CliftonHanger

interested.

A: A. Dunn B: P. Fielder, A. Gonzalez C: C. Pena, E. Longoria, M. Stanton D: T. Colvin, K. Youkilis, I. Stewart, J. Morneau, J. Upton WC: PM'd

I am thinking that BSU will be around for a while. They have only lost 14 games in the last nine years. They haev only been in Div I since 1996!

I've heard it reported (on Sportscenter and the like, no links as proof however) that Boise has offered to play one-time games on the road with more prolific schools and has been turned down at each offer. From the reports, they're not content with the softer schedule. As far as simply getting teams better than Wyoming and Toledo, would people really give them credit for beating Kentucky at home or Duke at a neutral site? And what motivation do those teams have to play Boise when they have their own tough conference schedules to play, which they generally don't win much in anyway? Boise is in a unique spot (kind of along with Utah, BYU and TCU) where there's really no positives for major programs to play them, yet they need to play as many major programs as possible. As long as we have the BCS, there will be no reason for a major program to schedule Boise. Why a few do now I have no idea, because there's no real gain to it (except perhaps some monetary gain). ^^^This^^^

NSBB: Where if you don't agree with my opinion, you are stupid.

oh, and some computers...

I agree that 64 is too many. But I don't think 16 is too many. Condider this scenario... Ohio State is 11-1. Their only loss is in double overtime against Michigan. Michigan goes undefeated, as does Alamama, as does Boise State. There are 3 other teams that only have 1 loss, and 14 more with 2 losses. I think that ANY of these teams COULD be the best team in the country, but in our current system, Only Michigan and Alabama get a shot at the title because the guys who write articles about sports think that they are the 2 best teams.

If they have to play a tough schedule to get a shot at the title, then, yes, it is possible, but HIGHLY unlikely. This is why I re-aligned the conferences to begin with. I am not only concerned with the national title. I am concerned with creating a better balance of power. This system would allow EVERY team in the country to play a balanced, but competitive schedule. It is a very radical idea, but I don't think that it is a horrible idea like you do. Sure there is probably a better way to do it than the way I did, but honestly, it wasn't all that scientific. I think that if a commitee of really smart guys (smarter than me, or even you jersey) could get together to take into account things like other sports, geography, revenue sharing, TV rights, academics, tradition, etc. we might, just might have a better system than the one that is in place.

Very true. Ok, so let's hear a proposal form someone that includes some sort of playoff, a balance of power between the conferences, and a playoff.

I never whined that I was being ctiticized. I never said focus only on the positives. I wanted to know what people thought about it. It's not like I spent weeks on this, I just think that there needs to be a better balance of power. Why do we have conferences such as the MAC, WAC, Sunbelt, etc in Division IA if none of the teams that compete in them can have a shot to beat Ohio State or USC in a national title game? That is my main point. I realize that there are 100's of other factors at play (money from bowls, tradition, other sports, etc) but my goal was to create more of a balance of power. In basketball, schools from a mid-major have a shot at winning the title every year. Remember that Bradley made the sweet 16 a few years ago? Or Gonzaga's program for the past 10 years? THink about how the level of competition would change instead of having 6 "power" conferences to having all of them balanced....

So, you took Purdue, an Indiana school, out of the Big Ten, in which you kept IU, and stuck the Boilers with a bunch of schools from Texas, Oklahoma, Alabama, Tennessee, the Carolinas, and decided to throw in a New Jersey school for good measure? And then replaced Purdue in the Big Ten with Ball State, another Indiana school? I'm really not seeing how that makes sense geographically. OK, you got me there. C-USA was comprised of schools from all over. No rhyme or reason there, but that's kind of how that conference is now.

All you want is for people to focus on the positive aspects of your proposal? That's absurd. It's a bad proposal and the fact that it has no chance of coming to fruition does not make it unnecessary to point out that it's a bad proposal. I think you just like to argue. I wanted feedback. That includes positive and negative feedback. If you think it is a bad proposal, fine, tell me why. Don't just say "this is lame."

Good point. I love CFB for many reasons. One of them being the fact that Boise State can beat Oklahoma in a bowl game. A reason that I don't love it is that they will never have a chance of getting a title. Think about how awesome March Madness and the NCAA BB tournament is. We could have that TWICE A YEAR!!! Wouldn't that be AWESOME?

I realize that this would never happen, so to criticize me by saying it's silly, stupid, or lame is unneccessary. Can we look at the positives of the proposal? I DO think that we need a change to the way the NCAA does things. Honestly, is the current BCS any less ludacris than this idea? While my "blowing up" of conferences is perhaps also unneeded, I DO think that there needs to be a better balance of power, by allowing teams such as Ball State or Boise State to have a legitamate shot at a title. Otherwise let's just eliminate the MAC, WAC, MWC, C-USA, and the Sun Belt from Division IA competition and give them their own division. I invite you to make a proposal that makes more sense than mine, or even one that's better than the one that is in place now. I was just thinking outside of the box...

Because you knew it was a bad idea? What makes it a bad idea? Because you said so? I think if it WOULD happen, (which it never will) that it's a GREAT idea.

It has nothing to do with how teams are currently performing. I divided it up geographically, and took an even amount of teams from power conferences (SEC, Big 10, etc) and teams from non-power conferences (WAC, MAC, etc). And of course it would never happen, I just thought it was fun.

It was just something I did out of boredom to see how it would look. I could have guessed that I would get nothing but negativity in here.

