T1B

How's this for deciding a national champ?

Take the winner of each Division I FBS conference and the top independent according to Van or .m2 and put 'em in an actual meatgrinder the following year. Make them play each other. That would be 11 games. School with the best record is champ. No computer. No polls. No shit bowl competition. No soft OOC schedule. The only way to puss out would be to whine about playing one less home game than half the conference. Boo fucking hoo.

The top 2 stay. From the bottom 10, 9 fall back to their original conference replaced by the 9 new schools who won their respective conference. The 2 conferences that are shut out perhaps send their winner to play against the independents in a round robin for the 10th and final spot.

So if it were to happen we'd have a 2009 Premiere Conference that looked like this:

Buffalo
East Carolina
Virginia Tech
Florida
Oklahoma
Cincinnati
Penn State
Utah
USC
Troy
Boise St.
Navy

Discuss amongst yourselves.

Navy's the top independent? When they lost to ND?

:?

Terry,

I only looked at their overall record. With the win head to head Notre Dame would be in it.

Now what say you?

The following year?

So any number of good teams whose starting rosters get obliterated by graduation and the NFL draft will get to compete for a championship next year?

Yeah, that makes total sense. Because you know, I really want to see a team like Buffalo, who (hypothetically) doesn't return the little bit of talent it actually had, get beat by Florida 70-3.

Yeah... to hell with the Civil War, the Iron Bowl, and all that shit.

Why the hell would USC ever want to play UCLA or ND, and why would OSU ever want to play Michigan, and I'm sure the Red River Shootout would be a lot more fun if they just inserted a random team to play OU or UT.


Besides, your ridiculous scenario would result in a million miles of traveling distance... so should Kal ever win the PAC, it's obviously unfair, what with all of those time zones and shit.

And upon futher review...

So, Oregon is ineligible for the championship next season, based on what they did this season?

If Terrell Pryor becomes the greatest player ever, he doesn't get to sniff the championship game?

Bama isn't allowed to compete after getting it together?

If LSU comes back strong, it's still no soup for you?


Sounds worse than the old-fashioned polls-only championships.

The following year. Exactly. Sure schools will have high water years followed by droughts. They all do.

Should you make it to the top shelf of collegiate football then the recruits will follow.

Granted Buffalo ain't gonna stick around long enough. They'll get bushwacked and sent back to their conference to catch lightning in a bottle again.

But LSU for damn sure better compete to get ahead of Florida.

Obviously it's a flawed system. So do away with conferences altogether for one year. Set up a bracket system where you play say 5 teams in pool play. Top two in your pool advances. Add 6 wild cards. Losers play a consolation "season" of sorts.

How many teams are there? 116? Pools of 6 would mean 19 pools plus 2 left over. Add the top two in FCS to even it out to 20 pools.

Out of those 20 pools, 20 winners advance plus the top 12 wildcards for 32.

Next round to 16.

Then to 8. These 8 are guaranteed a spot in next year's premiere conference.

(The other 8 go back in to two pools of 4. Round robin play. Top dog in each pool fill the 9 and 10 slots for next year. The bottom teams in each pool fall away. The four remaining middle teams back to round robin play. Top two take the final spots, 11 and 12.)

To a final 4.

Championship.

Now you've decided it all on the field.

Shit. Just play that tournament every year.

Play your little Catfight before or after the tournament. You sell your tickets. You get your drunk on. You have bragging rights on the biggest fish in the little O pond.

Same with every other rivalry or border skirmish.

So, that's a "no" on ND/Michigan, OSU/Michigan, Texas/OU, USC/UCLA, USC/ND, Bama/Aub, UO/OS, Mizzou/Kansas, and every other 100 year old game I can think of?


Better get to work selling that idea to the CFB fans.

I'd rather they take the top two teams at the end of the season and flip a coin for the crystal football. This idea is really that bad.

Again, you can set up your century old rivalry/scrimmage before or after the tournament. You won't be playing more than 10 games if you reach the championship. It may be a bitch for those schools scratching it out for the final 4 Premiere spots. Add a couple more games.

Keerist.

Just don't queef too much when you backpedal quietly out of a competition decided on the field.

See what happens when you let a basketball guy hopped on 'ludes and stale panties try to come up with football stuff?

Not a basketball guy at all.

Just a competition guy.

C'mon, Van. You of all people wouldn't be hiding behind the rivalry skirt now would you?

That was way too convoluted, socal. You're completely reinventing the wheel there, unneccesarily.

Wanna fix CF? Fine. Make me King For A Day and I'll have this shit fixed before lunch...

