RE: Divisionless Football Conferences? - Dr. Isaly von Yinzer - 03-01-2018 11:31 PM
It’s certainly an interesting idea and I appreciate the work you’ve done here. However, from my school’s perspective (Pitt), I don’t see anything that’s better than our current situation. Therefore, I would be inclined to vote against this type of proposal. However, it is interesting to see.
RE: Divisionless Football Conferences? - Nerdlinger - 11-13-2018 05:17 PM
(08-18-2017 09:38 AM)Nerdlinger Wrote: While I'm not really a fan of abandoning divisions, doing so would allow for a schedule in which even a school in a conference of 14 could play all the other schools in the conference at least twice in 4 years (and with only an 8-game conference schedule). I was inspired by this article. Basically, for a 14-team conference, each team gets 3 protected annual matchups and alternates between half of the other 10 opponents every 2 years. The author proposes a different scheme for the ACC, adding ND as a full member and having 4 protected matchups. Here I'm working with the ACC as is and giving them 3 protected matchups like the Big Ten and SEC. I also changed some of the matchups around in each conference. I tried to retain traditional/desired rivalries while still remaining somewhat competitively balanced.
The last 2 columns for the ACC, Big Ten, and SEC are the matchups I'd add if the conferences wanted to expand to 5 protected matchups and a 9-game schedule. This also allows each school to play every conference opponent at least twice in 4 years.
ACC
Code:
BOSTON COLLEGE Syracuse Miami-FL Pittsburgh | NC State Virginia Tech
CLEMSON Georgia Tech Florida State NC State | Louisville Miami-FL
DUKE Wake Forest Georgia Tech North Carolina | Virginia NC State
FLORIDA STATE Miami-FL Clemson Georgia Tech | Syracuse Louisville
GEORGIA TECH Clemson Duke Florida State | Virginia Tech North Carolina
LOUISVILLE Pittsburgh Virginia Tech Virginia | Clemson Florida State
MIAMI-FL Florida State Boston College Virginia Tech | Pittsburgh Clemson
NC STATE North Carolina Wake Forest Clemson | Boston College Duke
NORTH CAROLINA NC State Virginia Duke | Wake Forest Georgia Tech
PITTSBURGH Louisville Syracuse Boston College | Miami-FL Wake Forest
SYRACUSE Boston College Pittsburgh Wake Forest | Florida State Virginia
VIRGINIA Virginia Tech North Carolina Louisville | Duke Syracuse
VIRGINIA TECH Virginia Louisville Miami-FL | Georgia Tech Boston College
WAKE FOREST Duke NC State Syracuse | North Carolina Pittsburgh
Big Ten
Code:
ILLINOIS Northwestern Purdue Rutgers | Iowa Indiana
INDIANA Purdue Rutgers Northwestern | Maryland Illinois
IOWA Nebraska Wisconsin Minnesota | Illinois Ohio State
MARYLAND Rutgers Minnesota Purdue | Indiana Penn State
MICHIGAN Michigan State Ohio State Penn State | Minnesota Wisconsin
MICHIGAN STATE Michigan Penn State Ohio State | Nebraska Northwestern
MINNESOTA Wisconsin Maryland Iowa | Michigan Nebraska
NEBRASKA Iowa Northwestern Wisconsin | Michigan State Minnesota
NORTHWESTERN Illinois Nebraska Indiana | Purdue Michigan State
OHIO STATE Penn State Michigan Michigan State | Wisconsin Iowa
PENN STATE Ohio State Michigan State Michigan | Rutgers Maryland
PURDUE Indiana Illinois Maryland | Northwestern Rutgers
RUTGERS Maryland Indiana Illinois | Penn State Purdue
WISCONSIN Minnesota Iowa Nebraska | Ohio State Michigan
SEC
Code:
ALABAMA Auburn Tennessee LSU | Georgia Florida
ARKANSAS Texas A&M Missouri Mississippi St | Ole Miss LSU
AUBURN Alabama Georgia Florida | Texas A&M Ole Miss
FLORIDA Georgia South Carolina Auburn | Tennessee Alabama
GEORGIA Florida Auburn South Carolina | Alabama Tennessee
KENTUCKY South Carolina Vanderbilt Tennessee | Missouri Mississippi St
LSU Ole Miss Texas A&M Alabama | Mississippi St Arkansas
MISSISSIPPI ST Missouri Ole Miss Arkansas | LSU Kentucky
MISSOURI Mississippi St Arkansas Texas A&M | Kentucky Vanderbilt
OLE MISS LSU Mississippi St Vanderbilt | Arkansas Auburn
SOUTH CAROLINA Kentucky Florida Georgia | Vanderbilt Texas A&M
TENNESSEE Vanderbilt Alabama Kentucky | Florida Georgia
TEXAS A&M Arkansas LSU Missouri | Auburn South Carolina
VANDERBILT Tennessee Kentucky Ole Miss | South Carolina Missouri
I also have one for the Pac-12. The protected matchups were obvious. I suppose they could go with an 8-game schedule, but if they stick with 9 games, every team can play 3 California schools per season.
Pac-12
Code:
ARIZONA Arizona State Colorado Utah
ARIZONA STATE Arizona Utah Colorado
CALIFORNIA Stanford UCLA USC
COLORADO Utah Arizona Arizona State
OREGON Oregon State Washington Washington St
OREGON STATE Oregon Washington St Washington
STANFORD California USC UCLA
UCLA USC California Stanford
USC UCLA Stanford California
UTAH Colorado Arizona State Arizona
WASHINGTON Washington St Oregon Oregon State
WASHINGTON ST Washington Oregon State Oregon
Here's my setup for the ACC with 15 schools (ND goes all in). Each school has 4 protected matchups and alternates between half the other 10 every 2 years.
ACC
Code:
BOSTON COLLEGE BYE/OTHER Syracuse Pittsburgh Notre Dame Miami-FL
CLEMSON Virginia Tech NC State Florida State Georgia Tech (South Carolina)
DUKE BYE/OTHER Georgia Tech NC State North Carolina Wake Forest
FLORIDA STATE Georgia Tech Louisville Clemson Miami-FL (Florida)
GEORGIA TECH Florida State Duke Notre Dame Clemson (Georgia)
LOUISVILLE Pittsburgh Florida State Virginia Tech Virginia (Kentucky)
MIAMI-FL Notre Dame Virginia Tech BYE/OTHER Florida State Boston College
NC STATE BYE/OTHER Clemson Duke Wake Forest North Carolina
NORTH CAROLINA Virginia BYE/OTHER Wake Forest Duke NC State
NOTRE DAME Miami-FL Pittsburgh Georgia Tech Boston College (Stanford/USC)
PITTSBURGH Louisville Notre Dame Boston College BYE/OTHER Syracuse
SYRACUSE Wake Forest Boston College Virginia BYE/OTHER Pittsburgh
VIRGINIA North Carolina BYE/OTHER Syracuse Louisville Virginia Tech
VIRGINIA TECH Clemson Miami-FL Louisville BYE/OTHER Virginia
WAKE FOREST Syracuse BYE/OTHER North Carolina NC State Duke
What do you think of the whole scheme? Any matchups I should change?
