College Football is Ass Backwards

wiseplayer

wiseplayer

Pretty much a regular
LSU beats Georgia, LSU doesn’t get in, Dawgs still in.
Clemson-UNC winner doesn’t get in.
Utah beats USC, Utah doesn’t get in.
Purdue beats Michigan, Purdue doesn’t get in, Michigan still gets in. If OSU had lost by 3, it’s possible both OSU & Michigan get in with a Purdue win.
Kansas St wins, they dont get in.
Tell me we don’t need a 12 team playoff again? Next week’s conference championships are meaningless from a National Championship aspect for LSU, Clemson, UNC, Utah, Purdue and Kansas St.
When conference $ is involved for Final Four participants, why wouldn’t we feel officiating wouldn’t favor those eligible to advance to the playoffs?
Show me a sport that is more ass backwards than College Football?
 
wiseplayer said:
LSU beats Georgia, LSU doesn’t get in, Dawgs still in.
Clemson-UNC winner doesn’t get in.
Utah beats USC, Utah doesn’t get in.
Purdue beats Michigan, Purdue doesn’t get in, Michigan still gets in. If OSU had lost by 3, it’s possible both OSU & Michigan get in with a Purdue win.
Kansas St wins, they dont get in.
Tell me we don’t need a 12 team playoff again? Next week’s conference championships are meaningless from a National Championship aspect for LSU, Clemson, UNC, Utah, Purdue and Kansas St.
When conference $ is involved for Final Four participants, why wouldn’t we feel officiating wouldn’t favor those eligible to advance to the playoffs?
Show me a sport that is more ass backwards than College Football?
Click to expand...

@wiseplayer Let's do this the right way. You state exactly what system you propose, which teams get in and why. You are now ncaa commissioner with the power to do so. I or others will comment on your system and then others can submit the system they want with supporting points validating their opinions. And others can critique or agree - and maybe we will have more agreement than we suspect, or at least, everyone can gain respect from the different opinions - we don't have to agree, but let's just see if we can get some "I understand why you want that, it's just not what I want"
 
s--k said:
@wiseplayer Let's do this the right way. You state exactly what system you propose, which teams get in and why. You are now ncaa commissioner with the power to do so. I or others will comment on your system and then others can submit the system they want with supporting points validating their opinions. And others can critique or agree - and maybe we will have more agreement than we suspect, or at least, everyone can gain respect from the different opinions - we don't have to agree, but let's just see if we can get some "I understand why you want that, it's just not what I want"
Click to expand...
Sounds good and will do when I have time but quickly I’ll say this.
Rams lost to 9ers twice in the regular season last year. They played in the NFC Championship game and Rams won but 9ers get to go to the Super Bowl because of the regular season wins. That’s what we’re looking at if LSU or Purdue wins.
 
Not complicated and there’s no reason to make it complicated because the best will rear its head regardless.
Power 5 Conference Champion gets an automatic berth. What world are we living in to have it any other way?
The other 7 berths are At-Large. Then seed them 1-12 based on their body of work. If all 7 comes from 1 or 2 conferences so be it.
If they’re not going to give us meaningful games in the regular season other than a handful of games than they CAN NOT make Conference Championships meaningless.
I’ll say it again, there’s not a sport that is more ass backwards and cheats its fans more than CFB.
No need to reinvent the wheel here.
 
OK, I'll engage on that after the NFL games. Can you give me the 12 teams this year if chalk wins out (or any year, last year, 2019, etc). Any 12 you want to give me.
 
s--k said:
OK, I'll engage on that after the NFL games. Can you give me the 12 teams this year if chalk wins out (or any year, last year, 2019, etc). Any 12 you want to give me.
Click to expand...
Let’s wait until the conference championships play out to do it properly. That would be a great topic to discuss.
 
wiseplayer said:
Not complicated and there’s no reason to make it complicated because the best will rear its head regardless.
Power 5 Conference Champion gets an automatic berth. What world are we living in to have it any other way?
The other 7 berths are At-Large. Then seed them 1-12 based on their body of work. If all 7 comes from 1 or 2 conferences so be it.
If they’re not going to give us meaningful games in the regular season other than a handful of games than they CAN NOT make Conference Championships meaningless.
I’ll say it again, there’s not a sport that is more ass backwards and cheats its fans more than CFB.
No need to reinvent the wheel here.
Click to expand...

