College Football to Deregulate Championship Game Restrictions for 2016

[Dooley]

http://www.cbssports.com/collegefoo...nship-game-restrictions-to-be-relaxed-by-2016

 

[specialisthusky]

Not good for the realignment hopefuls

 

[UConn9604]

Not good for the realignment hopefuls

I disagree, this might have been the crack that we were looking for to get us in as number 15.5 for the ACC or even as number 15 for the Big Ten.

 

[CTGoonie]

I disagree, this might have been the crack that we were looking for to get us in as number 15.5 for the ACC or even as number 15 for the Big Ten.

My thoughts exactly. We don't need to wait for a partner now to join the ACC or B1G. They can just go to 3 divisions of 5 each and pick the top 2 for the championship game.

 

[CL82]

Maybe not. It allows for odd numbered conferences or three 5 team divisions.
That could help.

 

[specialisthusky]

I'm in the acceptance stage of the CR grief cycle. I currently cannot feel hope or optimism, but God bless you all for always finding a way to get us in there and bringing me through the cycle again. The article did say Bowlsby thinks the ACC may go to three divisions:

"“I think there's some belief that ACC would play three divisions, have two highest ranked play in postseason,” said Bob Bowlsby, chairman of the new NCAA Football Oversight Committee. “Really, nobody cares how you determine your champion. It should be a conference-level decision"

Maybe something like this:

BC/Cuse/Pitt/UConn/VPI
Ville/UVA/NCST/UNC/Duke
WF/Clemson/Gtech/FSU/UM

It would seem kind of weird to play three uneven divisions instead of 2 even divison of 7. Then again the ACC has done plenty of odd things in its past.

 

[SAMCRO]

Maybe something like this:
BC/Cuse/Pitt/UConn/VPI
Ville/UVA/NCST/UNC/Duke
WF/Clemson/Gtech/FSU/UM.

Or this:
UM, MSU, Illinois,, NW, RU
tOSU, PSU, Purd, IU, UConn
Wisc, Minn, Nebr, Iowa, UMd

 

[UConnTrumbull]

TAKE US! WE PROMISE TO NEVER WIN!!!

 

[Kevin Caliendo]

Is this being done so that ND can play in the ACC title game?!?

 

[nd73]

Is this being done so that ND can play in the ACC title game?!?

IMO, No.. This is being done to keep Duke(Wake, ect) out of the CCG.

 

[pepband99]

IMO, No.. This is being done to keep Duke(Wake, ect) out of the CCG.

Indeed. I'm going to tick off my Clemson buddies by calling this "the Clemson rule," meaning it gets them out of the way of FSU.

 

[CallMeBruce]

Or this:
UM, MSU, Illinois,, NW, RU
tOSU, PSU, Purd, IU, UConn
Wisc, Minn, Nebr, Iowa, UMd

Not for nothing, but if I'm setting up 3 B1G divisions with UConn, I'm putting UConn, Maryland, and Rutgers together to make travel somewhat manageable. I'd just do East/Central/West divisions:
East - UConn, RU, Maryland, Penn State, OSU
Central - Michigan, Michigan State, Indiana, Illinois, Purdue
West - Wisconsin, Minnesota, Northwestern, Iowa, Nebraska

 

[SAMCRO]

Not for nothing, but if I'm setting up 3 B1G divisions with UConn, I'm putting UConn, Maryland, and Rutgers together to make travel somewhat manageable. I'd just do East/Central/West divisions:
East - UConn, RU, Maryland, Penn State, OSU
Central - Michigan, Michigan State, Indiana, Illinois, Purdue
West - Wisconsin, Minnesota, Northwestern, Iowa, Nebraska

I'm guessing PSU and OSU would not be as keen to be placed with all 3 newbies as opposed to older and historical rivals and teams their fans could drive 2-4 hours to see play. I was setting it up where each division had a newbie, and held their closest geographical rival. (OSU v PSU, UM v MSU, Minn v Wisc, IU v Purd, NW v Illini, Iowa v. Nebr). Still need to solve for OSU-UM. Delaney is counting on us to figure this out!

 

[SubbaBub]

Not for nothing, but if I'm setting up 3 B1G divisions with UConn, I'm putting UConn, Maryland, and Rutgers together to make travel somewhat manageable. I'd just do East/Central/West divisions: you
East - UConn, RU, Maryland, Penn State, OSU
Central - Michigan, Michigan State, Indiana, Illinois, Purdue
West - Wisconsin, Minnesota, Northwestern, Iowa, Nebraska

Swap OSU for either, MSU or Indiana. Not perfect and PSU wouldn't like it but with a nine game schedule you play your division plus one of the others. If you go to 10 games then you can keep two "rivals" that you play every year and split them amongst for more balanced names, until VT, VA, or KS comes aboard. Then the east/west split is pretty easy to do.

