WolverineFan
Hall of Fame
Not a coincidence that he signed the UH extension offer a mere hour after the USC job was filled.
Keep Texans Talk Google Ad Free!
Venmo Tip Jar | Paypal Tip Jar
Thanks for your support! 🍺😎👍
2015 Houston Cougars Season
- Thread starter Blake
- Start date
Hervoyel
BUENO!
Just need to see them get past that "in-principle" thing and have a press conference where the word "signed" appears next to a contract along with some "This is where I want to be" words coming out of Tom Herman's mouth.
Hervoyel
BUENO!
Well, hopefully this puts a stop to the Georgia job rumors but like I said, until I see the words "Not going anywhere" come out of his mouth and he's done more than agree in principle I'm not going to be satisfied he's really staying.
WolverineFan
Hall of Fame
Georgia seems to have targeted Alabama DC Kirby Smart (UGA alum) as their guy, thus, I think Herman saw the writing on the wall with both elite jobs (USC and UGA) off the table and unwilling to take on middle-tier jobs like South Carolina and Missouri.
At this point I think he'll be back for another year, but I also think he will be gone after next season. UH is loaded for next year and could be even better so he would ride yet another great season into elite job offers.
Mr teX
Hall of Fame
I've never really understood why more coaches don't want to stay and coach at a school with a lesser established history & become your own legend there..get the field named after you & be revered when you walk on the campus..statues out front of the stadium of you etc. etc....... as opposed to going to some big time school with all kinds of history like Alabama where no matter what you did, you'd always be 2nd tier to the likes of Bear Bryant..where the stress level is ramped up & you're highly likely to get fired.
I mean i get it if you're a head coach coming up from division II to FBS, where the money being dished out is astronomically greater & the level of competition can potential get your program on the national stage, but situations where guys are leaving programs in 1 of the big 5 to go to another program in another big 5 conference or even situations like coach Herman has right now.....i don't really get. If you're that good of a coach & you've got your program winning on the national stage...like say Rich Rodriguez had it at WVU before he left to go to Michigan, those smaller schools more often than not will pay more money to keep you. You may not be at the forefront of your schools athletics like say Kentucky or a Syracuse or Kansas but you have the potential to build yourself as a legend there. I've always admired Bill Snyder for doing it this way at K-State.
I mean i get it if you're a head coach coming up from division II to FBS, where the money being dished out is astronomically greater & the level of competition can potential get your program on the national stage, but situations where guys are leaving programs in 1 of the big 5 to go to another program in another big 5 conference or even situations like coach Herman has right now.....i don't really get. If you're that good of a coach & you've got your program winning on the national stage...like say Rich Rodriguez had it at WVU before he left to go to Michigan, those smaller schools more often than not will pay more money to keep you. You may not be at the forefront of your schools athletics like say Kentucky or a Syracuse or Kansas but you have the potential to build yourself as a legend there. I've always admired Bill Snyder for doing it this way at K-State.
Speedy
Former Yeller Dweller
Money is the big part of it. If the Coogs can pay what these big schools are paying, that would help.
It's also the conference they're in. Herman could have had the Coogs go undefeated this season, win the Fiesta Bowl, go undefeated next season and have very little chance, if any, to be in the playoffs. The Coogs have to get back into a conference that matters (Big 12). Of course, UT still wants no part of that.
The last time Houston was really relevant, they were in a big conference (SWC). Texas, A&M, Arkansas, Baylor, TCU, Tech, hell, that's 5 schools, 5 competitive schools that are in the SEC and B12. That was a conference.
Until, at the very least, those 2 things happen, UH will always be a stepping stone school. And that might not be enough. Houston is a pro sports town. Herman, all season, has been on about filling the stadium. And that's just trying to fill a 40,000 seat stadium, not these 80,000-100,000 seaters at these big schools.
WolverineFan
Hall of Fame
Not exactly true. They may be more willing to pay that amount, but most just don't have that amount available to spend. West Virginia could have countered Michigan's offer and matched it and if UM really wanted Rodriguez then they could have just doubled their offer and there's not a thing WVU could do about it because Michigan has endless resources and WVU doesn't.
Rodriguez originally made just under $1M per year at WVU but signed an extension that got him up to $1.5M per year. UM paid a $4M buyout for his contract and also paid him $2.5M per year for his contract. Obviously WVU couldn't match it because they let him walk and signed Bill Stewart to just $800K a year. WVU had no chance of competing with UM financially.
Same with UH. They could offer Herman an exorbitant salary but if Texas wants him they can easily triple that salary without breaking a sweat and UH has no chance of coming close to a match because they don't have the resources. Just look at athletic department revenues. Texas generated $161M last year. Houston generated $40M. Houston can want Herman all they want and be willing to pay over their heads for him, but they still can't compete with a school like Texas when it comes to compensation. Houston's ceiling for compensation is around $3M. They just can't afford to go much higher. Meanwhile, Charlie Strong is making $5M a year at Texas.
