All you have to do is in the east, you play everyone one time and one team 2x, all are conf games. East champ would play west champ. Otherwise you will need a waiver on current rules..

well every P5 conference gets 2 votes (part of why they are P5) and every G5 conference gets one vote (part of why they are G5)

last time the SEC SEC SEC and AAC AAC AAC voted against the changes

http://www.ncaa.org/about/resources/medi...mpionships

it is well known the Big 10 put the change in for the divisional play or the full conference round robin.....some have said they would like to not change that, but Delaney is gone and who knows what the new guy thinks and I doubt they are ready to act on it

of course the AAC would be for it this time so there is 5 votes if all the other G5s vote for it......but are they all going to vote to do a "P6" member a favor.....probably not, but we will pretend they will

so you have 5 voted for

if the Big 12 decided to return the favor and vote against it there is two against.....the SEC SEC SEC will most likely be against so there is two more against and if the Big 10 has not decided what to do yet there is two against

so that is 6 against and 5 for with the PAC 12 and ACC left

the ACC will probably be for a full change, but I doubt they would be for a waiver so if it is a waiver they will vote no most likely so the vote is 8-5 and the PAC 12 vote would not matter

it was said the last time by many reports that the PAC 12 did not vote and was just "present", but later said they were for the change....but would they be for a short term waiver for just one conference

so there is a need for the Big 12 or the ACC to be for the waiver so the Big 12 has to forget the last AAC vote against any changes and the ACC has to be for one conference getting something for a period of time that the ACC was not able to get when they wanted it

but that is of course pretending that the other four G5 members vote like they did last time even though they would be doing their G5 counterpart that does all they can to thumb their noses at them a favor

so if 4 of the 5 vote no now you have 1-4 from the G5

SEC SEC SEC no so 1-6

so only one other P5 has to be against it for it to fail.....Big 10 or Big 12 or perhaps ACC (especially if just for a waiver)

better break out some G5 helmet stickers and marketing materials and try and make up ASAP might need some of those other 4 votes!

(06-25-2019 02:14 AM)TodgeRodge Wrote:  well every P5 conference gets 2 votes (part of why they are P5) and every G5 conference gets one vote (part of why they are G5)

last time the SEC SEC SEC and AAC AAC AAC voted against the changes

http://www.ncaa.org/about/resources/medi...mpionships

it is well known the Big 10 put the change in for the divisional play or the full conference round robin.....some have said they would like to not change that, but Delaney is gone and who knows what the new guy thinks and I doubt they are ready to act on it

of course the AAC would be for it this time so there is 5 votes if all the other G5s vote for it......but are they all going to vote to do a "P6" member a favor.....probably not, but we will pretend they will

so you have 5 voted for

if the Big 12 decided to return the favor and vote against it there is two against.....the SEC SEC SEC will most likely be against so there is two more against and if the Big 10 has not decided what to do yet there is two against

so that is 6 against and 5 for with the PAC 12 and ACC left

the ACC will probably be for a full change, but I doubt they would be for a waiver so if it is a waiver they will vote no most likely so the vote is 8-5 and the PAC 12 vote would not matter

it was said the last time by many reports that the PAC 12 did not vote and was just "present", but later said they were for the change....but would they be for a short term waiver for just one conference

so there is a need for the Big 12 or the ACC to be for the waiver so the Big 12 has to forget the last AAC vote against any changes and the ACC has to be for one conference getting something for a period of time that the ACC was not able to get when they wanted it

but that is of course pretending that the other four G5 members vote like they did last time even though they would be doing their G5 counterpart that does all they can to thumb their noses at them a favor

so if 4 of the 5 vote no now you have 1-4 from the G5

SEC SEC SEC no so 1-6

so only one other P5 has to be against it for it to fail.....Big 10 or Big 12 or perhaps ACC (especially if just for a waiver)

better break out some G5 helmet stickers and marketing materials and try and make up ASAP might need some of those other 4 votes!

The good news is the AAC can have a CCG regardless of the waiver vote. A waiver just makes it easier. That said---Im more optimistic that the Big10, and ACC would be "yes" votes. That might change the calculus a bit.

