New Big 12 TV Deal

[boomhorn]

And just look at those pods. At least one marquee power and one strong secondary power in each of them. National. Clean. Amazing. This is the dream.

I can see a setup that puts UT-OU-TT-TCU southwest, BU-OSU-KU-KSU midwest, ISU-ND-BC-WVA northeast, UM-FSU-GT-CU southeast... it's workable...

holy spaceballs. both slive and delany have got to be $#@!ting bricks if they have postulated this end-game.

Or SEC might blink first & take FSU/NC State (to head off emporer dodds plan)- B1G takes GT/ND/Wake Forest/Virginia (to form their own southern pod) wtf then???...

Well if you did pods, the same issues would crop up that were going to make the PAC16 tricky. Those being consistent access to certain states for recruiting. You are going to have to make it were old Big 12 schools get access to Texas schools each year as opponents. Why would KU, KSU, ISU, OU and oSu sign off on losing multiple games in Texas each year all for the sake of new members? Sure they'll get more money but they get that now. If the pods are a Texas branch (Texas, Tech, Baylor, TCU), Oklahoma/Kansas (OU, oSu, KU, KSU), ISU gets screwed being out on an island as then the next pod would have to be ISU, ND, BYU, WVU, and then the Georgia Tech, Miami, Clemson, FSU pod. 16 is a $#@!ing headache.

If this plan remotely works then the PAC has did the BEast - PennSt. furkup, by not taking okie & pokie (Boren shoulda ask'd PAC for OU-KU deal) it gave new life to a dead conference... {Dodds--------Castiglione & Luck against the galaxy & beyond, bitches} as long as Texas Longhorns-Oklahoma Sooners-Kansas Jayhawks are in same league i'm cool w/whatever...B12-B1G-PAC ect.

[RandallFlagg]

There is some legitimate logic buried in this....

Well if you did pods, the same issues would crop up that were going to make the PAC16 tricky. Those being consistent access to certain states for recruiting. You are going to have to make it were old Big 12 schools get access to Texas schools each year as opponents. Why would KU, KSU, ISU, OU and oSu sign off on losing multiple games in Texas each year all for the sake of new members? Sure they'll get more money but they get that now. If the pods are a Texas branch (Texas, Tech, Baylor, TCU), Oklahoma/Kansas (OU, oSu, KU, KSU), ISU gets screwed being out on an island as then the next pod would have to be ISU, ND, BYU, WVU, and then the Georgia Tech, Miami, Clemson, FSU pod. 16 is a $#@!ing headache.

[jtk1519]

If we go to 16 teams, two things have to happen. One, it has to be a two division set-up, none of this pod crap. And at least two teams have to come from Florida. The reasons for both are the same and they're reasons mdmost eluded to and reasons I laid out in another thread... there has to be balance.

The Big XII as it originally existed failed because the entire conference depended on the state of Texas which means any program in or near Texas that could dominate in-state would dominate the conference. No other conference in the nation has this issue. By adding multiple teams in Florida, the state of Florida acts as a counter to Texas. By creating an 8 team Western division, they all their foot in Texas while an 8 team Eastern division would have a foot in Florida. Much more balance, much less Texas-centric and thus much more sustainable long-term.

[Prophet]

2 8 team divisions would likely force at least 9 conference games a year. I doubt that would be very desirable to Notre Dame.

[maninblack]

If we go to 16 teams, two things have to happen. One, it has to be a two division set-up, none of this pod crap.

Meh I don't personally like divisions in a 16 team conference. I would do it if it was the 16 team conference we're talking about but the pod thing makes more sense to me.

You split everyone into 2 divisions where you only get some schools playing other schools from the other side on a limited basis I almost would say what's the point of expanding then. Hell might as well keep it at 10. At least with pods you expand and there is actual relationships that are grown throughout the conference between Universities and fans because you see each other on a regular basis.

I can see a setup that puts UT-OU-TT-TCU southwest, BU-OSU-KU-KSU midwest, ISU-ND-BC-WVA northeast, UM-FSU-GT-CU southeast... it's workable...

The only problem with this is I don’t see the state of Oklahoma being cool with OSU and OU being split. If they were then fine but just don’t see it. I think we’re going to have to negotiate a way to play OU outside of their pod or in your system they would have to negotiate a way to play OSU every year.