I revamped the protected matchups for the ACC, Big Ten, and SEC in the OP to (hopefully) better accommodate rivalries and strength of schedule. Let me know what you think! I'm certainly open to suggested changes.
RE: Divisionless Football Conferences? - Attackcoog - 11-13-2018 06:26 PM
Id be happy if the NCAA would allow conferences to have as many divisions as they like. As conferences get bigger---this will become a bigger issue.
RE: Divisionless Football Conferences? - Wedge - 11-13-2018 06:42 PM
(11-13-2018 06:26 PM)Attackcoog Wrote: Id be happy if the NCAA would allow conferences to have as many divisions as they like. As conferences get bigger---this will become a bigger issue.
What isn't allowed is for a conference to have more than one football conference title game that is exempt from the limit on the number of regular season games. And that's the sticking point. Extending the regular season by one or two more weeks so that a conference can have a 4 or 8 team football tournament, without giving extra games to every other team in FBS, is a non-starter.
RE: Divisionless Football Conferences? - dunstvangeet - 11-13-2018 11:54 PM
(08-18-2017 01:41 PM)Wedge Wrote: (08-18-2017 09:38 AM)Nerdlinger Wrote: Pac-12
Arizona: Arizona State, Colorado, Utah
Arizona State: Arizona, Colorado, Utah
California: Stanford, UCLA, USC
Colorado: Arizona, Arizona State, Utah
Oregon: Oregon State, Washington, Washington State
Oregon State: Oregon, Washington, Washington State
Stanford: California, UCLA, USC
UCLA: California, Stanford, USC
USC: California, Stanford, UCLA
Utah: Arizona, Arizona State, Colorado
Washington: Oregon, Oregon State, Washington State
Washington State: Oregon, Oregon State, Washington
Someone proposed this back when Utah and Colorado first joined, and also came up with a way to do it while still having two football divisions. Their Tumblr page explaining the idea is still up: http://pac12cooler.tumblr.com/post/773806609/pac-12-cooler-proposal
The essential graphic was
This basically put rivals on opposite sides. You'd play your half of the graphic, along with the teams in your rows (which are Northwest, California, and Mountain), and then play 2 of the other 4 teams that you miss (probably doing one in each row).
So, for instance, Oregon State's schedule would be (no particular order):
Every year Division: Arizona State, Stanford, Washington State, Utah, USC
Every year cross-divisional: Oregon, Washington
2 out of every 4 years: UCLA, Cal, Colorado, Arizona
It really was quite elegant, especially with the California schools wanting to play eachother every year.
RE: Divisionless Football Conferences? - Attackcoog - 11-14-2018 01:34 AM
(11-13-2018 06:42 PM)Wedge Wrote: (11-13-2018 06:26 PM)Attackcoog Wrote: Id be happy if the NCAA would allow conferences to have as many divisions as they like. As conferences get bigger---this will become a bigger issue.
What isn't allowed is for a conference to have more than one football conference title game that is exempt from the limit on the number of regular season games. And that's the sticking point. Extending the regular season by one or two more weeks so that a conference can have a 4 or 8 team football tournament, without giving extra games to every other team in FBS, is a non-starter.
True. But the rules governing CCG's also specifically prevent a conference from dividing into any more than 2 divisions for purposes of a title game. A 4 pod system, for instance, is not allowed--even if the conference has a tie breaker method to determine which 2 pod champs would actually play in a single CCG. The truth is, for some conferences--especially the more spread out ones---a pod system would work much better than 2 larger divisions. To be clear---its not necessary to have a 4 game playoff within the conference simply because you have 4 pods---you just have to have a reasonable tie breaker method for determining which 2 pod winners advance to the CCG. The season need not be expanded. Honestly, its really no more illegitimate than the way we crown our national champion. We have 10 FBS conference winners---but only 4 teams advance to the playoff (hell, the playoff participants may not all necessarily even be conference champs). We've simply set up a system to decide who advanced into a 4 team playoff. Before the CFP, the BCS had a system to select who advanced into a single title game (which is very much how a 4-pod system would work with a single title game).
RE: Divisionless Football Conferences? - Nerdlinger - 11-14-2018 08:28 AM
(11-14-2018 01:34 AM)Attackcoog Wrote: (11-13-2018 06:42 PM)Wedge Wrote: (11-13-2018 06:26 PM)Attackcoog Wrote: Id be happy if the NCAA would allow conferences to have as many divisions as they like. As conferences get bigger---this will become a bigger issue.
What isn't allowed is for a conference to have more than one football conference title game that is exempt from the limit on the number of regular season games. And that's the sticking point. Extending the regular season by one or two more weeks so that a conference can have a 4 or 8 team football tournament, without giving extra games to every other team in FBS, is a non-starter.
True. But the rules governing CCG's also specifically prevent a conference from dividing into any more than 2 divisions for purposes of a title game. A 4 pod system, for instance, is not allowed--even if the conference has a tie breaker method to determine which 2 pod champs would actually play in a single CCG. The truth is, for some conferences--especially the more spread out ones---a pod system would work much better than 2 larger divisions. To be clear---its not necessary to have a 4 game playoff within the conference simply because you have 4 pods---you just have to have a reasonable tie breaker method for determining which 2 pod winners advance to the CCG. The season need not be expanded. Honestly, its really no more illegitimate than the way we crown our national champion. We have 10 FBS conference winners---but only 4 teams advance to the playoff (hell, the playoff participants may not all necessarily even be conference champs). We've simply set up a system to decide who advanced into a 4 team playoff. Before the CFP, the BCS had a system to select who advanced into a single title game (which is very much how a 4-pod system would work with a single title game).
You're talking about pods as if they were divisions unto themselves. The idea of the pod system is to have them rotate between divisions, WAC-16 style. So it's certainly permitted under the current rules.
RE: Divisionless Football Conferences? - ken d - 11-14-2018 10:29 AM
(11-13-2018 05:17 PM)Nerdlinger Wrote: (08-18-2017 09:38 AM)Nerdlinger Wrote: While I'm not really a fan of abandoning divisions, doing so would allow for a schedule in which even a school in a conference of 14 could play all the other schools in the conference at least twice in 4 years (and with only an 8-game conference schedule). I was inspired by this article. Basically, for a 14-team conference, each team gets 3 protected annual matchups and alternates between half of the other 10 opponents every 2 years. The author proposes a different scheme for the ACC, adding ND as a full member and having 4 protected matchups. Here I'm working with the ACC as is and giving them 3 protected matchups like the Big Ten and SEC. I also changed some of the matchups around in each conference. I tried to retain traditional/desired rivalries while still remaining somewhat competitively balanced.
The last 2 columns for the ACC, Big Ten, and SEC are the matchups I'd add if the conferences wanted to expand to 5 protected matchups and a 9-game schedule. This also allows each school to play every conference opponent at least twice in 4 years.
