Hello There, Guest! (LoginRegister)

Post Reply 
I just dont get why this idea wont work for conf. scheduling
Author Message
johnbragg Online
Five Minute Google Expert
*

Posts: 16,395
Joined: Dec 2011
Reputation: 1006
I Root For: St Johns
Location:
Post: #21
RE: I just dont get why this idea wont work for conf. scheduling
Quote:all im saying is eliminate a stupid rule that says their has to be divisions. it doesnt change the 12 team requirement at all

All the Big 12 was saying is eliminated the stupid rule that you have to have 12 teams and divisions for a CCG.

(09-30-2013 08:43 PM)john01992 Wrote:  the b12 basically was asking for all the benefits of having a CCG without paying for any of the negatives that comes with it. the acc b10 & p12 all paid their dues for a ccg. so why should the b12 be exempt from that? you want a ccg add cincy & new mexico otherwise STFU

Play your division in a round-robin and STFU.

Oh, wait, that's rude and not a valid argument? Good point.
10-01-2013 07:00 AM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
john01992 Offline
Former ESPNer still in recovery mode

Posts: 16,277
Joined: Jul 2013
I Root For: John0 out!!!!
Location: The Worst P5 Program
Post: #22
RE: I just dont get why this idea wont work for conf. scheduling
(09-30-2013 09:21 PM)bitcruncher Wrote:  
(09-30-2013 08:43 PM)john01992 Wrote:  
(09-30-2013 08:35 PM)bitcruncher Wrote:  
(09-30-2013 07:47 PM)john01992 Wrote:  
(09-30-2013 07:29 PM)Ron7098 Wrote:  NCAA rules state that to have a conference championship game you must have at least 12 teams divided up into two divisions.
thats just so stupid.
You were singing a different tune when the B12 asked for an exemption to the 12 team championship game rule. Do you ever consider your past position on issues when you post stuff?
thats a big difference. they were asking for 10 teams to play a CCG (defeating the very purpose of why conferences have CCG)

the b12 basically was asking for all the benefits of having a CCG without paying for any of the negatives that comes with it. the acc b10 & p12 all paid their dues for a ccg. so why should the b12 be exempt from that? you want a ccg add cincy & new mexico otherwise STFU

all im saying is eliminate a stupid rule that says their has to be divisions. it doesnt change the 12 team requirement at all
If you eliminate divisions, then why is a set number an issue. IMO if a conference doesn't have divisions, then how many are members is irrelevant...

And saying otherwise doesn't make your position any more logical. It isn't...

because with 10 teams you can play true round robin. with 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, etc. you cant.....

is that concept really too hard for you to understand?????
10-01-2013 07:03 AM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
john01992 Offline
Former ESPNer still in recovery mode

Posts: 16,277
Joined: Jul 2013
I Root For: John0 out!!!!
Location: The Worst P5 Program
Post: #23
RE: I just dont get why this idea wont work for conf. scheduling
(10-01-2013 07:00 AM)johnbragg Wrote:  
Quote:all im saying is eliminate a stupid rule that says their has to be divisions. it doesnt change the 12 team requirement at all

All the Big 12 was saying is eliminated the stupid rule that you have to have 12 teams and divisions for a CCG.

(09-30-2013 08:43 PM)john01992 Wrote:  the b12 basically was asking for all the benefits of having a CCG without paying for any of the negatives that comes with it. the acc b10 & p12 all paid their dues for a ccg. so why should the b12 be exempt from that? you want a ccg add cincy & new mexico otherwise STFU

Play your division in a round-robin and STFU.

Oh, wait, that's rude and not a valid argument? Good point.

1. why should the b12 get special treatment?

2. playing a division round robin would be fine.....but they cant complete a full round robin in a single season cuz they have 14 teams.

