Hello There, Guest! (LoginRegister)

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

Posts: 2,010
Joined: Jun 2014
Reputation: 139
I Root For: RU/Big Ten
Location:
Post: #1
Per Dodd - Big 12 Divisional Plans On Hold
Quote:A special Big 12 subcommittee formed to determine how to best incorporate up to 14 teams in conference realignment from 2023-24 had been expected to finalize league composition and schedules this week. However, the Big 12 is awaiting resolution on a proposal from the NCAA Football Oversight Committee that would allow all leagues to play without divisions but still hold conference championship games without a waiver from the association.

That would give conferences an opportunity to match their two best (usually highest-ranked) teams in league title games. The legislation would be an option, not a mandate. Currently, the only FBS conferences that play without divisions are the 10-team Big 12 and 11-team American. The Big 12 plays a round-robin schedule, granting it the ability to play a conference championship game, while the AAC has an NCAA waiver to match its two best teams for the league title.

With divisions becoming less of a consideration, the Big 12 has to retrench with its largest membership ever, albeit temporarily.

"You're basically starting [the scheduling process] from scratch," a source familiar with the Big 12 process told CBS Sports.

https://www.cbssports.com/college-footba...trictions/
05-01-2022 08:05 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
Advertisement


Wedge Offline
Moderator
*

Posts: 19,729
Joined: May 2010
Reputation: 960
I Root For: California
Location: IV, V, VI, IX
Post: #2
RE: Per Dodd - Big 12 Divisional Plans On Hold
Quote:The oversight proposal -- authored by the Pac-12, according to NCAA documents -- is considered noncontroversial with widespread support among the 10 FBS conferences.
Quote:Two sources told CBS Sports the SEC may have slow-played the proposal perhaps out of retribution for the ACC not supporting expansion; however, the SEC is now on board.

Guess that means the Pac-12 and ACC are planning to get rid of football divisions as well.

Maybe the Big Ten will keep its football divisions, but they might be the only conference that does.
05-01-2022 08:25 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
RUScarlets Offline
All American
*

Posts: 3,601
Joined: May 2012
Reputation: 54
I Root For: Rutgers
Location:
Post: #3
RE: Per Dodd - Big 12 Divisional Plans On Hold
It has to change. I think the SEC wants to move to 3-4 protected rivals given all the history there, also allowing you to play all the big brands every 2-3 years. Could easily be adopted for any 12-14 or 16 team league. The only league I can see staying the course is the PAC12 because the divisions are so tight (G5 conferences probably also served best with status quo).
(This post was last modified: 05-01-2022 09:00 PM by RUScarlets.)
05-01-2022 08:58 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
Stugray2 Offline
Heisman
*

Posts: 5,369
Joined: Jan 2017
Reputation: 380
I Root For: tOSU SJSU Stan'
Location: South Bay Area CA
Post: #4
RE: Per Dodd - Big 12 Divisional Plans On Hold
RUScartlets,

The Pac-12 would definitely like to get rid of Divisions. They are not working as designed, rarely making the CCG anything but a potential trap game for the one school who might have a shot at the Playoff. On top of that the old Pac-8 Oregon and Washington schools get half the access to the LA schools as the newbies from the four-corner states. As it is, to get them in the first place they had to concede to the four California schools to be able to permanently play each other without rotation.

Honestly I think it's the B1G who alone are firmly against ending Divisions, or at least the conference HQ.
05-01-2022 10:13 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
Wedge Offline
Moderator
*

Posts: 19,729
Joined: May 2010
Reputation: 960
I Root For: California
Location: IV, V, VI, IX
Post: #5
RE: Per Dodd - Big 12 Divisional Plans On Hold
(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.
05-01-2022 11:38 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
Eichorst Offline
Bench Warmer
*

Posts: 224
Joined: Jan 2014
Reputation: 14
I Root For: Nebraska
Location:
Post: #6
RE: Per Dodd - Big 12 Divisional Plans On Hold
(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.
05-01-2022 11:59 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
Advertisement


Crayton Offline
1st String
*

Posts: 1,789
Joined: Feb 2019
Reputation: 104
I Root For: Florida
Location:
Post: #7
RE: Per Dodd - Big 12 Divisional Plans On Hold
Conference USA is (should be?) also operating without divisions this year.

