My BCS conference restructuring plan.

[chuckywang]

Alright guys, here's what I'm thinking for the BCS conferences.

1) Add Memphis to the Big Ten.
2) Add Temple to Conference USA
3) Add BYU and Nevada to the Pac 10
4) Upgrade Montana to Div 1-A and add them to the WAC
5) Upgrade North Dakota St. to Div 1-A and add them to the MWC

There you go. Now you got conference title games in the Big Ten and the Pac 10.

 

[tennisflip]

Big Ten should add Notre Dame or steal Pitt from the Big East

 

[Feldenak]

Originally posted by: tennisflip
Big Ten should add Notre Dame or steal Pitt from the Big East

ND will not join the Big 10...they're "too good" for that. :roll:

 

[AccruedExpenditure]

California is underrated in your poll.

 

[chuckywang]

Notre Dame will always be independent. They're stuck-up like that.

And you can't take even more good football programs away from the Big East.

 

[tfinch2]

Or how about cut down the non-conference schedule to 1 game, and take the top 2 teams from each of the bcs conferences, and 1 from the others, and have a 16-team playoff. The ones that don't make the playoff can have their pointless bowl games. If you're not in a conference, such as ND, too fvcking bad.

 

[slsmnaz]

Originally posted by: chuckywang
Alright guys, here's what I'm thinking for the BCS conferences.

1) Add Memphis to the Big Ten.
2) Add Temple to Conference USA
3) Add BYU and Nevada to the Pac 10
4) Upgrade Montana to Div 1-A and add them to the WAC
5) Upgrade North Dakota St. to Div 1-A and add them to the MWC

There you go. Now you got conference title games in the Big Ten and the Pac 10.

You only include 2 BCS conf. in your "plan". What does that even do? And please, like the PAC10 needs any more patsies At least add some good teams to the BCS conf.

 

[Mill]

Add Memphis to the Big-10? Are you drunk?

 

[chuckywang]

Originally posted by: slsmnaz

Originally posted by: chuckywang
Alright guys, here's what I'm thinking for the BCS conferences.

1) Add Memphis to the Big Ten.
2) Add Temple to Conference USA
3) Add BYU and Nevada to the Pac 10
4) Upgrade Montana to Div 1-A and add them to the WAC
5) Upgrade North Dakota St. to Div 1-A and add them to the MWC

There you go. Now you got conference title games in the Big Ten and the Pac 10.

You only include 2 BCS conf. in your "plan". What does that even do? And please, like the PAC10 needs any more patsies

The Big 12, the SEC, and the ACC all have 12 teams, so they have conference championship games. This "plan" will give championship games to the Big Ten and the Pac 10.

 

[chuckywang]

Originally posted by: Mill
Add Memphis to the Big-10? Are you drunk?

Basketball reasons

 

[BlancoNino]

How about if you want to go play for the national title, make sure you schedule games against tough opponents.

 

[slsmnaz]

Originally posted by: chuckywang

Originally posted by: slsmnaz

Originally posted by: chuckywang
Alright guys, here's what I'm thinking for the BCS conferences.

1) Add Memphis to the Big Ten.
2) Add Temple to Conference USA
3) Add BYU and Nevada to the Pac 10
4) Upgrade Montana to Div 1-A and add them to the WAC
5) Upgrade North Dakota St. to Div 1-A and add them to the MWC

There you go. Now you got conference title games in the Big Ten and the Pac 10.

You only include 2 BCS conf. in your "plan". What does that even do? And please, like the PAC10 needs any more patsies

The Big 12, the SEC, and the ACC all have 12 teams, so they have conference championship games. This "plan" will give championship games to the Big Ten and the Pac 10.

And add teams that will never be competitive in them. Not really a good plan.

 

[UTmtnbiker]

Generally when talk of BYU going to the PAC10, Utah is the other team mentioned (and vice versa). Keep in mind, up until this year, BYU has been in the dumps in football, and basketball is only making a reemergence within the last year or two. Although Utah is having a bad year in football, traditionally, they've been more of a basketball power with a lot of tourney appearances.