In college football there are Have's and there are Have Not's. The big schools are Have's. They have all the money. The little schools are Have Not's. They fight for the scraps leftover.
bah007
Hall of Fame
As a coach (high school not college), I agree with you to a point. And there are tons of examples that back up this idea. Snyder is obviously the first one to come to mind, and he is a shoe in Hall of Famer who many consider to be one of the greatest college coaches of all time, despite his lack of nationally recognized success. You also have a guy like Kirk Ferentz, who has been at Iowa forever, and has had many opportunities to move to a bigger school and even the NFL. But he appears to be happy with where he is. Pat Fitzgerald at Northwestern, Kyle Whittingham at Utah, and Bronco Mendenhall at BYU are other examples. They have turned away offers from bigger schools to stay at their current schools.
I think what you see is that there is not really any true loyalty between the coach and the school. And the schools have created this system. Most schools give a coach two or three years to turn a program around. It takes four or five years for a college coach's first freshmen class to graduate. Because the schools are so quick with the axe it creates a survival mentality for the coaches, because regardless of how much success you have had somewhere, one or two bad years could end it all. So coaches are always trying to maximize the advantages that their program has over others. And if there is a ceiling at your program it is a lot easier to jump to a bigger program than it is to shatter that ceiling.
And there is definitely a ceiling. The recent success of Boise St proves this. Chris Petersen was there forever. And if he could have gone any higher I think he would still be there. But with the way college football is currently structured, Boise St literally could not do anything more to raise their stock. And they have natural disadvantages that insure that they will not break through that ceiling in the near future.
Gary Patterson is another name I would throw out there, but he is really in the same boat as Petersen. Those Mountain West TCU teams could play with anyone in the country, but because of the disadvantages of being TCU at that time, they were never able to get a fair shot. I really think that Patterson would be at a school like Texas or Georgia right now if the Big XII hadn't broken up at a perfectly opportune time for TCU. Without the jump to a power conference I do not believe he would still be there.
I kind of rambled quite a bit. To cut it short, Schools aren't loyal to their coaches. So when it comes to contract time, coaches are looking out for themselves. And bigger schools have built in advantages that make it easier to have success if you're a good coach.
Hervoyel
BUENO!
But that's just it. Houston isn't a "Have Not". If anything it's even worse because it's in a kind of limbo between the two. It's a big school. Big enrollment. Decent amount of money. Regarded by some (not yet all) as a Tier 1 college. Its reputation as a commuter college has a stigma and the fact that nobody since the days of Bill Yeoman and Guy V. Lewis coached has been willing to commit to the school long term keeps it from finding a home. It's like the stepping-stone process contributes to you staying a stepping-stone school.
With the school paying Herman this kind of money on the heels of the new stadium and with (hopefully) a New Years day bowl game (and again hopefully a win to boot) maybe that's starting to change a little bit but really all it changes to is that in another year (or two if we get very, very lucky) Herman leaves and then UH becomes a really good paying stepping stone. That's not good enough but it's likely all that we'll get.
Mr teX is right about it being strange that nobody wants to be the coaching legend. I mean, money is great stuff but Alabama is going to be Bear Bryant country forever. Forever. Saban is a great coach but he's at most always going to be the other good coach Alabama hired. The guy Houston needs is going to have to be interested in creating his own legacy.
With the school paying Herman this kind of money on the heels of the new stadium and with (hopefully) a New Years day bowl game (and again hopefully a win to boot) maybe that's starting to change a little bit but really all it changes to is that in another year (or two if we get very, very lucky) Herman leaves and then UH becomes a really good paying stepping stone. That's not good enough but it's likely all that we'll get.
Mr teX is right about it being strange that nobody wants to be the coaching legend. I mean, money is great stuff but Alabama is going to be Bear Bryant country forever. Forever. Saban is a great coach but he's at most always going to be the other good coach Alabama hired. The guy Houston needs is going to have to be interested in creating his own legacy.
bah007
Hall of Fame
Too much focus is put on the coach's salary. Of course that matters to an extent but it's actually a secondary concern.
The more important things are how much money the school is willing to spend on the program. The more money a coach can get for his program, the more advantages he can create.
Houston can afford to spend X on football. Texas/Georgia can afford to spend 5X. That means a better stadium, better facilities, better assistant coaches, etc.
The more important things are how much money the school is willing to spend on the program. The more money a coach can get for his program, the more advantages he can create.
Houston can afford to spend X on football. Texas/Georgia can afford to spend 5X. That means a better stadium, better facilities, better assistant coaches, etc.
WolverineFan
Hall of Fame
Yes they are. I know UH fans/alums hate to hear that but it's true. And it's not a crack at the university when I say that. It's just facts. Just look at athletic department revenues.
1. Oregon - $196M
2. Texas - $161M
3. Michigan - $157M
4. Alabama - $153M
5. Ohio State - $145M
6. LSU - $133M
7. Oklahoma - $129M
8. Wisconsin - $127M
9. Florida - $124M
10. Texas A&M - $119M
80. Houston - $40M
UH isn't in the same stratosphere.
Hervoyel
BUENO!
