November 27, 2007
Nutt agrees to deal at Ole Miss
The Northeast Mississippi Daily Journal is reporting that Houston Nutt is the new head coach at Mississippi.
Houston Nutt became the leading candidate for the Ole Miss job in the middle of the day Monday, then closed the deal before midnight, sources close to the program told the Daily Journal.
...
Sources indicate Ole Miss offered Nutt $9.5 million over five years – $1.9 million a year – the fifth year being a rollover year. Nutt’s Arkansas contract was for about $1.5 million a year.
I will repeat my earlier doubts about Ole Miss actually cracking the wallet to hire someone with Nutt's resume, but... maybe the Rebels feel they need to spend some money and compete in the SEC West.
The Daily Journal goes on to say that Nutt and Ole Miss are still finalizing details on the coaching staff, including the future of wide receivers coach Hugh Freeze and DC John Thompson -- who many regard as one of the better DC's in the conference.
A press conference has been scheduled for today.
If this pans out, it is easily the best thing to happen at Ole Miss in a long, long time. It would be a monumental hire, for sure. It certainly re-raises the bar in the SEC and -- perhaps fittingly -- makes the SEC West the most inbred division in college football, with Saban (LSU, Alabama), Tuberville (Ole Miss, Auburn) and Nutt (Arkansas, Ole Miss).
UDPATE
CBS Sportsline is confirming that Nutt is the new head coach at Ole Miss.
Comments:
col reb said:
posted on November 27, 2007 1:10 PM — 76.107.123.246 — link — abuse?
As an Ole Miss alumni and fan, I am pumped. Not only does this guy have a great SEC track record, but he can also start with a good recruiting base. Last time around we took our 50th option, this time it appears to be our first. I am not going off the deep end here with NC predictions, but I now think that a Western Title every 5 years or so is legit. Cannot wait for October 25th.
posted on November 27, 2007 1:26 PM — 64.12.116.136 — link — abuse?War Eagle Atlanta
said:
Col Reb: Maybe Nutt will get you to Atlanta for the first time ever. But now you can expect the R-Kansas/Ole Miss rivalry to heat up, a la LSU/Alabama.
Oh yea. For the record:
Alumnus: male graduate of a school
Alumna: female graduate of a school
Alumni: plural, consisting of males and females
You latin grammar lesson. That will be 25 cents, please.
Big Tide said:
posted on November 27, 2007 2:11 PM — 69.34.227.69 — link — abuse?
Wonderful hire for Ole Miss. I love the fact that Tubberville stayed at Auburn. I know I predicted he would leave, but a couple of guys I know that are dedicated Barners have told me the LOVE has really been extended to Tommy (with $$ to follow.) Nutt Case is a good coach and anyone who has ever been to Oxford will tell you it is as pretty a place to play a football game as there is anywhere. I always feel like I'm going back in time when I hit the Square. Hey TE, do you ever frequent Square Books there in Oxford? Talk about a tough division. How good is the SEC West? Even you Mid West boys have to admit winning the SEC West is an accomplishment. So is Miles gonna hang around and keep the family together? C'mon Kevin, what's the scoop on turtleneck????
TE
posted on November 27, 2007 3:04 PM — 204.68.245.11 — link — abuse? said:
Is the SEC not the most interesting-and best-in all of college football?
Spurrier started at UF, now at USC (Rumored to be at LSU)...
Tuberville at OM now at AU...
Saban at LSU, now at UAT...
Nutt at Arkansas, now at OM...
Heck, Holtz was at Arky, then USC...
Kevin...Believe it or not, this almost cements the Pelini to Nebraska deal...Remember that jet we talked about yesterday, and where it went?
Since he's no longer an option at OM, he's probably going to come back home...
Cane Mutiny
posted on November 27, 2007 3:23 PM — 65.12.247.141 — link — abuse? said:
Wow, I'm still not really clear on why Nutt got fired at Arkansas. Not that I know much about it, but Arkansas doesn't seem to be doing that badly; it's not like a Larry Coker situation where he got progressively worse every year, he seems to have been pretty good consistently.
Although I guess the team's performance this year, with a Heisman caliber running back, was sub-par, and I guess the blame goes back to the coach. I just don't know who'll they'll be able to hire that's any better...
...It's great to be a Miami Hurricane...get some recruits!
