Printable View
Dan Wetzel had some pretty intriguing things to say in this article. He states that it's Dan Beebe fault for having the Big XII split up for not voting on having a "plus-one" playoff format when Beebe had the chance to. I think that it's pretty interesting that college football is screwing themselves out of some serious cash of not having a playoff system in place with the potential to gain at least $700 million.
Very interesting read. It has conspiracy theory written all over it though.
I read that. Theres one thing those numbers leave out as far as additional revenue- the potential damage that a playoff system would do to the bowl system, not just the BCS bowls, but the bowl system itself. Anything that further marginalized the rest of the bowls could result in reduced income for all from those, and decreased exposure for all but the top programs.Quote:
Originally Posted by MLawrence
A lot of the top media want the playoff because they really only care about the top 10-20 programs anyways. For those that are fans of all college football, damaging the bowl system could be bad for a lot of others.
Speaking of Dan Beebe, I guess he's now on Twitter.
Fake Dan Beebe (DanBeebe) on Twitter
fascinating
Not many care about the 56 other bowl games. Most just care when their team is in one of those bowls. By the time many school go to those bowl games they are lucky to break even on them. If ISU could get $10M more a year from a playoff wouldnt it be worth it, even if they lost their *** going to a lesser bowl game?Quote:
Originally Posted by alarson
This article nails the real battle lines and issues. The public, players, coaches and schools be damned, here to the almighty power struggle and dominance of the powers that be into eternity.
It raises a few important questions:
1) Did the B12 teams finally get wise to the trap and are they playing it for advantage - or are they truly squealing like a trapped animal slated for a skinning?
As this article points out, if cooler heads and maybe a shared war chest to weather the time before playoffs are approved, the B12 re-emerges ahead of both the B10 and PAC-10. But do the powers that be in the B12 really want that?
2) Why is a guy who killed a once proud football power (SMU) in charge of a dominant football power conference if his historical specialty is destroying once proud football powers?
Lunch links: Memorial Day Weekend edition - Big 12 Blog - ESPN
Stu Durando of the St. Louis Post Dispatch gives a look at Dan Beebe, the rugby player who later helped investigate the SMU scandal that led to the program's death penalty.
3) Is Texas behind all of this, getting "their man Beebe" to destroy the conference and then blame it on other schools (NU, MU, CU) while positioning themselves to stay at the top of the FB world in the new international TV PAC-16 league?
As long as Texas stays in their own division without USC (check) and OU (in progress...), they are virtually guaranteed to be in the PAC-16 playoff for league champion every year...kinda like now, but on a bigger stage.
4) Once the dust settles, the "power conferences" left dominate the playoff scenarios with inter-league playoffs. Like 4*4 divisions: 3 playoff games right there Div 1 x Div 2, Div 3 x Div 4 and conference champion playoffs. A way to "satisfy" the public while controlling the whole thing?
5) Don't you think gambling money is driving this? Consolidated control = larger and more reliable profits.
Damn, another "sport" falls into the greed and 100% controlled crapper.
And gamblers will stand in line like the lemmings they are to lose their money -- er, "place their bets" at the rigged circus wheel. It was inevitable, I guess. A little money here, a little money there, a few threats/blackmails later and wham! Here we are.
It's like they say -- what happens in Vegas (people losing money) STAYS in Vegas (the money, not the stories about what happened).
Ah, well. It's not like the Top 25 has really varied much in my lifetime anyways. And when it does, the Cinderfella teams get left behind now anyways don't they?
Maybe ISU goes old DIV II for the playoffs and love of the game, screw the money and power and we dominate and control that division....wait, I think I see a pattern here....
priceless :-)Quote:
Originally Posted by CrossCyed
I would say Vegas (and Delware to an extent) has something to do with this. To me, it seems like this past football season there was more time spent on the over-under line rather than the Offensive-Defensive lines of the teams that were playing. I found a blog posted from 2009 (I'll see if I can dig it up) that mentioned that the Big 12, notably the Big 12 North, has left itself vulnerable by scheduling weak non-conference opponents and sacrificed a televised game for an easy W in hopes to reach bowl eligibility. This is most true in the case of Kansas St. who was a Big 12 power in the early 2000s and now is struggling to earn back their credibility. Maybe ISU can earn some recognition this season with the schedule that we have.Quote:
Originally Posted by ShopTalk
I thought that we dismissed Wetzel's credibility when he said that KU will be invited to the MWC without KSU.
Beebe has been a jerk forever, he did ruin the Big 12
Thoughts after reading the article:
Very close to time to fire Beebe, but he may lose his job anyway.
Delaney appears to be smarter than anyone in the Big 12.
The television deals are being worked now to help line up choices.
The NCAA is going to be eased out.
The university presidents do not appear to be running this show.
ISU needs to build a better football program quickly.
It does not matter if you are KU and have a bball prgram.
Gold rules.
Time to resurrect playoff talk quickly.