(08-18-2021 06:25 PM)bullet Wrote:  

(08-18-2021 01:37 PM)Crayton Wrote:  Saban suggests pods, regardless of 8 or 9 games. His rationale is that it would allow a quicker rotation through your non-permanent rivals.

https://www.espn.com/college-football/st...cines-more

Off the topic, but interesting quote in the article:

"...But are we headed to an NFL model in college football with all of these changes?

It kind of looks like it. College football is for guys to get an education, and the more we pay players, the less sports we're going to have. If we start paying players, instead of having 21 sports, we're going to have nine. There will be no something -- golf team, track team, something. Then you're eliminating opportunities for people in non-revenue sports.

Where everybody misses the boat a little bit is that college athletics is not a business. People who think it's a business, I think they have the wrong perception. It's revenue producing, but nobody takes the profit. When Wayne Huizenga owned the Dolphins, he paid $500 million for the team, he made $50 million a year, and he sold it for $950 million. That's business. Well, in college, all you do is reinvest all of the money into all of the other sports, facilities and scholarships. There's more than 300 people having an opportunity, and not just 85 football players.

Then the argument is, "Well, the coaches make a lot of money." But do we create value or not? Alabama is making more money than they ever made before I came here, whether they pay me more or not...."

Wow, Saban would be better off not commenting on issues he doesn’t understand. Coaches can get paid a lot if they create value…but somehow players can’t create value? Non-profit athletics “reinvest all the money into all the sports, facilities and scholarships”…yet his $10M annual salary and compensation for 20+ analysts are a choice that players aren’t afforded?

(08-18-2021 07:26 PM)RUScarlets Wrote:  Can you do pods and protect a rival interpod? Or would you protect three interpod rivals, so to avoid spreadsheets and simplify things?

That’s essentially 6 games. Plus 3 means you’d cycle the remaining three interpod non-rivals on a three year cycle. This ensures 6 annual rivals for every team.

Anyone have time to blow drawing that one up? But it should solve most of the problems while leaving some out of the loop as well. Not to mention forcing some annual rivals.

Right, with pods + 9 games you could do 3 permanent inter-pod rivals for each team, BUT all 3 would have to be from different other pods because 1 always has to be partnered with your pod in any given year (you only have 2 cross-division games).

Therefore the more likely pods + 9 game scenario is 2 permanent inter pod rivals and 2 minor (4 out of 6 year) rivals. No more than 2 can be from any one pod. And, that second ‘minor’ rival is more than likely to be a random team that makes the rotation turn smoothly rather than an actual historic rival (think South Carolina-Arkansas or Missouri-Miss St).

Similarly, while a pods + 8 game arrangement allows for 1 permanent inter-pod rival (and technically a minor rival too, but again this is moreso a random team); you could also use that 8th game to have 3 ‘minor’ rivals. For example: Oklahoma, LSU, Alabama, and Florida are in different divisions and could be paired-off into permanent rivals OR they could each play one another twice every three years.

(08-18-2021 08:49 PM)Crayton Wrote:  

(08-18-2021 07:26 PM)RUScarlets Wrote:  Can you do pods and protect a rival interpod? Or would you protect three interpod rivals, so to avoid spreadsheets and simplify things?

That’s essentially 6 games. Plus 3 means you’d cycle the remaining three interpod non-rivals on a three year cycle. This ensures 6 annual rivals for every team.

Anyone have time to blow drawing that one up? But it should solve most of the problems while leaving some out of the loop as well. Not to mention forcing some annual rivals.

Right, with pods + 9 games you could do 3 permanent inter-pod rivals for each team, BUT all 3 would have to be from different other pods because 1 always has to be partnered with your pod in any given year (you only have 2 cross-division games). ...

Is this with a WAC style system of two alternating division alignments, presumably with a home/away rotation then swap pods in a four year cycle, or is this with "wandering pods" of each pod partners with each in a three year cycle?

Couldn’t draw up a setup with Geographic Pods with interpod rivals in same rows without omitting a lot of matchups and forcing others… maybe they will just do lame West vs East and be done with it.

(08-18-2021 08:49 PM)Crayton Wrote:  

(08-18-2021 07:26 PM)RUScarlets Wrote:  Can you do pods and protect a rival interpod? Or would you protect three interpod rivals, so to avoid spreadsheets and simplify things?

That’s essentially 6 games. Plus 3 means you’d cycle the remaining three interpod non-rivals on a three year cycle. This ensures 6 annual rivals for every team.

Anyone have time to blow drawing that one up? But it should solve most of the problems while leaving some out of the loop as well. Not to mention forcing some annual rivals.