Spartacus
posted on November 27, 2007 3:36 PM — 72.25.84.228 — link — abuse? said:
col reb:
"but he can also start with a good recruiting base". Great, but is he really gonna land a top class. I think that it's a tough situation for anybody to change jobs. First off, rarely does any coach have anything more than a mediocre first year of recruiting. Usually, he has inherited a team with not much talent, or the previous coach may not have been dismissed. He has to "redshirt" just about all of that 1st recruiting class - as there just isn't too much talent there. So, he plays out his 1st year with the same guys that were there the prior year (sans the very best seniors). So then he finally gets to recruit his 2nd class after takin' hard knocks in that 1st year. This can be a pretty decent class, but still, most of these recruits will be red-shirted. So, he gets to enter into his 2nd season with some sub-standard sophs and RS freshmen, to go along with all the sub-standard players that were left around from the prior failed regime. So, he takes his lumps again. Now, he gets to recruit his 3rd class. This is about the time that the "administration" expects for him to perform miracles. It's usually not going to happen. He has to redshirt about half of this class, some of these freshman will play, and he gets to have a pretty decent soph and RS freshmen group to work with. At this point the team is very young. He finally has some decent talent - but not much experience. Usually, if the coach doesn't win big in this year, he's in alot of trouble. Fact is: he probably will not be able to.
Urban Meyer was able to land an outstanding recruiting class in his 1st session at Florida. This was because of the outstanding pipeline that Florida has always had. Ron Zook left him plenty of talent. Ron Zook, now at Illinois, has been able to turn that program around immediately with his outstanding recruiting abilities. Pete Carroll did not have a great 1st recruiting session (by USC's standards), but had enough talent laying around, that he was able to launch the program in only his 2nd year.
Two guys who didn't really have an eye for talent, Bill Callahan and Charlie Weis, were able to go in and completely dismantle programs within a short period of time.
Point is: Nutt is a real good coach who would be able to get this program turned around (if they give him more than three years). Orgeron was a good recruiter (but many have probably been dismissed) - but I'm not so sure there is alot of talent on this squad. I would not expect instant miracles out of this group in the next two years. I would expect that the Rebs could probably win a few of those close games that they have been losing though. I think the fan base at Ol' Miss has to demand that this coach get more than three years - and not demand his head just because they are not winning immediately. This is an unreasonable expectation in light of all of the circumstances that have recently engulfed this team.Tommie Trojan
Big Tide said:
posted on November 27, 2007 4:46 PM — 69.34.227.69 — link — abuse?
Possibly it's the historical lack of quality professional football, but for some reason the South is college football crazy and a lot of my friends from out West that make it down here for a game just can't get over the passion. All of my Ole Miss friends are just sick to turn on the television and see Missouri, Oregon, etc. all winning football games and they can't even win a SINGLE SEC game! There is a lot of passion in Oxford and while all those Rebs would love a next day miracle I think they will be patient with Nutt Case. You never know, but Nutt may do for Ole Miss what Pat Dye did for Auburn. Bring them back to true respectability. That's really what we all want.....just to know if we get a few breaks and don't catch the injury bug OUR team has a chance to compete with anybody on any given Saturday. Let me tell you something, losing to your rival 6 years in a row Sucks!!! Somebody forward this post to Nick up in T-town. When does Spring ball start???????
Sweet Home Alabama said:
posted on November 27, 2007 4:54 PM — 75.120.243.45 — link — abuse?
I suppose that Nutt feels if he was worth 2.4 million yesterday then he was worth that last year.
It always griped me to be offered more money when I had decided to leave. Should have already been paying it to me.
posted on November 27, 2007 4:58 PM — 64.12.116.136 — link — abuse? said:
I thought Nutt was an Arkansas alumnus, but actually, after 2 years under Broyles, he transferred to OK State when Lou Holtz came in, because he didn't get enough playing time under the option style offense.
In the end, maybe leaving Arkansas wasn't that hard, even though he is a Little Rock native.
Porky: I call Bullsh*t on the $2.4 M offer. Who said that, other than your Hog Homers, so that they could feel better?
Tom Blogical
posted on November 27, 2007 6:26 PM — 24.95.77.153 — link — abuse? said:
TE (#9):
"Since he's no longer an option at OM, he's probably going to come back home..."
