btownqb Posted May 14 Report Share Posted May 14 3 minutes ago, IU Scott said: I just know by March I am tired of watching us play the same teams and ready to see us play teams from other conferences. If it was up to me we would only have 10 teams in a conference so you can play each team twice. That would only be 18 conference games and then you could have 13 non conference games. Well, how would you know with 4 extra teams? The bold isn't relevant. I just don't see how you have an 18-team league and a 20-game conference schedule, it doesn't seem sustainable to me, there needs to be MORE games vs. Power 5 teams, and less against, FGCU, Army, two exhibitions, etc. I am failing to see what those games do for anyone? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
IU Scott Posted May 14 Report Share Posted May 14 33 minutes ago, btownqb said: Well, how would you know with 4 extra teams? The bold isn't relevant. I just don't see how you have an 18-team league and a 20-game conference schedule, it doesn't seem sustainable to me, there needs to be MORE games vs. Power 5 teams, and less against, FGCU, Army, two exhibitions, etc. I am failing to see what those games do for anyone? What makes the difference in how many games you play because it will never be a balance schedule. If it is 20, 22 or 24 it isn't balanced. Might as well as just au each team once so every team would play each team the same amount of times. I know you don't care about what happened in the past. The best schedule format and the easiest to keep track of was with 10 teams. You played each team twice for 18 games and at one time played 10 non conference games. You also each team had a travel partner so it was easy to keep track of who you were playing. Today with so many networks and teams you never can keep track of when and where we are playing. I say sometimes simpler is the best way of doing things but college athletics is so far from that now that there is no holding it back. A lot say that NIL and the portal is the worst thing to happen to college sports but I feel realignment is the worst thing to happen to it. It has totally taken the most important thing from college sports and that is the competition on the field or court. Today they don't make decisions on what is best for the sport or athlete but it is just about pure greed. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
IU Scott Posted May 14 Report Share Posted May 14 42 minutes ago, btownqb said: Well, how would you know with 4 extra teams? The bold isn't relevant. I just don't see how you have an 18-team league and a 20-game conference schedule, it doesn't seem sustainable to me, there needs to be MORE games vs. Power 5 teams, and less against, FGCU, Army, two exhibitions, etc. I am failing to see what those games do for anyone? Also college programs don't want to lose home games. You take all of those games out you are taking away guaranteed home games. Again it is about money. In my early years of watching g there were 27 games with 10 being jon conference games. You knew 4 games were the Hoosier holiday tournaments, one in Bloomington and one in Indy. Most of those team were mid majors. We also played UK and ND every year. The last 4 were against teams like Miami of Ohio or Ball St. We also played teams like UL and Kansas St or Iowa St. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
btownqb Posted May 14 Report Share Posted May 14 6 minutes ago, IU Scott said: What makes the difference in how many games you play because it will never be a balance schedule. If it is 20, 22 or 24 it isn't balanced. Might as well as just au each team once so every team would play each team the same amount of times. I know you don't care about what happened in the past. The best schedule format and the easiest to keep track of was with 10 teams. You played each team twice for 18 games and at one time played 10 non conference games. You also each team had a travel partner so it was easy to keep track of who you were playing. Today with so many networks and teams you never can keep track of when and where we are playing. I say sometimes simpler is the best way of doing things but college athletics is so far from that now that there is no holding it back. A lot say that NIL and the portal is the worst thing to happen to college sports but I feel realignment is the worst thing to happen to it. It has totally taken the most important thing from college sports and that is the competition on the field or court. Today they don't make decisions on what is best for the sport or athlete but it is just about pure greed. Idc about an imbalanced schedule. I care about more Power 5 games. I would prefer 34 conference games (round robin) over the schedule we had last year lol ----------------------------------------------- 10-team conference isn't relevant there is no point in discussing it. Clearly, it was better. So was coke, I assume, when it had cocaine in it. I fully understand how the schedule used to work. We haven't had that schedule since 1990. I literally wasn't born when there were only 10 teams in the B1G. -------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- I keep track of what network we are playing on just fine. It's not that hard. ------------------------------------------------------ I'm not sure of the relevance of the last paragraph. Perfectly fine to have that opinion, I just wanted to talk about the schedule, though. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
