ronjon1990 Posted June 11, 2021 Share Posted June 11, 2021 2 hours ago, BobbyPhil1781 said: I absolutely love this idea even though I think 12 is too much. It's a nice even number and easy to do though so I get it. I can't wait for this to happen. Too much for sure. But I'd rather have too much than the farce we've had every single day. In recent years, UCF, Cincinnati, etc. have more than proven that it doesn't matter what they do, they're not cracking a field of 4. People can point to scheduling all they want, but when games are agreed on 10 years in advance, what can honestly be expected? A few years back, Bama played USC early (maybe the opener?). When that game was scheduled, it had the look of a showdown. Then came Clay Helton lol. That's USC. Imagine being a UCF or Cincy who can easily go on a 2 or 3 year run but almost never have an outlook past a couple of years. When the committee got formed and the 4 team field was announced, to me it absolutely devalued the ideas they claimed would matter. Strength of schedule? Good luck. Eye test? Hardly. EvErY gAmE cOuNtS? L.O.L. With 12, we're probably going to get a team or two with no business being in contention for a variety of reasons. But I'll take that over the thinky veiled shafting of good teams. The Bama-Utah excuse always sounded so hypocritical. Utah tops Bama in a bowl game, "Alabama was disappointed they weren't playing for a national championship". Boise State or UCF or Cincy go undefeated or are one of a very few 1 loss teams and lose to a middling P5 team in a random bowl game, "See! They aren't that good!". This should go one of two ways. Either fans rejoice at a real playoff and exciting matchups we don't see all that often, or, get ready for seeing Kentucky and Vanderbilt in the playoffs because "their conference is so hard". Can't wait to see how it goes either way. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ramssuperbowl99 Posted June 11, 2021 Share Posted June 11, 2021 32 minutes ago, ronjon1990 said: But I'd rather have too much than the farce we've had every single day. This is a fair point. You can argue about 8, 10, 12, or any other number, but they're all better than just 4. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MWil23 Posted June 11, 2021 Share Posted June 11, 2021 To me 8 is still the perfect number. 5 conference champs, 3 at large, seeded 1-8. It’s “only” one extra game. 12 screams shameless money grab as a response to having to pay players and keeping them from opting out of “pointless” bowl games. The 5-12 home field advantage does also grab me hook, line, and sinker though. I’m a sucker for that. 😂 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Texansfan713 Posted June 11, 2021 Share Posted June 11, 2021 i would kill for Houston to host a playoff game vs a team like Texas or A&M. Atmosphere would insane in the city. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
August4th Posted June 15, 2021 Share Posted June 15, 2021 I wish the top 4 got to host a game in the 2nd RD. I'm all for this tho. Season will matter more for majority of teams and not just the few elite. CFB regular season will be fine. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mse326 Posted June 21, 2021 Share Posted June 21, 2021 This could end up being a major turning point day for collegiate athletics. The Supreme Court handed down a decision today saying the NCAA's restriction on education benefits violates antitrust laws. It was unanimous and one Justice in concurring all but said many other restrictions are similarly illegal. https://www.supremecourt.gov/opinions/20pdf/20-512_gfbh.pdf Some things to bear in mind. 1) This is not an NIL case so it doesn't resolve that issue but will certainly be influential. 2) This is also not a case challenging the schools ability to pay players. It is only about restrictions on educational benefits. And interesting one that was discussed is paid posteligibility internships. This is only about schools and conferences can give so the NCAA can still ban, under this decision at least, certain promises from private businesses (I'm not sure where boosters fall). And as the bolded states it was only posteligibility so it's unclear how much that would even effect the top players in the money sports that expect to go pro, or at least hope to. But that category can certainly be a place where some shenanigans happen 3) There is language that can support both challengers and the NCAA in future lawsuits, so it isn't clear. I'm not gonna get nerdy about antitrust law but that is fairly common in antitrust law unless they are engaging in some well defined things that are per se violations. Otherwise judges use what is called the Rule of Reason which is just as vague as it sounds. 4) However importantly the Court did have some discussion about amateurism and while they didn't say that isn't legitimate it did say "a party can[not] relabel a restraint as a product feature and declare it “immune from §1 scrutiny.” They left some room for how amateurism may effect consumer demand, but this part of the holding will be major in future lawsuits. Ultimately it is too early to say what effect his will have, but it certainly has the potential to cause a major overhaul in college athletics. 4 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