Little bit of conference re-alignment, a little bit of mandatory scheduling and a simple and easy playoffs.

Done.

-My first act as King would be to institute what I'd affectionately label the Lefty Says It Can't Be Done Edict, which would abolish unbalanced home and way schedules.

6-6 home/away schedules for everybody. Neutral site games will simply count as one of your road games one year and one of your home games the next year.

-No games pitting D1 against D1-AA. If you play one you are ineligible for BCS bowl consideration.

-Dump the Sun Belt, Conference USA and MAC from D1 football. Merge the WAC and MWC. No more using teams from these bottom feeder conferences to pad your schedule.

-Re-align the conferences to where they make more geographic/rivalry sense, while making all conferences twelve teams.

Pac 10 adds Utah and BYU.

SEC drops Arkansas and S. Carolina, replacing them with Florida St and Miami.

ACC adds S. Carolina and East Carolina.

Big XII drops Iowa St and Colorado. They add Arkansas and TCU.

Big 10 picks up Notre Dame.

The Big East adds Iowa St, Tulsa, Houston and Rice to create a new 12 team Big Cupcake Conference.

The Huntin', Fishin' & Gamblin' Conference is created:

Boise St
Colorado
Colorado St
Air Force
New Mexico
New Mexico St
Wyoming
Fresno St
Hawaii
Idaho
Nevada
UNLV

84 teams. 87, if you add the three other remaining Independents, which I wouldn't, considering they're Western Kentucky, Army and Navy. There's more than enough D1 teams here to where nobody would ever need to play a non BCS conference team. Anybody who isn't in one of these Big 7 conferences, tough shit, you aren't relevant anyway.

-All conferences play eight conference games and four OOC games: 4/4 and 2/2, home and away. UNLV and Idaho can only book so many OOC games so the good teams will actually be forced to start calling each other to schedule home/home series.

-All conferences play a Conference Championship Game...but only when it's necessary to break a tie in the conference. If Team A from the Bollocks Division of a conference is 12-0 and Team B from the Shite Division of that conference is 10-2 including a head to head loss to Team A then we dispense with a farcical "championship" game.

-Eight team playoffs, with no conference tie ins. The Rose, Orange, Sugar and Fiesta each host Round 1 of the playoffs, which are to be comprised of the top eight finishers in the final regular season BCS poll. All Four games are on New Year's Day. Doesn't matter if four teams are from one conference and no teams are represented from four other conferences. Tough shit. The highest ranked eight teams go, period. They're seeded 1-8 and that's how they play each other in the first round.

-Second round sees the Final Four play one week later, rotating the venues among the four main bowls each year.

-Third round, a week later, same deal.

-BTPCF Stupendous Bowl game, a week later, same deal.

I debated where to put ND. Originally I had 'em in the ACC and I had Iowa St in the Big 10. The Big 10 is where a major tradition program from Indiana belongs though so that's where ND goes. Hell, originally I also had Iowa St in the Huntin', Fishin' and Gamblin' conference too. The Big 10 is the most logical place for Iowa St but the Big 10 simply doesn't need another POS. Iowa can still continue to play them every year, OOC.

The Big East also posed a problem. There simply weren't four more decent teams out there, to make it a good twelve team conference; especially not after East Carolina got punted to the ACC.

Oh well. The Big East sucks already anyway.

The other option was to make six Super Conferences, each with 14 teams. That might actually be easier, and more sensible. It'd still be 84 BCS teams though so it's pretty much six of one and a half dozen of the other...

After looking it over, screw the six conferences with fourteen teams apiece deal. Make it five, so that way there's no real dogshit conferences.

70 teams is plenty enough to come up with four game OOC schedules.

These would your five Super Conferences...

Pac 10: Add BYU, Utah, Boise St and Fresno St.

SEC: Drop S. Carolina and Arkansas. Add Florida St, Miami, S. Florida and Georgia Tech.

Big XII: Drop Iowa St. Add Arkansas, TCU and Tulsa.

Big 10: Add Iowa St, Syracuse and ND

ACC: Drop Miami, Florida St and Georgia Tech. Add W. Virginia, Pitt, Cincy, Louisville and S. Carolina. I would also accept arguments here for Rutgers and Connecticut instead of Louisville and Cincy but W. Virginia, Pitt and S. Carolina are definites here due to their tradition and the long standing rivalries they have in this conference.

The bottom feeders of the MWC, WAC and Conference USA go away from D1, as do the Sun Belt and MAC conferences and the three remaining Independents.

