What would you like to see the league shift to in the future in terms of conference play?
8 game conference slate?
9 game round robin?
Two 5 team divisional play with conference title?
Something else??
Once upon a time, I would've loved to have seen on campus conference title games as well divisional championships. Though the belt can certainly have them thanks to deregulation, just the thought the belt doing so with 10 teams just doesn't sit right with me. While the 9 round robin would seem like the logical way of determining a true conference champion (and King Karl insisting on the belt members to play less money games), I know that's not a feasible choice for everybody.
So, that's why if we choose to be a 10 football member conference, I say sticking with 8 conference games is best all around. I'm certainly not against divisions and championships, but I think you should have 12 members for that (which I still believe for the future well being of the conference may not be a bad idea)
Stick with 10 teams. 8 conference games. Top 2 teams play conference championship game at #1's house.
I prefer an 8 game schedule and if a title game is the price for having that, so be it.
Two 5 team divisions with a title game.
(05-28-2016 12:01 PM)Georgia_Power_Company Wrote: [ -> ]Two 5 team divisions with a title game.
This, and it wouldn't bother me to make it a 7-game league schedule, as (A) it seems weird to have just one member of the conference left off your schedule, and (B) maybe we can forge long-term yearly H&H's with nearby CUSA schools to fill the space.
(05-28-2016 02:58 PM)Pounce FTW Wrote: [ -> ] (05-28-2016 12:01 PM)Georgia_Power_Company Wrote: [ -> ]Two 5 team divisions with a title game.
This, and it wouldn't bother me to make it a 7-game league schedule, as (A) it seems weird to have just one member of the conference left off your schedule, and (B) maybe we can forge long-term yearly H&H's with nearby CUSA schools to fill the space.
What would be the point of a conference if almost half of your games are OOC? It's already hard enough to get 4 OOC games. Five would border on nightmares.
(05-28-2016 03:15 PM)CatMom Wrote: [ -> ] (05-28-2016 02:58 PM)Pounce FTW Wrote: [ -> ] (05-28-2016 12:01 PM)Georgia_Power_Company Wrote: [ -> ]Two 5 team divisions with a title game.
This, and it wouldn't bother me to make it a 7-game league schedule, as (A) it seems weird to have just one member of the conference left off your schedule, and (B) maybe we can forge long-term yearly H&H's with nearby CUSA schools to fill the space.
What would be the point of a conference if almost half of your games are OOC? It's already hard enough to get 4 OOC games. Five would border on nightmares.
7 would work nice. Nothing would prevent two cross conference teams agreeing to play a game if Thai helps those two. It would allow us to have more teams with better records if we win more ooc games. Could help over all in our conference power ranking. And would give us all some wiggle room to do 2 for 1s if needed to get some p5s to our home stadiums.
I'd like us to leave the door open and only require 7 conference games until we get 12 teams.
But still even with 10, yes split 5/5, get as CCG at higher ranked teams house. You play the four others from your side plus at least 3 from the other side. Option of 4.
We've been playing 8 with 2 teams rotating on/off after 2 years. I don't have a problem with that. I think it works and would still work with divisions. That said, it's the SBC offices. They'd probably have a mental meltdown trying to make it work. They should just hire me.
(05-28-2016 04:07 PM)The4thOption Wrote: [ -> ]7 would work nice. Nothing would prevent two cross conference teams agreeing to play a game if Thai helps those two. It would allow us to have more teams with better records if we win more ooc games. Could help over all in our conference power ranking. And would give us all some wiggle room to do 2 for 1s if needed to get some p5s to our home stadiums.
I'd like us to leave the door open and only require 7 conference games until we get 12 teams.
But still even with 10, yes split 5/5, get as CCG at higher ranked teams house. You play the four others from your side plus at least 3 from the other side. Option of 4.
No thanks on the seven-game conference schedule. Creates conference schedules that are too uneven and we have a hard enough time as it is filling up our non-conference schedule.
The problem if we add a championship game is less schedule flexibility. No one would be able to schedule games the last weekend like we have been, so there would be one less bye week for everyone. This makes scheduling our televised weeknight games tougher which would likely put some people on some short weeks.
8 conference games.
I guess a championship game if necessary to keep 8 games.
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
I'm guessing I'm in the minority regarding a championship game but I'm against it. My reasoning is I fear of watching a stadium with lots and lots of empty seats adding to the image many alteady have of our conference.
(05-29-2016 11:57 PM)SBEagle Wrote: [ -> ]I'm guessing I'm in the minority regarding a championship game but I'm against it. My reasoning is I fear of watching a stadium with lots and lots of empty seats adding to the image many alteady have of our conference.
In 2012 AState faced MTSU in a winner takes all season finale before just over 31,200 people. At roughly the same time Tulsa was hosting UCF in the CUSA title game in front of 17,600 and the night before the Pac-12 title game at Stanford drew 31,600 (in the rain in the 50k stadium) rematching a fairly easy win for Stanford that had been played at UCLA.
I think there is ample evidence at title game in Jonesboro, Lafayette, Boone, or Statesboro is little threat to have a bunch of empty seats as long as tix are priced reasonably. Not ruling out other sites being successful it is just that we don't have any comparable data points. You can't project attendance based on finales when a team is limping in from a disappointing season to what they may do as a division champ. Looks like Troy was pulling a bit over 16k in home finales during their title run but there has been time to see that grow.
(05-30-2016 02:25 AM)arkstfan Wrote: [ -> ] (05-29-2016 11:57 PM)SBEagle Wrote: [ -> ]I'm guessing I'm in the minority regarding a championship game but I'm against it. My reasoning is I fear of watching a stadium with lots and lots of empty seats adding to the image many alteady have of our conference.