3. if the b12 wants to be treated the same as the b10, acc pac & sec. then they need to do what those conferences did. add 2 more teams
10-01-2013 07:05 AM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
john01992 Offline
Former ESPNer still in recovery mode

Posts: 16,277
Joined: Jul 2013
I Root For: John0 out!!!!
Location: The Worst P5 Program
Post: #24
RE: I just dont get why this idea wont work for conf. scheduling
(10-01-2013 06:54 AM)CommuterBob Wrote:  
(09-30-2013 07:53 PM)john01992 Wrote:  actually they can get around the division rule

the rule:
17.9.1.2 © Twelve-Member Conference Championship Game. [FBS/FCS] A conference championship game between division champions of a member conference of 12 or more institutions that is divided into two divisions (of six or more institutions each), each of which conducts round-robin, regular-season competition among the members of that division;


the mac:
Because the MAC has been violating this NCAA rule ever since it went to 13 teams in 2007. The conference never applied for a waiver and no one at the NCAA has called them on violating the round-robin divisional play rule. So there's some precedent out there that suggests a 13 team conference can simply ignore the rule and the NCAA won't enforce that rule.

Way to plagiarize Clay Travis there, john01992. Here's the link to the article you stole that from verbatim:
http://outkickthecoverage.com/ncaa-rule-...bility.php

By the way, the source is wrong. The MAC does apply for a waiver every year, and every year it's granted.

i thought that was pretty obvious enough that i didnt write that part. and in case you didnt notice its in its separate post from the OP. the OP is 100% mine
10-01-2013 07:06 AM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
bitcruncher Offline
pepperoni roll psycho...
*

Posts: 61,859
Joined: Jan 2006
Reputation: 526
I Root For: West Virginia
Location: Knoxville, TN
Post: #25
RE: I just dont get why this idea wont work for conf. scheduling
(10-01-2013 07:03 AM)john01992 Wrote:  
(09-30-2013 09:21 PM)bitcruncher Wrote:  
(09-30-2013 08:43 PM)john01992 Wrote:  
(09-30-2013 08:35 PM)bitcruncher Wrote:  
(09-30-2013 07:47 PM)john01992 Wrote:  thats just so stupid.
You were singing a different tune when the B12 asked for an exemption to the 12 team championship game rule. Do you ever consider your past position on issues when you post stuff?
thats a big difference. they were asking for 10 teams to play a CCG (defeating the very purpose of why conferences have CCG)

the b12 basically was asking for all the benefits of having a CCG without paying for any of the negatives that comes with it. the acc b10 & p12 all paid their dues for a ccg. so why should the b12 be exempt from that? you want a ccg add cincy & new mexico otherwise STFU

all im saying is eliminate a stupid rule that says their has to be divisions. it doesnt change the 12 team requirement at all
If you eliminate divisions, then why is a set number an issue. IMO if a conference doesn't have divisions, then how many are members is irrelevant...

And saying otherwise doesn't make your position any more logical. It isn't...
because with 10 teams you can play true round robin. with 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, etc. you cant.....

is that concept really too hard for you to understand?????
So it only makes sense for conferences that are too cumbersome to allow all conference members to play equivalent schedules. That way members who play the weakest schedules get an advantage by having an easy path to their conference championship game. Got you... 07-coffee3
(This post was last modified: 10-01-2013 09:47 AM by bitcruncher.)
10-01-2013 09:47 AM
Visit this user's website Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
john01992 Offline
Former ESPNer still in recovery mode

Posts: 16,277
Joined: Jul 2013
I Root For: John0 out!!!!
Location: The Worst P5 Program
Post: #26
RE: I just dont get why this idea wont work for conf. scheduling
(10-01-2013 09:47 AM)bitcruncher Wrote:  
(10-01-2013 07:03 AM)john01992 Wrote:  
(09-30-2013 09:21 PM)bitcruncher Wrote:  
(09-30-2013 08:43 PM)john01992 Wrote:  
(09-30-2013 08:35 PM)bitcruncher Wrote:  You were singing a different tune when the B12 asked for an exemption to the 12 team championship game rule. Do you ever consider your past position on issues when you post stuff?
thats a big difference. they were asking for 10 teams to play a CCG (defeating the very purpose of why conferences have CCG)

the b12 basically was asking for all the benefits of having a CCG without paying for any of the negatives that comes with it. the acc b10 & p12 all paid their dues for a ccg. so why should the b12 be exempt from that? you want a ccg add cincy & new mexico otherwise STFU

all im saying is eliminate a stupid rule that says their has to be divisions. it doesnt change the 12 team requirement at all
If you eliminate divisions, then why is a set number an issue. IMO if a conference doesn't have divisions, then how many are members is irrelevant...