There are arguments to be had between Tulsa, Ball St, Air Force, Buffalo and East Carolina as to which of these teams make the cut and which don't. I chose Tulsa because of their location and their usual strength, otherwise I would've chosen Air Force.

So you want to go from 119 to 70 teams?


I'm going to go out on a limb and guess you didn't major in business in college.


Matter of fact, I'm now quite confident you've never run a successful business.


Hmmm, how can I reduce both supply and demand in one fell swoop?

I'm all about the Ruling Class and culling the herd...

Dinsean economics? Does XXXL have a masters in that?

Take the 116 or 119, whatever it takes, cut 'em in two. Top 60 is the new Premiere Division. The bottom 60 are second tier. Relegate the bottom 2 from each division. Bring up the top 2 from second tier year in year out.

How great would a Notre Dame/USC rivalry be when one of 'em is facing relegation?

8 conferences, 8 teams each.
10 game regular season games, 5 home and 5 away.
play all 7 conf opponents and 3 non conf opponents from the other 8 conferences
top 2 from each conference go to the playoffs on opposite sides of the tree
last place team from each conference drops to the lower division that runs a similar program and the top 8 from that division move up
conferences realign geographically every year based on the 8 new teams
regular season done by Halloween playoff rounds every other week for the next 6 weeks and then a month off before the Title Bowl

I only care about USC, conference smack talk is for fags who support shit teams..... like Auburn

you talk about cock in the ass a lot, bout time you exit that closet isnt it?
I validate USC, fuck the rest of the conference

just like Auburn is a bad team

they were coached by he whose name shall not be uttered those years.


Auburn has been like that forever, face it, theyre the Washington State or maybe the Cal of the SEC.

I know plenty of history, went to my first USC game in 1976, graduated from the school in 1993, my wife graduated the same year, we have had season tickets every year since. While Hackett was coach, we didnt use the tickets as part of a protest (along with many other USC boosters) to let the school know that he was unacceptable choice as coach.
If not using season tickets to support a program that was heading in the wrong direction is a sign of a bad fan, then that is what I am but many of us mad a decision that empty unused seats would send a better message to the Athletic Department than showing up or selling the tickets to the enemy teams fans.

again with the gay stuff, the only thing more pathetic than a big, fat, self hating queer is a big, fat, self hating queer still hiding in the closet like you.

did anyone mention that this stupid shit power conference idea gives each team one chance to win the championship before they're replaced by a different conference team the following year?

oh, and paul hackett wasn't an unacceptable coach until he began losing. most of us call withholding support from your team bandwagonning, though you're the first i've heard refer to it as protesting.

M Club wrote:did anyone mention that this stupid shit power conference idea gives each team one chance to win the championship before they're replaced by a different conference team the following year?

Yeah. I did. Sorta.

Win and you stay in. Lose and you fall back.

M Club wrote:oh, and paul hackett wasn't an unacceptable coach until he began losing. most of us call withholding support from your team bandwagonning, though you're the first i've heard refer to it as protesting.

If you show up at the game the administration doesnt know there is a problem. We went to all the games in 98, in 99 we went to the game in Hawaii and the first 3 home games, then when the firepaulhackett website started and it was obvious that everyone was trying to get him out we, like most the rest of our section stopped going to games, still have the tickets from the remaining 3 games in 99 and all 7 homes in 2000 that were never used. when we were called and asked why we werent using the tickets we told them we paid for them and will leave the seats empty until Hackett is gone

SoCalTrjn wrote: If you show up at the game the administration doesnt know there is a problem. We went to all the games in 98, in 99 we went to the game in Hawaii and the first 3 home games, then when the firepaulhackett website started and it was obvious that everyone was trying to get him out we, like most the rest of our section stopped going to games, still have the tickets from the remaining 3 games in 99 and all 7 homes in 2000 that were never used. when we were called and asked why we werent using the tickets we told them we paid for them and will leave the seats empty until Hackett is gone

that's a fair amount of casuistry. i think what you were trying to say is that you didn't go to the games because the team was losing. there's a russian word for that: bandwagoning.

SoCalTrjn wrote:8 conferences, 8 teams each.
10 game regular season games, 5 home and 5 away.
play all 7 conf opponents and 3 non conf opponents from the other 8 conferences
top 2 from each conference go to the playoffs on opposite sides of the tree
last place team from each conference drops to the lower division that runs a similar program and the top 8 from that division move up
conferences realign geographically every year based on the 8 new teams
regular season done by Halloween playoff rounds every other week for the next 6 weeks and then a month off before the Title Bowl

A similar proposal was done over at the old Project Playoff.com website. The biggest difference was that they formulated their proposal on the basis of attendance.