I understand that the revenues aren't there. At no point did I ever think that UH would be in the top 10 of athletic revenues. Big challenges I get. To me a "Have Not" is a school/program that has no prospects or path to improvement and a "Have" is a school that's in a Power 5 conference. I've already seen UH do more toward getting back to where they should be than I ever expected and I know it's a process but it's a process that's happening. Part of it is paying what you have to pay to keep your coach. Part of it is building facilities. Part of it is winning, which creates fans, which creates full stadiums and ticket sales. It's a machine. Look, Michigan might have spent $157 million dollars on their athletic department but they lost $8 million on the year. Only around 20 programs make a profit at this and the rest subsidize their athletics losing money all the way. Houston may not ever be in a position to spend upwards of $100 million dollars on the schools athletics but I don't consider a climb up to where say the Baylor Bears or TCU Horned Frogs are to be impossible.
Where did you find the numbers if I might ask? The only ones I could find were here and I couldn't say how accurate they are. It puts us at 66 but the $40M number is about the same. I don't think to be a Have Houston has to get into the top 10 or even the top 25. Heck, top 50 would be fine. Just a place at the table would be fine to me and Houston has more going for it than some of the schools that have a home in a real conference so I don't see why that isn't possible.
Mr teX
Hall of Fame
I hear all you guys, but the bolded i kinda disagree with. I believe salary is of the utmost concern & most of these guys go for the quick cash grab only to see themselves back at one of the lower tier programs 2-3 years after they've been fired by the upper tier program for their unrealistic expectations; either that or they become positional coaches on the NFL level making even less money. What's more is that they've more often than not missed thier opportunity to be that legend and learn how to actually build a team/program and be a head coach. While i can't blame them for accepting stupid money from an upper tier program, what i can say is they're hustling backwards if their ultimate goal is to get to & stay atop of thier profession...which would be the NFL where there's only 32 of those jobs and all of them pay as much if not more than these high profile college gigs...& the advantages are pretty much the same for all teams.
WolverineFan
Hall of Fame
Do you consider Iowa State or Purdue to be Have's? They have a seat at the big boy table, but I would not consider them Have's. Their coaches leave for bigger jobs the same as non-P5's do. Just being in a P5 doesn't automatically make you a big dog. It just makes you a bigger dog than the non-P5's.
Got the numbers from the same source. You are right that Houston is 66 not 80. Guess I had too many numbers in my head and put the wrong one in my post. Also, Michigan made $15M last year in athletic profit. They ended up in the negative because they bought out their Athletic Director, Head Coach, and all of his Assistant Coaches. It's the first time in a decade that UM has posted negative profits and it's because they basically fired the entire football department and also brought in Jim Harbaugh plus the highest paid coaching staff and support staff in college football. They just signed a $169M deal with NIKE so those profits are only going to be higher in the future.
Anyway, the whole argument about profits isn't really the point. Michigan is able to spend almost 4x as much on athletics as UH is. That's the point. That means higher salaries for HC, higher salaries for assistants, more money for facilities, and more money for recruiting budgets.
Last edited:
Hervoyel
BUENO!
Well, compared to where Houston is right now sure, they're absolutely Haves. When we get in a position like that I'll then adjust my goals appropriately.
Right now a seat and improved investment in the program would be great. Maybe get Houston up into the top 50 instead of at 66. That would be progress.
Then you build the program. Maybe you can only build it to the point where Michigan can spend 2X or 3X as much as you but you're in the discussion. You are relevant. Right now UH just isn't relevant and that only comes with wins, and dollars, facilities, and stability.
I understand that there is a ceiling. I'd like to actually see the Cougars hit it instead of just taking the worlds word for it that it exists. People are always going to be leaving for the jobs at the top 10 or 20 schools. That's a given but there are only 10-20 of those jobs. Purdue might lose a coach to one now and then but it's not like the revolving door that we have been dealing with here for over a decade. That's a step in the right direction.
Right now a seat and improved investment in the program would be great. Maybe get Houston up into the top 50 instead of at 66. That would be progress.
Then you build the program. Maybe you can only build it to the point where Michigan can spend 2X or 3X as much as you but you're in the discussion. You are relevant. Right now UH just isn't relevant and that only comes with wins, and dollars, facilities, and stability.
I understand that there is a ceiling. I'd like to actually see the Cougars hit it instead of just taking the worlds word for it that it exists. People are always going to be leaving for the jobs at the top 10 or 20 schools. That's a given but there are only 10-20 of those jobs. Purdue might lose a coach to one now and then but it's not like the revolving door that we have been dealing with here for over a decade. That's a step in the right direction.
WolverineFan
Hall of Fame
Ok so you're approaching this whole thing from a UH-centric POV. In your eyes, Purdue is a Have because they are in the Big Ten and can suck at football and still get $30M a year from the conference. I get that. I see where you're coming from.
In the grand scheme though, Purdue is not a Have. Conference mates like UM and OSU are able to spend 3x as much yearly on football as they are. UM and OSU are the Have's, not Purdue.
Let's say Houston gets a Big 12 invite this year. They wouldn't get a full piece of the Big 12 pie for another 3-5 years but in 5 years or so, because of switch to P5, their revenue would probably be around $70M instead of $40M. Big jump but that's still Iowa State, Kansas State, Purdue territory. At that point you're looking up at Texas and Oklahoma who are still outspending you like crazy. In that scenario, you are now at the big boy table but UT and OU are still the Have's.