Also I wouldn’t mind BC over Pitt but Pitt does give West Virginia the backyard brawl back. However, if BC got Notre Dame and Pitt didn’t then WV needs to sit down and shut up.

Or SEC might blink first & take FSU/NC State (to head off emporer dodds plan)- B1G takes GT/ND/Wake Forest/Virginia (to form their own southern pod) wtf then???...

I think your assumptions here are a little off. Wake and NC State probably aren’t going to break from the Tobacco Road circle jerk. The SEC could go first after FSU and Clemson but there are some member institutions that are opposed to that from internet chatter. The Big 10 is really $#@!ed though. The only logical addition for them (Notre Dame) wants nothing to do with them. If any of this goes down the Big 10 will probably try to raid whatever is left of the Big East or ACC for their teams. I don’t think they’ll be successful.

However it goes down I think the Big 12 would be wise to be on the giving end instead of the receiving end of all this madness.

[maninblack]

2 8 team divisions would likely force at least 9 conference games a year. I doubt that would be very desirable to Notre Dame.

Although I find it difficult to have a 16 team conference without a 9 game conference schedule I could acquiesce to this request and go with a 3-4-1 system.

I know some are anti-Notre Dame but they're such a big chip on the board that if you making reasonable concessions would be in everyone's best interest if they wanted to join.

[jtk1519]

Unless you find a way to give four "pods" and equal footing in Texas and/or Florida, you're just going to wind up with another corn aggy with a bleeding vagina in 15 years, whining about certain schools controlling the conference.

[maninblack]

Unless you find a way to give four "pods" and equal footing in Texas and/or Florida, you're just going to wind up with another corn aggy with a bleeding vagina in 15 years, whining about certain schools controlling the conference.

This is kind of ridiculous. No one is going to be on the same footing in Texas and Florida as Texas and Florida schools are so the premise is nonsense to begin with. Additionally, I think a the pod system would lead to less dissension among the schools than divisions. You reference Nebraska but they were in the Northern DIVISION. Also, their issues stem from many other places than equal footing in Texas. They never wanted to be in the Big 12 in the first place but that's another discussion.

[jtk1519]

This is kind of ridiculous. No one is going to be on the same footing in Texas and Florida as Texas and Florida schools are so the premise is nonsense to begin with. Additionally, I think a the pod system would lead to less dissension among the schools than divisions. You reference Nebraska but they were in the Northern DIVISION. Also, their issues stem from many other places than equal footing in Texas. They never wanted to be in the Big 12 in the first place but that's another discussion.

I never said you have to give the SCHOOLS equal footing, I said you would have to give the PODS equal footing. It's the same thing the Pac 12 did by splitting the state of California up evenly between the two divisions. No non-Cali school will ever be able to have the same presence in-state as say USC, but the two division both have equal footing within the state. That way no one conference can really take over the state and use that to dominate the other division the way the Big XII South did by controlling the state of Texas.

[Prophet]

How exactly would you split the 4 Texas schools (so no pod dominated the state of Texas) and the 2 Florida schools (so no pod dominated the state of Florida) without the pods being geographically retarded?

[maninblack]

I never said you have to give the SCHOOLS equal footing, I said you would have to give the PODS equal footing. It's the same thing the Pac 12 did by splitting the state of California up evenly between the two divisions. No non-Cali school will ever be able to have the same presence in-state as say USC, but the two division both have equal footing within the state. That way no one conference can really take over the state and use that to dominate the other division the way the Big XII South did by controlling the state of Texas.

You're still under the assumption that it was the state of Texas that broke up the Big 12. Stop reading shoddy articles from Communications majors.

[FCHorn]

Any word of the SEC trying to pre-empt any of this? Or take 2 more teams?

Haven't caught up on thread...

[randomscribbles]

Any word of the SEC trying to pre-empt any of this? Or take 2 more teams?

Haven't caught up on thread...

No word form the SEC, but I doubt there would be. Their Plan A seems to be to somehow poach VA Tech and NC State if at all possible, with Maryland being a backup. Plan B is to take the schools from their current states. My guess would be that the SEC would be all for an expanded Big 12 because while it screws their plan B, it helps plan A become more likely. The ACC would be in a panic if half the good football schools left at once.

[maninblack]

How likely is it for VTech to split from Virginia and NC State from the rest of their North Carolina brethren?

[USAOROTC]

How likely is it for VTech to split from Virginia and NC State from the rest of their North Carolina brethren?

