Interesting article on the future of conference realignment

[Payton]

Then that would be my pick for conference that gets poached. Great schools, highly populated states, etc..

Yawn... Really?

Still?

The ACC isn't going anywhere. The Big XII is on life support. Everyone sees that except Texas fans.

 

[Payton]

A lot of what the ACC does I believe will be determined by what Notre Dame does. If they feel like their only route to the national championship is by joining a conference, they'll likely join the ACC and then they'll only add one additional team to get to 16.

Yup, I think by that time we'll be ready to "stomach" West Virginia when the Big XII has its swan song, and the ACC will be built out at 16...

 

[Ron G]

But if you were to replace the Oklahoma game with an Eastern Kentucky, Ohio State gets in over Alabama despite the Iowa blowout which is what I believe his point was. They both would have had one loss but Ohio State would have won their conference where Alabama didn't even win their division plus Ohio State's schedule was harder even if you were to remove Oklahoma from it. They had wins over #7 Wisconsin, #8 Penn State, and #15 Michigan State while Alabama didn't beat a single top 15 team all year with a loss to #10 Auburn and then wins over #18 LSU and #19 Mississippi State.

Regardless with the schedules they did play and the results, going into it I personally thought Alabama deserved the nod from the committee which they did get and obviously ultimately proved that they also deserved.

Generally I have to agree. Ohio State had two losses and that is what kept them out. Ohio State did not deserve the bid with two losses. But neither did Alabama with one loss allowing them to by pass the CCG (strategically it was actually a good move). The SEC really got a benefit out of Alabama losing. If they had played in the CCG and lost they would not have been in. If they had won Georgia would not have been. If the Big 10 did hot have a CCG then Wisconsin would have been in. So if the pattern continues, the Alabama game against The Citadel next year will put them over the top.
Alabama gets credit for playing Florida State (without question) but that is more than offset by Mercer which (as The Citadel next year will do) is basically a bye with a W attached to it.

 

[Innermind]

A lot of what the ACC does I believe will be determined by what Notre Dame does. If they feel like their only route to the national championship is by joining a conference, they'll likely join the ACC and then they'll only add one additional team to get to 16.

And ND stays indie then UConn and Cincy would be the likely candidates (either way the ACC would skew northerly in order to have geographic football divisions, which the NC schools obviously want so that they all play each other again). Of course I don't see ND going into a football conference any time in the foreseeable future.

And one of the main reasons I want Boise and BYU in the Big 12 together is to end the Pac-12's monopoly on Power 5 football in the West (and to bring the Big 12 back into the West years after they lost Colorado).

and the ACC will be built out at 16...

Keep in mind that eventually, college football may possibly move towards getting rid of Divisions in the future....this would of course allow conferences to have an odd number of members (11, 13, 15, 17).

I believe it would be best if college football eliminated divisions....no more worries about unbalanced divisions within conferences.

Here's how it would work:
Instead of divisions, each team in a conference simply plays one or two annually protected in-conference rivalry games, and rotate the other conference foes. Again, with this system we could have conferences with an odd number of members......and......here's a very cool part: even with a 15 member conference playing only 8 conference games, a team could still play every conference opponent at least every other year, even while protecting two permanent annual in-conference rivalry games. At the end of the regular season, the two best teams in the conference meet in the CCG.

Under this division-less system with 8 conference games (4 home, and 4 away), I would also like to see it be made mandatory that at least 2 of the 4 out-of-conference (OOC) games be played against other Power 5 teams (one home, and one away).......some cool OOC rivalries could thus be played annually every Thanksgiving week, permanently (Oklahoma vs Nebraska, Pitt vs West Virginia, Texas vs Texas A&M, Iowa vs Iowa State, Louisville vs Kentucky, Florida State vs Florida, Georgia vs Georgia Tech, Clemson vs South Carolina, USC vs Notre Dame, and the big one: Rutgers vs Syracuse, etc.).........of course this system would allow two home games vs mid-major group of five opponents in order to guarantee 7 home contests each year for every Power 5 team (including a rule to have these two home games vs minor opponents be played prior to November....emergency weather re-scheduled games would be an exception to this November rule).


