Nobody is going to a 4-team championship playoff.

All conferences will ultimately adopt the current B12 model with no division champs, top 2 teams to play for conference championship.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

(02-04-2022 09:50 PM)GumbyFromPokeyLand Wrote:  Nobody is going to a 4-team championship playoff.

All conferences will ultimately adopt the current B12 model with no division champs, too 2 teams to play for conference championship.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

If the B1G decides this is what they are doing I do think most of the P5 will follow.

(02-04-2022 09:50 PM)GumbyFromPokeyLand Wrote:  Nobody is going to a 4-team championship playoff.

All conferences will ultimately adopt the current B12 model with no division champs, top 2 teams to play for conference championship.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

I agree with your first sentence, though I think they should.

I disagree with your second because the Big 12 model only works in a round robin situation -- because there will always be a clear No. 1 and clear No. 2 at the end of the season. This format is going to be a disaster in a league with 14-plus schools.

(02-04-2022 10:29 PM)bear2be2 Wrote:  

(02-04-2022 09:50 PM)GumbyFromPokeyLand Wrote:  Nobody is going to a 4-team championship playoff.

All conferences will ultimately adopt the current B12 model with no division champs, top 2 teams to play for conference championship.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

I agree with your first sentence, though I think they should.

I disagree with your second because the Big 12 model only works in a round robin situation -- because there will always be a clear No. 1 and clear No. 2 at the end of the season. This format is going to be a disaster in a league with 14-plus schools.

Every conference will want to position themselves to have the best possible chance to put a team or teams in the CFP. Thus, instead of division champions playing for the conference championship, the highest 2 teams in the CFP rankings will play for the conference championship.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

(02-04-2022 10:29 PM)bear2be2 Wrote:  

(02-04-2022 09:50 PM)GumbyFromPokeyLand Wrote:  Nobody is going to a 4-team championship playoff.

All conferences will ultimately adopt the current B12 model with no division champs, top 2 teams to play for conference championship.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

I agree with your first sentence, though I think they should.

I disagree with your second because the Big 12 model only works in a round robin situation -- because there will always be a clear No. 1 and clear No. 2 at the end of the season. This format is going to be a disaster in a league with 14-plus schools.

If anything, I'd say it goes the other way. If every team has already played each other, it makes more sense to have the playoff as something other than a rematch between the top two teams that have already played one another. On the other hand, with a conference of 14 you can have matchups between teams that haven't played one another and are both undefeated in conference play.

I can agree that divisions are more a more logical way of going about that (for a 14 team conference) in a vacuum, but conferences have other reasons for preferring a divisionless system (Big Ten has asymmetry, ACC and Pac-12 divisions don't break cleanly, Big 12 has potential scheduling concerns, and everybody is concerned about whether it helps or hurts their team's chances of making the playoffs.)

Personally I think two divisions of 7 in a 14 team league doesn't work very well. You're left playing 6 from your division and 3 of 7 from the other division (you can't play everyone home and home) in a 4 yr period like you can with 12 or 16 (pods of 4). 12 or 16 is the best way to go IMO. I'm not sure how well 14 has been working for the B1G, ACC, or SEC but I imagine not very well.

Sent from my LM-G820 using CSNbbs mobile app

(02-09-2022 09:12 AM)Once a Knight... Wrote:  Personally I think two divisions of 7 in a 14 team league doesn't work very well. You're left playing 6 from your division and 3 of 7 from the other division (you can't play everyone home and home) in a 4 yr period like you can with 12 or 16 (pods of 4). 12 or 16 is the best way to go IMO. I'm not sure how well 14 has been working for the B1G, ACC, or SEC but I imagine not very well.

Sent from my LM-G820 using CSNbbs mobile app

Fourteen teams is a bad format. Twelve makes sense and 16 makes sense. Fourteen is a giant mess.

