Mock 72 Team Football Breakaway From NCAA

[coolhorn]

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.

I don't think that there's more than 72 teams that year in and year out can stay competitive at college football's highest level. If you go with six twelve team conference, each with a CCG, that gives you six outright conference champs each year for an eight team playoff. You then pick the top two rated non-conference champs to complete the eight team field. If you insist on making a provision for teams left out of the select 72, make a policy that in years where only one non-conference champ is sufficiently highly-rated, you can bring in a team from the outside, IF it's highly-rated, to complete the field. That at least gives the teams that don't make the select 72 something to shoot for.

I think eight is the maximum team size for the playoffs. It may take some creative thinking, but with six twelve team conferences, I think you can put most teams in a fairly regional conference. The Metro might be the exception to that, but I'd think whatever twelve teams are chosen for the Metro, they'd just be happy to be in the mix and wouldn't complain all that much about what conference they're in. Maybe later, I will draw up what I think would be a good list for members of each conference.

 

[Blue Horn]

If we used those 72 teams, I would like to see 12 divisions/conferences of 6 teams. You would get to keep your geographical rivalries, but also schedule interesting national match-ups.

 

[SFlonghorngirl]

If we used those 72 teams, I would like to see 12 divisions/conferences of 6 teams. You would get to keep your geographical rivalries, but also schedule interesting national match-ups.

I am all for interesting national match-ups. Could be like the NFL. Each year, teams play teams from their own division plus a set of teams from another division.

 

[coolhorn]

PAC 12: As currently constituted

B1G: Nebraska and the eleven teams in the B1G before they joined

SEC: The 12 teams in the SEC before Mizzou and aggy came over

ACC: FSU, Miami, Clemson, G-Tech, UNC, NC State, Duke, Virginia, Va. Tech, Wake Forest, Notre Dame (Partial member), Maryland

Big XII: OU, UT, OSU, Tech, Agricultural, Mizzou, KU, KSU, Baylor, TCU, Houston, ISU

Metro: Louisville, Pitt, Syracuse, WVU, Boston College, Central Florida, Cincy, Rutgers, UConn, BYU, Boise, SMU

The Metro East would be: Syracuse, WVU, Pitt, B.C., UConn, Rutgers

Metro West: Central Florida, Louisville, Cincy, BYU, Boise, SMU

I was gonna trade UCF for Houston, but UCF's gonna be on something of an island either way, and I think the rejiggered Metro should have enough strong teams to be competitive with the other conferences. In the end, teams in the Metro will have a seat at the table, and that should keep them happy. I'm sure I'm leaving off somebody's favorite dark horse, but these are the 72 teams I see as having the best chance to be competitive, at least occasionally, for the playoffs.

I'm still not crazy about the makeup of the Big XII, but it would be significantly better than it currently is...and Nebraska ain't coming walking back through the door.

One thing I do like about the structure I have above...by and large, it protects the well-established memberships of the conferences as they have been aligned for years. I've tried to keep the moving pieces to a minimum, as much as is possible.

I could also see cross-conference scheduling agreements between the B1G and the PAC, the Big XII and the SEC, and the ACC and the Metro. It would make for some travel, but nothing impossible for any of the conferences.

Somebody tell me I'm full of beans and Christmas turkey, and this makes no sense at all!

 

[Sean Adams]

For some reason I think only four of the Big 5 make it and with the indep. there ends up being just 64 teams. 72 seems like a lot and the word within the conferences is that some of the Big 5 won't make it through if there is a break away from the NCAA (I don't think there will be). Great work. I tried to pull together 64 on the air last year and had the hardest time with who to cut when you have to add the Notre Dames and BYU's of the world.

 

[Randell Weatherall Jr]

I would love to see the 6 team deal, but you'd have to have serious incentives to get Aggy and Mizzou to come out of the SEC. They have hitched their entire athletics identity to it, and even if the money was equal or even greater, I would doubt they would leave. You'd probably have an easier time convincing Arkansas and maybe South Carolina to leave. That metro conference needs to be mixed into other conferences if they want to be competitive. It may have population, but that conference would be better off eliminated with other conferences absorbing two of those teams each.