It should pass. I believe this indicates the Oversight Committee has advanced this legislation as "non controversial" last week. The Big 12's hesitancy indicates either (a) they would rather go divisionless if able, or (b) they have not done their due diligence on this issue. I suspect it is (a).

Who else? Pac-12 for sure; 9 games and 12 teams makes it a win-win; would mean MTZ teams get diminished access to SoCal.

ACC? Everyone's favorite realignment project. Don't know if a majority decision can be reached on any change, and we've seen just this year that a competent team can outpace Clemson for the Atlantic division. If ESPN wants the change, the ACC will gladly do so... for extra cash.

Big Ten? There are complaints about the top-heaviness of the East. Penn State would like a bit more room to compete. Western teams would like to play Eastern teams a bit more often. I don't think divisionless would have Wisconsin play Michigan any more often though. The optics of a single-division, may be worth something to the "unified" Big Ten.

SEC? They have the most history and momentum for divisions. But, "East vs. West" is going to change in some fashion with the addition of OU/UT anyway. I think 4 divisions is still on the table too. I say they don't mix Texas with Georgia with Alabama with Kentucky into the a single division.

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.
05-02-2022 07:57 AM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
Frank the Tank Online
Hall of Famer
*

Posts: 13,915
Joined: Jun 2008
Reputation: 910
I Root For: Illinois/DePaul
Location: Chicago
Post: #8
RE: Per Dodd - Big 12 Divisional Plans On Hold
(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).
(This post was last modified: 05-02-2022 08:24 AM by Frank the Tank.)
05-02-2022 08:23 AM
Visit this user's website Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
ohio1317 Offline
Moderator
*

Posts: 5,431
Joined: Mar 2008
Reputation: 280
I Root For: Ohio State
Location:
Post: #9
RE: Per Dodd - Big 12 Divisional Plans On Hold
I'm generally agreeing with Frank. The Big Ten has been changing its tune on this. I would personally welcome getting rid of divisions as I hate how infrequently we play all our traditional opponents in the west.
05-02-2022 08:58 AM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
bullet Offline
Legend
*

Posts: 53,578
Joined: Apr 2012
Reputation: 2222
I Root For: Texas, UK, UGA
Location:
Post: #10
RE: Per Dodd - Big 12 Divisional Plans On Hold
(05-02-2022 07:57 AM)Crayton Wrote:  Conference USA is (should be?) also operating without divisions this year.

It should pass. I believe this indicates the Oversight Committee has advanced this legislation as "non controversial" last week. The Big 12's hesitancy indicates either (a) they would rather go divisionless if able, or (b) they have not done their due diligence on this issue. I suspect it is (a).

Who else? Pac-12 for sure; 9 games and 12 teams makes it a win-win; would mean MTZ teams get diminished access to SoCal.

ACC? Everyone's favorite realignment project. Don't know if a majority decision can be reached on any change, and we've seen just this year that a competent team can outpace Clemson for the Atlantic division. If ESPN wants the change, the ACC will gladly do so... for extra cash.

Big Ten? There are complaints about the top-heaviness of the East. Penn State would like a bit more room to compete. Western teams would like to play Eastern teams a bit more often. I don't think divisionless would have Wisconsin play Michigan any more often though. The optics of a single-division, may be worth something to the "unified" Big Ten.

SEC? They have the most history and momentum for divisions. But, "East vs. West" is going to change in some fashion with the addition of OU/UT anyway. I think 4 divisions is still on the table too. I say they don't mix Texas with Georgia with Alabama with Kentucky into the a single division.

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.

Divisions work pretty well except in the ACC where they have a stupid split.

