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: Talk of Eliminating Divisions

 (Read 8020 times)

medinabuckeye1

  • Legend
  • ****
  • Default Avatar
  • Posts: 8906
  • Liked:
Re: Talk of Eliminating Divisions
« Reply #140 on: December 26, 2018, 11:37:26 AM »
why bother discussing any realignment of eliminating divisions?

we have absolutely no control or input into the decision
What, you don't think Jim Delaney takes his marching orders from this board?

FearlessF

  • Hall of Fame
  • *****
  • Posts: 37516
  • Liked:
Re: Talk of Eliminating Divisions
« Reply #141 on: December 26, 2018, 11:41:30 AM »
I think he'd get better input if he did

but, sadly, no
"Courage; Generosity; Fairness; Honor; In these are the true awards of manly sport."

TyphonInc

  • Starter
  • *****
  • Posts: 1930
  • Easily Amused
  • Liked:
Re: Talk of Eliminating Divisions
« Reply #142 on: December 26, 2018, 10:59:47 PM »
I posted this in a different thread, makes more sense here.
What if the CFP only released a Top 6 (instead of 25) and those 6 were the 5 conference champs and 1 at large?
I would assert the fundamentally, and practically nothing changes from the current format, but it gives the appearance that championships matter. 

medinabuckeye1

  • Legend
  • ****
  • Default Avatar
  • Posts: 8906
  • Liked:
Re: Talk of Eliminating Divisions
« Reply #143 on: December 27, 2018, 09:14:08 AM »
I posted this in a different thread, makes more sense here.
What if the CFP only released a Top 6 (instead of 25) and those 6 were the 5 conference champs and 1 at large?
I would assert the fundamentally, and practically nothing changes from the current format, but it gives the appearance that championships matter.
It wouldn't change anything except that it would look ridiculous.  This year could have been a great example.  All of us who know and love this game know that s&*t happens.  Weird upsets happen.  This year a 7-5 Pittsburgh team and an 8-4 Northwestern team both made it to their respective CG's.  Suppose for a minute that they had both won.  It could have happened.  
Northwestern:
  • Lost by two TD's at home to a bad Dook team that finished 3-5 in a weak ACC and 7-5 overall, 
  • Lost at home to a REALLY BAD Akron team that finished 2-6 in the MAC, 4-8 overall, and fired their coach.  
Pittsburgh:
  • Got flat out annihilated at home by Penn State, 
  • Lost to UNC in what was UNC's only conference win of the year, 
  • Got flat out annihilated by UCF, 
  • Lost badly to a Miami team that finished .500 in the weak ACC and barely over .500 overall.  

If either or both of those teams had managed to upset the Buckeyes or Tigers they still would have been mediocre teams, just mediocre teams with a great win (like Purdue, Auburn, California, etc).  

It isn't a dichotomy where Championships are either the end-all/be-all or they don't matter at all.  I agree with you that Championships matter.  I think that they should.  That said, I don't think winning a weak division (NU/Pitt) and pulling off one upset makes you a playoff caliber team.  

LittlePig

  • Starter
  • *****
  • Posts: 1365
  • Liked:
Re: Talk of Eliminating Divisions
« Reply #144 on: December 30, 2018, 03:44:34 PM »
With Notre Dame getting blown out in the playoffs, it got me thinking how ND really should have played Clemson in the ACC title game instead.  Which got me thinking what kind of rules you would need to get Notre Dame to join the ACC, which got me thinking what kind of rules should all conferences have if they want to have division-less conferences and still have a CCG.  

So these are the rules I came up with if a conference wants to have a CCG without divisions.

1. Conference must have a minimum of 10 members
2.  Every member must play a minimum of 6 conference games each year. (The Big Ten would require 9 conference games)
3.  Every member must play every other member at least once every 3 years. (The Big Ten would probably set it up so that everybody plays everybody at least twice in 4 years.)
4.  The conference will decide which 2 teams go to the CCG. (The Big Ten would probably select the 2 teams with the 2 best conference records)

With these rules in place, I could see Notre Dame agreeing to join the ACC in football.  The ACC would still require all other members to play 8 conference games, but Notre Dame would get an exception and only have to play 6 conference games.  The ACC would probably have to pick its top 2 teams based on CFP rankings.
« Last Edit: December 30, 2018, 03:51:11 PM by LittlePig »

Cincydawg

  • Oracle of Piedmont Park
  • Global Moderator
  • Hall of Fame
  • *****
  • Default Avatar
  • Posts: 71536
  • Oracle of Piedmont Park
  • Liked:
Re: Talk of Eliminating Divisions
« Reply #145 on: December 30, 2018, 04:28:26 PM »
I'd be in favor of eliminating multiplications as well.

 

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