In sports leagues, promotion and relegation is a process where teams are transferred between two divisions based on their performance for the completed season. The best-ranked teams in the lower division are promoted to the division above, and the worst-ranked teams in the higher division are relegated to the division below. In some leagues, play-offs or qualifying rounds are also used to determine rankings. This process can continue through several levels, with teams being exchanged between levels 1 and 2, levels 2 and 3, levels 3 and 4, and so on. During the season, teams that are high enough in the table that they would qualify for promotion are sometimes said to be in the promotion zone, and those at the bottom are in the relegation zone (or, colloquially, the drop zone).

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Promotion_and_relegation

It's a merit-based system that would never happen in the strictly hierarchical world of CFB. However, how much more interesting would it make the game? Imagine if Marshall, ECU, CSU, UCF, & Boise were all fighting for 3 or 4 spots to make it into the P5 while WFU, Colorado, Kansas, Iowa State, Purdue & Indiana were all fighting to not be demoted to the G5. You could also do it with the FBS & the FCS and NDSU would quickly move up. Again, it's never gonna happen & the system is designed in a way that just makes it impossible (with conference alignment & other sports) but a merit-based system would not only promote fundamental fairness, it would also make the game so much more interesting.

Promotion and relegation does on thing - keeps the top teams on the top.

It hurts the teams like Purdue, Ole Miss, and Washington State. They are no longer able to recruit on a level playing field because they'll be bouncing up and down divisions every year.

But at the same time, the schools like ECU and Boise will also be bouncing up and down every year. So they don't gain any recruiting advantage. Even if they do get promoted, recruits (and fans) know that there's a decent liklihood that they'll be relegated to the lower division in the next few years anyways.

So this does nothing to help the teams on the bottom. All that promotion/relegation does is give the Ohio States and Alabamas of the world an extra tool to use in recruiting. Top recruits KNOW that Florida State and Texas will never be relegated, so they will go there rather than Duke or Baylor.

You won't witness a big flood of top recruits to AAC and MWC schools; instead, you'll see all a stricter hierarchy WITHIN the Big 10, SEC, and PAC as recruits avoid the teams likely to be relegated.

I would love it. There are so many P5's that got grandfathered in and they don't even try to win. They just collect big checks.

It sounds good in theory but ignores the fact that the programs moving up would need several recruiting cycles to adjust to their new conference, which they wouldn't have the luxury of.

We've talked about this notion a lot here.

If you look at what actually happens in promotion/relegation in the English Premier League and other top soccer leagues, it's perceived to be "fair", but the reality is that it actually entrenches the very top teams even more than the American pro leagues. Top players don't even consider going to a team that even has a tiny risk of getting relegated, so they all go to the same handful of teams (i.e. Manchester United, Arsenal, Chelsea, Liverpool, etc.). All of the relegation shuffling happens at the bottom tier. You can see this in college sports even more directly - lower level schools can at least sell the concept of more immediate playing time to recruits right now compared to teams that already have a lot of talent. In a promotion/relegation system, all of that goes away - you'd never see any talented recruited ever go to anyone other the most elite schools.

The OP has already touched upon why this would never happen - those that are in power (the power conference schools) want absolutely ZERO to do with putting their places at risk. At the same time, the power conferences look at more than merit - they need TV markets, academics and other factors besides on-the-field metrics.

Plus, a college roster both (a) can't change within a season due to NCAA rules yet, at the same time, (b) inherently turns over completely every 4 years. So, you have zero short-term ability to change your roster, but long-term your roster is going to change over completely. That combo is the absolute worst of both worlds for promotion/relegation - you're punishing poor-performing teams when they can't adjust their rosters in-season, while rewarding high-performing teams when their rosters will still eventually turn over completely. In soccer, it's the exact opposite - there's a robust international system of player transfers during the season, while you can also lock up top players in long-term contracts.

Finally, even G5 schools have their own tiers - the AAC and MWC are still a bit of step up compared to the other G5 leagues. Frankly, I have no problem with that. Schools should be able to associate with only the schools that they want to associate with.

