Combine MWC/AAC, add Gonzaga, Wichita, and VCU and call it a day.

(04-07-2015 04:06 PM)NBPirate Wrote:  Combine MWC/AAC, add Gonzaga, Wichita, and VCU and call it a day.

There is such thing as too much.

(04-07-2015 02:20 PM)Kruciff Wrote:  Link

Quote:The move would directly impact the Big 12 and ACC, which developed the legislation. The Big 12, which is the only Power Five league without a championship game, is merely seeking the option of staging such a contest with 10 teams. The ACC's ultimate intentions with a 14-team league in football, one which already holds a championship game, are not clear.

Current NCAA rules state a league must have at least 12 teams in order to play a conference title game. Those teams also must play a round-robin within each division.

If this is true, P5 expansion is off the table.

Time to shore up the best of the G5 status, and maximize our CFP contention.

We need that 4 pod setup asap.

Why?

(04-07-2015 04:23 PM)blunderbuss Wrote:  

(04-07-2015 02:20 PM)Kruciff Wrote:  Link

Quote:The move would directly impact the Big 12 and ACC, which developed the legislation. The Big 12, which is the only Power Five league without a championship game, is merely seeking the option of staging such a contest with 10 teams. The ACC's ultimate intentions with a 14-team league in football, one which already holds a championship game, are not clear.

Current NCAA rules state a league must have at least 12 teams in order to play a conference title game. Those teams also must play a round-robin within each division.

If this is true, P5 expansion is off the table.

Time to shore up the best of the G5 status, and maximize our CFP contention.

We need that 4 pod setup asap.

Why?

Exactly. All a 4 pod set up does is make it harder to determine which 2 pod champs should be in the CCG. With 3 pods, you just have to eliminate one--plus its easier to preserve and encourage rivalries.

What actually is kind of an interesting idea is to go with 3 6-team pods and a 7 game conference schedule. That gives you 5 games in your pod, one game vs each of the other pods, and one extra opportunity to schedule a P5 OOC game. That's one way to potentially allow conference members to upgrade their schedules. The down side is that it causes unbalanced home-away conference schedules.

(04-07-2015 04:23 PM)blunderbuss Wrote:  

(04-07-2015 02:20 PM)Kruciff Wrote:  Link

Quote:The move would directly impact the Big 12 and ACC, which developed the legislation. The Big 12, which is the only Power Five league without a championship game, is merely seeking the option of staging such a contest with 10 teams. The ACC's ultimate intentions with a 14-team league in football, one which already holds a championship game, are not clear.

Current NCAA rules state a league must have at least 12 teams in order to play a conference title game. Those teams also must play a round-robin within each division.

If this is true, P5 expansion is off the table.

Time to shore up the best of the G5 status, and maximize our CFP contention.

We need that 4 pod setup asap.

Why?

Addition by subtraction.

Everyone knows the At Large slot is going to be between the MWC and AAC every year, if we take away the quality programs from the MWC, whats to stop that bid from being ours every year?

(04-07-2015 04:28 PM)Attackcoog Wrote:  

(04-07-2015 04:23 PM)blunderbuss Wrote:  

(04-07-2015 02:20 PM)Kruciff Wrote:  Link

Quote:The move would directly impact the Big 12 and ACC, which developed the legislation. The Big 12, which is the only Power Five league without a championship game, is merely seeking the option of staging such a contest with 10 teams. The ACC's ultimate intentions with a 14-team league in football, one which already holds a championship game, are not clear.

Current NCAA rules state a league must have at least 12 teams in order to play a conference title game. Those teams also must play a round-robin within each division.

If this is true, P5 expansion is off the table.

Time to shore up the best of the G5 status, and maximize our CFP contention.

We need that 4 pod setup asap.

Why?

Exactly. All a 4 pod set up does is make it harder to determine which 2 pod champs should be in the CCG. With 3 pods, you just have to eliminate one--plus its easier to preserve and encourage rivalries.

What actually is kind of an interesting idea is to go with 3 6-team pods and a 7 game conference schedule. That gives you 5 games in your pod, one game vs each of the other pods, and one extra opportunity to schedule a P5 OOC game. That's one way to potentially allow conference members to upgrade their schedules. The down side is that it causes unbalanced home-away conference schedules.

