Jump to content


Null



Power 5 to play conference games only?


Recommended Posts

It certainly looks that way. The Big Ten passed this today. The ACC is expected to follow which will cancel the North Carolina game. If we have football it looks inevitable at this point that we will only play SEC games. Nothing set in stone yet but I think it is coming. 
https://www.google.com/amp/s/247sports.com/Article/ACC-conference-only-schedule-2020-college-football-season-148990727/Amp/

Edited by gr82b4au
  • Thanks 1
Link to post
Share on other sites




Posted this in the "Play the season without fans in the stadium thread." Forgive me for cross posting here but this was SEC Commission Greg Sankey about an hour ago as reported on the Paul Finebaum show:

"The SEC will continue to meet regularly with our campus leaders in the coming days, guided by medical advisers to make the important decisions necessary to determine the best path forward related to the SEC's fall sports. We recognize the challenges ahead and know the well being of our student athletes, coaches, staff and fans must remain at the forefront of those decisions." - SEC Commissioner Greg Sankey, July 9th, 2020

(My take? If you look at the announcements from the ACC and the Big 10, they're really saying "conference games only...if we play at all." They're not guaranteeing a season at all right now. I'm not going to be the least bit surprised if the major conferences go the way of the Ivy League and call the fall season off. If folks want to insure the best chance to see football this fall, stop making preventative measures into divisive political issues. They shouldn't have ever become that. Practice social distancing. And #WearTheDamnMask.)

 

Link to post
Share on other sites

Wonder what kind of insurance is in place for the cupcake games?  No Power 5 games would be destructive to a lot of non power teams.  I assume contracts are in place and some sort of buyout has to be paid?  Also does anyone know logistically how far out the SEC could wait to make a decision?

Link to post
Share on other sites
36 minutes ago, Win4AU said:

Wonder what kind of insurance is in place for the cupcake games?  No Power 5 games would be destructive to a lot of non power teams.  I assume contracts are in place and some sort of buyout has to be paid?  

Most well drawn contracts will include force majeure provisions for things like acts of God, natural disasters, war, insurrection and sometimes epidemics, pandemics and so on. Broad "catch all" language for other unforeseen events that would justify cancellation is also not unusual. I have no idea if standard contracts for these games include such provisions, but with the amounts of money at stake, I would not be surprised if they did.

Edited by CleCoTiger
  • Like 3
Link to post
Share on other sites

If we don't get to play at all, then not push the 2020 schedule to 2021. In fact, all teams could push all their schedules to the next season and the next season and ect until covered for the future. That way nobody would have to pay for buying out any games.

  • Like 2
Link to post
Share on other sites
3 minutes ago, auburn4ever said:

If we don't get to play at all, then not push the 2020 schedule to 2021. In fact, all teams could push all their schedules to the next season and the next season and ect until covered for the future. That way nobody would have to pay for buying out any games.

At first glance this seems like it could work. Bonus points for a V-8 moment there A4E. Kudos

Link to post
Share on other sites

I don't get the advantage of Conference Games Only. Yes, you reduce the number of games played by four. So what? If you're going to play eight might as well play twelve. If eight is manageable 12 will also be manageable. If eight isn't manageable, why try to play eight?

  • Like 3
Link to post
Share on other sites

This could be the end of a lot of football for a lot of smaller programs.  They rely heavily on that influx of cash from us playing these non-conference games.  I have posted this before but UMass has an athletic budget for $10m and they make just over $1m from this game alone.  Without this money, they would not be able to make their budget and will have to find ways to make up for it.

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
5 hours ago, Mikey said:

I don't get the advantage of Conference Games Only. 

From the Big Ten: Limiting competitions to conference-only play will give the Big Ten “the greatest flexibility to adjust its own operations throughout the season and make quick decisions in real-time based on the most current evolving medical advice and the fluid nature of the pandemic.” 

Reckon what they're getting at in part is that by making this decision now they can deal with issues of logistics and the health and well being of the athletes much easier than they could by going week by week. Schedule now. Make the best possible arrangements now. That as opposed to the chaos of weekly uncertainty to an even greater degree and last minute changes/cancellations.

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
5 hours ago, Mikey said:

I don't get the advantage of Conference Games Only. Yes, you reduce the number of games played by four. So what? If you're going to play eight might as well play twelve. If eight is manageable 12 will also be manageable. If eight isn't manageable, why try to play eight?

