+- CSNbbs (https://csnbbs.com)
+-- Forum: Active Boards (/forum-769.html)
+--- Forum: Lounge (/forum-564.html)
+---- Forum: College Sports and Conference Realignment (/forum-637.html)
+---- Thread: CCG deregulation -What if brainstorm (/thread-890535.html)
CCG deregulation -What if brainstorm - Crayton - 12-15-2019 08:00 PM
Scenario: Unable to agree on how and whether to expand the post-season, the FBS conferences instead agree to deregulate Conference Championship Games.
Deregulation: Conferences can use their 13th game exemption to pair any member institution (champion to cellar-dweller) with any of the 129 other FBS teams (including Norte Dame... if they’d accept the invitation).
Playoff: stays at 4 teams, BUT only the 10 CCG (Conference “Challenge” Game) winners are playoff eligible.
What happens?
Do conferences simply go divisionless? Do they enter into alliances? How do conferences (P5 and G5) maximize their CCG revenue AND playoff chances?
RE: CCG deregulation -What if brainstorm - Garrettabc - 12-15-2019 08:18 PM
Instead of a conference championship game perhaps give conferences the option to do a conference pro bowl game which would give a bunch of different fan bases an incentive to travel and buy tickets.
RE: CCG deregulation -What if brainstorm - goofus - 12-15-2019 08:25 PM
I believe there is potential to this idea.
But maybe tweak it so that the top 4 conference champs must invite the next 4 highest ranked at-large teams
So the 4th highest ranked conference champs invite the highest ranked at large team, and so forth.
RE: CCG deregulation -What if brainstorm - Crayton - 12-16-2019 03:43 PM
(12-15-2019 08:25 PM)goofus Wrote: I believe there is potential to this idea.
But maybe tweak it so that the top 4 conference champs must invite the next 4 highest ranked at-large teams
So the 4th highest ranked conference champs invite the highest ranked at large team, and so forth.
D
A great start! When we put teams and ranks to this idea, we run into the quintessential issue with a 4-team playoff: 5 major conferences.
SEC: 1 LSU vs. 9 Alabama
BT: 2 Ohio St vs. 8 Baylor
ACC: 3 Clemson vs. 7 Florida
P12: 4 Georgia vs. 5 Utah
B12: 6 Oklahoma vs. ???
Naturally you could slide Oklahoma in and bump Alabama out. But what happens to the Big 12’s game? And, would the conferences agree to a system where they could be that 5th conference and host a “consolation” game?
Conferences would need guarantees. Like the bowls, there would need to be a cycle so that conferences (and, importantly, their TV partners) would know when they’d host consolations.
The SEC and probably the Big Ten would likely prefer to abstain from such an alliance than host #9 vs. #10 in Atlanta/Indy, even if only every 5th year. Perhaps the other 3 major conferences would agree to a 3-year rotation.
Would the SEC (or any P5) be content hosting Baylor or (2018) Washington rather than a 2nd SEC team? Maybe not. There could be a selection process, where the conference with the #1 team picks which at large they play, or maybe they take their ball and stay to themselves ala the BT/P12 in the 90s.
Lots of things to consider. Would the G5 form a similar alliance? Would the G5 be excluded from a P5 (or ACC/P12/B12) alliance, even if they placed a team in the Top 8?
RE: CCG deregulation -What if brainstorm - YNot - 12-17-2019 04:31 PM
(12-15-2019 08:00 PM)Crayton Wrote: Scenario: Unable to agree on how and whether to expand the post-season, the FBS conferences instead agree to deregulate Conference Championship Games.
Deregulation: Conferences can use their 13th game exemption to pair any member institution (champion to cellar-dweller) with any of the 129 other FBS teams (including Norte Dame... if they’d accept the invitation).
Playoff: stays at 4 teams, BUT only the 10 CCG (Conference “Challenge” Game) winners are playoff eligible.
What happens?
Do conferences simply go divisionless? Do they enter into alliances? How do conferences (P5 and G5) maximize their CCG revenue AND playoff chances?
