Story today in San Jose Mercury News.
Link: https://www.mercurynews.com/2019/02...nferences-should-embrace-the-future-together/
Link: https://www.mercurynews.com/2019/02...nferences-should-embrace-the-future-together/
Follow along with the video below to see how to install our site as a web app on your home screen.
Note: This feature may not be available in some browsers.
I really dont like this idea. The PAC12 season is tough enough so why add three games that will add to the grinder? I like the present format of cupcake, tougher team and tougher team and then PAC12 play. I can see one OCC game per year with the Big 12 but not three per year
Yeah, OK idea in fantasyland, but unless some form of it extended to all the Power 5 conferences, no way. I see where Saban is quoted as saying he would like to see a schedule with only Power 5 opponents, I don't see that reflected in Alabama's scheduling.
Some sort of Pac-12/Big-12 challenge, where the entire conference(s) schedule one game against the other (12 vs 10 numbers don't work, but oh well) would be kind of interesting. Most of us play one Power 5 OOC already, so that would not be too much of a stretch. But again, that leaves out the other 3 conferences.
Finally, one step in the right direction would be for the Power 5 conferences to agree (like that would ever happen) to quit playing D1-AA schools. The Group of 5 would like that, as their members would pick up those slots and the associated paydays and exposure. It would be a financial stick in the eye for 1-AA schools that rely heavily on those paydays to balance their own budgets, but such is life.
I'd be OK with one game per team per year against a Big-12 opponent.I like the idea for one non-con game a year. Set aside a specific week and have all pac-12 vs. big-12 (personally i'd prefer we do it with the big-10, but whatever) it would make for a great showcase. I'd only do the one game though, not all of the non-con schedule. Maybe base it off previous year standings, 1v1, 2v2, et al. I'd even advocate each year one conference gets to host every game, the next it switches, so its balanced home-home.
I'm torn on the "championship" game, from a fan standpoint, it would be cool I think, but it surely would eliminate one of the 2 leagues each year from the playoff, which I don't like.
I'd be OK with one game per team per year against a Big-12 opponent.
My suggestion for how to arrange them:
Has to be 2 years ahead - use 2018 standings to set up 2020 games. Otherwise it'll create complications with late arrangements and scheduling.
Pac-12 #1 and #12 teams are excluded (because there are only 10 Big-12 teams)
Pac-12 #2 plays Big 12 #6 (Based on 2018, this would be WSU v. Baylor)
P#3 v. B#7 (Utah v. K State)
P#4 v. B#8 (Stanford v. Texas Tech)
P#5 v. B#9 (Oregon v Oklahoma State)
P#6 v. B#10 (Arizona State v. Kansas)
P#7 v. B#1 (Cal v. Oklahoma)
P#8 v. B#2 (USC v. Texas)
P#9 v. B#3 (Arizona v. Iowa State)
P#10 v B#4 (UCLA v. West Virginia)
P#11 v. B#5 (Colorado v TCU)
That gives each conference favorable matchups in half of the games while avoiding major mismatches (at least in theory). Using this year's standings, I think most of the games would be watchable.
Either play at the site of the higher seed, or set it up so the odd-numbered Pac-12 teams travel (or something like that). Either way, half of the games every year are at Pac-12 sites, half at Big 12 sites.
Neutral conference officials for all games.
There are 10 games, so I think 1 per week, excluding the first week and the last 2 weeks of the season. Games involving the #1 and #2 seeds occur during the first month.
I would not be on board with exempting the same two teams every year. USC and Stanford can maintain their Notre Dame rivalries and still play a Big 12 team every year. USC has typically set up at least a reasonable non-conference schedule, I don’t think they’d shy away too much. And Stanford would still have room to play UC DavisI was thinking that the logical teams to exclude would be Stanford and USC since they both play Notre Dame every year.
Anybody else remember the "Challenge Bowl" that they had for a couple of years, I believe in the Kingdome? Pac-10 all-stars vs Big 8? Seems like then they had Pac-10 vs Big 10. Then I think it went away.
I'd be OK with one game per team per year against a Big-12 opponent.
My suggestion for how to arrange them:
Has to be 2 years ahead - use 2018 standings to set up 2020 games. Otherwise it'll create complications with late arrangements and scheduling.
Pac-12 #1 and #12 teams are excluded (because there are only 10 Big-12 teams)
Pac-12 #2 plays Big 12 #6 (Based on 2018, this would be WSU v. Baylor)
P#3 v. B#7 (Utah v. K State)
P#4 v. B#8 (Stanford v. Texas Tech)
P#5 v. B#9 (Oregon v Oklahoma State)
P#6 v. B#10 (Arizona State v. Kansas)
P#7 v. B#1 (Cal v. Oklahoma)
P#8 v. B#2 (USC v. Texas)
P#9 v. B#3 (Arizona v. Iowa State)
P#10 v B#4 (UCLA v. West Virginia)
P#11 v. B#5 (Colorado v TCU)
That gives each conference favorable matchups in half of the games while avoiding major mismatches (at least in theory). Using this year's standings, I think most of the games would be watchable.
Either play at the site of the higher seed, or set it up so the odd-numbered Pac-12 teams travel (or something like that). Either way, half of the games every year are at Pac-12 sites, half at Big 12 sites.
Neutral conference officials for all games.
There are 10 games, so I think 1 per week, excluding the first week and the last 2 weeks of the season. Games involving the #1 and #2 seeds occur during the first month.