(06-25-2019 02:25 AM)Attackcoog Wrote:  

(06-25-2019 02:14 AM)TodgeRodge Wrote:  well every P5 conference gets 2 votes (part of why they are P5) and every G5 conference gets one vote (part of why they are G5)

last time the SEC SEC SEC and AAC AAC AAC voted against the changes

http://www.ncaa.org/about/resources/medi...mpionships

it is well known the Big 10 put the change in for the divisional play or the full conference round robin.....some have said they would like to not change that, but Delaney is gone and who knows what the new guy thinks and I doubt they are ready to act on it

of course the AAC would be for it this time so there is 5 votes if all the other G5s vote for it......but are they all going to vote to do a "P6" member a favor.....probably not, but we will pretend they will

so you have 5 voted for

if the Big 12 decided to return the favor and vote against it there is two against.....the SEC SEC SEC will most likely be against so there is two more against and if the Big 10 has not decided what to do yet there is two against

so that is 6 against and 5 for with the PAC 12 and ACC left

the ACC will probably be for a full change, but I doubt they would be for a waiver so if it is a waiver they will vote no most likely so the vote is 8-5 and the PAC 12 vote would not matter

it was said the last time by many reports that the PAC 12 did not vote and was just "present", but later said they were for the change....but would they be for a short term waiver for just one conference

so there is a need for the Big 12 or the ACC to be for the waiver so the Big 12 has to forget the last AAC vote against any changes and the ACC has to be for one conference getting something for a period of time that the ACC was not able to get when they wanted it

but that is of course pretending that the other four G5 members vote like they did last time even though they would be doing their G5 counterpart that does all they can to thumb their noses at them a favor

so if 4 of the 5 vote no now you have 1-4 from the G5

SEC SEC SEC no so 1-6

so only one other P5 has to be against it for it to fail.....Big 10 or Big 12 or perhaps ACC (especially if just for a waiver)

better break out some G5 helmet stickers and marketing materials and try and make up ASAP might need some of those other 4 votes!

The good news is the AAC can have a CCG regardless of the waiver vote. A waiver just makes it easier. That said---Im more optimistic that the Big10, and ACC would be "yes" votes. That might change the calculus a bit.

How the hell do u know what the AAC can do with no divisions and no round robin play?

Aresco is sleeping in his multi million dollar home and waiting for his car service to pick him up in the morning.

(06-25-2019 02:25 AM)Attackcoog Wrote:  

(06-25-2019 02:14 AM)TodgeRodge Wrote:  well every P5 conference gets 2 votes (part of why they are P5) and every G5 conference gets one vote (part of why they are G5)

last time the SEC SEC SEC and AAC AAC AAC voted against the changes

http://www.ncaa.org/about/resources/medi...mpionships

it is well known the Big 10 put the change in for the divisional play or the full conference round robin.....some have said they would like to not change that, but Delaney is gone and who knows what the new guy thinks and I doubt they are ready to act on it

of course the AAC would be for it this time so there is 5 votes if all the other G5s vote for it......but are they all going to vote to do a "P6" member a favor.....probably not, but we will pretend they will

so you have 5 voted for

if the Big 12 decided to return the favor and vote against it there is two against.....the SEC SEC SEC will most likely be against so there is two more against and if the Big 10 has not decided what to do yet there is two against

so that is 6 against and 5 for with the PAC 12 and ACC left

the ACC will probably be for a full change, but I doubt they would be for a waiver so if it is a waiver they will vote no most likely so the vote is 8-5 and the PAC 12 vote would not matter

it was said the last time by many reports that the PAC 12 did not vote and was just "present", but later said they were for the change....but would they be for a short term waiver for just one conference

so there is a need for the Big 12 or the ACC to be for the waiver so the Big 12 has to forget the last AAC vote against any changes and the ACC has to be for one conference getting something for a period of time that the ACC was not able to get when they wanted it

but that is of course pretending that the other four G5 members vote like they did last time even though they would be doing their G5 counterpart that does all they can to thumb their noses at them a favor

so if 4 of the 5 vote no now you have 1-4 from the G5

SEC SEC SEC no so 1-6

so only one other P5 has to be against it for it to fail.....Big 10 or Big 12 or perhaps ACC (especially if just for a waiver)

better break out some G5 helmet stickers and marketing materials and try and make up ASAP might need some of those other 4 votes!

The good news is the AAC can have a CCG regardless of the waiver vote. A waiver just makes it easier. That said---Im more optimistic that the Big10, and ACC would be "yes" votes. That might change the calculus a bit.