ACC
Code:
BOSTON COLLEGE Syracuse Miami-FL Pittsburgh | NC State Virginia Tech
CLEMSON Georgia Tech Florida State NC State | Louisville Miami-FL
DUKE Wake Forest Georgia Tech North Carolina | Virginia NC State
FLORIDA STATE Miami-FL Clemson Georgia Tech | Syracuse Louisville
GEORGIA TECH Clemson Duke Florida State | Virginia Tech North Carolina
LOUISVILLE Pittsburgh Virginia Tech Virginia | Clemson Florida State
MIAMI-FL Florida State Boston College Virginia Tech | Pittsburgh Clemson
NC STATE North Carolina Wake Forest Clemson | Boston College Duke
NORTH CAROLINA NC State Virginia Duke | Wake Forest Georgia Tech
PITTSBURGH Louisville Syracuse Boston College | Miami-FL Wake Forest
SYRACUSE Boston College Pittsburgh Wake Forest | Florida State Virginia
VIRGINIA Virginia Tech North Carolina Louisville | Duke Syracuse
VIRGINIA TECH Virginia Louisville Miami-FL | Georgia Tech Boston College
WAKE FOREST Duke NC State Syracuse | North Carolina Pittsburgh
Big Ten
Code:
ILLINOIS Northwestern Purdue Rutgers | Iowa Indiana
INDIANA Purdue Rutgers Northwestern | Maryland Illinois
IOWA Nebraska Wisconsin Minnesota | Illinois Ohio State
MARYLAND Rutgers Minnesota Purdue | Indiana Penn State
MICHIGAN Michigan State Ohio State Penn State | Minnesota Wisconsin
MICHIGAN STATE Michigan Penn State Ohio State | Nebraska Northwestern
MINNESOTA Wisconsin Maryland Iowa | Michigan Nebraska
NEBRASKA Iowa Northwestern Wisconsin | Michigan State Minnesota
NORTHWESTERN Illinois Nebraska Indiana | Purdue Michigan State
OHIO STATE Penn State Michigan Michigan State | Wisconsin Iowa
PENN STATE Ohio State Michigan State Michigan | Rutgers Maryland
PURDUE Indiana Illinois Maryland | Northwestern Rutgers
RUTGERS Maryland Indiana Illinois | Penn State Purdue
WISCONSIN Minnesota Iowa Nebraska | Ohio State Michigan
SEC
Code:
ALABAMA Auburn Tennessee LSU | Georgia Florida
ARKANSAS Texas A&M Missouri Mississippi St | Ole Miss LSU
AUBURN Alabama Georgia Florida | Texas A&M Ole Miss
FLORIDA Georgia South Carolina Auburn | Tennessee Alabama
GEORGIA Florida Auburn South Carolina | Alabama Tennessee
KENTUCKY South Carolina Vanderbilt Tennessee | Missouri Mississippi St
LSU Ole Miss Texas A&M Alabama | Mississippi St Arkansas
MISSISSIPPI ST Missouri Ole Miss Arkansas | LSU Kentucky
MISSOURI Mississippi St Arkansas Texas A&M | Kentucky Vanderbilt
OLE MISS LSU Mississippi St Vanderbilt | Arkansas Auburn
SOUTH CAROLINA Kentucky Florida Georgia | Vanderbilt Texas A&M
TENNESSEE Vanderbilt Alabama Kentucky | Florida Georgia
TEXAS A&M Arkansas LSU Missouri | Auburn South Carolina
VANDERBILT Tennessee Kentucky Ole Miss | South Carolina Missouri
I also have one for the Pac-12. The protected matchups were obvious. I suppose they could go with an 8-game schedule, but if they stick with 9 games, every team can play 3 California schools per season.
Pac-12
Code:
ARIZONA Arizona State Colorado Utah
ARIZONA STATE Arizona Utah Colorado
CALIFORNIA Stanford UCLA USC
COLORADO Utah Arizona Arizona State
OREGON Oregon State Washington Washington St
OREGON STATE Oregon Washington St Washington
STANFORD California USC UCLA
UCLA USC California Stanford
USC UCLA Stanford California
UTAH Colorado Arizona State Arizona
WASHINGTON Washington St Oregon Oregon State
WASHINGTON ST Washington Oregon State Oregon
Here's my setup for the ACC with 15 schools (ND goes all in). Each school has 4 protected matchups and alternates between half the other 10 every 2 years.
ACC
Code:
BOSTON COLLEGE BYE/OTHER Syracuse Pittsburgh Notre Dame Miami-FL
CLEMSON Virginia Tech NC State Florida State Georgia Tech (South Carolina)
DUKE BYE/OTHER Georgia Tech NC State North Carolina Wake Forest
FLORIDA STATE Georgia Tech Louisville Clemson Miami-FL (Florida)
GEORGIA TECH Florida State Duke Notre Dame Clemson (Georgia)
LOUISVILLE Pittsburgh Florida State Virginia Tech Virginia (Kentucky)
MIAMI-FL Notre Dame Virginia Tech BYE/OTHER Florida State Boston College
NC STATE BYE/OTHER Clemson Duke Wake Forest North Carolina
NORTH CAROLINA Virginia BYE/OTHER Wake Forest Duke NC State
NOTRE DAME Miami-FL Pittsburgh Georgia Tech Boston College (Stanford/USC)
PITTSBURGH Louisville Notre Dame Boston College BYE/OTHER Syracuse
SYRACUSE Wake Forest Boston College Virginia BYE/OTHER Pittsburgh
VIRGINIA North Carolina BYE/OTHER Syracuse Louisville Virginia Tech
VIRGINIA TECH Clemson Miami-FL Louisville BYE/OTHER Virginia
WAKE FOREST Syracuse BYE/OTHER North Carolina NC State Duke
What do you think of the whole scheme? Any matchups I should change?
I revamped the protected matchups for the ACC, Big Ten, and SEC in the OP to (hopefully) better accommodate rivalries and strength of schedule. Let me know what you think! I'm certainly open to suggested changes.
There's an alternative to the five protected game model that doesn't require a nine game league schedule. In your three protected game model, every school will play non-protected rivals twice every four years. If a school were to play whichever of their two additional rivals were not on their conference schedule OOC, they would be happy, and teams which want to preserve their 4 OOC games for schools outside the conference (Clemson comes to mind in the ACC) could still choose to do so.
RE: Divisionless Football Conferences? - Attackcoog - 11-14-2018 11:07 AM
(11-14-2018 08:28 AM)Nerdlinger Wrote: (11-14-2018 01:34 AM)Attackcoog Wrote: (11-13-2018 06:42 PM)Wedge Wrote: (11-13-2018 06:26 PM)Attackcoog Wrote: Id be happy if the NCAA would allow conferences to have as many divisions as they like. As conferences get bigger---this will become a bigger issue.
