(06-07-2016 09:05 PM)prisonmike Wrote:  I hope we do new divisions every 2 years based on the combined conference standings from the previous two seasons. Sun division would have (1, 4, 5, 7, 10) Belt division (2, 3, 6, 8, 9). Tie breaker would be most recent head to head.
For example (based on 2014/15, 10 teams, and CCU starts as #10):

Sun Division:

Georgia Southern
Louisiana
South Alabama
Troy
Costal Carolina

Belt Division:

Arkansas State
Appalachian State
Texas St.
Georgia State
Louisiana - Monroe


8 Game conference schedule. Conference Championship game is hosted by team with highest ranking or best record. Hopefully played on a Thursday or Friday night primetime on ESPN.

Permanent Rivals:
GASO: GAST, App St
GAST: GASO, Troy
App St: CCU, GASO
CCU: App St, USA
USA: Troy, CCU
Troy: USA, GAST
UL: ULM, TxSt
ULM: UL, Ark St
TxSt: Ark St, UL
Ark St: TxSt, ULM

Oo
----

Sent from my SM-G930F using Tapatalk

(06-08-2016 01:45 PM)WolfBird Wrote:  

(06-08-2016 01:44 PM)SkullyMaroo Wrote:  The championship game is good and bad. I'm not looking forward to the first time something like this happens:

Team A from one division goes 8-0 in conference
Team B from the other division goes 5-3, but wins that division (probably through tie breaks)
During the regular season Team A beat Team B by 28 points
During the title game Team B edges Team A by one point on a last second field goal.

Who is the better team?

A has to take care of business. It'll happen just like it does every March.

But you can't say let's not have it by cause the wrong team might win.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Ahhh. What us Braves fans like to call the Marlins scenario. Please excuse me. I have a meeting to attend.

King Division:

Arkansas State
Appalachian State
Georgia State
Louisiana - Monroe
Troy


Karl Division:

Georgia Southern
Louisiana
South Alabama
Texas St.
Coastal Carolina

Also known as the Front 9 and the Back 9. The commissioner will not be required to attend the CCG depending on tee time availability.

Best overall record should not be part of any tiebreaker but we will have divisions so that should help. Non-conference schedules vary wildly and cannot be used unless we want to encourage everyone to schedule 4 FCS games a year.

If two division members have the same record the tie-breakers should be:

- head-to-head
- division record
- record vs. highest division member not tied for first
- overall record (weighted for SOS)

(06-09-2016 09:15 AM)Saint3333 Wrote:  If two division members have the same record the tie-breakers should be:

- head-to-head
- division record
- record vs. highest division member not tied for first
- overall record (weighted for SOS)

Problem is, how do you weight it the SOS?


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

(06-08-2016 02:09 PM)GoBigRed26 Wrote:  

(06-08-2016 01:21 PM)ChooChoo Wrote:  

(06-08-2016 01:11 PM)WolfBird Wrote:  

(06-08-2016 01:09 PM)AppManDG Wrote:  I'm honestly not a big fan of a CCG with less than a 16 team two division league. Yea we'll get another game on TV and maybe a little more cash, but from it's a little lame playing someone you just beat a couple weeks before to be conference champion.

No guarantee it's a rematch.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

88% chance it's a rematch

Your math is off. It's 80%. If we split into two 5-team divisions, you will play the other four teams in your division, and 4 of the 5 teams in the other division. So if you make it to the championship game, you will have played 4 out of the 5 teams. 4/5=0.8=80%.

There's no way we will go to 16 teams, and then we would lose more money by splitting the pie up further. If we are going to do a CCG, I would prefer to add 2 more teams. That way, it drops down to a 50% chance the CCG is a rematch. We also don't get to beat up on eachother as much and will have more teams with better records. CFP money would be the same, but we would lose just shy of $17k per team for TV contract. Not bad, but we could make that up with the CCG being televised.

Not saying or advocating going to 16 teams. Just saying, imo, that's the only way I think a CCG actually works well for all concerned.

(06-09-2016 09:15 AM)Saint3333 Wrote:  If two division members have the same record the tie-breakers should be:

- head-to-head
- division record
- record vs. highest division member not tied for first
- overall [conference] record

I like your idea, just 1 minor change
[/i]

The easiest way would be to weight it by opponent's record (similar to RPI), excluding FCS games.

Multiply team A's record times the winning percentage of their opponents compared to team B's, if the same, flip the dreaded coin.

In reality head to head will take care of the tie-breaker unless there's a three way tie in which all three beat each other.