You Sir have missed the point. The only reason to go this route in the first place is to set yourself as a Power Conference as there would be none left close to you. So by subtracting games within your conference, you minimize your conferences earning potential to it's media partner. Yikes!!!!

(04-07-2015 04:28 PM)Attackcoog Wrote:  

(04-07-2015 04:23 PM)blunderbuss Wrote:  

(04-07-2015 02:20 PM)Kruciff Wrote:  Link

Quote:The move would directly impact the Big 12 and ACC, which developed the legislation. The Big 12, which is the only Power Five league without a championship game, is merely seeking the option of staging such a contest with 10 teams. The ACC's ultimate intentions with a 14-team league in football, one which already holds a championship game, are not clear.

Current NCAA rules state a league must have at least 12 teams in order to play a conference title game. Those teams also must play a round-robin within each division.

If this is true, P5 expansion is off the table.

Time to shore up the best of the G5 status, and maximize our CFP contention.

We need that 4 pod setup asap.

Why?

Exactly. All a 4 pod set up does is make it harder to determine which 2 pod champs should be in the CCG. With 3 pods, you just have to eliminate one--plus its easier to preserve and encourage rivalries.

What actually is kind of an interesting idea is to go with 3 6-team pods and a 7 game conference schedule. That gives you 5 games in your pod, one game vs each of the other pods, and one extra opportunity to schedule a P5 OOC game. That's one way to potentially allow conference members to upgrade their schedules. The down side is that it causes unbalanced home-away conference schedules.

The only way we could make an even 10 game schedule with 3 pods is if each pod had 7 members. I don't think a 21 team conference will fly.

4 pods, if championships are truly deregulated, allows for a semifinal, which would draw eyeballs imo. 4 pods of 4 is not too cumbersome, and fills our needs to the extent that we need it.

(04-07-2015 04:35 PM)Kruciff Wrote:  

(04-07-2015 04:28 PM)Attackcoog Wrote:  

(04-07-2015 04:23 PM)blunderbuss Wrote:  

(04-07-2015 02:20 PM)Kruciff Wrote:  Link

Quote:The move would directly impact the Big 12 and ACC, which developed the legislation. The Big 12, which is the only Power Five league without a championship game, is merely seeking the option of staging such a contest with 10 teams. The ACC's ultimate intentions with a 14-team league in football, one which already holds a championship game, are not clear.

Current NCAA rules state a league must have at least 12 teams in order to play a conference title game. Those teams also must play a round-robin within each division.

If this is true, P5 expansion is off the table.

Time to shore up the best of the G5 status, and maximize our CFP contention.

We need that 4 pod setup asap.

Why?

Exactly. All a 4 pod set up does is make it harder to determine which 2 pod champs should be in the CCG. With 3 pods, you just have to eliminate one--plus its easier to preserve and encourage rivalries.

What actually is kind of an interesting idea is to go with 3 6-team pods and a 7 game conference schedule. That gives you 5 games in your pod, one game vs each of the other pods, and one extra opportunity to schedule a P5 OOC game. That's one way to potentially allow conference members to upgrade their schedules. The down side is that it causes unbalanced home-away conference schedules.

The only way we could make an even 10 game schedule with 3 pods is if each pod had 7 members. I don't think a 21 team conference will fly.

4 pods, if championships are truly deregulated, allows for a semifinal, which would draw eyeballs imo. 4 pods of 4 is not too cumbersome, and fills our needs to the extent that we need it.

Why the hell do you need 21 members OR 10 conference games, especially if it's deregulated? You're not making much sense here. If we COULD raid the MWC, just take enough members to get to 18 for football and 16 for basketball (2 FB only including Navy). Split into 2 divisions of 9 and have no cross divisional play until the championship game. That's how I'd do it. It makes the most sense geographically and preserves the rivalries. Pods are ridiculous IMO.

All that said, we probably can't raid the MWC.

(04-07-2015 04:22 PM)Kruciff Wrote:  

(04-07-2015 04:06 PM)NBPirate Wrote:  Combine MWC/AAC, add Gonzaga, Wichita, and VCU and call it a day.

There is such thing as too much.