 

[SFlonghorngirl]

For some reason I think only four of the Big 5 make it and with the indep. there ends up being just 64 teams. 72 seems like a lot and the word within the conferences is that some of the Big 5 won't make it through if there is a break away from the NCAA (I don't think there will be). Great work. I tried to pull together 64 on the air last year and had the hardest time with who to cut when you have to add the Notre Dames and BYU's of the world.

Yeah, it was so hard to weed out teams for 64 so I expanded to 72. What would the criteria be? Football Revenue? Academics?

Based on the Big 5 conferences, if I had to get rid of 3 teams to include Louisville, Notre Dame, BYU, I would eliminate: Iowa St, Wake Forest, and either Vanderbilt, Duke, or Kansas. Shoot, I don't know. It's so hard.

 

[coolhorn]

I would love to see the 6 team deal, but you'd have to have serious incentives to get Aggy and Mizzou to come out of the SEC. They have hitched their entire athletics identity to it, and even if the money was equal or even greater, I would doubt they would leave. You'd probably have an easier time convincing Arkansas and maybe South Carolina to leave. That metro conference needs to be mixed into other conferences if they want to be competitive. It may have population, but that conference would be better off eliminated with other conferences absorbing two of those teams each.

I disagree with you a bit on the Metro. You have to remember that they'd primarily be playing against themselves, and as with all conferences, the cream would rise to the top. Those teams sit in a good recruiting area, especially the ones on the east coast. When I look at the makeup of that conference, I see six, and possibly seven teams that could be very representative against teams from other conferences, and I see at least a couple of others who, if they make the right coaching hires, have real potential.

Reference aggy and Mizzou...the SEC won't "kick them out"...but if, in a breakaway, they are strongly urged, for competitive reasons, to go back to the Big XII, I think with some other incentives, they could be persuaded. Don't get me wrong...I'd much rather have Arkey, and if they could be persuaded to come to the Big XII with Mizzou, then aggy can spend the rest of their days in the confederacy as far as I'm concerned. I'm just not sure how feasible it is to try to get Arkey. I know there's been some talk, on both sides, but so far, talk is all it is.

Reference the teams in the proposed Metro with a chance to win from the start, I'd say they are these teams: Louisville, WVU, UCF, Syracuse, BYU, and Boise. I think with the right coaching in place, B.C. and Rutgers can be plenty competitive. I don't see that as being a weak conference at all.

 

[java]

I think you must look at attendance and revenues, which is a daunting task. Duke has just started playing something called football.

Weed out Duke, Kansas, ISU, Wake (if the numbers support it), Northwestern ( if numbers support).

No more than 64 teams and 4 divisions. Anything else is unworkable. It has to be a moving average. If numbers drop for too long, you are out & will be reviewed in 'x' number of years. After the first 3 years, moving average calculated annually.

Also, self governing. Too many violations of membership rules, you are out in the cold for 1 year first violation with no distribution. Three years for second violation. After third violation, require a 2/3 majority vote.

Violating coaches not eligible for hire by member schools for 5 years.

Stipends for players + scholarship.

Apologize for long post. I've been thinking about this since I was a student, and that has been more than a few years.

Hook 'em!

 

[SFlonghorngirl]

I think you must look at attendance and revenues, which is a daunting task. Duke has just started playing something called football.
Weed out Duke, Kansas, ISU, Wake (if the numbers support it), Northwestern ( if numbers support).

No more than 64 teams and 4 divisions. Anything else is unworkable. It has to be a moving average. If numbers drop for too long, you are out & will be reviewed in 'x' number of years. After the first 3 years, moving average calculated annually.

Also, self governing. Too many violations of membership rules, you are out in the cold for 1 year first violation with no distribution. Three years for second violation. After third violation, require a 2/3 majority vote.

Violating coaches not eligible for hire by member schools for 5 years.

Stipends for players + scholarship.

Apologize for long post. I've been thinking about this since I was a student, and that has been more than a few years.

Hook 'em!

You're awesome! I really like the consequences of violating membership rules. Playing sports is a privilege and some athletics departments, coaches, and players take this for granted. Definitely has to be self governing. The NCAA's infractions committee is a real joke.

