team, 1 good team, 2 - 3 average teams, 3 - 4 bad teams.    The SEC would be the same way if it only had 8 teams.

 

This is why the SEC also plays 9 in conference games.   Each team only has 3 potential loses outside of the conference, and everyone plays a FCS and Sunbelt team anyways, so it's really only one chance.   They stack the entire deck so that even though a team like Kentucky sucks and goes 3-9, all of those 9 losses were to SEC teams and made them look stronger record wise so it's all good.

[Superhippy]

no need to combine conferences.

 

just let our 2 champs play each other

 

I think it would help. say last year #9 and #13 play.

 

the winner is sure to move up rankings.

 

it's no guarantee of a playoff spot but the winner most certainly will move up every time.

That's another great idea that could work, except I have no doubt in my mind that the P5 conferences would block it from happening.  If they could pull it off though it would accomplish the same thing though of atleast giving those conferences a shot at making the playoff.

[Triple B]

 

 

It could happen, and if after everything is said and done a 10-2 team wins a 24 team conference, then they will get into the Cotton, Fiesta, or Orange Bowl and miss out on the playoff.  It's still much better though then having an AAC team potentially go 12-0 and still be left out of the playoff.

A 10-2 AAC conference winner can just as easily go to a Cotton, Fiesta, or Orange Bowl now and a 12-0 Mega Conference team could just as easily be left out of the playoffs.

 

 

I think the rule right now states that the best Non-P5 team has to be placed in a New Years Day game.

 

So aren't we essentially in a Mega-Conference already with the Mountain West, Sunbelt, MAC, and C-USA,.   A 10-2 AAC team could get left out in favor of an 11-1 Mountain West team or a 12-0 MAC team.   The way the rules are rigged right now they have placed the 62 remaining teams in one big grouping anyways.  We might as well just create one official 24 team conference and call it a day.

 

 

And a 10-2 Mega Conference team could get left out in favor of 11-1 CUSA team or a 12-0 MAC team, especially since you have 2 rounds of conference "playoffs" that would be ripe for upsets ... there just doesn't seem like that much, if any, advantage would be gained by us over the current situation.

[Bull94]

 

no need to combine conferences.

 

just let our 2 champs play each other

 

I think it would help. say last year #9 and #13 play.

 

the winner is sure to move up rankings.

 

it's no guarantee of a playoff spot but the winner most certainly will move up every time.

That's another great idea that could work, except I have no doubt in my mind that the P5 conferences would block it from happening.  If they could pull it off though it would accomplish the same thing though of atleast giving those conferences a shot at making the playoff.

 

not sure if they could block it . new law gives more autonomy to conferences.

 

they will go to 8 playoff members soon anyway. to much money left on the table. that will allow one of the lower conference champs in if they are ranked in top 10.

[Superhippy]

 

 

 

It could happen, and if after everything is said and done a 10-2 team wins a 24 team conference, then they will get into the Cotton, Fiesta, or Orange Bowl and miss out on the playoff.  It's still much better though then having an AAC team potentially go 12-0 and still be left out of the playoff.

A 10-2 AAC conference winner can just as easily go to a Cotton, Fiesta, or Orange Bowl now and a 12-0 Mega Conference team could just as easily be left out of the playoffs.

 

 

I think the rule right now states that the best Non-P5 team has to be placed in a New Years Day game.

 

So aren't we essentially in a Mega-Conference already with the Mountain West, Sunbelt, MAC, and C-USA,.   A 10-2 AAC team could get left out in favor of an 11-1 Mountain West team or a 12-0 MAC team.   The way the rules are rigged right now they have placed the 62 remaining teams in one big grouping anyways.  We might as well just create one official 24 team conference and call it a day.

 

 

And a 10-2 Mega Conference team could get left out in favor of 11-1 CUSA team or a 12-0 MAC team, especially since you have 2 rounds of conference "playoffs" that would be ripe for upsets ... there just doesn't seem like that much, if any, advantage would be gained by us over the current situation.

 

I really don't think so though.   It would work out like Auburn with 2 losses last year getting in over 1 loss Michigan State.  The Mega-Conference team with 2 losses would also have a better SOS and no less then 2 wins that would no doubt be better than any wins those other two teams had.     A 10-2 USF for example with wins over 10-2 Cincy and 11-1 Boise State looks a whole lot better then a 12-0 Ball State team with a win over 9-3 NIU and then 11 wins over teams with 7 wins or less.  We actually already saw this once with Ball State.  Undefeated earned them about the #16 ranking and no BCS game.

[raptorcj]

 

Looks desperate to create more relevancy, but like others have pointed out, a mega-conference may actually do the opposite. Even when it had consistent top 10 teams, the BE was thought to be second-tier in CFB because of all the lower-end. Still think the best way to get relevant is win & get invite up. This looks to be our admins' approach too, but everything is predicated on wins.

That approach terrifies me though.    We could win three conference titles in a row and have 3 10-win seasons in a row, and it's not like we would win some award placing us in the Big 12.     They could still say, "No Thanks, we want Cincy, Boise, and BYU. thanks for trying."

 

The Big East was second-tier because in an 8 team league and we just beat up on eachother.  The numbers just tell you that you will have 1 great team, 1 good team, 2 - 3 average teams, 3 - 4 bad teams.    The SEC would be the same way if it only had 8 teams.

 

This is why the SEC also plays 9 in conference games.   Each team only has 3 potential loses outside of the conference, and everyone plays a FCS and Sunbelt team anyways, so it's really only one chance.   They stack the entire deck so that even though a team like Kentucky sucks and goes 3-9, all of those 9 losses were to SEC teams and made them look stronger record wise so it's all good.

 

It's true that the "promotion" strategy could backfire, but with the P5 wanting to remain "elite", it's much more a likelihood IMO than the P5 deciding to annex a super-conference with a lot more mid-tier teams than good ones. A promotion has more historical success, and if we win the title 3x in a row, our fanbase is going to blow up, which would yield more $$ for the school and put us in a better position to move up.

 

I get you on the BE beat-up sessions, but when our "great" team lost a conf game to one of the "bad" teams, it tanked their chances for a good bowl because the conference SOS didn't support it. In P5, not as much like you said. So I'd maintain a full-conference promotion would essentially just put us back in the BE situation of being chained to a bunch of schools with far less potential, and therefore snubbed for a playoff matchup. It's just my opinion.

[Apis Bull]

You can't have playoffs within your conference.

[JTrue]

Does Superhippy get paid by the word?

Edited August 22, 2014 by JTrue