Right, with pods + 9 games you could do 3 permanent inter-pod rivals for each team, BUT all 3 would have to be from different other pods because 1 always has to be partnered with your pod in any given year (you only have 2 cross-division games).

Therefore the more likely pods + 9 game scenario is 2 permanent inter pod rivals and 2 minor (4 out of 6 year) rivals. No more than 2 can be from any one pod. And, that second ‘minor’ rival is more than likely to be a random team that makes the rotation turn smoothly rather than an actual historic rival (think South Carolina-Arkansas or Missouri-Miss St).

Similarly, while a pods + 8 game arrangement allows for 1 permanent inter-pod rival (and technically a minor rival too, but again this is moreso a random team); you could also use that 8th game to have 3 ‘minor’ rivals. For example: Oklahoma, LSU, Alabama, and Florida are in different divisions and could be paired-off into permanent rivals OR they could each play one another twice every three years.

This ain’t happening. Too complicated for fans.

(08-18-2021 09:23 PM)BruceMcF Wrote:  

(08-18-2021 08:49 PM)Crayton Wrote:  

(08-18-2021 07:26 PM)RUScarlets Wrote:  Can you do pods and protect a rival interpod? Or would you protect three interpod rivals, so to avoid spreadsheets and simplify things?

That’s essentially 6 games. Plus 3 means you’d cycle the remaining three interpod non-rivals on a three year cycle. This ensures 6 annual rivals for every team.

Anyone have time to blow drawing that one up? But it should solve most of the problems while leaving some out of the loop as well. Not to mention forcing some annual rivals.

Right, with pods + 9 games you could do 3 permanent inter-pod rivals for each team, BUT all 3 would have to be from different other pods because 1 always has to be partnered with your pod in any given year (you only have 2 cross-division games). ...

Is this with a WAC style system of two alternating division alignments, presumably with a home/away rotation then swap pods in a four year cycle, or is this with "wandering pods" of each pod partners with each in a three year cycle?

I was speaking from the wandering, 3-year method. The WAC/alternating method forces teams to play twice every four years, eating up any opportunity for inter-pod rivals. I suppose you could add 1 permanent rival and then switch to every 3 years against 3 teams from the pod withwhom you are never paired. I can't see what the gains of this model would be over a 3-year rotation.

(08-19-2021 06:09 AM)RUScarlets Wrote:  Couldn’t draw up a setup with Geographic Pods with interpod rivals in same rows without omitting a lot of matchups and forcing others… maybe they will just do lame West vs East and be done with it.

It may help a little, but interpod rivals don't have to ALL be on the same row, you'd simply need 1 from each other pod. So, LSU may have Alabama, Florida, and Oklahoma, but Florida could have LSU, Tennessee, and Texas A&M, for example.

It's a difficult task and I think you'll come to the same conclusion that lots of rivalries are "forced". As suggested earlier, come up with 2 permanent rivals and 1 "minor" (2 out of 3 year) rival with an increased max of 2 from each pod. That should give you more than enough flexibility to get all the good games in.

(08-19-2021 06:22 AM)esayem Wrote:  

(08-18-2021 08:49 PM)Crayton Wrote:  The more likely pods + 9 game scenario is 2 permanent inter pod rivals and 2 minor (4 out of 6 year) rivals. No more than 2 can be from any one pod. And, that second ‘minor’ rival is more than likely to be a random team that makes the rotation turn smoothly rather than an actual historic rival (think South Carolina-Arkansas or Missouri-Miss St).

Similarly, while a pods + 8 game arrangement allows for 1 permanent inter-pod rival (and technically a minor rival too, but again this is moreso a random team); you could also use that 8th game to have 3 ‘minor’ rivals. For example: Oklahoma, LSU, Alabama, and Florida are in different divisions and could be paired-off into permanent rivals OR they could each play one another twice every three years.

This ain’t happening. Too complicated for fans.

True. Fan comprehension is an important variable.

The actual schedule/rotation, I believe, is not a big part of that. Do fans understand why Iowa is playing Rutgers every year for the next 6, do they even know its happening? How often do Colorado and Oregon State play; is it the same as Colorado and California? How often to Buffalo and NIU play? In what year will LSU and Kentucky next play; what West team does Kentucky play annually?

As far as schedules go, most fans don't understand much beyond who is always on the schedule and who "cycles in." The BIGGER issue is the conference races. How does the conference portray the in-season competition so that fans can see how close their team is to clinching a post-season spot?

