CollegeFootballPoll.com Message Board

They won't be able to implement it completely until likely 2015, but I like the move. A very good chance that this means extending the B1G conference schedule.

Your move, SEC.

http://www.usatoday.com/story/gameon/2013/02/13/big-ten-meetings-eliminating-fcs-opponents-schedule/1916263/

I like it too. Playing FCS teams serves no purpose other than being a fund raising tool for the FCS teams.

Spence wrote:I like it too. Playing FCS teams serves no purpose other than being a fund raising tool for the FCS teams.

I don't really mind that though. Those athletic departments may be bloated, but football is the cash cow, and it helps funds a lot of their other sports. The Savannah State spectacle was embarrassing for them, but the administration is not complaining about the checks that were cashed and the guys who played in it can laugh about it one day.

It might be good for the B1G's image in the end though and it's their call whether or not they want to do it or not. I wouldn't mind a 9-game conference slate, but that hurts your conference's chances for playing for a national title in the long run in my opinion, as do conference championship games. Also the fringe bowl teams will have a harder time qualifying at 6-6. I also don't want to see the MAC lose their games against the B1G.

I'm not for adding another conference game either. I would like them to add some big games like they have been playing. The B-10 should play the best teams from around the country OOC. I personally would rather play Oklahoma, SC, and Alabama in the same year than make the championship game. Now that playoffs are around the corner I find myself caring less and less about post season games.

There is two sides to this coin. If you want your league to be premier and have the illusion of a cut above and in an exalted sphere, then maybe this is the way to go. Generates cash and puts you in the running for a National Championship and the prestige of that honor.

The other side is it forsakes the geographical ties of smaller schools that in many cases, state schools, subsidize schools programs but now have no access to where there tax dollars go. It is elitist and arrogance. If that is what schools want, have at it. For years..and I am talking back to the late 1800's, football thrived on local contests and regional games. Nobody was always ranking teams based on perception and hope and.....not often mentions but in my opinion one of the great motivators of all this gambling and the odds makers of Vegas....that is where the juice is. They keep it low keep for a reason, but it is what spins the dials.

I live in the past, I am a curmudgeon, have references on that subject, some from this message board...but not ready to throw away this heritage, like so many others. There is more than instant gratification that has to intensify with every turn.

I am not against the regional matchups. I don't mind playing an Ohio team or MAC team. I just don't like the cross divisional games. There are more D111 schools than FCS and many of them could use funding as well, but no one is suggesting they play. I like the big games from a selfish standpoint, but I would like to see all the OOC games against other FBS schools, no matter who the schools they play are.

Also, I don't find you curmudgeonly (is that a word) at all. And I also agree with you more than I don't.

It truly is a mixed bag. What good is game that a school is going to get pummeled but receive a big paycheck. Better the large institution play a competitive game and just give the smaller schools some money. I get that.

As I know you have expressed. I am more concerned about College Presidents having abdicated their responsibility to these programs. Seems if there is money dangled, they say get it and do whatever is necessary. There was time when conferences meant much more than just sports. I suppose ease of travel has done away with some of that, but all kinds of things were done in conferences, research sharing, libraries, minor activities, speech, debate; even joint service projects. There were institutional size requirements which took into account, geography, size, programs, etc. But that was the Fore and Yore, not the Sour Now and Now and certainly not the Sweet Bye and Bye.

The Big Ten needs not to schedule FCS because they have the MAC as a captive OOC conference...

The Big Ten played 133 games in the last 10 seasons against the MAC....winning 86% of the games.

billybud wrote:The Big Ten needs not to schedule FCS because they have the MAC as a captive OOC conference...

The Big Ten played 133 games in the last 10 seasons against the MAC....winning 86% of the games.

It only makes sense geographically to for the B-10 to play the MAC. I don't mind that. Usually one game a year and then move around and get some other games. The MAC is D1 and they need to fill their schedule. The B-10 pays pretty well. It makes sense. It is the games against FCS schools that shouldn't be scheduled. Ohio State should never have played Youngstown State a few years ago. It was purely about spreading the money to instate schools.

It's not much different than the Sun Belt and the SEC. I think the MAC and the Big 10 have a pretty good relationship going on. It gives the MAC some exposure, the Big 10 some easy wins, and some money funnels into the MAC.

The SEC played about 50 fewer games with the Sun Belt in the same period...The ACC actually almost played the same number of games with the SEC (82) during the period as the Sun Belt..

And all time the SEC has played 80 games against FCS teams. The ACC has played 89. The Big Ten has played 57. So it looks like the SEC and the ACC has filled the void pretty well.

As far as I know, the MAC teams will play anyone who wants to schedule them. They don't shy away from teams. So if the ACC or SEC wish to get their MAC on, they just need to make a call.

Not sure how else to phrase this; We finally have an out of season pissing contest.

I would join in but age and cold weather leave my accoutrement missing in action....but if it were a dribbling contest...

donovan wrote:Not sure how else to phrase this; We finally have an out of season pissing contest.

I would join in but age and cold weather leave my accoutrement missing in action....but if it were a dribbling contest...

I think if it were a dribbling contest we would all compete.

The MAC is a good source of fodder...as good as any. The last 10 years, the MAC has won 25% of their non conference games against other Div I schools.

Somewhat better than the Sun Belts 20% win record against other Div I schools.