(02-05-2022 02:55 PM)parialex Wrote:  

(02-04-2022 10:29 PM)bear2be2 Wrote:  

(02-04-2022 09:50 PM)GumbyFromPokeyLand Wrote:  Nobody is going to a 4-team championship playoff.

All conferences will ultimately adopt the current B12 model with no division champs, top 2 teams to play for conference championship.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

I agree with your first sentence, though I think they should.

I disagree with your second because the Big 12 model only works in a round robin situation -- because there will always be a clear No. 1 and clear No. 2 at the end of the season. This format is going to be a disaster in a league with 14-plus schools.

If anything, I'd say it goes the other way. If every team has already played each other, it makes more sense to have the playoff as something other than a rematch between the top two teams that have already played one another. On the other hand, with a conference of 14 you can have matchups between teams that haven't played one another and are both undefeated in conference play.

I can agree that divisions are more a more logical way of going about that (for a 14 team conference) in a vacuum, but conferences have other reasons for preferring a divisionless system (Big Ten has asymmetry, ACC and Pac-12 divisions don't break cleanly, Big 12 has potential scheduling concerns, and everybody is concerned about whether it helps or hurts their team's chances of making the playoffs.)

You're as likely (if not more) to get two teams that haven't played each other in a divisional format than a divisionless one. And there's no silliness involved in creating conference schedules or deciding the two championship game participants.

(02-09-2022 09:12 AM)Once a Knight... Wrote:  Personally I think two divisions of 7 in a 14 team league doesn't work very well. You're left playing 6 from your division and 3 of 7 from the other division (you can't play everyone home and home) in a 4 yr period like you can with 12 or 16 (pods of 4). 12 or 16 is the best way to go IMO. I'm not sure how well 14 has been working for the B1G, ACC, or SEC but I imagine not very well.

Sent from my LM-G820 using CSNbbs mobile app

As an outside I really think the number is 15. With 15 you can still have pods of 3 and play only 8 conf games and still play the entire conf every 4 year cycle. Pods of 3 also help deal with regionality like UCF/WVU/UC or ISU/KSU/KU. If I was in the B12 I would want the conf to stay at 12 or if expansion is needed for additional revenue than I would seriously consider 15.

15 with pods also works for hoops. You play everyone once except your pod mates who you play home and away for 16 games.

(02-09-2022 11:33 AM)AztecEmpire Wrote:  

(02-09-2022 09:12 AM)Once a Knight... Wrote:  Personally I think two divisions of 7 in a 14 team league doesn't work very well. You're left playing 6 from your division and 3 of 7 from the other division (you can't play everyone home and home) in a 4 yr period like you can with 12 or 16 (pods of 4). 12 or 16 is the best way to go IMO. I'm not sure how well 14 has been working for the B1G, ACC, or SEC but I imagine not very well.

Sent from my LM-G820 using CSNbbs mobile app

As an outside I really think the number is 15. With 15 you can still have pods of 3 and play only 8 conf games and still play the entire conf every 4 year cycle. Pods of 3 also help deal with regionality like UCF/WVU/UC or ISU/KSU/KU. If I was in the B12 I would want the conf to stay at 12 or if expansion is needed for additional revenue than I would seriously consider 15.

15 with pods also works for hoops. You play everyone once except your pod mates who you play home and away for 16 games.

There are too many games in this league that need to be annual affairs and too much distance separating the eastern and western outliers to make a schedule like that make sense. It needs to be two six-team divisions in a 12-team league or four four-team pods in a 16-team format IMO. Both of those can be manipulated in a way that limits extreme travel and gets your best matchups played on an annual basis. Anything else creates avoidable logistical issues.

If this conference is going to succeed, everything needs to be optimized. It makes the most sense to keep divisions/schedules regional and try to build some annual rivalries that people will tune in for.