With 10 games:

East: PSU, UM, Indiana, Iowa, UConn
Central: Wisconsin, OSU, Illinois, Minnesota, RU
West: Nebraska, MSU, Purdue, Northwestern, Maryland

The rival teams are listed by column (PSU/Wisc/Nebraska, UM, OSU, MSU, etc until UConn, RU, Maryland) The Big 6 are separated, 2 per division, to protect annual schedules. Every team plays at least 4 per season. Only Iowa gets a bit of a short stick not playing both Wisconsin and Nebraska every year but someone has to be Northwestern's rival. It also made sense to make the newbie each other's rival.

 

[DarthGrumpy]

I'm guessing PSU and OSU would not be as keen to be placed with all 3 newbies as opposed to older and historical rivals and teams their fans could drive 2-4 hours to see play. I was setting it up where each division had a newbie, and held their closest geographical rival. (OSU v PSU, UM v MSU, Minn v Wisc, IU v Purd, NW v Illini, Iowa v. Nebr). Still need to solve for OSU-UM. Delaney is counting on us to figure this out!

With three pods, call it 4 in-pod games, 1 'fixed' rivalry game, i.e. Ohio St v. Michigan, and 1 rotating cross-pod game. That's 8 in-conference. The 9th game would be a semi-final with the 3 pods winners and a wildcard (highest ranked?) with the other teams playing each other (the one issue with a odd number of teams). Semi-finals play for the conference championship. Could work.

While Ohio St. may to want to be looped into the East with (attendance figures, especially away may disagree), their road to the conference playoffs with only Penn St in their pod versus other power teams (Nebraska, Wisconsin, Michigan St & Michigan) is not a bad thing. They just need a solid out-of-conference game or two.

Overall, as long as any agreement does not allow the XII to have a conference championship with 10 teams, conference realignment is not dead.

 

[Kolumbo]

State1: UCONN, Pitt, Clemson, NC State, VPI
State2: Ga Tech, UNC, UVA, FL St, L-ville,
Private: BC, Cuse, Duke, WF, Miami
Or you could have one division rotated strictly for the violators on probation and they would get barred from post-season. e.g.: UNC, Cuse, Florida State....
The private division is already set up to be carved out if major CR tips the richter scale again.

 

[Dooley]

Some conjecture of how to align the ACC divisions: http://www.cbssports.com/collegefoo...he-future-of-the-acc-divisions-and-title-game

 

[jostar1]

Some conjecture of how to align the ACC divisions: http://www.cbssports.com/collegefoo...he-future-of-the-acc-divisions-and-title-game

Swofford pulls another one out of his , I mean hat.

 

[BlueHen]

This has the potential to be good news for UConn, but I think we will have to wait.

We are not valuable enough that any network and P5 league would be willing to rip up their existing TV deal to add us. If we were it would have happened already.
We are also not valuable enough that any P5 league would be willing to cut their existing revenue pie into smaller pieces in order to add us.
However, once existing TV contracts are set to expire there may be CR movement and we are in play. The fact that we can apparently join a conference without needing a partner to join with us means that one barrier to a potential P5 invite has been removed.

 

[nelsonmuntz]

I don't see FSU and Clemson allowing ND to play 4 ACC games and then play in the conference championship game. ND will be invited to be the 15th member, and they will decline. Then what does the ACC do?

 

[Point6]

This is good news on the B1G front, because they will be able to add a 15th without a 16th. This is bad news on the ACC front because, if ND joins, they will be able to stay at 15.

 

[billybud]

Heather Dinich chased this down with Swofford and has tweeted:

Bowlsby told @dennisdoddcbs there's been talk about ACC going to 3 divisions but Swofford told me "that's unlikely in our league."

JS:We haven’t really discussed that to any degree of seriousness. A few yrs ago it came up briefly but didn’t get legs in our discussions.

 

[TRest]

I think the idea for the ACC is to avoid having a dud win one division and be in the championship game. They would rather have the two teams with the best overall records at the end of conference play meet, instead of a team with a 5-3 record playing while someone with a 7-1 records is eliminated by being second in a division.

 

[billybud]

I think the idea for the ACC is to avoid having a dud win one division and be in the championship game. They would rather have the two teams with the best overall records at the end of conference play meet, instead of a team with a 5-3 record playing while someone with a 7-1 records is eliminated by being second in a division.

I think that you may be right....I do not like games being replayed, but I could see an 11-1 Clemson being rematched against an 11-1 or 12-0 FSU for the ratings.

Same scenario with a GT-Miami or Miami-VT as an example.

 

[pj]

This is good news on the B1G front, because they will be able to add a 15th without a 16th. This is bad news on the ACC front because, if ND joins, they will be able to stay at 15.

The ACC would probably prefer 16 to 15, and UConn adds considerable value to the ACC, and strategically they won't want to let the B1G dominate the northeast. If Notre Dame joins they will try to add UConn.