Nevada is too much of a small time program to go to something like the PAC10, whereas Utah/BYU has the population, alumni, and fan base.

 

[chuckywang]

Originally posted by: slsmnaz

Originally posted by: chuckywang

Originally posted by: slsmnaz

Originally posted by: chuckywang
Alright guys, here's what I'm thinking for the BCS conferences.

1) Add Memphis to the Big Ten.
2) Add Temple to Conference USA
3) Add BYU and Nevada to the Pac 10
4) Upgrade Montana to Div 1-A and add them to the WAC
5) Upgrade North Dakota St. to Div 1-A and add them to the MWC

There you go. Now you got conference title games in the Big Ten and the Pac 10.

You only include 2 BCS conf. in your "plan". What does that even do? And please, like the PAC10 needs any more patsies

The Big 12, the SEC, and the ACC all have 12 teams, so they have conference championship games. This "plan" will give championship games to the Big Ten and the Pac 10.

And add teams that will never be competitive in them. Not really a good plan.

They will be competitive when they get the major conference money. And joining major conferences will help recruiting as well.

 

[chuckywang]

Originally posted by: UTmtnbiker
Generally when talk of BYU going to the PAC10, Utah is the other team mentioned (and vice versa). Keep in mind, up until this year, BYU has been in the dumps in football, and basketball is only making a reemergence within the last year or two. Although Utah is having a bad year in football, traditionally, they've been more of a basketball power with a lot of tourney appearances.

Nevada is too much of a small time program to go to something like the PAC10, whereas Utah/BYU has the population, alumni, and fan base.

I was thinking about Utah as well, but that would mean the MWC losing two teams.

 

[chuckywang]

Originally posted by: BlancoNino
How about if you want to go play for the national title, make sure you schedule games against tough opponents.

1) This thread isn't about the national title and how to determine one.
2) Teams such as Louisville have been trying to schedule tough opponents. Those "tough" opponents keep turning them down.

 

[slsmnaz]

Originally posted by: chuckywang

Originally posted by: slsmnaz

Originally posted by: chuckywang

Originally posted by: slsmnaz

Originally posted by: chuckywang
Alright guys, here's what I'm thinking for the BCS conferences.

1) Add Memphis to the Big Ten.
2) Add Temple to Conference USA
3) Add BYU and Nevada to the Pac 10
4) Upgrade Montana to Div 1-A and add them to the WAC
5) Upgrade North Dakota St. to Div 1-A and add them to the MWC

There you go. Now you got conference title games in the Big Ten and the Pac 10.

You only include 2 BCS conf. in your "plan". What does that even do? And please, like the PAC10 needs any more patsies

The Big 12, the SEC, and the ACC all have 12 teams, so they have conference championship games. This "plan" will give championship games to the Big Ten and the Pac 10.

And add teams that will never be competitive in them. Not really a good plan.

They will be competitive when they get the major conference money. And joining major conferences will help recruiting as well.

See Kentucky and Vanderbilt as examples that this is not true.

 

[chuckywang]

Originally posted by: slsmnaz

Originally posted by: chuckywang

Originally posted by: slsmnaz

Originally posted by: chuckywang

Originally posted by: slsmnaz

Originally posted by: chuckywang
Alright guys, here's what I'm thinking for the BCS conferences.

1) Add Memphis to the Big Ten.
2) Add Temple to Conference USA
3) Add BYU and Nevada to the Pac 10
4) Upgrade Montana to Div 1-A and add them to the WAC
5) Upgrade North Dakota St. to Div 1-A and add them to the MWC

There you go. Now you got conference title games in the Big Ten and the Pac 10.

You only include 2 BCS conf. in your "plan". What does that even do? And please, like the PAC10 needs any more patsies

The Big 12, the SEC, and the ACC all have 12 teams, so they have conference championship games. This "plan" will give championship games to the Big Ten and the Pac 10.