(02-09-2022 11:41 AM)bear2be2 Wrote:  

(02-09-2022 11:33 AM)AztecEmpire Wrote:  

(02-09-2022 09:12 AM)Once a Knight... Wrote:  Personally I think two divisions of 7 in a 14 team league doesn't work very well. You're left playing 6 from your division and 3 of 7 from the other division (you can't play everyone home and home) in a 4 yr period like you can with 12 or 16 (pods of 4). 12 or 16 is the best way to go IMO. I'm not sure how well 14 has been working for the B1G, ACC, or SEC but I imagine not very well.

Sent from my LM-G820 using CSNbbs mobile app

As an outside I really think the number is 15. With 15 you can still have pods of 3 and play only 8 conf games and still play the entire conf every 4 year cycle. Pods of 3 also help deal with regionality like UCF/WVU/UC or ISU/KSU/KU. If I was in the B12 I would want the conf to stay at 12 or if expansion is needed for additional revenue than I would seriously consider 15.

15 with pods also works for hoops. You play everyone once except your pod mates who you play home and away for 16 games.

There are too many games in this league that need to be annual affairs and too much distance separating the eastern and western outliers to make a schedule like that make sense. It needs to be two six-team divisions in a 12-team league or four four-team pods in a 16-team format IMO. Both of those can be manipulated in a way that limits extreme travel and gets your best matchups played on an annual basis. Anything else creates avoidable logistical issues.

If this conference is going to succeed, everything needs to be optimized. It makes the most sense to keep divisions/schedules regional and try to build some annual rivalries that people will tune in for.

What about three groups of 4?

Group 1 - Iowa State, Kansas, Kansas State, Oklahoma State
Group 2 - Texas Tech, Baylor, TCU, Houston
Group 3 - BYU, Cincinnati, WVU, UCF

OR

Group 1 - Iowa State, Kansas, Kansas State, Oklahoma State
Group 2 - Texas Tech, Baylor, TCU, BYU
Group 3 - Houston, Cincinnati, WVU, UCF

This keeps the annual rivalry games and keeps the AAC schools together. With 4 schools in Texas, it would be pretty easy to stack the schedules to get everyone at least one game in Texas every year.

IMO, BYU with TCU and Baylor is a great fit. And, if it came to it, BYU would prefer football games in Florida and Ohio more than games in Kansas and Iowa.

(02-09-2022 11:33 AM)AztecEmpire Wrote:  

(02-09-2022 09:12 AM)Once a Knight... Wrote:  Personally I think two divisions of 7 in a 14 team league doesn't work very well. You're left playing 6 from your division and 3 of 7 from the other division (you can't play everyone home and home) in a 4 yr period like you can with 12 or 16 (pods of 4). 12 or 16 is the best way to go IMO. I'm not sure how well 14 has been working for the B1G, ACC, or SEC but I imagine not very well.

Sent from my LM-G820 using CSNbbs mobile app

As an outside I really think the number is 15. With 15 you can still have pods of 3 and play only 8 conf games and still play the entire conf every 4 year cycle. Pods of 3 also help deal with regionality like UCF/WVU/UC or ISU/KSU/KU. If I was in the B12 I would want the conf to stay at 12 or if expansion is needed for additional revenue than I would seriously consider 15.

15 with pods also works for hoops. You play everyone once except your pod mates who you play home and away for 16 games.

I'm with you. 12, 15, or 16. Say no to 14!

Sent from my LM-G820 using CSNbbs mobile app

(02-09-2022 12:21 PM)YNot Wrote:  

(02-09-2022 11:41 AM)bear2be2 Wrote:  

(02-09-2022 11:33 AM)AztecEmpire Wrote:  

(02-09-2022 09:12 AM)Once a Knight... Wrote:  Personally I think two divisions of 7 in a 14 team league doesn't work very well. You're left playing 6 from your division and 3 of 7 from the other division (you can't play everyone home and home) in a 4 yr period like you can with 12 or 16 (pods of 4). 12 or 16 is the best way to go IMO. I'm not sure how well 14 has been working for the B1G, ACC, or SEC but I imagine not very well.

