Hello There, Guest! (LoginRegister)

Post Reply 
Why the AAC will hold at 11
Author Message
Nerdlinger Offline
Realignment Enthusiast
*

Posts: 1,845
Joined: May 2017
Reputation: 80
I Root For: Realignment!
Location: :uoᴉʇɐɔo⌉
Post: #101
RE: Why the AAC will hold at 11
(06-30-2019 01:53 PM)Foreverandever Wrote:  
(06-30-2019 12:45 PM)Attackcoog Wrote:  
(06-30-2019 12:11 PM)quo vadis Wrote:  
(06-30-2019 11:50 AM)adcorbett Wrote:  
(06-30-2019 08:04 AM)quo vadis Wrote:  No question, when the remaining G5 evaluate whatever the AAC proposes, they are going to do so in light of the impact it is likely to have on AAC chances to get the G5 autobid.

I think that what would pass muster with everyone would be a 9-game conference schedule with the two teams with the best conference records - regardless of their CFP ranking or overall record - playing in the CCG. IIRC, that is the Big 12 setup so that is the precedent.

You can’t play nine games with 11 teams. You have the same problem: one team has to have an unbalanced schedule.

Alright, is that true with 8 as well? Is there any way that an 11-team league can't have an unbalanced schedule?

Thats why Ive said---maybe now is the time to just go ahead and address the rules regarding odd numbered leagues holding CCG games. Instead of waivers---just do a permanent fix to the rules so odd numbered conferences will have a reasonable and established way of handling a CCG.

There will some sort of schedule requirements so people can't just work it up, probably something like a certain percentage of teams "permanently set" and a set number of years to rotate to play each team in the conference. Also the rules will be set that the best conference record teams will play and rankings may only used to tie break.

So something like:

To hold a championship game with out a round robin of one or two divisions, a conference must be larger than 10 and set the schedule such that each team is in permanent alignment with one third of the teams (rounded up when a fraction) and must play each school in its conference at least once every four years in a home and home series. The championship must be contested between the teams with the two best conference records. Rankings may not be used to decide the two participants unless it is as a conference record tie breaker.




Examples:

For the SEC, ACC, and B1G (CUSA) ~14 teams~ to go divisionless they would have to play 5 teams in a permanent set up, and than play 4 games to rotate through the other eight teams home and home in four years. Total of 9 games.

For the PAC (AAC, MWC, MAC) ~12 teams~ they would have to play 4 teams in a permanent set up and play 4 games to rotate through the other seven teams in home and home in four years . Total of 8 games.

Should a super league of 16 or ND be given a spot in the ACC..
15 teams would require 5 permanent set up and 5 games to rotate through. Total games 10
16 teams would require 6 permanent set up and 5 games to rotate through. Total games 11

For 11 it would require 4 permanent set up, then 3 games to rotate through the other 6 teams in in four years. Total 7 games.

Teams of course could have more than the minimum requirement of conference games.



Once a complete rotation of home and home have been played against each conference opponent the "permanent" alignment can be altered and a new championship cycle begins. Each cycle must be completed according to the divisionless championship rules before a new alignment or a return to divisions for a championship through round robin can occur.

I don't know why the revised rule for a CCG would be so complicated and restrictive. Maybe just require a round robin for conferences with 9 or fewer FBS members and at least 8 conference games for those with more than 9 FBS members. (Even this may be more restrictive than necessary, since all conferences are already compliant with this even though there's no specific rule like it.) Otherwise, a conference can set up schedules, CCG qualification, and divisions (if they opt for divisions) as it sees fit.
(This post was last modified: 07-02-2019 09:58 PM by Nerdlinger.)
07-02-2019 07:37 AM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
TodgeRodge Offline
All American
*

Posts: 3,448
Joined: Jun 2010
Reputation: 156
I Root For: Todge
Location: Westlake
Post: #102
RE: Why the AAC will hold at 11
(07-02-2019 07:37 AM)Nerdlinger Wrote:  
(06-30-2019 01:53 PM)Foreverandever Wrote:  
(06-30-2019 12:45 PM)Attackcoog Wrote:  
(06-30-2019 12:11 PM)quo vadis Wrote:  
(06-30-2019 11:50 AM)adcorbett Wrote:  You can’t play nine games with 11 teams. You have the same problem: one team has to have an unbalanced schedule.