And saying otherwise doesn't make your position any more logical. It isn't...
because with 10 teams you can play true round robin. with 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, etc. you cant.....

is that concept really too hard for you to understand?????
So it only makes sense for conferences that are too cumbersome to allow all conference members to play equivalent schedules. That way members who play the weakest schedules get an advantage by having an easy path to their conference championship game. Got you... 07-coffee3

you obviously dont have the reading comprehension or smartness to understand this.the whole purpose of this rule change is to prevent conference dodging and make things more equal. with the 2 division rule the two SEC teams (bama & uga) with the easiest SEC got to slide right into the SEC championship game. go look at their out of division opponents from last year and get to me. this rule change fixes the very problem that you falsely say i create.

yeah Mr. MIT sure is a genius here03-banghead
10-01-2013 10:04 AM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
adcorbett Offline
This F'n Guy
*

Posts: 14,325
Joined: Mar 2010
Reputation: 368
I Root For: Louisville
Location: Cybertron
Post: #27
RE: I just dont get why this idea wont work for conf. scheduling
(09-30-2013 07:47 PM)john01992 Wrote:  
(09-30-2013 07:29 PM)Ron7098 Wrote:  NCAA rules state that to have a conference championship game you must have at least 12 teams divided up into two divisions.

thats just so stupid.

The rule was NEVER meant for football. It was meant for other sports. In fact when the SEC found this loophole, the NCAA tried to stop them,


(09-30-2013 08:14 PM)john01992 Wrote:  i thought about this however i havent had the time to make a spread sheet to see if this is mathematically possible

I know it's not what you are talking about, but the MAC's issue is 13 teams is not mathematically possible under the rules. That is why they skip a team, and likely why no one has ever complained. They physically cannot have every team in the seven team division play each other, or they'd have to have some teams either play the same team twice in a season, or have some teams play an additional conference game.
10-01-2013 10:14 AM
Visit this user's website Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
adcorbett Offline
This F'n Guy
*

Posts: 14,325
Joined: Mar 2010
Reputation: 368
I Root For: Louisville
Location: Cybertron
Post: #28
RE: I just dont get why this idea wont work for conf. scheduling
(10-01-2013 05:55 AM)goofus Wrote:  Well, you are on the right board. I have done the spreadsheets and it can work. This was a popular subject when the pac-10 was talking of expanding to 16.

the key is don't get locked into thinking permanent rivals have to be in the same divisions. Or in some models that have pods, dont assume that teams in the same pods have to be in the same division. Once you free yourself from that thought , everything else falls into place. rhe pac-16 was perfect for 4 pods non-permanent division model. The Big Ten is more ideal for 3 defined permanent rivals but no defined pods.

With 16 teams, the pods are pretty easy to do, so long as you have a nine team schedule. You can come up with a lot of possibilities. Now first, I am curious of the line I bolded: I don't understand how you can have teams in the same pod NOT in the same division. The inverse is true, but not sure about this.

Anyway I have done this scenario a few times, and for the purposes of understanding how it works, I am going to repost it. Okay when I created this example, for some reason Missouri and Navy were the two teams that were added. I don’t remember the reasons at the moment why those two were it, but it was due to some discussion we were having. Anyway the “who” is not important. This is simply an exercise of how to create a schedule.


*************************

The idea is that pods simply create a new division every year. Consider it like an NFL schedule modified to fit college. You would have nine games as opposed to eight, otherwise it doesn’t work, but the Big Ten is going to nine anyway, so no big deal.

The pods will look like this:
Code:
Mideast    East    West    Midwest
Ohio St    Penn St    Nebraska    Illinois
Michigan    M’land    Wisconsin    Purdue
Michgn St    Rutgers    Missouri    Indiana
Minnesota   Navy    Univ Iowa     Northwestern

For most of these purposes, I am going to be Ohio State when I make these examples
  • * Each team plays each of the other three teams in its pod: once at home, and two on the road, alternating in years (three games). Thus Ohio State will play Michigan, Michigan St, and Minnesota ever year.

