menu
Logo
Ohio Football Topic
Topic: MWC and CUSA Merger
Page: 3 of 3
WeAreMarshall
General User
WAM
Member Since: 8/21/2010
Post Count: 62
person
mail
WeAreMarshall
mail
Posted: 10/22/2011 10:13 AM
Flat Tire wrote:expand_more
If this "Super Conference" info is true, there is no reason we could not be a part of it.  If it occurs and we miss it, what a shame!


This proposed desperation super conference is our only chance at a D1 football lifeboat as the Titanic sinks.


I disagree. The point is assuring a BCS bid....for 1 of 32 teams. You're just splitting up the conference's pie into more pieces. The pie has to get bigger (and maybe it will, I don't know). The way to do that, theoretically, is a TV deal/network. But what do you give up with a 32-team conference? Are you playing more conference games to assure the TV deal/network? And if you are, do you give up your money games or your cupcakes? The easy answer is cupcakes, but that helps assure bowl eligibility and keeps the fanbase happy and donations rolling in. But if you give up money games, are you really any better off with just one BCS bid and a TV deal split up between 32 teams? I don't know. Still a lot of questions to be answered. It's counter-intuitive, but I really don't mind being on the outside of this one looking in. I don't think it will last, and OHIO will always be relevant to me.


On the surface, it appears that you might have four separate football conferences under one alliance and this separates the BE basketball schools from the quotation? It would give the "alliance" a chance to negotiate a TV contract covering 4 or 5 time zones. TV money might be driving force for this alliance?


That's exactly right. The Big East then has the option to go out and replace what it lost on the basketball side with their loss of Syracuse, Pitt and what is presumably WVU in the near future. In other words they (the basketball schools) can go out and invite whomever they want that is "basketball only" without disturbing the interest of the football playing side. More than likely that means adding catholic schools from the A-10 to fill the void . That keeps both sides happy.
Last Edited: 10/22/2011 10:14:49 AM by WeAreMarshall
First Street Forever
General User
Member Since: 12/19/2010
Location: Chicago, IL
Post Count: 247
mail
First Street Forever
mail
Posted: 10/22/2011 10:51 AM
C Money wrote:expand_more
If this "Super Conference" info is true, there is no reason we could not be a part of it.  If it occurs and we miss it, what a shame!


This proposed desperation super conference is our only chance at a D1 football lifeboat as the Titanic sinks.


... but that helps assure bowl eligibility and keeps the fanbase happy and donations rolling in...


You know why there's the scramble? It ain't about bowl games. It's about the future Playoff System. There will be a playoff system and it ain't going to involve all current 100+ teams of FBS or whatever the current newspeak term is for D1 football. It makes sense for the borderline BCS teams to form some sort of federation to assure them a spot at the table. 

Here's the gist:
16 team playoff
X number of auto bids for conference champs
Y number of bids

The Powers That Be do not want to waste an auto bid on the MAC, SunBelt and other conferences they deem unworthy of even receiving an at-home version of their game as a parting gift. Their logic of thinking - does the champion of the MAC, the SunBelt, and other mid-major conference(s) deserve a playoff spot over the second place team of the SEC, Big10 and or the PAC10? Or even the monies involved? Their answer is NO!!!!!!

But this super conference is actually a brilliant scheme that benefits many. This allows the BCS to eliminate the headache of a significant number of marginal schools bitching to their Senators, representatives, lawyers, village elders or trusted clergymen about being excluded from the playoff system. The BCS will fork over one auto bid to not deal with this boondoggle.

This super conference in return, is going to know its role, be happy with its one auto bid, and keep its mouth shut. Those schools left out of the super conference will rot on the vine...

Wait, no they won't.

There still will be the excitement of college football, even playoff football. You'll have the drama and pageantry of FCS football. I've learned that the majority of the Ohio U. fan base wants to excel, but not necessarily on the national stage. So this will be a blessing in disguise for a whole lot of you. Plus, you won't have to worry about competing with O$U!!! Do the Toledo Mud Hens compete with the Reds or Indians? Nope, two different entities. You can even root for them and your favorite Ohio MLB team. It's a win for our fan base - like having two hands and three snakes at Sunday service!!! 


Last Edited: 10/22/2011 3:06:33 PM by First Street Forever
WeAreMarshall
General User
WAM
Member Since: 8/21/2010
Post Count: 62
person
mail
WeAreMarshall
mail
Posted: 10/22/2011 11:20 AM
First Street Forever wrote:expand_more
If this "Super Conference" info is true, there is no reason we could not be a part of it.  If it occurs and we miss it, what a shame!