What isn't allowed is for a conference to have more than one football conference title game that is exempt from the limit on the number of regular season games. And that's the sticking point. Extending the regular season by one or two more weeks so that a conference can have a 4 or 8 team football tournament, without giving extra games to every other team in FBS, is a non-starter.
True. But the rules governing CCG's also specifically prevent a conference from dividing into any more than 2 divisions for purposes of a title game. A 4 pod system, for instance, is not allowed--even if the conference has a tie breaker method to determine which 2 pod champs would actually play in a single CCG. The truth is, for some conferences--especially the more spread out ones---a pod system would work much better than 2 larger divisions. To be clear---its not necessary to have a 4 game playoff within the conference simply because you have 4 pods---you just have to have a reasonable tie breaker method for determining which 2 pod winners advance to the CCG. The season need not be expanded. Honestly, its really no more illegitimate than the way we crown our national champion. We have 10 FBS conference winners---but only 4 teams advance to the playoff (hell, the playoff participants may not all necessarily even be conference champs). We've simply set up a system to decide who advanced into a 4 team playoff. Before the CFP, the BCS had a system to select who advanced into a single title game (which is very much how a 4-pod system would work with a single title game).
You're talking about pods as if they were divisions unto themselves. The idea of the pod system is to have them rotate between divisions, WAC-16 style. So it's certainly permitted under the current rules.
Thats was my whole original point. I'd like to see the NCAA give the the conferences the ability to divide into as many divisions as they like. Yes, you can use pods today---but your really just using the pods to mimic two divisions. What I'm proposing is simply allowing conferences to decide how many divisions to split into. The single CCG per conference rule is fine and would not need to change. A true 3 or 4 division format would give conferences far more scheduling flexibility than the current model.
RE: Divisionless Football Conferences? - Nerdlinger - 11-15-2018 12:18 PM
(11-14-2018 10:29 AM)ken d Wrote: There's an alternative to the five protected game model that doesn't require a nine game league schedule. In your three protected game model, every school will play non-protected rivals twice every four years. If a school were to play whichever of their two additional rivals were not on their conference schedule OOC, they would be happy, and teams which want to preserve their 4 OOC games for schools outside the conference (Clemson comes to mind in the ACC) could still choose to do so.
True, this is an alternative, but I'm not sure many schools would sign off on a conference schedule that requires them to play in-conference rivals OOC.
(11-14-2018 11:07 AM)Attackcoog Wrote: Thats was my whole original point. I'd like to see the NCAA give the the conferences the ability to divide into as many divisions as they like. Yes, you can use pods today---but your really just using the pods to mimic two divisions. What I'm proposing is simply allowing conferences to decide how many divisions to split into. The single CCG per conference rule is fine and would not need to change. A true 3 or 4 division format would give conferences far more scheduling flexibility than the current model.
I too am in favor of letting conferences decide how to organize their own members and set their own schedule. I don't see why either of those need to be regulated by the NCAA. I'm also in favor of giving conferences control over their championship structure, although I can see for the players' sake why the NCAA wants to limit the number of extra games. I don't think permitting 3 extra games per conference (for a 2-round championship) instead of just 1 extra game would result in that much of an additional burden.
RE: Divisionless Football Conferences? - Nerdlinger - 11-16-2018 01:12 PM
(01-30-2018 05:34 PM)Nerdlinger Wrote: So there is already at least one large conference that lacks divisions and uses protected matchups for football: the Big Sky Conference. There will be 14 football schools in the Big Sky in the 2018 and 2019 seasons (technically 13, as UND is FCS independent but is still playing a Big Sky schedule). Each team has 2 protected rivals, as shown here.
Right now they're using an 8-game conference schedule, but they may be moving to 9 games in 2020. That year North Dakota football joins the MVFC, leaving 13 football schools once again. Presumably, if the conference sticks with 2 protected matchups, MSU and UNC (UND's partners) will just play each other.
Since Idaho is rejoining as a football school this year, EWU is losing its protected matchup with UM. This could be reversed in 2020 by increasing the number of protected matchups. This also would allow Idaho to play ISU every year. Having 3 protected matchups in a 13-team conference means that one team is perpetually going to end up with 2 or 4 protected matchups, so perhaps 4 matchups across the board would be better.
Here's my proposal for the protected matchups for 2020 on:
Cal Poly: Sac State, UC Davis + NAU, SUU
EWU: Idaho, PSU + Montana, MSU
Idaho: EWU, Montana + ISU, PSU
ISU: Weber + Idaho, Montana, MSU (- PSU)
Montana: Idaho, MSU + EWU, ISU
MSU: Montana + EWU, ISU, UNC, (- UND)
NAU: SUU, UNC + Cal Poly, UC Davis
PSU: EWU + Idaho, Sac State, UC Davis (- ISU)
Sac State: Cal Poly, UC Davis + PSU, Weber
SUU: NAU, Weber + Cal Poly, UNC
UC Davis: Cal Poly, Sac State + NAU, PSU
UNC: NAU + MSU, SUU, Weber (- UND)
Weber: ISU, SUU + Sac State, UNC
With an 8-game schedule, each team can play half the 8 non-protected opponents every year. A 9-game schedule is doable; it just makes these pairings more frequent. Note that a 9-game conference schedule with 13 teams means one team will end up with 8 or 10 conference games. The team affected by this can be rotated annually.
Here's the Big Sky schedule proposed above in table form, plus 2 more columns of opponents:
Code:
SCHOOL OPPONENTS WITH 2 PROTECTED | ADD'L OPPONENTS WITH 4 PROTECTED | ADD'L OPPONENTS WITH 6 PROTECTED
CAL POLY Sacramento State UC Davis | Southern Utah Northern Arizona | Idaho Northern Colorado
EASTERN WASHINGTON Montana Portland State | Idaho Montana State | UC Davis Sacramento State
IDAHO Portland State Idaho State | Montana Eastern Washington | Montana State Cal Poly
IDAHO STATE Idaho Weber State | Montana State Montana | Northern Colorado Southern Utah
MONTANA Montana State Eastern Washington | Idaho State Idaho | Weber State Portland State
MONTANA STATE Northern Colorado Montana | Eastern Washington Idaho State | Portland State Idaho
NORTHERN ARIZONA Southern Utah Northern Colorado | Cal Poly UC Davis | Sacramento State Weber State
NORTHERN COLORADO Northern Arizona Montana State | Weber State Southern Utah | Cal Poly Idaho State
PORTLAND STATE Eastern Washington Idaho | UC Davis Sacramento State | Montana Montana State
SACRAMENTO STATE UC Davis Cal Poly | Portland State Weber State | Eastern Washington Northern Arizona
SOUTHERN UTAH Weber State Northern Arizona | Northern Colorado Cal Poly | Idaho State UC Davis
UC DAVIS Cal Poly Sacramento State | Northern Arizona Portland State | Southern Utah Eastern Washington
WEBER STATE Idaho State Southern Utah | Sacramento State Northern Colorado | Northern Arizona Montana
The first 2 columns of opponents are for a conference schedule with 2 protected opponents, the next 2 columns are additional opponents for a schedule with 4 protected opponents, and the last 2 columns are even more opponents for a schedule with 6 protected opponents.