If i recall correctly UVA had to pull a $#@! ton of strings to get Tech into the ACC to begin with. I doubt they seperate

[conVINCEd]

How likely is it for VTech to split from Virginia and NC State from the rest of their North Carolina brethren?

Unlikely, from what i understand. But if the acc implodes, it may be every man for himself.

[Wizard of Os]

All this realignment talk is interesting. Maybe we can get a sub forum going or something.

[FCHorn]

No word form the SEC, but I doubt there would be. Their Plan A seems to be to somehow poach VA Tech and NC State if at all possible, with Maryland being a backup. Plan B is to take the schools from their current states. My guess would be that the SEC would be all for an expanded Big 12 because while it screws their plan B, it helps plan A become more likely. The ACC would be in a panic if half the good football schools left at once.

Sounds about right...north Carolina schools must be $#@!ting their pants..

[TexasWolf]

I agree about pods, but think 'rotating divisions' is the better format. 8 games- three with your podmates, four with that year's rival pod, and one game with your interpod rival. It lets ND keep more of its old rivalries, and lets all the schools have a better shot at getting better records/more home games. If you assume Texas is OU's out-of-pod rival and FSU is ND's, then every school in the conference can play two of the four marquee teams every year. That would be a recruiting goldmine for everyone. Texas' schedule would look like this:

Year 1: Baylor, TCU, Tech, OU, ND, ISU, WVU, Pitt
Year 2: Baylor, TCU, Tech, OU, FSU, Miami, GT, Clemson
Year 3: Baylor, TCU, Tech, OU, OSU, KU, KSU, FSU/ND (with OU playing the other team)
and then you repeat with reversed home and aways.

Agree. Two divisions of this configuration would get stale. As far as a championship game, this would produce a pretty cool hybrid. Each pair of pods that played during the season would produce a team that would play in the Big XVI Championship game.

That would make the CCG a little bit different each season, yet insure that both teams playing the CCG would be high quality. It would also make a "rematch" in the CCG less likely.

I've never been much into pods, but this kind of set up would keep my interest.

[randomscribbles]

Sounds about right...north Carolina schools must be $#@!ting their pants..

I have no doubt their leaked post-expansion draft contract suddenly became way too small this week, yeah. If it doesn't get way bigger now, the future of the conference stands at the whims of Florida State.

[jtk1519]

How exactly would you split the 4 Texas schools (so no pod dominated the state of Texas) and the 2 Florida schools (so no pod dominated the state of Florida) without the pods being geographically retarded?

You can't. That's why the pod idea is bad.

[maninblack]

You can't. That's why the pod idea is bad.

The way you want to do it is.

[randomscribbles]

You can't. That's why the pod idea is bad.

No. You don't split the obvious geographic pods up. You give the schools that depend on certain states inter-pod rivalries in the state they need, namely Texas or the Florida/Georgia region. OU and Texas. ND and FSU. OSU and Tech. WVU/Pitt with Miami/GT. ISU with either KSU or KU to keep that alive. The other Kansas school and Clemson with Baylor or TCU, as none of those schools are dependent on recruits from a different pod.

It's doable. Those exact details are all bull$#@! obviously, but it shows it can be done.

[Lone Star]

You can't. That's why the pod idea is bad.

I guess im a little slow. I don't see why the pods don't work and i don't see why you can't retain geographical teams.

As I under stand (in a perfect scenario) it the pods would look like this:
A: UT, Tech, Baylor, TCu
B: OU, OSU, KU, KSU
C: Miami, FSU, Georgia Tech, Clemson
D: ISU, ND, WVU, Pitt

So each pod retains traditional, natural rivals.

Then a hypothetical schedule (I'll use WVU for grins) would Look like this:
1.) all teams in "home" pod: ND, ISU, Pitt
2.) All the teams from one other pod (say Pod B): OU, OSU, KU, KSU
3.) One team from the other two Pods: FSU, Tech

Nine conference games, always access to at least one Texas school, 75% chance of a Florida/Georgia school, 75% chance at a well known East Coast (Pennsylvania/Ohio/Indiana/New York) type school (Pitt, WVU, ND). The only real Pod that might, and i emphasize might get screwed would be the OU, OSU, KU, KSU pod. But the reality is that OU is a national name and might as well be in Texas. KU and KSU are historically average to bad in football but do quite well nationally in basketball recruiting, and OSU grabs what it can.