Alright, is that true with 8 as well? Is there any way that an 11-team league can't have an unbalanced schedule?

Thats why Ive said---maybe now is the time to just go ahead and address the rules regarding odd numbered leagues holding CCG games. Instead of waivers---just do a permanent fix to the rules so odd numbered conferences will have a reasonable and established way of handling a CCG.

There will some sort of schedule requirements so people can't just work it up, probably something like a certain percentage of teams "permanently set" and a set number of years to rotate to play each team in the conference. Also the rules will be set that the best conference record teams will play and rankings may only used to tie break.

So something like:

To hold a championship game with out a round robin of one or two divisions, a conference must be larger than 10 and set the schedule such that each team is in permanent alignment with one third of the teams (rounded up when a fraction) and must play each school in its conference at least once every four years in a home and home series. The championship must be contested between the teams with the two best conference records. Rankings may not be used to decide the two participants unless it is as a conference record tie breaker.




Examples:

For the SEC, ACC, and B1G (CUSA) ~14 teams~ to go divisionless they would have to play 5 teams in a permanent set up, and than play 4 games to rotate through the other eight teams home and home in four years. Total of 9 games.

For the PAC (AAC, MWC, MAC) ~12 teams~ they would have to play 4 teams in a permanent set up and play 4 games to rotate through the other seven teams in home and home in four years . Total of 8 games.

Should a super league of 16 or ND be given a spot in the ACC..
15 teams would require 5 permanent set up and 5 games to rotate through. Total games 10
16 teams would require 6 permanent set up and 5 games to rotate through. Total games 11

For 11 it would require 4 permanent set up, then 3 games to rotate through the other 6 teams in in four years. Total 7 games.

Teams of course could have more than the minimum requirement of conference games.



Once a complete rotation of home and home have been played against each conference opponent the "permanent" alignment can be altered and a new championship cycle begins. Each cycle must be completed according to the divisionless championship rules before a new alignment or a return to divisions for a championship through round robin can occur.

I don't know why the revised rule for a CCG would be so complicated and restricitive. Maybe just require a round robin for conferences with 9 or fewer FBS members and at least 8 conference games for those with more than 9 FBS members. (Even this may be more restrictive than necessary, since all conferences are already compliant with this even though there's no specific rule like it.) Otherwise, a conference can set up schedules, CCG qualification, and divisions (if they opt for divisions) as it sees fit.

the rule does not have to be complicated.....but the facts are the NCAA is not just random people making rules it is the conferences creating and submitting and voting on rules

and in the case of the CCG the Big 10 very specifically and the SEC SEC SEC wanted to make it nor possible for a conference to have divisions and have a CCG with their two top teams in the CCG

they wanted it where if a conference did not play a full conference round robin then they had to play a divisional round robin and match the division winners in the CCG

so there is no reason to think that the same conferences that voted to have the rule that way specifically are prepared to give a pass to one conference (especially the AAC that has NOT made friends in spite of silly claims otherwise)

there is really nothing to suggest they will give a short term pass much less a long term one and I would think IF they gave a short term path it would be with a very short window (like one season) and with a very clear understanding that was the only pass

now if the Big 10 has changed their mind and the Big 12 has forgotten that the AAC voted against any CCG deregulation and the other G5 programs vote the opposite of the way the AAC did when the AAC thought they would back the Big 12 into a corner and force them to expand then perhaps there will be an eventual vote to change the rule completely

but as of now there is no reason to think the SEC SEC SEC will give a pass to the AAC after all the "national champions" talk and the call outs of Florida and LSU and others nor is there any reason to think that the SEC SEC SEC wants the rule changed at all when they were against any deregulation

there is little to suggest the Big 10 is looking to give the AAC a waiver to do something the Big 10 can't (and that the Big 10 was clearly against, and little to suggest that the ACC would give a pass for something they wanted and could not get

and there is little to suggest the other G5 will want to help the AAC out at all even if they might lose a member (most are probably not worried about losing a member at all and a couple might want it to happen)
07-02-2019 09:39 AM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
Attackcoog Online
Moderator
*

