Menu
What's new
By:
Filters
AllBuffs | Unofficial fan site for the University of Colorado at Boulder Athletics programs

This is a sample guest message. Register a free account today to become a member! Once signed in, you'll be able to participate on this site by adding your own topics and posts, as well as connect with other members through your own private inbox!

  • Prime Time. Prime Time. Its a new era for Colorado football. Consider signing up for a club membership! For $20/year, you can get access to all the special features at Allbuffs, including club member only forums, dark mode, avatars and best of all no ads ! But seriously, please sign up so that we can pay the bills. No one earns money here, and we can use your $20 to keep this hellhole running. You can sign up for a club membership by navigating to your account in the upper right and clicking on "Account Upgrades". Make it happen!

Saban - All P5 Plan for College Football

Buffnik

Buffnik

Real name isn't Nik
Club Member
Junta Member
"We should play all teams in the Power 5 conferences," Saban said on Wednesday. "If we did that, then if we were going to have bowl games, we should do the bowl games just like we do in the NCAA basketball tournament - not by record, but by some kind of power rating that gets you in a bowl game. If we did that, people would be a little less interested in maybe bowl games and more interested in expanding the playoff."

"You eliminate the six wins to get in a bowl game, and now you can have a different kind of scheduling that is more fan interest, more good games, bring out the better quality team," he said, "and whether you expand the playoff or have a system where it's like now - we take the top 12 teams and decide what bowl game they go to - just take them all.

"In this scenario, there would be more opportunity to play more teams in your league, as well as to have more games that people would be interested in," he said. "We all play three or four games a year now that nobody's really interested in. We'd have more good games, more public interest, more fan interest, better TV."

Saban suggested a 10-game SEC schedule, for example, plus two Power 5 nonconference opponents during the regular season. http://www.espn.com/college-footbal...an-envisions-changes-college-football-playoff

I need to digest this a bit, but I think I like it. Especially if we move to 4 conferences with 16 teams each for 64 P5 programs (we currently have 65). But I'd do 9-game conference schedules (pod setup) and then 1 game each against each of the other 3 conferences. The tv money would be absolutely insane.
 
Yeah sounds like a great plan just needs a little consolidating. Not a big fan of the "power rating" he talks about but have 4 conferences with 16 teams and expand the playoff to 8 with the conference championship games being the first round. No doubt pod scheduling is the best way to go about 16 team conferences.
 
Buffnik said:
"We should play all teams in the Power 5 conferences," Saban said on Wednesday. "If we did that, then if we were going to have bowl games, we should do the bowl games just like we do in the NCAA basketball tournament - not by record, but by some kind of power rating that gets you in a bowl game. If we did that, people would be a little less interested in maybe bowl games and more interested in expanding the playoff."

"You eliminate the six wins to get in a bowl game, and now you can have a different kind of scheduling that is more fan interest, more good games, bring out the better quality team," he said, "and whether you expand the playoff or have a system where it's like now - we take the top 12 teams and decide what bowl game they go to - just take them all.

"In this scenario, there would be more opportunity to play more teams in your league, as well as to have more games that people would be interested in," he said. "We all play three or four games a year now that nobody's really interested in. We'd have more good games, more public interest, more fan interest, better TV."

Saban suggested a 10-game SEC schedule, for example, plus two Power 5 nonconference opponents during the regular season. http://www.espn.com/college-footbal...an-envisions-changes-college-football-playoff

I need to digest this a bit, but I think I like it. Especially if we move to 4 conferences with 16 teams each for 64 P5 programs (we currently have 65). But I'd do 9-game conference schedules (pod setup) and then 1 game each against each of the other 3 conferences. The tv money would be absolutely insane.
Click to expand...

The 4 "conference", 16 team league makes too much sense.

Using the pod system you end up with a defacto 16 team playoff, which is probably the perfect size. Win your pod and you are in the playoffs.
 