But I suspect they will all do away with divisions. The Pac 12 with 12 teams and 9 games and 3 natural "quads," makes the most sense to do away with them. 3 teams every year and everybody else 6 out of 8 or 4 every year and everybody else 5 out of 7.
05-02-2022 09:02 AM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
goofus Offline
All American
*

Posts: 3,278
Joined: May 2013
Reputation: 80
I Root For: Iowa
Location: chicago suburbs
Post: #11
RE: Per Dodd - Big 12 Divisional Plans On Hold
As an Iowa fan, I would like to get rid of divisions because of the additional flexibility of scheduling. I like the idea of Iowa playing OSU, Mich, MSU, PSU at least 50% of the time. I also apologize to Rutgers, but no team from the West wants to be the team that ends up having to play Rutgers 6 straight years, which is Iowa's current schedule.

I am also Ok with the idea of having the 2 best teams in the conference playing in the CCG, even if that means an OSU-Mich rematch.

Besides if the Big Ten goes with a schedule with 5 permanent rivals, it would be easy to set up unoficial division formats that don't count in the CCC race Just set it up that the 2 best teams overall still go to the CCG.

Unofficial west division
Nebraska, Iowa, Minnesota, Wisconsin, NW, ILL

Unofficial Central
Mich, MSU, Pur, Indy

Unofficial East
OSU, PSU, MD, Rut

In the end the unofficial division titles would be meaningless in the CCC race, but the winning teams get bragging rights and they could even make another traveling trophy or something.
(This post was last modified: 05-02-2022 10:00 AM by goofus.)
05-02-2022 09:35 AM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
Advertisement


Crayton Offline
1st String
*

Posts: 1,789
Joined: Feb 2019
Reputation: 104
I Root For: Florida
Location:
Post: #12
RE: Per Dodd - Big 12 Divisional Plans On Hold
The Dodd article also notes that visits by Oklahoma and Texas are hot commodities. They have 16 away games between the two of them the next two years. Who gets them?

a) 2 apiece for the "Little 8", or
b) 1 for all 12 remain-ers, +1 for each newbie
05-02-2022 10:33 AM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
Wahoowa84 Offline
1st String
*

Posts: 1,778
Joined: Oct 2017
Reputation: 179
I Root For: UVa
Location:
Post: #13
RE: Per Dodd - Big 12 Divisional Plans On Hold
Two interesting insights from the Dodd article:

1) The B12 planning group is working under the assumptions that there will be a two year window of 14 teams. Specifically, expectations are that a) new teams (BYU, UC, UCF & UH) will join on 7/1/2023 and b) OU and UT are leaving the conference on 6/30/2025. The B12 does not want OU and UT to leave early.

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 post was last modified: 05-02-2022 12:58 PM by Wahoowa84.)
05-02-2022 12:50 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
CatsClaw1 Online
2nd String
*

Posts: 269
Joined: Oct 2007
Reputation: 22
I Root For: Cincinnati
Location:
Post: #14
RE: Per Dodd - Big 12 Divisional Plans On Hold
(05-01-2022 08:25 PM)Wedge Wrote:  
Quote:The oversight proposal -- authored by the Pac-12, according to NCAA documents -- is considered noncontroversial with widespread support among the 10 FBS conferences.
Quote:Two sources told CBS Sports the SEC may have slow-played the proposal perhaps out of retribution for the ACC not supporting expansion; however, the SEC is now on board.

Guess that means the Pac-12 and ACC are planning to get rid of football divisions as well.

Maybe the Big Ten will keep its football divisions, but they might be the only conference that does.

The B1G were originally the ones pushing for the elimination of division requirements.