I would actually like UH to get a Big 12 invite because I think the potential is there for a TCU like program upswing. Big enrollment, great location, fertile recruiting ground, etc. However, it's still all about having the right coach at that point. TCU and Baylor are where they're at right now because of Gary Patterson and Art Briles. When those guys retire, they better find suitable replacements or they will find themselves at the back of the pack again.
In the grand scheme though, Purdue is not a Have. Conference mates like UM and OSU are able to spend 3x as much yearly on football as they are. UM and OSU are the Have's, not Purdue.
Let's say Houston gets a Big 12 invite this year. They wouldn't get a full piece of the Big 12 pie for another 3-5 years but in 5 years or so, because of switch to P5, their revenue would probably be around $70M instead of $40M. Big jump but that's still Iowa State, Kansas State, Purdue territory. At that point you're looking up at Texas and Oklahoma who are still outspending you like crazy. In that scenario, you are now at the big boy table but UT and OU are still the Have's.
I would actually like UH to get a Big 12 invite because I think the potential is there for a TCU like program upswing. Big enrollment, great location, fertile recruiting ground, etc. However, it's still all about having the right coach at that point. TCU and Baylor are where they're at right now because of Gary Patterson and Art Briles. When those guys retire, they better find suitable replacements or they will find themselves at the back of the pack again.
eriadoc
Texan-American
If UH gets to the point where schools like Texas and Michigan can only spend 2X what UH can, coaches will stick around a lot longer, because leaving will be a sideways move to many schools. Sure, a coach would leave UH for Michigan or Texas, but maybe not for Arizona, South Carolina, Miami, Baylor, TCU, Iowa, etc. As it stands today, those programs are better than UH, but UH can achieve that same level of program with some sustained work. But it's going to take a coach and AD that are willing to work on it. There's a base of players here that can be recruited, and once the wins start piling up, it's easier to start stealing some of those recruits. The big boys are always going to get theirs, but UH can get a lot more than what they have been.
bah007
Hall of Fame
I understand the frustration of UH fans. I didn't attend but both my parents did and so did my wife. I'm a fan.
You can't stop Sumlin from going to A&M. That just won't ever happen. UH is capable of being a very enticing place for a HC. But it is almost an impossible expectation to think that the HC will stay when the goliaths start calling. UH won't ever be A&M unless they catch some extremely lucky breaks.
UH went through some dark days in the 90s and early 2000s before Briles came along. Briles, Sumlin, and now Herman have all done their part to keep UH's stock on the rise. And the prestige of the UH job has gone up with each new hire.
If anything, you guys should look on the bright side here. Eight years ago, Briles left UH to go to Baylor, which was clearly the worst program in the Big XII at the time. According to reports, this week Herman has turned down jobs with much better situations than what Briles left for. And that's a step in the right direction. I know it sucks to look at it in that way but that's just how it is.
I understand you guys want it to happen faster. But it's not likely to. If Herman continues his success he will eventually leave for a bigger school. But as long as UH keeps sustaining this success they will continue their slow climb up the ranks. I don't think you will see Herman leave for anything other than a top tier job offer. And that's about what you can expect UH's ceiling to be for now.
You can't stop Sumlin from going to A&M. That just won't ever happen. UH is capable of being a very enticing place for a HC. But it is almost an impossible expectation to think that the HC will stay when the goliaths start calling. UH won't ever be A&M unless they catch some extremely lucky breaks.
UH went through some dark days in the 90s and early 2000s before Briles came along. Briles, Sumlin, and now Herman have all done their part to keep UH's stock on the rise. And the prestige of the UH job has gone up with each new hire.
If anything, you guys should look on the bright side here. Eight years ago, Briles left UH to go to Baylor, which was clearly the worst program in the Big XII at the time. According to reports, this week Herman has turned down jobs with much better situations than what Briles left for. And that's a step in the right direction. I know it sucks to look at it in that way but that's just how it is.
I understand you guys want it to happen faster. But it's not likely to. If Herman continues his success he will eventually leave for a bigger school. But as long as UH keeps sustaining this success they will continue their slow climb up the ranks. I don't think you will see Herman leave for anything other than a top tier job offer. And that's about what you can expect UH's ceiling to be for now.
eriadoc
Texan-American
Herv and I are doing just that. There's no reason to believe UH can't become like Baylor. They used to be, like Baylor, they had the same head coach Baylor now has, and they have a solid base from which to recruit. All it takes is for a coach to stick around for a while, like Briles has at Baylor. UH can't stop the goliaths from poaching their coach, but they sure as hell can raise themselves up to the point where there aren't as many goliaths above them. Baylor and TCU are good examples of that happening just from the state of Texas. South Carolina before Spurrier got there is another. Mississippi St. is not a bad example.
It can be done.
Speedy
Former Yeller Dweller
Briles left to go to a school that hadn't won more than 5 games in a season since 1995, the last year of the SWC. Why? More money obviously, but Baylor certainly wasn't one of the "haves". They're in a conference that matters. If Briles stays in Houston and wins, wins, wins, they're never in the national title/playoff conversation. Do that at Baylor, Kansas, Purdue, any school in the big conferences, and you've got a chance for some national prominence.