Fook divisions!

 

[Payton]

Keep in mind that eventually, college football may possibly move towards getting rid of Divisions in the future....this would of course allow conferences to have an odd number of members (11, 13, 15, 17).

I believe it would be best if college football eliminated divisions....no more worries about unbalanced divisions within conferences.

Here's how it would work:
Instead of divisions, each team in a conference simply plays one or two annually protected in-conference rivalry games, and rotate the other conference foes. Again, with this system we could have conferences with an odd number of members......and......here's a very cool part: even with a 15 member conference playing only 8 conference games, a team could still play every conference opponent at least every other year, even while protecting two permanent annual in-conference rivalry games. At the end of the regular season, the two best teams in the conference meet in the CCG.

Under this division-less system with 8 conference games (4 home, and 4 away), I would also like to see it be made mandatory that at least 2 of the 4 out-of-conference (OOC) games be played against other Power 5 teams (one home, and one away).......some cool OOC rivalries could thus be played annually every Thanksgiving week, permanently (Oklahoma vs Nebraska, Pitt vs West Virginia, Texas vs Texas A&M, Iowa vs Iowa State, Louisville vs Kentucky, Florida State vs Florida, Georgia vs Georgia Tech, Clemson vs South Carolina, USC vs Notre Dame, and the big one: Rutgers vs Syracuse, etc.).........of course this system would allow two home games vs mid-major group of five opponents in order to guarantee 7 home contests each year for every Power 5 team (including a rule to have these two home games vs minor opponents be played prior to November....emergency weather re-scheduled games would be an exception to this November rule).


Fook divisions!

Can a 15 team conference be scheduled so that every member only plays 8 conference games, no more, no less?

 

[Deep Creek]

I believe it would be best if college football eliminated divisions....no more worries about unbalanced divisions within conferences.

Here's how it would work:
Instead of divisions, each team in a conference simply plays one or two annually protected in-conference rivalry games, and rotate the other conference foes. Again, with this system we could have conferences with an odd number of members......and......here's a very cool part: even with a 15 member conference playing only 8 conference games, a team could still play every conference opponent at least every other year, even while protecting two permanent annual in-conference rivalry games. At the end of the regular season, the two best teams in the conference meet in the CCG.

While your suggestion is definitely a hell of a lot better than what currently exists and has a lot of merit, there remains a very high probability that schedules could still be significantly unbalanced because of the two protected in conference rivalry games. Auburn's two protected games could be Bama and Georgia while Mizzou's could be Arkansas and Kentucky. That ain't balanced IMHO. Aubie's "row to hoe" would definitely be more difficult than Mizzou's would be year in and year out.

 

[Innermind]

While your suggestion is definitely a hell of a lot better than what currently exists and has a lot of merit, there remains a very high probability that schedules could still be significantly unbalanced because of the two protected in conference rivalry games. Auburn's two protected games could be Bama and Georgia while Mizzou's could be Arkansas and Kentucky. That ain't balanced IMHO. Aubie's "row to hoe" would definitely be more difficult than Mizzou's would be year in and year out.

Under the system I proposed, the 1 or 2 annually protected games would be optional.....not all teams have strong enough in conference rivalries that merit annually protected conference games. Take the B1G for example--- there are probably only 5 games in the B1G that merit annual protection:
Michigan vs Michigan State
Michigan vs Ohio State
Wisconsin vs Minnesota
Indiana vs Purdue
Illinois vs Northwestern

Sure, there are other cool rivalries in the B1G such as Minnesota vs Iowa, Wisconsin vs Iowa, Ohio State vs Penn State, Nebraska vs Wisconsin, Nebraska vs Iowa, Maryland vs Penn State, etc.......but none of those really need to be played every year...but under my proposed system, they still could be played quite often.

Using your example of Mizzou.....they would not merit any annually protected SEC conference games......however, going back to my original post #144 above, an annually protected permanent Thanksgiving week OOC game between Kansas & Mizzou would probably be warranted.

