(12-23-2018 12:27 PM)Nerdlinger Wrote:  

(12-23-2018 06:38 AM)CardinalJim Wrote:  That’s Delany’s weasely way to send a message to college football:

“Agree to give my champion that can’t win its way in most seasons an automatic spot in the playoffs and I’ll budge on my asinine objection to divisions”

I love how Jimmy is willing to say anything and everything short of “I was wrong” to twist the CFP narrative. Does make for an entertaining off season.

Well, if you think about it, it's rather shrewd to avoid giving someone something without getting much in return, especially if that someone might have something you need in the future. The Big Ten could have supported the ACC's request for abolishing divisions, but then they'd have nothing to hold over the ACC when it came to CFP expansion and autobids.

Heaven forbid any of these commissioners should ever do what's best for the GAME!

(12-23-2018 01:05 PM)Hokie Mark Wrote:  

(12-23-2018 12:27 PM)Nerdlinger Wrote:  

(12-23-2018 06:38 AM)CardinalJim Wrote:  That’s Delany’s weasely way to send a message to college football:

“Agree to give my champion that can’t win its way in most seasons an automatic spot in the playoffs and I’ll budge on my asinine objection to divisions”

I love how Jimmy is willing to say anything and everything short of “I was wrong” to twist the CFP narrative. Does make for an entertaining off season.

Well, if you think about it, it's rather shrewd to avoid giving someone something without getting much in return, especially if that someone might have something you need in the future. The Big Ten could have supported the ACC's request for abolishing divisions, but then they'd have nothing to hold over the ACC when it came to CFP expansion and autobids.

Heaven forbid any of these commissioners should ever do what's best for the GAME!

Though I'm in favor of giving conferences control over their divisional structure and championship setup, I'd say it's arguable as to whether this is best for the game or not.

(12-23-2018 12:27 PM)Nerdlinger Wrote:  

(12-23-2018 06:38 AM)CardinalJim Wrote:  That’s Delany’s weasely way to send a message to college football:

“Agree to give my champion that can’t win its way in most seasons an automatic spot in the playoffs and I’ll budge on my asinine objection to divisions”

I love how Jimmy is willing to say anything and everything short of “I was wrong” to twist the CFP narrative. Does make for an entertaining off season.

Well, if you think about it, it's rather shrewd to avoid giving someone something without getting much in return, especially if that someone might have something you need in the future. The Big Ten could have supported the ACC's request for abolishing divisions, but then they'd have nothing to hold over the ACC when it came to CFP expansion and autobids.

When the Big Ten didn't support the change I doubt they ever at any point in time thought their conference would be the one going 3 for 5 in terms of CFP playoffs participation or even more so that the ACC would be 5 for 5.

And I am not even sure the rule change for conference championship helps with the Big Ten getting an annual slot all that much (the perceived reason for the possible change of heart) since one of the two years they didn't get a spot was when the lower ranked Ohio State beat the higher ranked Wisconsin and the other was way more about who Ohio State lost to in the regular season than about who they beat in the championship game.

So, if Delany wants the change to help the conference more so than wanting some leverage over the ACC for playoff expansion it probably has more to do with Western Division teams wanting to play the likes of Ohio State, Michigan, PSU, and MSU more often while at least three of those four powerhouses probably want to play Rutgers and Maryland less often. One thing is for sure though, the Big Ten doesn't need the rule change at all for regular season reasons, unlike the ACC.

Like all things, time will tell.

Cheers,
Neil

If you read the regulation as it is currently written, Conferences can have more than 2 divisions now. They just need to pair the highest ranked winners of the divisions. "Conferences that want to play championship games must either play their championship game between division winners after round-robin competition in each division." https://www.ncaa.com/news/football/artic...-able-hold

It does not specifically say there can only be 2 divisions. If you had a conference of 15 divided into 3 divisions of 5 the top 2 division champs could meet for the championship as the rule is written. You could have a conference of 16 divided up into 4 division of 4 and do the same.

(12-28-2018 06:33 AM)Shannon Panther Wrote:  If you read the regulation as it is currently written, Conferences can have more than 2 divisions now. They just need to pair the highest ranked winners of the divisions. "Conferences that want to play championship games must either play their championship game between division winners after round-robin competition in each division." https://www.ncaa.com/news/football/artic...-able-hold

It does not specifically say there can only be 2 divisions. If you had a conference of 15 divided into 3 divisions of 5 the top 2 division champs could meet for the championship as the rule is written. You could have a conference of 16 divided up into 4 division of 4 and do the same.

But isn't it implied it's restricted to two divisions since the conference with divisions "MUST play their division winners after round-robin competition in each division"? Three divisions means three winners and since the exception for the extra game is specifically for a championship game, three winners cannot play in a championship game. That's how I interpret it.

Cheers,
Neil

(12-28-2018 06:33 AM)Shannon Panther Wrote:  If you read the regulation as it is currently written, Conferences can have more than 2 divisions now. They just need to pair the highest ranked winners of the divisions. "Conferences that want to play championship games must either play their championship game between division winners after round-robin competition in each division." https://www.ncaa.com/news/football/artic...-able-hold

It does not specifically say there can only be 2 divisions. If you had a conference of 15 divided into 3 divisions of 5 the top 2 division champs could meet for the championship as the rule is written. You could have a conference of 16 divided up into 4 division of 4 and do the same.