I don't think full deregulation will be on the table right now

so from a waiver standpoint

I don't see any way it would not be 1-4 from the G5......just no way the MWC, Sunbelt, MAC and CUSA are going to allow the AAC to have their two highest ranked teams in the CCG when they know the AAC does not NEED that to have a CCG

and the SEC SEC SEC is going to vote no.....they voted no before and after how they behaved with OU making the playoffs last year there is no chance they are going to vote for any conference to be able to match their two highest ranked teams especially if that conference does not NEED to.....if they voted to allow the AAC to do it even for a brief period then the Big 10 and ACC might get ideas again.....and there is no chance the SEC SEC SEC is looking to have those conferences be able to match their two highest ranked teams especially after last year and Texas vs OU and OU getting in

so that is 6 against 1 for with the Big 12, Big 10, ACC and PAC 12

I am not sure the Big 12 holds grudges about things because their leadership is often brain dead on most things especially CCG related....BUT maybe they have woken up and the fact is the AAC does not NEED the waiver

I do not think the ACC or Big 10 (especially the ACC) would be willing to give the waiver when it is not NEEDED especially since the ACC essentially got nothing from the last deregulation and the Big 12 got everything and more

so between the Big 12 and ACC there are two conferences with strong reasons to say no

the Big 10 made the rule last time that screwed the ACC.....it has been said now they realize they were stupid to do so and screwed themselves, but they still made the rule and if they wanted to change the rule I do not see them voting to give the AAC a break (a waiver) until full deregulation can be brought up).....so again I see a high likelihood of a no

so with a 6-1 vote and three of the four P5 conferences having a strong reason to not give a waiver and the PAC 12 seemingly not caring it only takes one of the Big 12 (grudge), ACC (giving something they wanted and did not get), or Big 10 (giving something they were fully against, and might want now, but would want for themselves and not another conference only) to vote no for it to be 8-1 and the other 6 votes not mattering

I see no way the G5 (G4 how is that working out for you now ) are going to do the AAC a favor.....SEC SEC SEC no chance.....and just too many reasons for at least one of the other P5 to say no to get the needed votes especially because the AAC does not NEED the waiver it is just making things much easier on them

(06-25-2019 02:35 AM)wavefan12 Wrote:  

(06-25-2019 02:25 AM)Attackcoog Wrote:  

(06-25-2019 02:14 AM)TodgeRodge Wrote:  well every P5 conference gets 2 votes (part of why they are P5) and every G5 conference gets one vote (part of why they are G5)

last time the SEC SEC SEC and AAC AAC AAC voted against the changes

http://www.ncaa.org/about/resources/medi...mpionships

it is well known the Big 10 put the change in for the divisional play or the full conference round robin.....some have said they would like to not change that, but Delaney is gone and who knows what the new guy thinks and I doubt they are ready to act on it

of course the AAC would be for it this time so there is 5 votes if all the other G5s vote for it......but are they all going to vote to do a "P6" member a favor.....probably not, but we will pretend they will

so you have 5 voted for

if the Big 12 decided to return the favor and vote against it there is two against.....the SEC SEC SEC will most likely be against so there is two more against and if the Big 10 has not decided what to do yet there is two against

so that is 6 against and 5 for with the PAC 12 and ACC left

the ACC will probably be for a full change, but I doubt they would be for a waiver so if it is a waiver they will vote no most likely so the vote is 8-5 and the PAC 12 vote would not matter

it was said the last time by many reports that the PAC 12 did not vote and was just "present", but later said they were for the change....but would they be for a short term waiver for just one conference

so there is a need for the Big 12 or the ACC to be for the waiver so the Big 12 has to forget the last AAC vote against any changes and the ACC has to be for one conference getting something for a period of time that the ACC was not able to get when they wanted it

but that is of course pretending that the other four G5 members vote like they did last time even though they would be doing their G5 counterpart that does all they can to thumb their noses at them a favor

so if 4 of the 5 vote no now you have 1-4 from the G5

SEC SEC SEC no so 1-6

so only one other P5 has to be against it for it to fail.....Big 10 or Big 12 or perhaps ACC (especially if just for a waiver)

better break out some G5 helmet stickers and marketing materials and try and make up ASAP might need some of those other 4 votes!

The good news is the AAC can have a CCG regardless of the waiver vote. A waiver just makes it easier. That said---Im more optimistic that the Big10, and ACC would be "yes" votes. That might change the calculus a bit.

How the hell do u know what the AAC can do with no divisions and no round robin play?

