I'll start this by saying I think the super conference idea is just so stupid on many many levels and I doubt it happens without massive legal entanglements and political wrangling. I wish the media would quit talking about it if they are not going to also seriously talk about the ramifications. So here is a proposal that I think could save and greatly improve College Football.
First go to 8 12 team conferences (Pac12, Big 12, B1g, Sec, ACC, Big East, MWC, CUSA??). This would mean 96 schools are included.
Within the conferences you can still have control over competition tv contracts ect. Whether it's round robin or with protected rivalries.
Now each conference has 8 in conference games (negotiable) and four non conference games. Of the non conference games two can be any opponent outside your conference or division 1, ie UNI, Iowa whatever, to protect rivalries. The final two are played against teams in the other conferences (one home one away) and are determined by how you finished the prior year. The conference you play are rotated every year. If you finish say 6th B12 you would play maybe SEC 6th(Home) and MWC 6th(away). 5th in B12 might play 5th B1G and 5th CUSA ect. Now using the results of these mandatory games you can get a decent ranking of the strength of each conference. I'll get to why this is important in a moment.
Next the playoffs. So each conference has a conference championship game which in effect is the first round of a 16 team playoff. The winners of these games move on to four bowl games (After a couple weeks off) around XMas. Now the opponents are seeded by conference rank determined by the aforementioned games. Or you could have the highest seeded conference champ be able to pick their next opponent (first round only). ESPN could have a hour long "The Decision" show. The winners then play two bowls on new years and then a championship game two weeks later.
Also you can keep most of your other bowl games with conference tie ins ect. Sure they are meaningless but they are meaningless now. This will keep some incentive for being in a strong conference as opposed to CUSA for instance.
Pros:
. I think it would be awesome in the end and have a huge increase in meaningful games. Come on powers that be make this happen and save college football for the vast majority of fans and make boat loads of money in the process. If you agree pass this along to all the Presidents, AD's, fan forums, Senators, Congressmen, Governors, PTA's you can. Power to the people and away from Enron... er ESPN.
That is all, time to tailgate. Go State...
First go to 8 12 team conferences (Pac12, Big 12, B1g, Sec, ACC, Big East, MWC, CUSA??). This would mean 96 schools are included.
Within the conferences you can still have control over competition tv contracts ect. Whether it's round robin or with protected rivalries.
Now each conference has 8 in conference games (negotiable) and four non conference games. Of the non conference games two can be any opponent outside your conference or division 1, ie UNI, Iowa whatever, to protect rivalries. The final two are played against teams in the other conferences (one home one away) and are determined by how you finished the prior year. The conference you play are rotated every year. If you finish say 6th B12 you would play maybe SEC 6th(Home) and MWC 6th(away). 5th in B12 might play 5th B1G and 5th CUSA ect. Now using the results of these mandatory games you can get a decent ranking of the strength of each conference. I'll get to why this is important in a moment.
Next the playoffs. So each conference has a conference championship game which in effect is the first round of a 16 team playoff. The winners of these games move on to four bowl games (After a couple weeks off) around XMas. Now the opponents are seeded by conference rank determined by the aforementioned games. Or you could have the highest seeded conference champ be able to pick their next opponent (first round only). ESPN could have a hour long "The Decision" show. The winners then play two bowls on new years and then a championship game two weeks later.
Also you can keep most of your other bowl games with conference tie ins ect. Sure they are meaningless but they are meaningless now. This will keep some incentive for being in a strong conference as opposed to CUSA for instance.
Pros:
- More likely to get implemented then 4 super conferences.
- No BCS teams or borderline BCS teams left out.
- 12 teams are somewhat manageable and make way more sense then 16.
- All teams have at least a 1 in 6 shot at a playoff game.
- Seed determining games would be meaningful and beneficial to your conference as well as help create conference unity and an incentive to keep your conference strong.
- Seed Determining games will create some interesting match ups which promotes the college football product.
- Seed determining games gives conferences legitimate bragging rights instead of perceived media driven bragging rights (B1G).
- Can maintain bowls as a reward for a nice season and a vacation excuse.
- Can still maintain some out of conference rivalries.
- Notre Dame and Texas would hate it.
- Twenty or so Division 1 teams left out. But they are out anyway. Does suck.
- Weaker conferences have easier path to Title. (Don't care. Better then no path. Plus seeding should help in this regard)
- Travel arrangements for New Years and XMas games. (Won't affect the vast majority of fans also could do four new years games and then two home games then championship game)
- Makes too much sense for it to actually happen.
That is all, time to tailgate. Go State...