    * Each team plays the four teams from another pod once on a rotating three-year cycle: two at home, and two on the road (four games). This creates the "division" for that season, the two pods playing each other. . The two entire pods that play each other create a “division” for that year, which obviously changes each year, and the team with the best conference record in that “division” (normal tie breaker rules apply) goes to the conference championship game. Thus Ohio State will play the East division one year, the West division the next year, and the Midwest division the third year

Then you have three options for how to schedule the last two games which we dub "Wild Card" games:
  • *(Rival Style) - Each team plays once against the team in each pod designated as a rival, not counting the pod they were already scheduled to play: one at home, one on the road (two games). The advantage of allowing each team to have a unique 7 team conference of teams they play each year, allowing the most rivalries to stay intact. Thus in addition to OSU playing Michigan, Michigan St, and Minnesota every year, they would also play Penn State, Nebraska, and Illinois every season. Note that while OSU’s schedule seems incredibly tough, these pods were designed so that each team continued with rivalries they already have. Newer teams had to fit where they could into existing older rivalries. OSU’s schedule rotation would look like this:

    Code:
    -    Division Games            Cross Division                    Wild Card    
    Year    1      2       3      Pod    1      2       3    4    Riv1    Riv2
    2016    UM    MSU    Minn    East    PSU    MD    Rut    Navy    Neb    Ill
    2017    UM    MSU    Minn    West    Neb    Wisc  Mizz    Iowa    PSU    Ill
    2018    UM    MSU    Minn    Mwst    Ill    Pur    IU    NW    PSU    Neb
    2019    UM    MSU    Minn    East    PSU    MD    Rut    Navy    Neb    Ill
    2020    UM    MSU    Minn    West    Neb    Wisc   Mizz    Iowa    PSU    Ill
    2021    UM    MSU    Minn    Mwst    Ill    Pur    IU    NW    PSU    Neb
    2022    UM    MSU    Minn    East    PSU    MD    Rut    Navy    Neb    Ill
    2023    UM    MSU    Minn    West    Neb    Wisc   Mizz    Iowa    PSU    Ill
    2024    UM    MSU    Minn    Mwst    Ill    Pur    IU    NW    PSU    Neb
    2025    UM    MSU    Minn    East    PSU    MD    Rut    Navy    Neb    Ill
    2026    UM    MSU    Minn    West    Neb    Wisc   Mizz    Iowa    PSU    Ill
    2027    UM    MSU    Minn    Mwst    Ill    Pur    IU    NW    PSU    Neb


    * (Rotation Style) - Each team plays once against the team in each pod designated in sequential order rotating in a three year cycle, not counting the pod they were already scheduled to play: one at home, one on the road (two games). Advantage: allows you to play each team in your pod every year and every other team six years per twelve year cycle, for an average of once every other year (won't work out exactly that way per year, but will over the course of 12 years). OSU’s schedule would look like this:

    Code:
    -    Division Games            Cross Division                    Wild Card    
    Year    1      2       3      Pod    1      2       3    4    Seq1    Seq2
    2016    UM    MSU    Minn    East    PSU    MD    Rut    Navy    Neb    Ill
    2017    UM    MSU    Minn    West    Neb    Wisc  Mizz    Iowa    MD    Pur
    2018    UM    MSU    Minn    Mwst    Ill    Pur    IU    NW    Rut    Mizz
    2019    UM    MSU    Minn    East    PSU    MD    Rut    Navy    Iowa    NW
    2020    UM    MSU    Minn    West    Neb    Wisc   Mizz    Iowa    PSU    Ill
    2021    UM    MSU    Minn    Mwst    Ill    Pur    IU    NW    MD    Wisc
    2022    UM    MSU    Minn    East    PSU    MD    Rut    Navy    Mizz    IU
    2023    UM    MSU    Minn    West    Neb    Wisc   Mizz    Iowa    Navy    NW
    2024    UM    MSU    Minn    Mwst    Ill    Pur    IU    NW    PSU    Neb
    2025    UM    MSU    Minn    East    PSU    MD    Rut    Navy    Wisc    Pur
    2026    UM    MSU    Minn    West    Neb    Wisc   Mizz    Iowa    Rut    IU
    2027    UM    MSU    Minn    Mwst    Ill    Pur    IU    NW    Navy    Iowa




    * (NFL Style) - Each team plays once against the other teams that finished in the same place in their own pods as themselves in the previous season, not counting the pod they were already scheduled to play: one at home, one on the road (two games). Advantage of allowing contenders to have the best SOS. OSU’s schedule *may* look like this (using hypothetical finishes)