Posts: 29,044
Joined: Oct 2011
Reputation: 1264
I Root For: Houston
Location:
Post: #103
RE: Why the AAC will hold at 11
(07-02-2019 09:39 AM)TodgeRodge Wrote:  
(07-02-2019 07:37 AM)Nerdlinger Wrote:  
(06-30-2019 01:53 PM)Foreverandever Wrote:  
(06-30-2019 12:45 PM)Attackcoog Wrote:  
(06-30-2019 12:11 PM)quo vadis Wrote:  Alright, is that true with 8 as well? Is there any way that an 11-team league can't have an unbalanced schedule?

Thats why Ive said---maybe now is the time to just go ahead and address the rules regarding odd numbered leagues holding CCG games. Instead of waivers---just do a permanent fix to the rules so odd numbered conferences will have a reasonable and established way of handling a CCG.

There will some sort of schedule requirements so people can't just work it up, probably something like a certain percentage of teams "permanently set" and a set number of years to rotate to play each team in the conference. Also the rules will be set that the best conference record teams will play and rankings may only used to tie break.

So something like:

To hold a championship game with out a round robin of one or two divisions, a conference must be larger than 10 and set the schedule such that each team is in permanent alignment with one third of the teams (rounded up when a fraction) and must play each school in its conference at least once every four years in a home and home series. The championship must be contested between the teams with the two best conference records. Rankings may not be used to decide the two participants unless it is as a conference record tie breaker.




Examples:

For the SEC, ACC, and B1G (CUSA) ~14 teams~ to go divisionless they would have to play 5 teams in a permanent set up, and than play 4 games to rotate through the other eight teams home and home in four years. Total of 9 games.

For the PAC (AAC, MWC, MAC) ~12 teams~ they would have to play 4 teams in a permanent set up and play 4 games to rotate through the other seven teams in home and home in four years . Total of 8 games.

Should a super league of 16 or ND be given a spot in the ACC..
15 teams would require 5 permanent set up and 5 games to rotate through. Total games 10
16 teams would require 6 permanent set up and 5 games to rotate through. Total games 11

For 11 it would require 4 permanent set up, then 3 games to rotate through the other 6 teams in in four years. Total 7 games.

Teams of course could have more than the minimum requirement of conference games.



Once a complete rotation of home and home have been played against each conference opponent the "permanent" alignment can be altered and a new championship cycle begins. Each cycle must be completed according to the divisionless championship rules before a new alignment or a return to divisions for a championship through round robin can occur.

I don't know why the revised rule for a CCG would be so complicated and restricitive. Maybe just require a round robin for conferences with 9 or fewer FBS members and at least 8 conference games for those with more than 9 FBS members. (Even this may be more restrictive than necessary, since all conferences are already compliant with this even though there's no specific rule like it.) Otherwise, a conference can set up schedules, CCG qualification, and divisions (if they opt for divisions) as it sees fit.

the rule does not have to be complicated.....but the facts are the NCAA is not just random people making rules it is the conferences creating and submitting and voting on rules

and in the case of the CCG the Big 10 very specifically and the SEC SEC SEC wanted to make it nor possible for a conference to have divisions and have a CCG with their two top teams in the CCG

they wanted it where if a conference did not play a full conference round robin then they had to play a divisional round robin and match the division winners in the CCG

so there is no reason to think that the same conferences that voted to have the rule that way specifically are prepared to give a pass to one conference (especially the AAC that has NOT made friends in spite of silly claims otherwise)

there is really nothing to suggest they will give a short term pass much less a long term one and I would think IF they gave a short term path it would be with a very short window (like one season) and with a very clear understanding that was the only pass

now if the Big 10 has changed their mind and the Big 12 has forgotten that the AAC voted against any CCG deregulation and the other G5 programs vote the opposite of the way the AAC did when the AAC thought they would back the Big 12 into a corner and force them to expand then perhaps there will be an eventual vote to change the rule completely

but as of now there is no reason to think the SEC SEC SEC will give a pass to the AAC after all the "national champions" talk and the call outs of Florida and LSU and others nor is there any reason to think that the SEC SEC SEC wants the rule changed at all when they were against any deregulation

there is little to suggest the Big 10 is looking to give the AAC a waiver to do something the Big 10 can't (and that the Big 10 was clearly against, and little to suggest that the ACC would give a pass for something they wanted and could not get

and there is little to suggest the other G5 will want to help the AAC out at all even if they might lose a member (most are probably not worried about losing a member at all and a couple might want it to happen)