How about the SEC as another example--- there are probably only 6 in conference SEC games that absolutely need to be played each year:
Ole Miss vs Mississippi State
Vanderbilt vs Tennessee
Alabama vs Tennessee
Alabama vs Auburn
Auburn vs Georgia
Georgia vs Florida

Yes, there are other cool SEC rivalries, but they really don't need to be played every year...but under my proposed system, they still could be played quite often.

 

[7Samurai13]

Under the system I proposed, the 1 or 2 annually protected games would be optional.....not all teams have strong enough in conference rivalries that merit annually protected conference games. Take the B1G for example--- there are probably only 5 games in the B1G that merit annual protection:
Michigan vs Michigan State
Michigan vs Ohio State
Wisconsin vs Minnesota
Indiana vs Purdue
Illinois vs Northwestern

Sure, there are other cool rivalries in the B1G such as Minnesota vs Iowa, Wisconsin vs Iowa, Ohio State vs Penn State, Nebraska vs Wisconsin, Nebraska vs Iowa, Maryland vs Penn State, etc.......but none of those really need to be played every year...but under my proposed system, they still could be played quite often.

Using your example of Mizzou.....they would not merit any annually protected SEC conference games......however, going back to my original post #144 above, an annually protected permanent Thanksgiving week OOC game between Kansas & Mizzou would probably be warranted.

How about the SEC as another example--- there are probably only 6 in conference SEC games that absolutely need to be played each year:
Ole Miss vs Mississippi State
Vanderbilt vs Tennessee
Alabama vs Tennessee
Alabama vs Auburn
Auburn vs Georgia
Georgia vs Florida

Yes, there are other cool SEC rivalries, but they really don't need to be played every year...but under my proposed system, they still could be played quite often.

I like the idea of 3 protected “rivalry”’ games. It makes for cleaner scheduling. The remaining ten teams split into two pools and alternate years. I say “rivalry” because every team should have one easier opponent so as to cut down on the unfairness of playing three tough teams every year.
Michigan - MSU, OSU, Minn
Michigan State - UM, Wis, Indiana
Ohio State - UM, PSU, Purdue
Penn State - OSU, Neb, Maryland
Wisconsin - MSU, Iowa, Minn
Minnesota - Wis, UM, Ill
Nebraska - PSU, Iowa, NW
Maryland - PSU, Iowa, Rutgers
Iowa - Wis, Neb, Purdue
Northwestern - Neb, Ill, Purdue
Illinois - NW, Minn, Rutgers
Indiana - MSU, Purdue, Rutgers
Purdue - Iowa, Indiana, NE
Rutgers - Maryland, Ill, Indiana

I know the weaker teams got easy opponents but it’s early and I’m not putting much effort into it right now.

 

[Deep Creek]

Keep in mind that eventually, college football may possibly move towards getting rid of Divisions in the future....this would of course allow conferences to have an odd number of members (11, 13, 15, 17).

I believe it would be best if college football eliminated divisions....no more worries about unbalanced divisions within conferences.

Here's how it would work:
Instead of divisions, each team in a conference simply plays one or two annually protected in-conference rivalry games, and rotate the other conference foes. Again, with this system we could have conferences with an odd number of members......and......here's a very cool part: even with a 15 member conference playing only 8 conference games, a team could still play every conference opponent at least every other year, even while protecting two permanent annual in-conference rivalry games. At the end of the regular season, the two best teams in the conference meet in the CCG.

Under this division-less system with 8 conference games (4 home, and 4 away), I would also like to see it be made mandatory that at least 2 of the 4 out-of-conference (OOC) games be played against other Power 5 teams (one home, and one away).......some cool OOC rivalries could thus be played annually every Thanksgiving week, permanently (Oklahoma vs Nebraska, Pitt vs West Virginia, Texas vs Texas A&M, Iowa vs Iowa State, Louisville vs Kentucky, Florida State vs Florida, Georgia vs Georgia Tech, Clemson vs South Carolina, USC vs Notre Dame, and the big one: Rutgers vs Syracuse, etc.).........of course this system would allow two home games vs mid-major group of five opponents in order to guarantee 7 home contests each year for every Power 5 team (including a rule to have these two home games vs minor opponents be played prior to November....emergency weather re-scheduled games would be an exception to this November rule).


