(04-18-2014 03:09 PM)ODUalum78 Wrote:  To what end? Under dereg you would no longer need divisions.
The best ccg revenue would probably be accrued with the two best teams.
Likely the best shot at getting into the mix for the G5 playoff spot is by playing your two best teams.
Staying at eleven for whatever time it chooses allows the SBC to be selective IF it indeed feels it needs to go to twelve. This eliminates the need for an immediate "panic" add.
Under deregulation, a conference can schedule as it sees fit, in the best interest of the conference and individual programs, not the forced round robin from the NCAA. This especially could benefit conferences that have had to split natural rivals in order to define the requisite divisions.
I see no downside to the SBC remaining at eleven and eliminating arbitrary divisions if in fact deregulation passes.
I see plenty of upside.

Couple of things. With divisions you develop natural, annual rivals. Secondly, you are playing two divisional winners instead of a clear number one against a clear number two. A UMass invitation allows you the bridge of time you may need to find a clear cut number 12 while you move forward with divisional play (if so desired).

It's 50/50 for sure, I just like the more elegant approach of divisional play.