Hello There, Guest! (LoginRegister)

Post Reply 
Per Dodd - Big 12 Divisional Plans On Hold
Author Message
inutech Offline
1st String
*

Posts: 1,661
Joined: Dec 2014
Reputation: 170
I Root For: Louisiana Tech
Location:
Post: #21
RE: Per Dodd - Big 12 Divisional Plans On Hold
(05-02-2022 07:57 AM)Crayton Wrote:  G5? I lumped these together because I think chasing the NY6/6+6 spot is going to influence the decision here. It should therefore point to all 5 going to a single division. Except for maybe the new Sun Belt, divisions seem to split rivalries too. And, with the new Sun Belt, getting two teams from the so-called "best division in G5" on the same field in December cannot be missed.

At the G5 level, the divisions still make more sense because they really help with travel costs. And you're less likely to have any real desire to play the schools from the other division more than just the normal cross-divisional rotations require.

Like, I've always liked the idea of pods, but in the current 14 team CUSA it just wouldn't have made any sense. You'd maybe like to play Marshall because of their history or something but nobody in the West really felt that sad about not seeing the East teams more often and vice versa. At least not enough to justify not playing a geographic division schedule.

For Tech, we shared a conference with ODU for like 9 years and never hosted them for football. But if the trade-off for rotating through more quickly would be increased travel costs, it just never seemed worth it.

For P5 schools the motivation (and the budget) is just very different. I could maybe see it for that SOS in trying to get playoff access or a NY6 game, but even then you might get enough push-back from the accounting side of things that it'd get shot down.
05-02-2022 05:00 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
goofus Offline
All American
*

Posts: 3,270
Joined: May 2013
Reputation: 80
I Root For: Iowa
Location: chicago suburbs
Post: #22
RE: Per Dodd - Big 12 Divisional Plans On Hold
All the geographic and travel advantages of divisions and pods can be easily duplicated by setting up a division-less schedule with each team getting 3-5 permanent rivals. No need to set up official divisions to achieve that.
05-02-2022 05:09 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
Frank the Tank Online
Hall of Famer
*

Posts: 13,868
Joined: Jun 2008
Reputation: 906
I Root For: Illinois/DePaul
Location: Chicago
Post: #23
RE: Per Dodd - Big 12 Divisional Plans On Hold
(05-02-2022 02:58 PM)Eggszecutor Wrote:  
(05-02-2022 08:23 AM)Frank the Tank Wrote:  
(05-01-2022 11:59 PM)Eichorst Wrote:  
(05-01-2022 11:38 PM)Wedge Wrote:  
(05-01-2022 10:13 PM)Stugray2 Wrote:  Honestly I think it's the B1G who alone are firmly against ending Divisions, or at least the conference HQ.

I don't know about the conference office. But among the members, the east division schools are probably all in favor of a no-division format. Rutgers, Maryland, and Indiana would love it because they would never have to play all of the Big Four in the same football season, and the Big Four would figure that among them they would have a pretty good chance of getting both of the CCG spots in any given year. The west division teams might all favor the current format that guarantees one of them will be in the CCG.

That's the only conference for which it seems possible that as many as half of the members would oppose a no-division format for football.

I also think B1G fanbases like the current division format. The divisions seem natural and strongly contested.

I guess I'm going against the grain here: I believe that the Big Ten would be better off without divisions and, if I had to wager, they're going to get rid of divisions eventually.

The DNA of the Big Ten is that we really did play each other all of the time with very infrequent breaks up until expansion in the last decade. This is in contrast to the SEC DNA where each school had a handful of fierce protected annual rivals but played everyone else in the league much less frequently.

Two reasons why I believe that the Big Ten will eliminate divisions:

(1) The DNA that I mentioned matters because the Big Ten schools really LIKE playing each other, particularly Michigan and Ohio State. That's a huge reason why a school would want to be in the Big Ten in the first place. While the Big Ten West has benefited from an easier-on-paper path to the Big Ten CCG, they're also missing out on those marquee games against Michigan, Ohio State and Penn State more frequently and that eventually catches up in terms of unbalanced exposure. Case in point is to look at the Big Ten recruiting rankings this past year where Iowa has the #6 ranked recruiting class in the conference, but otherwise every single other Big Ten East team has a higher ranked recruiting class than all of the other Big Ten West teams (yes, Maryland, Rutgers and Indiana are pulling in better recruiting classes than Wisconsin).