Attendance has one advantage: unlike computer rankings, which might generate some complaints of bias in favor of one team over another, attendance is what it is. The downside (or at least, one of the most obvious problems with this approach) is that when attendance is the criterion, certain schools have built-in protections in that they're all but guaranteed never to fall out of the Top 64 in terms of attendance, no matter how badly the program falters.

You also wouldn't get a ton of turnover, at least not from year to year. If you did something like this back in 1998 (the earliest year for which attendance figures are available on the NCAA's website), the 64 teams in the mix would've looked like this:

1 Michigan
2 Tennessee
3 Penn St.
4 Ohio St.
5 Georgia
6 Florida
7 Alabama
8 Auburn
9 Florida St.
10 LSU
11 Notre Dame
12 Texas
13 Wisconsin
14 Nebraska
15 South Caro.
16 UCLA
17 Washington
18 Oklahoma
19 Michigan St.
20 Clemson
21 Iowa
22 Brigham Young
23 Arizona St.
24 Southern Cal
25 Texas A&M
26 Kentucky
27 Missouri
28 North Carolina
29 West Virginia
30 Purdue
31 Arkansas
32 Virginia Tech
33 California
34 Arizona
35 Syracuse
36 Colorado
37 Mississippi
38 Air Force
39 Oregon
40 Virginia
41 Texas Tech
42 Miami (Fla.)
43 Kansas St.
44 Oklahoma St.
45 Boston College
46 Pittsburgh
47 NorthWestern
48 Georgia Tech
49 North Carolina St.
50 Minnesota
51 Louisville
52 Illinois
53 Utah
54 Mississippi St.
55 Fresno St.
56 Army
57 Indiana
58 Iowa St.
59 Stanford
60 Washington St.
61 Baylor
62 Navy
63 Kansas
64 East Carolina

If you made changes annually, from year to year they would've looked like this:

1999

Add: Hawaii, UTEP, Vanderbilt
Drop: Baylor, Northwestern, Washington State

2000

Add: Maryland, Northwestern, Oregon State
Drop: Indiana, Kansas, Navy

2001

Add: Indiana, Kansas, Toledo
Drop: Army, Cal , UTEP

2003 (note: I'm omitting 2002 from the analysis due to the fact that NCAA released only attendance figures for Top 50 schools that year)

Add: Army, Cal, UConn, Memphis, TCU
Drop: East Carolina, Indiana, Northwestern, Toledo, Vanderbilt

2005 (note: I'm omitting 2004 from the analysis due to the fact that figures on NCAA website list only attendance by conferences and independents, rather than individual school attendance)

Add: Baylor, Indiana, South Florida
Drop: Air Force, Hawaii, TCU

2006

Add: Air Force, East Carolina
Drop: Indiana, Memphis

2007

Add: Central Florida, Hawaii, Indiana, Rutgers, UTEP
Drop: Army, Baylor, Fresno State, Pittsburgh, Syracuse

2008

Add: Navy, Pittsburgh, Vanderbilt
Drop: Indiana, Stanford, UTEP

But more importantly, I think you and Van are missing the point here. The point is simply this: KISS (that's Keep It Simple, Stupid, rather than the 70's glam-rock band). You guys are chasing an unattainable ideal -- NFL over the past 30 years or so out front should have told you so. If you're talking about a college football playoff, the model should be the NCAA basketball tournament, rather than the NFL playoffs. Yeah, there's always a little bitching about who gets in and who doesn't when March Madness rolls around, but that's all-but-forgotten by the time the tourney gets underway. Three words: Sixteen. Team. Playoff.

Sixteen teams gives you enough margin for error that you don't have to worry about the polls or computer rankings. You'll still get the best teams in, and the ones who complain about not making it would've been in the "lucky just to be there" category to begin with. No messing with traditional rivalries. No need to get the NCAA involved in scheduling. No need to force certain teams into conferences that they want no part of ('sup, ND).

Sixteen teams. Simple. No need to make it more complicated than that.

Attendance would be a ludicrous criteria. But as you said it is what it is. It's the bottom line getting in the way of true competition.

Believe the Heupel wrote:Let me get this straight:

Not showing up for games but still paying for season tickets is somehow sending a message to the AD?

It certainly does send a message to the AD - exactly the message he wants to receive, which is that he can do whatever he wants and the ticket revenue is still coming in.

On the topic - I am going to stick up for The MAC . I think West Coast Bias is wrong to overlook that conference. Whatever Utah can do, Buffalo or Toledo can do - beleeb dat.