Leaves a lot of opportunity for open dates and therefore the ability for players to get over the illness if they happen to contract it.  As an example if Ohio State had 10 starters out with covid, all of a sudden a game with Indiana might be more competitive than it should be if there was no off week. You would almost always have 2 weeks between games with an 8 week schedule.

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

I haven't really thought this out. 

But what if a tournament arrangement was used similar to March Madness.  Start it off at the conference level and once narrowed down to one or two teams from each conference you expand it to a national level.  All games at neutral sites.  Could make for a really short season if you lose early.  But each week the teams and fan bases exposing themselves to COVID gets cut in half. 

Probably a dumb idea....I'm just getting really resigned to there being no season this year and I'm grasping at straws.

Link to post
Share on other sites
8 hours ago, Mikey said:

I don't get the advantage of Conference Games Only. Yes, you reduce the number of games played by four. So what? If you're going to play eight might as well play twelve. If eight is manageable 12 will also be manageable. If eight isn't manageable, why try to play eight?

The issue is they don't believe the non power 5 schools have the resources in place to do consistent testing and other necessary measures week to week to ensure they aren't spreading it.

  • Like 3
Link to post
Share on other sites

 

This is the stuff that makes it hard for me to believe we will have fall sports. You outlaw this but totally okay to huddle and tackle each other 

  • Like 4
  • Thanks 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
10 hours ago, countoff said:

I haven't really thought this out. 

But what if a tournament arrangement was used similar to March Madness.  Start it off at the conference level and once narrowed down to one or two teams from each conference you expand it to a national level.  All games at neutral sites.  Could make for a really short season if you lose early.  But each week the teams and fan bases exposing themselves to COVID gets cut in half. 

Probably a dumb idea....I'm just getting really resigned to there being no season this year and I'm grasping at straws.

I actually like it. 120 teams.....week 1>60 week 2 >32 week 3 16 week 4>8 then have round robin with final 8...I dont know...this is where I am at with the world....redesigning the college football landscape lol

Link to post
Share on other sites
4 hours ago, Tigerpro2a said:

I actually like it. 120 teams.....week 1>60 week 2 >32 week 3 16 week 4>8 then have round robin with final 8...I dont know...this is where I am at with the world....redesigning the college football landscape lol

If you consider the football season going from early September to the end of December (17 or 18 weekends), I think you could have all D1 teams participate.  This means that teams (and fan bases) would have off weeks (even if they keep winning).  This would further reduce their exposure.  And yet, if the schedule is done right, we could have at least a couple of games being played somewhere every weekend.  So there would be TV revenue.

Whoever is administering the AUFamily website should feel free to pass along my personal email to the NCAA if they would like to talk through the details with me.  I'd be more than happy to help them figure this out....and I'll give them my discounted rates.

  

Link to post
Share on other sites

I don’t believe we’re going to have any football this fall but lets say we do and its all just conference games.

Would we still have a playoff? How would you judge conference strength with no non con games? 

This would hurt the Pac 12 the most I think since they are already generally perceived to be the weakest conference. 

Would be interesting to see it play out but I just don’t believe we will get there.

Edited by nixtosanders94
Link to post
Share on other sites

I think calling it all off for the fall and doing some limited games in the spring, provided we have a vaccine by then,  or either rolling the whole schedule to next fall makes the most sense.  It just doesn’t make sense to start into a season this fall and then have to shut it down due to our inability to control the infections.  Football is not a sport that works with social distancing.  

Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, weagl1 said:

I think calling it all off for the fall and doing some limited games in the spring, provided we have a vaccine by then,  or either rolling the whole schedule to next fall makes the most sense.  It just doesn’t make sense to start into a season this fall and then have to shut it down due to our inability to control the infections.  Football is not a sport that works with social distancing.  

It’s also not a sport that can afford not to play, but someone is either going to have to decide that the risk is worth it and the backlash when the media storm come at them when cases rise (regardless of cause) isn’t going to destroy them if they are going to play a down of football. The only problem is see is a lot of pussyfooting around making a clear cut decision and waiting for others to make a call. thats true of leaders in areas other than sports as well. 

Link to post
Share on other sites

Chances are dropping but the financial applications of not having football are substantial. So many issues: schools refunding tickets, re-scheduling games, recruiting (visits and signing and can the play in the spring), players graduating (can they play next year if we don’t play this year). 

I hate China. 

Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Loading...
×
×
  • Create New...