Big Ten considering the elimination of divisions amid College Football Playoff expansion talks
(This post was last modified: 05-02-2022 01:03 PM by CatsClaw1.)
05-02-2022 01:00 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
CatsClaw1 Online
2nd String
*

Posts: 269
Joined: Oct 2007
Reputation: 22
I Root For: Cincinnati
Location:
Post: #15
RE: Per Dodd - Big 12 Divisional Plans On Hold
(05-02-2022 10:33 AM)Crayton Wrote:  The Dodd article also notes that visits by Oklahoma and Texas are hot commodities. They have 16 away games between the two of them the next two years. Who gets them?

a) 2 apiece for the "Little 8", or
b) 1 for all 12 remain-ers, +1 for each newbie

It should interesting. You would think that the Continuing 8 would take b since they're already going to divide the exit fees amongst themselves, so giving the new members more games helps payoff their exit fees.
05-02-2022 01:10 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
CoastalJuan Offline
Business Drunk
*

Posts: 5,679
Joined: Sep 2014
Reputation: 299
I Root For: ECU
Location: Right near da beeach
Post: #16
RE: Per Dodd - Big 12 Divisional Plans On Hold
(05-01-2022 08:25 PM)Wedge Wrote:  
Quote:The oversight proposal -- authored by the Pac-12, according to NCAA documents -- is considered noncontroversial with widespread support among the 10 FBS conferences.
Quote:Two sources told CBS Sports the SEC may have slow-played the proposal perhaps out of retribution for the ACC not supporting expansion; however, the SEC is now on board.

Guess that means the Pac-12 and ACC are planning to get rid of football divisions as well.

Maybe the Big Ten will keep its football divisions, but they might be the only conference that does.

I'd be shocked if the Big 10 kept divisions. The AAC, when exploring the scheduling format while they have their waiver, talked about each team having a couple of permanent opponents. This could keep Michigan-Ohio State, for example, on each other's schedules.

That said, it would be stupid to risk a playoff spot keeping divisions for any conference.
05-02-2022 02:53 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
Advertisement


Eggszecutor Offline
Water Engineer
*

Posts: 74
Joined: Jun 2020
Reputation: 25
I Root For: Nebraska
Location:
Post: #17
RE: Per Dodd - Big 12 Divisional Plans On Hold
(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.
05-02-2022 02:58 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
Crayton Offline
1st String
*

Posts: 1,789
Joined: Feb 2019
Reputation: 104
I Root For: Florida
Location:
Post: #18
RE: Per Dodd - Big 12 Divisional Plans On Hold
(05-02-2022 02:53 PM)CoastalJuan Wrote:  That said, it would be stupid to risk a playoff spot keeping divisions for any conference.

Don't think the risk is too great for the Big Ten and SEC.
05-02-2022 02:58 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
Attackcoog Offline
Moderator
*

Posts: 39,233
Joined: Oct 2011
Reputation: 2179
I Root For: Houston
Location:
Post: #19
RE: Per Dodd - Big 12 Divisional Plans On Hold
(05-01-2022 08:58 PM)RUScarlets Wrote:  It has to change. I think the SEC wants to move to 3-4 protected rivals given all the history there, also allowing you to play all the big brands every 2-3 years. Could easily be adopted for any 12-14 or 16 team league. The only league I can see staying the course is the PAC12 because the divisions are so tight (G5 conferences probably also served best with status quo).

Yup. I think we see complete deregulation of CCG games soon. Frankly, it should be completely up to the conference to decide how it crowns its champ as long as the conference stays within the NCAA maximum game limits. Thats the way it was before there were CCG's. Every conference had its own tie breaking procedures---which were all somewhat different---and that worked out just fine.
(This post was last modified: 05-02-2022 04:06 PM by Attackcoog.)
05-02-2022 04:05 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
RUScarlets Offline
All American
*

Posts: 3,601
Joined: May 2012
Reputation: 54
I Root For: Rutgers
Location:
Post: #20
RE: Per Dodd - Big 12 Divisional Plans On Hold
And if that's the case, then I have to go with the following pods: 3+3+3, so you play everyone 3/4 years.

1. WVU, UC, UCF, Houston
2. OSU, ISU, KU, KSU
3. TTech, Baylor, TCU, BYU
(This post was last modified: 05-02-2022 04:25 PM by RUScarlets.)
05-02-2022 04:20 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.