I presume you're talking about Pelini. He was born and raised in Youngstown, Ohio and was a Free Safety at Ohio State from '87-'90. He may be going back to Nebraska to coach there again, or he may stay at LSU, but those two places ain't "home". ;-)
"Is the SEC not the most interesting-and best-in all of college football?"
Most interesting? Absolutely, yes. The best? Not in my opinion. The way this season has played out, it tells me there are no clear cut "better" conferences. I'm not saying that to start an argument--because I'm just not in the mood to argue--I'm just answering your question and stating my opinion. I already know what your opinion is (and I'm sure...check that, I know...you'd have good points to back it up), so let's just agree to disagree. ;-)
I do believe LSU will take the Vols down rather easily. Then again, I'm not good at predictions. Since I've said that, it'll probably turn into a 4 or 5 OT nail biter. And now I feel sorry for WVU since I think (and stated on another thread) they'll open a 55 gallon drum of whoop ass on Pitt.
Big Tide said:
posted on November 27, 2007 6:39 PM — 69.34.227.69 — link — abuse?
Tom Blogical #24, IMHO the SEC is better than the Big 11 because we have a championship game. That would also put, IMHO, the ACC and Big 12 ahead of them as well. PAC 10 Dead LAST. No arguments here either. Just stating my humble opinion. I like a clear conference champion and the championship game is the only way to have one.
Tom Blogical
posted on November 27, 2007 6:55 PM — 24.95.77.153 — link — abuse? said:
Big Tide (#26):
I hear what you're saying, I think it's dumb for the Big 10(11) to have 11 teams instead of 10 or 12, and just as dumb for them to not have a Conference Championship. However, the Big 10(11) does have a clear winner this year, as OSU won it outright based on their win-loss record. In a perfect world, each Conference would have a Championship Game.
posted on November 27, 2007 7:27 PM — 64.12.116.136 — link — abuse? said:
Porky: An apology to you sir, you were correct, I was wrong. In the old days, you might have challenged me to a dual impuning your credibility so.
Okay, I still call BS on this 'source' that told Ivan Maisel that figure. It just doesn't make a lot of sense that he would accept an Ole Miss offer of so much less...
Tom Blogical
posted on November 27, 2007 7:56 PM — 24.95.77.153 — link — abuse? said:
War Eagle Atlanta (#31):
I think you're on to something. All Championship and National Championship Games can be settled with a glove slap and a duel between the QBs! Instead of guns, they throw footballs at their noggins!!
(:-D)
posted on November 27, 2007 8:15 PM — 64.12.116.136 — link — abuse? said:
Tom: I prefer 'nose tweeking' to gets things fired off... Of all the 18th century insults you could make to someone, grabbing their nose quickly was the worst one.
Glad to see you're firmly grounded in reality as far as the Big 10(11)needing to get a championship game. It's only a win/win/win. I really can't believe they've waited this long. For the record, who would you like to see added to that coveted 12th slot?
Hey Tom, another thing. This is kind of embarassing, but I figure maybe not many people are reading this at this time. How do you put italics on here? I'm not a blogger, so I don't know the tricks of the trade. You just did it, and some of the others guys do it. Is there an easy way? I'd ask my doctor, but I don't think he'd know... LOL
Big Tide said:
posted on November 27, 2007 8:37 PM — 12.208.88.211 — link — abuse?
Tom, yeah I'd like that as well. WEA, I've been waiting for someone to ask that question since I began reading/posting on this site. By the way Tom, as coaches go, I sure like the sweater and tie worn by Tressel. I was hoping Saban might break out a tie at least once this year. Then again I was hoping we would win more than 6 games. There's always next year!!!!
The question is, with all the money the Big 10 already has, what on Earth would they do with the extra zillion a championship game would bring in? Maybe convince Joe Pa to retire.
Tom Blogical
posted on November 27, 2007 9:04 PM — 24.95.77.153 — link — abuse? said:
War Eagle Atlanta (#33):
Nothing to be embarrassed about, bro. Let's say you want to put the words War Eagle in italics in your comment. Basically, you have to put a little code (very short, only 3 characters) in front of the word War and a little code (only 4 characters) after the word Eagle.
(***Disclaimer: Hopefully, this next part will display properly. I tested it in blogger, and it seemed to go OK. Comment preview doesn't work for me in either Firefox or Internet Explorer.***)
In front of the word War, you'd have to type a letter i surrounded by >. After the word Eagle, you'd have to type a /i surrounded by >. The first part--the i (with the less than and greater than signs of course)--tells the comment software where you want to start italicizing, and the second part--the /i--tells you where you want to stop italicizing.
