Just Curious On Expanded Conferences...

Deep Creek said:
But divisions weren't balanced either.
Click to expand...
I am not saying I am a diehard supporter of one over the other. It is just a little wacky that the first season they did this Michigan would be bad, Indiana would reach 11 wins, Alabama would have 3 losses, Kansas would knock off 2-3 ranked teams in a row, Florida State would win 2 games (I think), etc.
 
Deep Creek said:
But divisions weren't balanced either.
Click to expand...
This is true, but it can never be completely fair. The divisions are more balanced, than the current system. 8/9 conference games spread out over 16 or more teams is going to lead to ridiculously unbalanced schedules. Big 10, ACC, and SEC all had major issues.
 
Collegefbfan said:
I am not saying I am a diehard supporter of one over the other. It is just a little wacky that the first season they did this Michigan would be bad, Indiana would reach 11 wins, Alabama would have 3 losses, Kansas would knock off 2-3 ranked teams in a row, Florida State would win 2 games (I think), etc.
Click to expand...
I'm in agreement with @Wizardhawk. This ain't going to be resolved in the current format.

And I think this is going to be the norm from now on with huge conferences, NIL and the transfer portal. Everyone is saying the teams are "flawed". I think they are just more even. We should just get used to playoff teams having more losses or getting an easier path to the playoff by avoiding the better conference opponents.
 
Codaxx said:
This is true, but it can never be completely fair. The divisions are more balanced, than the current system. 8/9 conference games spread out over 16 or more teams is going to lead to ridiculously unbalanced schedules. Big 10, ACC, and SEC all had major issues.
Click to expand...
I agree. But it really won't even be close to fair with or without divisions as long as the conferences are this big.
 
Deep Creek said:
I agree. But it really won't even be close to fair with or without divisions as long as the conferences are this big.fair with in the divisions
Click to expand...
It relatively fair within a division. You can rank teams with a pretty high confidence level. Who wins the Big 10 if you Oregon, PSU, and Indiana actually play each other. Hard to rank teams that have little overlap
 
Current system is way better. Divisions with this many teams, esp if you only play 8 conference games is retarded
 
Deep Creek said:
But divisions weren't balanced either.
Click to expand...
Yeah, I never thought I would give divisions a second thought. But I am. The conferences have to do 1 of these 2 things:

1. They have to figure out how to balance the schedules. I can't be perfect, but it should be better. Anyone looking at UGA, UF, and OU, and then looking at Texas could see there was no way that was balanced. It would have been easy to remedy. Looking at my team, you had to have them not play 1 of UA, TX, or OM. It's not hard to categorize the SEC teams.

2. Go back to divisions but make sure they are balanced.

The key is that they have to be reevaluated every 10 years, or something like that. For example, having UTjr on the schedule is way different in the 90s and early 00s, than the past 20 years. And they are now likely cycling back up to being good. UF, same thing. They were hell in the mid-80s to 06, but sucked the last 15 years. For that matter, Bama - they pretty much sucked for 20 years post Bear, but obviously have been the GOAT program the last 20-ish years. How does one ever evaluated a team like Auburn which can be really good for a year or two and the suck the rest of the time? UGA is a great example ... awesome for about 6 years in the early 80s, then suck for 15 years, then really good but not elite for 15 years under Richt, then elite the last 8 years under Kirby. So, you have to analyze that to make sure there is more balance.

So, I am thinking they will stay without divisions, but will try to do a better job balancing schedules after the 2027 season. I swear, if they balance it in 2026 and Texas doesn't have to play the other side of their schedule, I will be major pissed.

A quick thought on Texas ... they may like the schedule this year, and they didn't do anything wrong. You play the games in front of you. But if the SEC sticks with this for 4 years, it won't help them in 2026 and 2027. Their schedule would be Bama, LSU, OM, OU, UTjr, USCjr, Mizzou, and Auburn. That will be the no. 1 SOS in the country to start the season by a long shot. That isn't fair for them any more than it wasn't fair that they had such an easy slate this year.
 
Deep Creek said:
True. If anything they'll get larger....or merge into super conferences.
Click to expand...
I don't see this at all. If anything, I've seen people who advocated for who are realizing that being too large is already a big problem. Getting bigger will only happen if they break into divisions, so why pull everyone into one conference?
 
Deep Creek said:
I agree. But it really won't even be close to fair with or without divisions as long as the conferences are this big.
Click to expand...