Lol....These commissioners are not mad little fanboys pounding out angry messages on bulletin boards. They would laugh their butts off at your post. They work hard to largely get along, and when they don’t—it’s not going to be over some minor waiver to accommodate an odd numbered conference scheduling quirk.

The AAC will get a MAC style waiver to handle the uneven division issues with zero fuss. I agree with most everyone that the AAC will NOT get a waiver to do a division-less CCG without a full conference wide round robin. They aren’t going to get to do something nobody else has been allowed to do. My guess is the AAC won’t even ask for a waiver until they know they have the votes—so they will know not to even bother asking for the divisionless waiver.

The only real question is “will they go for a rule change that would allow EVERY conference to exercise the option the AAC would like to try?”. I suspect that type of rule change might just pass now if the Big10 has actually changed its stance on a divisionless CCG without a full round robin (which it appears it has).
(This post was last modified: 07-02-2019 11:25 AM by Attackcoog.)
07-02-2019 10:31 AM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
ken d Offline
Hall of Famer
*

Posts: 10,208
Joined: Dec 2013
Reputation: 464
I Root For: college sports
Location: Raleigh
Post: #104
RE: Why the AAC will hold at 11
(07-02-2019 09:39 AM)TodgeRodge Wrote:  
(07-02-2019 07:37 AM)Nerdlinger Wrote:  
(06-30-2019 01:53 PM)Foreverandever Wrote:  
(06-30-2019 12:45 PM)Attackcoog Wrote:  
(06-30-2019 12:11 PM)quo vadis Wrote:  Alright, is that true with 8 as well? Is there any way that an 11-team league can't have an unbalanced schedule?

Thats why Ive said---maybe now is the time to just go ahead and address the rules regarding odd numbered leagues holding CCG games. Instead of waivers---just do a permanent fix to the rules so odd numbered conferences will have a reasonable and established way of handling a CCG.

There will some sort of schedule requirements so people can't just work it up, probably something like a certain percentage of teams "permanently set" and a set number of years to rotate to play each team in the conference. Also the rules will be set that the best conference record teams will play and rankings may only used to tie break.

So something like:

To hold a championship game with out a round robin of one or two divisions, a conference must be larger than 10 and set the schedule such that each team is in permanent alignment with one third of the teams (rounded up when a fraction) and must play each school in its conference at least once every four years in a home and home series. The championship must be contested between the teams with the two best conference records. Rankings may not be used to decide the two participants unless it is as a conference record tie breaker.




Examples:

For the SEC, ACC, and B1G (CUSA) ~14 teams~ to go divisionless they would have to play 5 teams in a permanent set up, and than play 4 games to rotate through the other eight teams home and home in four years. Total of 9 games.

For the PAC (AAC, MWC, MAC) ~12 teams~ they would have to play 4 teams in a permanent set up and play 4 games to rotate through the other seven teams in home and home in four years . Total of 8 games.

Should a super league of 16 or ND be given a spot in the ACC..
15 teams would require 5 permanent set up and 5 games to rotate through. Total games 10
16 teams would require 6 permanent set up and 5 games to rotate through. Total games 11

For 11 it would require 4 permanent set up, then 3 games to rotate through the other 6 teams in in four years. Total 7 games.

Teams of course could have more than the minimum requirement of conference games.



Once a complete rotation of home and home have been played against each conference opponent the "permanent" alignment can be altered and a new championship cycle begins. Each cycle must be completed according to the divisionless championship rules before a new alignment or a return to divisions for a championship through round robin can occur.

