header pic

Perhaps the BEST B1G Forum anywhere, here at College Football Fan Site, CFB51!!!

The 'Old' CFN/Scout Crowd- Enjoy Civil discussion, game analytics, in depth player and coaching 'takes' and discussing topics surrounding the game. You can even have your own free board, all you have to do is ask!!!

Anyone is welcomed and encouraged to join our FREE site and to take part in our community- a community with you- the user, the fan, -and the person- will be protected from intrusive actions and with a clean place to interact.


Author

Topic: Conferences with the 3+5+5 scheduling model

 (Read 1841 times)

OrangeAfroMan

  • Stats Porn
  • Hall of Fame
  • *****
  • Posts: 15383
  • Liked:
Conferences with the 3+5+5 scheduling model
« on: May 14, 2022, 05:49:28 PM »
Apparently the ACC is thinking about this - 3 annual opponents, then 5 one year, the other 5 the next year, alternating.
So naturally, if it became the norm (for conferences of up to 16 teams:  3+6+6), what might that look like?
It's basically a pod system when you don't yet have enough teams for the pod system.
The B1G, Big 12, and PAC may look into this as well, if expansion isn't happening anytime soon.
The SEC, with 16 teams, would just do a pod system (4x4).
.
ACC - the easiest way to do this is to pair up each team with 2 others, then fill it in from there.
For the ACC, this is doable with geography, old ACC, old Big East....but then there's Louisville.  Someone will just be stuck with UL, basically at random. 
.
I start with FSU getting Miami and Clemson.  2 name programs, so this would be the toughest pair of opponents initially, and that will encourage a weaker 3rd team later on.
FSU:  Miami and Clem, Duke
Clemson:  FSU and GT, UNC
GT:  Clemson and WF, Pitt
WF:  GT and Duke, NCST
Duke:  WF and UNC, FSU
UNC:  Duke and NCST, Clem
NCST:  UNC and UVA, WF
UVA:  NCST and UL, VT.....here's who gets randomly paired with Louisville.  It's okay, though, as the Cavs will have their real rival, VT, as their 3rd annual opponent. 
UL:  UVA and SU, BC
SU:  UL and BC, Miami....the UL-SU pairing is weak and kind of basketball-y, but it's fine.  SU-BC starts the old BC run.
BC:  SU and Pitt, UL
Pitt:  BC and VT, GT
VT:  Pitt and Miami, UVA...while not very geographic, VT was Miami's toughest out back in the Big East days.
.
So all of that focused on clumping teams that might give a damn about each other, aside from the exceptions noted.  The 3rd team will be to try to even things out, as much as that is possible.  So we're not going to sit here and toss Clemson and Miami together or make FSU play those 2 plus VT.
.
Added in above, in bold.
“The Swamp is where Gators live.  We feel comfortable there, but we hope our opponents feel tentative. A swamp is hot and sticky and can be dangerous." - Steve Spurrier

OrangeAfroMan

  • Stats Porn
  • Hall of Fame
  • *****
  • Posts: 15383
  • Liked:
Re: Conferences with the 3+5+5 scheduling model
« Reply #1 on: May 14, 2022, 06:07:55 PM »
How might it look for the B1G?
.
Again, my first step is creating a circle where each team has one on either side that make some sort of sense:
UM-OSU and MSU, ILL (weak one)
MSU - UM and Neb, Penn St....wasn't sure which western team to go with here, as I feel like MSU kind of has a little link with Iowa and UW as well.  Am I making that up?
Neb - MSU nd Iowa, UW
Iowa - Neb and UW, NW
UW-Iowa and Minn, Neb
Minn-UW and NW, Purdue....not a rivalry, basically an "I'm stuck" pairing
NW-Minn and ILL, Iowa
ILL- NW and Purdue, UM
Purdue - ILL and IU, Minn
IU- Purdue and Rutgers, Maryland....again, here, as with Louisville in the ACC, no one is invested in playing Rutgers.  
Rutgers-IU and Maryland, OSU....solely on joining the conference together and geography
Maryland-Rutgers and Penn St, IU.....weak pair, but something's there, right?
Penn St-Maryland and OSU, MSU
OSU- Penn St and UM, Rutgers (weak one)
.
Then we'd add in the 3rd team for evening-out purposes and where it makes sense.  Again, you all would be better suited for this than I am (I'll whiff on some old oaken spittoon trophy somewhere).
Above, in bold.
.
*note, I got about 85% through this before realizing I hadn't included Nebraska.  I blame working on a Whoa Nellie order full of late 70s teams.
“The Swamp is where Gators live.  We feel comfortable there, but we hope our opponents feel tentative. A swamp is hot and sticky and can be dangerous." - Steve Spurrier