The same thing will be why Herman leaves. Boise State went undefeated twice, lost 3 games in a 4 year stretch and never got a sniff of the National title. Herman can go on a Boise State run like that and never be in the title hunt. Do that at Duke, Kansas, Maryland, Colorado, Purdue, schools that are far from being UT, USC, Michigan, Alabama, and you're in the National Title race.
UH has to get in a major conference if they ever hope to just have a chance to keep a guy like Briles, Sumlin, Herman. Until then it's the minor leagues of coaching until you get the call to the big leagues.
The same thing will be why Herman leaves. Boise State went undefeated twice, lost 3 games in a 4 year stretch and never got a sniff of the National title. Herman can go on a Boise State run like that and never be in the title hunt. Do that at Duke, Kansas, Maryland, Colorado, Purdue, schools that are far from being UT, USC, Michigan, Alabama, and you're in the National Title race.
UH has to get in a major conference if they ever hope to just have a chance to keep a guy like Briles, Sumlin, Herman. Until then it's the minor leagues of coaching until you get the call to the big leagues.
Last edited:
EllisUnit
Vote RED!!!
To be fair it also has to do with the conference. I mean C-USA and the big 12 are light years away. Hell the AAC has already past C-USA in it's first 2 years. We had 4 teams ranked in the top 25 at one point this year. If all the programs in the AAC continue to improve and CONTINUE to get wins over the power conferences then there will be no need for UH to go to the Big 12. Cause from where i'm sitting the AAC could be just as big of a power house as the Big 12 in the next few years.
SAMURAITEXAN
All Pro
I agree but, that is an exact reason Big 12 may want UH to joined them. Only thing that I hate seeing is rich conferences able to choose almost any school they want to join them when needed. At the beginning of Big 12, they excluded UH but now they are interested. Although I am tentatively excited about possibility for UH in joining Big 12, it just doesn't feel right.
Hervoyel
BUENO!
I understand the feeling but if you get an invite from a Power 5 conference you accept. That's a no brainer. No point in cutting off your nose to spite your face.
SAMURAITEXAN
All Pro
In reality, like I said I understand(tentatively excited) that but, it would be interesting to see if AAC continues to put up several schools in top 25 for a few more years. Then, power of conferences may shift and UH may have say who could join their conference for a change. Of course, this is very unlikely(almost NIL) but just a thought. Put big schools in UH's shoes and see how they like it.
EllisUnit
Vote RED!!!
Thats what i'm thinking i mean we have some good programs in the conference
Houston
Memphis
Temple
Navy
South Flordia
UCF
Conneticut
This could become a power house conference, especially with the success it had this year. I bet this will help all schools as far as recruiting goes.
Mr teX
Hall of Fame
I agree, the conference thing is a big issue & I think a big factor in why these mid major conferences can't really build themselves up & why these coaches jump at the 1st sign of any interest from teams in a power conference is b/c they have absolutely no shot of playing for a championship in a mid major conference & they know it. i'd like to see college football do something similar to how NCAA b-ball does it with the play-in game obviously on a smaller scale where they expand the playoff to 8. Conference champions from the big 5 all get automatic bids and 2 of the remaining 3 are automatic bids to the lower tier conferences like the MAC, AAC and CUSA etc... That last bid could go to anyone..Norte Dame who isn't affiliated with a conference or the proverbial 2 loss team from the SEC that seemingly almost everyone believes every year is better than X conference champion. At least then these smaller conferences at least have the pie in sky dream that they could possibly win the championship if they can just GET IN playoff. The system as it was before with the BCS and as it stands now they absolutely had/have no way of getting in.
Speedy
Former Yeller Dweller
I would take it a step further and go with a 16 team tourney with all conference champions getting in and 6 at-large bids.
If that scenario played out this season the college football post-season playoff bracket, round 1 would look something like this;
Clemson vs San Diego St.
Alabama vs Bowling Green
Oklahoma vs Arkansas State
Iowa vs Western Kentucky
Michigan State vs Houston
Notre Dame vs Oklahoma State
Baylor vs Michigan
Ohio State vs Stanford
The higher you're ranked the easier 1st round matchup you get i.e. #1 Clemson getting San Diego St.
Potential round 2 matchups;
Clemson vs Ohio State
Alabama vs Michigan
Oklahoma vs Notre Dame
Iowa vs Houston...what???
10,000 times better and a billion times more TV revenue than Louisiana Tech vs Georgia Southern in the Raycom Media Camellia Bowl.
That's how a school like UH, other than joining one of the big conferences, avoids being a stepping stone school for coaches. Someone like Herman might stay and build that legacy if there were a chance to do something on a national stage. Of course, you'd still have to find a way to pay him.
4 teams is fine. It's elite and makes the regular season uber compelling.
8 teams is reasonable, would hush some lingering whining, and it wouldn't terribly hurt the regular season.
16 teams is absurd. It takes a dump on the best regular season in sports while watering down the playoff. Arkansas St, ffs.
8 teams is reasonable, would hush some lingering whining, and it wouldn't terribly hurt the regular season.
16 teams is absurd. It takes a dump on the best regular season in sports while watering down the playoff. Arkansas St, ffs.
