re: Should the NCAA Assign Teams to Conferences?

quote:

---

It's too easy to win 6 games when you have 3-4 rent a wins on your schedule.

---

while this is true, its also irrelevant. who cares if a team eased its way into a bowl game. BCS and the championship games are the only ones that matter.

If teams book soft OTC games they are hurting their strength of schedule and therefor hurting themselves.

quote:

---

and then let the lesser teams fall to the ACC and Big East

---

So would you prefer for the NCAA to make you join the SEC, for example, and then get crushed each and every week....except for the years you get to play Vandy

quote:

---

So would you prefer for the NCAA to make you join the SEC, for example, and then get crushed each and every week....except for the years you get to play Vandy

---

If that was right and justified, then yes I wouldn't mind it. I just wish conferences were joined because of geography #1, balance #2 and academics #3. I think it is wierd to have Oklahoma in the Pac 12 or TCU in the Big East. I also think it is wrong to have the SEC as the Super, Super Conference plucking all of the very best teams, and the B1G and Pac 12 grabbing the other good teams, leaving the ACC and Big East with the scraps.

The SEC is going to even more brutal than it is now once they add A&M and another school. The B1G and the Pac 12 will be great conferences too, just not as tough as the SEC. However, the ACC and Big East will be terrible and they might lose their AQ status. So the way conference expansion is going now, you will have competitive and geographical unbalance, which I think sucks for college football.