(11-23-2019 03:59 PM)toddjnsn Wrote:  I do NOT see divisions going away at all. :)

With 12+ teams in conferences (sans B12, for now) -- and want to make excuses to have even 16 teams -- you're going to need Divisions, sorry.

Otherwise, a Conf Championship game doesn't hold as much weight.

Why?

Quote:I can see the SEC not liking their division format. Getting rid of them isn't the solution at all. The way the B12 has it is UNIDEAL. The *ONLY* reason they have a Conf Championship in their weird format is because not having one costs the B12 Champ the ability to go to the 4-team playoff.

Considering in just a handful of years, there'll most likely be an 8 team playoff where all P5 Champs go -- that's not going to be an issue to the B12. And they'll end up having a couple extra teams most likely when this happens anyway (and once you have a championship game, no matter how weird the conference setup is, they ain't taking it away anyway).

You don't want "re-match re-do" games to decide a conf champ. That's ridiculous. Does any other sport people watch, in their conference with no divisions of separation, have a conf championship GAME among the #1 & #2 teams?

I would instead see a conference like the SEC mixing it up. EX: Shifting 4 teams into another division every 4 years.

I get the rematch argument, but that happens with divisions as well. See example 1, AAC.

I created a clause where if the finale is between the top two teams, the loser cannot appear in the CCG. It becomes a play-in game essentially.*

Although, the rematch should be at a neutral location, spicing things up.


*I believe the same for the current playoff, actually. If a team loses their CCG, they should be eliminated.