(09-21-2017 01:16 PM)AllTideUp Wrote:  I like 20 as a final number better than 18.

1) You can easily divide into 4 divisions and each division can produce a participant for the conference semis. I think it's much easier than creating a system to select a wildcard.

2) If we go to 9 games then 20 is more conducive to balanced scheduling because 2 divisions can have 5 home games while the other 2 can have 5 away games. They would simply switch the following season. There is no advantage of one division mate over another as would have to be the case if the number is 18. I think that sort of imbalance could lead to issues.

I would suggest this...

West: Texas, Texas Tech, Oklahoma, Oklahoma State, Kansas
Central: Texas A&M, LSU, Arkansas, Missouri, Ole Miss
South: Mississippi State, Alabama, Auburn, Tennessee, Vanderbilt
East: Florida, Georgia, South Carolina, Kentucky, West Virginia

Play each of your division mates annually = 4
Select 2 permanent rivals from any division = 2
Play 1 opponent from each division on a rotational basis = 3

That's 9 games that preserve rivalries and allow plenty of room for non-conference games of note.

As to you last 2 posts, I have no problem with 20 as long as they fit and add. And, the SEC and the Big 10 are the most compact because only the desperate go beyond the natural grasp of their footprint to gain a school. The ACC needed relevance so they get N.D. as a partial. The PAC was dying for market penetration and Denver was attractive. WVU we've covered.

If we want to go to 20 profitably then it needs to be one of these options: Oklahoma, Texas, North Carolina, Duke, Florida State, Clemson; or Oklahoma, Oklahoma State, North Carolina, Duke, Florida State, Clemson; or substitute North Carolina State and Virginia Tech for North Carolina and Duke in either of the first two scenarios. So let's not waste space on the Big 12 until we know absolutely that the ACC is off the menu.