2014 NCAA Football

[k-troop]

[URL=http://espn.go.com/college-football/story/_/id/11964184/big-12-present-tcu-baylor-co-champions]http://espn.go.com/college-football/story/_/id/11964184/big-12-present-tcu-baylor-co-champions[/URL] I think that is smart of the league, to simply say that TCU and Baylor are co-champions.  It completely nullifies the whole "but they didn't win their conference" argument that people have been preparing towards TCU. In an ideal world, the Big 12 also has a championship game like the other 4 conferences, so they are all basically on the same footing.

I'm remembering (probably wrong) that the 12 team requirement to have a conf championship game was a BCS rule?

[saevel25]

Quote:

Originally Posted by k-troop


I'm remembering (probably wrong) that the 12 team requirement to have a conf championship game was a BCS rule?

Looks like it is an NCAA rule. When you have 12 teams or more you must be split into two divisions and the top two teams from each division play.

http://www.cbssports.com/collegefootball/writer/dennis-dodd/24483893/acc-supports-deregulation-of-conference-championship-games-would-change-postseason-structure

Quote:

The intent is to allow leagues their preference in how to determine their conference champion. It would theoretically eliminate the need -- per NCAA rules -- to split into divisions with the division winners meeting in a conference championship game.

That would benefit the ACC and other conferences which have expanded to the requisite minimum of 12 teams (and two divisions) to stage a championship game. Theoretically, with passage of the legislation, any of those conferences could play in one division and still stage a championship game.

If the new legislation is adopted a league could match its two highest-ranked teams. That might enhance a conference's ability to get as many teams as possible into the new four-team playoff

[Golfingdad]

I'm remembering (probably wrong) that the 12 team requirement to have a conf championship game was a BCS rule?

Absolutely no idea. ;)

It looks like the Big 12 currently has 10 teams ( ) ... and it also looks like 4 of them are Texas teams.  All they need to do is loot the nearby conferences for two more of the Texas teams (say, Rice and SMU, for example) and then they could have a North division and a "Lone Star" division.

Big-12 you are welcome.  Send my naming royalty checks to:

@Golfingdad

Shitty golfer Blvd.

Whatisrain?, CA 90210

[k-troop]

Absolutely no idea. ;) It looks like the Big 12 currently has 10 teams (:doh: ) ... and it also looks like 4 of them are Texas teams.  All they need to do is loot the nearby conferences for two more of the Texas teams (say, Rice and SMU, for example) and then they could have a North division and a "Lone Star" division. Big-12 you are welcome.  Send my naming royalty checks to: @Golfingdad Shitty golfer Blvd. Whatisrain?, CA 90210

The Big 10 grew to 12 teams, and the Big 12 shrunk to 10. Double face slap. Guess it would have been too confusing to swap names, logos, and merchandise. I'm still kinda bummed that Texas didn't move to the B1G when it had the chance. B1G is a great, academically strong conference. And it would be fun to whip up on historical powerhouse cupcakes like Penn State, Nebraska, Michigan, and tOSU every year.

[saevel25]

The Big 10 grew to 12 teams, and the Big 12 shrunk to 10. Double face slap.

Guess it would have been too confusing to swap names, logos, and merchandise. I'm still kinda bummed that Texas didn't move to the B1G when it had the chance. B1G is a great, academically strong conference. And it would be fun to whip up on historical powerhouse cupcakes like Penn State, Nebraska, Michigan, and tOSU every year.

Says the team that barely got out of Columbus with a win the year Texas won the NC game. That OSU team was the only team that year to hold Texas under 30 points that year. Just saying, don't think they would come up all in here and dominate. Especially with all the trouble they are having down there the past few years.

Not to mention I don't think Texas can handle temperatures below 50 degrees with out crying. Texas is having a hard time against teams they use to pound. Oh how the mighty have fallen.

Also Texas is very greedy. They have their own TV network, and they don't have to share revenues from bowl games. All revenues from bowl games and the Big Ten Network get split evenly between all the teams in the Big Ten. Texas would have to suck up their pride and actually give back to the conference.