Unlike what we saw in the Big12 where the north had issues recruiting, this pod system allows greater access to multiple talent rich areas. Mama's are guaranteed to see their babies play several games close to home. Competition would be SEC level, and it would develop a national following and new interesting rivalries based on pods (ie our 4 are better than your 4) capitalizing on geographic pride - like those old high school all star games between texas-cali-florida.

Talking about permanent cross pod rivals I would go at it in this manner. The rotation is obviously set many years in advance. In those years where the rival (say OU) isn't the selected team to play from their pod, I would schedule them as a non-conference match up. So effectively playing 10 conference teams in certain years but where the game has no bearing on conference standings.

[jtk1519]

No. You don't split the obvious geographic pods up. You give the schools that depend on certain states inter-pod rivalries in the state they need, namely Texas or the Florida/Georgia region. OU and Texas. ND and FSU. OSU and Tech. WVU/Pitt with Miami/GT. ISU with either KSU or KU to keep that alive. The other Kansas school and Clemson with Baylor or TCU, as none of those schools are dependent on recruits from a different pod.

It's doable. Those exact details are all bull$#@! obviously, but it shows it can be done.

If, and only if, you can work out a scheduling system where every pod has a significant presence in either Texas or Florida, then yes, it could work. But you can't have a situation where say Notre Dame goes even one year without at least one game in either big state.

[TheTexasHammer]

Ya'll are engaged in discussions that simply "assume" the Domers join the Big 12? Must be the offseason.

[FCHorn]

Ya'll are engaged in discussions that simply "assume" the Domers join the Big 12? Must be the offseason.

Not really buying it for the simple fact that half of ND games annually are against the PAC/B1G....don't know how that would be reconciled...alumni aren't gonna want ksu/Baylor/TT/Okie State/whomever over Wash, Stanford, asu/B1G schools...just dont see it...far too much tradition in that scheduling to give up...

[Prophet]

Talking about permanent cross pod rivals I would go at it in this manner. The rotation is obviously set many years in advance. In those years where the rival (say OU) isn't the selected team to play from the pod, I would schedule them as a non-conference match up. So effectively playing 10 conference teams in certain years but where the game has no bearing on conference standings.

Which part of "permanent cross pod rival" do you not understand? In the 3-4-1 format, each team would have one permanent cross pod rival. In the years where their two pods were paired, the 8th conference game can be against someone else. In the years where their pods aren't paired, they will play one another in the 8th conference game. That means they will play every single year.

10 conference games? Are you $#@!ing retarded?

To the people including Notre Dame and pushing 9 conference games, are you high? Did you forget that they have several rivalries they would like to keep? Anything more than 8 conference games is asinine. Even 8 might be pushing it.

[Hagbard Celine]

Not really buying it for the simple fact that half of ND games annually are against the PAC/B1G....don't know how that would be reconciled...alumni aren't gonna want ksu/Baylor/TT/Okie State/whomever over Wash, Stanford, asu/B1G schools...just dont see it...far too much tradition in that scheduling to give up...

domer may not have a choice. depending on how the playoff unfolds, they may have to choose between maintaining all of their precious rivalries, or having a shot at the big lebowski. the two may end up being mutually exclusive. for domer.

[Duck of Death]

nd is used to 11-12 non conference games so they were able to develop some decent rivalries over the years. no matter what conference they join, they are going to drop to 3-4 non conference games so they will have to pick which non conference games they want to keep as annual games and which they would want to rotate. last year it sounded like nd and michigan were ready to part ways. let them play usc and navy every year and use their remaining 1-2 games to rotate purdue, mich st, penn st, whomever.

[RandallFlagg]

ND is a big fish and a great catch but $#@! those guys and their retarded alumni. An expanded Big12 would never be stable with scheduling concessions just for ND. They aren't bigger than we are, at least nobody should admit it or pretend they are. ND gets nothing special.

[Lone Star]

Which part of "permanent cross pod rival" do you not understand? In the 3-4-1 format, each team would have one permanent cross pod rival. In the years where their two pods were paired, the 8th conference game can be against someone else. In the years where their pods aren't paired, they will play one another in the 8th conference game. That means they will play every single year.