Fook divisions!

I understand what you are saying. I'm just countering that having to protect rivalries will, in and of itself, create some degree of imbalance. Some minor imbalance...all the way to some major imbalances. Getting rid of divisions doesn't necessarily remove imbalance, but it is at least closer to balance and goes a long way in putting the two best teams to the CCG.

The only way to have balanced schedules is a true round robin. That would require conference shrinkage instead of expansion. No way in hell that is happening so I guess we just have to learn to live with unbalanced schedules.

 

[Payton]

I like the idea of 3 protected “rivalry”’ games. It makes for cleaner scheduling. The remaining ten teams split into two pools and alternate years. I say “rivalry” because every team should have one easier opponent so as to cut down on the unfairness of playing three tough teams every year.
Michigan - MSU, OSU, Minn
Michigan State - UM, Wis, Indiana
Ohio State - UM, PSU, Purdue
Penn State - OSU, Neb, Maryland
Wisconsin - MSU, Iowa, Minn
Minnesota - Wis, UM, Ill
Nebraska - PSU, Iowa, NW
Maryland - PSU, Iowa, Rutgers
Iowa - Wis, Neb, Purdue
Northwestern - Neb, Ill, Purdue
Illinois - NW, Minn, Rutgers
Indiana - MSU, Purdue, Rutgers
Purdue - Iowa, Indiana, NE
Rutgers - Maryland, Ill, Indiana

I know the weaker teams got easy opponents but it’s early and I’m not putting much effort into it right now.

Tbis is what I thought might happen though.... For Maryland, you list Iowa, but on Iowa's list, you don't have Maryland, etc...

Maybe it would work though. Unsure.

 

[7Samurai13]

Tbis is what I thought might happen though.... For Maryland, you list Iowa, but on Iowa's list, you don't have Maryland, etc...

Maybe it would work though. Unsure.

Like I said, it was early. I had Purdue four times. Iowa’s should have been Maryland. It could be revisited every 4-8 years and alternate some of the lesser “rivalries”.

 

[BamaDude]

But never let us forget. If Ohio State had scheduled Eastern Kentucky instead of Oklahoma, they would have been in the playoff instead of Alabama.

The Oklahoma loss didn't hurt the Buckeyes nearly as much as the Iowa loss. It still would have been a toss-up.

 

[Innermind]

I like the idea of 3 protected “rivalry”’ games. It makes for cleaner scheduling. The remaining ten teams split into two pools and alternate years. I say “rivalry” because every team should have one easier opponent so as to cut down on the unfairness of playing three tough teams every year.
Michigan - MSU, OSU, Minn
Michigan State - UM, Wis, Indiana
Ohio State - UM, PSU, Purdue
Penn State - OSU, Neb, Maryland
Wisconsin - MSU, Iowa, Minn
Minnesota - Wis, UM, Ill
Nebraska - PSU, Iowa, NW
Maryland - PSU, Iowa, Rutgers
Iowa - Wis, Neb, Purdue
Northwestern - Neb, Ill, Purdue
Illinois - NW, Minn, Rutgers
Indiana - MSU, Purdue, Rutgers
Purdue - Iowa, Indiana, NE
Rutgers - Maryland, Ill, Indiana

I know the weaker teams got easy opponents but it’s early and I’m not putting much effort into it right now.

Like I said, it was early. I had Purdue four times. Iowa’s should have been Maryland. It could be revisited every 4-8 years and alternate some of the lesser “rivalries”.

Don't forget one of the best B1G rivalries, Floyd of Rosedale between Iowa & Minnesota....if everyone is getting 3 permanent games, that's pretty much a mandatory annual game after the 5 contests I mentioned in post# 147.

As @Payton mentioned, there are a few boo-boos in your list........so.......



........your mission, if you choose to accept it, is to redo your list...........this post will not self-destruct in 10 seconds.