Mock 72 Team Football Breakaway From NCAA

[SFlonghorngirl]

[TABLE=width: 332]

<colgroup><col width="110" style="width: 83pt; mso-width-source: userset; mso-width-alt: 4022;" span="4"> <tbody>[TR]

[TD=class: xl65, width: 110, bgcolor: transparent]Region 1[/TD]

[TD=class: xl65, width: 110, bgcolor: transparent]Region 2[/TD]

[TD=class: xl65, width: 110, bgcolor: transparent]Region 3[/TD]

[TD=class: xl65, width: 110, bgcolor: transparent]Region 4[/TD]

[/TR]

[TR]

[TD=class: xl66, bgcolor: transparent]Texas[/TD]

[TD=class: xl67, bgcolor: transparent]Washington[/TD]

[TD=class: xl67, bgcolor: transparent]Mississippi St[/TD]

[TD=class: xl67, bgcolor: transparent]Michigan St[/TD]

[/TR]

[TR]

[TD=class: xl66, bgcolor: transparent]Texas A&M[/TD]

[TD=class: xl67, bgcolor: transparent]Washington St[/TD]

[TD=class: xl67, bgcolor: transparent]Mississippi[/TD]

[TD=class: xl67, bgcolor: transparent]Michigan[/TD]

[/TR]

[TR]

[TD=class: xl66, bgcolor: transparent]Texas Tech[/TD]

[TD=class: xl67, bgcolor: transparent]Oregon[/TD]

[TD=class: xl67, bgcolor: transparent]Alabama[/TD]

[TD=class: xl67, bgcolor: transparent]Ohio St[/TD]

[/TR]

[TR]

[TD=class: xl66, bgcolor: transparent]Baylor[/TD]

[TD=class: xl67, bgcolor: transparent]Oregon St[/TD]

[TD=class: xl67, bgcolor: transparent]Auburn[/TD]

[TD=class: xl67, bgcolor: transparent]Cincinnati[/TD]

[/TR]

[TR]

[TD=class: xl66, bgcolor: transparent]TCU[/TD]

[TD=class: xl67, bgcolor: transparent]BYU[/TD]

[TD=class: xl67, bgcolor: transparent]Tennessee[/TD]

[TD=class: xl67, bgcolor: transparent]Penn St[/TD]

[/TR]

[TR]

[TD=class: xl66, bgcolor: transparent]SMU[/TD]

[TD=class: xl67, bgcolor: transparent]Utah [/TD]

[TD=class: xl67, bgcolor: transparent]Vanderbilt[/TD]

[TD=class: xl67, bgcolor: transparent]Pittsburgh[/TD]

[/TR]

[TR]

[TD=class: xl66, bgcolor: transparent]Houston[/TD]

[TD=class: xl67, bgcolor: transparent]Boise St[/TD]

[TD=class: xl67, bgcolor: transparent]Kentucky[/TD]

[TD=class: xl67, bgcolor: transparent]Rutgers[/TD]

[/TR]

[TR]

[TD=class: xl67, bgcolor: transparent]Oklahoma[/TD]

[TD=class: xl67, bgcolor: transparent]Colorado[/TD]

[TD=class: xl67, bgcolor: transparent]Louisville[/TD]

[TD=class: xl67, bgcolor: transparent]Syracuse[/TD]

[/TR]

[TR]

[TD=class: xl67, bgcolor: transparent]Oklahoma St[/TD]

[TD=class: xl67, bgcolor: transparent]Nebraska[/TD]

[TD=class: xl67, bgcolor: transparent]Indiana[/TD]

[TD=class: xl67, bgcolor: transparent]Boston College[/TD]

[/TR]

[TR]

[TD=class: xl66, bgcolor: transparent]LSU[/TD]

[TD=class: xl67, bgcolor: transparent]Kansas St[/TD]

[TD=class: xl67, bgcolor: transparent]Purdue[/TD]

[TD=class: xl67, bgcolor: transparent]Connecticut[/TD]

[/TR]

[TR]

[TD=class: xl66, bgcolor: transparent]Arkansas[/TD]

[TD=class: xl67, bgcolor: transparent]Kansas[/TD]

[TD=class: xl67, bgcolor: transparent]Georgia[/TD]

[TD=class: xl67, bgcolor: transparent]West Virginia[/TD]

[/TR]

[TR]

[TD=class: xl66, bgcolor: transparent]Missouri[/TD]

[TD=class: xl67, bgcolor: transparent]Minnesota[/TD]

[TD=class: xl67, bgcolor: transparent]Georgia Tech[/TD]

[TD=class: xl67, bgcolor: transparent]Maryland[/TD]

[/TR]

[TR]

[TD=class: xl67, bgcolor: transparent]Arizona St[/TD]

[TD=class: xl67, bgcolor: transparent]Iowa St[/TD]

[TD=class: xl67, bgcolor: transparent]Florida St[/TD]

[TD=class: xl67, bgcolor: transparent]Virginia Tech[/TD]

[/TR]

[TR]