This proposed desperation super conference is our only chance at a D1 football lifeboat as the Titanic sinks.


... but that helps assure bowl eligibility and keeps the fanbase happy and donations rolling in...


You know why there's the scramble? It ain't about bowl games. It's about the future Playoff System. There will be a playoff system and it ain't going to involve all current 100+ teams of FBS or whatever the current newspeak term is for D1 football. It makes sense for the borderline BCS teams to form some sort of federation to assure them a spot at the table. 

Here's the gist:
16 team playoff
X number of auto bids for conference champs
Y number of bids

The Powers That Be do not want to waste an auto bid on the MAC, SunBelt and other conferences they deem unworthy of even receiving an at-home version of their game as a parting gift. Their logic of thinking - does the champion of the MAC, the SunBelt, and other mid-major conference(s) deserve a playoff spot over the second place team of the SEC, Big10 and or the PAC10? Or even the monies involved? Their answer is NO!!!!!!

But this super conference is actually a brilliant scheme that benefits many. This allows the BCS to eliminate the headache of a significant number of marginal schools bitching to their Senators, representatives, lawyers, village elders or trusted clergymen about being excluded from the playoff system. The BCS will fork over one auto bid to not deal with this boondoggle.

This super conference in return, is going to know its role, be happy with its one auto bid, and keep its mouth shut. Those schools left out of the super conference will rot on the vine...

Wait, no they won't.

There still will be the excitement of college football, even playoff football. You'll have the drama and pageantry of FCS football. I've learned that the majority of the Ohio U. fan base wants to excel, but not necessarily on the national stage. So this will be a blessing in disguise for a whole lot of you. Plus, you won't have to worry about competing with O$U!!! Do the Toledo Mud Hens compete with the Reds or Indians? Nope, too different entities. You can even root for them and your favorite Ohio MLB team. It's a win for our fan base - like having two hands and three snakes at Sunday service!!! 


I believe you are right about the "Playoff". It's all starting to make sense now. Look at this article:


www.boston.com/sports/colleges/extras/colleges_blog/


A formal 16-team college football playoff worth at least $650 million has been proposed by Mountain West commissioner Craig Thompson.

CBSSports.com obtained information from the document that was distributed to the 10 other Football Bowl Subdivision commissioners. It proposes that a human committee would rank 30 teams at the end of the season to help select the 16-team field. Those rankings would determine the 1-through-16 seedings. At least six Football Bowl Subdivision (formerly Division I-A) conference champions would be in the field. There would be a maximum of three teams per conference.

Last Edited: 10/22/2011 12:31:16 PM by WeAreMarshall
First Street Forever
General User
Member Since: 12/19/2010
Location: Chicago, IL
Post Count: 247
mail
First Street Forever
mail
Posted: 10/22/2011 11:43 AM
WeAreMarshall wrote:expand_more
I believe you are right about the "Playoff". It's all starting to make sense now. 


Thank you! I take back everything bad I've ever said about Marshall fans! 

Now if someone as dense as a Marshall fan can see the big picture, why can't a bunch of you learned, shoe wearing types see it too?

The End (of Ohio as D1 football) is Nigh!  
C Money
General User
Member Since: 8/28/2010
Post Count: 3,420
mail
C Money
mail
Posted: 10/22/2011 12:00 PM
You may be right that this is the prelude to a playoff, but it definitely does not eliminate anti-trust issues. When 75% of market participants collude to freeze 25% of market participants out completely, and limit the market share of another 25% of participants to 1/16th of the whole market, there are anti-trust concerns. And it doesn't begin to address the private benefit concerns for these "non-profits", which is really the argument to make if you want to blow up the BCS and clamp down on the NCAA.

Like I said previously, this super conference raises more questions than provides answers. And I would rather be OHIO, as a college football team, than Ohio State Jr., as a semi-pro football team.
OhioCatFan
General User
Member Since: 12/20/2004
Location: Athens, OH
Post Count: 15,714
mail
OhioCatFan
mail
Posted: 10/22/2011 2:49 PM
I think there may be a 16 team playoff in the fairly near future, but the incoherent ramblings of FSF have nothing relevant to say about what is actually going to happen.  Ohio will NOT be going to FCS football.  Perhaps, if FSF had spent his collegiate years on Second rather than First street he'd be a whole lot more capable of rational thought processes. Just like me!

