Will there be divisions in Olympic sports?

That's the word on the streets... no "insider info" here, just... word on the skreeks and the innernets.

I know there will be for football in 2017 when they enter but can t see why divisions are necessary for Olympic sports

There should be division. East and West for Olympic sports. The Sun Belt met the other day and trimmed down the amount of basketball conference games from 20 to 18. Personally that gives me the impression we will be going to divisions.

So I guess that means the top 4 in each division will make the conference tourney in each Olympic sport. I would prefer no divisions and top 8-- you could still fix schedule to play closer teams twice in basketball for example.

18 conference games means playing 7 teams twice and 4 teams once.

(10-07-2015 08:45 PM)SENOREIDA Wrote:  There should be division. East and West for Olympic sports. The Sun Belt met the other day and trimmed down the amount of basketball conference games from 20 to 18. Personally that gives me the impression we will be going to divisions.

My guess is 18 games means no divisions. A lot harder to come up with an 18 game schedule with divisions.

In baseball hopefully there are no divisions with 30 conference games. That would mean missing 1 team each year. I would even go for 33 conference games.

no to divisions except in football.

(10-07-2015 08:59 PM)chiefsfan Wrote:  

(10-07-2015 08:45 PM)SENOREIDA Wrote:  There should be division. East and West for Olympic sports. The Sun Belt met the other day and trimmed down the amount of basketball conference games from 20 to 18. Personally that gives me the impression we will be going to divisions.

My guess is 18 games means no divisions. A lot harder to come up with an 18 game schedule with divisions.

I agree I don't see how you make an 18 game schedule work with two 6-team divisions.

Divisions are great because they lower the travel expense and the opposing teams have a more realistic chance of traveling to the opposing teams home. It also builds rivalries (which is golden to build a strong conference). Obviously every sport is different (considering the amount of games on a schedule). I'd be more inclined to have divisions in sports with fewer games (Football), while less inclined with sports who have 20 plus games (baseball, softball etc)

(10-08-2015 07:04 AM)NewJersey GATA Wrote:  Divisions are great because they lower the travel expense and the opposing teams have a more realistic chance of traveling to the opposing teams home. It also builds rivalries (which is golden to build a strong conference). Obviously every sport is different (considering the amount of games on a schedule). I'd be more inclined to have divisions in sports with fewer games (Football), while less inclined with sports who have 20 plus games (baseball, softball etc)

divisions would mean each school plays teams their fans are familiar with and would maybe lead to better attendance. there should be a rotating selection of cross division games to tie everyone together, otherwise could just be two conferences..

Don't have divisions for standings purposes, but have them for scheduling purposes. There are going to be four programs you only play once either way so the scheduling will be uneven from a SOS perspective.

I personally don't like 18 games. I'd rather a 16 game conference schedule but I guess it makes it tough for some teams to bring in extra game or pay for them. I would have thought it would allow you more flexibility in your OOC scheduling, but that's just me.

For basketball, my preference would have been going with two 6 team divisions and a 16 game schedule where you play everyone in your division home/home every year and all six teams from the other division rotating home/away every other year. It seems that would have minimized longer travel in conference and more flexibility to schedule games closer to home. JMO

(10-08-2015 10:59 AM)CajunAmos Wrote:  I personally don't like 18 games. I'd rather a 16 game conference schedule but I guess it makes it tough for some teams to bring in extra game or pay for them. I would have thought it would allow you more flexibility in your OOC scheduling, but that's just me.

For basketball, my preference would have been going with two 6 team divisions and a 16 game schedule where you play everyone in your division home/home every year and all six teams from the other division rotating home/away every other year. It seems that would have minimized longer travel in conference and more flexibility to schedule games closer to home. JMO

I like this plan but maybe others could chime in on why divisions in basketball are not good.

(10-08-2015 11:03 AM)Georgia_Power_Company Wrote:  

(10-08-2015 10:59 AM)CajunAmos Wrote:  I personally don't like 18 games. I'd rather a 16 game conference schedule but I guess it makes it tough for some teams to bring in extra game or pay for them. I would have thought it would allow you more flexibility in your OOC scheduling, but that's just me.

For basketball, my preference would have been going with two 6 team divisions and a 16 game schedule where you play everyone in your division home/home every year and all six teams from the other division rotating home/away every other year. It seems that would have minimized longer travel in conference and more flexibility to schedule games closer to home. JMO

I like this plan but maybe others could chime in on why divisions in basketball are not good.

What I like about it is you play everyone so there are methods of tie breakers. For the conference tournament if the concern is having a heavy/light division you could always guarantee the two division winners a bye to the quarters and select the next 6 best records.