Marshall
Not pretty, but ALIVE!
I disagree. But it would require the reduction of the regular season schedule or an earlier start of their regular season. A ten game schedule with only one or two inter-conference games is doable, if not preferable. But moving the start of the season back a couple of weeks and maintaining a 12 game schedule is also doable.
Reducing or moving the regular season does nothing to help the problems I mentioned.
Mr teX
Hall of Fame
i agree 16 is too much, but i see no problem reducing the regular season schedule down by 1-2 games in the interest of getting a halfway equitable playoff system in place..I think we could all do without the tune up games these powerhouse schools schedule early in the season. You have no interest in seeing Arkansas state play against Florida State in a playoff game when they have next to no chance to win, I don't have any interest in seeing Oregon blow up the Citadel by 70 pts in wk 2 of the season. It may be the best regular season in sports, but those types of games add nothing to it & It's the best regular season in sports mostly when it gets down to conference play. Most believe the conferences are headed towards 16 teams anyway, why not just make 90% of the games these teams play conference games?
Last edited:
I don't care to watch Insert Power 5 school here vs Directional School Tech, no, but I don't mind one of those early in the year to act as a warm-up in lieu of a real preseason. Especially don't mind it knowing how much it helps those lesser schools financially. That said, one cupcake should be enough per season for any school with real national title intentions.
Marshall
Not pretty, but ALIVE!
I was merely mentioning the problem of scheduling to get two extra weeks available for a 16 team playoff. The advantage would be to give every conference champ an opportunity along with some at large spots. But even at 8 teams, I believe two conference champs couldn't get in the mix. I think, but am not sure, there are 10 conferences.
My thought is not about probability for their chances of winning, but the POSSIBILITY for all teams. In the 16 team format, there is always room for independents which would not be true in an 8 team format without even more conference champs being excluded.
But if ever there were a time and place where we can agree to disagree, this is it.
Marshall
Not pretty, but ALIVE!
In the spirit of outside the box thinking, a twelve team format with an 8 team (4 Game) play-in week for the weaker conferences to get to the final 8 could be a compromise which has benefits of universal chances for all teams to become Champions and reduce the impact on regular season attractions since avoiding the extra game still makes the seeding important.
(8)_________
(9)_________> _________
\ __________
BYE (1)_________ / \
\_________
(5)_________ / \
(12)_________> _________ / \
\ __________/ \
BYE (4)_________ / \
\_________
(7)_________ /
(10)_________> _________ /
\ __________ /
BYE (2)_________ / \ /
\_________/
(6)_________ /
(11)_________> _________ /
\ ___________/
BYE (3)_________ /
Looks great until posted.
(8)_________
(9)_________> _________
\ __________
BYE (1)_________ / \
\_________
(5)_________ / \
(12)_________> _________ / \
\ __________/ \
BYE (4)_________ / \
\_________
(7)_________ /
(10)_________> _________ /
\ __________ /
BYE (2)_________ / \ /
\_________/
(6)_________ /
(11)_________> _________ /
\ ___________/
BYE (3)_________ /
Looks great until posted.
Last edited:
Blake
MMQB
Give me 8 teams. Thats only 1 extra week for the playoff process. And I would be fine if Alabama had to cut Charleston Southern from their LATE November schedule.
8 also gives teams from lesser divisions a chance to get in, since the CFP committee is always going to pick 4 powerhouse football schools over a Boise, UH, Temple, Fresno, Duke, etc.
8 also gives teams from lesser divisions a chance to get in, since the CFP committee is always going to pick 4 powerhouse football schools over a Boise, UH, Temple, Fresno, Duke, etc.
Hervoyel
BUENO!
I just don't get why anyone would want to turn college football into something we already have in pro football. Hell I miss the days before there even was a playoff at all. I liked the debate and ambiguity of the polls and bowl games. Trying to pin down a definitive champion among 120 CFB teams is a misguided exercise in futility.
No one said it couldn't be scheduled. Doesn't make Arkansas St, Bowling Green, Northern Ill., or San Diego St., any more interesting a match-up to consider expanding the playoff to a nonsensical 16 team format though.
Mr teX
Hall of Fame
Disagree with the bolded. If NCAA basketball with its 120+ teams could come up with something fair and reasonably scaled towards the sport to determine its champion like March Madness, College football can do it to. As Marshall said, it's not about the likelihood of the mid major teams winning it all, its just about them at least getting a reasonably fair opportunity to...It's completely unreasonable that those teams should have to go undefeated for like 2-3 years just to even enter the conversation of getting into the playoff while teams like Notre Dame can get consideration almost every year by playing the same also ran teams and other scrubs teams at the bottom of the barrel of power 5 conferences (the same teams that good mid major programs are beating by the way) just b/c they're Notre Dame.
I mean look at Iowa...They've beaten no one of note all year & yet somehow these guys are in position to play for a national championship...Meanwhile UH has beaten 2 ranked in the mid to low teens this year & are about to face another ranked team for the championship.......They can barely crack the top 20.
Last edited:
Hervoyel
BUENO!
