It’s funny they say they don’t care about us, but they always love rubbing everything in our faces, have a cute nickname and everything.
Sure we aren’t relevant to them on the court, but we live in their heads. We always will.
OT: Conference Realignment
- Thread starter Pablo
- Start date
Sure we aren’t relevant to them on the court, but we live in their heads. We always will.
We’ve beaten them at least 3 times in the last 5, but two things are true: one, none of those victories were on our home court (until it is nearly impossible to win coming into EBA the hate won’t start flowing), two, we haven’t beaten them when it matters (in the postseason) in a very, very long time. We need to pull a URI a la 2018? and knock them off in the quarters as like an 8 seed and then they’ll hate us.
Edit: forgot one more wrinkle (a hateable player), you know like Yuta Watanabe from GW, Jeff Dowtin from URI, Gudmundsen from Davidson, a player who just wrecks your day when they’re playing your team.
The last one of those we had legitimately was probably Ryan Pearson. You might be able to make a claim for is Marquise Moore, but he was too quiet I think and he played on mostly bad teams. Maybe Austin Ball or Keyshawn Hall can grow into one of those.
Last edited:
Actually we have only beat them 1 time in the last 5 (February 2021). Unfortunately, we have only won 4 of the last 21 against them.
At least 3 of those 4 were at their place.
The point still stands, though, in that until they dread coming to Fairfax again, the rivalry won’t matter.
OP
Pablo
Hall of Famer
- Thread Starter
- #425
SMU Mustangs Raise $100M in 1 Week to Support Move to ACC amid Conference Realignment
SMU is joining the Atlantic Coast Conference alongside Cal and Stanford in advance of the 2024-25 athletic sports season, and the university announced it has…
bleacherreport.com
"Per the release, the commitments are via 'a group of thirty donors that includes trustees and key donors,' both alumni and non-alumni."
SMU got that Church and Oil & Gas money. Double factor!
OP
Pablo
Hall of Famer
- Thread Starter
- #427
A Pac-12/Mountain West merger could include conference relegation, would that work in college athletics?
Eight Pac schools would compete in the Pac-8 while the other eight schools would compete in the Mountain West, with two schools getting promoted/relegated per year.
www.9news.com
"As of now the Pac-2 and Mountain West merging would result in 14 football schools, and with eight teams being the minimum it would require two additions - which could include FCS powerhouses North Dakota State and South Dakota State.
This way the eight Pac schools (the Pac-8) would compete as their own conference while the other eight schools (Mountain West) would compete as a separate conference, with two schools getting promoted and relegated every year (or two) based on a points system that would be determined.
A scheduling alliance would be part of this system, with Dellenger explaining it as two non-conference games, seven games within the conference, and three against the partner league.
The proposed alliance could also include a BracketBuster weekend in the middle of the season, as well as relegation and promotion games with the idea that those games would draw a large audience and would be appealing to television partners and therefore drive up the conference's media rights deal.
Barriers are significant, the least of which is teams not wanting to risk falling into the lower level - although the only two schools that aren't currently G5 are Oregon State and Washington State. How this would impact other sports is a big one as well - would the 14 team conference just merge for every other sport and only do promotion/relegation for football? Or would they try this in other sports as well?"
I like this idea but unless they can solve the financial problem with relegation it goes nowhere.Say the Pac-8 gets $7m/year and the MW gets $4m/yr. Relegation means 2 schools lose $3m/year and how is that loss accounted for?A Pac-12/Mountain West merger could include conference relegation, would that work in college athletics?
Eight Pac schools would compete in the Pac-8 while the other eight schools would compete in the Mountain West, with two schools getting promoted/relegated per year.
"As of now the Pac-2 and Mountain West merging would result in 14 football schools, and with eight teams being the minimum it would require two additions - which could include FCS powerhouses North Dakota State and South Dakota State.
This way the eight Pac schools (the Pac-8) would compete as their own conference while the other eight schools (Mountain West) would compete as a separate conference, with two schools getting promoted and relegated every year (or two) based on a points system that would be determined.
A scheduling alliance would be part of this system, with Dellenger explaining it as two non-conference games, seven games within the conference, and three against the partner league.
The proposed alliance could also include a BracketBuster weekend in the middle of the season, as well as relegation and promotion games with the idea that those games would draw a large audience and would be appealing to television partners and therefore drive up the conference's media rights deal.
Barriers are significant, the least of which is teams not wanting to risk falling into the lower level - although the only two schools that aren't currently G5 are Oregon State and Washington State. How this would impact other sports is a big one as well - would the 14 team conference just merge for every other sport and only do promotion/relegation for football? Or would they try this in other sports as well?"
base budget of $4m/yr for all 16 teams
at the start of the season the Pac 8 teams get a 1 year "bonus" of $3m/yr
OP
Pablo
Hall of Famer
- Thread Starter
- #430
College Football Playoff expected to keep format for expanded 12-team bracket despite conference realignment
If any change is to come to the 6+6 model, it will likely be after the conclusion of the 2024 season
www.cbssports.com
"Despite the rash of conference realignment this offseason, it is expected that agreed-upon 12-team College Football Playoff format will maintain its structure at least for the 2024 season, sources told CBS Sports.
The main reason: It would take an unanimous vote of the CFP Management Committee -- 10 commissioners and Notre Dame's athletic director -- to make any change to the 12-team format at this point, sources confirmed.
The 12-team structure in place for 2024 will include see the six highest-ranked conference champions populate the field as automatic qualifiers with six other at-large teams receiving playoff bids.
The original idea behind guaranteeing spots to the six highest-ranked conference champions was that, most years, not only would the Power Five league champions have access to the playoff but so would at least one champion from a Group of Five conference.
Maintaining the 6+6 structure for 2024 would put off speculation that the number of automatic qualifiers will decrease with the expected loss of the Pac-12. The two other structures that have been informally suggested are 5+7 with five AQs (accounting for the expiration of the Pac-12) and the 12 highest-rated teams -- regardless of conference championship status -- earning CFP bids.
The committee will gather for a regularly scheduled two-day meeting beginning Tuesday in Chicago. Even if alternate models are proposed at the meeting, it will only take one dissenting vote to keep the agreed-upon structure in place."