And here is an alternate divisionless schedule that includes NMSU, in case they decide to throw in the FBS towel like Idaho:
Code:
CAL POLY Northern Arizona Sacramento State UC Davis | Southern Utah | New Mexico State
EASTERN WASHINGTON Portland State Montana Idaho | UC Davis | Sacramento State
IDAHO Montana Idaho State Eastern Washington | Portland State | Montana State
IDAHO STATE Montana State Idaho Weber State | Montana | Portland State
MONTANA Idaho Eastern Washington Montana State | Idaho State | Weber State
MONTANA STATE Idaho State Northern Colorado Montana | Sacramento State | Idaho
NEW MEXICO STATE Southern Utah Northern Arizona Northern Colorado | Weber State | Cal Poly
NORTHERN ARIZONA Cal Poly New Mexico State Southern Utah | Northern Colorado | UC Davis
NORTHERN COLORADO Weber State Montana State New Mexico State | Northern Arizona | Southern Utah
PORTLAND STATE Eastern Washington UC Davis Sacramento State | Idaho | Idaho State
SACRAMENTO STATE UC Davis Cal Poly Portland State | Montana State | Eastern Washington
SOUTHERN UTAH New Mexico State Weber State Northern Arizona | Cal Poly | Northern Colorado
UC DAVIS Sacramento State Portland State Cal Poly | Eastern Washington | Northern Arizona
WEBER STATE Northern Colorado Southern Utah Idaho State | New Mexico State | Montana
The first 3 columns of opponents are for a conference schedule with 3 protected opponents, the additional 4th column is for a schedule with 4 protected opponents, and the additional 5th column is for a schedule with 5 protected opponents.
With 14 teams, the Big Sky could instead go with a 2-division alignment, like so:
North: Eastern Washington, Idaho, Idaho State, Montana, Montana State, Northern Colorado, Portland State
South: Cal Poly, New Mexico State, Northern Arizona, Sacramento State, Southern Utah, UC Davis, Weber State
But of course there's less incentive to do so in FCS, where there are few conference championship games due to the tournament.
---
EDIT: As it turns out, the Big Sky is not actually planning to move to 9 conference games in 2020: https://www.foxsports.com/college-football/story/no-increase-yet-in-big-sky-conference-schedule-102116
This is evidenced by Cal Poly's 2020 schedule, which can be found here: https://fbschedules.com/ncaa/cal-poly/
RE: Divisionless Football Conferences? - Nerdlinger - 11-19-2018 04:30 PM
The Southland Conference has had 11 football teams in a divisionless slate since 2014, and they've played a 9-game conference schedule since 2015. Because of the odd numbers, this has meant one team actually plays just 8 conference games every year. This team was Houston Baptist in 2015 and 2016 (and will be in 2019 and 2020) and Incarnate Word in 2017 and 2018. The league may go back to an 8-game conference schedule in 2021, permitting all teams to play the same number of conference games.
I haven't found anything about which annual football matchups between Southland members are being protected (if any), but I've come up with a scheme that should work for 2, 4, or 6 protected matchups. I tried to protect the most important rivalries first. Let me know what you think!
Code:
SCHOOL OPPONENTS WITH 2 PROTECTED | ADD'L OPPONENTS WITH 4 PROTECTED | ADD'L OPPONENTS WITH 6 PROTECTED
ABILENE CHRISTIAN Houston Baptist Incarnate Word | Central Arkansas Stephen F. Austin | Lamar Sam Houston
CENTRAL ARKANSAS Nicholls State SE Louisiana | Incarnate Word Abilene Christian | Northwestern State McNeese State
HOUSTON BAPTIST Incarnate Word Abilene Christian | Lamar Sam Houston | McNeese State Nicholls State
INCARNATE WORD Abilene Christian Houston Baptist | Sam Houston Central Arkansas | Stephen F. Austin Northwestern State
LAMAR McNeese State Sam Houston | Stephen F. Austin Houston Baptist | Nicholls State Abilene Christian
MCNEESE STATE Northwestern State Lamar | Nicholls State SE Louisiana | Central Arkansas Houston Baptist
NICHOLLS STATE SE Louisiana Central Arkansas | Northwestern State McNeese State | Houston Baptist Lamar
NORTHWESTERN STATE Stephen F. Austin McNeese State | SE Louisiana Nicholls State | Incarnate Word Central Arkansas
SAM HOUSTON Lamar Stephen F. Austin | Houston Baptist Incarnate Word | Abilene Christian SE Louisiana
SE LOUISIANA Central Arkansas Nicholls State | McNeese State Northwestern State | Sam Houston Stephen F. Austin
STEPHEN F. AUSTIN Sam Houston Northwestern State | Abilene Christian Lamar | SE Louisiana Incarnate Word
Some info on the different scenarios, which vary depending on how many conference games and protected matchups there are:
Code:
Total Conference Games 8 9 8 9 8 9
Protected Opponents 2 2 4 4 6 6
Non-Protected Opponents 8 8 6 6 4 4
Games vs. Non-Protected 6 7 4 5 2 3
Years to Play All Teams 1.33 1.14 1.50 1.20 2.00 1.33
RE: Divisionless Football Conferences? - YNot - 11-19-2018 06:47 PM
(11-16-2018 01:12 PM)Nerdlinger Wrote: (01-30-2018 05:34 PM)Nerdlinger Wrote: So there is already at least one large conference that lacks divisions and uses protected matchups for football: the Big Sky Conference. There will be 14 football schools in the Big Sky in the 2018 and 2019 seasons (technically 13, as UND is FCS independent but is still playing a Big Sky schedule). Each team has 2 protected rivals, as shown here.
Right now they're using an 8-game conference schedule, but they may be moving to 9 games in 2020. That year North Dakota football joins the MVFC, leaving 13 football schools once again. Presumably, if the conference sticks with 2 protected matchups, MSU and UNC (UND's partners) will just play each other.
Since Idaho is rejoining as a football school this year, EWU is losing its protected matchup with UM. This could be reversed in 2020 by increasing the number of protected matchups. This also would allow Idaho to play ISU every year. Having 3 protected matchups in a 13-team conference means that one team is perpetually going to end up with 2 or 4 protected matchups, so perhaps 4 matchups across the board would be better.
Here's my proposal for the protected matchups for 2020 on:
Cal Poly: Sac State, UC Davis + NAU, SUU
EWU: Idaho, PSU + Montana, MSU
Idaho: EWU, Montana + ISU, PSU
ISU: Weber + Idaho, Montana, MSU (- PSU)
Montana: Idaho, MSU + EWU, ISU
MSU: Montana + EWU, ISU, UNC, (- UND)
NAU: SUU, UNC + Cal Poly, UC Davis
PSU: EWU + Idaho, Sac State, UC Davis (- ISU)
Sac State: Cal Poly, UC Davis + PSU, Weber
SUU: NAU, Weber + Cal Poly, UNC
UC Davis: Cal Poly, Sac State + NAU, PSU
UNC: NAU + MSU, SUU, Weber (- UND)
Weber: ISU, SUU + Sac State, UNC
With an 8-game schedule, each team can play half the 8 non-protected opponents every year. A 9-game schedule is doable; it just makes these pairings more frequent. Note that a 9-game conference schedule with 13 teams means one team will end up with 8 or 10 conference games. The team affected by this can be rotated annually.
