Proposal: College Football Realignment

[JXC]

There are 11 conferences right now. If the independents don't want to join a conference...so be it, that's there decision, it would only hurt them, I feel, with this idea. Keep it at 16 teams. I say, the first TWO rounds have the highest seed hosting the game. That's the incentive to finish higher, therefore a late season game agasint two top 5 teams still means a lot, because it determines if you get home field for the first two rounds or not. Use a committee, just like the NCAA basketball does, to see the tournament. All 11 conference champions get an automatic bid, and then 5 at large teams get a bid. Lets face it. If you are not in the top 5 of teams that DID NOT win your conference...then you don't deserve to win the national title. Plus, this gives EVERYBODY a shot at it. And if Notre Dame wants to stay independent, then they have to finish in the top 5 of teams that don't win a conference, so maybe they might think about joining a conference. The attendance to these 'home' games in the first two rounds would be rediculous...and you could even up the price of tickets and I would say they would still sell out easy. I mean, even if lets say we have a home game against the MAC champion in the first round...it's still going to be a VERY tough ticket to get. You could probably put a face value of 100 bucks on it. The money would be shared with all the conferences, but teams that make it would get extra monatary incentives.

What exactly are the bad point about this. You could still have bowl games, and have the "final four" be in major bowl sites that rotate. The other bowls could take other teams that didn't make the "final four". Meaning that if you don't make the final four, but made the tournament, you can still play a bowl game to go out on top. So really all this does, is add one extra week for 8 teams, and they still get to go to a bowl game, two extra weeks of football for 6 teams a year, and they still get to go to a bowl game...and then the 2 championship teams would play 3 extra weeks. Maybe 3 extra weeks is a lot...but it's only 2 teams a year, and it'd be worth it to those schools, players, and fans.

 

[Best Buckeye]

It ain't gonna happen.

 

[daveeb]

Hypothetical scenario, and it was fun to read. Would work if this was pro football. In reality, there is too much tradition to make this change.

 

[Jake]

There are currently 66 BCS teams (12 SEC, 12 ACC, 12 Big Twelve, 11 Big Ten, 10 Pac Ten, 8 Big East, and Notre Dame). While 66 is a rather unwieldly number, it does allow for six conferences of eleven teams each.

Put Baylor and Duke out of their misery leaving us with 64 teams. Form eight conferences consisting of 8 teams each, and the top two teams in each division make the playoffs. The coaches have better things to do than fill out polls. The writers will still do it, because they can, but there's no reason why anyone has to actually use it for anything.

Any games versus I-AA teams and you are not eligible for playoffs no matter your record - sorry YSU, we can't play you. Play everyone in your conference and play four other games versus teams from other divisions, using a rotating format based on your finish in the prior year (similar to the NFL). No loading up on cupcakes, no loading up on home games, no southern teams avoiding trips above the Mason-Dixon line after Halloween.

Fun to talk about, no chance of ever happening. :)

 

[Buckeyefrankmp]

You could still have bowl games, and have the "final four" be in major bowl sites that rotate. The other bowls could take other teams that didn't make the "final four". Meaning that if you don't make the final four, but made the tournament, you can still play a bowl game to go out on top. So really all this does, is add one extra week for 8 teams, and they still get to go to a bowl game, two extra weeks of football for 6 teams a year, and they still get to go to a bowl game...and then the 2 championship teams would play 3 extra weeks. Maybe 3 extra weeks is a lot...but it's only 2 teams a year, and it'd be worth it to those schools, players, and fans.

Good idea.

I think he was referring to the travels of the team as in where they go to play..hence the nonconsideration of geography for the conference matchups. Not the fans. I do agree with the home games for first couple weeks of the playoffs though.

From Sports illustrated in October of this year. "Even schools with more pedestrian travel needs have been hit hard. According to The New York Times, officials at Ohio State, the nation's richest athletic department, suffered sticker shock last month when they received a $346,000 bill for two charter flights for the Sept. 13 game at USC. The bill included a fuel surcharge of $24,200. Pittsburgh athletic director Steve Pederson said schools must plan to pay more for everything, from the cost of airline tickets to hefty surcharges for equipment."

 

[Dryden]

With Western Kentucky making the jump there will be 120 FBS teams next year. I think the scenario that causes the least upheaval would be to realign to 10 12-team leagues (keep the 2x6 divisional CCG system), with a 16-team tournament consisting of the 10 league champions and 6 at-large teams/'wildcard' selections. At the very least, if you include everybody you sidestep those congressional landmines and provide the illusion that everybody has a fair shot (which isn't true, though its not really true in basketball either, but I digress).

