Sambojangles

Sambojangles's picture

History

Member for
3 years 23 weeks
Blog
View recent blog entries

Karma

Current value
1

Recent Comments

Date Title Body
1 day 17 hours ago Other sports

Carl Hagelin Swedish Ambassador and Director of BORK

Shawn Hunwick Instructor for short players

Darius Morris Professor of Lepidopterology

Zack Novak Director of Facial blood.
3 days 10 hours ago I think MSU-Indiana is a

I think MSU-Indiana is a protected rivalry because that's what was leftover after the rest of the cross-division rivalries were made.

M-OSU, Nebraska-PSU were obvious

Minnesota-Wisconsin: had to protect the oldest rivalry in college football

Illinois-Northwestern: in-state rivalry.

Iowa and MSU were left from the Legends, and IU and Purdue from the Leaders. The rivalries  it seems were more or less randomly assigned from there
4 days 5 hours ago My prediction: everyone

My prediction: everyone regrets forming conferences bigger than 12. When the WAC was at 16 it didn't last long before they broke up. I think the same thing might happen if the Big XII tries to get bigger than 12, if the ACC replaces any losses, and if the B1G adds more. Even the SEC might not like 14 teams soon.

Everyone wanted to get into a BCS conference to get access to BCS money. Utah was the luckiest by playing their way into the Pac-12, and that's why TCU and everyone else the Big East has added recently took the chance. But with the playoff and new B12-SEC bowl game, it looks like the BCS will stop to exist soon. Bigger conferences just means it's harder for each team to win it.

I won't guess who, but I think someone in either the ACC or SEC will soon start to complain that it is too hard to win the conference with 14 teams, and that they would be better off in a smaller conference. If we do go to some form of 16+ team super-conferences, my prediction is that it doesn't last long, and the conferences end up splitting again into more reasonable 8 or 10 team leagues, which make much more sense.

To me, all this speculation is kind of sad. When Nebraska joined, their chancellor made the comment that changing conferences is a 100 year committment. I'm sure that Texas A&M and Missouri said that when they went to the SEC, that Pitt and SU said that to the ACC, and whoever the Big East added may have mentioned it too. Still, it seems like it's still not over (the conference merry-go-round) and the craziness will continue, and that no one seems to really be committed to their current situation, which is and should be relatively stable.
4 days 6 hours ago Would "Go walk 1,000 miles to

Would "Go walk 1,000 miles to Oklahoma" be too soon?
4 days 17 hours ago I don't think it's happening

I don't think it's happening as soon and as conveniently as everyone is thinking. There are no strong forces pushing for 16-team conferences, at least not strong enough to overcome the obvious and severe disadvantages:

Super-conferences absolutely destroy the importance of the regular season and the dear rivalries of each school. If you just need to get into your conference playoff in order to qualify for the national playoff, having a great regular season is even more meaningless. A 9-3 team can win their conference and advance into the national championship the same way a 12-0 team can. Also, the do-or-die nature of rivalries like the Game are also devalued because it will never decide anything like who will go to the Rose Bowl, only maybe who gets into the national playoff structure. There will probably be no more games like 1969, 1995, 1996, and 2006 in a super-conference world.

Second, 16 team conferences are barely even a conference any more. With 12 teams, it's possible to go 4 years without playing a conference-mate. With 14, the SEC will have an even longer time between games. All the expansion erodes the important ties between schools that holds a conference together. Freshman last season will never get a chance to visit Madison to play, and will only play Wisconsin if they happen to meet in the B1GCG. That's terrible for a conference--the idea is that the schools are close-knit and similar. Super-conferences destroy that concept. Also, if schools are added in big blocks (the B1G suddenly taking 4 ACC schools, for instance), there is little chance for socialization and introduction. Nebraska was famous, obvious, and we had a whole year to get to know them. If all of a sudden UMD, UVa, VT, and Syracuse were invited to the B1G, I think there would be issues in terms of the harmonious relationship between members. When the 4 Texas schools joined the Big 8 (XII), it clearly didn't work, and the conference almsot asploded because of it.

Finally, it's easy to assign different schools to new conferences from here, but in real life, it would be much more difficult for each conference to get to 16. There are territory, academic, and TV money issues, among many others. Conferences want to expand outside the footprint: it doesn't do SEC much good to add Miami, or the Pac-12 to add more California schools. Also, the B1G and Pac-12 have some academic arrogance--they don't want bad schools just for the sake of football. To pick on Wolverine Devotee's set-up above, there is no chance that Boise State will ever join the Pac-??. Ever. Also, if you think the existing schools in the conferences are going to want to share their piles of cash with the SDSUs, Louisvilles, and VaTechs of the world, I think you're wrong. Almost all expansion past what has happened so far probably decreases each school's share of the money, which means it won't happen. The B1G and Pac-12 seem happy at 12, and I see no reason for that to change any time soon.
6 days 9 hours ago I think it's funny that the

I think it's funny that the #1 has all the hoopla (thanks to Braylon, some of it ridiculous) and talk about it, but Desmond Howard won the Heisman in #21 and now since it has the patch, it may likely pass #1 as the most important jersey number for WRs. 

With that, I would love Denard, or anyone really, to wear #1 sooner or later, just to get the monkey off all our backs. Everyone has opinions, and some complicated criteria about who deserves to win the number. It just needs to go back to being a number for very good players, not just something that we hold for players we think are going to be literally legendary.
6 days 9 hours ago so vs. LSU or Alabama

so vs. LSU or Alabama
1 week 1 day ago Does anyone else think that

Does anyone else think that the B1G's support for the Rose Bowl is a calculated political move? Everybody knows that they probably favor home site semis, but it seems like a non-starter: the SEC is obviously against it, and the ACC, Pac-12, and Big XII likely don't want it either. So instead of fighting for what doesn't have a chance of getting enough votes, they are working within the realm of reasonable outcomes for everyone. 
1 week 1 day ago It's the day before the Notre

It's the day before the Notre Dame game, so I'm assuming the band won't be able to make it. If I ran the AD, I would give extra points to have a mini version of the band (probably only 1 percussionist, a tuba, and a few horns and woodwinds) show up at Comerica, play for the game, then drive to South Bend the next day. They should get there in plenty of time for the game (it's at 8 p.m.).

Still, sounds awesome. I will do my best to attend. MGoBoard, please make sure to remind us (me) as it approaches!
1 week 6 days ago I think Harvard and Yale

I think Harvard and Yale might have thought that players would still come, because they were great academic AND athletic schools back in the day. But somewhere along the way the Ivy League took themselves out of going to bowl games, and now they are irrelevant in football. It could happen if the B1G and Pac-12 took themselves out of possibly participating in the National Championship Playoff.
Theme provided by Roopletheme; sidebars adapted from Chris Murphy.