Going to no divisions with a 9-game conference schedule would allow for a format where each school has 3 protected rivals and then plays everyone else in the league 6 times out of 10 years. That creates a much stronger bond across the entire league and is much closer to the DNA of the Big Ten where it's a truly cohesive unit that's not segmented by geography.

(2) Despite the Big Ten wanting the P5 getting auto-bids in a 12-team playoff, there are plenty in the league that are realistic enough that we're probably going to end up with the original CFP expansion committee proposal of a 12-team playoff with the top 6 conference champs getting bids plus the top 4 conference champs getting byes.

If/when that happens, it HEAVILY incentivizes everyone to do everything possible to have their very two best teams meeting in the CCG every year. Frankly, it would be crazy not to do so - no league wants to lose out on either a top 6 conference champ bid or a top 4 conference champ bye (which would still apply even with P5 auto-bids) because of a weak division winner upsetting a higher ranked team in the CCG. The Big Ten knows this all too well with the most recent example of an unranked Northwestern putting a scare into Ohio State in the 2020 Big Ten CCG. In fact, THAT is the specific example that keeps getting brought up in the media as why the CFP expansion committee wanted top 6 conference champs for bids as opposed to P5 auto-bids.

As a result, I believe that the Big Ten has done a 180-degree turn on this issue compared to the start of the CFP era. At that time, they blocked the ACC proposal to eliminate divisions because the Big Ten was legitimately concerned that it was a way for the ACC to entice ND to join that league full-time. I don't believe that the concern is there for the Big Ten any longer and, even if there's still residual concern on that front, it doesn't outweigh the practical consideration that the 12-team playoff is definitely going to provide every incentive for leagues to have their top 2 teams to play in their respective CCGs (which means getting rid of divisions).

Going division-less with a 9-game schedule, the Big Ten could protect five games for each school and rotate the remaining eight schools home/away ever four years. Four schools in years 1&2 and the other four schools in years 3&4.

That feels like the best solution. You can preserve almost every important annual rivalry game, play all the schools at least twice every four years and keep a regional feel for your schedule with five protected games.

If they move to an 8-game schedule, they could protect three games every year and rotate the other ten schools home/away over a four year period similar to above.

My gut feeling is that they’ll have fewer protected rivals (3) in a 9-game schedule. The priority seems to be able get more of the Wisconsin/Nebraska vs. Ohio State/Michigan/Penn State games more frequently. That’s just my gut feeling on the number of protected rivals, though. The 9-game schedule was effectively confirmed by Gene Smith earlier this year with the proclamation that the Big Ten wasn’t dropping a conference game in exchange for an Alliance non-conference game.
05-02-2022 05:20 PM
Visit this user's website Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
Crayton Offline
1st String
*

Posts: 1,786
Joined: Feb 2019
Reputation: 104
I Root For: Florida
Location:
Post: #24
RE: Per Dodd - Big 12 Divisional Plans On Hold
(05-02-2022 05:20 PM)Frank the Tank Wrote:  My gut feeling is that they’ll have fewer protected rivals (3) in a 9-game schedule. The priority seems to be able get more of the Wisconsin/Nebraska vs. Ohio State/Michigan/Penn State games more frequently. That’s just my gut feeling on the number of protected rivals, though. The 9-game schedule was effectively confirmed by Gene Smith earlier this year with the proclamation that the Big Ten wasn’t dropping a conference game in exchange for an Alliance non-conference game.

Agree that fewer protected rivals is the Big Ten's MO.

Will note again that when they went to 9 games, Wisc/Neb/Iowa were scheduled to meet OSU/PSU/UM 10 out of 18 years (the pandemic kinda screwed that up and Iowa somehow drew Rutgers). Even with 3 protected rivals, that frequency is not greatly enhanced. So, "more best West vs. best East" games won't be a driving REASON to go divisionless.
05-02-2022 06:14 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
random asian guy Offline
Special Teams
*

Posts: 915
Joined: Aug 2014
Reputation: 61
I Root For: VT, Georgetown
Location:
Post: #25
RE: Per Dodd - Big 12 Divisional Plans On Hold
(05-02-2022 12:50 PM)Wahoowa84 Wrote:  2) The “SEC may have slow-played the [division-less] proposal perhaps out of retribution for the ACC not supporting expansion…”. An expected tactic (a la the COVID game cancellations) from the SEC/Sankey.