Easiest solution

stAte goes 8-0 every year in the league, and east just volunteers us a victim for the title game.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

(06-09-2016 09:27 AM)GS99-00 Wrote:  

(06-09-2016 09:15 AM)Saint3333 Wrote:  If two division members have the same record the tie-breakers should be:

- head-to-head
- division record
- record vs. highest division member not tied for first
- overall [conference] record

I like your idea, just 1 minor change
[/i]

To get to the tie-breaker they would already have the same conference record. You don't win your division by going 4-4 having beaten all the conference members in your division. You win it by having the best overall conference record for your division.

You have to use divisions to do it right and who the hell wants 9 conference games anyhow. With divisions, the tiebreaker is simple. Head to head breaks the tie. End of story.

(06-09-2016 09:41 AM)Crump1 Wrote:  You have to use divisions to do it right and who the hell wants 9 conference games anyhow. With divisions, the tiebreaker is simple. Head to head breaks the tie. End of story.

Unless you have a three way tie within a division.

(06-09-2016 09:31 AM)Saint3333 Wrote:  

(06-09-2016 09:27 AM)GS99-00 Wrote:  

(06-09-2016 09:15 AM)Saint3333 Wrote:  If two division members have the same record the tie-breakers should be:

- head-to-head
- division record
- record vs. highest division member not tied for first
- overall [conference] record

I like your idea, just 1 minor change
[/i]

To get to the tie-breaker they would already have the same conference record. You don't win your division by going 4-4 having beaten all the conference members in your division. You win it by having the best overall conference record for your division.

I mean similar to the PAC-12:

2 teams: head-to-head

3 teams or more:

1. head-to-head results (best record in games bw tied teams)
2. record in inter-divisional games
3. record against the next highest placed team in the division (based on the record in all conference games), proceeding through division
4. record in common conference games

(06-09-2016 09:43 AM)GS99-00 Wrote:  

(06-09-2016 09:31 AM)Saint3333 Wrote:  

(06-09-2016 09:27 AM)GS99-00 Wrote:  

(06-09-2016 09:15 AM)Saint3333 Wrote:  If two division members have the same record the tie-breakers should be:

- head-to-head
- division record
- record vs. highest division member not tied for first
- overall [conference] record

I like your idea, just 1 minor change
[/i]

To get to the tie-breaker they would already have the same conference record. You don't win your division by going 4-4 having beaten all the conference members in your division. You win it by having the best overall conference record for your division.

I mean similar to the PAC-12:

2 teams: head-to-head

3 teams or more:

1. head-to-head results (best record in games bw tied teams)
2. record in inter-divisional games
3. record against the next highest placed team in the division (based on the record in all conference games), proceeding through division
4. record in common conference games

That is a good point and I'd actually put your #4 as #3 or maybe even #2.

(06-09-2016 09:43 AM)arkstfan Wrote:  

(06-09-2016 09:41 AM)Crump1 Wrote:  You have to use divisions to do it right and who the hell wants 9 conference games anyhow. With divisions, the tiebreaker is simple. Head to head breaks the tie. End of story.

Unless you have a three way tie within a division.

Impossible!

(06-09-2016 09:57 AM)Crump1 Wrote:  

(06-09-2016 09:43 AM)arkstfan Wrote:  

(06-09-2016 09:41 AM)Crump1 Wrote:  You have to use divisions to do it right and who the hell wants 9 conference games anyhow. With divisions, the tiebreaker is simple. Head to head breaks the tie. End of story.

Unless you have a three way tie within a division.

Impossible!

Yes it is possible.
GS 7-1 in conference lost to AppSt.
GSU 7-1 in conference lost to GS
AppSt 7-1 in conference lost to GSU.

All 3 have the same in conference record and the same record in there division.

Look at how the SoCon does tie-breakers and do the opposite

(06-09-2016 12:05 PM)ValleyBoy Wrote:  

(06-09-2016 09:57 AM)Crump1 Wrote:  

(06-09-2016 09:43 AM)arkstfan Wrote:  

(06-09-2016 09:41 AM)Crump1 Wrote:  You have to use divisions to do it right and who the hell wants 9 conference games anyhow. With divisions, the tiebreaker is simple. Head to head breaks the tie. End of story.

Unless you have a three way tie within a division.

Impossible!

Yes it is possible.
GS 7-1 in conference lost to AppSt.
GSU 7-1 in conference lost to GS
AppSt 7-1 in conference lost to GSU.

All 3 have the same in conference record and the same record in there division.

I know. I was joking. We finished in a 3 way tie in 2005.

They have 2 years to figure out tie-breaker scenarios. I know, given the SBC, that may not be enough time.
Now, if they actually get that done we may not be privy to it anyway. It will probably be hidden behind that cloak like the rest of the by laws.