Here's the Big Sky schedule proposed above in table form, plus 2 more columns of opponents:
Code:
CAL POLY Sacramento State UC Davis Northern Arizona Southern Utah | Idaho Northern Colorado
EASTERN WASHINGTON Idaho Portland State Montana Montana State | Idaho State UC Davis
IDAHO Montana Eastern Washington Portland State Idaho State | Montana State Cal Poly
IDAHO STATE Weber State Idaho Montana State Montana | Northern Colorado Eastern Washington
MONTANA Montana State Idaho State Idaho Eastern Washington | Weber State Portland State
MONTANA STATE Idaho State Montana Eastern Washington Northern Colorado | Portland State Idaho
NORTHERN ARIZONA Cal Poly Southern Utah Northern Colorado UC Davis | Sacramento State Weber State
NORTHERN COLORADO Northern Arizona Montana State Southern Utah Weber State | Cal Poly Idaho State
PORTLAND STATE Eastern Washington Sacramento State UC Davis Idaho | Montana Montana State
SACRAMENTO STATE UC Davis Cal Poly Weber State Portland State | Southern Utah Northern Arizona
SOUTHERN UTAH Northern Colorado Weber State Cal Poly Northern Arizona | UC Davis Sacramento State
UC DAVIS Portland State Northern Arizona Sacramento State Cal Poly | Eastern Washington Southern Utah
WEBER STATE Southern Utah Northern Colorado Idaho State Sacramento State | Northern Arizona Montana
The first 4 columns of opponents are for an 8-game conference schedule with 4 protected opponents and the additional 2 columns are for a 9-game schedule with 6 protected opponents. In each case, a team plays its protected opponents and half the non-protected opponents every year (alternating biennially).
And here is an alternate divisionless schedule that includes NMSU, in case they decide to throw in the FBS towel like Idaho:
Code:
CAL POLY Northern Arizona UC Davis Sacramento State | Southern Utah New Mexico State
EASTERN WASHINGTON Portland State Montana Idaho | Sacramento State UC Davis
IDAHO Montana Idaho State Eastern Washington | Montana State Portland State
IDAHO STATE Idaho Montana State Weber State | Montana Sacramento State
MONTANA Eastern Washington Idaho Montana State | Weber State Idaho State
MONTANA STATE Idaho State Northern Colorado Montana | Portland State Idaho
NEW MEXICO STATE Southern Utah Northern Arizona Northern Colorado | Cal Poly Weber State
NORTHERN ARIZONA New Mexico State Cal Poly Southern Utah | UC Davis Northern Colorado
NORTHERN COLORADO Montana State Weber State New Mexico State | Northern Arizona Southern Utah
PORTLAND STATE Sacramento State Eastern Washington UC Davis | Idaho Montana State
SACRAMENTO STATE UC Davis Portland State Cal Poly | Idaho State Eastern Washington
SOUTHERN UTAH Weber State New Mexico State Northern Arizona | Northern Colorado Cal Poly
UC DAVIS Cal Poly Sacramento State Portland State | Eastern Washington Northern Arizona
WEBER STATE Northern Colorado Southern Utah Idaho State | New Mexico State Montana
The first 3 columns of opponents are for an 8-game conference schedule with 3 protected opponents and the additional 2 columns are for a 9-game schedule with 5 protected opponents. In each case, a team plays its protected opponents and half the non-protected opponents every year (alternating biennially).
With 14 teams, the Big Sky could instead go with a 2-division alignment, like so:
North: Eastern Washington, Idaho, Idaho State, Montana, Montana State, Northern Colorado, Portland State
South: Cal Poly, New Mexico State, Northern Arizona, Sacramento State, Southern Utah, UC Davis, Weber State
But of course there's less incentive to do so in FCS, where there are few conference championship games due to the tournament.
---
EDIT: As it turns out, the Big Sky is not actually planning to move to 9 conference games in 2020: https://www.foxsports.com/college-football/story/no-increase-yet-in-big-sky-conference-schedule-102116
This is evidenced by Cal Poly's 2020 schedule, which can be found here: https://fbschedules.com/ncaa/cal-poly/
I like the idea to replace the conference championship games with CFP expansion. Then, the FBS conferences could more easily move to division-less scheduling.
RE: Divisionless Football Conferences? - Nerdlinger - 11-19-2018 09:39 PM
Like the Big Sky and Southland (and most FCS conferences), the CAA lacks divisions. Unlike the Big Sky and Southland, however, the CAA actually has an even number of football teams (12), so any number of protected matchups per team can work for them. The conference schedule is 8 games. Below is a schedule for 3, 4, or 5 protected matchups. Again, I tried to protect the biggest rivalries first. Any thoughts on this?
Code:
ALBANY Maine Stony Brook New Hampshire | Rhode Island | James Madison
DELAWARE Towson Villanova James Madison | William & Mary | Richmond
ELON William & Mary Richmond Towson | James Madison | Villanova
JAMES MADISON Richmond William & Mary Delaware | Elon | Albany
MAINE New Hampshire Albany Rhode Island | Villanova | Stony Brook
NEW HAMPSHIRE Rhode Island Maine Albany | Stony Brook | Towson
RHODE ISLAND Stony Brook New Hampshire Maine | Albany | William & Mary
RICHMOND Elon James Madison William & Mary | Towson | Delaware
STONY BROOK Albany Rhode Island Villanova | New Hampshire | Maine
TOWSON Villanova Delaware Elon | Richmond | New Hampshire
VILLANOVA Delaware Towson Stony Brook | Maine | Elon
WILLIAM & MARY James Madison Elon Richmond | Delaware | Rhode Island
The schedule with 5 protected matchups could have worked out the same as if the teams were split into the following nice geographic divisions:
North: Albany, Maine, New Hampshire, Rhode Island, Stony Brook, Villanova
South: Delaware, Elon, James Madison, Richmond, Towson, William & Mary
... except that Delaware/Villanova had to be protected, which meant a bunch of other "cross-division" matchups (of dubious rivalry value) also had to be protected.
Actually, a divisional setup like this might work well:
North: Albany, Maine, New Hampshire, Rhode Island, Stony Brook, Towson
South: Delaware, Elon, James Madison, Richmond, Villanova, William & Mary
This just swaps Towson and Villanova in order to keep Delaware and Villanova together. Each team could play its division plus half the other division every year for an 8-game conference schedule.