 

[coolhorn]

I think you must look at attendance and revenues, which is a daunting task. Duke has just started playing something called football.
Weed out Duke, Kansas, ISU, Wake (if the numbers support it), Northwestern ( if numbers support).

No more than 64 teams and 4 divisions. Anything else is unworkable. It has to be a moving average. If numbers drop for too long, you are out & will be reviewed in 'x' number of years. After the first 3 years, moving average calculated annually.

Also, self governing. Too many violations of membership rules, you are out in the cold for 1 year first violation with no distribution. Three years for second violation. After third violation, require a 2/3 majority vote.

Violating coaches not eligible for hire by member schools for 5 years.

Stipends for players + scholarship.

Apologize for long post. I've been thinking about this since I was a student, and that has been more than a few years.

Hook 'em!

I think it's too easy right now to overthink this thing. I didn't pull the number 72 out of the air. As is right now, we have one major conference with 12 teams, one with 10 teams, one soon to be with 14 teams, one currently with 14 teams, and ever how many the ACC is actually claiming. My six conferences, with two divisions each of six teams, with six conference championship teams in an eight team playoff and two at large teams ranked high lays out smoother than any other configuration I've looked at. Not all 72 teams will have sustained success in football, but I see no reason to exclude the Dukes and KU's of this world because they're great basketball schools. Both, within the last five or six years, have had success in football too. I'm not opposed to stipends for athletes, and I do agree that there needs to be a structure in place to adequately deal with the programs that want to cheat their way to the top. Whatever structure is put in place is almost bound to be better than what the NCAA does in governance these days. An eight team playoff also allows for the six conferences to work within the structure of the existing big bowls to provide meaningful games leading up to the championship game. Like I said before, if someone has a better plan, I'm certainly open to see it. I don't claim my arrangement is foolproof...but I haven't figured out any other alignment that works to keep the conferences relatively intact, make room for 72 teams, make use of the existing bowls, and all lead up to a true championship game.

 

[java]

SF/AustinGirl: Thank you. There is so much money to be made here that I think that membership definitely has to be a privilege. It's a Country Club of sorts, self supporting and self governing. Membership is earned and can be lost unless treated responsibly.

I really do think it needs to be limited to 64 teams. If it is determined after a trial period that 8 more teams can be added, so be it.

I know someone responded after you did and said "don't overthink". Not overthinking, just setting boundaries.

After all, not saying there will never be room for anyone else, but not everyone carries their weight, as it is!

There must be a cutoff. There is for college admissions, scholarships, home loans, and pass/fail. Schools that regularly put 35,000 butts in the stands won't carry their weight in a playoff situation, either.

Why was the Texas/USC Rose Bowl so highly rated? Besides, the NCAA supposedly uses these guidelines already, but they couldn't enforce lights out in a blackout.

Hook 'em!

 

[java]

Coolhorn. I apologize. My internet and cable are out tonight due to a downed line, so posting from a phone. Very limiting.

I think this should be viewed as football only, no other sport. Every other sport has a national championship.

I like the College World Series, The NCAA Basketball championship, The Indoor and Outdoor Track and Field Champ. If you want to over complicate matters, throw all of that into the mix.

If you do, there will be gridlock.

Hook 'em!

 

[BBQ time]

It's helpful to have 72 teams and keep weaker schools in for scheduling. Fans probably don't want an NFL like schedule where a conference champ makes it to the playoffs with a 7-5 record.

I assume that these conferences would also be for other sports. That's where Wake and Kansas make sense.

In complete agreement on Arky. I'll take them any day over aggie.

 

[SFlonghorngirl]

Think this works for football only. Doesn't work for basketball because where would basketball schools like Villanova fit in? Villanova is a DII football school.

 

[java]

Think this works for football only. Doesn't work for basketball because where would basketball schools like Villanova fit in? Villanova is a DII football school.

I agree. Football only. Leave conferences for all other sports.

It won't work any other way.

Hook 'em!

 

[TheContractor]

Football only. Very fun topic. I hope the break from NCAA happens soon. Also, whatever this break becomes needs rules that are enforced and if those rules are broken then stiff penalties need to be set in place.