EDIT: Just read where you acknowledged my points.

If you're looking for more fun and balance, then run a computerized RPI ranking instead of a playoff committee.

There should be a clear set of reasons as to why a conference or team has no right to access the playoff. This would have no effect on THIS season, but it matters.

Would be a disaster of unintended consequences.

It would work if you evaluated teams every 5 years then made adjustments that would remain in effect for the next 5 years and so on.

and how would this work for their other sports? would they be banished from their primary league also?

(11-05-2014 03:40 PM)jdgaucho Wrote:  and how would this work for their other sports? would they be banished from their primary league also?

That's one of about three million reasons why this would never work in college athletics. But I assume that everyone is suspending that reality for the purpose of this thread, and pretending that college football teams are free-standing franchises not connected to universities or their athletic departments, like Manchester United or Real Madrid.

Also, coaches, ADs, and administrators at every level would hate this even in the alternate fantasy world where college football teams are free-standing franchises. Someone on a message board might be thinking it would be great if an AAC team got promoted to the SEC, but the coaches and ADs of the weaker AAC football teams would worry about finishing in the bottom three of the AAC and getting relegated to the CAA or some other FCS conference. You think most G5 programs struggle to attract the best recruits and coaches now? Watch how quickly they would run away from teams that not only can't get into the "upper division", but are in danger of being dropped into the "third division".

I had a similar idea that I created a couple of years ago:

Have 8 conferences with 16 teams per conference (128 total teams).
Each conference will have two divisions (Tier 1 and Tier 2).
At the end of each season, the team from Tier 1 that finishes in last place will be demoted down to Tier 2, and the team that finishes in first place from Tier 2 will be promoted up to Tier 1.
Then have a 16 team playoff with all 8 of the Tier 1 champions plus 8 at-large teams.
There could also be another 16 team playoff for the Tier 2 teams (similar to an NIT tournament).

WESTERN
Tier 1
USC
UCLA
California
Stanford
Oregon
Oregon State
Washington
Washington State
Tier 2
Hawaii
Fresno State
San Diego State
San Jose State
Nevada
UNLV
Boise State
Idaho

MOUNTAIN
Tier 1
Colorado
Colorado State
Utah
BYU
Arizona
Arizona State
Oklahoma
Oklahoma State
Tier 2
Montana
Wyoming
North Dakota State
Utah State
Air Force
New Mexico
New Mexico State
Tulsa

SOUTHERN
Tier 1
LSU
SMU
TCU
Texas Tech
Texas A&M
Texas
Houston
Baylor
Tier 2
Louisiana
Louisiana Tech
Tulane
Rice
North Texas
Texas State
UTEP
UTSA

CENTRAL
Tier 1
Nebraska
Kansas
Kansas State
Missouri
Iowa
Wisconsin
Purdue
Notre Dame
Tier 2
Missouri State
Iowa State
Minnesota
Northwestern
Northern Illinois
Illinois
Indiana
Ball State

MIDWEST
Tier 1
Michigan State
Michigan
Ohio State
Ohio
Toledo
Cincinnati
Kentucky
Louisville
Tier 2
Western Michigan
Central Michigan
Eastern Michigan
Akron
Miami OH
Bowling Green
Kent State
Western Kentucky

SOUTHEASTERN
Tier 1
Arkansas
Mississippi
Mississippi State
Auburn
Alabama
Florida
Florida State
Miami FL
Tier 2
Arkansas State
Southern Mississippi
Troy
UAB
Central Florida
South Florida
Florida Atlantic
Florida International

EASTERN
Tier 1
Georgia Tech
Georgia
Clemson
South Carolina
North Carolina
NC State
Duke
Tennessee
Tier 2
Georgia State
Appalacian State
Wake Forest
Charlotte
East Carolina
Middle Tennessee
Memphis
Vanderbilt

NORTHEASTERN
Tier 1
Virginia Tech
West Virginia
Pittsburg
Penn State
Rutgers
Syracuse
Maryland
Boston College
Tier 2
Virginia
Marshall
Army
Navy
Temple
Buffalo
U Conn
U Mass

This might seem like a crazy idea, but technically you could also include the teams from all of the lower divisions by adding more tiers. Tier 1 would never play teams lower than tier 2, tier 2 would never play teams lower than tier 3, and so on. Every team in the country would suddenly become relevant because all of them would be competing against each other to climb up the tiers. A lot of fans would start paying attention to the small school games.