This also suggests that the ACC still wants the deregulation which makes sense. The SEC/Sankey probably figured out that even if they had tried to slow down the process, they would have been outnumbered by the Alliance. The ACC has always wanted the deregulation. The Pac proposed it this time. And if the BIG is on board, this thing will pass whether the SEC likes it or not.
05-02-2022 06:17 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
jimrtex Online
Special Teams
*

Posts: 758
Joined: Aug 2021
Reputation: 27
I Root For: Houston, Tulsa, Colorado
Location:
Post: #26
RE: Per Dodd - Big 12 Divisional Plans On Hold
The ideal division size is 10. 9 games full round-robin and every team plays everyone else.

So: B1G Big 10 Division: Over a 7-year cycle every B1G team is in the Big 10 Divsion 5/7 of seasons.

ACC Atlantic Coast Division: Over a 7-year cycle every ACC team is in the Atlantic Coast Division 5/7 of seasons.

Pac 12 Pac 10 Division: Over a 6-year cycle every Pac 12 team is in the Pac 10 division 5/6 of seasons.

B1ACP Alliance Division: The remaining 4 B1G, 4 ACC, and 2 Pac 12 teams.

Four Division Winners play two round playoff to determine the Alliance Champion.

What does the SEC do to counter?

SEC Southeast Division 10 of 16 teams 5/8 of seasons.

MtW Mountain West Division 10 of 12 teams 5/6 of seasons.

Big 12 Big 12 Division 10 of 12 teams 5/6 of seasons.

SEB12MW Coalition: The remaining 6 SEC, 2 B12, and 2 Mountain West teams.

Four Division Winners play two round playoff to determine the Coalition Champion.

Coalition Champion v Alliance National Champion for the National Champion.
05-03-2022 08:01 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
CarlSmithCenter Offline
Special Teams
*

Posts: 821
Joined: Jun 2014
Reputation: 82
I Root For: Ball So Hard U
Location:
Post: #27
RE: Per Dodd - Big 12 Divisional Plans On Hold
The SEC will be able to do 3 permanent opponents and 6 of the remaining 12 every other year.

As for the B1G, here’s an idea: just go ahead and add Kansas to get to 15 schools. Then conference every school can play a 9 game slate with 4 permanent opponents and 5 of the remaining 10 every other year. It won’t prevent the conference from being able to try to steal 3-5 of Stanford, USC, UCLA, Cal, Washington, Oregon, Colorado, Virginia, Duke, North Carolina, or Georgia Tech in the future.
(This post was last modified: 05-03-2022 10:39 PM by CarlSmithCenter.)
05-03-2022 10:31 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
Milwaukee Online
1st String
*

Posts: 1,873
Joined: Jun 2021
Reputation: 100
I Root For: many teams
Location:
Post: #28
RE: Per Dodd - Big 12 Divisional Plans On Hold
Ending divisional play, simply to gain some perceived competitive advantages would be extremely irresponsible - in conferences where the divisions are designed to minimize travel costs and travel time for student athletes - since it would have an adverse effect on the student athletes' studies and would contribute to increased carbon dioxide and other pollutants in the air we breath, and to global warming.

The idea that many the nation's leading universities would take such an action, which would have adverse effects on their student athletes and on global efforts to slow global warming and improve air quality, is offensive to thousands of organizations that are committed to preventing rising sea levels and other harmful effects of global warming.

Ending divisional play would be of the greatest concern with respect to the PAC and SEC conferences, and to the new Big 12. A switch to non-divisional play in the Big 10 wouldn't have equally adverse effects, since the Big 10 schools aren't quite as widely dispersed, but would still be unfortunate. The ACC, unfortunately, opted for a divisional model that did not seek to reduce air travel or travel time, since the ACC's divisions are not drawn regionally, has as a result been generating more CO2, more pollutants and contributing to global warming since it adopted this divisional scheme, and would not be affected as much by a switch to non-divisional play.
(This post was last modified: 05-04-2022 01:32 AM by Milwaukee.)
05-04-2022 01:17 AM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
RUScarlets Online
All American
*

Posts: 3,597
Joined: May 2012
Reputation: 54
I Root For: Rutgers
Location:
Post: #29
RE: Per Dodd - Big 12 Divisional Plans On Hold
PAC isn't really affected by overburdened travel whether they move to pods/protected since the distances are already vast.

Divisionless play in the BIG and SEC would increase the CO2 print. The ACC is increasing CO2 prints despite the division alignment. The Big 12 is kinda boxed regardless. It's another PAC situation, presumably worse.