[k-troop]

Says the team that barely got out of Columbus with a win the year Texas won the NC game. That OSU team was the only team that year to hold Texas under 30 points that year. [SIZE=13px]Just saying, don't think they would come up all in here and dominate. Especially with all the trouble they are having down there the past few years. [/SIZE] Not to mention I don't think Texas can handle temperatures below 50 degrees with out crying. [SIZE=13px]Texas is having a hard time against teams they use to pound. Oh how the mighty have fallen. [/SIZE] [SIZE=13px]Also Texas is very greedy. They have their own TV network, and they don't have to share revenues from bowl games. All revenues from bowl games and the Big Ten Network get split evenly between all the teams in the Big Ten. Texas would have to suck up their pride and actually give back to the conference. [/SIZE]

Ya, the last sentence of my previous post was sarcasm. Best games Texas has played in the BCS era were against Michigan and OSU, and our second trip to the Rose Bowl in 2006. In fact the bookend games of the 2005 season are probably the two best college football games I've ever watched. And further agree Texas was greedy. The longhorn network is a joke. It costs like $8/month and it's not even HD. That gets you two entire BS games against non-competitive programs. Not sure how they're making any money. It was a pure money and power grab move that had nothing to do with the quality of Texas athletics (excepting of course the quality of its finances).

[saevel25]

Ya, the last sentence of my previous post was sarcasm. Best games Texas has played in the BCS era were against Michigan and OSU, and our second trip to the Rose Bowl in 2006. In fact the bookend games of the 2005 season are probably the two best college football games I've ever watched.

And further agree Texas was greedy. The longhorn network is a joke. It costs like $8/month and it's not even HD. That gets you two entire BS games against non-competitive programs. Not sure how they're making any money. It was a pure money and power grab move that had nothing to do with the quality of Texas athletics (excepting of course the quality of its finances).

I was there in 2005 when Texas beat Ohio State. Besides the 2006 game of the century Ohio State versus Michigan. The best game I have ever been to. It was the loudest game I have ever been to.

Ohio State needs more games like that on their schedule.

[trickyputt]

Nick Saban gives Urban Meyer heart palpatations. And not in a good way. I seriously think its an issue the closer the final four looms its shadow on Ohio State. I have seen his quarterbacks cry and Urban squirm to leave the conference because of the coaching at Bama.

[smellysell]

If nothing else, Jones at least seems to be fairly intelligent...

[saevel25]

If nothing else, Jones at least seems to be fairly intelligent...

Wow you posted about a tweet from 2 years ago. If that is all you got, it ain't much. Clearly Michigan fans can't come up with anything original. Wait, how about this one, Ohio State is 12-2 versus Michigan over the last 14 years. BOOM!

[smellysell]

Haha, I would gladly have all the convicts running around Ann Arbor that Urban had at Florida and has in Columbus if it meant they could win a damn game! You have to admit that tweet is absurd though, regardless of how old is.

[Golfingdad]

Wow you posted about a tweet from 2 years ago. If that is all you got, it ain't much. Clearly Michigan fans can't come up with anything original.

Wait, how about this one, Ohio State is 12-2 versus Michigan over the last 14 years. BOOM!

Who cares how old it is, it's new to me. ;)  "We ain't come to play school???"  That should be made into a chant and signs and bumper stickers and whatever else they can come up with up there in Wisconsin for this weekend.

Haha, I would gladly have all the convicts running around Ann Arbor that Urban had at Florida and has in Columbus if it meant they could win a damn game!

Agree.  I went to Fresno State and we had a good basketball team for a few years ... and the only reason was because Jerry Tarkanian was our coach and we DID have a bunch of criminals on that team.  I was fine with it.

[trickyputt]

And they tell me my property taxes support education. Not much evidently.

[saevel25]

Haha, I would gladly have all the convicts running around Ann Arbor that Urban had at Florida and has in Columbus if it meant they could win a damn game! You have to admit that tweet is absurd though, regardless of how old is.

Yea it's absurd, hey the guy was a 20 year old cocky college kid. If stupid tweets are the worst he does, then he's ahead of the curve. Convicts at OSU? Not like the convicts at UM, I believe there has bee at least two people kicked off the team for assaulting women. The biggest thing happening in Ohio State is their best pash rusher Spence has an addiction to LSD. I'd take recreational drug use over a guy who beats women.

[teamroper60]

Yea it's absurd, hey the guy was a 20 year old cocky college kid. If stupid tweets are the worst he does, then he's ahead of the curve.

Convicts at OSU? Not like the convicts at UM, I believe there has bee at least two people kicked off the team for assaulting women.