For "pods" the simplest method would be if they somehow allowed two (one East and one West) "Championship" Games. In that case you simply display standings as 4 divisions of 4, ala the NFL, and everything is clear. With current rules requiring 2 divisions, however, you'll have to combine two pods' standings so that fans have a clear picture of the stakes.

The portmanteau names are the best I could come up with. While you could use Legends/Leaders, Coastal/Atlantic, or simply A/B style nomenclature, with the changing makeup you need a visual cue for fans to know which division they are competing in. Gator fans will know what division their team is in whether it is called EastCentral, SouthEast, or EastPlains.

Here is an example, pilfering records from 2019:
SouthCentral Division
8-0 LSU* (Florida)
6-2 Alabama (Oklahoma)
5-3 Tennessee (Kentucky)
5-3 Auburn (Georgia)
4-4 Texas A&M (Texas)
3-5 Miss St (Arkansas)
2-6 Mississippi (Missouri)
1-7 Vanderbilt (South Carolina)

EastPlains Division (<-Gators play here)
7-1 Georgia* (Auburn)
7-1 Oklahoma (Alabama)
6-2 Florida (LSU)
4-4 Texas (A&M)
3-5 Missouri (Ole Miss)
3-5 South Carolina (Vanderbilt)
3-5 Kentucky (Tennessee)
0-8 Arkansas (Miss St)

Cross-division opponents are given in parentheses and in many cases are fan-known permanent rivals. Fans can follow these standings easily through the season. Offseason, as much as CFB fans remember Colorado is in the Pac12-South Division, they'll also remember Ole Miss is in the SEC-South Division.

The WAC 16 failed. Nobody liked the pods.

The Big 10 changed their ridiculous divisions to something sensible after just one season. It was a complete and utter failure.

My money is on the SEC either pushing to get rid of divisions or settling in East and West, which works out pretty well.

OR they might go with pods that have three permanent opponents, but adding a fourth “out-of-pod” will screw up a perfect rotation. Not that I think a perfect rotation is necessary, but it will be preferred if the option is there. Cycling through 12 at six a season > 11 at 5 a season.

Good luck making pods that keep everyone happy.

I think the way to go is just basically create 2 leagues of 8 teams, sec east and west. Play 7-1-1 format in football and 14-4 in hoops. Create new rules where each division can have their own tournaments for basketball, baseball, etc only football has the crossover title. For the 9 football games, I would have 1 game for each school at a neutral site, Dallas, Houston, New Orleans, Atlanta , Jacksonville so 4 home games, 4 away games, 1 neutral site game.

(08-19-2021 12:08 PM)bluesox Wrote:  I think the way to go is just basically create 2 leagues of 8 teams, sec east and west. Play 7-1-1 format in football and 14-4 in hoops. Create new rules where each division can have their own tournaments for basketball, baseball, etc only football has the crossover title. For the 9 football games, I would have 1 game for each school at a neutral site, Dallas, Houston, New Orleans, Atlanta , Jacksonville so 4 home games, 4 away games, 1 neutral site game.

14-4 in hoops? Does that mean play 14 opponents once and the 15th opponent 4 times?

I would think they could play 12 opponents once and the other 3 twice for 18 games, or 10 opponents once and the other 5 twice for 20 games.

Here's an out-of-box concept: 3 divisions and a 9+1 conference schedule.

EAST: Florida, Georgia, Tennessee, South Carolina, Kentucky, Vanderbilt
SOUTH: Alabama, Auburn, LSU, Ole Miss, Mississippi St.
WEST: Oklahoma, Texas A&M, Texas, Missouri, Arkansas

EAST plays a 5x4 schedule and the SOUTH and WEST play 4x5 schedule. Alabama-Tennessee and Auburn-Georgia are the only protected cross-division rivalry games. I believe this ensures everyone plays each other at least twice in six seasons, even with the protected cross-division rivalry games.

For the 10th conference game, the 3 division winners and next top team are paired in semifinal matchups.
The other 12 teams are paired in the 10th game to ensure everyone gets 5 conference home games and to avoid rematches.

*Of course, you would need CCG deregulation for the CCG matchup. But, this structure ensures the casual fan can follow the divisions and the path to the CCG, while also maintaining intriguing matchups and frequently playing the entire conference.

**I would suggest a 13th pre-season game where schools could host a payday game (FCS, if desired). Use the 2 OOC games for ACC rivalry games and other desired games.

(08-19-2021 12:51 PM)Nerdlinger Wrote:  

(08-19-2021 12:08 PM)bluesox Wrote:  I think the way to go is just basically create 2 leagues of 8 teams, sec east and west. Play 7-1-1 format in football and 14-4 in hoops. Create new rules where each division can have their own tournaments for basketball, baseball, etc only football has the crossover title. For the 9 football games, I would have 1 game for each school at a neutral site, Dallas, Houston, New Orleans, Atlanta , Jacksonville so 4 home games, 4 away games, 1 neutral site game.