The only thing that might change would be a move to divisionless conference schedules and ensure top-2 match-ups in each CCG. No conference would agree to risk one of their teams not being a CCG winner.
Why would Ohio State or the B1G agree to play B12 Baylor instead of B1G Wisconsin?
Why would Clemson or the ACC agree to play SEC-Florida instead of ACC-member Virginia?
Why would Utah or the PAC 12 agree to play SEC-Georgia instead of PAC 12 Oregon?
RE: CCG deregulation -What if brainstorm - Garrettabc - 12-17-2019 05:30 PM
Let the record show that Clemson would totally PWN! UF.
RE: CCG deregulation -What if brainstorm - Nerdlinger - 12-17-2019 06:04 PM
(12-17-2019 05:30 PM)Garrettabc Wrote: Let the record show that Clemson would totally PWN! UF.
While I don't necessarily disagree, I don't think the "record" could show that unless they actually played. Last time was in 1961.
RE: CCG deregulation -What if brainstorm - Fighting Muskie - 12-17-2019 09:09 PM
I think that each member should be required to play each member of their conference at least twice in a 4 year cycle.
Additionally, all P5 schools should have to play 10 P5 opponents.
RE: CCG deregulation -What if brainstorm - goofus - 12-17-2019 10:48 PM
(12-16-2019 03:43 PM)Crayton Wrote:(12-15-2019 08:25 PM)goofus Wrote: I believe there is potential to this idea.
But maybe tweak it so that the top 4 conference champs must invite the next 4 highest ranked at-large teams
So the 4th highest ranked conference champs invite the highest ranked at large team, and so forth.
D
A great start! When we put teams and ranks to this idea, we run into the quintessential issue with a 4-team playoff: 5 major conferences.
SEC: 1 LSU vs. 9 Alabama
BT: 2 Ohio St vs. 8 Baylor
ACC: 3 Clemson vs. 7 Florida
P12: 4 Georgia vs. 5 Utah
B12: 6 Oklahoma vs. ???
Naturally you could slide Oklahoma in and bump Alabama out. But what happens to the Big 12’s game? And, would the conferences agree to a system where they could be that 5th conference and host a “consolation” game?
Conferences would need guarantees. Like the bowls, there would need to be a cycle so that conferences (and, importantly, their TV partners) would know when they’d host consolations.
The SEC and probably the Big Ten would likely prefer to abstain from such an alliance than host #9 vs. #10 in Atlanta/Indy, even if only every 5th year. Perhaps the other 3 major conferences would agree to a 3-year rotation.
Would the SEC (or any P5) be content hosting Baylor or (2018) Washington rather than a 2nd SEC team? Maybe not. There could be a selection process, where the conference with the #1 team picks which at large they play, or maybe they take their ball and stay to themselves ala the BT/P12 in the 90s.
Lots of things to consider. Would the G5 form a similar alliance? Would the G5 be excluded from a P5 (or ACC/P12/B12) alliance, even if they placed a team in the Top 8?
No it would have been the top 4 regular season champions, so it would have been
Big Ten: #1 OSU vs #8 Baylor
SEC: #2 LSU vs # 7 Wisconsin
ACC: # 3 Clem vs # 6 Oklahoma
P12: #5 utah vs #4 georgia
AAC #17 Memphis vs #19 BSU
B12: #25 OkSt vs #9 Florida
Of course in this plan, Oregon gets screwed
RE: CCG deregulation -What if brainstorm - Crayton - 12-19-2019 02:41 PM
(12-17-2019 04:31 PM)YNot Wrote: The only thing that might change would be a move to divisionless conference schedules and ensure top-2 match-ups in each CCG. No conference would agree to risk one of their teams not being a CCG winner.Good “why” questions. Here are some potential answers.
Why would Ohio State or the B1G agree to play B12 Baylor instead of B1G Wisconsin?
Why would Clemson or the ACC agree to play SEC-Florida instead of ACC-member Virginia?