G5 need divisions.
(This post was last modified: 05-04-2022 04:08 AM by RUScarlets.)
05-04-2022 04:01 AM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
Crayton Offline
1st String
*

Posts: 1,786
Joined: Feb 2019
Reputation: 104
I Root For: Florida
Location:
Post: #30
RE: Per Dodd - Big 12 Divisional Plans On Hold
(05-04-2022 01:17 AM)Milwaukee Wrote:  [color=#0000CD]
Ending divisional play would be of the greatest concern with respect to the PAC and SEC conferences, and to the new Big 12. A switch to non-divisional play in the Big 10 wouldn't have equally adverse effects, since the Big 10 schools aren't quite as widely dispersed, but would still be unfortunate. The ACC, unfortunately, opted for a divisional model that did not seek to reduce air travel or travel time, since the ACC's divisions are not drawn regionally, has as a result been generating more CO2, more pollutants and contributing to global warming since it adopted this divisional scheme, and would not be affected as much by a switch to non-divisional play.

I would think the Big Ten divisions are more widely dispersed. For football it is nearly a non-issue. Most teams will still be playing their closest rivals annually, they are likely adding <2 cumulative hours to the 4 flights they are already making.
05-04-2022 05:08 AM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
Frank the Tank Online
Hall of Famer
*

Posts: 13,868
Joined: Jun 2008
Reputation: 906
I Root For: Illinois/DePaul
Location: Chicago
Post: #31
RE: Per Dodd - Big 12 Divisional Plans On Hold
(05-03-2022 10:31 PM)CarlSmithCenter Wrote:  The SEC will be able to do 3 permanent opponents and 6 of the remaining 12 every other year.

As for the B1G, here’s an idea: just go ahead and add Kansas to get to 15 schools. Then conference every school can play a 9 game slate with 4 permanent opponents and 5 of the remaining 10 every other year. It won’t prevent the conference from being able to try to steal 3-5 of Stanford, USC, UCLA, Cal, Washington, Oregon, Colorado, Virginia, Duke, North Carolina, or Georgia Tech in the future.

You can't have a 9-game (or any odd-numbered) conference schedule with an odd number of schools. The Big Ten (likely with feedback from TV networks) seems to have concluded that a 9-game conference schedule is more valuable than an 8-game conference schedule.

I'm someone that generally thinks Kansas is a viable Big Ten expansion candidate, but definitely not as a lone addition.
05-04-2022 07:58 AM
Visit this user's website Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
Crayton Offline
1st String
*

Posts: 1,786
Joined: Feb 2019
Reputation: 104
I Root For: Florida
Location:
Post: #32
RE: Per Dodd - Big 12 Divisional Plans On Hold
(05-03-2022 10:31 PM)CarlSmithCenter Wrote:  The SEC will be able to do 3 permanent opponents and 6 of the remaining 12 every other year.

Don't think 3 is "enough" for most teams. Plus, the SEC will want to prioritize best-on-best matchups.

Instead I imagine 3 permanent rivals + 4 (of 12) rotating games + 1 (or 2, if they go to 9 games) additional games for rivals and/or best-on-best. And, no matter how you pick CCG teams, I think this is best done with 4 divisions with hidden scheduling pairs. At the least, in the case the CCG is "top two," no 3 teams can finish tied without playing each other and ranking-based tie-breakers will only rarely be needed.
(This post was last modified: 05-04-2022 08:48 AM by Crayton.)
05-04-2022 08:47 AM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
CO Jayhawk Offline
Water Engineer
*

Posts: 7
Joined: Aug 2020
Reputation: 5
I Root For: Kansas
Location:
Post: #33
RE: Per Dodd - Big 12 Divisional Plans On Hold
Quote: You can't have a 9-game (or any odd-numbered) conference schedule with an odd number of schools. The Big Ten (likely with feedback from TV networks) seems to have concluded that a 9-game conference schedule is more valuable than an 8-game conference schedule. I'm someone that generally thinks Kansas is a viable Big Ten expansion candidate, but definitely not as a lone addition.

You would be correct, but without divisions you wouldn't hamper the championship deciding process, (since we're making new rules here) top four go to semifinals in a 1 vs 4, 2 vs 3 format.

Penalize KU by making us play one less game (less shared gate receipts), or simply pool a P5 KU home game to the pot, We will get over it, I promise. When the next round of expansion comes, you add three, five or nine schools that will address needs at that time and scheduling becomes less of a headache. Granted, to some this would be a defensive move to keep KU from going to the SEC - which may cause UNC, Duke and UVa to think a basketball super conference with the SEC would be more attractive than the B1G. Just sayin'

Now... about basketball. With the NCAA being taken out of the equation as far as basketball revenue, I think KU more than carries its weight in building the B1G basketball brand to an even more valuable product. Would anyone disagree?