Brutus Buckeye

  • Hall of Fame
  • *****
  • Posts: 10528
  • Liked:
Re: Conferences with the 3+5+5 scheduling model
« Reply #2 on: May 15, 2022, 08:29:10 AM »
I would want OSU to have MSU's trio, in this absurd hypothetical. 
1919, 20, 21, 28, 29, 31, 34, 35, 36, 37, 42, 44
WWH: 1952, 54, 55, 57, 58, 60, 61, 62, 63, 65, 67, 68, 70, 72, 74, 75
1979, 81, 82, 84, 87, 94, 98
2001, 02, 04, 05, 06, 07, 08, 09, 10, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19

OrangeAfroMan

  • Stats Porn
  • Hall of Fame
  • *****
  • Posts: 15383
  • Liked:
Re: Conferences with the 3+5+5 scheduling model
« Reply #3 on: May 15, 2022, 08:49:45 AM »
Is there some kind of greater link between OSU and Nebraska than OSU and Rutgers?  And why do I get the feeling that you deem reality an absurd hypothetical?
“The Swamp is where Gators live.  We feel comfortable there, but we hope our opponents feel tentative. A swamp is hot and sticky and can be dangerous." - Steve Spurrier

LittlePig

  • Player
  • ****
  • Posts: 867
  • Liked:
Re: Conferences with the 3+5+5 scheduling model
« Reply #4 on: May 15, 2022, 10:51:38 AM »
The ACC adopting a 3-5-5 is most likely reality.  What other conferences do is still open to speculation.  The Big Ten could go to a 5-4-4 scheduling model if it keeps 9 conference games or use the 3-5-5 model if they switch to 8 games. 

 If the Big Ten goes with 3 permanent rivals, I think you can do better than your choices above.  Just forget the pod idea and focus on giving each school the 3 best choices for annual rivals.

Brutus Buckeye

  • Hall of Fame
  • *****
  • Posts: 10528
  • Liked:
Re: Conferences with the 3+5+5 scheduling model
« Reply #5 on: May 15, 2022, 10:57:12 AM »
Is there some kind of greater link between OSU and Nebraska than OSU and Rutgers?  And why do I get the feeling that you deem reality an absurd hypothetical?
Yeah, both are helmets, and they were fixed crossover rivals there for about a six year stretch where OSU was the only team in the Big 10 that played all of the other "helmets" annually. 

Why should MSU get to have the ultimate fixed schedule while OSU gets stuck with Rutgers? This idea sucks. 
1919, 20, 21, 28, 29, 31, 34, 35, 36, 37, 42, 44
WWH: 1952, 54, 55, 57, 58, 60, 61, 62, 63, 65, 67, 68, 70, 72, 74, 75
1979, 81, 82, 84, 87, 94, 98
2001, 02, 04, 05, 06, 07, 08, 09, 10, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19

OrangeAfroMan

  • Stats Porn
  • Hall of Fame
  • *****
  • Posts: 15383
  • Liked:
Re: Conferences with the 3+5+5 scheduling model
« Reply #6 on: May 15, 2022, 11:42:38 AM »

 If the Big Ten goes with 3 permanent rivals, I think you can do better than your choices above.  Just forget the pod idea and focus on giving each school the 3 best choices for annual rivals.
This isn't pods.  
You can't just give each school the 3 best choices, it's all uneven.  Some schools have 2 others that deem them their top rival, while others have zero.  
You'd also have wildly uneven schedules in terms of difficulty if you didn't toss in a weaker foe in there.  
.
No one wants to play Rutgers every year, because no one gives a shit about Rutgers.  But someone has to play them.  Does it not make sense that the team with the toughest other pair of annual foes plays them?  
“The Swamp is where Gators live.  We feel comfortable there, but we hope our opponents feel tentative. A swamp is hot and sticky and can be dangerous." - Steve Spurrier

Brutus Buckeye

  • Hall of Fame
  • *****
  • Posts: 10528
  • Liked:
Re: Conferences with the 3+5+5 scheduling model
« Reply #7 on: May 15, 2022, 11:59:39 AM »
So OSU can't play Michigan, Penn State and Nebraska because "it's all uneven" but MSU can play Michigan, Penn State and Nebraska, and everything comes up Even Stephen? 