OCF aka "2nd Street Guy"
Last Edited: 10/22/2011 2:52:05 PM by OhioCatFan
WeAreMarshall
General User
WAM
Member Since: 8/21/2010
Post Count: 62
person
mail
WeAreMarshall
mail
Posted: 10/25/2011 12:28 PM
Here is the latest::

  tinyurl.com/3ftnd8k



"Commissioners from the Mountain West Conference and Conference USA are scheduled to meet with the head of the Big East Conference on Wednesday to discuss the formation of one 28- to 32-football team super conference to try to gain automatic Bowl Championship Series status.

According to a document obtained by the Review-Journal, UNLV could be in a division that also includes Boise State, Fresno State, Hawaii, San Diego State, UNR and Utah State, with San Jose State a possibility if the conference includes 32 teams rather than 28.

We would figure out some way -- four divisions of seven teams each, a playoff and then a conference championship game -- to come up with the (automatic qualifier)," UNLV athletic director Jim Livengood said. "Craig and Britton are going into this meeting in New York with one thing in mind, to make this happen with the Big East."



 

Last Edited: 10/25/2011 2:35:44 PM by WeAreMarshall
WeAreMarshall
General User
WAM
Member Since: 8/21/2010
Post Count: 62
person
mail
WeAreMarshall
mail
Posted: 10/25/2011 2:37 PM
The aforementioned article I posted in the previous post is obviously a direct result of the report that WVU is now going to the Big 12. The next few days should be interesting.
OhioCatFan
General User
Member Since: 12/20/2004
Location: Athens, OH
Post Count: 15,714
mail
OhioCatFan
mail
Posted: 10/25/2011 3:29 PM
This leaves me speechless, WAM.  Some will say that's a big improvement! 
WeAreMarshall
General User
WAM
Member Since: 8/21/2010
Post Count: 62
person
mail
WeAreMarshall
mail
Posted: 10/25/2011 4:40 PM
OhioCatFan wrote:expand_more
This leaves me speechless, WAM.  Some will say that's a big improvement! 



 We'll see what shakes out over the next couple days. It's still possible the Big East will survive in one way or another but them losing WVU (another full member) today is an absolute huge blow to that conference. That likely all but assured Boise and Air force staying put. Can't imagine them making the trek to play Rutgers, Uconn, Louisville, Cincy and South Florida. Obviously the topic of the meeting tomorrow will be "plan b" which is essentially working out a deal where the remaining five football teams can play in the merged football conference allowing the Big East to add some good "basketball only" playing schools to bolster back up the Big East basketball side. That could essentially have an effect on the A-10.
L.C.
General User
LC
Member Since: 9/1/2005
Post Count: 10,584
person
mail
L.C.
mail
Posted: 10/25/2011 5:04 PM
This conference makes a lot of sense. If it happens there will be a 3 tier situation:
1. The top tier will be the BCS conferences - Big Tendozen, Pac 12, Big Twelveten, ACC and the SEC. These teams have about a one in 12 chance of making the BCS games, if you erroneously assume equal chances.
2. Below them would be this middle conference, made of of 4 mini-conferences from CUSA, Big East, and MWC. These would have about a one in 30 chance, again, erroneously assuming equal chances.
3. On the bottom tier would be the MAC, Sunbelt, and WAC, outside, looking in, with no chance.

I suppose the MAC, Sunbelt, and WAC could form a second leftover conference, with a 2-game playoff, and argue that they, too should have an automatic entry.  They might get it, too, if you added a 5th BCS game. That way you could have 7 automatic qualifiers, and 3 at large teams.
Mike Coleman
Administrator
Member Since: 12/21/2004
Location: Near the Pristine Sandy Shores of Lake Erie, OH
Post Count: 1,999
mail
Mike Coleman
mail
Posted: 10/25/2011 5:08 PM
L.C. wrote:expand_more
This conference makes a lot of sense. If it happens there will be a 3 tier situation:
1. The top tier will be the BCS conferences - Big Tendozen, Pac 12, Big Twelveten, ACC and the SEC. These teams have about a one in 12 chance of making the BCS games, if you erroneously assume equal chances.
2. Below them would be this middle conference, made of of 4 mini-conferences from CUSA, Big East, and MWC. These would have about a one in 30 chance, again, erroneously assuming equal chances.
3. On the bottom tier would be the MAC, Sunbelt, and WAC, outside, looking in, with no chance.

I suppose the MAC, Sunbelt, and WAC could form a second leftover conference, with a 2-game playoff, and argue that they, too should have an automatic entry.  They might get it, too, if you added a 5th BCS game. That way you could have 7 automatic qualifiers, and 3 at large teams.