1. The SEC, ACC, Big-XII, and C-USA remain unchanged.
2. Notre Dame joins the Big 10.
3. Temple leaves the MAC (the MAC currently has 13 teams).
4. Army, Navy, Temple, and Middle Tennessee go to the Big East.
5. BYU and Utah join the Pac 10.
6. The remainder of the Sun Belt, WAC, and MWC conferences are pared down to two more 12-team leagues by approximate east/west geography.

 

[Steve19]

With Western Kentucky making the jump there will be 120 FBS teams next year. I think the scenario that causes the least upheaval would be to realign to 10 12-team leagues (keep the 2x6 divisional CCG system), with a 16-team tournament consisting of the 10 league champions and 6 at-large teams/'wildcard' selections. At the very least, if you include everybody you sidestep those congressional landmines and provide the illusion that everybody has a fair shot (which isn't true, though its not really true in basketball either, but I digress).

1. The SEC, ACC, Big-XII, and C-USA remain unchanged.
2. Notre Dame joins the Big 10.
3. Temple leaves the MAC (the MAC currently has 13 teams).
4. Army, Navy, Temple, and Middle Tennessee go to the Big East.
5. BYU and Utah join the Pac 10.
6. The remainder of the Sun Belt, WAC, and MWC conferences are pared down to two more 12-team leagues by approximate east/west geography.

That looks pretty good to me.

 

[Ttown]

With Western Kentucky making the jump there will be 120 FBS teams next year. I think the scenario that causes the least upheaval would be to realign to 10 12-team leagues (keep the 2x6 divisional CCG system), with a 16-team tournament consisting of the 10 league champions and 6 at-large teams/'wildcard' selections. At the very least, if you include everybody you sidestep those congressional landmines and provide the illusion that everybody has a fair shot (which isn't true, though its not really true in basketball either, but I digress).

1. The SEC, ACC, Big-XII, and C-USA remain unchanged.
2. Notre Dame joins the Big 10.
3. Temple leaves the MAC (the MAC currently has 13 teams).
4. Army, Navy, Temple, and Middle Tennessee go to the Big East.
5. BYU and Utah join the Pac 10.
6. The remainder of the Sun Belt, WAC, and MWC conferences are pared down to two more 12-team leagues by approximate east/west geography.

How do you;
1. get the colleges to agree to those moves? The Ncaa has no power to force them.
2. decide which teams get pared down/out ?
3. decide who the last 6 teams will be ?
4. determine what the NCAA will do regarding the "other" teams that think they should be in the at large six because they beat so and so who beat so and so ?
Just askin.

 

[Dryden]

How do you;
1. get the colleges to agree to those moves? The Ncaa has no power to force them.
2. decide which teams get pared down/out ?
3. decide who the last 6 teams will be ?
4. determine what the NCAA will do regarding the "other" teams that think they should be in the at large six because they beat so and so who beat so and so ?
Just askin.

1. Don't know, and don't really care to craft a solution to it either. It's purely a hypothetical realignment which gives all 120 D1A/FBS teams a legitimate path to the national title -- win your conference and you're in.

2. Nobody gets pared down/out. Next year there will be 120 D1A/FBS teams, this is simply a method to sort them into conferences of equal size. Don't ask me how to address the problem of the next FCS school stepping up and pushing the group to 121 -- I'm just using the current group of teams.

3. The last six teams would be selected the same way teams are chosen now, they would be at large selections qualified by a common poll system. The at-larges, for arguments sake, would be limited to one per conference, so you'd have a playoff with essentially the two best teams from each of the current six BCS conference, plus your champions from the MAC, CUSA, MWC, and WAC. Nobody gives a shit about the Sun Belt.

4. Don't care about that. This isn't any different than what we're already using today, we're just making the pool larger and adding a 16-team playoff, so Texas has a legitimate shot to advance to the next round and play Florida. Who was seeded where to begin with isn't really important.

 

[BrowardBuck]

Or you leave the conferences unchanged and have the winner of each conference get the automatic bid. That is 11 spots. Add in the 5 at large teams and you have your 16 teams. I could care less whether one conference has 20 teams and another 10 (I know that is a ludicrous example, but you get the point).

Otherwise, you go with the top 16 teams in the final poll, regardless of conference affiliation.