My proposal has always been a 6 team tourney where the Power 5 champs all get an auto bid and then there’s one “at large” team picked. The other option would be 8 teams, Power 5 champs all get in and then. 3 at large bids.

Either way, you’d still have a team with a loss potentially getting in, even if they’ve lost to a team that isn’t in, based on conference championship games.

12 is way too many. I really think 6 is the number but would understand and can be convinced that 8 is the better number.
 
gps_3 said:
My only problem with this is that it rewards scheduling cupcakes
Click to expand...
Be interesting if they allowed only one game on the schedule to be non power 5 including the FCS team. I get that these games are scheduled years in advance and you have to adjust for the difference that teams will obviously be different than they are when you schedule, that's the nature of college athletics and a fundamental difference between being an amateur game vs a professional one.

Everything has to be a bracket for us, CFB for the most part has avoided it and what makes it enjoyable. For all I care do like they do in all levels of soccer and kick the bottom three down a league. More exciting than watching rematches in CFB by far for me.
 
The NCAA seems to have it dialed perfectly for March Madness. CFB regular season would be impacted even more with this formula. In my eyes the regular season would become the best 4 months in sports. It would rival the NFL regular season.
 
wiseplayer said:
The NCAA seems to have it dialed perfectly for March Madness. CFB regular season would be impacted even more with this formula. In my eyes the regular season would become the best 4 months in sports. It would rival the NFL regular season.
Click to expand...
March Madness has a completely different playground to deal with because of 3x the games football plays. CFB competing with MM would be so incredibly awful we wouldn't care about the sport until December.

MM is a great tournament for a reason. You can play 2 games in 3 days. That kind of thing would destroy CFB which seems like what they're trying to do anyway.
 
We all need to remember that TV and media companies are responsible for setting up any playoff, not the NCAA. So they take care of them. If what you want aligns with them, then it works out.
 
wiseplayer said:
Let’s wait until the conference championships play out to do it properly. That would be a great topic to discuss.
Click to expand...

That's a week away, and I may or may not care as much then.

wiseplayer said:
Not complicated and there’s no reason to make it complicated because the best will rear its head regardless.
Power 5 Conference Champion gets an automatic berth. What world are we living in to have it any other way?
The other 7 berths are At-Large. Then seed them 1-12 based on their body of work. If all 7 comes from 1 or 2 conferences so be it.
If they’re not going to give us meaningful games in the regular season other than a handful of games than they CAN NOT make Conference Championships meaningless.
I’ll say it again, there’s not a sport that is more ass backwards and cheats its fans more than CFB.
No need to reinvent the wheel here.
Click to expand...

Where I agree in principle if not exactly:

I want conference champions to get an automatic playoff bid as well. I favor a 4-team playoff, all conference champions. However, more on your proposal, let's include all 5 power conference champions. I would join you on that.

Where I disagree or require more detail:

Where do you come up with 7 at-large berths? Why not 2 or 3 (depending if you include any other conference champions to go with the P5 teams). Why not 11? What is your reasoning behind the number of 7 at-large births?
 
jedi ninja said:
My proposal has always been a 6 team tourney where the Power 5 champs all get an auto bid and then there’s one “at large” team picked. The other option would be 8 teams, Power 5 champs all get in and then. 3 at large bids.

Either way, you’d still have a team with a loss potentially getting in, even if they’ve lost to a team that isn’t in, based on conference championship games.

12 is way too many. I really think 6 is the number but would understand and can be convinced that 8 is the better number.
Click to expand...

I kind of like that. If it were 6, why the at-large team? Why not include the highest ranked group of 5 conference champion to join the group of 6?

For me personally, I do not think I can ever agree that any at-large births should ever be included because I believe we have already had teams participate in both the BCS and the playoff who, in my opinion, should never have participated because they did not win their conference.

Can you convince me why at-large non conference champions should be considered?
 
s--k said:
I kind of like that. If it were 6, why the at-large team? Why not include the highest ranked group of 5 conference champion to join the group of 6?

For me personally, I do not think I can ever agree that any at-large births should ever be included because I believe we have already had teams participate in both the BCS and the playoff who, in my opinion, should never have participated because they did not win their conference.

Can you convince me why at-large non conference champions should be considered?
Click to expand...

