(04-11-2021 07:36 PM)Foreverandever Wrote:  

(04-11-2021 06:54 PM)quo vadis Wrote:  

(04-11-2021 04:27 PM)johnbragg Wrote:  

(04-11-2021 03:53 PM)panite Wrote:  Next question though is - will the waiver become a permanent thing so the AAC expansion threads can stop for awhile.

Seriously: IMO, the waiver is here to stay. Nobody is mad about it, so nobody's going to do the work of getting it taken away.

I agree. It would be hard to see how the AAC waiver could be taken away while allowing the Big 12 to keep theirs, and nobody is taking the Big 12's waiver away. No, they aren't for the same thing, but I don't see how the NCAA could justify allowing the Big 12 to keep theirs while stripping the AAC.

The rule will quietly be repealed in a year or two.

The big 12 doesn't have a waiver and doesn't need one, they got the rule changed from divisions to a full round robin.

I agree with attack though, in particular the SEC will be interested in a change. I assume it will be something along his lines of a rotating round robin, but I also see flexibility being built in so it contains an or clause in which you play every conference member home and away at least once in a five year cycle. That will allow for some three permanent rivals and two groups of five rotating in and out scheduling that the ACC and SEC would ,love to bring back some of the games that only happen once every seven years. That sort of rule works well for the PAC too and would allow the Cali schools to play every year but do an 8 game conference schedule and still everyone be in California regularly for recruiting.

Divisionless format would work well for the SEC and ACC. Each school plays three of the thirteen teams annually and five of the remaining ten every other year. For example, Bama could keep annual matchups with Auburn, Tennessee and LSU, and Mizzou could play Arkansas, A&M and one of the Mississippi schools each year instead of being lumped into the East.