IU Scott Posted May 14 Report Share Posted May 14 35 minutes ago, btownqb said: Idc about an imbalanced schedule. I care about more Power 5 games. I would prefer 34 conference games (round robin) over the schedule we had last year lol ----------------------------------------------- 10-team conference isn't relevant there is no point in discussing it. Clearly, it was better. So was coke, I assume, when it had cocaine in it. I fully understand how the schedule used to work. We haven't had that schedule since 1990. I literally wasn't born when there were only 10 teams in the B1G. -------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- I keep track of what network we are playing on just fine. It's not that hard. ------------------------------------------------------ I'm not sure of the relevance of the last paragraph. Perfectly fine to have that opinion, I just wanted to talk about the schedule, though. Say we add 4 conference games do you really think they would eliminate the home guarantee games. We add 4 conference games it will take away the non conference games against power 5 teams. Coaches are under enough pressure to win and make the tournament they aren't going to eliminate sure wins. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
btownqb Posted May 14 Report Share Posted May 14 Just now, IU Scott said: Say we add 4 conference games do you really think they would eliminate the home guarantee games. We add 4 conference games it will take away the non conference games against power 5 teams. Coaches are under enough pressure to win and make the tournament they aren't going to eliminate sure wins. Meh-- we already have Atlantis, teams are still going to go to Maui. Don't allow teams to play more than 5 games against non power 5 teams. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
IUJoe Posted May 14 Report Share Posted May 14 (edited) 52 minutes ago, btownqb said: Idc about an imbalanced schedule. I care about more Power 5 games. I would prefer 34 conference games (round robin) over the schedule we had last year lol ----------------------------------------------- 10-team conference isn't relevant there is no point in discussing it. Clearly, it was better. So was coke, I assume, when it had cocaine in it. I fully understand how the schedule used to work. We haven't had that schedule since 1990. I literally wasn't born when there were only 10 teams in the B1G. -------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- I keep track of what network we are playing on just fine. It's not that hard. ------------------------------------------------------ I'm not sure of the relevance of the last paragraph. Perfectly fine to have that opinion, I just wanted to talk about the schedule, though. The biggest argument against it from member schools and coaches would likely be that our schedule would then be much tougher than other conferences, and they probably wouldn’t trust the tournament committee to account for that. I mean, just listening to our own fan base this past season, the narrative from almost everyone was that the Big Ten was horrible. In reality, the Big Ten had a team play for the title, another team in the elite eight, and was the second-ranked conference in everybody’s metrics. That kind of gets lost when they’re beating each other up in a 20-game schedule, and would get even further lost in a 24 or 26-game schedule. I think that would be the argument against it. Edited May 14 by IUJoe Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
IU Scott Posted May 14 Report Share Posted May 14 9 minutes ago, btownqb said: Meh-- we already have Atlantis, teams are still going to go to Maui. Don't allow teams to play more than 5 games against non power 5 teams. No way you will talk programs and coaches into this. I just think down the road you would see less big ten schools entering those ore season tournaments. Eventually you will get your wish because I think the Power 5 schools will leave the NCAA. The only way some of the some smaller schools finance their athletic department is by playing on the road against power 5 schools. I also think there are way to many D1 schools now. When you had around 270 you had a lot less games vs the really bad programs we see today Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
btownqb Posted May 14 Report Share Posted May 14 Just now, IU Scott said: No way you will talk programs and coaches into this. I just think down the road you would see less big ten schools entering those ore season tournaments. Eventually you will get your wish because I think the Power 5 schools will leave the NCAA. The only way some of the some smaller schools finance their athletic department is by playing on the road against power 5 schools. I also think there are way to many D1 schools now. When you had around 270 you had a lot less games vs the really bad programs we see today I wouldn't ask them. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