Sure, that could work. I’m pretty sure I’ve always used the 6th team as the non-Power 5 but then the argument becomes why should a non-Power 5 team get an auto berth every year (and I would agree with that), so I figured let’s just use “at large” and if there is a deserving non-Power 5 team they’re in, and if there isn’t it would go to a Power 5 school.
 
jedi ninja said:
Sure, that could work. I’m pretty sure I’ve always used the 6th team as the non-Power 5 but then the argument becomes why should a non-Power 5 team get an auto berth every year (and I would agree with that), so I figured let’s just use “at large” and if there is a deserving non-Power 5 team they’re in, and if there isn’t it would go to a Power 5 school.
Click to expand...

Yes, there are years that the group of 5 doesn't have a real strong champion.

I think there is something so virtuous and simple for winning your way to the playoff, that is really what I want to strive for. I'm trying to be open minded with engaging wiseplayer, perhaps I will be enlightened or there is something I am missing.
 
To me it makes no sense, and we’ve been having this discussion for years now, that there are 5 “Power” conferences but only 4 teams in a playoff. Right out of the gate that makes no sense…how can one of the Power 5 be left out every year? If each conference had an undefeated team, how could anyone explain logically how one of those 5 were left out of a playoff?

That’s just for starters too, as there are many other issues/discussions to have about it…but you can’t have less playoff spots than you have “Power” conferences because mathematically it doesn’t work.
 
s--k said:
That's a week away, and I may or may not care as much then.



Where I agree in principle if not exactly:

I want conference champions to get an automatic playoff bid as well. I favor a 4-team playoff, all conference champions. However, more on your proposal, let's include all 5 power conference champions. I would join you on that.

Where I disagree or require more detail:

Where do you come up with 7 at-large berths? Why not 2 or 3 (depending if you include any other conference champions to go with the P5 teams). Why not 11? What is your reasoning behind the number of 7 at-large births?
Click to expand...
Power 5 gets the automatic berth from the conference champion. 7 spots left.
My question to you is why on 4 teams when it completely lessens the regular season? With 12 spots we at least get more teams involved for a playoff spot. Think about it. 12 teams actually broadens the interest to the Top 25 who are vying for the 12 spot.
Every year we have a Top 25 list which is the most meaningless list I’ve ever seen. Who can actually name the teams outside of the top 10? Nobody cares.
My idea implements a hope for at least top 25 teams throughout the season to get a playoff berth. Every week will be meaningful to all of those teams, not to mention keep players from bailing on their teams.
The season lacks drama. It lacks big games. How many must watch games did we have?
 
jedi ninja said:
To me it makes no sense, and we’ve been having this discussion for years now, that there are 5 “Power” conferences but only 4 teams in a playoff. Right out of the gate that makes no sense…how can one of the Power 5 be left out every year? If each conference had an undefeated team, how could anyone explain logically how one of those 5 were left out of a playoff?

That’s just for starters too, as there are many other issues/discussions to have about it…but you can’t have less playoff spots than you have “Power” conferences because mathematically it doesn’t work.
Click to expand...

I will address that because I like the concept of only 4 while I know there are 5 conferences. This, to me, should be very exclusive. It has always been exclusive, the most outstanding teams and I think that using the BCS (for instance) to determine the 4 most deserving conference champions keeps it as exclusive as I desire it to be.

But, I am willing to concede and I could join with others on agreeing to an expanded field, but only under certain conditions. All of this is a fairly tale of course because the TV companies are going to do what they want.

By the way, how does a 6 team format work with the scheduling?
 
Crazy my favorite memories of this sport included shared titles. Colorado/GaTech, Washington/Miami, Michigan/Nebraska

Man that created memories. I don't remotely remember the Georgia/Bama game last year. Has gotten to be too much now it's gonna get worse.
 
wiseplayer said:
Power 5 gets the automatic berth from the conference champion. 7 spots left.
My question to you is why on 4 teams when it completely lessens the regular season? With 12 spots we at least get more teams involved for a playoff spot. Think about it. 12 teams actually broadens the interest to the Top 25 who are vying for the 12 spot.
Every year we have a Top 25 list which is the most meaningless list I’ve ever seen. Who can actually name the teams outside of the top 10? Nobody cares.
My idea implements a hope for at least top 25 teams throughout the season to get a playoff berth. Every week will be meaningful to all of those teams, not to mention keep players from bailing on their teams.
The season lacks drama. It lacks big games. How many must watch games did we have?
Click to expand...

See, I think expanding the field "lessens the regular season" because it gives losers rewards they didn't earn or deserve.