Kansas alums and fans overwhelmingly prefer the B1G to the SEC in terms of geography and the peer factor in potential breakaway scenarios, but our relationships with MU, OU and UT make it more palatable than staying in the XII.
05-04-2022 10:53 AM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
CO Jayhawk Offline
Water Engineer
*

Posts: 7
Joined: Aug 2020
Reputation: 5
I Root For: Kansas
Location:
Post: #34
RE: Per Dodd - Big 12 Divisional Plans On Hold
Taking the 15 member conference a step further:

Each school would play four permanent rival games annually:

So you would have Iowa, (Kansas), Minnesota, Nebraska, Wisconsin in group A

Illinois, Indiana, Michigan State, Northwestern, Purdue in group B

Maryland, Michigan, Ohio State, Penn State, Rutgers in group C

Then each of those schools in group A would play five games against the other groups, meaning they would through work the entire conference in a four year cycle, playing home and home.

Kansas would play the other four group A schools, two each from group B and group C each year.

Now granted, I was not a math major, but I think it would work, no? If not, fire away.
(This post was last modified: 05-04-2022 11:04 AM by CO Jayhawk.)
05-04-2022 11:02 AM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
Frank the Tank Online
Hall of Famer
*

Posts: 13,868
Joined: Jun 2008
Reputation: 906
I Root For: Illinois/DePaul
Location: Chicago
Post: #35
RE: Per Dodd - Big 12 Divisional Plans On Hold
(05-04-2022 11:02 AM)CO Jayhawk Wrote:  Taking the 15 member conference a step further:

Each school would play four permanent rival games annually:

So you would have Iowa, (Kansas), Minnesota, Nebraska, Wisconsin in group A

Illinois, Indiana, Michigan State, Northwestern, Purdue in group B

Maryland, Michigan, Ohio State, Penn State, Rutgers in group C

Then each of those schools in group A would play five games against the other groups, meaning they would through work the entire conference in a four year cycle, playing home and home.

Kansas would play the other four group A schools, two each from group B and group C each year.

Now granted, I was not a math major, but I think it would work, no? If not, fire away.

It doesn't work when you apply it. There's always going to be one school that can't be matched with another school when you have an odd number of schools and an odd number of conference games.

You can see it simply if you had just one conference game - it's obviously impossible to match up all 15 teams in conference games in a single week. There's always one "odd" team left over. You can apply that to 3, 5, 7, 9, etc. conference games. It's mathematically impossible to match everyone up evenly with the same number of conference games with an odd number of teams and an odd number of games.
(This post was last modified: 05-04-2022 11:47 AM by Frank the Tank.)
05-04-2022 11:46 AM
Visit this user's website Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
Wedge Offline
Moderator
*

Posts: 19,712
Joined: May 2010
Reputation: 960
I Root For: California
Location: IV, V, VI, IX
Post: #36
RE: Per Dodd - Big 12 Divisional Plans On Hold
That's correct -- if a conference has an odd number of teams, then the only way each team can play the same number of conference games is if they play an even number of conference games.

So a 9, 11, 13, or 15-member football conference can play 8 or 10 conference games, but not 7 or 9 conference games.
05-04-2022 12:04 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
Crayton Offline
1st String
*

Posts: 1,786
Joined: Feb 2019
Reputation: 104
I Root For: Florida
Location:
Post: #37
RE: Per Dodd - Big 12 Divisional Plans On Hold
(05-04-2022 11:46 AM)Frank the Tank Wrote:  
(05-04-2022 11:02 AM)CO Jayhawk Wrote:  Taking the 15 member conference a step further:

Each school would play four permanent rival games annually:

So you would have Iowa, (Kansas), Minnesota, Nebraska, Wisconsin in group A

Illinois, Indiana, Michigan State, Northwestern, Purdue in group B

Maryland, Michigan, Ohio State, Penn State, Rutgers in group C

Then each of those schools in group A would play five games against the other groups, meaning they would through work the entire conference in a four year cycle, playing home and home.

Kansas would play the other four group A schools, two each from group B and group C each year.

Now granted, I was not a math major, but I think it would work, no? If not, fire away.

It doesn't work when you apply it. There's always going to be one school that can't be matched with another school when you have an odd number of schools and an odd number of conference games.