10 conference games? Are you $#@!ing retarded?

hmm probably the part where three teams in a pod would never really get the opportunity to play another team - 6 $#@!ing years for a home and away - $#@! that. I'm pretty sure KU, KSU, and OSU would like to play texas a few more times than once every 3 years. Or that Tech, Baylor, TCu would like a shot at OU more often. Or WVU/ISU/Pitt might get a little sore being locked out of playing Miami/Gtech more than a handful of times.

And the "permanent" rivalries are marquee so yeah even if it is a "10th" conference game (with zero bearing on conference titles) it would still be nationally picked up and would probably strengthen SOS.

[mdmost]

ND will look at the ACC or Big 12 if they are forced to join a conference for one reason, they keep their tier 3 rights. That is huge for ND. They are one of a handful of school who could do a Longhorn Network type deal and get picked up with relative ease. The ACC still makes more sense as they have Boston College and Pitt in there. They can still do a few of their protected rivalry games like Navy, Michigan (assuming UM doesn't puss out), and USC. They could then do a rotator of the other rivalries they like but they would need an 8 game conference schedule to do that. The Big 12 may not offer that.

[maninblack]

Because the nature of what we're talking about would be new and it's all hypothetical I don't really think there's a bad idea.

I don't like the idea of divisions with a 16 team conference. Would I accept it if it were the teams we're talking about? Sure but I think it sets up for more problems then pods. You would essentially have two mini-conferences and teams from both sides would rarely see each other.

Most of the discussion is predicated on Notre Dame joining. With that said it seems only realistic that they would join because they knew which way the college football winds were blowing and needed to be in a conference. With that assumption it's logical to assume that they might also be asked to make some type of a concession with regard to scheduling. If its a 3-4-1 system they would have to suck it up and and not play in Texas or Florida one season. This not as big of a deal as some are making it out to be. They may also have to sacrifice some traditional rivalries.

I don't see anything wrong with 9 conference games with a possible 10th (CCG) but I would also be completely happy with a 8 games and the 9th being the CCG.

[BurntOrangeAss]

What if, and I'm thinking out loud on a keyboard, there could be one pod for Texas, Texas Tech, OU and OSU. Another pod for Baylor, TCU, KU and KSU. Then the southeast for FSU, GT, Clemson and Miami, and the northeast pod for ISU, ND, WVU and Pitt. At least that way you have solved the issue of OU-OSU being attached at the hip, and Texas-OU. We could then have a permanent cross-pod rivalry with ND. Also, if we did the 3-2-2-2 idea everyone could come into Texas or Florida once every year for recruiting purposes. I know I haven't completely thought my way through all of this, but it seems simple and workable to me. If y'all don't like this, then I'll go $#@! myself. The permanent cross-pod idea may not work, it's too complicated for me, this early on a Sunday morning.

[mdmost]

^^^Yeah but then you are asking private schools with smaller budgets to go two states up while possibly losing games against Texas in a given year. And before any of throw out the so and so is lucky to even be here, this is what happens in expansion. CU was poised to throw a big monkey wrench in the whole Pac 16 format if they lost out on their yearly CA trips. With Mizzou dropping out, the other non-Texas Big 12 schools are in a prime position to take some of Mizzou's recruiting area away.

I just don't see how you can separate the Texas school. Regionallity was what was going to make the Pac 16 work.

[maninblack]

ND will look at the ACC or Big 12 if they are forced to join a conference for one reason, they keep their tier 3 rights. That is huge for ND. They are one of a handful of school who could do a Longhorn Network type deal and get picked up with relative ease. The ACC still makes more sense as they have Boston College and Pitt in there. They can still do a few of their protected rivalry games like Navy, Michigan (assuming UM doesn't puss out), and USC. They could then do a rotator of the other rivalries they like but they would need an 8 game conference schedule to do that. The Big 12 may not offer that.

I agree with provided FSU and Clemson don't break away and start to fracture the ACC. That's why I'm advocating the Big 12 not be passive this time and jump in the game throwing haymakers. Like Deloss said, "we didn't start this but we'll finish it."

[mdmost]

I agree with provided FSU and Clemson don't break away and start to fracture the ACC. That's why I'm advocating the Big 12 not be passive this time and jump in the game throwing haymakers. Like Deloss said, "we didn't start this but we'll finish it."

Oh I agree. I've said all along that if 12 is the number the Big 12 really wants then skip over Louisville and BYU and go straight to Clemson and FSU. Then you've still have room to go beyond 12 to 14 with ND if they choose to join or other unhappy non-basketball ACC schools like Georgia Tech and Miami. If you really want 16 then backfill with Louisville and someone else. You force the SEC's hand then and we see if they can make a successful play at Va. Tech.