Nope. From page 273 of the 2018-19 NCAA manual:

17.10.5.2.1 Bowl Subdivision. [FBS]
In bowl subdivision football, the maximum number of football contests shall exclude the following: (Revised: 1/10/90, 11/1/07 effective 8/1/08, 10/28/10, 10/27/11 effective 4/1/12, Adopted: 8/2/12 effective 8/1/14, 1/15/16 effective 8/1/16)
...
(b) Conference Championship Game.
One conference championship game:
(1) Between division champions of a conference that is divided into two divisions (as equally balanced in number as possible) and conducts round-robin, regular-season competition in each division; or
(2) Between the top two teams in the conference standings following full round-robin regular-season competition among all members of the conference.

(12-28-2018 10:45 AM)Nerdlinger Wrote:  

(12-28-2018 06:33 AM)Shannon Panther Wrote:  If you read the regulation as it is currently written, Conferences can have more than 2 divisions now. They just need to pair the highest ranked winners of the divisions. "Conferences that want to play championship games must either play their championship game between division winners after round-robin competition in each division." https://www.ncaa.com/news/football/artic...-able-hold

It does not specifically say there can only be 2 divisions. If you had a conference of 15 divided into 3 divisions of 5 the top 2 division champs could meet for the championship as the rule is written. You could have a conference of 16 divided up into 4 division of 4 and do the same.

Nope. From page 273 of the 2018-19 NCAA manual:

17.10.5.2.1 Bowl Subdivision. [FBS]
In bowl subdivision football, the maximum number of football contests shall exclude the following: (Revised: 1/10/90, 11/1/07 effective 8/1/08, 10/28/10, 10/27/11 effective 4/1/12, Adopted: 8/2/12 effective 8/1/14, 1/15/16 effective 8/1/16)
...
(b) Conference Championship Game.
One conference championship game:
(1) Between division champions of a conference that is divided into two divisions (as equally balanced in number as possible) and conducts round-robin, regular-season competition in each division; or
(2) Between the top two teams in the conference standings following full round-robin regular-season competition among all members of the conference.

I went to the NCAA’s website to get this info and it said the site was down for maintenance. Thanks for clarifying this.


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

Yeah, you can only have 2 divisions... but if you have an odd number of teams (say 15) playing football, you can (and must) have uneven divisions (8 vs. 7), which opens the door for a few scheduling tricks... in that scenario, it's likely that the 8-team division would play 9 conference games whereas the 7-team division would only play 8 ACC games... thus allowing you to cater to everyone's wishes.

see also: https://accfootballrx.blogspot.com/2015/...sions.html

(12-28-2018 12:34 PM)Hokie Mark Wrote:  Yeah, you can only have 2 divisions... but if you have an odd number of teams (say 15) playing football, you can (and must) have uneven divisions (8 vs. 7), which opens the door for a few scheduling tricks... in that scenario, it's likely that the 8-team division would play 9 conference games whereas the 7-team division would only play 8 ACC games... thus allowing you to cater to everyone's wishes.

see also: https://accfootballrx.blogspot.com/2015/...sions.html

A conference with 2 even divisions can already arrange its schedule so that teams play different numbers of conference games. For example, if the current 14-team ACC were to move Louisville to the Coastal and some other team to the Atlantic, then all the teams could play 9 conference games except Clemson, FSU, GT, and Louisville, which would only play 8.

Maybe trade Louisville and Wake Forest for North Carolina and Virginia?

Atlantic/Coastal
Boston College/Louisville
Clemson/Georgia Tech
Florida State/Miami-FL
NC State/Wake Forest
North Carolina/Duke
Syracuse/Pittsburgh
Virginia/Virginia Tech

(12-28-2018 02:54 PM)Nerdlinger Wrote:  

(12-28-2018 12:34 PM)Hokie Mark Wrote:  Yeah, you can only have 2 divisions... but if you have an odd number of teams (say 15) playing football, you can (and must) have uneven divisions (8 vs. 7), which opens the door for a few scheduling tricks... in that scenario, it's likely that the 8-team division would play 9 conference games whereas the 7-team division would only play 8 ACC games... thus allowing you to cater to everyone's wishes.

see also: https://accfootballrx.blogspot.com/2015/...sions.html

A conference with 2 even divisions can already arrange its schedule so that teams play different numbers of conference games. For example, if the current 14-team ACC were to move Louisville to the Coastal and some other team to the Atlantic, then all the teams could play 9 conference games except Clemson, FSU, GT, and Louisville, which would only play 8.

Maybe trade Louisville and Wake Forest for North Carolina and Virginia?

Atlantic/Coastal
Boston College/Louisville
Clemson/Georgia Tech
Florida State/Miami-FL
NC State/Wake Forest
North Carolina/Duke
Syracuse/Pittsburgh
Virginia/Virginia Tech

And actually, if Pittsburgh and either Miami or Virginia Tech were also allowed to play only 8 conference games, then you wouldn't need any realignment, since you'd have 3 teams playing 8 in both divisions.