I don't know why the revised rule for a CCG would be so complicated and restricitive. Maybe just require a round robin for conferences with 9 or fewer FBS members and at least 8 conference games for those with more than 9 FBS members. (Even this may be more restrictive than necessary, since all conferences are already compliant with this even though there's no specific rule like it.) Otherwise, a conference can set up schedules, CCG qualification, and divisions (if they opt for divisions) as it sees fit.

the rule does not have to be complicated.....but the facts are the NCAA is not just random people making rules it is the conferences creating and submitting and voting on rules

and in the case of the CCG the Big 10 very specifically and the SEC SEC SEC wanted to make it nor possible for a conference to have divisions and have a CCG with their two top teams in the CCG

they wanted it where if a conference did not play a full conference round robin then they had to play a divisional round robin and match the division winners in the CCG

so there is no reason to think that the same conferences that voted to have the rule that way specifically are prepared to give a pass to one conference (especially the AAC that has NOT made friends in spite of silly claims otherwise)

there is really nothing to suggest they will give a short term pass much less a long term one and I would think IF they gave a short term path it would be with a very short window (like one season) and with a very clear understanding that was the only pass

now if the Big 10 has changed their mind and the Big 12 has forgotten that the AAC voted against any CCG deregulation and the other G5 programs vote the opposite of the way the AAC did when the AAC thought they would back the Big 12 into a corner and force them to expand then perhaps there will be an eventual vote to change the rule completely

but as of now there is no reason to think the SEC SEC SEC will give a pass to the AAC after all the "national champions" talk and the call outs of Florida and LSU and others nor is there any reason to think that the SEC SEC SEC wants the rule changed at all when they were against any deregulation

there is little to suggest the Big 10 is looking to give the AAC a waiver to do something the Big 10 can't (and that the Big 10 was clearly against, and little to suggest that the ACC would give a pass for something they wanted and could not get

and there is little to suggest the other G5 will want to help the AAC out at all even if they might lose a member (most are probably not worried about losing a member at all and a couple might want it to happen)

Sounds like junior high all over again. Aren't there any adults making these decisions?
07-02-2019 11:21 AM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
ken d Offline
Hall of Famer
*

Posts: 10,208
Joined: Dec 2013
Reputation: 464
I Root For: college sports
Location: Raleigh
Post: #105
RE: Why the AAC will hold at 11
(06-29-2019 04:59 PM)quo vadis Wrote:  
(06-29-2019 10:10 AM)Attackcoog Wrote:  
(06-29-2019 09:47 AM)usffan Wrote:  
(06-29-2019 09:35 AM)GTFletch Wrote:  AAC Unlikely to Expand...Unless

NCAA by-laws state that any conference which holds a championship game (The AAC does) and is smaller than 12 teams MUST play a full round robin schedule. The initial sentiment among AAC members, who will hold a conference call on Friday, is to follow that path.

The conference is just starting a new 12-year $1 billion television contract with ESPN, which boosts payoff for each team from $2 million per season to slightly under $ 7 million per team. That amount was partially based on the AAC having a championship game in football.

For the AAC to meet the NCAA requirements, it would have to schedule an unprecedented 10 conference games per season. That is not likely to happen. AAC commissioner Mike Aresco said on Thursday he was confident the NCAA would grant the AAC a waiver on that requirement, wondering why the NCAA would enforce a rule that would basically require the AAC potentially raiding another conference to get back to 12 teams.

The quickest path for the AAC to get back to 12 teams would be to add one team in football only, similar to the arrangement Navy now has with the conference. The two most attractive teams who have independent status in football are Army and BYU

Link
https://collegesportsmaven.io/tmg/mark-b...jI3f7E2Qg/

This is not the first time I've seen this written. It is 100% factually untrue. Look no further than the Sun Belt Conference. They have 10 members. They play 8 conference games. They have 2 divisions. Their division champions play.

It is appalling how many "reporters" just write things without fact checking them. Or how easy it is to create a website, write something and have somebody cite it as fact.