In 2012 AState faced MTSU in a winner takes all season finale before just over 31,200 people. At roughly the same time Tulsa was hosting UCF in the CUSA title game in front of 17,600 and the night before the Pac-12 title game at Stanford drew 31,600 (in the rain in the 50k stadium) rematching a fairly easy win for Stanford that had been played at UCLA.
I think there is ample evidence at title game in Jonesboro, Lafayette, Boone, or Statesboro is little threat to have a bunch of empty seats as long as tix are priced reasonably. Not ruling out other sites being successful it is just that we don't have any comparable data points. You can't project attendance based on finales when a team is limping in from a disappointing season to what they may do as a division champ. Looks like Troy was pulling a bit over 16k in home finales during their title run but there has been time to see that grow.
Well that is good to hear. If a championship game happens, I hope I'm wrong. Either way you have softened my stance. Thanks for the info.
(05-30-2016 09:16 AM)SBEagle Wrote: [ -> ] (05-30-2016 02:25 AM)arkstfan Wrote: [ -> ] (05-29-2016 11:57 PM)SBEagle Wrote: [ -> ]I'm guessing I'm in the minority regarding a championship game but I'm against it. My reasoning is I fear of watching a stadium with lots and lots of empty seats adding to the image many alteady have of our conference.
In 2012 AState faced MTSU in a winner takes all season finale before just over 31,200 people. At roughly the same time Tulsa was hosting UCF in the CUSA title game in front of 17,600 and the night before the Pac-12 title game at Stanford drew 31,600 (in the rain in the 50k stadium) rematching a fairly easy win for Stanford that had been played at UCLA.
I think there is ample evidence at title game in Jonesboro, Lafayette, Boone, or Statesboro is little threat to have a bunch of empty seats as long as tix are priced reasonably. Not ruling out other sites being successful it is just that we don't have any comparable data points. You can't project attendance based on finales when a team is limping in from a disappointing season to what they may do as a division champ. Looks like Troy was pulling a bit over 16k in home finales during their title run but there has been time to see that grow.
Well that is good to hear. If a championship game happens, I hope I'm wrong. Either way you have softened my stance. Thanks for the info.
Hosting at campus site fixes the attendance problem.
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
There's proof that a Sun Belt title game can draw if it is at a campus site, I think the better question is whether or not we get served any benefit as a league by playing an extra game against conference competition. Also, is the television network good enough to be worth the trouble?
Sure, we might get 30K to Jonesboro or Boone to watch a title game between AState and App one year, but if one of those teams is 12-0 and the other 9-3, is it of a real benefit to the 12-0 team to play the game?
(05-30-2016 10:42 AM)chiefsfan Wrote: [ -> ]There's proof that a Sun Belt title game can draw if it is at a campus site, I think the better question is whether or not we get served any benefit as a league by playing an extra game against conference competition. Also, is the television network good enough to be worth the trouble?
Sure, we might get 30K to Jonesboro or Boone to watch a title game between AState and App one year, but if one of those teams is 12-0 and the other 9-3, is it of a real benefit to the 12-0 team to play the game?
There isn't, but we are going to have to add it to avoid the perception that goes with not having a game.
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
My problem with a championship game is this. If each team plays 8 of the other 9 teams, there is a very high probability that the championship game will be a repeat of a regular season matchup. Consider this scenario. Team A goes 8-0 and is #1. Team B goes 7-1 losing only to team A and is #2. Team B beats team A in the championship game. Both teams are now 8-1 in the conference and have beaten the other team. I know the winner of the championship game will be declared the champion but their case for being the best team in the conference is no stronger than the loser's case. Team A may have had a case for the access bowl before the championship game but not after.
(05-30-2016 12:14 PM)Fark Wrote: [ -> ]My problem with a championship game is this. If each team plays 8 of the other 9 teams, there is a very high probability that the championship game will be a repeat of a regular season matchup. Consider this scenario. Team A goes 8-0 and is #1. Team B goes 7-1 losing only to team A and is #2. Team B beats team A in the championship game. Both teams are now 8-1 in the conference and have beaten the other team. I know the winner of the championship game will be declared the champion but their case for being the best team in the conference is no stronger than the loser's case. Team A may have had a case for the access bowl before the championship game but not after.
Exactly. There is no reason to have one except for the perception people assign those leagues who don't have one.
So just have it and be done with it.
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
(05-30-2016 12:14 PM)Fark Wrote: [ -> ]My problem with a championship game is this. If each team plays 8 of the other 9 teams, there is a very high probability that the championship game will be a repeat of a regular season matchup. Consider this scenario. Team A goes 8-0 and is #1. Team B goes 7-1 losing only to team A and is #2. Team B beats team A in the championship game. Both teams are now 8-1 in the conference and have beaten the other team. I know the winner of the championship game will be declared the champion but their case for being the best team in the conference is no stronger than the loser's case. Team A may have had a case for the access bowl before the championship game but not after.
Two sides to every coin.
If team A wins the game, they have another good win under their belt and the possible spring board needed to put themselves in front of others in the Access Bowl chase. At the very least, they might prevent being leaped frogged or left behind.
I think that we can't plan out of fear. We can't be scared to play another game to prove we belong. At least it helps put the future of where we go into our own hands. If we lose the ccg, we probably don't deserve the Access.
Side note: on the issue of rematches in the title game:
Nobody likes them, but they happen. But until we have 12 teams, this is part of why I like only 7 required conference games. Also, it might help to keep the two highest ranked programs on each side of the conference, off of next year's schedule of the both two highest ranked finishers from the other side. Maybe this would help our top cross divisional teams from only meeting in a ccg.