(If you want something in bold--replace the letter i with the letter b.)
I have to word it like that and can't show you exactly how to type it because the software would interpret that as code and it wouldn't display--just like you don't see the code, and see italics instead when I italicize something.
Alright, so long story short, it should look like this when you're done:
War Eagle
Tom Blogical
posted on November 27, 2007 9:11 PM — 24.95.77.153 — link — abuse? said:
War Eagle Atlanta (#33):
I'm sorry, the parts in bold in the following section didn't display properly:
In front of the word War, you'd have to type a letter i surrounded by >. After the word Eagle, you'd have to type a /i surrounded by >. The first part--the i (with the less than and greater than signs of course)--tells the comment software where you want to start italicizing, and the second part--the /i--tells you where you want to stop italicizing.
For these two items in bold it should have the "less than sign" also, not just the "greater than sign". The letter b or i should be inside them to begin the bold or italics, and the /b or /i should be inside them to end the bold or italics.
Does this make sense? I really tried to explain this without being too wordy! (:-D)
Tom Blogical
posted on November 27, 2007 9:14 PM — 24.95.77.153 — link — abuse? said:
War Eagle Atlanta (#33):
I'm so sorry!! The items in bold didn't show up well! They are the two "greater than" signs in that section.
Tom Blogical
posted on November 27, 2007 9:21 PM — 24.95.77.153 — link — abuse? said:
War Eagle Atlanta (#33):
This
website has a chart of HTML tags (scroll down a little and you'll find it, including the examples for bold and italics that I tried (not very well) to show you.Hope that helps!
Cane Mutiny
posted on November 27, 2007 9:35 PM — 65.12.247.141 — link — abuse? said:
Dammit, sorry, it erased what I wanted to show for some reason - I guess I now understand Tom Blogical's frustration...
Lol, whatever, I tried, just go to the website....
...It's great to be a Miami Hurricane - R.I.P. Sean Taylor, #26.
Tom Blogical
posted on November 27, 2007 10:03 PM — 24.95.77.153 — link — abuse? said:
War Eagle Atlanta (#33):
Who would I like to see in the coveted 12th spot? I really haven't given it much thought. Notre Dame would seem like the logical choice, and it would drastically help their program without question. I think it would help the Big 10(11) from a financial perspective, but it would hurt the conference from a competition perspective initially.
After that, West Virginia, Pittsburgh and possibly Louisville would be interesting additions, however they're all in the Big East already.
Tom Blogical
posted on November 27, 2007 11:15 PM — 24.95.77.153 — link — abuse? said:
War Eagle Atlanta (#33):
As far as the Conference Championships, oh yeah!!! I want a clear winner!!! Co-Championships and ties are like kissing your sister...UGH!!!
Isn't that why we have overtimes now to settle the ties in regulation? I wish the Big 10(11) and all the other conferences with out the Championship Game get a clue on that.
The Big 10(11) hasn't made any recent decisions that make any freaking sense. I'll be glad if the day comes that Jim Delaney is no longer the Big 10(11) president.
Tom Blogical
posted on November 27, 2007 11:53 PM — 24.95.77.153 — link — abuse? said:
Lennie Collins (#44):
I wholeheartedly agree that they were designed for the cash, but my personal thing is, I hate ties. Without a Conference Championship, ties (Co-Champions) will potentially happen, unless each Big 10(11) team plays each of the other 10 teams in the conference. Co-Champions really doesn't sound so hot when that Co-Champion gets to go play in the National Championship game.
And, since it is all about the cash, it's even more ridiculous that Delaney hasn't gone to a Championship Game. Isn't Delaney all about the money?
The beauty of a Championship Game is, it declares 1 winner, and gets rid of the Co-Champion moniker. Does that mean I would use that information to discount the winner of a conference without a Championship Game? No. All the conferences must currently play first by the rules of their conference, and second by the rules of the BCS. It is what it is, and each team has to deal with it, unfortunately.
Now, in all fairness to the Big 12, yes Kansas has 1 loss. BUT--they had to play Missouri to get into the Championship Game. They had their shot and they didn't win. Missouri had their shot and they won. It was decided on the field, so I really can't find anything wrong with that.
posted on November 28, 2007 3:22 PM — 64.12.116.136 — link — abuse? said:
Well said, BMC!