You can see it simply if you had just one conference game - it's obviously impossible to match up all 15 teams in conference games in a single week. There's always one "odd" team left over. You can apply that to 3, 5, 7, 9, etc. conference games. It's mathematically impossible to match everyone up evenly with the same number of conference games with an odd number of teams and an odd number of games.

In his previous post he said give Kansas 8 games. With that, it works. A would play 12 games against B and C while B and C would play 13 games against each other. It’d be hard to craft a rotation when you are playing 5 games against 10 teams, but are playing 1 of those teams only 40% of the time.
(This post was last modified: 05-04-2022 12:33 PM by Crayton.)
05-04-2022 12:28 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
bullet Offline
Legend
*

Posts: 53,541
Joined: Apr 2012
Reputation: 2216
I Root For: Texas, UK, UGA
Location:
Post: #38
RE: Per Dodd - Big 12 Divisional Plans On Hold
(05-04-2022 11:46 AM)Frank the Tank Wrote:  
(05-04-2022 11:02 AM)CO Jayhawk Wrote:  Taking the 15 member conference a step further:

Each school would play four permanent rival games annually:

So you would have Iowa, (Kansas), Minnesota, Nebraska, Wisconsin in group A

Illinois, Indiana, Michigan State, Northwestern, Purdue in group B

Maryland, Michigan, Ohio State, Penn State, Rutgers in group C

Then each of those schools in group A would play five games against the other groups, meaning they would through work the entire conference in a four year cycle, playing home and home.

Kansas would play the other four group A schools, two each from group B and group C each year.

Now granted, I was not a math major, but I think it would work, no? If not, fire away.

It doesn't work when you apply it. There's always going to be one school that can't be matched with another school when you have an odd number of schools and an odd number of conference games.

You can see it simply if you had just one conference game - it's obviously impossible to match up all 15 teams in conference games in a single week. There's always one "odd" team left over. You can apply that to 3, 5, 7, 9, etc. conference games. It's mathematically impossible to match everyone up evenly with the same number of conference games with an odd number of teams and an odd number of games.

Look at it this way. 15 teams each play 9 conference games. 15X9=135. There are 2 opponents in a game. 135/2=67 + 1 left over. It doesn't work unless you figure out a way to have 3 teams in one game!
05-04-2022 08:19 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
CO Jayhawk Offline
Water Engineer
*

Posts: 7
Joined: Aug 2020
Reputation: 5
I Root For: Kansas
Location:
Post: #39
RE: Per Dodd - Big 12 Divisional Plans On Hold
(05-04-2022 08:19 PM)bullet Wrote:  
(05-04-2022 11:46 AM)Frank the Tank Wrote:  
(05-04-2022 11:02 AM)CO Jayhawk Wrote:  Taking the 15 member conference a step further:

Each school would play four permanent rival games annually:

So you would have Iowa, (Kansas), Minnesota, Nebraska, Wisconsin in group A

Illinois, Indiana, Michigan State, Northwestern, Purdue in group B

Maryland, Michigan, Ohio State, Penn State, Rutgers in group C

Then each of those schools in group A would play five games against the other groups, meaning they would through work the entire conference in a four year cycle, playing home and home.

Kansas would play the other four group A schools, two each from group B and group C each year.

Now granted, I was not a math major, but I think it would work, no? If not, fire away.

It doesn't work when you apply it. There's always going to be one school that can't be matched with another school when you have an odd number of schools and an odd number of conference games.

You can see it simply if you had just one conference game - it's obviously impossible to match up all 15 teams in conference games in a single week. There's always one "odd" team left over. You can apply that to 3, 5, 7, 9, etc. conference games. It's mathematically impossible to match everyone up evenly with the same number of conference games with an odd number of teams and an odd number of games.

Look at it this way. 15 teams each play 9 conference games. 15X9=135. There are 2 opponents in a game. 135/2=67 + 1 left over. It doesn't work unless you figure out a way to have 3 teams in one game!

I wasn't a math major, but I understand that the concept of it takes two teams to play a game. I have already addressed that.... but you probably know that by now.
05-04-2022 10:02 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
Wedge Offline
Moderator
*

Posts: 19,712
Joined: May 2010
Reputation: 960
I Root For: California
Location: IV, V, VI, IX
Post: #40
RE: Per Dodd - Big 12 Divisional Plans On Hold
The way you “fixed” it is nonsensical. No major conference today would schedule teams in the conference to play a different number of conference football games.
(This post was last modified: 05-04-2022 10:17 PM by Wedge.)
05-04-2022 10:16 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
Post Reply 




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


Copyright © 2002-2022 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, © 2002-2022 MyBB Group.