I don't like it. Smaller schools are very dependent on revenue from playing P5 schools. But this is just a continuation of the trend where the rich in CFB get richer and **** the poor...kind of the motto of America really so I'm not surprised.
 
Bufffan68 said:
I don't like it. Smaller schools are very dependent on revenue from playing P5 schools. But this is just a continuation of the trend where the rich in CFB get richer and **** the poor...kind of the motto of America really so I'm not surprised.
Click to expand...

I know that those schools need the revenue, but to Saban's point, who wants to watch Alabama play Mercer in week 11? Hint: No one.
 
Bufffan68 said:
I don't like it. Smaller schools are very dependent on revenue from playing P5 schools. But this is just a continuation of the trend where the rich in CFB get richer and **** the poor...kind of the motto of America really so I'm not surprised.
Click to expand...
If the smaller schools can't generate the revenue, why do terrible football games to artificially inflate their coffers?

As I've mentioned, I'd also support the addition of 1 pre-season game during camp. That should be a payday visit from a non P5 opponent (FCS, most likely) that gets included in the season ticket and broadcast packages. Could also bring in an FCS team to scrimmage for the spring game to make that more interesting under this model. If we did that, it might actually make the finances better for smaller programs.
 
Buffnik said:
If the smaller schools can't generate the revenue, why do terrible football games to artificially inflate their coffers?

As I've mentioned, I'd also support the addition of 1 pre-season game during camp. That should be a payday visit from a non P5 opponent (FCS, most likely) that gets included in the season ticket and broadcast packages. Could also bring in an FCS team to scrimmage for the spring game to make that more interesting under this model. If we did that, it might actually make the finances better for smaller programs.
Click to expand...
I like this actually.

1 or 2 games pre-season and make the spring game a real scrimmage.
 
One step closer to a 14 game regular season.

It's bound to happen eventually. Too much money on the table.

In a 14-game regular season, you play 10 conference games and one game against a team from the other P5 conferences.
 
10 Pac-12 games? I'm down for that and it's still possible to face a 11th Pac-12 team in the same season.
Much better than having csu, Texas State, and UNC on the schedule.
 
He's not the first person to bring this type of thing up. In fact, I remember Klatt doing it either last summer or the summer before in a podcast. He suggested having everybody play the team that finished in the same spot you did in your conference. Using last year as an example, that would give us an OOC that featured some combination of Florida, Wisconsin, Virginia Tech, and Oklahoma State. I think we all could get excited about getting a chance to play at least the first three names on that list. Got some other thoughts, though-

1) Everybody has to play the same amount of conference games. How you get there and what the number is doesn't matter.
2) I don't think the playoff needs to be expanded, and I won't change my tune on that until we see somebody genuinely get jobbed. 2014 Baylor didn't have an argument to make the playoff ahead of that year's Ohio State team. We've seen one conference champion finish with at least two losses the last two years, which has made things really easy for the committee.
3) I think onealcd is on to something if you did expand the playoff, but his idea needs more tinkering. Two examples-If USC and Washington are what we expect them to be this season, that could be a true play-in game for the CFP. On the other hand, Florida and Virginia Tech would not have been deserving playoff teams had they won the SEC and ACC championship games last year. Get rid of the divisions and allow the top 2 in each league to play each other in the conference title game to avoid those type of scenarios.
 
ahoelsken said:
He's not the first person to bring this type of thing up. In fact, I remember Klatt doing it either last summer or the summer before in a podcast. He suggested having everybody play the team that finished in the same spot you did in your conference. Using last year as an example, that would give us an OOC that featured some combination of Florida, Wisconsin, Virginia Tech, and Oklahoma State. I think we all could get excited about getting a chance to play at least the first three names on that list. Got some other thoughts, though-