 

[java]

Think this works for football only. Doesn't work for basketball because where would basketball schools like Villanova fit in? Villanova is a DII football school.

Football only. Very fun topic. I hope the break from NCAA happens soon. Also, whatever this break becomes needs rules that are enforced and if those rules are broken then stiff penalties need to be set in place.

Whenever this has been discussed in the past, in magazines or blogs, I've seen references to divisions and pods, perhaps so there is no confusion wrt conferences.

If the schools are to profit, and the athletes receive a stipend +scholarship, the schools will need to control the flow of money, not some bowl committee.

 

[TheContractor]

I tried, on excel, to come with with 2 different scenarios; a group/pod of 5 teams and a different one with 6 teams. I tried to group them geographically and somewhat evenly loaded(did not put Lsu, Bama, Auburn, Miss St and Ole Miss in the same pod).

I found this very hard to do bc it is unclear who the 64 or 72 or however many teams will want to and can financially break apart. Once that is determined, it is would be a much easier process.

I found 66 teams that would likely be in, at least IMO. Also, i had 21 others as teams to consider.

Likely In:

Wash

Wash St

Oregon

Oregon St

Cal

Stanford

Colorado

USC

UCLA

BYU

UTAH

Arizona

Arizona St

TT

Ou

Ok St

TCU

Baylor

Texas

Tx Aggies

LSU

Arky

Kansas

Kansas St

Nebraska

Mizzouri

Ole Miss

Miss St

Vandy

Iowa

Iowa St

Illinois

Minnesota

NW

Purdue

Indiana

ND

Michigan

Michigan St

Louisville

Kentucky

Tennessee

Ohio St

Wvu

Pitt

Penn St

Syracuse

Uconn

BC

Rutgers

Maryland

UVA

Virginia Tech

UNC

NC St

Duke

Clemson

USC-east

UGA

Georgia Tech

Bama

Auburn

Florida

Florida St

Miami

UCF

Under Consideration:

Bosie St

Utah St

Wyoming

Colorado St

Nevada

Air Force

SDSU

UNLV

SJSU

Fresno St

New Mexico

Houston

Tulane

Navy

East Carolina

Marshall

Wake Forest

USF

Southern Miss

Memphis

UAB

Who is in? Who is out?

I love realignment talk and especially the idea of breaking away from the crap hole that is the NCAA.

 

[Old Tascosa]

Java,

I think we're starting to get down to the nitty gritty on this. I like lots of your ideas. The split is for football only. And Contractor, that is a good list, although I would think you have to add Cincinnati. I would leave the current conferences and their TV contracts in place, with the modification that none of them have a CCG any more and football is no longer a conference sport. As far as scheduling, set up 6 regional divisions of 12 teams without regard to conference, so that the teams in each are playing their closest area teams. This means natural rivals closes enough that fans can travel to them. That give you 6 regions of 12 teams, each playing a standard 5/3 schedule with a playoff to determine the regional champion. 6 champions and 2 wild cards selected by committee to make up the playoff. That leaves 4 games to be scheduled from among the other 60 teams, so it provides for some variety in the schedule; 5 annual local rivals along with the regional 6 you rotate 3 every other year. Home teams would have the game televised by whatever conference TV contract they are in. And the conferences would function just like before for the other sports. Conference revenues would be about the same due to increased regular season viewership from better schedules. A membership criteria would be set up which would include budget including stipends for ALL athletes, not just football, attendance, academic entrance requirements and the elimination of semi-cheating "athlete designed" majors & courses such as poultry or underwater basket weaving. The athletes have to be real students attending real classes maintaining real grades.

Some of the teams in the power 5 wouldn't make the cut, and some outsiders would. And I would require that a small percentage of TV & gate revenue be given to fund a rule enforcement group set up with some teeth to subpoena and authority to suspend or ban players, coaches, and boosters from participating at this level. And to ensure that the rules are fairly and equally enforced, Have the governing board elected by the schools and publish a a standardized example list of offenses and the recommended punishment. The board would then have to justify any punishments handed out against the examples listed. Athletes that don't want to get an education or can't make their grades can compete on a different level.