The problem is, for this to make sense, the NCAA has to change its rules regarding postseason. And to get it to change its rules, this new megamidmajor conference would seemingly need a ton of votes from either the BCS AQs or the MAC/Sun Belt/WAC schools. I have a hard time either group would sign on.
Bert Presley
General User
Member Since: 12/20/2004
Location: Where OHIO is winning and Miami is getting whipped, OH
Post Count: 370
mail
Bert Presley
mail
Posted: 10/25/2011 7:18 PM
Isn't there a limit on the number of games a team can play per regular season (including conference championships) for FBS? if so, all 30 teams would have to play 11 regular scheduled games in case they made it to the one game playoff for the confrence title, leaving a lot of money, and a lot of Bowl eligibility on the table. you are talking only 2 possibly OOC games, and likely sometimes only (gasp) 4 home games for some schools.
OhioCatFan
General User
Member Since: 12/20/2004
Location: Athens, OH
Post Count: 15,714
mail
OhioCatFan
mail
Posted: 10/25/2011 7:49 PM
Mike Coleman wrote:expand_more
The problem is, for this to make sense, the NCAA has to change its rules regarding postseason. And to get it to change its rules, this new megamidmajor conference would seemingly need a ton of votes from either the BCS AQs or the MAC/Sun Belt/WAC schools. I have a hard time either group would sign on.


Exactly!  This is a pipe dream born of desperation on the part of the Big Least.  Even the more modest, C-USA-MWC "merger" or "alliance" would need new legislation by the NCAA to make it truly viable. 
Monroe Slavin
General User
MS
Member Since: 12/21/2004
Location: Oxnard, CA
Post Count: 9,121
person
mail
Monroe Slavin
mail
Posted: 10/25/2011 8:43 PM
There is no doubt at all that we are a very attractive candidate and that we can name our conference.



When are these inane threads going to end.  Anyone who thinks other than that we are very, very likely--unfortunately--to get hung out to dry in all the re-orgs is not thinking very clearly.
WeAreMarshall
General User
WAM
Member Since: 8/21/2010
Post Count: 62
person
mail
WeAreMarshall
mail
Posted: 10/25/2011 9:25 PM
OhioCatFan wrote:expand_more
The problem is, for this to make sense, the NCAA has to change its rules regarding postseason. And to get it to change its rules, this new megamidmajor conference would seemingly need a ton of votes from either the BCS AQs or the MAC/Sun Belt/WAC schools. I have a hard time either group would sign on.


Exactly!  This is a pipe dream born of desperation on the part of the Big Least.  Even the more modest, C-USA-MWC "merger" or "alliance" would need new legislation by the NCAA to make it truly viable. 


Actually, no new legislation is needed to be passed and that's why the alliance between the MWC and CUSA has already been announced.

The rule for FBS schools is that they can play no more than 13 games before entering bowl season. What I'm told is that each division will likely have 8 members (32 teams total). Each division will be grouped based on geography location(less travel). Other than the standard out of conference games, the schools will only compete in their respective division.  Each team in the alliance will have their "open" week the weekend before the final regular season game. The final season game for each school will be known as "to be determined" on the schedule. During that "open" week schools will then be paired to play each other based on seeding. Obviously the four number one seeds will play each other the final week to determine the two winners that will advance to the overall "Championship Game".

Example: In the east will be two divisions. After the bye week pairings, the number 1 seed of division 1 will meet the number 1 seed of division 2. Number 2 seed will meet the number 2 seed and so on. Obviously the winner of the number 1 seeded games will advance to the Championship.

12 regular season games. 1 Championship. Playoff football without the need of NCAA legislation.
OhioCatFan
General User
Member Since: 12/20/2004
Location: Athens, OH
Post Count: 15,714
mail
OhioCatFan
mail
Posted: 10/25/2011 10:32 PM
WAM, I understand what you are saying, and it sounds like a good plan; however, I'm not convinced from what I know that this doesn't require the NCAA to pass new legislation.  The rules as they now stand require a "conference" to have at least 12 football playing members in order to have a conference championship at the end of the season.  In essence what's being proposed here is a playoff system of one extra game before a championship game between teams that are not in the same conference but are in an alliance of sorts.  This is new territory, and I don't think it can be implemented by the C-USA and MWC on their own.  I may be wrong about this, but I don't think we'll know until the Godfathers of the NCAA have spoken, and I haven't heard a peep out of them yet.  Have you?  
Bert Presley
General User
Member Since: 12/20/2004
Location: Where OHIO is winning and Miami is getting whipped, OH
Post Count: 370
mail
Bert Presley
mail
Posted: 10/25/2011 11:36 PM
I believe the NCAA will make the ruling that you can have a C-USA Championship and a MWC Championship, but to have both play each other during the regular season to determine a Joint Champion will require a new by-law.
Last Edited: 10/25/2011 11:37:53 PM by Bert Presley
WeAreMarshall
General User
WAM
Member Since: 8/21/2010
Post Count: 62
person
mail
WeAreMarshall
mail
Posted: 10/26/2011 12:13 AM
OhioCatFan wrote:expand_more
WAM, I understand what you are saying, and it sounds like a good plan; however, I'm not convinced from what I know that this doesn't require the NCAA to pass new legislation.  The rules as they now stand require a "conference" to have at least 12 football playing members in order to have a conference championship at the end of the season.  In essence what's being proposed here is a playoff system of one extra game before a championship game between teams that are not in the same conference but are in an alliance of sorts.  This is new territory, and I don't think it can be implemented by the C-USA and MWC on their own.  I may be wrong about this, but I don't think we'll know until the Godfathers of the NCAA have spoken, and I haven't heard a peep out of them yet.  Have you?  