- 4 year schedules, twice
- That's 8 years. Meet during the 8th year and adjust based on the strength of the teams at that point.
- Make the names something other than E/W, N/S so you can move people around, although you want to make it geographical if you can. Something like Leaders and Legends would work, jk, jk.
- Same with no-divisions ... you run the 4 years schedules twice over 8 years, and then balance schedules based on strength of teams.
- Some math nerd can come up with something that will enable them to do that.
 
WhosYourDawggy said:
I don't see this at all. If anything, I've seen people who advocated for who are realizing that being too large is already a big problem. Getting bigger will only happen if they break into divisions, so why pull everyone into one conference?
Click to expand...
Larger media marketing/buying power. $$$

Again, the answer is to break away from the NCAA conf model and move closer to an NFL model.

They are paid to play now. Start acting like it.
 
Wizardhawk said:
Larger media marketing/buying power. $$$

Again, the answer is to break away from the NCAA conf model and move closer to an NFL model.

They are paid to play now. Start acting like it.
Click to expand...
CFB fans don't want the NFL. The two conferences that have marketing/buying power have no reason to share that with others. The ACC/B12 has no reason to share in the largess of the SEC and the B1G. Sorry but that is the reality of it all.
 
I know divisions are gone, and we have what we have. There has not been one close CCG under the expanded conference format. Currently, combined score:
Winners: 191
Losers: 55
 
The playoff has completely changed the magnitude of the conference championship day.
 
We talked about how divisions in the conferences were not the same strength when they were in effect. I looked at the division-less conferences and the different strengths and weaknesses:
***The ACC:
SMU played 2 of the 6 teams that finished with a winning record.
***The SEC:
Texas played 2 of the 8 teams that finished with a winning record.
Alabama played 5 of the 8 teams that finished with a winning record.
***The B1G:
Penn State avoided all the top conference teams except Illinois (if you consider them somewhat top) and Ohio State.
Indiana avoided all the top conference teams except Ohio State.
Oregon had to play Ohio State and Illinois.
Ohio State had to play Penn State, Indiana, and Oregon.

There are some that I missed, I am sure, but I had no idea it was this unbalanced. I am not saying that divisions need to be brought back. But this current way needs to be fixed.
 
Collegefbfan said:
We talked about how divisions in the conferences were not the same strength when they were in effect. I looked at the division-less conferences and the different strengths and weaknesses:
***The ACC:
SMU played 2 of the 6 teams that finished with a winning record.
***The SEC:
Texas played 2 of the 8 teams that finished with a winning record.
Alabama played 5 of the 8 teams that finished with a winning record.
***The B1G:
Penn State avoided all the top conference teams except Illinois (if you consider them somewhat top) and Ohio State.
Indiana avoided all the top conference teams except Ohio State.
Oregon had to play Ohio State and Illinois.
Ohio State had to play Penn State, Indiana, and Oregon.

There are some that I missed, I am sure, but I had no idea it was this unbalanced. I am not saying that divisions need to be brought back. But this current way needs to be fixed.
Click to expand...

Divisions doesnt fix anything.

More conference games is the answer,but we cant get conferences to 9, let alone 10.
 
Collegefbfan said:
We talked about how divisions in the conferences were not the same strength when they were in effect. I looked at the division-less conferences and the different strengths and weaknesses:
***The ACC:
SMU played 2 of the 6 teams that finished with a winning record.
***The SEC:
Texas played 2 of the 8 teams that finished with a winning record.
Alabama played 5 of the 8 teams that finished with a winning record.
***The B1G:
Penn State avoided all the top conference teams except Illinois (if you consider them somewhat top) and Ohio State.
Indiana avoided all the top conference teams except Ohio State.
Oregon had to play Ohio State and Illinois.
Ohio State had to play Penn State, Indiana, and Oregon.

There are some that I missed, I am sure, but I had no idea it was this unbalanced. I am not saying that divisions need to be brought back. But this current way needs to be fixed.
Click to expand...
UGA won 4 games against 3 different teams in the CFP-12 (Texas twice, Tenn, Clemson). Our two losses were to the CFP #11 and #14. So, we played 6 games against the CFP Top 14 and went 4-2.

Meanwhile, Texas played 1 team in the CFP top 25 and lost twice.

Not Texas' fault, the SEC's fault for no being able to do their fucking job.
 
michaeljordan_fan said:
Divisions doesnt fix anything.

More conference games is the answer,but we cant get conferences to 9, let alone 10.
Click to expand...
Yes, for sure. That will fix a good bit of it. I would like to see teams getting rid of playing FCS teams. Georgia wants to schedule Bowling Green... fine. Iowa wants to schedule Buffalo... go ahead. You want a tune-up game before the Iron Bowl... super, just not FCS level.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top