If your intention is to make the regular season more "meaningful", which I disagree with, but I know you feel differently, if that is the case, why are you picking 12 teams for a playoff? Shouldn't you pick 16 or 32 or more?
 
s--k said:
I will address that because I like the concept of only 4 while I know there are 5 conferences. This, to me, should be very exclusive. It has always been exclusive, the most outstanding teams and I think that using the BCS (for instance) to determine the 4 most deserving conference champions keeps it as exclusive as I desire it to be.

But, I am willing to concede and I could join with others on agreeing to an expanded field, but only under certain conditions. All of this is a fairly tale of course because the TV companies are going to do what they want.

By the way, how does a 6 team format work with the scheduling?
Click to expand...

I think the top 2 would get a bye, 6/3 and 4/5 play first.
 
s--k said:
See, I think expanding the field "lessens the regular season" because it gives losers rewards they didn't earn or deserve.

If your intention is to make the regular season more "meaningful", which I disagree with, but I know you feel differently, if that is the case, why are you picking 12 teams for a playoff? Shouldn't you pick 16 or 32 or more?
Click to expand...

12 is too many. That’s why I think 6 is best (because of the 5 “power conferences”), but would be understanding and accepting of 8 if need be.
 
KJ said:
Crazy my favorite memories of this sport included shared titles. Colorado/GaTech, Washington/Miami, Michigan/Nebraska

Man that created memories. I don't remotely remember the Georgia/Bama game last year. Has gotten to be too much now it's gonna get worse.
Click to expand...

My feelings are similar. If I'm being honest part of it might be romanticizing the past. But I too have a greater affection for those champions that were voted upon than the ones we actually have playing for it.
 
jedi ninja said:
12 is too many. That’s why I think 6 is best (because of the 5 “power conferences”), but would be understanding and accepting of 8 if need be.
Click to expand...

Out of the options discussed here I certainly could join on a 6 team model. I would reluctantly go along with an 8 team model under certain conditions. I am waiting to see if I could be swayed or if perhaps wiseplayer and I can come to some kind of agreement on a 12 team. But my prejudice tells me 12 is certainly too many for several reasons.
 
s--k said:
My feelings are similar. If I'm being honest part of it might be romanticizing the past. But I too have a greater affection for those champions that were voted upon than the ones we actually have playing for it.
Click to expand...
I don't believe you're romanticizing anything when actual memories are being compared.

I mean are you going to challenge my memory and enjoyment? That would be a tough challenge.
 
KJ said:
I don't believe you're romanticizing anything when actual memories are being compared.

I mean are you going to challenge my memory and enjoyment? That would be a tough challenge.
Click to expand...

laughing, yes, just that it might be human nature to think of "the good old days" and that the way things were are better than they are now. I tend to do that with respect to a lot of things in life
 
  • Haha
Reactions: KJ
I bet the 3 v 6 and 4 v 5 would be much better games than the semifinals have historically been.

I'll assume chalk wins all of the games next week which is probably an underdog to happen.

This year, maybe we get Mich vs TCU and then USC vs Jorja unless they have the balls to put an undefeated TCU behind a one loss USC.

If 6 were to get in, then you would have TCU vs Bama and USC vs Ohio.

If it were 8 and I got to pick the teams you'd have Jorja v Washington (in over Penn St. Would take Utah here if they win the pac 12). Then you'd have Mich vs Tennessee and then you'd have the same 3v6 and 4v5 games.
 
s--k said:
laughing, yes, just that it might be human nature to think of "the good old days" and that the way things were are better than they are now. I tend to do that with respect to a lot of things in life
Click to expand...
Among others, a couple remembers I have, completely different generations. 2011 a massive party with no one affiliated with either LSU or Bama regular season, that was an EVENT. Of course Bama beats LSU in this little tournament to win the crystal ball. That completely destroyed the event since it was basically irrelevant.

One game I'll never forget was Iowa beating Michigan 12-10 on a Rob Houghtin FG. Mind you I'm not so much an Iowa fan but I was young and we'd been to the ISU game in Ames that day, mom and several people at that party were Hawk fans, I'll forever remember it...#1 vs #2.

Given the current state of CFB, both of those events would be easily forgotten. But they are memories I'll never forget. Trying to ruin CFB does exactly what those of us who share memories are pretty worried about.
 
One other change I would make is get rid of all divisions, get rid of all conf title games, make the last week of the reg season a flex week where conferences set their own matchups on the Sunday before.