Aresco is sleeping in his multi million dollar home and waiting for his car service to pick him up in the morning.

to answer your direct question they could play 10 conference games which I think the original P6 conference should do to show everyone else how it is done (because it is a TERRIBLE idea ) DO IT!!!!

but again the AAC can still have a CCG with uneven divisions of 6 teams and 5 teams as long as each division plays a DIVISIONAL round robin just like they do now

the rules do not require equal teams in each division....the rules require "as equal as possible" (so a one team difference) and then a DIVISIONAL round robin

so there is no rule change or waiver needed and that is why I don't think the AAC will get a waiver.....because it is not NEEDED and no one in the G5 will be looking to make things "easier" for the AAC especially if it makes the AAC have a better CCG match up which is bad for all the other G5

and I do not see any of the P5 really caring about making things easier for the AAC either especially the SEC SEC SEC because they were against any change, and the Big 10 amended the rules specifically to not allow divisions and the top teams in he CCG (and even if they wish to change it they are not going to let the AAC get it and not themselves) and same with the ACC.....and the Big 12 has probably forgotten how the AAC voted last time, but hopefully not....and the PAC 12 was a wallflower last time so maybe they will want to take a stand this time (who knows about what maybe the AAC can cut them a check from the UConn exit fees the PAC 12 needs cash)

(06-25-2019 02:00 AM)goodknightfl Wrote:  All you have to do is in the east, you play everyone one time and one team 2x, all are conf games. East champ would play west champ. Otherwise you will need a waiver on current rules..

SMU hereby volunteers to play in BOTH divisions. Problem solved.

One issue that the East Division schools could have is with scheduling: we will now have to add another OOC game. With schedules being done so far in advance these days, that’s not as easy as it sounds.

Thanks, Hokies!

At least we have UConn to call now LOL.

(06-25-2019 06:18 AM)Ned Low Wrote:  One issue that the East Division schools could have is with scheduling: we will now have to add another OOC game. With schedules being done so far in advance these days, that’s not as easy as it sounds.

Thanks, Hokies!




At least we have UConn to call now LOL.

The UCONN team bus is in such bad shape it wouldn’t make it past the George Washington Bridge.

I didn't realize Cincinnati still had a paper...interesting.

(06-25-2019 01:23 AM)Attackcoog Wrote:  

(06-25-2019 01:05 AM)UofMemphis Wrote:  

(06-25-2019 01:03 AM)Attackcoog Wrote:  By the way---I looked it up. Here is the word for word verbiage governing the FBS CCG cut and pasted directly from the NCAA Rulebook.


(b) Conference Championship Game. One conference championship game:

(1) Between division champions of a conference that is divided into two divisions (as equally balanced in number as possible) and conducts round-robin, regular-season competition in each division; or

2) Between the top two teams in the conference standings following full round-robin regular season competition among all members of the conference.

unless you get a waiver...it's been done with the MAC

True. But if I recall correctly--that MAC waiver allowed the CCG even though one or two teams did not complete a full round robin in one division (to aid in evening out the cross divisional scheduling). The MAC waiver did NOT allow the MAC to have a CCG with nary a single member completing a full divisional round robin--which is what we would be asking for if we want to have a divisonless CCG. With an 8 game schedule---not a single AAC team will complete a full round robin of the conference-----not a single one.

My guess is that we would be given the same courtesy waiver the MAC got for an uneven division based CCG---but would not get a waiver allowing a divisionless CCG. There really is no precdedent for the divisionless waiver. That said---No harm in asking---but I suspect we wont get that one.

The MAC had 4 (4!) teams play only 5 division games in the 7-team East. If the AAC gets a waiver that allows only a single pair of teams to skip their game, we can do a CCG no problem.

You CAN arrange it so that the 2 opponents each team skips in a given year are in the opposite division (minus the one pair of skipped teams that, via the waiver, can be placed in the same division) and manipulate the divisions themselves so that at the end of the year the 2 best teams are placed opposite each other... all while satisfying the constraint of a waiver allowing only 1 missed round-robin game.

Meaning, you can have a functionally divisionless 11-team conference while only skipping a single round-roubin game in the larger, 6-team division.

Note, the waiver is not for going divisionless, only to skip a single division game (something a million more times likely to pass, given the AAC has an odd number of teams). Also, I have doubts the NCAA would allow division champs to be determined by rankings rather than conference games; they are wishy-washy on tie-breakers though, even head-to-head is not a guaranteed 1st tie-breaker.

One issue that the East Division schools could have is with scheduling: we will now have to add another OOC game. With schedules being done so far in advance these days, that’s not as easy as it sounds.

Thanks, Hokies!

At least we have UConn to call now LOL.

West (5 teams)

Round robin in the division.
Four games each against the East

So 20 crossover games are needed.

East (6 teams)

Four teams play round robin + three crossover
Two teams play four East + four West

There's your 20 crossover games (12 +8).

And that's the basis of the waiver: that the East comes one game shy of a full round robin. As mentioned above, the MAC got a waiver when it's seven team division came two games shy.