Thread fail. 
1919, 20, 21, 28, 29, 31, 34, 35, 36, 37, 42, 44
WWH: 1952, 54, 55, 57, 58, 60, 61, 62, 63, 65, 67, 68, 70, 72, 74, 75
1979, 81, 82, 84, 87, 94, 98
2001, 02, 04, 05, 06, 07, 08, 09, 10, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19

OrangeAfroMan

  • Stats Porn
  • Hall of Fame
  • *****
  • Posts: 15383
  • Liked:
Re: Conferences with the 3+5+5 scheduling model
« Reply #8 on: May 15, 2022, 02:50:10 PM »
I know you're eager to hate me, but try having an actual conversation.

Penn St being included in MSU's trio and making it too tough is what I'm looking for to improve it.  Pointing out what you deem as an error and saying I suck isnt helpful.
Providing a fix would be nice.  You're not nice, but still.  Try it.
.
The "OSU and Nebraska were crossover rivals for a time" was useful.  Try sticking to that mindset.  Thanks.
“The Swamp is where Gators live.  We feel comfortable there, but we hope our opponents feel tentative. A swamp is hot and sticky and can be dangerous." - Steve Spurrier

Brutus Buckeye

  • Hall of Fame
  • *****
  • Posts: 10528
  • Liked:
Re: Conferences with the 3+5+5 scheduling model
« Reply #9 on: May 15, 2022, 03:14:14 PM »
You could have drawn names out of a hat, and it would have been better. :D
1919, 20, 21, 28, 29, 31, 34, 35, 36, 37, 42, 44
WWH: 1952, 54, 55, 57, 58, 60, 61, 62, 63, 65, 67, 68, 70, 72, 74, 75
1979, 81, 82, 84, 87, 94, 98
2001, 02, 04, 05, 06, 07, 08, 09, 10, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19

OrangeAfroMan

  • Stats Porn
  • Hall of Fame
  • *****
  • Posts: 15383
  • Liked:
Re: Conferences with the 3+5+5 scheduling model
« Reply #10 on: May 15, 2022, 06:34:34 PM »
And no improvement suggestions....thanks for being useful.
“The Swamp is where Gators live.  We feel comfortable there, but we hope our opponents feel tentative. A swamp is hot and sticky and can be dangerous." - Steve Spurrier

FearlessF

  • Hall of Fame
  • *****
  • Posts: 28009
  • Liked:
Re: Conferences with the 3+5+5 scheduling model
« Reply #11 on: May 15, 2022, 07:30:26 PM »
pods are for whales
"Courage; Generosity; Fairness; Honor; In these are the true awards of manly sport."

OrangeAfroMan

  • Stats Porn
  • Hall of Fame
  • *****
  • Posts: 15383
  • Liked:
Re: Conferences with the 3+5+5 scheduling model
« Reply #12 on: May 16, 2022, 01:52:33 AM »
This isn't pods, ffs. 
It's 3 annual opponents + "half of the rest" each season, possibly including no divisions.  The "half of the rest" could be the same groups, alternating each season or it could be a gradual mix.
.
Pods are solely divisions, of which you play the other teams in yours every year (3 annual opp) + 2 from each of the other pods one year, the other 2 from each in the next.  Pods wouldn't work with 14 teams. 
.
The only similarity between these two are the 3 annual opponents thing.
“The Swamp is where Gators live.  We feel comfortable there, but we hope our opponents feel tentative. A swamp is hot and sticky and can be dangerous." - Steve Spurrier

Hawkinole

  • Starter
  • *****
  • Posts: 1792
  • Liked:
Re: Conferences with the 3+5+5 scheduling model
« Reply #13 on: May 16, 2022, 02:09:00 AM »
And no improvement suggestions....thanks for being useful.
In my opinion, Wisconsin, Nebraska, Minnesota, and Iowa are a starting point because arguably these schools have the closest connections in the current western division, although Nebraska-Wisconsin is the more tenuous than the other rivalries. 
I haven't figured out how three protected games for these four schools would affect the rest of Big Ten Scheduling.

 

Support the Site!
Purchase of every item listed here DIRECTLY supports the site.