[maninblack]

^^^Yeah but then you are asking private schools with smaller budgets to go two states up while possibly losing games against Texas in a given year.

This is a good point BUT they were willing to make huge concessions to be a part of the big east. THis seems small in comparison.

Like I said everything should be on the table and there's really no bad ideas if it meant having those 16 teams together.

[Ignatius]

SEC historians know this has happened before. Several decades ago, they were up around 20 teams, and it wasn't very good.

When in the hell was the SEC "up around" 20 teams? Are you rounding to the nearest 20?

Or are you talking about the Southern Conference, in which case you're claiming that conference alignment during the Depression is relevant to today...

[BurntOrangeAss]

Well, md, if you could have say Baylor (on a 3-2-2 basis) play one of OU / OSU for two years and then flip, and then either one of UT /TT for two years then flip, why would anyone be upset with that. Baylor would play the first year: KU KSU TCU OU TT from the two westernmost pods with home and road schedules whatever mix you want, along with two from the SE and two from the NE, then in year two, flip all the home games with road games, then in year three and four Baylor would have KU KSU TCU UT OSU along with the other two pods previously unplayed teams from year one and two, do you think Baylor would piss and moan about that?
Then Baylor would have at least one of OU or Texas every single year.

[Hagbard Celine]

14 is the new historical maximum

[FCHorn]

When in the hell was the SEC "up around" 20 teams? Are you rounding to the nearest 20?

Or are you talking about the Southern Conference, in which case you're claiming that conference alignment during the Depression is relevant to today...

Well, yes and no...the sec used to be SIAA and then The Southern conference until 1932 when the sec officially came into being...but SIAA had anywhere from 12 to 30 teams I believe...not abnormal back in back ass old days...


Seems the route that will most likely be taken is the one md is espousing...

[randomscribbles]

Yeah, he was referring to the old Southern Conference, from which the SEC broke off in 1932. And he makes a good point about lessons that can be learned. The great depression probably hit their tier 1 media value pretty bad

[Ignatius]

Here's a variation on the pod idea and scheduling, keeping in mind that:

* - With 4 'divisions' you really need two rounds of conference playoffs; the NCAA currently allows only a 13th game as a CCG for 12+ team conferences
* - Any fewer than 4 non-conference games and you've got problems convincing Notre Dame
* - Everyone needs a chance to play in the Florida / Texas markets


Each team plays everyone in its own pod, plus every team in one of the other 3 pods, on a rotating basis. This makes up 7 conference games. The 8th conference game, to be played over the Thanksgiving holiday/weekend, would be scheduled based on pod standings and would essentially serve as the semi-final round for all teams in 1st place in their pod. The 'other pod' you would play that year would rotate on a 3-year basis.

For example, let's say that after 11 weeks of the regular season the conference standings look like this:

Pod A: 1.Texas 2.TCU 3.Baylor 4.Tech
Pod B: 1.OU 2.OSU 3.KSU 4.KU
Pod C: 1.ND 2.WVU 3.Pitt 4.ISU
Pod D: 1.FSU 2.Clemson 3.Miami 4.GaTech

Assume also that every team in Pods A & B and Pods C & D have played each other already during the conference season. Your week 12 matchups would be:

#1 UT vs. #1 ND
#1 OU vs. #1 FSU
#2 TCU vs. #2 OSU
#2 WVU vs. #2 Clemson
#3 Baylor vs. #3 KSU
#3 Pitt vs. #3 Miami
#4 Tech vs. #4 KU
#4 ISU vs. #4 GaTech

By having the week 12 matchup always be against a pod you didn't play, you're guaranteed to have no conference game rematches this week (with a caveat below). You don't have to petition the NCAA for anything, because even though you've got a defacto CCG semifinal in the 1st two games, you're not adding any games to the schedule, only having a 'flex' schedule for the final week of the season. After this weekend, the winners of the two #1 vs. #1 games would play each other in the CCG game. The week 12 sites could be on campus determined by seeding, on campus pre-determined (ie you know #1 Pod A is at #1 Pod C before the season even starts), or at a neutral site. There are obvious TV/travel considerations in that decision, but to me it would work under any of those scenarios.