But just because seven American teams play 4 & 4, I don't think the NCAA would allow us to manipulate which five of those seven are called "West" for the purposes of trying to arrange the two best teams for the title game...

Why do we need a waiver for a CCG? I thought they changed the rule about 12 schools a few years ago?

(06-25-2019 07:12 AM)CougarRed Wrote:  West (5 teams)

Round robin in the division.
Four games each against the East

So 20 crossover games are needed.

East (6 teams)

Four teams play round robin + three crossover
Two teams play four East + four West

There's your 20 crossover games (12 +8).

And that's the basis of the waiver: that the East comes one game shy of a full round robin. As mentioned above, the MAC got a waiver when it's seven team division came two games shy.

But just because seven American teams play 4 & 4, I don't think the NCAA would allow us to manipulate which five of those seven are called "West" for the purposes of trying to arrange the two best teams for the title game...

Random thought here, but it doesn't seem any less likely that we'd get a waiver for doing a "full round robin -1" than a 6+5 divisional schedule (i.e. just play 8 divisionless conference games). I kind of wish we'd push for the former. It would create way less scheduling confusion, and we would have the opportunity to get the highest ranked teams into the CCG.

i.e. I'd rather ask for a modified Big12 schedule than a modified AAC schedule, if that's not deemed ridiculous by the NCAA.

(06-25-2019 07:16 AM)firmbizzle Wrote:  Why do we need a waiver for a CCG? I thought they changed the rule about 12 schools a few years ago?

Yeah I don't really get that part. It seems like rule 1 above allows for divisions "as even as possible". Doesn't really sound like we'd be outside the rules with 6+5.

(06-25-2019 07:20 AM)CoastalJuan Wrote:  

(06-25-2019 07:16 AM)firmbizzle Wrote:  Why do we need a waiver for a CCG? I thought they changed the rule about 12 schools a few years ago?

Yeah I don't really get that part. It seems like rule 1 above allows for divisions "as even as possible". Doesn't really sound like we'd be outside the rules with 6+5.

I see now.

6+5 creates an odd schedule for some schools to have more conference games. One division would have 8 conference games, the other 9 conference games with 1 school having 8 conference games. Might help some schools with scheduling issues (UCF) to get an extra game. The other option is 10 conference games.

Can we kick out Tulsa and go to 9 conference games?

(06-25-2019 07:20 AM)CoastalJuan Wrote:  

(06-25-2019 07:16 AM)firmbizzle Wrote:  Why do we need a waiver for a CCG? I thought they changed the rule about 12 schools a few years ago?

Yeah I don't really get that part. It seems like rule 1 above allows for divisions "as even as possible". Doesn't really sound like we'd be outside the rules with 6+5.

there is no need for a waiver.....but this is the AAC forum where people do not like to see reality and instead like to believe that situations that make things difficult will always turn out to be really amazingly positive for the AAC or for their school in particular

there is not a need for a waiver and thus I see little chance that there will be enough votes for the AAC to get a waiver simply because it will make it easier for them to schedule

(06-25-2019 07:45 AM)firmbizzle Wrote:  

(06-25-2019 07:20 AM)CoastalJuan Wrote:  

(06-25-2019 07:16 AM)firmbizzle Wrote:  Why do we need a waiver for a CCG? I thought they changed the rule about 12 schools a few years ago?

Yeah I don't really get that part. It seems like rule 1 above allows for divisions "as even as possible". Doesn't really sound like we'd be outside the rules with 6+5.

I see now.

6+5 creates an odd schedule for some schools to have more conference games. The other option is 10 conference games.

Can we kick out Tulsa and go to 9 conference games?

Even if we did, Navy will never agree to more than 8 conference games. Probably other schools here, too.

(06-25-2019 07:51 AM)TripleA Wrote:  

(06-25-2019 07:45 AM)firmbizzle Wrote:  

(06-25-2019 07:20 AM)CoastalJuan Wrote:  

(06-25-2019 07:16 AM)firmbizzle Wrote:  Why do we need a waiver for a CCG? I thought they changed the rule about 12 schools a few years ago?

Yeah I don't really get that part. It seems like rule 1 above allows for divisions "as even as possible". Doesn't really sound like we'd be outside the rules with 6+5.

I see now.

6+5 creates an odd schedule for some schools to have more conference games. The other option is 10 conference games.

Can we kick out Tulsa and go to 9 conference games?

Even if we did, Navy will never agree to more than 8 conference games. Probably other schools here, too.

I'm sure that there are some schools that don't mind 9 games. That would mean the East would have 9 games and west 8 games.