http://www.cbssports.com/collegefootball...ed-by-2016

What's up with 3 divisions? THERE ARE 14 FOOTBALL TEAMS, PEOPLE! 14 is NOT divisible by 3!!!
It's called DIVISION-LESS scheduling!!!
(Will the stupid stuff NEVER end?)

(04-07-2015 01:35 PM)Hokie Mark Wrote:  What's up with 3 divisions? THERE ARE 14 FOOTBALL TEAMS, PEOPLE! 14 is NOT divisible by 3!!!
It's called DIVISION-LESS scheduling!!!
(Will the stupid stuff NEVER end?)

Right. That wouldn't make everyone happy either. No divisions with some permanent rivals is the way to go.

(04-07-2015 01:43 PM)esayem Wrote:  

(04-07-2015 01:35 PM)Hokie Mark Wrote:  What's up with 3 divisions? THERE ARE 14 FOOTBALL TEAMS, PEOPLE! 14 is NOT divisible by 3!!!
It's called DIVISION-LESS scheduling!!!
(Will the stupid stuff NEVER end?)

Right. That wouldn't make everyone happy either. No divisions with some permanent rivals is the way to go.

concur. 3 or 4 perms ought to make everyone happy and allow you to make the rounds in 2 or 3 years. also, it removes the need for a 16th if the irish ever decide to go all in. cue terryD to come in with an independence forever rant in 3, 2, 1...

SB Nation already has a 3 division concept setup:

SB Nation

I highly doubt the rest of the ACC would allow ND to be in that division without a chance of their school playing ND, ever.

(04-07-2015 02:35 PM)cuseroc Wrote:  SB Nation already has a 3 division concept setup:

SB Nation

The biggest problem I have with this is the idea of allowing Notre Dame to play for the ACC football championship at all without being a full member... NO WAY!

(04-07-2015 02:48 PM)Hokie Mark Wrote:  

(04-07-2015 02:35 PM)cuseroc Wrote:  SB Nation already has a 3 division concept setup:

SB Nation

The biggest problem I have with this is the idea of allowing Notre Dame to play for the ACC football championship at all without being a full member... NO WAY!

Not only that, but ND would not be on board with anything that remotely makes it even look like its part of a conference.


I just saved Terry the trouble of having to respond with that message.

Never heard of it (3div) and not sure where Bowlsby is going with it.
I think mostly out of his butt on this one.
Unless he's referring to 'pods' for scheduling which is my guess.

(04-07-2015 02:51 PM)cuseroc Wrote:  

(04-07-2015 02:48 PM)Hokie Mark Wrote:  

(04-07-2015 02:35 PM)cuseroc Wrote:  SB Nation already has a 3 division concept setup:

SB Nation

The biggest problem I have with this is the idea of allowing Notre Dame to play for the ACC football championship at all without being a full member... NO WAY!

Not only that, but ND would not be on board with anything that remotely makes it even look like its part of a conference.


I just saved Terry the trouble of having to respond with that message.

Close call...

14 teams

3 permanent rivals

play one set of 5 one year and another set of 5 the next year.

See every team once every two years.

Common sense.

(04-07-2015 02:48 PM)Hokie Mark Wrote:  

(04-07-2015 02:35 PM)cuseroc Wrote:  SB Nation already has a 3 division concept setup:

SB Nation

The biggest problem I have with this is the idea of allowing Notre Dame to play for the ACC football championship at all without being a full member... NO WAY!

i don't say this lightly, but the dumbest idea on the internet today is, without doubt, the notion that the acc (or any other conference) would allow ND to play in the conference champ game without playing a full conference schedule. I would bet my 401k on that. it won't happen. it won't even be discussed. how any rational person can even consider such a thing is beyond me.

(04-07-2015 03:00 PM)Ragu Wrote:  14 teams

3 permanent rivals

play one set of 5 one year and another set of 5 the next year.

See every team once every two years.

Common sense.

GENIUS!

(04-07-2015 03:05 PM)ren.hoek Wrote:  

(04-07-2015 02:48 PM)Hokie Mark Wrote:  

(04-07-2015 02:35 PM)cuseroc Wrote:  SB Nation already has a 3 division concept setup:

SB Nation

The biggest problem I have with this is the idea of allowing Notre Dame to play for the ACC football championship at all without being a full member... NO WAY!

i don't say this lightly, but the dumbest idea on the internet today is, without doubt, the notion that the acc (or any other conference) would allow ND to play in the conference champ game without playing a full conference schedule. I would bet my 401k on that. it won't happen. it won't even be discussed. how any rational person can even consider such a thing is beyond me.

