Free Trial Ad
Why Subscribe?
  • Player/Prospect News
  • Exclusive Insider Info
  • Members-Only Forums
  • Exclusive Videos
  • Subscribe Now!
Inbox

Playoffs, Are you talking about PLAYOFFS

Posted: 11/12/2012 8:17 PM

Playoffs, Are you talking about PLAYOFFS 


I have been told that certain teams have offered a plan that is similar to the southern California and why they have had a successful playoff system (3 Champs &  1 at Large). The commissioner in the south, said this is the plan, whoever wants to be in the top level commit or you don’t have a chance at the state game and limited bowl game access. This would work in the North, however, rumor has it that Chabot, DVC, Laney and Sac City banghead don’t want to play with the big boys anymorerolleyes. The positive thing for these schools if they did agree is that the conferences are more local, games are closer which in these cost cutting days is very important. Hoping the playoffs come not only for more games but to save schools money.
Reply | Quote

Posted: 11/12/2012 8:28 PM

Re: Playoffs, Are you talking about PLAYOFFS 


How about a 6 team playoff. top 2 ranked teams get a bye while the remaining 4 play according  to their ranking.(3rd vs 6th and 4th vs 5th) Then #1 vs lowest ranked winner, #2 vs the highest ranked winner. Then on to the north state championship.
Keep the Nor-Cal and the Valley conferences the way they have been.

Last edited 11/12/2012 8:31 PM by loppylarry

Reply | Quote

Posted: 11/12/2012 8:38 PM

Re: Playoffs, Are you talking about PLAYOFFS 


Unfortunately with Title IX it wouldn't be possible to have that many games. The CCCAA has rules on the amount games in the post-season and I believe the added games wouldn't be possible under the Cost-Containment rulings.
Reply | Quote

Posted: 11/12/2012 9:21 PM

Re: Playoffs, Are you talking about PLAYOFFS 


Heard this same conversation at the Laney-Reedley game, the 4 team Mid-Empire and 5 Team Golden Gate Conferences are not that viable --losing Solano was a real problem. Games like West Hills at Siskiyous are really long drives.
So guys were proposing changing the 33 teams in the North into two levels, one level of three conferences of six teams, championship eligible, with same number of games as the South tournament. 3 division winners and one wild card into a playoff.  Here is one idea.
---------
Butte, Siskiyous, Santa Rosa, Feather River, Sierra, Sac City

CCSF, CSM, Chabot, Laney, DVC, Delta

Fresno, Sequoias, Modesto, Reedley, DeAnza, Foothill
---------
pre-conference September games would match up a school against schools from the two divisions.

in this arrangement Merced would go to Bay Valley Conf and West Hills to Coast Conf.  Solano has not shown effort to bring football back.

However this is all just talk, the likelihood of any changes at all in North State football structure is really remote.  The people who actually run things want it the way it is, and I'm sure they have good reasons.
Reply | Quote

Posted: 11/13/2012 10:08 AM

Re: Playoffs, Are you talking about PLAYOFFS 


Glenpark
You forgot American River.  I did a three league of seven teams combining the A and B leagues.  Here is my take.

NORTH                                BAY                              VALLEY
Butte                                  CCSF                            Fresno
American River                      CSM                             Delta
Sierra                                  Foothill                         Modesto
Santa Rosa                          DeAnza                         COS
Siskiyous                             Laney                           West Hills
Sacramento                         Chabot                          Reedley
Feather River                        DVC                             Merced


Not perfect, but might work.  The Valley is the weakest of the three.  Maybe you go to six team leagues like you suggest.  Drop Merced and West Hills.  Maybe even Feather River and slide someone from the BAY to the VALLEY.  Perhaps DVC or DeAnza.  Who knows.
Reply | Quote

Posted: 11/13/2012 12:03 PM

Re: Playoffs, Are you talking about PLAYOFFS 


I am just a fan, my background is in business, I have no connection to any program.  When I look at JC Football I see a very high quality community asset that is being marketed through logics which make the most sense only to administrators.
We all know about the crisis in funding public education, this asset could very helpful in generating both media money and gate receipts. And higher visibility helps both players and coaches.  But maybe the people who run these schools are uncomfortable having football programs in very high visibility in communities.  Or even on their own campuses.

A while back I attended an NFLPA conference at UC Berkeley Law School, we spoke about issues JC players face in the major conferences --and why 4 year programs are hostile even when the players (like Newton) win the Heisman and take their school to the national championship. Or when star players like Aaron Rodgers or the Bishop brothers come from NorCal JC programs to the Berkeley stadium.  And why so few JC players overall are welcomed into Cal and UCLA.

At Solano, almost simultaneous with the completion of great new facilities, the school shut down football --why? didn't the team just win two straight conference championships? and more important, if community college football programs have their hands tied in competing for much needed revenues, how many other solid programs are also on the edge?

These are questions for other places, this is a place to talk about football, and support the players and coaches whose efforts bring us all together every Saturday.
Reply | Quote