Rivals writers all think we are out
Rivals.com College Football - Superconferences: Which 64 teams belong?
Rivals.com College Football - Superconferences: Which 64 teams belong?
Rivals thinks we will be left out of the BCS
- Thread starter CycloneJoe
- Start date
Memphis was included in at least one guy's list and he didn't have ISU. Um, maybe it's just me but Memphis is terrible at football and hasn't had a great basketball program really ever. They had a few solid years recently, but that's it. Overall, those dudes haven't a clue. Which, like someone said above, it's a good thing it's not their choice.
I'm not even going to read it. From the posts above mine, it sounds like they are just throwing darts at a map to pick teams.
That, plus the fact that nobody really knows anything. Most of these people's opinion on the matter is about as valuable and informed as mine.
Agreed, but I think the only ones who actually want 4 16 team conferences are sports writers.
This. The media is perpetuating this super-conference myth. They stand around in a circle and....
CycloneErik
Well-Known Member
Is there a reason that I would care what rivals thinks?
Those guys are just as inaccurate and uninformed as the rest of the media running wild on this story. Why should their groupthink opinion matter?
Those guys are just as inaccurate and uninformed as the rest of the media running wild on this story. Why should their groupthink opinion matter?
Cold, hard reality: basketball doesn't matter. Football rules in this whole discussion. BB is just icing on the cake.
I should add, I don't give Rivals much crediblity on this.
Isn't it odd that this is the one year that I can't remember a single article calling out the BCS for not using a playoff system to crown the national champion?
As long as the BCS exists in it's current configuration it doesn't matter if there are 4 20-team super conferences, a play-off system will not be introduced.
Welp, if Rivals said so, you guys might as well just pack it up and call it a day. Have the administration folks call up the students and tell them that Iowa State University is, as of September 14th, 2001, disbanded.
Last one out, hit the lights.
Last one out, hit the lights.
i love how they all say they selected teams based on their commitment to excel at high level of football... then read the list of teams they selected... indiana, kentucky, Uconn, Lousiville, Minnesota, Wash State, Syracuse, the list would include many many more.. essentially they just kept sec, big 10, big east schools, pac 12 schools.. duh! no one is going to get kicked out of those leagues, even though they should if this goes down. same article written for the 5000th time.
i cannot beleive they pay people for these types of opinions... here is the first sentence of Tom D's write up..
"A school must be able to justify its spot at the table by showing what it brings to a league from a TV standpoint."
then read the list... its the same as everyone elses.. every Big10, SEC, BIG EAST, PAC 12, ACC school...
the article should be just about the big 12 then, not their collective thoughts on who should be the 64 teams. if was actually just the 64 most deserving schools current conference affiliation would not matter... fing dip wads...
16 is so stupid. You can't even play half your conference teams in football. Travel expenses are rediculous. Top level talent will get watered down...more and more teams will have more losses...meaning fan bases will get more mad....it may seem great now, but I think its a disaster.
I don't understand the purpose of 16 team conf.
It would basically be 2 loosely knit 8-team conferences.
Plus, what's to stop ND from not joining and still retaining a sweet heart deal with the "playoff" system?
It would basically be 2 loosely knit 8-team conferences.
Plus, what's to stop ND from not joining and still retaining a sweet heart deal with the "playoff" system?