Completely disagree because basketball isn't football. Football is a sport of attrition and it's one of the few sports where the more you play it th more damage you seem to do to the human body. Setting up some kind of elaborate playoff system is going to put unnecessary games/miles on the bodies of the best players before they ever see a dollar of a pro salary. It's a stupid, selfish idea. College football was fine the way it was before it began changing.
Speedy
Former Yeller Dweller
If every division in college football can have a 16 team playoff I don't see why the big boys can't. Don't people want to see who the best of the best is be decided on the field instead of the polls?
Yeah, nobody cares about an Arkansas State or Louisiana Tech, but they'll be in bowl games this year none-the-less. Those schools would basically be 1st round byes for the top ranked schools like Clemson, Alabama. No different than 1 vs 16 in March Madness.
It doesn't lessen the regular season because you still have to either win your conference or be ranked high enough to get an at-large bid, and be ranked high enough to get a W. Kentucky in the 1st round. If anything, the way it is now lessens the regular season. Lose just one game and you're pretty much out of the playoff picture.
You don't really add much to the season. After this weekend's conference championships it will be 5 weeks before the National Title game is played. 5 weeks a 16 team playoff could take place. And out of 80 or so teams that play a bowl game now (one extra game), only 8 teams would play an extra game on top of that, just 4 teams would play 2 more, and the 2 that make it to the championship, 3. D1-AA, D2 and D3 all do it, I don't see why the schools with all the money can't.
And you can still have your meaningless GoDaddy Bowls or whatever. Nobody's watching that crap anyway. But EVERYBODY would be watching the playoff tournament.
Even though a Sun Belt school would likely never get through a slate of games against Clemson, Ohio State, Oklahoma and Alabama to win a championship, at least they have the opportunity. And if they did knock off one or 2 of those guys, it would be a bigger Cinderella story than anything in March Madness.
And if you're just never going to give those conferences an opportunity then you might as well put them in another division separate from the P5.
I don't get why you wouldn't want to see Alabama/Michigan, Oklahoma/Notre Dame in a 2nd round matchup, with the winners to play Clemson and Iowa. A tourney like that would be bigger than March Madness, IMO.
And trying to pin down a definitive champion among 120 CFB teams is a misguided exercise in futility? Do you know how many teams there are available to be in March Madness this year? 351. They seem to do a good job of pinning down a definitive champion. Not to mention 125 teams in D1-AA, 168 teams in D2, and 248 teams in D3. They don't have a problem pinning down a definitive champion.
Yeah, nobody cares about an Arkansas State or Louisiana Tech, but they'll be in bowl games this year none-the-less. Those schools would basically be 1st round byes for the top ranked schools like Clemson, Alabama. No different than 1 vs 16 in March Madness.
It doesn't lessen the regular season because you still have to either win your conference or be ranked high enough to get an at-large bid, and be ranked high enough to get a W. Kentucky in the 1st round. If anything, the way it is now lessens the regular season. Lose just one game and you're pretty much out of the playoff picture.
You don't really add much to the season. After this weekend's conference championships it will be 5 weeks before the National Title game is played. 5 weeks a 16 team playoff could take place. And out of 80 or so teams that play a bowl game now (one extra game), only 8 teams would play an extra game on top of that, just 4 teams would play 2 more, and the 2 that make it to the championship, 3. D1-AA, D2 and D3 all do it, I don't see why the schools with all the money can't.
And you can still have your meaningless GoDaddy Bowls or whatever. Nobody's watching that crap anyway. But EVERYBODY would be watching the playoff tournament.
Even though a Sun Belt school would likely never get through a slate of games against Clemson, Ohio State, Oklahoma and Alabama to win a championship, at least they have the opportunity. And if they did knock off one or 2 of those guys, it would be a bigger Cinderella story than anything in March Madness.
And if you're just never going to give those conferences an opportunity then you might as well put them in another division separate from the P5.
I don't get why you wouldn't want to see Alabama/Michigan, Oklahoma/Notre Dame in a 2nd round matchup, with the winners to play Clemson and Iowa. A tourney like that would be bigger than March Madness, IMO.
And trying to pin down a definitive champion among 120 CFB teams is a misguided exercise in futility? Do you know how many teams there are available to be in March Madness this year? 351. They seem to do a good job of pinning down a definitive champion. Not to mention 125 teams in D1-AA, 168 teams in D2, and 248 teams in D3. They don't have a problem pinning down a definitive champion.
Mr teX
Hall of Fame
Lol, i'm not talking about having a 64 game playoff tournament like the NCAA..that's why I said of appropriate scale for the sport..& 8 game playoff isn't elaborate... and deleting 1 or 2 of those garbage ass out of conference games each of the big boys play every year could make it happen.
eriadoc
Texan-American
A 16 game playoff this season would be a first round of something like:
Clemson v Oregon
Alabama v Michigan
Oklahoma v Northwestern
Iowa v Ole Miss
Michigan St. v Baylor
Ohio St. v TCU
Stanford v NC
Notre Dame v Florida St.