Why would Utah or the PAC 12 agree to play SEC-Georgia instead of PAC 12 Oregon?
Utah defeating Georgia would guarantee the Utes a playoff berth, which a win over Oregon could not.
Clemson vs. Florida would be a much more lucrative TV property (better matchup, higher stakes) than Clemson vs. Virginia.
The claim that conferences would not want to risk having no “CCG” winner is on par with the current risk of missing the 4-team playoff. Therefore, no additional risk is taken.
Would the SEC or Big Ten want Baylor when they already have high ranking Georgia and Wisconsin? I agree, probably not. These 2 conference have enough large fan bases that even a 9-3 conference team would be more worthwhile than a 10+ win non-champion.
Would the Pac-12, ACC, and Big 12 agree to share 2 annual Challenge Games between their 3 regular season champions and their top at-large member? These would be near-certain quarterfinals. If they shared the revenue, they wouldn’t have to worry about a rotation and could simply pre-select their quarterfinal sites.
The Big Ten and SEC make too much money on their current CCGs, so I could see them passing on this alliance.
West: 5 Utah vs. 6 Oklahoma
East: 3 Clemson vs. 8 Baylor
SEC: 1 LSU vs. 4 Georgia
BT: 2 Ohio St vs. 10 Wisconsin
AAC: 17 Memphis vs 7 Florida ???
If the Pac-12, Big 12, and ACC have no at-larges in the Top 8 MAYBE they invite an alternate Top 8 team, like Norte Dame or BT/SEC #3 or a G5 champ to fill that 4th spot.
They can also stage a 3rd Challenge Game, like an early Bowl Game, and upgrade it to a 3rd Quarterfinal if ever the alliance has 5 of the Top 8 to 10 teams. ...a pre-bowl Bowl Game, however, does sound like a consolation game and would rarely if ever get upgraded.
RE: CCG deregulation -What if brainstorm - bullet - 12-19-2019 03:12 PM
(12-15-2019 08:00 PM)Crayton Wrote: Scenario: Unable to agree on how and whether to expand the post-season, the FBS conferences instead agree to deregulate Conference Championship Games.
Deregulation: Conferences can use their 13th game exemption to pair any member institution (champion to cellar-dweller) with any of the 129 other FBS teams (including Norte Dame... if they’d accept the invitation).
Playoff: stays at 4 teams, BUT only the 10 CCG (Conference “Challenge” Game) winners are playoff eligible.
What happens?
Do conferences simply go divisionless? Do they enter into alliances? How do conferences (P5 and G5) maximize their CCG revenue AND playoff chances?
Better solution. Drop ccgs. Then maybe conferences will try to be sizes where they can actually determine a champion.
But that isn't happening.
RE: CCG deregulation -What if brainstorm - IWokeUpLikeThis - 12-19-2019 04:52 PM
(12-19-2019 03:12 PM)bullet Wrote:(12-15-2019 08:00 PM)Crayton Wrote: Scenario: Unable to agree on how and whether to expand the post-season, the FBS conferences instead agree to deregulate Conference Championship Games.
Deregulation: Conferences can use their 13th game exemption to pair any member institution (champion to cellar-dweller) with any of the 129 other FBS teams (including Norte Dame... if they’d accept the invitation).
Playoff: stays at 4 teams, BUT only the 10 CCG (Conference “Challenge” Game) winners are playoff eligible.
What happens?
Do conferences simply go divisionless? Do they enter into alliances? How do conferences (P5 and G5) maximize their CCG revenue AND playoff chances?
Better solution. Drop ccgs. Then maybe conferences will try to be sizes where they can actually determine a champion.
But that isn't happening.
Yep. Imagine a CFB world with 13 game regular seasons where the ACC/BE/B1G/BXII/PAC/SEC/SWC determined their champs via round robin and the top 7 ranked conference champs + 1 at-large made an 8-team playoff. No more rematches, everyone loads up OOC scheduling to gun for the 1 at-large bid.