So if you have two undefeated teams, you match em up. You have a couple of 1 or 2 loss teams who are fighting for the 8th playoff spot, you match em up.
 
s--k said:
See, I think expanding the field "lessens the regular season" because it gives losers rewards they didn't earn or deserve.

If your intention is to make the regular season more "meaningful", which I disagree with, but I know you feel differently, if that is the case, why are you picking 12 teams for a playoff? Shouldn't you pick 16 or 32 or more?
Click to expand...
Im going with 12 only because thats what it’s expanding to.
We all know its going to come down to the top 4 teams in the end so if we know that then lets spice it up for the so called 16th seed like March Madness. Look at the excitement it brings the Play-In teams who play on Tuesday and Wednesday of March Madness. It just adds. The Boise States of the world maybe gets a 12 seed. We give Tennessee, Ole Miss, LSU who had nice wins and a nice season some added life. As opposed to now them playing in a Bowl game with their top players opting out?
 
cubsker said:
One other change I would make is get rid of all divisions, get rid of all conf title games, make the last week of the reg season a flex week where conferences set their own matchups on the Sunday before.

So if you have two undefeated teams, you match em up. You have a couple of 1 or 2 loss teams who are fighting for the 8th playoff spot, you match em up.
Click to expand...

That is unique and I see the merit in doing that. However, I think it would be more complicated in certain years with tie-breakers and hard feelings and controversial choices.

With the ever growing conference sizes, there could be 4 divisions in each conference whereby the winners of each of those play eachother a two week span for the conference title and then the winners advance to a relatively small national title playoff field. I don't like the rematch aspect of it, but that would literally create a playoff before the playoff.
 
wiseplayer said:
Im going with 12 only because thats what it’s expanding to.
We all know its going to come down to the top 4 teams in the end so if we know that then lets spice it up for the so called 16th seed like March Madness. Look at the excitement it brings the Play-In teams who play on Tuesday and Wednesday of March Madness. It just adds. The Boise States of the world maybe gets a 12 seed. We give Tennessee, Ole Miss, LSU who had nice wins and a nice season some added life. As opposed to now them playing in a Bowl game with their top players opting out?
Click to expand...

Yes, but I gave you the power to create whatever system you want. If you truly think 12 is the ideal number and that is your belief we can carry on as such. But it sounds more like you just want more meaningful games and the solution for that along your line of thinking is having more teams competing for playoff spots so it would seem that you want more than 12?

Could you agree to a 12 team format where the 5 power conference champions and the group of 5 champions all qualify and maybe you pick two at large? Or is it really the more at large teams you desire?
 
Let me ask you something else @wiseplayer - provide some examples of games from this season that would be more "meaningful" in an expanded playoff?
 
s--k said:
Yes, but I gave you the power to create whatever system you want. If you truly think 12 is the ideal number and that is your belief we can carry on as such. But it sounds more like you just want more meaningful games and the solution for that along your line of thinking is having more teams competing for playoff spots so it would seem that you want more than 12?

Could you agree to a 12 team format where the 5 power conference champions and the group of 5 champions all qualify and maybe you pick two at large? Or is it really the more at large teams you desire?
Click to expand...
In my system it would be only the power 5 who have automatic berths. This would allow more teams from the power 5 to get a berth. I don’t think we want to see the likes of Ohio from the MAC or Tulane from the AAC get in if they’re not deserving.
There’s 2 play-in games that could be played the same day Army-Navy play. Quarters the following week and then a bye week before the Final Four.
 
s--k said:
Let me ask you something else @wiseplayer - provide some examples of games from this season that would be more "meaningful" in an expanded playoff?
Click to expand...
Any game involving teams who are playing for a top 12 spot. How many would that be more than what we had?
The ACC championship would be meaningful to Clemson-UNC. The Big 12 championship would be meaningful to K St as well as TCU. Same with the Big 10 for Purdue. How many rivalry games would be more meaningful to win?
How does it not create more meaningful games? I feel like I’m repeating myself.
 
wiseplayer said:
Any game involving teams who are playing for a top 12 spot. How many would that be more than what we had?
The ACC championship would be meaningful to Clemson-UNC. The Big 12 championship would be meaningful to K St as well as TCU. Same with the Big 10 for Purdue. How many rivalry games would be more meaningful to win?
How does it not create more meaningful games? I feel like I’m repeating myself.
Click to expand...