USFFan

Exactly. Ive already posted the exact verbiage from the NCAA handbook in another thread. There is no longer any reference to a minimum number of members required in a conference as a prerequisite for dividing into divisions (for the purpose of having a CCG). The only limitations are there can only be 2 divisions, the 2 divisions must be as close to equal as possible, and they must play a complete round robin within each division. There is no specific requirement that all teams play the same number of conference games.

I agree with you about the wording of the NCAA rule, but maybe one reason for that is that a conference would be nutso these days to have a CCG and a situation where some teams are playing more conference games than others. That is just patently unfair to the teams that have to play more.

And sometimes it will be patently unfair to the teams that have to play less. You'll never know in advance which will happen.
07-02-2019 11:53 AM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
ken d Offline
Hall of Famer
*

Posts: 10,208
Joined: Dec 2013
Reputation: 464
I Root For: college sports
Location: Raleigh
Post: #106
RE: Why the AAC will hold at 11
(06-30-2019 08:04 AM)quo vadis Wrote:  
(06-29-2019 05:18 PM)TripleA Wrote:  
(06-29-2019 04:59 PM)quo vadis Wrote:  
(06-29-2019 10:10 AM)Attackcoog Wrote:  
(06-29-2019 09:47 AM)usffan Wrote:  This is not the first time I've seen this written. It is 100% factually untrue. Look no further than the Sun Belt Conference. They have 10 members. They play 8 conference games. They have 2 divisions. Their division champions play.

It is appalling how many "reporters" just write things without fact checking them. Or how easy it is to create a website, write something and have somebody cite it as fact.

USFFan

Exactly. Ive already posted the exact verbiage from the NCAA handbook in another thread. There is no longer any reference to a minimum number of members required in a conference as a prerequisite for dividing into divisions (for the purpose of having a CCG). The only limitations are there can only be 2 divisions, the 2 divisions must be as close to equal as possible, and they must play a complete round robin within each division. There is no specific requirement that all teams play the same number of conference games.

I agree with you about the wording of the NCAA rule, but maybe one reason for that is that a conference would be nutso these days to have a CCG and a situation where some teams are playing more conference games than others. That is just patently unfair to the teams that have to play more.

The only clean way is to get a waiver or a rule change, play 8 conference games (or maybe 9 if Navy would budge), and let the 2 highest ranked teams play the CCG.

BUT, I think the other G5 schools would object, if they used the top 2 highest ranked (which Aresco has mentioned), and not the 2 with the best conference game records.

No question, when the remaining G5 evaluate whatever the AAC proposes, they are going to do so in light of the impact it is likely to have on AAC chances to get the G5 autobid.

I think that what would pass muster with everyone would be a 9-game conference schedule with the two teams with the best conference records - regardless of their CFP ranking or overall record - playing in the CCG. IIRC, that is the Big 12 setup so that is the precedent.

That isn't a precedent. That's just the Big 12 obeying the current rule.
07-02-2019 11:57 AM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
ken d Offline
Hall of Famer
*

Posts: 10,208
Joined: Dec 2013
Reputation: 464
I Root For: college sports
Location: Raleigh
Post: #107
RE: Why the AAC will hold at 11
I'm not aware of any rule about the minimum number of conference games an individual member must play. Why can't a conference decide that only games between members assigned to the same division count as conference games for determining who plays in a CCG? Then the only thing they need to do scheduling wise is satisfy their media partner with the number of games included in their contract. Schedules don't have to be balanced unless you want them to be. That becomes a discussion/debate within each conference, and no outside conference gets to interfere in your private business.
07-02-2019 12:06 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
Nerdlinger Offline
Realignment Enthusiast
*

Posts: 1,845
Joined: May 2017
Reputation: 80
I Root For: Realignment!
Location: :uoᴉʇɐɔo⌉
Post: #108
RE: Why the AAC will hold at 11
(07-02-2019 12:06 PM)ken d Wrote:  I'm not aware of any rule about the minimum number of conference games an individual member must play. Why can't a conference decide that only games between members assigned to the same division count as conference games for determining who plays in a CCG? Then the only thing they need to do scheduling wise is satisfy their media partner with the number of games included in their contract. Schedules don't have to be balanced unless you want them to be. That becomes a discussion/debate within each conference, and no outside conference gets to interfere in your private business.