BB

 

[TheIronColonel]

I think you've missed the point of this thread.

 

[Apache]

Notre Dame

That looks pretty good to me.

After careful thought (of about a minute) it seems to me that Notre Dame would profit from joining the Big 10, 11 or 12.

They could compete with Indiana, and such and add to the conference.

Joe Paterno is in favor of a Big 10 split into two divisions and a playoff. I have never been in favor of this but it does make sense.

Go Joe Pa!

Go Bucks!

 

[NightmaresDad]

After careful thought (of about a minute) it seems to me that Notre Dame would profit from joining the Big 10, 11 or 12.

They could compete with Indiana, and such and add to the conference.

Joe Paterno is in favor of a Big 10 split into two divisions and a playoff. I have never been in favor of this but it does make sense.

Go Joe Pa!

Go Bucks!

Yeah, because he knows that tOSU and scUM would be in one division and he would be in the other.
I just hope that for CFB, the regular season still has paramount significance. I think 16 teams is too many for a playoff. Have 12 where the top four seeds get a bye in the first round, or just have 8. Or just have 4 after the major bowls are played on New Year's day (again).

BTW, thanks to LJB for all the thought that went into this thread.
It's fun to hypothesize, but hopefully no single org gets enough power to dictate to the conferences and schools how things will be without their consent.

 

[LordJeffBuck]

In light of impending Big Ten expansion, here is a new proposal for realignment that attempts to resolve these issues: (1) strengthening the Big East, which is both the smallest and weakest conference; (2) bringing all conferences up to at least twelve teams; (3) maintaining regional rivalries; and (4) in the special case of the Big Ten, maintaining long-standing conference-wide academic standards.

The Moves
The Big East needs to add four teams, which is quite a task. Notre Dame is already in the Big East for other sports, so they are a no-brainer. Penn State is a more natural fit for the Big East than the Big Ten, so they move into the conference. Boston College is a more natural fit for the Big East, and South Florida is a more natural fit for the ACC, so the two schools swap places. The remaining two Big East schools present somewhat of a problem, but the top candidates would be Army and Navy, with Marshall of the C-USA also being a possibility.

Missouri and Nebraska (or Iowa State) would move to the Big Ten, which would truly become a midwestern conference. To replace those two schools, the Big 12 would add former SWC schools TCU and Houston. The Pac 10 would need to add two schools, with Boise State being the most likely candidate, and with Utah and/or BYU being the best choice for the 12th and/or 13th slot(s). The SEC would stay the same.

Here is a look at the realigned conferences:

The Big East
Eastern Division
1. UConn
2. Boston College
3. Rutgers
4. Penn State
5. Navy
6. Army

Western Division
1. Notre Dame
2. Louisville
3. Cincinnati
4. Pittsburgh
5. West Virginia
6. Syracuse
7. Marshall (?)

The Big Ten
Eastern Division
1. Ohio State
2. Michigan
3. Michigan State
4. Indiana
5. Purdue
6. Northwestern

Western Division
1. Illinois
2. Missouri
3. Nebraska (or Iowa State)
4. Iowa
5. Wisconsin
6. Minnesota

The ACC
Northern Division
1. Maryland
2. Virginia
3. Virginia Tech
4. North Carolina
5. North Carolina State
6. Wake Forest

Southern Division
1. Miami
2. Florida State
3. South Florida
4. Georgia Tech
5. Clemson
6. Duke

The SEC
Eastern Division
1. Florida
2. Georgia
3. South Carolina
4. Tennessee
5. Vanderbilt
6. Kentucky

Western Division
1. LSU
2. Alabama
3. Auburn
4. Mississippi
5. Mississippi State
6. Arkansas

The Big 12
Northern Division
1. Colorado
2. Kansas
3. Kansas State
4. Oklahoma
5. Oklahoma State
6. Iowa State (or Nebraska)

Southern Division
1. Texas
2. Texas A+M
3. Texas Tech
4. Texas Christian
5. Houston
6. Baylor

the Pac 10
Northern Division
1. Washington
2. Washington State
3. Oregon
4. Oregon State
5. Boise State
6. Utah and/or BYU

Southern Division
1. USC
2. UCLA
3. Stanford
4. California
5. Arizona
6. Arizona State

 

[Jake]

This thread makes way too much sense for the "Football Bowl Subdivision" to comprehend. Upon further reflection, I prefer proposal #2.