Losing Your Lunch: The B1G Sucks
Might I use this this picture forever more? YESSSSSSSSSS!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
Hello Followers. Hope you’re doing great.
In the midst of taking a lunch break, I stumbled across a little bit of e-football news via that fancy little thing called Twitter.
After thinking about it, I decided to take a few minutes and throw together a new type of post, which I just decided to call “Losing Your Lunch.” This series will represent a hodgepodge of things that may or may not fit together. My goal: Get out whatever comes out until such time that my lunch break is over (I will have 25 minutes to get this done).
Now, will I ever launch another such post under this moniker? I don’t know. But for today, I am going to write a few sentences about why the Big Ten sucks. Read on.
++++
If you didn’t click on the above link, the news I am referring to is straightforward: Barry Alvarez, the former coach and current AD at Wisconsin, just announced that the B1G conference has decided to no longer schedule FCS schools for football.
The “reason?”: The conference wants to improve its image with respect to strength-of-schedule as the BCS transitions to a playoff format.
A few thoughts (ouch!) came to mind when I read that:
Thought #1: The NCAA sucks. As we all know, Football is king for athletic departments everywhere. We also know that those little 1-AA/FCS schools fund nearly all of their entire operating budget for football and other sports by going to places like Nebraska, Michigan, and Ohio State in September and getting their brains beaten out (see Sac State and Appalachian State as notable exceptions).
Anyhow, it’s nice to the NCAA once again unable to protect the little guy, and therefore is jeopardizing the capacity of smaller schools to offer Intercollegiate Athletics, and within, to offer scholarships to kids who may not otherwise gain access to a four-year school and the experiences afforded by it.
Nice work.
Thought #2. The Big Ten sucks. Why? Well, because..
Thought #3. Perhaps it’s time for schools in the B1G, which include some of our nation’s most elite universities, to help the NCAA and company devise a better and fairer system for evaluating strength of schedule. For instance, maybe the BCS should penalize schools, not for scheduling ONE FCS opponent a year, but for scheduling two FCS school in the same year (see SEC schools across the board as well ASU a year ago as prime examples.)
Here’s another thought: Why not reward schools not only for scheduling teams which are good during the current year, but also teams that been good historically?
For example, think about Notre Dame’s schedule last year. Can you imagine a schedule that was more chalked full of heavyweights before the season began? I mean, there was a reason why no one ranked them early—it was because no one saw them doing jack-diddly-squat against the likes of Stanford, USC, Michigan, Michigan State, Oklahoma and the like. Of course, the problem that Notre Dame would have faced had Oregon or Kansas not lost is that those teams overall didn’t pan out the way that folks thought. Of course, no team, coach, or athletic director can control how another team will perform—especially when schedules are arranged, 2, 3, 5, or 7 years in advance!
Similarly, there must be other mechanisms for incentivizing schools when they increase the quality of their opposition. One strategy would be to incentivize an increase in conference games. In this scenario, a conference like the Pac-12 would be rewarded for having the cojones to schedule 9, instead of 8, conference games.
Another idea would be for the BCS to give extra points for scheduling a non-conference opponent who turned out to be much better than expected for that year. Here, I’m thinking about a school like Wisconsin who probably scheduled the 2014 game in Pullman thinking that they’d be playing a doormat. Of course, they could do just that. But, when you look at our roster and the way its setting up, that WSU team could wind up being in the top 20. And if so (and if Wisconsin actually keeps that date), shouldn’t they be rewarded for that above and beyond the typical formula (winning percentage of opponents and winning percentage of opponents, opponents)?
Anyhow, that’s all I’ve got for today, because the iPhone says I just spent 26 minutes on this, and my lunch break is over. In other words, I just lost my lunch.
All for now. Go Cougs.
I decided to download Firefox and try it as my browser to get into the site and VOILA! No compressed pictures. I don't get kicked out! Bloguin and MS Internet Explorer--the TWO DON"T MIX!!
Sutra, I never really thought of it from the point of view of it being such a money maker for the 1-AA schools and schollies for their kids. I think having those FCS schools where other kids can go to college for free and participate is very important. That said, I don't know that that should be a consideration for the B1G or any other FBS school. Why is it their concern? And how did the FCS schools manage to survive before. They didn't all use to travel all over creation to play big teams. Alabama use to never schedule them when Bear Bryant was coach.
I was happy to hear that the B1G is switching to a 9-game schedule. From a competitive standpoint, good for them for not scheduling 1-AA schools. They'll still get their creampuffs when they schedule the little brother in their midst (the MAC).
The one thing that is a bit disturbing to me about the B1G's growth is the way that they seem to be making themselves into a wholly self-sufficient league that doesn't need to play anyone else or care about playing anyone else. If they gobble up enough of the northeast major media markets, combined with the large rustbelt media markets, they will control the football product of a majority of the populace of the country. At some point they can decide to operate outside of the NCAA, and BUY the best players and establish their own elite semi-pro league. The may just choose to have their own championship and call it good--and it may be a superior TV product that sells better than a national championship among all the hillbilly southeast schools, low population plains schools, and the "they play games too late to notice" western schools. It might be watched by more people nationwide. Certainly it would become the focus of all things ESPN. It would absolutely destroy college football as we know it.
IF that's what the B1G is trying to do, let's hope the NCAA see's it too and acts swiftly and strongly to thwart any such skullduggery. This is after all supposed to be amateur sports.