    Code:
    -    Division Games            Cross Division                    Wild Card    NFL
    Year    1      2       3      Pod    1      2       3    4    Fin      Tm1     Tm2
    2016    UM    MSU    Minn    East    PSU    MD    Rut    Navy    1    Neb    Pur
    2017    UM    MSU    Minn    West    Neb    Wisc  Mizz  Iowa    2    MD    Pur
    2018    UM    MSU    Minn    Mwst    Ill    Pur    IU    NW    1    PSU    Neb
    2019    UM    MSU    Minn    East    PSU    MD    Rut    Navy    1    Iowa    NW
    2020    UM    MSU    Minn    West    Neb    Wisc  Mizz  Iowa    3    PSU    Pur
    2021    UM    MSU    Minn    Mwst    Ill    Pur    IU    NW    2    MD    Neb
    2022    UM    MSU    Minn    East    PSU    MD    Rut    Navy    1    Neb    Pur
    2023    UM    MSU    Minn    West    Neb    Wisc   Mizz  Iowa    3    Navy    IU
    2024    UM    MSU    Minn    Mwst    Ill    Pur    IU    NW    2    Navy    Wisc
    2025    UM    MSU    Minn    East    PSU    MD    Rut    Navy    1    Neb    Pur
    2026    UM    MSU    Minn    West    Neb    Wisc   Mizz  Iowa    1    PSU    NW
    2027    UM    MSU    Minn    Mwst    Ill    Pur    IU    NW    4    Rut    Iowa



Now ultimately how the “wild card” games are handled would probably dictate how the pods were made up. I would imagine they would stay the same, but it's possible the "rival" set up may cause a team or two to be moved around. But since the new Big Ten divisions look pretty much like I have them, only with Indiana and Minnesota swapping places, seems about right. Anyway for the purposes of evaluating each method of scheduling, here is how often Ohio State would play each team under each scheduling method:

Games played vs. each team Over 12 year period
Tm_ Seq Riv NFL
Mich 12 12_ 12
MSU 12 12_ 12
Minn 12 12_ 12
PSU_ 6_ 12_ 7
UMD 6_ 4__ 6
Rutg 6_ 4__ 5
Navy 6_ 4__ 6
Neb_ 6_ 12_ 9
Wisc 6_ 4__ 5
Mizz 6_ 4__ 4
Iowa 6_ 4__ 6
Illini 6_ 12_ 4
Purd 6_ 4__ 9
Ind_ 6_ 4__ 5
Nwst 6_ 4__ 6
(This post was last modified: 10-01-2013 11:13 AM by adcorbett.)
10-01-2013 10:20 AM
Visit this user's website Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
goofus Offline
All American
*

Posts: 4,321
Joined: May 2013
Reputation: 151
I Root For: Iowa
Location: chicago suburbs
Post: #29
RE: I just dont get why this idea wont work for conf. scheduling
folks, this is not that hard. if you have 4-team pods and 4 total pods in a 16-team league, then you play everyone in your pod every year, but all 4 teams don't have to be in the same division. If they aint in your division that year, you play your podmate as a cross-division opponent that year.

The rotation is set up so that you play the 3 teams from your pod each year, and play 2 teams each from the other 3 pods every year. So you play a total of 9 conference games every year, and play every team from the other pods at least once every 2 years.
10-03-2013 05:08 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
Post Reply 




User(s) browsing this thread: 1 Guest(s)


Copyright © 2002-2024 Collegiate Sports Nation Bulletin Board System (CSNbbs), All Rights Reserved.
CSNbbs is an independent fan site and is in no way affiliated to the NCAA or any of the schools and conferences it represents.
This site monetizes links. FTC Disclosure.
We allow third-party companies to serve ads and/or collect certain anonymous information when you visit our web site. These companies may use non-personally identifiable information (e.g., click stream information, browser type, time and date, subject of advertisements clicked or scrolled over) during your visits to this and other Web sites in order to provide advertisements about goods and services likely to be of greater interest to you. These companies typically use a cookie or third party web beacon to collect this information. To learn more about this behavioral advertising practice or to opt-out of this type of advertising, you can visit http://www.networkadvertising.org.
Powered By MyBB, © 2002-2024 MyBB Group.