(11-05-2014 03:52 PM)Wedge Wrote:  

(11-05-2014 03:40 PM)jdgaucho Wrote:  and how would this work for their other sports? would they be banished from their primary league also?

That's one of about three million reasons why this would never work in college athletics. But I assume that everyone is suspending that reality for the purpose of this thread, and pretending that college football teams are free-standing franchises not connected to universities or their athletic departments, like Manchester United or Real Madrid.

Also, coaches, ADs, and administrators at every level would hate this even in the alternate fantasy world where college football teams are free-standing franchises. Someone on a message board might be thinking it would be great if an AAC team got promoted to the SEC, but the coaches and ADs of the weaker AAC football teams would worry about finishing in the bottom three of the AAC and getting relegated to the CAA or some other FCS conference. You think most G5 programs struggle to attract the best recruits and coaches now? Watch how quickly they would run away from teams that not only can't get into the "upper division", but are in danger of being dropped into the "third division".

This is absolutely correct. Collegiate athletics are not international soccer. There are not owners willingly risking their investment on the chance their sports property will be relegated to a lower division. I have only heard soccer fans tout this idea as viable or worthy.

Imagine that Boise State, Cincinnati and ECU have spent millions of dollars on facilities, equipment, coaches salaries, etc. in order to compete at the highest levels of collegiate athletics. Then after a couple of years of bad seasons -- whether due to injuries, poor recruiting, poor coaching, whatever -- they find themselves relegated to a lower division. Do you think their fundraising would suffer? Do you think administrators, coaches, etc. would lose jobs? If you think cheating is rampant now, imagine the negative motivation involved in a possible loss of standing for the university.

It will never, ever happen. I wish people would just stop.

(11-05-2014 08:48 AM)Captain Bearcat Wrote:  Promotion and relegation does on thing - keeps the top teams on the top.

It hurts the teams like Purdue, Ole Miss, and Washington State. They are no longer able to recruit on a level playing field because they'll be bouncing up and down divisions every year.

But at the same time, the schools like ECU and Boise will also be bouncing up and down every year. So they don't gain any recruiting advantage. Even if they do get promoted, recruits (and fans) know that there's a decent liklihood that they'll be relegated to the lower division in the next few years anyways.

So this does nothing to help the teams on the bottom. All that promotion/relegation does is give the Ohio States and Alabamas of the world an extra tool to use in recruiting. Top recruits KNOW that Florida State and Texas will never be relegated, so they will go there rather than Duke or Baylor.

You won't witness a big flood of top recruits to AAC and MWC schools; instead, you'll see all a stricter hierarchy WITHIN the Big 10, SEC, and PAC as recruits avoid the teams likely to be relegated.

Strong evaluation. +3

Too many sports. If you extract football from the rest of the athletic department you create a Title IX issue.

Too many teams. There are ~44 English soccer teams. There are 128 FBS+ teams

Too big of a territory. The US is 75 times as large as England. That takes a very large travel budget.

(11-05-2014 06:28 PM)Wolfman Wrote:  Too many sports. If you extract football from the rest of the athletic department you create a Title IX issue.

Too many teams. There are ~44 English soccer teams. There are 128 FBS+ teams

Too big of a territory. The US is 75 times as large as England. That takes a very large travel budget.

There are a lot more English football teams. Their entire promotion/relegation system covers hundreds of teams and dozens of leagues. It's sorta/kinda explained at this link: http://thepyramid.info/asp/pyramid3.asp