In order to preserve existing rivalries and to give everyone a shot in the Texas / Florida markets, I would also permit conference teams to play up to 2 games against conference foes every year. These games would have to be played prior to the conference season starting, and you wouldn't be allowed to schedule a team that was already on your schedule that year anyway. Wins/losses in these games wouldn't matter at all as far as conference standings. I don't think a lot of teams would do this just to get games in certain markets, but it would be an option. In other words, if ISU wants to get exposure in Florida in years where they don't play Pod D they can try to schedule a game with FSU, though IMO it would be better to schedule someone like South Florida as a home-and-home or at a neutral site in FLA. If the predictions of the plus 1 model come to pass and it only involves conference champions, you've got to think that the team who came out of this would be a lock to be in the national playoff, so losing a nonconference game to a really good team wouldn't hurt you.

For purely selfish reasons, it allows us to play OU every year in the Cotton Bowl, and (in my world) Notre Dame every year. This would involve us giving up either 0, 1, or 2 nonconference games depending on the year/rotation, but would any of us really care? Play Eastern $#@!bag State and Rice with the other two and be done with it.

Think about the scenario where we lose to OU in the Cotton Bowl as a nonconference game, both teams win their pod, and our week 12 matchup is OU at DKR in the conference semifinals on Thanksgiving night...

[BurntOrangeAss]

I actually like your idea ignatius. Seems to me the ad's and espn would chomp at the bit for a semi-playoff idea like that. All we need now is for someone to start the dominos falling. Anyone think something like this would be innovative enough to catch on and be implemented? If the bottom line is really the bottom line, then this cash cow of an idea would be unbeatable and the secsecsec would be wondering what hit them. Every game would be eagerly anticipated and dollars from the 1st and 2nd tier rights would be staggering, not to mention everyone has a shot a negotiating and keeping whatever 3rd tier rights they could. I'm on board in this fantasy land scenario. Anyone else? Also, i don't think Texas would be seen as a bad guy by any other school in the conference. Would never need to worry about those so called friends from the east. They would only drag us down.

[Hagbard Celine]

agree:

* - Any fewer than 4 non-conference games and you've got problems convincing Notre Dame
* - Everyone needs a chance to play in the Florida / Texas markets

disagree:

* - With 4 'divisions' you really need two rounds of conference playoffs; the NCAA currently allows only a 13th game as a CCG for 12+ team conferences

deviladvocate:

2 potential paths for us to the playoff...

1. BIG16: win all your games, including beat OU (pod), beat FSU/domer (road semi), beat OU (neutral ccg), another top 4 (home/road national semi), another top 4 (neutral national final)

2. B12(10): win all your games, beat OU, top 4 (home/road national semi), top 4 (neutral national final)

we could have to beat OU twice, neither at DKR, and win road games in south bend / tallahassee, and LA/AnnArbor as examples, just to get to the final in scenario 1.

or we could stand pat with 10 and take our chances with the national semi.

i like our chances better re: opponent and venue in game in a national round of 8 than a conference semi.

edit:

i don't want a system where there are any backdoors, trapdoors, possible screwings, special circumstances, exceptions to rules, double-victory requirements... basically i don't want to sell anything, buy anything, or process anything in my ideal conference regular season and playoff scenario. I don't want to sell anything bought or processed, or buy anything sold or processed, or process anything sold, bought, or processed, or repair anything sold, bought, or processed. You know, as a set-up for major college football, I don't want to do that.

double edit:

i still $#@!ing love that map. especially if it's worth $30M a year to everyone before Tier 3.

[mdmost]

The Pac12 has the right idea with a home game CCG. Spreading out the CCG to neutral sites is pretty much doing that any way (2005 in Houston, 2009 in Arlington). I think it's too much to ask to send fans to neutral site games for the CCG especially if the top 4 Plus 1 is at bowl game sites too. The ACC always had a hard time selling out Jacksonville. Home games are the best way to go.

[SamBass]

The SEC will argue that they've added significant media markets to their footprint and want more. We're going to find out how much additional leverage Mizzou and aggy give the SEC.

This will be an interesting aspect to follow. It basically proves or disproves the SEC strategy, right? Since the schools they added don't bring much in the wow factor {see combined records, championships, prat falls of the two schools athletic depts}, the market addition is the only argument they have. But the clippers aren't the lakers just because they're in the same market.

[Duck of Death]

But the clippers aren't the lakers just because they're in the same market.

and therein lies the rub