I believe the minimum number of conference games is 5. And I don't think there's any rule dictating that conferences with divisions have to use conference record to determine division champ. The MAC used division record a few years when some teams were scheduled to play 7 conference games due to unbalanced divisions.
07-02-2019 04:53 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
sierrajip Offline
All American
*

Posts: 2,893
Joined: May 2011
Reputation: 55
I Root For: UCF
Location:
Post: #109
RE: Why the AAC will hold at 11
Hope so. Stay at 11, even if the conference losses the UConn money.
07-02-2019 09:54 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
Foreverandever Offline
All American
*

Posts: 3,739
Joined: Aug 2018
Reputation: 144
I Root For: &
Location:
Post: #110
RE: Why the AAC will hold at 11
(07-02-2019 07:37 AM)Nerdlinger Wrote:  
(06-30-2019 01:53 PM)Foreverandever Wrote:  
(06-30-2019 12:45 PM)Attackcoog Wrote:  
(06-30-2019 12:11 PM)quo vadis Wrote:  
(06-30-2019 11:50 AM)adcorbett Wrote:  You can’t play nine games with 11 teams. You have the same problem: one team has to have an unbalanced schedule.

Alright, is that true with 8 as well? Is there any way that an 11-team league can't have an unbalanced schedule?

Thats why Ive said---maybe now is the time to just go ahead and address the rules regarding odd numbered leagues holding CCG games. Instead of waivers---just do a permanent fix to the rules so odd numbered conferences will have a reasonable and established way of handling a CCG.

There will some sort of schedule requirements so people can't just work it up, probably something like a certain percentage of teams "permanently set" and a set number of years to rotate to play each team in the conference. Also the rules will be set that the best conference record teams will play and rankings may only used to tie break.

So something like:

To hold a championship game with out a round robin of one or two divisions, a conference must be larger than 10 and set the schedule such that each team is in permanent alignment with one third of the teams (rounded up when a fraction) and must play each school in its conference at least once every four years in a home and home series. The championship must be contested between the teams with the two best conference records. Rankings may not be used to decide the two participants unless it is as a conference record tie breaker.




Examples:

For the SEC, ACC, and B1G (CUSA) ~14 teams~ to go divisionless they would have to play 5 teams in a permanent set up, and than play 4 games to rotate through the other eight teams home and home in four years. Total of 9 games.

For the PAC (AAC, MWC, MAC) ~12 teams~ they would have to play 4 teams in a permanent set up and play 4 games to rotate through the other seven teams in home and home in four years . Total of 8 games.

Should a super league of 16 or ND be given a spot in the ACC..
15 teams would require 5 permanent set up and 5 games to rotate through. Total games 10
16 teams would require 6 permanent set up and 5 games to rotate through. Total games 11

For 11 it would require 4 permanent set up, then 3 games to rotate through the other 6 teams in in four years. Total 7 games.

Teams of course could have more than the minimum requirement of conference games.



Once a complete rotation of home and home have been played against each conference opponent the "permanent" alignment can be altered and a new championship cycle begins. Each cycle must be completed according to the divisionless championship rules before a new alignment or a return to divisions for a championship through round robin can occur.

I don't know why the revised rule for a CCG would be so complicated and restrictive. Maybe just require a round robin for conferences with 9 or fewer FBS members and at least 8 conference games for those with more than 9 FBS members. (Even this may be more restrictive than necessary, since all conferences are already compliant with this even though there's no specific rule like it.) Otherwise, a conference can set up schedules, CCG qualification, and divisions (if they opt for divisions) as it sees fit.


Because some conferences could rig the system to improve their play off chances.