Sent from my LM-G820 using CSNbbs mobile app

As an outside I really think the number is 15. With 15 you can still have pods of 3 and play only 8 conf games and still play the entire conf every 4 year cycle. Pods of 3 also help deal with regionality like UCF/WVU/UC or ISU/KSU/KU. If I was in the B12 I would want the conf to stay at 12 or if expansion is needed for additional revenue than I would seriously consider 15.

15 with pods also works for hoops. You play everyone once except your pod mates who you play home and away for 16 games.

There are too many games in this league that need to be annual affairs and too much distance separating the eastern and western outliers to make a schedule like that make sense. It needs to be two six-team divisions in a 12-team league or four four-team pods in a 16-team format IMO. Both of those can be manipulated in a way that limits extreme travel and gets your best matchups played on an annual basis. Anything else creates avoidable logistical issues.

If this conference is going to succeed, everything needs to be optimized. It makes the most sense to keep divisions/schedules regional and try to build some annual rivalries that people will tune in for.

What about three groups of 4?

Group 1 - Iowa State, Kansas, Kansas State, Oklahoma State
Group 2 - Texas Tech, Baylor, TCU, Houston
Group 3 - BYU, Cincinnati, WVU, UCF

OR

Group 1 - Iowa State, Kansas, Kansas State, Oklahoma State
Group 2 - Texas Tech, Baylor, TCU, BYU
Group 3 - Houston, Cincinnati, WVU, UCF

This keeps the annual rivalry games and keeps the AAC schools together. With 4 schools in Texas, it would be pretty easy to stack the schedules to get everyone at least one game in Texas every year.

IMO, BYU with TCU and Baylor is a great fit. And, if it came to it, BYU would prefer football games in Florida and Ohio more than games in Kansas and Iowa.

The only issue I have with this is it's just unnecessary. If you're going to stick with 12, an even split into two six-team divisions makes too much sense.

(02-09-2022 01:32 PM)bear2be2 Wrote:  

(02-09-2022 12:21 PM)YNot Wrote:  

(02-09-2022 11:41 AM)bear2be2 Wrote:  

(02-09-2022 11:33 AM)AztecEmpire Wrote:  

(02-09-2022 09:12 AM)Once a Knight... Wrote:  Personally I think two divisions of 7 in a 14 team league doesn't work very well. You're left playing 6 from your division and 3 of 7 from the other division (you can't play everyone home and home) in a 4 yr period like you can with 12 or 16 (pods of 4). 12 or 16 is the best way to go IMO. I'm not sure how well 14 has been working for the B1G, ACC, or SEC but I imagine not very well.

Sent from my LM-G820 using CSNbbs mobile app

As an outside I really think the number is 15. With 15 you can still have pods of 3 and play only 8 conf games and still play the entire conf every 4 year cycle. Pods of 3 also help deal with regionality like UCF/WVU/UC or ISU/KSU/KU. If I was in the B12 I would want the conf to stay at 12 or if expansion is needed for additional revenue than I would seriously consider 15.

15 with pods also works for hoops. You play everyone once except your pod mates who you play home and away for 16 games.

There are too many games in this league that need to be annual affairs and too much distance separating the eastern and western outliers to make a schedule like that make sense. It needs to be two six-team divisions in a 12-team league or four four-team pods in a 16-team format IMO. Both of those can be manipulated in a way that limits extreme travel and gets your best matchups played on an annual basis. Anything else creates avoidable logistical issues.

If this conference is going to succeed, everything needs to be optimized. It makes the most sense to keep divisions/schedules regional and try to build some annual rivalries that people will tune in for.

What about three groups of 4?

Group 1 - Iowa State, Kansas, Kansas State, Oklahoma State
Group 2 - Texas Tech, Baylor, TCU, Houston
Group 3 - BYU, Cincinnati, WVU, UCF

OR

Group 1 - Iowa State, Kansas, Kansas State, Oklahoma State
Group 2 - Texas Tech, Baylor, TCU, BYU
Group 3 - Houston, Cincinnati, WVU, UCF

This keeps the annual rivalry games and keeps the AAC schools together. With 4 schools in Texas, it would be pretty easy to stack the schedules to get everyone at least one game in Texas every year.