OK, first of all, we agree, winning a conference championship game should advance that team to a national title playoff. AND I believe that the loser of the conference title game should be eliminated from the playoff.

Now, here we go, I am about to explain everything that is wrong with your thinking on making game more meaningful by having at-large teams go to a playoff.

Ohio State - Michigan = less meaningful if the loser can now be selected to play for a national title playoff after losing

Clemson - South Carolina = less meaningful if Clemson can now be slected to play for a national playoff title after losing

Alabama - LSU = less meaningful if loser can now be selected to play for a national title playoff after losing
Alabama - Tennessee = less meaningful if the loser can now be selected to play for a national title playoff after losing

Tennessee - Georgia = less meaningful if the loser can now be selected to play for a national title playoff after losing
Tennessee - South Carolina = less meaningful if the loser can now be selected to play for a national title playoff after losing

Penn State - Ohio State = less meaningful if the loser can now be selected to play for a national title playoff after losing
Penn State - Michigan = less meaningful if the loser can now be selected to play for a national title playoff after losing

All these games should be treated as qualifiers for not only the league championships, but also the national championship.

ACC Title, Big Ten Title, Big Xll Title, PAC 12 Title, Big Ten Title - any title game where the loser of that game can be selected to play for a national title thereby makes that game less meaningful. I do not care if LSU beats Georgia, Georgia to me is out, done. You want them in? If so how does that not render the game meaningless?
I am repeating myself because you never ever understand this.
 
Last edited:
s--k said:
OK, first of all, we agree, winning a conference championship game should advance that team to a national title playoff. AND I believe that the loser of the conference title game should be eliminated from the playoff.

Now, here we go, I am about to explain everything that is wrong with your thinking on making game more meaningful by having at-large teams go to a playoff.

Ohio State - Michigan = less meaningful if the loser can now be selected to play for a national title playoff after losing

Clemson - South Carolina = less meaningful if Clemson can now be slected to play for a national playoff title after losing

Alabama - LSU = less meaningful if loser can now be selected to play for a national title playoff after losing
Alabama - Tennessee = less meaningful if the loser can now be selected to play for a national title playoff after losing

Tennessee - Georgia = less meaningful if the loser can now be selected to play for a national title playoff after losing
Tennessee - South Carolina = less meaningful if the loser can now be selected to play for a national title playoff after losing

Penn State - Ohio State = less meaningful if the loser can no be selected to play for a national title playoff after losing
Penn State - Michigan = less meaningful if the loser can no be selected to play for a national title playoff after losing

All these games should be treated as qualifiers for not only the league championships, but also the national championship.

ACC Title, Big Ten Title, Big Xll Title, PAC 12 Title, Big Ten Title - any title game where the loser of that game can be selected to play for a national title thereby makes that game less meaningful. I do not care if LSU beats Georgia, Georgia to me is out, done. You want them in? If so how does that not render the game meaningless?
I am repeating myself because you never ever understand this.
Click to expand...

Agreed. It makes the games less meaningful for obvious reasons.
 
wiseplayer said:
In my system it would be only the power 5 who have automatic berths. This would allow more teams from the power 5 to get a berth. I don’t think we want to see the likes of Ohio from the MAC or Tulane from the AAC get in if they’re not deserving.
There’s 2 play-in games that could be played the same day Army-Navy play. Quarters the following week and then a bye week before the Final Four.
Click to expand...
I am no fan of student athletes playing more than 2 games after the season is over for a multitude of reason

Can you even convince me that a 4 team tournament is necessary?

If you're a sure fire millionaire going forward, why would you play an extra 3 games against stiff competition? Be stupid considering as mentioned before, none of the games would be worth a mention among friends 3 months later. They are not exciting, not worthwhile, not memorable unless someone gets hurt.
 
so if lsu wins they are conf champions?

think cbb, season conf champ/conf tourney champs(gets the bid).
I'm not reading all this , just wondering where the conf champ is determined.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

R
Saturday’s College Football bets:
Replies
0
Views
178
ROASHE
R
R
Saturday College Football bets:
Replies
0
Views
187
ROASHE
R
Wiretowire
NCAAF Bowls 2023
Replies
5
Views
362
KJ
KJ
wiseplayer
Congratulations Tennessee Vols
Replies
48
Views
1K
B.A.R.
B.A.R.
bookieassassin
WEEK 3
Replies
32
Views
2K
bookieassassin
bookieassassin
Back
Top