Tom Blog: Thanks for the tip. I will practice it now. Yea, don't think ND will come to the Big 10 bargaining table until they've had a few losing seasons strung together and after it's time to renegotiate their share of the BCS pie.
Big Tide, I'm glad I'm not the only clueless guy on here.
b> This should be bold. a/b>
i> This should be in italics. a/i>
posted on November 28, 2007 3:27 PM — 64.12.116.136 — link — abuse? said:
Okay, I just screwed the pooch on that. Back to the drawing board.
Lennie #44: You're such a cynic. Giving teams a chance to win it on the field is the central idea behind the conf. champ. game. Money and exposure are just gravy!
Let me try again. I think I read Tom's instructions too literally...
Bold
Italics
Tom Blogical
posted on November 28, 2007 4:21 PM — 24.95.77.153 — link — abuse? said:
Lennie Collins (#50):
The right to lose the "Co-Champion" tag. :)
Tom Blogical
posted on November 28, 2007 4:25 PM — 24.95.77.153 — link — abuse? said:
War Eagle (#49):
Don't mention it! (:-D)
gatorhippy
posted on November 28, 2007 4:30 PM — 209.16.115.5 — link — abuse? said:
Lennie (#50):
"If a undefeated team beats an above average team in the game what has been won?"
A conference championship...
The number one goal of any conference affiliated team should be to win it's league and if that means going undefeated through the season only to 'screw the pooch' in the most meaningful game of the season then so be it...
However, I do agree that either ALL conferences should be required to have one or NONE should have one...
The way it is now, it either gives a team an advantage or a disadvantege depending on which end of the stick their holding in the cesspool of the BCS...
posted on November 28, 2007 4:36 PM — 64.12.116.136 — link — abuse? said:
Cynic: a person who believes that only selfishness motivates human actions and who disbelieves in or minimizes selfless acts or disinterested points of view. See Lennie Collins.
and then I looked further...
Lennie Collins a person who thinks everything is about money. See cynic...
I'm just playing with you, Lennie.
Hey, we need to have a little wiggle room. All these threads are about coaching changes the last few days.
Tom Blogical
posted on November 28, 2007 5:04 PM — 24.95.77.153 — link — abuse? said:
gatorhippy (#55):
No sweat, bro! Glad I could help you guys out. It's kinda fun to use 'em. I guess 20 years in IT finally paid off! LOL!!
Lennie Collins (#57):
Well if you insist on talking about the topic of the thread...sigh...just kidding!
My take on Houston Nutt is that it was bound to happen. When the fan base turns on a coach like that, there is nothing the coach is going to do to overcome it. Even winning. I do think Ole Miss is getting a good coach, but not a great one. At least, he's not a great coach yet.
Tom Blogical
posted on November 28, 2007 5:22 PM — 24.95.77.153 — link — abuse? said:
OU-Ron (#61):
Hang tight. I'm going to post something on my blog, then will link to it here. I can get what I want to show up there.
Spartacus
posted on November 28, 2007 5:47 PM — 72.25.84.228 — link — abuse? said:
WEA:
My close friends insist that I am the most cynical person that has ever lived. I carry that mantle proudly with only one difference: I do beleive that there are some people who do good things, just because, somebody needs to do it. On the other hand, where big money is involved, I don't see any hope for mankind. Sorry. So, you can let Lenny off that hook. He can't possibly be as twisted as I am.
Tommie Trojan
Tom Blogical
posted on November 28, 2007 5:55 PM — 24.95.77.153 — link — abuse? said:
OU-Ron:
OK, I posted the instructions on my blog. You can click on this link to get there. Hope this helps you out!
Tom Blogical
posted on November 28, 2007 5:59 PM — 24.95.77.153 — link — abuse? said:
OU-Ron:
Yep, that's it. Now just replace the letter b with the letter i, and you'll have it in italics.
GO SOONERS!!!!
Tom Blogical
posted on November 28, 2007 6:40 PM — 24.95.77.153 — link — abuse? said:
OU-Ron (#72):
It's showing up well. I combined bold and italics when I posted before:
GO SOONERS!!!
You can also use just italics:
GO SOONERS!!!
And to honor Houston Nutt and have this comment relate at least a little to the thread:
Go Rebels!!