  No, actually its not an extra game. That's where a lot of people are getting the wrong idea. It's still 12 games with a conference championship. That's why the merger was already approved and announced. What they are going to do is have everybody leave the last football date on their schedule as "to be determined".....the final week of the season will see all the teams paired based on their ranking. Number 1 seed will play the other Number 1 seed...the number 2 seed will play the other number 2 seed....and so on for that final 8th conference game. The winner of those number 1 seeds on each side will advance to the championship for the 13th game. No extra games involved. Hopefully what I'm explaining makes sense.
Mike Coleman
Administrator
Member Since: 12/21/2004
Location: Near the Pristine Sandy Shores of Lake Erie, OH
Post Count: 1,999
mail
Mike Coleman
mail
Posted: 10/26/2011 12:29 AM
WeAreMarshall wrote:expand_more
WAM, I understand what you are saying, and it sounds like a good plan; however, I'm not convinced from what I know that this doesn't require the NCAA to pass new legislation.  The rules as they now stand require a "conference" to have at least 12 football playing members in order to have a conference championship at the end of the season.  In essence what's being proposed here is a playoff system of one extra game before a championship game between teams that are not in the same conference but are in an alliance of sorts.  This is new territory, and I don't think it can be implemented by the C-USA and MWC on their own.  I may be wrong about this, but I don't think we'll know until the Godfathers of the NCAA have spoken, and I haven't heard a peep out of them yet.  Have you?  


  No, actually its not an extra game. That's where a lot of people are getting the wrong idea. It's still 12 games with a conference championship. That's why the merger was already approved and announced. What they are going to do is have everybody leave the last football date on their schedule as "to be determined".....the final week of the season will see all the teams paired based on their ranking. Number 1 seed will play the other Number 1 seed...the number 2 seed will play the other number 2 seed....and so on for that final 8th conference game. The winner of those number 1 seeds on each side will advance to the championship for the 13th game. No extra games involved. Hopefully what I'm explaining makes sense.


It does, except I think (and I could be wrong) to qualify for a championship game you have to play a round-robin in your division. So if you have 24 teams, you'd have to play at least 11 games in your division. So in order to qualify, you'd have to forego all nonconference games? So how could you guarantee AQ status without any nonconference games? The devil will be in the details.

Anyway, you can't just say these 24 teams qualify. There have to be standards to be met and kept. And there's no reason that other non-AQs couldn't line up and form similar "mergers." To keep those schools out would be anti-competitive as Tulane's president is well aware.
OhioCatFan
General User
Member Since: 12/20/2004
Location: Athens, OH
Post Count: 15,714
mail
OhioCatFan
mail
Posted: 10/26/2011 10:56 AM
WAM, I think that a two game playoff is by any other name a playoff.  I think this requires a change in the NCAA bylaws.  As far as I know no one from the NCAA has given the organization's blessing on this concept.  I'm not saying it won't happen; I'm just saying they're lost of aspects of this plan that are more in the proposal stage than any type of reality. 

BTW, I'm going to be in Huntington this weekend for the clash with UAB.  I'll be wearing all my Marshall gear, including my RAM button from 1971.  That button signifies "Rally Around Marshall" and was put out to honor the Young Herd in '71.  I've worn it since to every Marshall game that I've attended, except, of course, the one's against Ohio.  
Showing Messages: 51 - 71 of 71



extra small (< 576px)
small (>= 576px)
medium (>= 768px)
large (>= 992px)
x-large (>= 1200px)
xx-large (>= 1400px)