IU Scott Posted May 14 Report Share Posted May 14 54 minutes ago, btownqb said: Idc about an imbalanced schedule. I care about more Power 5 games. I would prefer 34 conference games (round robin) over the schedule we had last year lol ----------------------------------------------- 10-team conference isn't relevant there is no point in discussing it. Clearly, it was better. So was coke, I assume, when it had cocaine in it. I fully understand how the schedule used to work. We haven't had that schedule since 1990. I literally wasn't born when there were only 10 teams in the B1G. -------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- I keep track of what network we are playing on just fine. It's not that hard. ------------------------------------------------------ I'm not sure of the relevance of the last paragraph. Perfectly fine to have that opinion, I just wanted to talk about the schedule, though. Also you can't play 34 conference games because you only play 31 regular season games. Also if you did this I would eliminate the conference tournament Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
IU Scott Posted May 14 Report Share Posted May 14 Just now, btownqb said: I wouldn't ask them. Those people are who makes the schedule. The big ten doesn't have any say in teams non conference schedule Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
btownqb Posted May 14 Report Share Posted May 14 2 minutes ago, IUJoe said: The biggest argument against it from member schools and coaches would likely be that our schedule would then be much tougher than other conferences, and they probably wouldn’t trust the tournament committee to account for that. I mean, just listening to our own fan base this past season, the narrative from almost everyone was that the Big Ten was horrible. In reality, the Big Ten had a team play for the title, another team in the elite eight, and was the second-ranked conference in everybody’s metrics. That kind of gets lost when they’re beating each other up in a 20-game schedule, and would get even further lost in a 24 or 26-game schedule. I think that would be the argument against it. Man-- idk. I'm not sure I agree with that. (the bold)... Respectfully, I think the conference absolutely sucked last year. Especially looking at past B1G seasons. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
btownqb Posted May 14 Report Share Posted May 14 1 minute ago, IU Scott said: Also you can't play 34 conference games because you only play 31 regular season games. Also if you did this I would eliminate the conference tournament So play more games. Why would it eliminate the conference tourney? Just play more games. Regardless, I said--- I would PREFER that schedule compared to what we had last season. Just now, IU Scott said: Those people are who makes the schedule. The big ten doesn't have any say in teams non conference schedule If the B1G says we're playing 24 conference games, there is nothing the coaches can do. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
btownqb Posted May 14 Report Share Posted May 14 Like I said from the start--- adding 4 teams to the conference, but no more conference games, surprises me and disappoints me. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
IU Scott Posted May 14 Report Share Posted May 14 34 minutes ago, btownqb said: So play more games. Why would it eliminate the conference tourney? Just play more games. Regardless, I said--- I would PREFER that schedule compared to what we had last season. If the B1G says we're playing 24 conference games, there is nothing the coaches can do. That isn't correct. The Big Ten commissioners office don't make the rules, they just enforced them. The Big Ten is made up of the college presidents and administrators and they make the rules. Most presidents will go with what the AD and coaches wants and I feel the coaches won't want more games. Ad of right now and he NCAA rule is that you are not allowed to play more than 31 regular season games. To get that to change you would have to get the approval from all the college presidents and administrators. Also why play the conference tournament if you play each team twice to get the real champion. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
btownqb Posted May 14 Report Share Posted May 14 4 minutes ago, IU Scott said: That isn't correct. The Big Ten commissioners office don't make the rules, they just enforced them. The Big Ten is made up of the college presidents and administrators and they make the rules. Most presidents will go with what the AD and coaches wants and I feel the coaches won't want more games. Ad of right now and he NCAA rule is that you are not allowed to play more than 31 regular season games. To get that to change you would have to get the approval from all the college presidents and administrators. Also why play the conference tournament if you play each team twice to get the real champion. Again-- I'd prefer a 34-game round-robin compared to playing the amount of non-power 5 teams we did last year. Idc about a real champ, though. If the B1G wants more conference games, they can get more conference games. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