WEST
Gonzaga* (Air Force)
Fresno State
San Diego State
BYU
Boise State

SOUTH
SMU
Houston
Rice
Tulsa
Wichita State* (Navy)

NORTH
Cincinnati
Temple
Connecticut
Massachusetts
VCU* (Army)

EAST
Tulane
Memphis
UCF
South Florida
East Carolina

(04-07-2015 04:51 PM)Carolina_Low_Country Wrote:  WEST
Gonzaga* (Air Force)
Fresno State
San Diego State
BYU
Boise State

SOUTH
SMU
Houston
Rice
Tulsa
Wichita State* (Navy)

NORTH
Cincinnati
Temple
Connecticut
Massachusetts
VCU* (Army)

EAST
Tulane
Memphis
UCF
South Florida
East Carolina

I could get behind this.

Example 2017 FB Schedule:
• @Texas
• vs. Maryland (would have to change this, as it's originally scheduled for away)
• vs. Boise State
• @Houston
• vs. Cincinnati
• @ San Diego State
• vs. Tulsa
• @Temple
• vs. Tulane
• vs. Memphis
• @ECU
• vs. USF
• CONFERENCE SEMIFINAL
• CONFERENCE FINAL
• CFP SEMIFINAL
• CFP FINAL
  

One can dream

(04-07-2015 04:51 PM)Carolina_Low_Country Wrote:  WEST
Gonzaga* (Air Force)
Fresno State
San Diego State
BYU
Boise State

SOUTH
SMU
Houston
Rice
Tulsa
Wichita State* (Navy)

NORTH
Cincinnati
Temple
Connecticut
Massachusetts
VCU* (Army)

EAST
Tulane
Memphis
UCF
South Florida
East Carolina

That makes no geographical sense for ECU

(04-07-2015 04:55 PM)NBPirate Wrote:  

(04-07-2015 04:51 PM)Carolina_Low_Country Wrote:  WEST
Gonzaga* (Air Force)
Fresno State
San Diego State
BYU
Boise State

SOUTH
SMU
Houston
Rice
Tulsa
Wichita State* (Navy)

NORTH
Cincinnati
Temple
Connecticut
Massachusetts
VCU* (Army)

EAST
Tulane
Memphis
UCF
South Florida
East Carolina

That makes no geographical sense for ECU

That's why 3 6-team divisions work a little better. The reality of the AAC is there are 2 3-team clusters, and two 2-team clusters. We have already fought the divisional battle. The 6-team divisions allows the existing divisions to be used and basically just preserves the compromises already made.

(04-07-2015 04:38 PM)blunderbuss Wrote:  

(04-07-2015 04:35 PM)Kruciff Wrote:  

(04-07-2015 04:28 PM)Attackcoog Wrote:  

(04-07-2015 04:23 PM)blunderbuss Wrote:  

(04-07-2015 02:20 PM)Kruciff Wrote:  Link


If this is true, P5 expansion is off the table.

Time to shore up the best of the G5 status, and maximize our CFP contention.

We need that 4 pod setup asap.

Why?

Exactly. All a 4 pod set up does is make it harder to determine which 2 pod champs should be in the CCG. With 3 pods, you just have to eliminate one--plus its easier to preserve and encourage rivalries.

What actually is kind of an interesting idea is to go with 3 6-team pods and a 7 game conference schedule. That gives you 5 games in your pod, one game vs each of the other pods, and one extra opportunity to schedule a P5 OOC game. That's one way to potentially allow conference members to upgrade their schedules. The down side is that it causes unbalanced home-away conference schedules.

The only way we could make an even 10 game schedule with 3 pods is if each pod had 7 members. I don't think a 21 team conference will fly.

4 pods, if championships are truly deregulated, allows for a semifinal, which would draw eyeballs imo. 4 pods of 4 is not too cumbersome, and fills our needs to the extent that we need it.

Why the hell do you need 21 members OR 10 conference games, especially if it's deregulated? You're not making much sense here. If we COULD raid the MWC, just take enough members to get to 18 for football and 16 for basketball (2 FB only including Navy). Split into 2 divisions of 9 and have no cross divisional play until the championship game. That's how I'd do it. It makes the most sense geographically and preserves the rivalries. Pods are ridiculous IMO.