IMO, BYU with TCU and Baylor is a great fit. And, if it came to it, BYU would prefer football games in Florida and Ohio more than games in Kansas and Iowa.

The only issue I have with this is it's just unnecessary. If you're going to stick with 12, an even split into two six-team divisions makes too much sense.

I agree with you also. 6 and 6 is a tried and true model that has worked time and time again. The only annoyance is the odd geography of the conference with 3 teams way east, 1 team way west, and 8 teams down the middle. Anyway you split it 6 and 6 just gonna look a bit funky, this can be negated (mostly) by bringing in 4 more eastern members so you'd have 7 in the east and 9 in the west (though I'm sure pods of 4 would be adopted at that point).

Sent from my LM-G820 using CSNbbs mobile app

(02-09-2022 02:10 PM)Once a Knight... Wrote:  

(02-09-2022 01:32 PM)bear2be2 Wrote:  

(02-09-2022 12:21 PM)YNot Wrote:  

(02-09-2022 11:41 AM)bear2be2 Wrote:  

(02-09-2022 11:33 AM)AztecEmpire Wrote:  As an outside I really think the number is 15. With 15 you can still have pods of 3 and play only 8 conf games and still play the entire conf every 4 year cycle. Pods of 3 also help deal with regionality like UCF/WVU/UC or ISU/KSU/KU. If I was in the B12 I would want the conf to stay at 12 or if expansion is needed for additional revenue than I would seriously consider 15.

15 with pods also works for hoops. You play everyone once except your pod mates who you play home and away for 16 games.

There are too many games in this league that need to be annual affairs and too much distance separating the eastern and western outliers to make a schedule like that make sense. It needs to be two six-team divisions in a 12-team league or four four-team pods in a 16-team format IMO. Both of those can be manipulated in a way that limits extreme travel and gets your best matchups played on an annual basis. Anything else creates avoidable logistical issues.

If this conference is going to succeed, everything needs to be optimized. It makes the most sense to keep divisions/schedules regional and try to build some annual rivalries that people will tune in for.

What about three groups of 4?

Group 1 - Iowa State, Kansas, Kansas State, Oklahoma State
Group 2 - Texas Tech, Baylor, TCU, Houston
Group 3 - BYU, Cincinnati, WVU, UCF

OR

Group 1 - Iowa State, Kansas, Kansas State, Oklahoma State
Group 2 - Texas Tech, Baylor, TCU, BYU
Group 3 - Houston, Cincinnati, WVU, UCF

This keeps the annual rivalry games and keeps the AAC schools together. With 4 schools in Texas, it would be pretty easy to stack the schedules to get everyone at least one game in Texas every year.

IMO, BYU with TCU and Baylor is a great fit. And, if it came to it, BYU would prefer football games in Florida and Ohio more than games in Kansas and Iowa.

The only issue I have with this is it's just unnecessary. If you're going to stick with 12, an even split into two six-team divisions makes too much sense.

I agree with you also. 6 and 6 is a tried and true model that has worked time and time again. The only annoyance is the odd geography of the conference with 3 teams way east, 1 team way west, and 8 teams down the middle. Anyway you split it 6 and 6 just gonna look a bit funky, this can be negated (mostly) by bringing in 4 more eastern members so you'd have 7 in the east and 9 in the west (though I'm sure pods of 4 would be adopted at that point).

Sent from my LM-G820 using CSNbbs mobile app

But also having 9 conference games mean teams like UCF could play more games on the “east” side of the conference before having to do any significant traveling.


Sent from the Warp via the ruinous powers of Chaos!