IU Scott Posted May 14 Report Share Posted May 14 (edited) 23 minutes ago, btownqb said: Again-- I'd prefer a 34-game round-robin compared to playing the amount of non-power 5 teams we did last year. Idc about a real champ, though. If the B1G wants more conference games, they can get more conference games. I understand what you want but you asked the question why don't they and you have been given the reasons why they don't. If you don't care about the true champion then why play in a conference to begin with. I just liked it better when you play a true conference schedule with no conference tournament. Why give an automatic bid to the tournament to a team and hat might got hot for 3 or 4 days over the best team for 4 months Edited May 14 by IU Scott Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
btownqb Posted May 14 Report Share Posted May 14 1 Exhibition 3 of (AZ, Davidson, OU, WVU, UL, Gonzaga)--- lets say AZ, Davidson, and WVU for the sake of discussion... 24 conference games-- Purdue, OSU, PSU, Oregon, UCLA, MSU and Iowa as our home and homes. 5 cupcakes.... Exhibition Florida Gulf Coast Army Wright St Harvard Davidson WVU AZ Morehead St @Ohio St UCLA @Oregon Michigan Michigan St @Iowa Minnesota @Washington USC @Purdue Ohio St Penn St @Michigan St Oregon @Nebraska Purdue @UCLA Maryland @Penn St Illinois Rutgers @Northwestern UCLA @Wisky That's just an example of what it could look like. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
btownqb Posted May 14 Report Share Posted May 14 5 minutes ago, IU Scott said: I understand what you want but you asked the question why don't they and you have been given the reasons why they don't. If you don't care about the true champion then why play in a conference to begin with. I just liked it better when you play a true conference schedule with no conference tournament. Why give an automatic bid to the tournament to a team and hat might got hot for 3 or 4 days over the best team for 4 months They don't seem like very good reasons. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ledies22 Posted May 14 Report Share Posted May 14 40 minutes ago, IU Scott said: I understand what you want but you asked the question why don't they and you have been given the reasons why they don't. If you don't care about the true champion then why play in a conference to begin with. I just liked it better when you play a true conference schedule with no conference tournament. Why give an automatic bid to the tournament to a team and hat might got hot for 3 or 4 days over the best team for 4 months It's March Madness baby. With that logic, why have the field of 68 and crown the champion of the big dance based on regular season. Or at most have a 6 team (winner of all P6) tournament. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
IU Scott Posted May 14 Report Share Posted May 14 51 minutes ago, btownqb said: They don't seem like very good reasons. Let's use your 34 conference game as an example. Say the Champion goes 22-12, do you think that would get you a 1 or 2 seed in the tournament. It is about wins and money and getting in the tournament and nothing else matters Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
btownqb Posted May 14 Report Share Posted May 14 1 minute ago, IU Scott said: Let's use your 34 conference game as an example. Say the Champion goes 22-12, do you think that would get you a 1 or 2 seed in the tournament. It is about wins and money and getting in the tournament and nothing else matters I would think a 1. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
IU Scott Posted May 14 Report Share Posted May 14 15 minutes ago, ledies22 said: It's March Madness baby. With that logic, why have the field of 68 and crown the champion of the big dance based on regular season. Or at most have a 6 team (winner of all P6) tournament. My thinking is more for the small conferences because it doesn't make since to me to have the tournament championship determines the automatic bid. You would think they want their best team to represent them in the tournament. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
IU Scott Posted May 14 Report Share Posted May 14 Just now, btownqb said: I would think a 1. Not at that record when other conference champions from other power conferences are 27-6 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
btownqb Posted May 14 Report Share Posted May 14 Just now, IU Scott said: Not at that record when other conference champions from other power conferences are 27-6 Makes no sense. That would be like 18+ quad 1 wins. 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.