How to fix College Football

by 54b on Dec 7, 2006 5:19 PM CST

Like all of you, I've read a ton of articles and have heard a lot of opinions regarding the BCS and how to fix it...everything from leave it the way it is to scrapping the bowl format and instituting a 64 team play-off.

Well I think I've come up with the answer to crowning a true national champion without making the importance and pageantry of the regular season irrelevant.

Basically, it's a relegation system like the Euro soccer leagues...

Take the 120 Division-1 (we'll need to add 1 to the current 119) football teams and make 12 conferences of 10 teams each. To begin with, the majority of the teams from the 6 BCS Power conferences will make up the six top conferences. Conferences like the SEC, Big XII and Big 10+1 will have to be cut down to 10 teams relegating the weakest teams in their conferences to the lower 6 conferences.
Pair the big six conferences and little six off by geographic proximity...

Big XII - Mountain West
SEC - Sun Belt
Big East - Independents plus the leftovers
Big 10 - MAC
PAC 10 - WAC
ACC - Conf. USA

After each season, the two worst teams in each big six conference will be relegated to their lower six conference counterpart and the two best teams from the lower six conferences will be promoted to their big six conference counterparts.

This year Colorado and ISU would have gone to the Mountain West and TCU and BYU would have been promoted to the Big XII. Obviously, there would have to be some tie-breaker rules to determine the two best and two worst teams in each conference, but that can easily be done. I like this idea because it forces the Dukes and Temples of college football to get competitive or play in a conference where they can be.

All teams will play an 11 game season, every team from their conference, plus the first two games will be against non-con teams any of the conferences in the other division (a little like inner-league play in the MLB). Also, the first two games will be treated like preseason and won't count against your conference record just like non-con don't effect conference standings now. But, and this is important, all games will count when the polls are voted on. The human vote is still important. If more than two teams in a conference tie for first, the polls will have to decide who the top two are. Otherwise, all the traditional tie breakers that we use now, like head-to-head, will apply.
Play-offs - The six champions of the six power conferences plus two wild cards to be decided by the BCS ranking system, #7 and #8 will be invited to a play-off. The BCS, based on the polls, will decide the seeding for the playoffs, 1 vs 8, 2 vs 7 and so on. At the most, you've got a 15 game season. I like an 8-team playoff, but you could also take the top 2 teams from the Big 6 conferences (12 team play-off) and give the top 4 teams in college football a bye like they do in the pros. This would help dilute the home field advantage such as Rutgers had over Louisville this year.

Note: You could also have a play-off for the champion of the lower six conferences, though their true prize is getting promoted to a big six conference.

Also, many of the current bowl game sites could be used as the play-off venues for all you bowl lovers.

Discuss, debate, call me an idiot...
54b

All comments, FanPosts, and FanShots are the views of the reader-authors who create them.

Tweet Comment 21 comments | 0 recs |

Do you like this story?

Comments

Well, it won't happen...

but I can't say it's a bad idea.

It's also one of the most original ideas, and it might work. Conference play would be more exciting if TCU was in here.

One thing I would change in here are some of the conference affiliations for the mid-major conferences. It doesn't make much sense to give UTEP the chance to play in the ACC.

by boomhauer25 on Dec 7, 2006 5:31 PM CST reply actions

Conference USA is all over the place

UTEP is on the western edge, but Conf USA spans Eastern Carolina to Central Florida and all points in between. The ACC is as good a match-up as any, geographically speaking.

Overall I think it's an interesting idea, and a novel one, for sure.

by Defender90 on Dec 8, 2006 2:50 AM CST up reply actions

Step up the competition

First and foremost we need more competition. While SOS was a weak attempt, it didn't work. It won't work now.

Mandating all the teams to play at least 2 opponents from a BCS Conference will ratchet things up immediately. The entire BigEast did it this past season. Heck, Syracuse and Louisville played THREE(3) opponents from a BCS Conference!

Meanwhile, the Big-12 reached a new low. Other than OU, every team in the Big-12 played a Div.1-AA opponent. The teams of the Big-12 racked up 8 easy victories from teams of the SunBelt Conference. Not one BCS Conference played fewer opponents from a BCS Conference! An all-time low.

Mack Brown has NEVER defeated OU without first playing a RANKED opponent. Not once.

--- We have pansies scheduling our patsies. ---

by HornChamps on Dec 7, 2006 5:48 PM CST reply actions

TCU should be ranked

low, but they'll be ranked, so I don't think we should worry.

by aorist9 on Dec 7, 2006 6:00 PM CST up reply actions

"Mack has NEVER defeated OU without..."

That means about as much to me as Mack Brown has never defeated Bob Stoops under a full moon. What are we, baseball fans?

by Wells on Dec 7, 2006 8:38 PM CST up reply actions

...on astroturf...

at night, after the 7th inning, coming out of a rain delay...

...til Gabriel blows his horn

by BigTexBD on Dec 7, 2006 8:45 PM CST up reply actions

Not so fast.......

TCU won't be ranked if Baylor beats them first.

It was a 10-point game this season.

--- We have pansies scheduling our patsies. ---

by HornChamps on Dec 7, 2006 6:47 PM CST reply actions

It's a shame...

Relegation will never catch on, since it's, IMHO, one of the most exciting aspects of the EPL.

