Author
Topic: UCLA and USC
(Read 49321 times)

FearlessF · « **Reply #448 on:** July 13, 2022, 09:34:06 AM »

Amen!

The older we get, the more often Utee and I agree on things

never woulda thunk it 20 years ago

Cincydawg · « **Reply #449 on:** July 13, 2022, 09:41:25 AM »

My realistic hope now is that conferences go to 20 teams, and end up being 10 team conferences in reality.

Heck, go to 24.

I fear some of the more interesting OOC matchups may suffer.

FearlessF · « **Reply #450 on:** July 13, 2022, 09:53:12 AM »

If the Big Ten and UNL would just allow me to set schedules, I think even the TV network goons would like it.

More interesting and competitive games = better content = more $$$

medinabuckeye1 · « **Reply #451 on:** July 13, 2022, 09:58:27 AM »

Quote from: FearlessF on July 13, 2022, 09:27:10 AM

I know it's a full magnitude tougher as the number of teams increase, but I'd much rather schedule 4 or more teams that play annually like the Iowa AD is pushing.

watering it down to only 3 teams in an attempt to be able to play Rutgers and Maryland somewhat regularly, every 5 or 6 seasons maybe more just because they're in "the same" conference is a stretch that doesn't help

I think that pods are the compromise here.

LIke you, I think it is best to have a group of teams that you play annually because that feeds rivalry.

OTOH, I think it would be ridiculous if Ohio State becomes conference-mates with USC and UCLA and plays them LESS frequently than back when they were in a different league.

Pods split the difference by giving each team a group of annual games and still playing all league teams once in a while.

EastAthens · « **Reply #452 on:** July 13, 2022, 10:13:59 AM »

I was surprised Cal would like UCLA disappear without a trace and looks like so was Cal.

https://www.mercurynews.com/2022/07/12/pac-12-here-come-the-uc-regents-governing-board-to-discuss-uclas-move-to-the-big-ten-litigation-cited/

FearlessF · « **Reply #453 on:** July 13, 2022, 10:33:10 AM »

Quote from: medinabuckeye1 on July 13, 2022, 09:58:27 AM

I think that pods are the compromise here.

I think this will happen
I just don't like the compromise and don't think it's good for the conference or college football

if this is going to happen, then 10 or 12 conference games and fewer non con games should be the way
that way the pods can be larger - 6 or 7 team pods

utee94 · « **Reply #454 on:** July 13, 2022, 11:06:01 AM »

Quote from: medinabuckeye1 on July 13, 2022, 09:58:27 AM

I think that pods are the compromise here.

LIke you, I think it is best to have a group of teams that you play annually because that feeds rivalry.

OTOH, I think it would be ridiculous if Ohio State becomes conference-mates with USC and UCLA and plays them LESS frequently than back when they were in a different league.

Pods split the difference by giving each team a group of annual games and still playing all league teams once in a while.

I don't think you need strict, formal pods to do this. That's why I like the idea of each team having 3 (or 4, for Fearless) set, annual games, but they don't have to be the same set teams as others in a specific group. Then rotate the rest of the schedule as you like, without the formality and limitations of ensuring pod boundaries are maintained. It accomplishes the same goal, but allows more flexibility.

If I set up the following pod: Ohio State, Michigan, Michigan State, and Minnesota, those teams are forced to use up some of their annual slots against teams that might or might not be that important to them.

But if I just say, every year Michigan plays Ohio State, Michigan State, and Minnesota, but Ohio State gets to play Michigan, Penn State, and Wisconsin, and every year Wisconsin gets to play Ohio State, Minnesota, and Nebraska, it's a lot more flexible. (yeah I made up the perma-rivals, they probably don't make complete sense, forgive me I'm not a B1Ger...

).

Additionally, I really do like FF's suggestion of simply admitting you don't need to schedule every team in the conference. Why should Nebraska ever play Rutgers? Let's admit it's an undesirable game, admit that in a 16-team or 20-team conference, the idea of playing everyone is silly and antiquated, and just try to schedule some fun games!

medinabuckeye1 · « **Reply #455 on:** July 13, 2022, 11:30:54 AM »

Quote from: utee94 on July 13, 2022, 11:06:01 AM

I don't think you need strict, formal pods to do this. That's why I like the idea of each team having 3 (or 4, for Fearless) set, annual games, but they don't have to be the same set teams as others in a specific group. Then rotate the rest of the schedule as you like, without the formality and limitations of ensuring pod boundaries are maintained. It accomplishes the same goal, but allows more flexibility.

If I set up the following pod: Ohio State, Michigan, Michigan State, and Minnesota, those teams are forced to use up some of their annual slots against teams that might or might not be that important to them.

But if I just say, every year Michigan plays Ohio State, Michigan State, and Minnesota, but Ohio State gets to play Michigan, Penn State, and Wisconsin, and every year Wisconsin gets to play Ohio State, Minnesota, and Nebraska, it's a lot more flexible. (yeah I made up the perma-rivals, they probably don't make complete sense, forgive me I'm not a B1Ger... ).