[TD=class: xl67, bgcolor: transparent]Arizona[/TD]

[TD=class: xl67, bgcolor: transparent]Iowa[/TD]

[TD=class: xl67, bgcolor: transparent]Miami[/TD]

[TD=class: xl67, bgcolor: transparent]Virginia[/TD]

[/TR]

[TR]

[TD=class: xl67, bgcolor: transparent]USC[/TD]

[TD=class: xl67, bgcolor: transparent]Wisconsin[/TD]

[TD=class: xl67, bgcolor: transparent]Florida[/TD]

[TD=class: xl67, bgcolor: transparent]NC State[/TD]

[/TR]

[TR]

[TD=class: xl67, bgcolor: transparent]UCLA[/TD]

[TD=class: xl67, bgcolor: transparent]Notre Dame[/TD]

[TD=class: xl67, bgcolor: transparent]Central Florida[/TD]

[TD=class: xl67, bgcolor: transparent]Wake Forest[/TD]

[/TR]

[TR]

[TD=class: xl67, bgcolor: transparent]California[/TD]

[TD=class: xl67, bgcolor: transparent]Illinois[/TD]

[TD=class: xl67, bgcolor: transparent]South Carolina[/TD]

[TD=class: xl67, bgcolor: transparent]Duke[/TD]

[/TR]

[TR]

[TD=class: xl67, bgcolor: transparent]Stanford[/TD]

[TD=class: xl67, bgcolor: transparent]Northwestern[/TD]

[TD=class: xl67, bgcolor: transparent]Clemson[/TD]

[TD=class: xl67, bgcolor: transparent]North Carolina[/TD]

[/TR]

[TR]

[TD=class: xl67, bgcolor: transparent][/TD]

[TD=class: xl67, bgcolor: transparent][/TD]

[TD=class: xl67, bgcolor: transparent][/TD]

[TD=class: xl67, bgcolor: transparent][/TD]

[/TR]

</tbody>[/TABLE]

The Big 5 Conferences consist of 64 teams. I had to expand to 72 to include major Independent schools like ND and BYU and include some heavy weights amongst lesser conferences like Louisville and Boise St. I tried my best to group by geographical region and traditional rivalries. As of now, I think Region 1 and Region 3 are best football conferences.

How would you have group the schools differently? Also, each Region could have 2 divisions or 3 six team pods. I love realignment talk.

The top 4 teams from each conference would qualify for 16 team playoffs.

 

[Sirhornsalot]

I think you're going to have to go to 5 or 6 groupings. Look at the geography in Group 2. Iowa and Washington aren't real close.

Group 3 would be the most brutal football conference of all time . . . of all time. Group 1 isn't far behind.

 

[SFlonghorngirl]

I think you're going to have to go to 5 or 6 groupings. Look at the geography in Group 2. Iowa and Washington aren't real close.
Group 3 would be the most brutal football conference of all time . . . of all time. Group 1 isn't far behind.

Yea, I hear ya. But I also like non-traditional matchups so only made four Groups. Region 2 was hard. I took the PNW schools and group them with Northern schools from the Midwest if that made any sense.

So many subjective opinions. Love hearing them!

 

[BBQ time]

You have ASU and Ariz twice in group 1 with no UCLA or USC.

Great start.

 

[SFlonghorngirl]

You have ASU and Ariz twice in group 1 with no UCLA or USC.
Great start.

Thanks. I fixed it.

 

[BBQ time]

I would prefer 6 groups of 12. Take the champ from each group and two wild cards for a playoff.

 

[SFlonghorngirl]

I would prefer 6 groups of 12. Take the champ from each group and two wild cards for a playoff.

Great idea! Or have two divisions in each Region and have interdivisonal games.

 

[SFlonghorngirl]

Teams like SMU and Wake Forest, would you replace them with another school?

 

[hornag]

canceled

 

[Epictetus]

I think if USC is ressurected, and Texas and OU return to prominance, and a few others in the Big 12 keep on keeping on... Group 1 can be as brutal as Group 3.

I feel Group 2 is very weak, based of course on recent trends.

Overall a good start on the idea in general.

The kind of exercise also makes me think more about open scheduling. Two or more games across regions to produce more intriguing schedules.

For instance... what if there were 4 regions. And only 6 locked-in annual games in that region for each team.

With that split. you have 3 at home in Year A, and 3 away, then flip for Year B. Ie., home and home.

The other six games are alternating and fluctuating. Maybe one game an annual home-and-home from another region.

What I have not liked recently is such a repetative schedule that it has become stale.

It was not llke that with older traditional conferences and therefore playing all conference teams every year.

 

[Capn Hook]

No matter how many teams, 64, 76 etc., and no matter how many groups, it is a daunting prospect to set up conferences that totally make sense. I spent some time trying to come up with a similar structure and decided that it probably was not an improvement.

Thanks for the time and thought provoking analysis.