So they agree to rules that are restrictive while still kind of flexible. In this case the rules would force people to play a schedule similar to divisions, it allows more flexibility but sets guides that prevent too much playing around making it more equitable for those who want to keep divisions.
07-02-2019 10:15 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
Nerdlinger Offline
Realignment Enthusiast
*

Posts: 1,845
Joined: May 2017
Reputation: 80
I Root For: Realignment!
Location: :uoᴉʇɐɔo⌉
Post: #111
RE: Why the AAC will hold at 11
(07-02-2019 10:15 PM)Foreverandever Wrote:  
(07-02-2019 07:37 AM)Nerdlinger Wrote:  
(06-30-2019 01:53 PM)Foreverandever Wrote:  
(06-30-2019 12:45 PM)Attackcoog Wrote:  
(06-30-2019 12:11 PM)quo vadis Wrote:  Alright, is that true with 8 as well? Is there any way that an 11-team league can't have an unbalanced schedule?

Thats why Ive said---maybe now is the time to just go ahead and address the rules regarding odd numbered leagues holding CCG games. Instead of waivers---just do a permanent fix to the rules so odd numbered conferences will have a reasonable and established way of handling a CCG.

There will some sort of schedule requirements so people can't just work it up, probably something like a certain percentage of teams "permanently set" and a set number of years to rotate to play each team in the conference. Also the rules will be set that the best conference record teams will play and rankings may only used to tie break.

So something like:

To hold a championship game with out a round robin of one or two divisions, a conference must be larger than 10 and set the schedule such that each team is in permanent alignment with one third of the teams (rounded up when a fraction) and must play each school in its conference at least once every four years in a home and home series. The championship must be contested between the teams with the two best conference records. Rankings may not be used to decide the two participants unless it is as a conference record tie breaker.




Examples:

For the SEC, ACC, and B1G (CUSA) ~14 teams~ to go divisionless they would have to play 5 teams in a permanent set up, and than play 4 games to rotate through the other eight teams home and home in four years. Total of 9 games.

For the PAC (AAC, MWC, MAC) ~12 teams~ they would have to play 4 teams in a permanent set up and play 4 games to rotate through the other seven teams in home and home in four years . Total of 8 games.

Should a super league of 16 or ND be given a spot in the ACC..
15 teams would require 5 permanent set up and 5 games to rotate through. Total games 10
16 teams would require 6 permanent set up and 5 games to rotate through. Total games 11

For 11 it would require 4 permanent set up, then 3 games to rotate through the other 6 teams in in four years. Total 7 games.

Teams of course could have more than the minimum requirement of conference games.



Once a complete rotation of home and home have been played against each conference opponent the "permanent" alignment can be altered and a new championship cycle begins. Each cycle must be completed according to the divisionless championship rules before a new alignment or a return to divisions for a championship through round robin can occur.

I don't know why the revised rule for a CCG would be so complicated and restrictive. Maybe just require a round robin for conferences with 9 or fewer FBS members and at least 8 conference games for those with more than 9 FBS members. (Even this may be more restrictive than necessary, since all conferences are already compliant with this even though there's no specific rule like it.) Otherwise, a conference can set up schedules, CCG qualification, and divisions (if they opt for divisions) as it sees fit.


Because some conferences could rig the system to improve their play off chances.

So they agree to rules that are restrictive while still kind of flexible. In this case the rules would force people to play a schedule similar to divisions, it allows more flexibility but sets guides that prevent too much playing around making it more equitable for those who want to keep divisions.

But if all conferences have the option to "rig the system", as you say, then it's a level playing field.
07-02-2019 10:23 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
Post Reply 




User(s) browsing this thread: 1 Guest(s)


Copyright © 2002-2019 Collegiate Sports Nation Bulletin Board System (CSNbbs), All Rights Reserved.
CSNbbs is an independent fan site and is in no way affiliated to the NCAA or any of the schools and conferences it represents.
This site monetizes links. FTC Disclosure.
We allow third-party companies to serve ads and/or collect certain anonymous information when you visit our web site. These companies may use non-personally identifiable information (e.g., click stream information, browser type, time and date, subject of advertisements clicked or scrolled over) during your visits to this and other Web sites in order to provide advertisements about goods and services likely to be of greater interest to you. These companies typically use a cookie or third party web beacon to collect this information. To learn more about this behavioral advertising practice or to opt-out of this type of advertising, you can visit http://www.networkadvertising.org.
Powered By MyBB, © 2002-2019 MyBB Group.