1) Everybody has to play the same amount of conference games. How you get there and what the number is doesn't matter.
2) I don't think the playoff needs to be expanded, and I won't change my tune on that until we see somebody genuinely get jobbed. 2014 Baylor didn't have an argument to make the playoff ahead of that year's Ohio State team. We've seen one conference champion finish with at least two losses the last two years, which has made things really easy for the committee.
3) I think onealcd is on to something if you did expand the playoff, but his idea needs more tinkering. Two examples-If USC and Washington are what we expect them to be this season, that could be a true play-in game for the CFP. On the other hand, Florida and Virginia Tech would not have been deserving playoff teams had they won the SEC and ACC championship games last year. Get rid of the divisions and allow the top 2 in each league to play each other in the conference title game to avoid those type of scenarios.
Click to expand...

The 16 team playoff scenario would basically be the winner of each pod playing for a the conference title, then playing for the national title. For example, in the Pac12 (assuming we add OU, OSU, TTU, and someone else) you would have:

Midwest: OSU
Mountain: Colorado
California: USC
PNW: Washington

Those four get seeded and have a playoff for the CCG. Winner gets into the National Playoff.

IMO, if you can't win your pod you don't deserve a shot at the natty.
 
Shldr2Shldr said:
The 16 team playoff scenario would basically be the winner of each pod playing for a the conference title, then playing for the national title. For example, in the Pac12 (assuming we add OU, OSU, TTU, and someone else) you would have:

Midwest: OSU
Mountain: Colorado
California: USC
PNW: Washington

Those four get seeded and have a playoff for the CCG. Winner gets into the National Playoff.

IMO, if you can't win your pod you don't deserve a shot at the natty.
Click to expand...

Why use the pods for anything other than scheduling? Just give me the two best teams and let them go at it in a CCG. We don't need conference tournaments in football IMO
 
Means that the fourth best team in each league is in the playoffs competing for the NC, what a joke. Why not just skip the regular season and have a giant 2 game elimination with the losers playing each other for additional seeding.

To me one of the unique and special things about college football is having a regular season in which every game is meaningful. I'm sick of teams having mediocre or slightly better seasons and ending up in playoffs or tournaments.

I can understand the NC game and even a 4 team playoff but this expanding and expanding of the playoff pool just makes it less likely to get the best team for the year as the final champion.
 
ahoelsken said:
Why use the pods for anything other than scheduling? Just give me the two best teams and let them go at it in a CCG. We don't need conference tournaments in football IMO
Click to expand...

Larry Scott might disagree with you.

$.
$.
$.
 
Shldr2Shldr said:
If the realignment looks closer to the NFL and gets all of the top teams playing by the same rules, then go for it.
Click to expand...
I can picture a scenario where the Pac 12 asks for specific academic requirements that everyone else pushes back on, and things stall - or worse move on without the Pac 12.
 
Highlander said:
I can picture a scenario where the Pac 12 asks for specific academic requirements that everyone else pushes back on, and things stall - or worse move on without the Pac 12.
Click to expand...

Fear not there is Japanese college football and in South Korea as well. Video of a Japanese team playing an Alabama high school team I believe:

 
Jalapeno said:
Fear not there is Japanese college football and in South Korea as well. Video of a Japanese team playing an Alabama high school team I believe:

Click to expand...

Football is going to be HUGE in Japan and South Korea. HUGE! It might take 50 years or more, but when it does explode the Pac-12 Networks will be positioned like no other to cash in. ;)
 
Buffnik said:
Football is going to be HUGE in Japan and South Korea. HUGE! It might take 50 years or more, but when it does explode the Pac-12 Networks will be positioned like no other to cash in. ;)
Click to expand...

Yep when Asia-Pacific makes up 60% of the world's population. Just imagine by the 2040s, the OU and Nebraska fans will be in deep amazement that there was one time that they had more resources than mighty CU. Texas fans will ponder what a different world they would be in if Deloss Dodds never was the UT AD. ;)

Football just kicked off in India: http://www.thehindubusinessline.com...eague-to-kick-off-in-india/article4917660.ece
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top