I would like to get some feedback on my NCAA proposal. I am tired of schools like Boise State and TCU being able to run the table and have ZERO chance at a title. I propose we keep the conferences that are already in place, and add a 12th . With 120 teams in D-IA, each conference would have 10 teams, comprised of schools from the "power conferences" and those from the not-so-powerful conferences (no independants). Each Conference would have 2 divisions, with the winners of each division facing off at the end of the regualr season in a title game for an automatic bid to the playoffs. Throw in 4 "wild card" teams (The top 4 ranked teams among non title game winners), and we have ourselves a 16 team playoff. I know that some schools that have been in the same conference for eons will now be separated, but now, instead of Auburn playing Middle Tennessee in it's first game, it will play Alabama in order to keep the rivalry going. This eliminates "gimme" games in non-conference play, and ultimately makes the regular season mean A lot more. The schools themselves will benefit from the profits of post season play on campus. Millions of dollars will be generated back into the schools themselves. The only people losing out here are the sponsors, but in all honesty who gives a [expletive] about the Chik-fil-A Bowl, or the Meinekie car care Bowl? Really we could just name the playoff games after bowl games and we would still technically have a bowl system still in place also. ACC Army Navy North Carolina North Carolina State Temple Virginia Virginia Tech Marshall Wake Forest East Carolina Big 10 Illinois Iowa Iowa State Minnesota Indiana Northwestern Wisconsin Ball State Toledo Northern Illinois Big 12 Texas Texas A&M Texas Tech TCU Oklahoma Oklahoma St. Houston North Texas SMU UTEP Big East Syracuse Boston College Connecticut Penn State West Virginia Maryland Akron Ohio Kent State Buffalo C-USA Purdue Baylor Auburn Vanderbilt Clemson Duke Rice Tulsa Troy Rutgers MWC Washington Washington St. Oregon Oregon St. Boise St. Nevada Utah Utah St. Nevada San Jose St. PAC 10 USC UCLA California Arizona Arizona St. Fresno St. Hawaii Stanford San Diego St. UNLV SUN BELT Kentucky Tennessee Louisville Missouri South Carolina Cincinatti Memphis Tulane Middle Tennesee Western Kentucky WAC Nebraska Kansas Kansas St Colorado BYU Colorado St. Air Force Wyoming New Mexico New Mexico St. SEC Florida Florida State South Florida Miami Georgia Georgia Tech Florida International Central Florida Florida Atlantic Central Florida MAC Ohio State Michigan Michigan St. Notre Dame Pitt Central Michigan Westen Michigan Eastern Michigan Bowling Green Miami (OH) New Conference Alabama Mississippi Mississippi St. Arkansas LSU Louisiana Tech Louisiana - Monroe UAB Southern Mississippi Arkansas St. OK, So each of the title games is also a bowl. That gives us 27 bowl games. Do we really need 34? Does the big 10 and SEC really deserve to have 7 teams in post season play? For instance, last year's Insight.com bowl featured Iowa State... (7-6) vs. Minnesota (6-7). Really? And if you say that the MAC is stacked, and the Big 10 is weak, look at the existing SEC vs. the SunBelt. The way it stands right now (Boise St. and TCU being perfect examples), unless you came from a "power" conference, you don't have a shot at the title, and this is wrong. Why even have the WAC, MWC, MAC and SunBelt in Division IA, if none of those teams can EVER win a title? It's not fair. And the money issue is jaded as well. Like I stated previously, Just because Alabama and Auburn are not in the same Conference anymore does not mean that they can't still play, and this gives sponsors a huge opportunity to exploit those big games in the regular season and make them mean more. Do you have any idea on how much revenue is generated for each home game on a major college campus? Not only to the schools, but to the surrounding businesses? Let's eliminate neutral bowl sites all together. Who wouldn't want to see Michigan play Ohio State in the big house in December? Now THAT"S football!!!

Its not the games Milton would have cost us by being a jerk, it's the games he might have cost us by not playing to his full potential. I am in no way defending the move, or Milton, but you have to take into consideration the fact that he DID NOT want to play in Chicago. He made that abundantly clear. so you're saying you think milton dogged it and didn't try to hit? No, I am saying that it is entirely possible that he would dog it next year because he has unhappy to still be playing here.

Its not the games Milton would have cost us by being a jerk, it's the games he might have cost us by not playing to his full potential. I am in no way defending the move, or Milton, but you have to take into consideration the fact that he DID NOT want to play in Chicago. He made that abundantly clear.

he reminds me of Jerome Walton.

I am quite the beer snob after working in bars with vast assortments of microbrews and inports. HOWEVER, there is nothing like the taste of a warm old style on a hot summer day. It tastes like . . . Baseball. I have an uncle in milwaukee that gave me a light up Old Style sign wahen I was about 12 years old. I thought it was the coolest thing ever. Old Style became my trademark drink of choice through out my teenage, college, and early to mid 20's. When I was in college, everyone else was drinking Keystone light, or Milwaukee's Best. I was the ONLY person who always had Old Style. If we were at a party and I saw someone else drinking an OS, I knew it was mine. Eventually, everyone knew to keep their hands off the OS, or it was your ass. I bitchslapped a freshman in front of his girlfriend once. It was priceless.

I vaguely remember my first trip to wrigley as a young lad. I was propably about 8 or 9. I walked into the bathroom to throngs of men peeing in troughs. I had no idea what was going on. I found the first available spot and started doing my business. It wasn't until I saw a guy washing his hands next to me that I realized, I was pissing in the hand sink!!! OOPS!!!

I'm sure Shane would love to play in Wrigley, after having a beer thrown on him...

Was the DJ Elias Koblentz? haha, you kidding... that dude was pissed when Aaron Miles signed with the Cubs... he'd HATE this I would love to watch that again. I almost peed myself when watching that the first time. Is that guy still posting?