Additionally, I really do like FF's suggestion of simply admitting you don't need to schedule every team in the conference. Why should Nebraska ever play Rutgers? Let's admit it's an undesirable game, admit that in a 16-team or 20-team conference, the idea of playing everyone is silly and antiquated, and just try to schedule some fun games!

In theory I like your idea but I think there is a potentially major practical problem:

If you have 18 or 20 team leagues then even with nine league games you will only be playing nine of the other 17 or 19 teams, that is a little under or over half.

That causes several problems. First, it means that the term "B1G schedule" will be effectively meaningless because you could end up with wildly divergent schedules and relative strength thereof.

Second, if you just rotate the non-permanent rivals without considering other league schools it will be possible for the league to produce more than two undefeated teams.

As I see it, the solution is to split into two groups (divisions) where all members of each group play all of the other members. That way, at least within each group/division the schedules will either be identical or similar enough that we can be confident that there isn't a 6-3 team that is actually better than the 9-0 champion.

FearlessF · « **Reply #456 on:** July 13, 2022, 11:40:54 AM »

Quote from: medinabuckeye1 on July 13, 2022, 11:30:54 AM

As I see it, the solution is to split into two groups (divisions) where all members of each group play all of the other members. That way, at least within each group/division the schedules will either be identical or similar enough that we can be confident that there isn't a 6-3 team that is actually better than the 9-0 champion.

this

utee94 · « **Reply #457 on:** July 13, 2022, 12:06:34 PM »

I think it's highly unlikely you'll ever get a 6-3 team better than a 9-0 champion, in a randomized schedule drawing within the future B1G or SEC conference, which is all we're actually talking about, here. It's a statistical corner case and not worth addressing in any scheduling solutions.

Just my opinion of course, but I wouldn't spend a single joule of brainpower worrying about it.

MrNubbz · « **Reply #458 on:** July 13, 2022, 12:29:09 PM »

Quote from: medinabuckeye1 on July 13, 2022, 09:17:41 AM

I generally like what @LittlePig came up with and I want to add that I've done lists like his and it isn't easy. Compromises have to be made.

It is easy to pick one or two "rivalries" from the list to criticize but MUCH harder to come up with a better alternative.

Kick out Maryland and Rutgers?

medinabuckeye1 · « **Reply #459 on:** July 13, 2022, 01:43:00 PM »

Quote from: utee94 on July 13, 2022, 12:06:34 PM

I think it's highly unlikely you'll ever get a 6-3 team better than a 9-0 champion, in a randomized schedule drawing within the future B1G or SEC conference, which is all we're actually talking about, here. It's a statistical corner case and not worth addressing in any scheduling solutions.

Just my opinion of course, but I wouldn't spend a single joule of brainpower worrying about it.

Well, I honestly think the need to avoid the possibility of three undefeated teams is a more pressing concern. As a practical matter the only way to avoid that in a league of 20 teams is to have two groups each of which all play each other.

On your point about schedules I'm more concerned about it than you are. As league sizes increase the percentage of teams played decreases which necessarily increases the variability of league schedules.

Assuming nine league games:

With 10 members you play 100% and miss 0%
With 12 members you play 82% and miss 18%
With 14 members you play 69% and miss 31%
With 16 members you play 60% and miss 40%
With 18 members you play 53% and miss 47%
With 20 members you play 47% and miss 53%

With 18 members you * COULD* end up with two teams that didn't play each other and have only one common opponent. Obviously that is a worst case scenario but that would make it quite difficult to compare the teams. I think that with 16or more teams you really need divisions.

847badgerfan · « **Reply #460 on:** July 13, 2022, 01:50:27 PM »

Quote from: EastAthens on July 13, 2022, 10:13:59 AM

I was surprised Cal would like UCLA disappear without a trace and looks like so was Cal.

https://www.mercurynews.com/2022/07/12/pac-12-here-come-the-uc-regents-governing-board-to-discuss-uclas-move-to-the-big-ten-litigation-cited/

Figured this would come up at some point.

ELA · « **Reply #461 on:** July 13, 2022, 02:05:16 PM »

They were busy chained to trees, and missed the whole thing

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.

Topic: UCLA and USC

FearlessF

Re: UCLA and USC

Cincydawg

Re: UCLA and USC

FearlessF

Re: UCLA and USC

medinabuckeye1

Re: UCLA and USC

EastAthens

Re: UCLA and USC

FearlessF

Re: UCLA and USC

utee94

Re: UCLA and USC

medinabuckeye1

Re: UCLA and USC

FearlessF

Re: UCLA and USC

utee94

Re: UCLA and USC

MrNubbz

Re: UCLA and USC

medinabuckeye1

Re: UCLA and USC

847badgerfan

Re: UCLA and USC

ELA

Re: UCLA and USC