Yes, yes, I know, the key word there is supposed. If college football were a private company, it would be in the Fortune 500 top 50 or higher. Possibly the top 10 in revenue. That's some very powerful motivation to "bend" the rules to your advantage as much as possible, and possibly step outside the boundaries if you think you can get away with it. Scary when you think about it. I would hate to see your scenario come to light Walla, but I would also have to agree it's a possibility. I think remote as of now, but perhaps getting closer within a few years. That would be a shame for the rest of college sports unless the NCAA simply kicks them off the island, which would really create a mess now wouldn't it!
I got in again! Amazing. Have you blacklisted me and I occasionally sneak in or does Bloguin just hate my computer/browser or vice versa? I don't visit the site much anymore, because ever since Bloguin made the change to the different font and all of our pictures got compressed back mid-season, my browser usually shuts down when I click on "Continue Reading" or "Comments". Is anyone else having this problem. Can you relate the problem to Bloguin? Have you noticed the number of page views being down since the change?
I have had the same problem, and until this morning, all the avatars were compressed as well. Today everything seems to be back in working order. I never had my browser shut down, but nearly all the time it took forever to load the comments portion of the blog. Perhaps someone at bloguin was paying attention and actually fixed the problem.
@Ambush184 @WallaCoug You all are just feeling the effects of a conspiracy that those Penguins launched against ME a few years ago when they lured us onto a site that would be difficult to load, difficult to post, difficult to comment, but really great beyond that...
On a different note, the NCAA is losing control by the day. They better fire Emmert in a hurry, or conferences will become increasingly empowered to go rogue. This is a dangerous time for college sports...
1 Like
Longball, can I get rid of the slow clap with penicillin? Reason number 4: I just heard that Wisconsin is looking to schedule a game with Alabama on the same date they have us slated.
I mean next year we are playing Southern freakin Utah. Here is their 8,000 seat stadium:
http://tbirdnation.files.wordpress.com/2011/09/img_0093.jpg
Why don't we just schedule some of the top high schools in Texas?
There are over 120 FBS teams. We don't need to go slummin to the FCS for games to play.
1 Like
I, for one, applaud the Big 10. It is not their responsibility to subsidize the athletic budgets of FCS schools. Rather it is their responsibility to reward the loyalty of their terrific fan bases with quality matchups. When Michigan fans fill the Big House week in and week out forever they deserve better than App State (even if App State won!). I would love to see the Pac-12 with their 9 game conference slate and the Big 10 with their ban on FCS games finally shame the SEC into improving their schedules. As a football fan and consumer I deserve much better than I am getting with the current slate of early season games. When there are over 60 games on the schedule and only 3 or 4 are worth watching and your team is playing some school with both a direction AND A&M in their name, that is total BS. I am waiting for the day when the NCAA comes to its senses and has a tournament with automatic bids for the champions of the major conferences, as long as those conferences play at least 9 conference games and NO FCS TEAMS.
Meanwhile, for the Big 10 who is leading the way I give you brave visionaries the slow clap:
http://24.media.tumblr.com/tumblr_m6iigiqiKX1ra443jo1_400.gif
2 Like
Right on. I have been pushing that we keep FCS games to provide money to the small schools, but require that they be scheduled at the beginning of the season (or even prior to start) and as an exhibition game if you choose to play it.
Of course, I am pushing for mandated interconf. scheduling as well on an annual rotation basis.
@ptowncoug3012 Yes yes yes. Make the FCS games exhibitions, which do NOT count toward a team's record. Then I think the problem might just solve itself. ASU can win its 2 FCS games, but they STILL have to win 6 games to make a bowl.
@Longball Its a good and fair take. But then you have to wonder how those FCS schools--many of which are public--are going to fund football and other college sports. Once you get to the D-111 level, you have mostly private schools whose endowments and 50k a year fees make the cost more manageable.
Personally, I'm for more scholllies for kids across the board and more opps for students to enjoy college and all it has to offer--especially for kids from economically challenged backgrounds. Plus, as long as its not more than one game a year, I like watching my team beat Idaho State by 50. Notwithstanding Tuel's injury, its one of my favorite recent Cougar memories.
I like the "ABC" scheduling approach that the Cougs tend to follow. Go ahead and get your FCS opponent in there, along with a lower tier BCS or "mid'major" team and test yourself against a BCS big boy if they're willing. On balance the strength of schedule should be OK, especially if your conference is good. From a practical standpoint, I think this gives your team the best chance to build/test themselves in advance of the conference slate.
1 Like
Sorta mixed here. I see the "reasoning" behind the B1G 10 doing that for SOS points. I also see the value for FCS schools playing the $$$ games. My thought here would also be that if a BCS school plays an FCS school and runs up the score, read that leaving the starters in for more than half the game, or they are ahead by 30 or more in the first half, then PENALIZE the daylights out of 'em. There is no honor in humiliating an opponent that obviously doesn't have the resources to compete at the BCS level. Some BCS schools have huge rosters with many players that may not have much chance to play during regular season baring injuries to other players. There's a win-win possibility here if the NCAA decides to really look at it and do the right thing. (Oops, I forget, this is the NCAA and they don't do the right thing or do it logically.)
@WazzuFBBlog @CougSutra So basically they are going to play heavyweights from the MAC instead of 1-AA schools... Good for them.
@twyounger Yep. And those Big Sky and Dakota schools are going to suffer, since it will be even harder for them to schedule $$ games.