The biggest thing happening in Ohio State is their best pash rusher Spence has an addiction to LSD. I'd take recreational drug use over a guy who beats women.

Not condoning either instance but "has" is present tense, implying the guy is still on the team.   Whereas "kicked off" implies the two UM players are no longer with the program...   No coach can keep track of their players 24-7, so the only gauge we can put on them is their choice in how they handle the situations once they are made aware of them.   We aren't talking about weed, which is pseudo-legal in some places.   We are talking about a drug that is illegal in all 50 states.     IF the OSU player is still on the team, then.you and I apparently have different definitions of which coach made the appropriate choice.

[saevel25]

Not condoning either instance but "has" is present tense, implying the guy is still on the team.   Whereas "kicked off" implies the two UM players are no longer with the program...   No coach can keep track of their players 24-7, so the only gauge we can put on them is their choice in how they handle the situations once they are made aware of them.   We aren't talking about weed, which is pseudo-legal in some places.   We are talking about a drug that is illegal in all 50 states.     IF the OSU player is still on the team, then.you and I apparently have different definitions of which coach made the appropriate choice.

Spence was suspended indefinitely. He still maintained a spot on the team and could work out but never play. The reason he still is on the team is because OSU is helping him seek medical help for his addiction, and allowing him to maintain a scholarship so he can graduate. Basically OSU is giving up a scholarship to a player who will never play one more snap so he can graduate and receive medical help. Tell me again how OSU is getting any help for actually giving a scholarship to a player who will never play. To me that is actually a hinderence to the team who could have offer someone else a scholarship. So I ask you, does it sound bad that OSU is actually helping a former player seek medical help and graduate? Should OSU just push him to the curb? OSU basically has done everything the NCAA requires on this. As long as Spence doesn't play, it is up to OSU to do what they want to do with their scholarship. There is no rule requiring scholarship players actually have to play.

[teamroper60]

Spence was suspended indefinitely. He still maintained a spot on the team and could work out but never play. The reason he still is on the team is because OSU is helping him seek medical help for his addiction, and allowing him to maintain a scholarship so he can graduate.

Basically OSU is giving up a scholarship to a player who will never play one more snap so he can graduate and receive medical help. Tell me again how OSU is getting any help for actually giving a scholarship to a player who will never play. To me that is actually a hinderence to the team who could have offer someone else a scholarship.

So I ask you, does it sound bad that OSU is actually helping a former player seek medical help and graduate? Should OSU just push him to the curb?

OSU basically has done everything the NCAA requires on this. As long as Spence doesn't play, it is up to OSU to do what they want to do with their scholarship. There is no rule requiring scholarship players actually have to play.

I know nothing about this situation other than what you have posted, so I can only go by what you have said in these posts.   Above you called this guy OSU's best pass rusher, which implies he is an active member of the team.   If he is not, and OSU has decided to let him keep his scholarship, that is their decision and I have no problem with it, provided he is not an active member of the team.  I would also not have a problem with it if they had revoked his scholarship and dismissed him from the team.   Either way, making statements such as, "Not like the convicts at UM" and then throwing up two players who were dismissed from the team as evidence that UM has "convicts" on their team is more than a little misleading since they in fact, are NOT on the team..

[saevel25]

I know nothing about this situation other than what you have posted, so I can only go by what you have said in these posts.   Above you called this guy OSU's best pass rusher, which implies he is an active member of the team.   If he is not, and OSU has decided to let him keep his scholarship, that is their decision and I have no problem with it, provided he is not an active member of the team.  I would also not have a problem with it if they had revoked his scholarship and dismissed him from the team.   Either way, making statements such as, "Not like the convicts at UM" and then throwing up two players who were dismissed from the team as evidence that UM has "convicts" on their team is more than a little misleading since they in fact, are NOT on the team..

Last year as a sophomore he had 14 tackles for loss and 7.5 sacks. He was tied with Joey Bosa who had 13.5 tackles for loss and 7.5 sacks last year.

I think most NFL scouts projected him as a first round draft pick. He the prototypical speed rusher at the defense end position.

It wasn't even the NCAA it was the Big Ten who has stricter rules than the NCAA on their drug policy. Still, he can not play in the games. He hasn't been kicked out of college football due to NCAA infractions. So he's basically in a limbo area of the rules. He can be an active member of the team. He can practice, and he can work out and use the facilities. He just can not play in a game.