RE: Divisionless Football Conferences? - Nerdlinger - 11-19-2018 09:42 PM
(11-19-2018 06:47 PM)YNot Wrote: I like the idea to replace the conference championship games with CFP expansion. Then, the FBS conferences could more easily move to division-less scheduling.
I don't think that will ever happen, since conferences control their own CCG revenue. It's more likely that conference championships go to 4 teams than the CFP goes above 4. Such a change could occur due to a deregulation of CCGs, meaning dropping divisions would be an option for larger conferences.
RE: Divisionless Football Conferences? - Nerdlinger - 11-20-2018 08:26 PM
Continuing my tour of the larger FCS conferences: North Dakota will be joining the MVFC in 2020, giving that conference 11 members. This means there can only be an even number of protected opponents per team. Below is a proposed MVFC setup for 2, 4, or 6 protected opponents. As before, I focused on the protecting the most important rivalries first. Constructive feedback is appreciated!
Code:
SCHOOL OPPONENTS WITH 2 PROTECTED | ADD'L OPPONENTS WITH 4 PROTECTED | ADD'L OPPONENTS WITH 6 PROTECTED
ILLINOIS STATE Western Illinois Youngstown State | Indiana State Southern Illinois | North Dakota State Missouri State
INDIANA STATE Youngstown State Southern Illinois | Western Illinois Illinois State | South Dakota State North Dakota
MISSOURI STATE Southern Illinois Northern Iowa | South Dakota Youngstown State | Illinois State Western Illinois
NORTH DAKOTA North Dakota State South Dakota | Youngstown State South Dakota State | Indiana State Northern Iowa
NORTH DAKOTA STATE South Dakota State North Dakota | Northern Iowa South Dakota | Youngstown State Illinois State
NORTHERN IOWA Missouri State Western Illinois | South Dakota State North Dakota State | North Dakota South Dakota
SOUTH DAKOTA North Dakota South Dakota State | North Dakota State Missouri State | Northern Iowa Southern Illinois
SOUTH DAKOTA STATE South Dakota North Dakota State | North Dakota Northern Iowa | Western Illinois Indiana State
SOUTHERN ILLINOIS Indiana State Missouri State | Illinois State Western Illinois | South Dakota Youngstown State
WESTERN ILLINOIS Northern Iowa Illinois State | Southern Illinois Indiana State | Missouri State South Dakota State
YOUNGSTOWN STATE Illinois State Indiana State | Missouri State North Dakota | Southern Illinois North Dakota State
RE: Divisionless Football Conferences? - Nerdlinger - 11-21-2018 02:04 PM
Returning to FBS: a divisionless CUSA setup for 3, 4, or 5 protected opponents. Not sure if this is any better than the current 2-division lineup. Since CUSA is such a recently cobbled-together conference, most teams don't have many strong in-conference rivalries to protect.
Code:
CHARLOTTE Old Dominion Western Kentucky FAU | FIU | Marshall
FAU FIU Old Dominion Charlotte | Marshall | Western Kentucky
FIU FAU Marshall Southern Miss | Charlotte | Old Dominion
LOUISIANA TECH Southern Miss Middle Tennessee UAB | North Texas | Rice
MARSHALL Western Kentucky FIU Old Dominion | FAU | Charlotte
MIDDLE TENNESSEE UAB Louisiana Tech Western Kentucky | UTSA | North Texas
NORTH TEXAS Rice UTEP UTSA | Louisiana Tech | Middle Tennessee
OLD DOMINION Charlotte FAU Marshall | Western Kentucky | FIU
RICE North Texas UTSA UTEP | Southern Miss | Louisiana Tech
SOUTHERN MISS Louisiana Tech UAB FIU | Rice | UTEP
UAB Middle Tennessee Southern Miss Louisiana Tech | UTEP | UTSA
UTEP UTSA North Texas Rice | UAB | Southern Miss
UTSA UTEP Rice North Texas | Middle Tennessee | UAB
WESTERN KENTUCKY Marshall Charlotte Middle Tennessee | Old Dominion | FAU
RE: Divisionless Football Conferences? - MrCincy - 11-21-2018 02:18 PM
(08-18-2017 09:38 AM)Nerdlinger Wrote: While I'm not really a fan of abandoning divisions, doing so would allow for a schedule in which even a school in a conference of 14 could play all the other schools in the conference at least twice in 4 years (and with only an 8-game conference schedule). I was inspired by this article. Basically, for a 14-team conference, each team gets 3 protected annual matchups and alternates between half of the other 10 opponents every 2 years. The author proposes a different scheme for the ACC, adding ND as a full member and having 4 protected matchups. Here I'm working with the ACC as is and giving them 3 protected matchups like the Big Ten and SEC. I also changed some of the matchups around in each conference. I tried to retain traditional/desired rivalries while still remaining somewhat competitively balanced.
The last 2 columns for the ACC, Big Ten, and SEC are the matchups I'd add if the conferences wanted to expand to 4 or 5 protected matchups. Having 5 protected matchups works well with a 9-game conference schedule, permitting each team to play all other teams at least twice in 4 years.
ACC
Code:
BOSTON COLLEGE Syracuse Miami-FL Pittsburgh | Florida State | Wake Forest
CLEMSON Georgia Tech Florida State NC State | Louisville | Virginia Tech
DUKE Wake Forest Georgia Tech North Carolina | NC State | Virginia
FLORIDA STATE Miami-FL Clemson Georgia Tech | Boston College | Louisville
GEORGIA TECH Clemson Duke Florida State | Virginia Tech | Miami-FL
LOUISVILLE Pittsburgh Virginia Tech Virginia | Clemson | Florida State
MIAMI-FL Florida State Boston College Virginia Tech | Syracuse | Georgia Tech
NC STATE North Carolina Wake Forest Clemson | Duke | Syracuse
NORTH CAROLINA NC State Virginia Duke | Wake Forest | Pittsburgh
PITTSBURGH Louisville Syracuse Boston College | Virginia | North Carolina
SYRACUSE Boston College Pittsburgh Wake Forest | Miami-FL | NC State
VIRGINIA Virginia Tech North Carolina Louisville | Pittsburgh | Duke
VIRGINIA TECH Virginia Louisville Miami-FL | Georgia Tech | Clemson
WAKE FOREST Duke NC State Syracuse | North Carolina | Boston College
Big Ten
Code:
ILLINOIS Northwestern Purdue Rutgers | Indiana | Iowa
INDIANA Purdue Rutgers Northwestern | Illinois | Maryland
IOWA Nebraska Wisconsin Minnesota | Michigan State | Illinois
MARYLAND Rutgers Penn State Purdue | Minnesota | Indiana
MICHIGAN Michigan State Ohio State Penn State | Wisconsin | Nebraska
MICHIGAN STATE Michigan Northwestern Ohio State | Iowa | Penn State
MINNESOTA Wisconsin Nebraska Iowa | Maryland | Northwestern
NEBRASKA Iowa Minnesota Wisconsin | Ohio State | Michigan
NORTHWESTERN Illinois Michigan State Indiana | Purdue | Minnesota
OHIO STATE Penn State Michigan Michigan State | Nebraska | Wisconsin
PENN STATE Ohio State Maryland Michigan | Rutgers | Michigan State
PURDUE Indiana Illinois Maryland | Northwestern | Rutgers
RUTGERS Maryland Indiana Illinois | Penn State | Purdue
WISCONSIN Minnesota Iowa Nebraska | Michigan | Ohio State
SEC
Code:
ALABAMA Auburn Tennessee LSU | Georgia | Florida
ARKANSAS Texas A&M Missouri Mississippi St | LSU | Ole Miss
AUBURN Alabama Georgia Florida | Ole Miss | Texas A&M
FLORIDA Georgia South Carolina Auburn | Tennessee | Alabama
GEORGIA Florida Auburn South Carolina | Alabama | Tennessee
KENTUCKY South Carolina Vanderbilt Tennessee | Mississippi St | Missouri
LSU Ole Miss Texas A&M Alabama | Arkansas | Mississippi St
MISSISSIPPI ST Missouri Ole Miss Arkansas | Kentucky | LSU
MISSOURI Mississippi St Arkansas Texas A&M | Vanderbilt | Kentucky
OLE MISS LSU Mississippi St Vanderbilt | Auburn | Arkansas
SOUTH CAROLINA Kentucky Florida Georgia | Texas A&M | Vanderbilt
TENNESSEE Vanderbilt Alabama Kentucky | Florida | Georgia
TEXAS A&M Arkansas LSU Missouri | South Carolina | Auburn
VANDERBILT Tennessee Kentucky Ole Miss | Missouri | South Carolina
I also have one for the Pac-12. The protected matchups were obvious. I suppose they could go with an 8-game schedule, but if they stick with 9 games, every team can play 3 California schools per season.