14-4 in hoops? Does that mean play 14 opponents once and the 15th opponent 4 times?

I would think they could play 12 opponents once and the other 3 twice for 18 games, or 10 opponents once and the other 5 twice for 20 games.

Yeah, the SEC currently uses an 8-5 format, with 3 of the 5 H/H opponents being permanent and the other two rotating.

When OU & UT come on board the SEC will probably stick with 18 games and do one of the following:

12-1p-2r
12-2p-1r
12-3p
12-3r

I think it will probably be the first or third option.

(08-19-2021 11:58 AM)esayem Wrote:  The WAC 16 failed. Nobody liked the pods.

The Big 10 changed their ridiculous divisions to something sensible after just one season. It was a complete and utter failure.

My money is on the SEC either pushing to get rid of divisions or settling in East and West, which works out pretty well.

OR they might go with pods that have three permanent opponents, but adding a fourth “out-of-pod” will screw up a perfect rotation. Not that I think a perfect rotation is necessary, but it will be preferred if the option is there. Cycling through 12 at six a season > 11 at 5 a season.

Good luck making pods that keep everyone happy.

Totally agree; having an 11-year rotation would be silly when there are almost identical choices with far shorter cycle times. Pods would require 2 or 3 different schedules, not 11. I don't think you can even do an 11-year rotation with pods unless you essentially have a divisionless setup... in which case, ya, pods are useless.

Pods would be 3 permanent rivals, +rotating through the other 12 teams every 3 years. That is a pretty "perfect" rotation. But, it only gets you 7 games. You then have the added flexibility of an 8th and/or 9th game against a rival. In my most recent example, the Gators would have the following schedule:

1. Georgia
2. South Carolina
3. Kentucky
4. Texas/Texas A&M/Auburn (3 year rotation)
5. Missouri/Tennessee/Ole Miss (3 year rotation)
6. Arkansas/Vanderbilt/Miss St (3 year rotation)
7. LSU/Oklahoma/Alabama (3 year rotation)
8. Oklahoma/Alabama/LSU (3 year rotation)

Georgia, who has a permanent crossover with Auburn, would have an identical schedule for the first 7 games but with a slightly different 8th game:
1. Florida
2. South Carolina
3. Kentucky
4. Texas/Texas A&M/Auburn (3 year rotation)
5. Missouri/Tennessee/Ole Miss (3 year rotation)
6. Arkansas/Vanderbilt/Miss St (3 year rotation)
7. LSU/Oklahoma/Alabama (3 year rotation)
8. Auburn/Auburn/Texas (3 year rotation)

Lack of an a NYD bowl and adding 6 teams in 1 year did-in the WAC-16. But, ya, nobody liked the Quads

(08-19-2021 11:58 AM)esayem Wrote:  The WAC 16 failed. Nobody liked the pods.

Indeed, one could argue that the WAC16 opened the door to abandoning continuity based on schools playing together and starting continuity due to the length of time a conference has been able to get enough warm bodies among the membership, by provoking the "airport meeting" which led to the formation of the MWC conference.

Quote: The Big 10 changed their ridiculous divisions to something sensible after just one season. It was a complete and utter failure. ...

Leaders and Legends led to much derisive laughter, but in fact lasted for three lamentable seasons, in which the Leading schools in the Leaders went into probation and the biggest Legends in the Legends failed to win the division once. Their demise is not lamented.

I think you do go with pods, but you simply refer to them as rotating divisions. I get the reluctance for based on being more complicated and think that is why they have been avoided, but there's nothing else you can do with this many teams which doesn't make the other division feel like a completely different conference (1-2 games a year vs. 8 other teams in a 8/9 team schedule).

If they think it's better, rather than posting the pods, they can simply post the teams everyone will be guarenteed every year.

(08-20-2021 08:29 AM)ohio1317 Wrote:  I think you do go with pods, but you simply refer to them as rotating divisions. I get the reluctance for based on being more complicated and think that is why they have been avoided, but there's nothing else you can do with this many teams which doesn't make the other division feel like a completely different conference (1-2 games a year vs. 8 other teams in a 8/9 team schedule).

If they think it's better, rather than posting the pods, they can simply post the teams everyone will be guarenteed every year.

Well the E/W has the second/big12 schools west and sec east with only LSU and the ms schools west. Everyone but the MS schools get who they want to play