Derwood

i don't get it

A tie could still happen in the Big 10 now without a conference championship game. Wisconsin beats OSU, OSU beats Penn St., Penn St. beats Wisconsin. All have one loss, which one gets the BCS berth? Right nothing would have changed. well they've clearly figured out this problem in the SEC and Big 12....

Gonzalez was hired before Hendry even realized he was available.

i think as long as your frame your posts as "pro-other team" instead of "anti-Bears" you should be okay. I wasnt' around for much of the game thread last week, so I don't know the circumstances of the moderation. i would hope that moderators would simply keep things civil instead of censoring any non-Bears posts.

sometimes september call ups are a bad thing. lou doesn't seem to know what to do with all the extra players

no one? i don't think it was a 1-A mandate. i still thought it was a conference by conference decision I don't remember seeing a single team not playing 12 since that decision was made. Would you pass up another opportunity to make money? right. home/road inequality will never go away. Penn State "only" has 7 home games this year because they play @ Temple (which is really at the Philadelphia Eagles stadium which will have about 90% PSU fans in it). Last year they had 7/5 as well (ND on the road). The year before they had 8 home games. 11 or 12, that's less important than when teams play. OSU was lucky USC lost twice last year, as they were sitting at 12-0 for almost a month while USC kept playing, meaning the pollsters had more temptation to keep sneaking USC up over an idle OSU team

the good news is that Lidge is probably burned for the next two games

kendall doesn't strike out kendall is good at hit and run lou gives up outs with kendall at the plate :wall:

Hawkins '04 = Dempster '07. IT'S GONNA HAPPEN. and......no

Game 7 of the WS

no one? i don't think it was a 1-A mandate. i still thought it was a conference by conference decision

can we put "Astros" in the word filter please? it's about as funny as "Yankmes" and "Muskat"

Except, y'know, that inning where got everyone out in 5 pitches. End result, he lost the game. 15 MEN ON BASE!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! DEMPSTER!!!!! Geovany Soto lou was saving him for, what, the 19th inning?

if you're planning on being on the board much, you should probably just put that in your sig for the next 20 days or so fixed

So who would have you used there? I don't care if Dempster sucks in non-save situations, that's practically a save situation there and he's the best pitcher remaining in the pen. Oh, and he was dynamite that first inning. yep. i'd have no faith in wuertz, ohman or whomever to do any better there

giving up outs with your catcher who doesn't strike out is asinine.

YAY for men LOB!

The only thing ridiculous is that the Michigans of the world can put 8 home games in a year on their schedule as opposed to the Ball States that play 4 or 5. I don't see what the big deal is about everything else. some teams play 11 games. some play 12. some play 13. some conferences have championship games. some don't some conferences (coughBig10cough) mandate 12 game schedules with no bye weeks. some schools (coughUSCcough) are still playing 3 weeks after other conferences are done (and if you don't think that makes a difference in the polls, you're delusional). Every school can independently negotiate it's own non-con games with no semblance of order or even parity within a conference I've used this analogy before, but it bears repeating: Imagine an NFL where the AFC teams played one more game than the NFC teams, but the NFC teams got two bye weeks and the AFC got none. Also, the NFC teams play championship games to determine conference winners while the AFC goes just by record. Also, some teams can play CFL or AFL teams for their non-divisional games but others don't.

12 teams means 2 divisions with 6 teams per division. No other conference with conference championships (SEC, Big XII, etc) have problems with ties. They have set tiebreakers that decide who goes to the championship game. right, i didn't say that but it was implied...every conference would have 2 divisions and a conference championship game

to remove the inequities of scheduling among other things geography no ties, as conference championship games determine the playoff teams I could be wrong about what you're proposing. Are you saying that each conference champion then enters a post-season tourney to determine the NC? If so, I don't understand how that eliminates scheduling inequity? Individual conferences will still be better than others. Which means many times the best teams (say, the second best team in the SEC) will be eliminated from post-season contention because it had a much harder schedule. College basketball works fine with unbalanced conferences, etc. A system that mirrors college hoops would be much better, IMO, then realigning every college team in the country, and it would also spare us from the confusion that arises during other sports' seasons. i mean in terms of # of games played, when games are played, etc. right now it's ridiculous

to remove the inequities of scheduling among other things geography no ties, as conference championship games determine the playoff teams

well that is certainly true. it's not a perfect solution But football trumps bball. I dont know what tv market Hawaii brings but Boise expands the Pac10's market a little. And as you know Penn State didnt get invited to the Big Ten for its Bball. (i see what others are listing in this thread as more likely) The Big East isnt that whacked because Providence/Nova/Georgtown/Marquette dont even have a football team. Im sure they would remain in the Big East when it comes bball season. The Big East becomes a 20 team conference in basketball. Their current number of 16 is already too large-20 wouldn't be feasible. Boise and Hawaii might get the TV market a little higher, but it also makes sure that the Pac 10 has no chance to be a great basketball conference. I'm sure there would be problems in other sports as well. It's simply not worth it for a small benefit in football to greatly hurt some other sports. i guess the point is that the complete lack of formality or uniformity in college football needs to be remedied by whatever means necessary

well that is certainly true. it's not a perfect solution

i've been thinking about this for awhile, and now is as good a time as any to discuss it. I really think that the Division 1-A should add a school to move to 120 teams, and then realign into ten 12-team conferences as follows: ACC Boston College Clemson Duke Florida St. Georgia Tech Maryland Miami North Carolina North Carolina St. Virginia Virginia Tech Wake Forest Big East Army Cincinnati Connecticut East Carolina Louisville Marshall Navy Pittsburgh Rutgers Syracuse Temple West Virginia Big Ten Illinois Indiana Iowa Michigan Michigan St. Minnesota Northwestern Notre Dame Ohio St. Penn St. Purdue Wisconsin Big 12 Baylor Colorado Iowa St. Kansas Kansas St. Missouri Nebraska Oklahoma Oklahoma St. Texas Texas A&M Texas Tech MAAC Akron Ball St. Bowling Green Buffalo Central Michigan Eastern Michigan Kent St. Miami (OH) Northern Illinois Ohio Toledo Western Michigan Mountain West Air Force Brigham Young Colorado St. Idaho Nevada New Mexico New Mexico St. Tulsa UNLV Utah Utah St. Wyoming PAC 10 Arizona Arizona St. Boise St. California Hawaii Oregon Oregon St. Stanford UCLA USC Washington Washington St. SEC Alabama Arkansas Auburn Florida Georgia Kentucky LSU Mississippi Mississippi St. South Carolina Tennessee Vanderbilt Southwestern Conference Fresno St. Houston LA-Lafayette LA-Monroe LA Tech North Texas Rice San Diego St. Southern Methodist TCU Tulane UTEP Southern Conference Arkansas St. FAU FIU Memphis Middle Tennessee South Florida Southern Miss Troy UAB UCF W. Kentucky

i'm just of the opinion that the Independent thing is played out, that's all. i no longer think that it's "good for college football" that ND is an independent. there is no reason they can't join a conference and maintain their rivalries with USC, etc.