NateDawg Posted June 21, 2021 Share Posted June 21, 2021 50 minutes ago, mse326 said: This could end up being a major turning point day for collegiate athletics. The Supreme Court handed down a decision today saying the NCAA's restriction on education benefits violates antitrust laws. It was unanimous and one Justice in concurring all but said many other restrictions are similarly illegal. https://www.supremecourt.gov/opinions/20pdf/20-512_gfbh.pdf Some things to bear in mind. 1) This is not an NIL case so it doesn't resolve that issue but will certainly be influential. 2) This is also not a case challenging the schools ability to pay players. It is only about restrictions on educational benefits. And interesting one that was discussed is paid posteligibility internships. This is only about schools and conferences can give so the NCAA can still ban, under this decision at least, certain promises from private businesses (I'm not sure where boosters fall). And as the bolded states it was only posteligibility so it's unclear how much that would even effect the top players in the money sports that expect to go pro, or at least hope to. But that category can certainly be a place where some shenanigans happen 3) There is language that can support both challengers and the NCAA in future lawsuits, so it isn't clear. I'm not gonna get nerdy about antitrust law but that is fairly common in antitrust law unless they are engaging in some well defined things that are per se violations. Otherwise judges use what is called the Rule of Reason which is just as vague as it sounds. 4) However importantly the Court did have some discussion about amateurism and while they didn't say that isn't legitimate it did say "a party can[not] relabel a restraint as a product feature and declare it “immune from §1 scrutiny.” They left some room for how amateurism may effect consumer demand, but this part of the holding will be major in future lawsuits. Ultimately it is too early to say what effect his will have, but it certainly has the potential to cause a major overhaul in college athletics. Yeah, this is definitely a big deal. The NCAA is slowly getting neutered. I would say within a couple years it will be basically abolished. Amateurism is at an end. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ramssuperbowl99 Posted June 21, 2021 Share Posted June 21, 2021 25 minutes ago, NateDawg said: Yeah, this is definitely a big deal. The NCAA is slowly getting neutered. I would say within a couple years it will be basically abolished. Amateurism is at an end. Amateurism was at its end years ago, the Supreme Court just stopped the NCAA from dancing on its grave. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RuskieTitan Posted June 21, 2021 Share Posted June 21, 2021 Well I for one will not stand for this abolishment of amateurism and will refuse to watch college paid sports! /s Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
beekay414 Posted June 21, 2021 Share Posted June 21, 2021 1 hour ago, RuskieTitan said: Well I for one will not stand for this abolishment of amateurism and will refuse to watch college paid sports! /s R.I.P. Death Penalty 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
August4th Posted June 22, 2021 Share Posted June 22, 2021 CFB going through some major chances all at once Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BobbyPhil1781 Posted June 28, 2021 Share Posted June 28, 2021 https://www.elevenwarriors.com/ohio-state-athletics/2021/06/123285/ohio-governor-mike-dewine-to-sign-executive-order-allowing-college-athletes-to-profit-from-name-image-likeness OHIO GOVERNOR MIKE DEWINE TO SIGN EXECUTIVE ORDER ALLOWING COLLEGE ATHLETES TO PROFIT FROM NAME, IMAGE, LIKENESS Good for him. I understand that a free education is a lot but majority of these kids won't go pro afterwards so they should be able to make a little extra on the side while they can. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ronjon1990 Posted June 28, 2021 Share Posted June 28, 2021 5 hours ago, BobbyPhil1781 said: OHIO GOVERNOR MIKE DEWINE TO SIGN EXECUTIVE ORDER ALLOWING COLLEGE ATHLETES TO PROFIT FROM NAME, IMAGE, LIKENESS Cardale Jones endorses this move. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
OkeyDoke21 Posted June 29, 2021 Share Posted June 29, 2021 16 hours ago, ronjon1990 said: Cardale Jones endorses this move. Terrelle Pryor, too Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
August4th Posted June 30, 2021 Share Posted June 30, 2021 and so it begins! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.