And add teams that will never be competitive in them. Not really a good plan.

They will be competitive when they get the major conference money. And joining major conferences will help recruiting as well.

See Kentucky and Vanderbilt as examples that this is not true.

Tim Couch and Jay Cutler

 

[slsmnaz]

You name 2 players 10 years apart for your proof? Seriously?

 

[chuckywang]

Kentucky's there for basketball. Vanderbilt is there for academics. Every major conference has that elitist school known for academics: Stanford, Duke, Northwestern, Baylor, Syracuse.

 

[slsmnaz]

Originally posted by: chuckywang
Kentucky's there for basketball. Vanderbilt is there for academics. Every major conference has that elitist school known for academics: Stanford, Duke, Northwestern, Baylor, Rutgers.

BCS is football and the teams you listed have none of those. No one goes to Memphis or North Dakota St for academics.

 

[UTmtnbiker]

I think you'd have to take the two of them together because of their fierce inter-state rivalry. Let's face it, the MWC is Utah and BYU. Sure, you could maybe say Colorado State in there as Sonny Lubick has always fielded a contending football team and the Lobos are always tough in basketball, but the MWC is basically those two teams. Pull both of them out and the entire conference collapses, which I think it well should. If one stays in, I think you could say they would win the football and basketball titles every year.

The WAC survived ASU and Arizona bolting for the PAC10, but once BYU/Utah pulled out it pretty much became the All Weird Geographic Conference as they took any team they could to stay in the big leagues.

PAC12 with Utah and BYU would make me happy....we could've gotten a real team to play 2 years ago in the Fiesta Bowl rather than that crummy Pitt team from the Big East.

Originally posted by: chuckywang

Originally posted by: UTmtnbiker
Generally when talk of BYU going to the PAC10, Utah is the other team mentioned (and vice versa). Keep in mind, up until this year, BYU has been in the dumps in football, and basketball is only making a reemergence within the last year or two. Although Utah is having a bad year in football, traditionally, they've been more of a basketball power with a lot of tourney appearances.

Nevada is too much of a small time program to go to something like the PAC10, whereas Utah/BYU has the population, alumni, and fan base.

I was thinking about Utah as well, but that would mean the MWC losing two teams.

 

[chuckywang]

Originally posted by: slsmnaz

Originally posted by: chuckywang
Kentucky's there for basketball. Vanderbilt is there for academics. Every major conference has that elitist school known for academics: Stanford, Duke, Northwestern, Baylor, Rutgers.

BCS is football and the teams you listed have none of those. No one goes to Memphis or North Dakota St for academics.

BCS is football, but BCS conference is a term that has crossed over to other sports.

And the schools I added weren't because of academics (the BCS conferences already have those schools). It was because of football or basketball, the two major sports. And you see that I added North Dakota St. to the MWC, which is not a major conference.

 

[Mill]

Originally posted by: chuckywang

Originally posted by: Mill
Add Memphis to the Big-10? Are you drunk?

Basketball reasons

Uhh. If they should go somewhere it shouldn't be the Big 10.

 

[rgwalt]

Originally posted by: Feldenak

Originally posted by: tennisflip
Big Ten should add Notre Dame or steal Pitt from the Big East

ND will not join the Big 10...they're "too good" for that. :roll:

ND is not too good for a conference... they are Big 10 in all sports other than football. They are not "too stuck up". What does an athletic conference really do besides provide a base set of teams to play and provide television coverage? I suppose they distribute winnings from Bowl games...

Why join a conference when you can get all of your home games televised without conference support? ND does not need money or television support for their football program, so joining a conference would only hurt the Irish. Besides, joining a conference would likely dictate much of ND's schedule, and prevent the Irish from playing teams like USC and Navy year after year, which is a tradition for ND.

If the BCS made a rule saying that only conference teams can go to BCS bowl games I am sure the Irish would join a conference at that point. Until there are clear motivations for ND to join a conference, there is no real reason to do so.

R