(08-08-2018 11:33 AM)TexanMark Wrote: This forum has been known to be home for many delusional, fun exercises...
…and, on that note, I’ll throw this wild idea out there:
I’ve always been intrigued by the idea of college football relegation. I don’t see it ever happening among the P5, but maybe it could be considered (for football only) by the MAC, C-USA, and the SB, taking the following assumptions into account:
- The American is perceived (rightly, IMO) as the strongest (top-to-bottom) of the G5 conferences.
- The MW is perceived (very debatable, IMO) as stronger (top-to-bottom) than the MAC, C-USA, and SB.
- There are long-term geographic concerns about the makeup of both C-USA and the SB.
- Many MAC fans (and, likely, many C-USA and SB fans) have concerns about some underperforming members within the conference.
How would a system of relegation among the three conferences work? It might look something like this:
- The current 36 schools in the MAC, C-USA, and SB would be divided into four nine-team divisions. Initially determining the four divisions would be based on total number of conference wins (not including conference championship games) over the past four seasons. It would look something like this:
Gold Division (3 MAC; 3 C-USA; 3 SB)
App St. (27), Toledo (26), Ark St. (26), NIU (24), WMU (24), La Tech (23), WKU (23), MTSU (20), Ga So (20)
Silver Division (3 MAC; 4 C-USA; 2 SB)
CMU (20), Ohio (20), Marshall (19), Louisiana (19), Troy (19), So Miss (18), ODU (17), BG (17), FAU (15)
Bronze Division (3 MAC; 4 C-USA; 2 SB)
Akron (17), FIU (15), UTSA (14), Miami (14), N. Texas (13), S. Ala (13), Ga St (12), Rice (11), Buffalo (11)
Copper Division (3 MAC; 3 C-USA; 3 SB)
La. Monroe (11), UTEP (10), EMU (8), Texas St (8), Ball St (7), Kent St (6), Charlotte (4), UAB (4), Coastal Car (2)
I settled on using the past four seasons because that’s when C-USA began in its current form (and when the most recent college football playoff agreement began). There’s room for debate about who belongs where, but that’s not really the point. The point is finding a generally fair way to initially determine the divisions, and this would accomplish that.
- Once the four divisions are determined, the divisions would be set for the next two years. Each school would play the other eight division schools (once at home and once on the road) over the next two seasons (with four home games and four away games each season).
- Divisions would be realigned every two years, with the top three schools in each division moving up and the bottom three schools in each division moving down. (You could debate lessening this to two - or even just one - school moving each way, but IMO there needs to be incentive and opportunity for moving up, especially for the schools in the lower divisions.)
Attempting to address some issues/concerns:
- One potential drawback of relegation would be the fear of losing a potential rival, so in addition to the eight-game divisional schedule, every school would be guaranteed one game each season (which would not count in divisional standings) against either a rival not in the same division (for example, WMU-CMU would continue to play every year) or, if the rival is in the same division, against the closest available geographic school (for example, NIU-Ball St would play each other for two years, and this could be revisited after the next round of relegation). This would require a bit of flexibility, but wouldn’t be too hard to iron out.
- Schools would be free to determine the other three games of their non-division schedule as they see fit. If your school wants the NIU 2018 Group of Death model, go for it. If your school prefers a DavidSt Special of Lindenwood, Central Oklahoma, and Wayne State, well, good for you. P5, the American, the MW…or perhaps your school just wants to continue playing other traditional non-divisional opponents (maybe, say, BG wants to continue playing Akron and/or Kent State). All of that would be fine.
- Would there be division championship games? The top two teams in each division could face each other in a rematch, although I’m not sure that would be possible with only nine teams in a division (or if it would even be necessary). I prefer the idea of the Gold Division champion playing the Silver Division champion. This would offer another opportunity for a quality win for the Gold Division champion and one of the best opportunities for a quality win for the Silver Division champion (think, for example, 2018 FAU).
- 36 schools; nine of each in four divisions…it almost works out too evenly. What would happen if a school left for another conference? The best option would be picking up an independent (for example, NMSU or UMass) or adding a high-quality FCS school looking for a new challenge (for example, NDSU or James Madison). (I’d actually be all for another tier of high-end FCS schools coming along, provided they agree to start at the bottom and work their way up.)
It’s not a perfect idea, of course, and it doesn’t solve all issues. For example, geographic concerns would likely grow and not improve, especially for the MAC schools, and figuring out reconfigured bowl scenarios would be awfully messy.
That said, IMO, as long as the current system remains in place, the MAC, C-USA and SB will always be at a clear disadvantage in trying to get a team in the NY6 bowl. Whoever emerges from the Gold Division would IMO have a much stronger resume than a MW champion and would be close to, right on par with, or perhaps even stronger when compared to an AAC champion in many years. The Silver Division champion would also probably be pretty strong in most years. Schools in the lower divisions (such as EMU or Kent State) would have a better chance to pick up more wins, grow interest in their programs, and potentially move up over the years.
/
3rd Time the Charm for Marshall and the MAC?