All that said, we probably can't raid the MWC.

The CUSA/MWC alliance lives. It's now proposed to be called a conference instead of an alliance.

(04-07-2015 05:20 PM)oldtiger Wrote:  

(04-07-2015 04:38 PM)blunderbuss Wrote:  

(04-07-2015 04:35 PM)Kruciff Wrote:  

(04-07-2015 04:28 PM)Attackcoog Wrote:  

(04-07-2015 04:23 PM)blunderbuss Wrote:  Why?

Exactly. All a 4 pod set up does is make it harder to determine which 2 pod champs should be in the CCG. With 3 pods, you just have to eliminate one--plus its easier to preserve and encourage rivalries. The biggest problem with it was it didn't work under NCAA rules. Now it would.

What actually is kind of an interesting idea is to go with 3 6-team pods and a 7 game conference schedule. That gives you 5 games in your pod, one game vs each of the other pods, and one extra opportunity to schedule a P5 OOC game. That's one way to potentially allow conference members to upgrade their schedules. The down side is that it causes unbalanced home-away conference schedules.

The only way we could make an even 10 game schedule with 3 pods is if each pod had 7 members. I don't think a 21 team conference will fly.

4 pods, if championships are truly deregulated, allows for a semifinal, which would draw eyeballs imo. 4 pods of 4 is not too cumbersome, and fills our needs to the extent that we need it.

Why the hell do you need 21 members OR 10 conference games, especially if it's deregulated? You're not making much sense here. If we COULD raid the MWC, just take enough members to get to 18 for football and 16 for basketball (2 FB only including Navy). Split into 2 divisions of 9 and have no cross divisional play until the championship game. That's how I'd do it. It makes the most sense geographically and preserves the rivalries. Pods are ridiculous IMO.

All that said, we probably can't raid the MWC.

The CUSA/MWC alliance lives. It's now proposed to be called a conference instead of an alliance.

Truth be told---I liked the idea when it was proposed by Banowsky and Thompson in 2011. Not enough to blow off the Big East invite (when the BE still had Notre Dame, the C7, Louisville, Rutgers, W Virginia, and a BCS bowl)---but I did like the merger idea.

(04-07-2015 05:28 PM)Attackcoog Wrote:  Truth be told---I liked the idea when it was proposed by Banowsky and Thompson in 2011. Not enough to blow off the Big East invite (when the BE has Notre Dame, the C7, Louisville, Rutgers, W Virginia, and a BCS bowl)---but I did like it merger idea.

IMHO, the alliance was an all-win/no-loss situation.

It gained the advantage of scheduling and appearance of a united "best of G5 assembly of programs" while not being encumbered by confining large conference minutia.

(04-07-2015 04:32 PM)Kruciff Wrote:  

(04-07-2015 04:23 PM)blunderbuss Wrote:  

(04-07-2015 02:20 PM)Kruciff Wrote:  Link

Quote:The move would directly impact the Big 12 and ACC, which developed the legislation. The Big 12, which is the only Power Five league without a championship game, is merely seeking the option of staging such a contest with 10 teams. The ACC's ultimate intentions with a 14-team league in football, one which already holds a championship game, are not clear.

Current NCAA rules state a league must have at least 12 teams in order to play a conference title game. Those teams also must play a round-robin within each division.

If this is true, P5 expansion is off the table.

Time to shore up the best of the G5 status, and maximize our CFP contention.

We need that 4 pod setup asap.

Why?

Addition by subtraction.

Everyone knows the At Large slot is going to be between the MWC and AAC every year, if we take away the quality programs from the MWC, whats to stop that bid from being ours every year?

We already tried that. Failed.

Good god, has this board gone mad?!?

Guys, the AAC doesn't need anyone from the mwc... All we need is 1-3 Olympic only program/s

Wichita State
Gonzaga
VCU/UMass

(04-07-2015 04:22 PM)Kruciff Wrote:  

(04-07-2015 04:06 PM)NBPirate Wrote:  Combine MWC/AAC, add Gonzaga, Wichita, and VCU and call it a day.

There is such thing as too much.

Airport meeting waiting to happen...

Hopefully we have a seat at the Denver Marriott this time