 

[coolhorn]

I think six conferences of twelve teams apiece, with the championship being expanded to eight teams. Those eight would be the six conference champions, and the two highest-rated wild cards. The problem with this is the push back you're gonna get, especially from the SEC, PAC, and B1G who seem to like their makeup right now and don't seem prone to take being removed without a fight. I suppose you could use some of the existing conference names, and take, for instance, the SEC back to the 12 teams that were there before the arrival of aggy and mizzou. The B1G could go back to the original lineup plus Nebraska. The PAC is already at twelve. The Big XII could lose WVU, and gain three new members to get to twelve, probably bringing back aggy and Mizzou, and adding perhaps Houston, since the conference could use more of a presence there and already has a well-established presence in the Metroplex. It's early and my thinking cap isn't working so well right now...but I'll be back to this a little later when I'm more bright-eyed and bushy-tailed. If you're rejiggering the conferences, you could still go with the PAC, ACC, SEC, B1G, Big XII, and bring back the Metro conference to make a place for teams in the northeast. Twelve teams each conference, and I suppose the conferences could do a CCG, and you would have a total of 72 teams. That should be sufficient to cover any lawsuits from a breakaway from the NCAA and the previously established conferences.

 

[RoyalCrowns]

Well put together. I've compiled similar groupings, but I used four, 16 team divisions. I actually like yours better simply because you involve eight more schools. I truly believe, and hope, we're heading to a structure like this in the near future.

 

[Juan]

Impressive posting skillz.

ps1- pretty sure swaggy will not want to be in our region.

ps2 - unless think its their region?

 

[armadillo slim]

i like the effort. what is the rationale for 72? why not 80?

4-20 team regions, each with two ten team conferences. that makes for a regular season of 9 conference games and three out of conference games chosen outside of your region but within the 80. that puts 8 teams (division champs) into a natural playoff leading to a true NC. if there's no clear cut conference champ, you can have a couple of tie breakers (best record, best conference record, head to head and then resort to use of a BCS style rating system to determine the winner after comparing head to head records (say with three teams tying) which would include the SOS of the out of conference games each team played. you could also use the BCS style rating system to initially seed the teams in the 8 team tournament which would use 7 bowls to determine the champion and you could rotate the bowls into the quarterfinals, semi finals and final.

the other teams not in the 8 team NC playoff would be paired up in the other traditional bowls. there might be some mechanisim to rotate the bowls into and out of the playoff system if a particular bowl wasn't working out, but i cannot imagine that this system wouldn't dwarf march madness for money generated.

 

[SFlonghorngirl]

The kind of exercise also makes me think more about open scheduling. Two or more games across regions to produce more intriguing schedules.
For instance... what if there were 4 regions. And only 6 locked-in annual games in that region for each team.

With that split. you have 3 at home in Year A, and 3 away, then flip for Year B. Ie., home and home.

The other six games are alternating and fluctuating. Maybe one game an annual home-and-home from another region.

What I have not liked recently is such a repetative schedule that it has become stale.

It was not llke that with older traditional conferences and therefore playing all conference teams every year.

Love your idea better than mine. I prefer interesting matchup and like you said, the same conference matchups have become stale.

 

[Topstarr]

Lets just do it....time to get it done

 

[Longhorns96]

The main reason I like this idea is to get away from the 70+ point beatdowns that some schools put on lesser quality opponents. Heisman frontrunners pad their stats and teams get national recognition. Then, at the end of the season, all the announcers talk about is Team X averaged 59 points a game this season, therefore, they must be considered as a top contender. Meanwhile, you realize that they hung 78 on Eastern Carolina State and 82 on Southwest Louisiana Tech.

If this new realignment cuts out the non-AQ schools, I am all for it.

I think I would also change some of your teams. If you are saying that there is going to be a playoff scenario, then I wouldn't look at us traveling to the west coast as much. For strength of schedule, it wouldn't matter anymore. So, that being said, I would look at geography first, and then strength of schedule second. Here are my suggestions.....

I would trade the following schools....

Get rid of USC, UCLA, Cal, Stanford, Arizona and ASU.

Trade them to Region 2 for the following teams....

Notre Dame, Nebraska, Kansas, Kansas State, Iowa and Iowa State.

This way, you are leaving the majority of the existing conferences intact. You leave the Pac-16 together, and the Big XII stays together. You would also keep your in-state rivals together (Iowa/Iowa State, KU/KSU, Zona/ASU, USC/UCLA, etc).

I like the idea of bringing Notre Dame into Texas' region and bringing Nebraska back, only because we made them our bitch during their time in the Big XII.

 

[Randell Weatherall Jr]

The way around schools wanting to stay in current alignments is to simply go with bigger conferences. Perhaps 4, 16 or 18 team conferences instead of 6. Yes, someone has to go, but that will keep the tv money competitive and perhaps give a little incentive to some conference jumping. Yes, that's a lot of teams per conference, but you can just divide these into divisions and have the division winners makeup the playoff. Would rather have more conferences, but there would be a lot of bitching and moaning. Making them large will allow some movement, especially for traditional rivals to perhaps join each other if they desired and get more teams per conference. I would hope this means the teams would group geographically, but it could have the opposite affect of creating more national conferences as conferences look for viewers.