(02-09-2022 02:10 PM)Once a Knight... Wrote:  

(02-09-2022 01:32 PM)bear2be2 Wrote:  

(02-09-2022 12:21 PM)YNot Wrote:  

(02-09-2022 11:41 AM)bear2be2 Wrote:  

(02-09-2022 11:33 AM)AztecEmpire Wrote:  As an outside I really think the number is 15. With 15 you can still have pods of 3 and play only 8 conf games and still play the entire conf every 4 year cycle. Pods of 3 also help deal with regionality like UCF/WVU/UC or ISU/KSU/KU. If I was in the B12 I would want the conf to stay at 12 or if expansion is needed for additional revenue than I would seriously consider 15.

15 with pods also works for hoops. You play everyone once except your pod mates who you play home and away for 16 games.

There are too many games in this league that need to be annual affairs and too much distance separating the eastern and western outliers to make a schedule like that make sense. It needs to be two six-team divisions in a 12-team league or four four-team pods in a 16-team format IMO. Both of those can be manipulated in a way that limits extreme travel and gets your best matchups played on an annual basis. Anything else creates avoidable logistical issues.

If this conference is going to succeed, everything needs to be optimized. It makes the most sense to keep divisions/schedules regional and try to build some annual rivalries that people will tune in for.

What about three groups of 4?

Group 1 - Iowa State, Kansas, Kansas State, Oklahoma State
Group 2 - Texas Tech, Baylor, TCU, Houston
Group 3 - BYU, Cincinnati, WVU, UCF

OR

Group 1 - Iowa State, Kansas, Kansas State, Oklahoma State
Group 2 - Texas Tech, Baylor, TCU, BYU
Group 3 - Houston, Cincinnati, WVU, UCF

This keeps the annual rivalry games and keeps the AAC schools together. With 4 schools in Texas, it would be pretty easy to stack the schedules to get everyone at least one game in Texas every year.

IMO, BYU with TCU and Baylor is a great fit. And, if it came to it, BYU would prefer football games in Florida and Ohio more than games in Kansas and Iowa.

The only issue I have with this is it's just unnecessary. If you're going to stick with 12, an even split into two six-team divisions makes too much sense.

I agree with you also. 6 and 6 is a tried and true model that has worked time and time again. The only annoyance is the odd geography of the conference with 3 teams way east, 1 team way west, and 8 teams down the middle. Anyway you split it 6 and 6 just gonna look a bit funky, this can be negated (mostly) by bringing in 4 more eastern members so you'd have 7 in the east and 9 in the west (though I'm sure pods of 4 would be adopted at that point).

Sent from my LM-G820 using CSNbbs mobile app

The conf spread is exactly why I started thinking pods of 3. That said I could see why small pods of 3 could create issues. For existing members this would be a shock to the system after playing a round robin for a decade. That said what are the must have annual rivalry games with OUT gone? If most teams have at least 3 games obviously pods of 4 would be the limit and even then they could be too much too soon.

Putting BYU and UCF in the same group is, with all due respect, stupid.

;P

Whether divisions or pods, no one should be grouped with a school more than one time zone away. That seems very avoidable.

I think four pods of three is fine. Even schools outside the pod will play each other *a lot*. An average of seven out of every nine years if you keep the nine game schedule.

Sort of sounds now like they might not be married to divisions, which wouldn't be the worst. Again, as an Iowa State fan, my priority is maintaining KU/KSU every year in football (OSU if possible).

Based on 8 conference games:

12 teams work great with 2 divisions. 5 games in your division plus 3 cross over for half the other division meaning you get to play everyone one every 2 years.

14 teams works great with 3 permanent rivals and then play 5 games against the other 10 teams. Play everyone at least once every 2 years.

16 teams similar but only 1 permanent rival and then 7 games for half the remaining 14 teams to be played every year. Everyone played every 2 years.

I don't really care how they set it up so long as every team plays each other team regularly (ie. every 2-3 years) and no long gaps like soem of the other conferences have with their divisions.