Tom Blogical
posted on November 28, 2007 6:46 PM — 24.95.77.153 — link — abuse? said:
So, who is going to want to go to Arkansas now? I guess they could just negotiate with 1-year contracts until they find somebody they like...if anybody would ever agree to something like that.
posted on November 28, 2007 7:13 PM — 64.12.116.136 — link — abuse? said:
First time we ever turned a thread into an instructional-work/study format. Tom Blog, do you feel like Gabe Kaplan in Welcome Back Kotter with all us morons?
Tommie T: Yea, I know you're a cynic, man. Aren't we all a little bit? There's actually many definitions for the word, the one I gave just sounded like Lennie. I'm just busting his balls a little.
It's like someone on here once said about the conference championship games, "Yea, they just want the money", and my answer was "and your point is......"
Tom Blogical
posted on November 28, 2007 8:26 PM — 24.95.77.153 — link — abuse? said:
K-Hue (#77):
You had me at OH-IO...and Houston Nutt says Show me the MONEY!!!
That's the best reference to Jerry Maguire I've got...
Tom Blogical
posted on November 29, 2007 11:12 AM — 24.95.77.153 — link — abuse? said:
Porky:
I can get 100 miles to the gallon on this hog...
Tomcat said:
posted on November 29, 2007 12:43 PM — 68.93.140.127 — link — abuse?
#54 gatorhippy One of the best posts on the subject. Guys from Big 11 or Pac just dont get it.
Everything should be level between leagues and sometimes blogging this subject is like beatin a dead horse. Ohio St & Michigan should play twice a year right? Doesnt make sense ?
Then why OU vs Missu 07
UT vs Colo 05
AU vs Tenn 04
UT vs Colo 02
UT vs Neb 99
Just a few examples, theres many more and theres usually a disatvantage to the team that won the first one.
Headlines Read
Rebel football team gets a NuttCFB Fan said:
posted on November 29, 2007 4:26 PM — 192.131.99.130 — link — abuse?
@ 85
Tomcat,
By saying, “Guys from Big 11 or Pac just don’t get it.”
Is the glass half empty or half full?
The Big East with 8 schools, plays 7 conference games with 5 non-conference games.
The PAC-10 with 10 schools, plays 9 conference games with 3 non-conference games.
Both of these conferences at least play ALL their conference members, during the football season.
Something that NONE of the remaining BCS conferences can say.
Remember, when the ACC got Miami and Virginia Tech to join, which took them to 11 schools. They petition the NCAA for a conference championship game with two divisions; 1 of 5 teams and the other with 6 teams.
The NCAA said, “NO”. At which time the ACC invited Boston College.
So saying all that, the Big Ten should do one of two things (IMHO). Either add a 12th school and split into two divisions as like the ACC, Big 12 & SEC. Or play a 10 game conference schedule, with only 2 non-conference games.
You mentioned, “Ohio St & Michigan should play twice a year right? Doesnt make sense ?
Then why OU vs Missu 07, UT vs Colo 05, AU vs Tenn 04, UT vs Colo 02 & UT vs Neb 99”Why play someone a second time, during the season. When there are 106 other teams you have not played?
Look, besides making millions of dollars for the conference, what good are these conference championship games anyway?
In 2003 Oklahoma loses to Kansas St., 35-7 in the Big 12 championship game. But, still plays for the national championship.
This year with BIG “ifs” (should both Missouri & West Virginia lose this weekend), Georgia may get into the NC game, without winning their division and/or conference championship.
I’m not slamming Georgia. As if this were a play-off situation, I would not want to face either, Georgia or Southern Cal at this time. Both teams are clicking on all cylinders!
My point is this; with 119 teams, over the course of a 12 game regular season schedule, with no play-off system and competing for the #1 and #2 rankings.
In order to play in the BCS National Championship game. One minimum qualification should be, the teams must be a conference champion.
As defined by each, of these BCS conferences (excluding Notre Dame, should they be ranked either #1 or #2 of course).
Tomcat said:
posted on November 30, 2007 10:05 AM — 70.249.43.172 — link — abuse?
#88 CFB
This subject has been covered repeatedly and my stance is very simple and complicated.
All conferences should have the same number of teams
Conference championships should either be eliminated or all conferences should play them.While I agree with your statement "Why play somebody for a second time when there are 107 teams you have not played" I also agree with " What good are these conference championship games anyway"
We are in agreement and you obviuosly support a team that does not have a CCG game, so your team is at an advantage over a team that belongs to a conference that has a CCG game.