For this season, that would move down - Duke, NC, Syracuse, UConn, Iowa State, Colorado, Mich. St., Illinois, Vandy, Miss. St., Stanford, and Wash.

by Hoenna on Dec 7, 2006 8:21 PM CST reply actions

Very Interesting

Wow, this is the most innovative idea I've heard. Also probably one of the most unrealisic requiring the radical conference realignment.

I'd love to see a big mock up of how this would work assigning teams to the conferences and showing the movement between the divisions.

by TexasTiger on Dec 7, 2006 8:35 PM CST reply actions

I'll have to admit

I have been steadfastly against a playoff, but this actually makes a bit of sense.

by orangeblood1 on Dec 7, 2006 8:40 PM CST reply actions

Great thinking...

but because it requires so much change in so many aspects it will not happen. Too much "tradition" would have to change.

I really do think the European soccer leagues have the best system in the world. Their league format - everyone plays everyone else at home and away - really is the best way to determine the best team. In a lot of American sports, the best team does not always win the championship. Also, the best teams from each individual soccer league come together to play in the Champions League. This is like a playoff (once you get to the final 16) of the best teams.

Finally, relegation is awesome. Even if your team sucks, it is quite an accomplishment to move up to the top tier league. And if your team sucks and is at the bottom of the league you still have to play hard in order to avoid moving down.

by JohnsonUT on Dec 7, 2006 9:29 PM CST reply actions

I absolutely LOVE this idea, but

how would this affect other sports? Can UNC & Duke be relegated to Conf USA in football, but stay in the ACC for basketball?

I think this is the best idea yet, better than my idea of a 16-team playoff (11 conf champs + 5 at large). I thought about the possibility of 11 game seasons and 10 teams per conference, but I had no idea how to implement it. You totally nailed that one.

As for the 120th team - How about the previous season's 1-AA champ?

by cheevyjames on Dec 7, 2006 10:07 PM CST reply actions

That's solid 54b

I'm gonna link to it on CC. I'm not a fan of the playoff idea at all. But this jives with me a lot.

Fight On! Beat the Cougars!

by USCLink on Dec 7, 2006 10:36 PM CST reply actions

Btw

Is it safe to assume that ND joins the big east?

Fight On! Beat the Cougars!

by USCLink on Dec 7, 2006 10:38 PM CST reply actions

Love it

but then I started life as one of those suspect furrin types, so of course I would.

One note re: best teams in European league competiton. Within say the EPL, presumably the best team will win. But there's also the Football Association Cup, which is pretty much a war of all against all from multiple tiers, and it's not unheard of for better teams to crash out, even if it's because they are holding good players back for other competitions. You could run a season long national championship competition the same way in Div 1A, I'd bet, but the logistics for fans would be trying. Anf

by DC Trojan on Dec 7, 2006 10:50 PM CST reply actions

not a bad idea, but...

conference re-alignments won't happen. It doesn't even have that much to do with 'tradition', it has to do with the fact that conferences extend much further than just athletics.

Don't know how many of you have ever worked with any universities, but they tend to work within their conferences on academics, sharing information, and negotiating contracts that reach as far as fleet services, printing contracts, you name it.

Go Big Red Nebraska!
http://www.cornnation.com

by cornnation @ Burnt Orange Nation on Dec 7, 2006 11:22 PM CST reply actions

I've been wanting this for years

I've always thought the Europeans had a better system for deciding championships. The EPL champion gives the English fans that "truly great" champion that college football gives us now (ie: no fluke champions), but having the FA Cup as a second but equally prestigious event gives them that NCAA tournament excitement that Americans crave.

Funny how the same team almost never wins both events, which should be something to consider for those of you who want a college football playoff.

by BrooklynHorn on Dec 7, 2006 11:25 PM CST reply actions

Interesting

It's certainly fresh. I like the idea of relegation, but I don't think that it's a good idea for college sports. The problem is turnover. Jumping ahead five years in time almost every player in college football will be different. It seems like this sets up the potential for some pretty wild swings following a single down year.

Also, would teams be less likely to fire a coach knowing that a rebuilding year (ie Colorado) would make them much more likely to be relegated?

by Off Tackle Tom on Dec 8, 2006 10:20 AM CST reply actions

Thanks for the comments

I agree that this has about as much chance of happening as Greg Davis getting hired as head coach at Texas Tech, but it's fun to think about.

I think the way you implement is to get it approved and then set it to begin 3 to 5 years from now. That way teams have a chance to get prepared. And I think colleges have the flexibility to isolate their football program. Notre Dame is independent in Football, but is basically in the Big East for everything else.

As for how it would change the overall face of college football, I have no idea. I just know the level of competition would increase and we'd actually crown a real champion.

There are lots of ways to carve this up, that's why I left it somehwat open ended.

by 54b on Dec 8, 2006 12:21 PM CST reply actions

No, but

After this, conferences won't mean much and a lot of other sports are going to be destroyed.

I do like the idea, however, for professional football, basketball, and baseball.

by Caradoc on Dec 8, 2006 11:01 PM CST reply actions

Not following you

I agree that it will have some effect on the current conference structure, but "destroying other sports?"

We have over 300 schools that participate in what is considered D-1 basketball, yet we only have 119 in D-1 Football. Are all those basketball-only schools in danger because they don't have a football team.

And if we're so concerned about conferences, where was the national backlash after the SWC imploded or more recently, the Big East was reduced to almost nothing. Things change. Heck, look at TCU, they've been four different conferences in the last 10 years based on what was best for their football team. Were the other sports "destroyed."

by 54b on Dec 9, 2006 7:57 AM CST up reply actions