Pac-12
Code:
ARIZONA Arizona State Colorado Utah
ARIZONA STATE Arizona Utah Colorado
CALIFORNIA Stanford UCLA USC
COLORADO Utah Arizona Arizona State
OREGON Oregon State Washington Washington St
OREGON STATE Oregon Washington St Washington
STANFORD California USC UCLA
UCLA USC California Stanford
USC UCLA Stanford California
UTAH Colorado Arizona State Arizona
WASHINGTON Washington St Oregon Oregon State
WASHINGTON ST Washington Oregon State Oregon
Here's my setup for the ACC with 15 schools (ND goes all in). Each school has 4 protected matchups.
ACC
Code:
BOSTON COLLEGE BYE/OTHER Syracuse Pittsburgh Notre Dame Miami-FL
CLEMSON Virginia Tech NC State Florida State Georgia Tech (South Carolina)
DUKE BYE/OTHER Georgia Tech NC State North Carolina Wake Forest
FLORIDA STATE Georgia Tech Louisville Clemson Miami-FL (Florida)
GEORGIA TECH Florida State Duke Notre Dame Clemson (Georgia)
LOUISVILLE Pittsburgh Florida State Virginia Tech Virginia (Kentucky)
MIAMI-FL Notre Dame Virginia Tech BYE/OTHER Florida State Boston College
NC STATE BYE/OTHER Clemson Duke Wake Forest North Carolina
NORTH CAROLINA Virginia BYE/OTHER Wake Forest Duke NC State
NOTRE DAME Miami-FL Pittsburgh Georgia Tech Boston College (Stanford/USC)
PITTSBURGH Louisville Notre Dame Boston College BYE/OTHER Syracuse
SYRACUSE Wake Forest Boston College Virginia BYE/OTHER Pittsburgh
VIRGINIA North Carolina BYE/OTHER Syracuse Louisville Virginia Tech
VIRGINIA TECH Clemson Miami-FL Louisville BYE/OTHER Virginia
WAKE FOREST Syracuse BYE/OTHER North Carolina NC State Duke
What do you think of the whole scheme? Any matchups I should change?
Where is the U. Cincinnati?---Louisville vs Cincinnati
RE: Divisionless Football Conferences? - Nerdlinger - 11-21-2018 02:22 PM
(11-21-2018 02:18 PM)MrCincy Wrote: Where is the U. Cincinnati?---Louisville vs Cincinnati
With a few exceptions, this thread has been about existing or upcoming conference lineups. Until Cincinnati is invited to the ACC, Louisville can't play them in-conference.
EDIT: But since you asked nicely, here's a divisionless setup for the ACC plus ND (full) and Cincinnati, for 3, 4, or 5 protected opponents. You like?
Code:
BOSTON COLLEGE Notre Dame Cincinnati Syracuse | Miami-FL | Pittsburgh
CINCINNATI Louisville Boston College Pittsburgh | Syracuse | Wake Forest
CLEMSON Georgia Tech NC State Florida State | Virginia Tech | Miami-FL
DUKE Wake Forest North Carolina Georgia Tech | NC State | Virginia
FLORIDA STATE Miami-FL Georgia Tech Clemson | Louisville | North Carolina
GEORGIA TECH Clemson Florida State Duke | Notre Dame | Virginia Tech
LOUISVILLE Cincinnati Virginia Virginia Tech | Florida State | Notre Dame
MIAMI-FL Florida State Virginia Tech Notre Dame | Boston College | Clemson
NC STATE North Carolina Clemson Wake Forest | Duke | Syracuse
NORTH CAROLINA NC State Duke Virginia | Wake Forest | Florida State
NOTRE DAME Boston College Pittsburgh Miami-FL | Georgia Tech | Louisville
PITTSBURGH Syracuse Notre Dame Cincinnati | Virginia | Boston College
SYRACUSE Pittsburgh Wake Forest Boston College | Cincinnati | NC State
VIRGINIA Virginia Tech Louisville North Carolina | Pittsburgh | Duke
VIRGINIA TECH Virginia Miami-FL Louisville | Clemson | Georgia Tech
WAKE FOREST Duke Syracuse NC State | North Carolina | Cincinnati
RE: Divisionless Football Conferences? - virgosports - 11-25-2018 01:01 PM
[quote='Nerdlinger' pid='14513733' dateline='1503116800']
Proposals for some G5 conferences:
American
Central Florida: East Carolina, South Florida, Temple
Cincinnati: Connecticut, Memphis, South Florida
Connecticut: Cincinnati, South Florida, Temple
East Carolina: Central Florida, Navy, Temple
Houston: Navy, SMU, Tulane
Memphis: Cincinnati, Tulane, Tulsa
Navy: East Carolina, Houston, SMU
SMU: Houston, Navy, Tulsa
South Florida: Central Florida, Cincinnati, Connecticut
Temple: Central Florida, Connecticut, East Carolina
Tulane: Houston, Memphis, Tulsa
Tulsa: Memphis, SMU, Tulane
This is fun to read. For Memphis (personal preference), I would replace Tulsa with Houston. For Houston, I imagine it would be SMU, Tulsa, Memphis. Cincy seems correct and for Navy, I assume it would be SMU, Tulane, Ecu.
|