I don't see any directional tech schools in there. Aside from Northwestern, who had a great year in a power conference, I don't see any schools that aren't competing for New Year's Day bowl games regularly. Sorry, that argument against a 16 team playoff doesn't hold water. Hell, name a directional tech school in the top 25 CFP rankings. UH, Temple, and Navy are about the least representative teams of a typical top 25 and they damn well earned it this year. As for the regular season meaning something, talk to me when power conferences outside of the SEC start playing a regular season worth mentioning. #1 Clemson played Wofford, Appalachian St., and a collection of teams that aren't even ranked. They've played one team all year that's currently ranked - Florida St. That's not exactly a regular season worth touting. Alabama played a few non-conference cupcakes as well. The regular season validity argument doesn't hold water. SEC teams at least beat each other up during the season because of the overall quality of the teams, but the other power conferences are top heavy with a couple teams and then have big name cupcakes instead of directional tech schools.
Other levels of college football have playoff systems that D1 should mirror. If the schools that truly are focused on academics can manage it, the big boys can as well. Maybe they're not smart enough to figure it out on their own, but the model's there for them to follow.
Clemson v Oregon
Alabama v Michigan
Oklahoma v Northwestern
Iowa v Ole Miss
Michigan St. v Baylor
Ohio St. v TCU
Stanford v NC
Notre Dame v Florida St.
I don't see any directional tech schools in there. Aside from Northwestern, who had a great year in a power conference, I don't see any schools that aren't competing for New Year's Day bowl games regularly. Sorry, that argument against a 16 team playoff doesn't hold water. Hell, name a directional tech school in the top 25 CFP rankings. UH, Temple, and Navy are about the least representative teams of a typical top 25 and they damn well earned it this year. As for the regular season meaning something, talk to me when power conferences outside of the SEC start playing a regular season worth mentioning. #1 Clemson played Wofford, Appalachian St., and a collection of teams that aren't even ranked. They've played one team all year that's currently ranked - Florida St. That's not exactly a regular season worth touting. Alabama played a few non-conference cupcakes as well. The regular season validity argument doesn't hold water. SEC teams at least beat each other up during the season because of the overall quality of the teams, but the other power conferences are top heavy with a couple teams and then have big name cupcakes instead of directional tech schools.
Other levels of college football have playoff systems that D1 should mirror. If the schools that truly are focused on academics can manage it, the big boys can as well. Maybe they're not smart enough to figure it out on their own, but the model's there for them to follow.
Yes, we need the third place ACC team, an also ran SEC team, third place Pac-12, the fourth place Big 12, and the fourth or so place Big Ten team to really nail down the national champion in FBS football.
Tons of prestige there.
Tons of prestige there.
texanhead08
All Pro
We have come a long way when it comes to how we pay our coaches. When Art Briles was hired in 2003 he made $250,000. We are about to give Tom Herman a raise to $3 million.
Hervoyel
BUENO!
So 16 team playoff would take about four weeks right? Conferences play fewer creampuffs early on in "tuneup" games. Those creampuffs kind of need the money they get but no big deal, **** them. We're about crowning a Champion right?
So drop a couple of games early in the year and get right into playing conference games. Conferences with championship games are going to want to keep those ($$$$). Bowl games? Those aren't going anywhere and bowl season (around New Years) isn't changing. I don't see how this is desireable but if you gotta know who's number one I guess it sounds good.
So drop a couple of games early in the year and get right into playing conference games. Conferences with championship games are going to want to keep those ($$$$). Bowl games? Those aren't going anywhere and bowl season (around New Years) isn't changing. I don't see how this is desireable but if you gotta know who's number one I guess it sounds good.
eriadoc
Texan-American
How long is the D2 football playoff? How many teams? Haven't looked it up, but no reason to reinvent the wheel.
Speedy
Former Yeller Dweller
D1-AA, or FCS, has a 24 team playoff. 16 teams face off in the 1st round, winners play 8 teams that had 1st round byes.
D2 and D3 both have a 28 team playoff. 24 teams in the 1st round with 4 teams getting 1st round byes. 4 of the winners of the 1st round would play those teams with byes in the 2nd round based on how they're seeded (I would assume), while the rest of the winners play each other.
All 3 divisions go 5 weeks to get through the tourney. A 16 team playoff for the big boys would just take 4 weeks.
You want your sport to have a champion at the end of the year? No, let's just give everyone participation ribbons. Or send 66% of the division to meaningless bowl games.
You can still have bowls , GoDaddy, Independence, Famous Idaho Potato, whatever crap bowl you want for the MAC2 to play the Sun Belt 3 or even for teams that didn't make the playoffs, say TCU, Florida State, Northwestern, Oregon, Ole Miss, whoever. You could even incorporate some bowls into the tourney. Hell, it's what they're doing now for the 4 team playoff.
The bowls don't have to go anywhere. I get that the school/conference gets money playing in a bowl game, but the game itself is absolutely meaningless. Georgia vs UCLA in the Sun Bowl means nothing. Ohio State vs Sam Houston St in the regular season would have more meaning than that game. Notre Dame vs Oklahoma State in the Sun Bowl 1st round playoff game, somebody might actually watch that game on TV. Michigan St vs Houston 1st round playoff in the Liberty Bowl and I'm actually watching a Liberty Bowl for the 1st time in forever.
Every other division of college football does it, why can't the big boys do it?