For example in 06 had the big-10/11 had a CCG game perhaps Ohio st - Mich would have to play twice-sounds stupid, and I dont agree with it, but that is the way it is in the XII,SEC and ACCI disagree that in order to play in a BSC game that you should be the conference champion.
Sometimes the conf champ is not necessarily the best team from that conference, especialy if that conference has a CCG game and I can give some examples
04 FSU conference champion 4 loss team goes to BCS and other more deserving 2 loss teams are left out. FSU won the CCG game they are the conference champ right.
06 XII champ game Neb vs OU
winnner automatic BCS bid
two teams that UT beat during regular season
This year XII champ game Missu vs OU
They already played each other and OU won, its very difficult to beat the same team twice and Missu has an advantage, now if OU somehow wins then a 2 loss OU gets automatic BCS bid and a 1 loss KU is left out,probably not, but they would be the third place team in the conference even though they only lost 1 game and 2-2 loss teams would advance.
Adios TomcatOU-Ron
posted on November 30, 2007 10:49 AM — 216.201.209.146 — link — abuse? said:
Tomcat, I agree with what your saying, but don't forget that Kansas didn't play Texas or Oklahoma this year, no one knows what their record would be if they had played...unless you play everyone in your conference, this problem will be back again and again...
Lennie Collins
posted on November 30, 2007 11:23 AM — 68.93.132.233 — link — abuse? said:
Tomcat Comment #88...Remember in the 2006 season Texas had two conference losses and Oklahoma had one so the point you are trying to make? Comment: 06 XII champ game Neb vs OU winner automatic BCS bid two teams that UT beat during regular season. The point is that UT lost to KSU anf TA&M....SO?
CFB Fan said:
posted on November 30, 2007 12:41 PM — 192.131.99.130 — link — abuse?
@89
Tomcat,
Thanks for the more expanded version.
I agree with some of what you’re saying and many of the points.
Since the NCAA allows the “BCS” conferences to some extent, run the show for the Football Bowl Series, at least we have something we did not have prior to 1998.
I don’t foresee in the near future, where each of the BCS conference commissioners (ACC, Big 12, Big East, Big Ten, PAC-10, SEC, along with Notre Dame), agreeing in principle on how the structuring of each of their conferences should be.
Such as, number of schools; divisions within conference; number of regular season conference games and/or how to determine each of their conferences champions.
Other than each of these champions get a free pass to one of the five BCS Bowl games.
One thing I see where we can agree to disagree, is who should play in the BCS Championship Game.
Once again (IMHO), with no play-off system; 119 schools competing for the #1 and #2 ranking and over a 12 game regular season schedule. Anything other than conference champions (from either the ACC, Big 12, Big East, Big Ten, PAC-10, SEC and/or Notre Dame) playing in the BCS Championship Game, just seems wrong too me.
Tomcat said:
posted on November 30, 2007 2:28 PM — 70.249.43.172 — link — abuse?
#90 OU Ron Yes, this is true, not every one in a 12 team conference plays each other as opposed to Pac and BigE and you are correct KU somehow avoided OU and UT this year.
#91 Lennie I really dont need a history lesson and I know the teams records, it was just an example of how sometimes the CCG game does not aways mean that the two best teams of a particular conference are represented.
# 92 Yes your right, that the current system is better than what we used to have, and over time hopefully more improvements should be made.
Without somesort of playoff senerio alot of times teams that are deserving of a title shot AU 04 are left out and that the debate continues.
Here again we go with polls, computers and alot of good teams, some with only 1 or 2 losses from conferences without CCG games and some others that have to beat the same team twice and could possibly knock off #1 and still not get a shot.
Adios Tomcat
Lennie Collins
posted on November 30, 2007 6:05 PM — 68.93.132.233 — link — abuse? said:
Well Tomcat Comment #91 in 2006 Oklahoma had 1 conference loss and Texas had 2 so how in the (edit) that would make Texas the better team to represent? You need a doggone history lesson I think! Still can't get over the fact Oklahoma won it!
Spartacus
said:
posted on November 27, 2007 12:45 PM — 72.25.84.228 — link — abuse?I guess Nutt is going to get the opportunity to kick some of that Porker Butt!
Tommie Trojan