SAGE!

Yeah, three divisions makes zero sense with 14 members. Unless Bowlsby knows something we don't about the ND's intentions to become the 15th ACC football member, that comment is very bizzare.

If ND is a possibility for the ACC Championship game, the Orange Bowl deal would HAVE to be reworked........wouldn't it?

Deregulating the game takes care of a couple of things:

1) You can schedule whatever way you want. That means teams can see each other more often and the ACC can create better matchups for TV.

2) ACC doesn't have to expand to 16 if/when ND decides to join.

I guarantee this. Swofford has something up his sleeve.

(04-07-2015 03:05 PM)ren.hoek Wrote:  

(04-07-2015 02:48 PM)Hokie Mark Wrote:  

(04-07-2015 02:35 PM)cuseroc Wrote:  SB Nation already has a 3 division concept setup:

SB Nation

The biggest problem I have with this is the idea of allowing Notre Dame to play for the ACC football championship at all without being a full member... NO WAY!

i don't say this lightly, but the dumbest idea on the internet today is, without doubt, the notion that the acc (or any other conference) would allow ND to play in the conference champ game without playing a full conference schedule. I would bet my 401k on that. it won't happen. it won't even be discussed. how any rational person can even consider such a thing is beyond me.

I would be careful making that statement.

Prior to September of 2012 the same thing would have been said about the ACC allowing partial, parasitical membership.

The divisions would not have to be of equal size. If you are alright with the idea of a divisional winner not in the championship game, the math work fine with 14 teams and an 8 game schedule and since a divisional winner is not automatically in the championship game, strength of schedule does not have to be completely equal (although closer to parity still idea).

You could have two 5 team divisions and one 4 team division. Everyone plays round robin in division. That's 4 games for the teams in the 5 team division and 3 for the teams in the 4 team division. Everyone in the 5 team divisions plays 2 teams each from the other two divisions. That works out to everyone in the 4 team divisions playing 5 total games against teams in other divisions.

Edit: In some ways, this is actually very similar to no divisions at all. Everyone just gets 3/4 locked games a year vs. their divisional mates and the division doesn't actually determine who goes to the championship (although you probably cannot have two teams from same division in it). The disadvantage to that set-up is that you can't mix and match the way you could with no divisions (which makes preserving all rivalries harder).

(04-07-2015 02:55 PM)TIGER-PAUL Wrote:  Never heard of it (3div) and not sure where Bowlsby is going with it.
I think mostly out of his butt on this one.
Unless he's referring to 'pods' for scheduling which is my guess.

Have you already forgotten that Conference USA actually did this back in the 1990's?

(04-07-2015 01:43 PM)esayem Wrote:  

(04-07-2015 01:35 PM)Hokie Mark Wrote:  What's up with 3 divisions? THERE ARE 14 FOOTBALL TEAMS, PEOPLE! 14 is NOT divisible by 3!!!
It's called DIVISION-LESS scheduling!!!
(Will the stupid stuff NEVER end?)

Right. That wouldn't make everyone happy either. No divisions with some permanent rivals is the way to go.

Here is an example of how it could look. I did this quickly so obviously there are minor corrections to be made, but I simply made sure each team got to play it's top rival and its closest rival, then fit in the most played (if not already in there) as I could



*The numbers don't mean that is a team's top rival, second rival, etc. as I had the team names in three columns and tried to keep them in the order I moved them to keep them straight for my own accounting, then backfilled.

This is just a starting point. But each team would play three specific teams every year, and 5 games against the other ten teams every other season, for an 8 game schedule. As an added bonus, the league doesn't even have to make it an even flip flop every year. Just make sure each team plays every other team 3 times per six years. That way, certain matchups can be manipulated as needed, say if you have two hotshot quarterbacks, one at Florida State, and say one at Virginia Tech, two teams who otherwise would play every other year. Then they could play each other two years in a row, for example, then skip each other for two seasons, or something like that. Georgia Tech and Pittsburgh have a great game one year? Make the rematch the next season. and so forth.