Per your ask for some clarification... no apology necessary... completely understandable that you'd be a little uncertain, and probably owes to gaps in my original explanation... being on your side of things for things like this (well, not
just like this, but similar) on other forums in the past, I appreciate the effort to try to digest it all...
If I am reading right, you are proposing that there would be 6 OOC games
Yes.
and a hard schedule for the first three conference games
Actually, not unless your team finished in the bottom two last season.
First three games for #1-#4 from previous season pit those teams against last season's bottom two, then the third game being versus one of the first teams in the current season to achieve two losses.
Using last season's results and pretending implementation this season, you'd have Rice, Marshall, East Carolina, and UTSA getting two games against FIU and... I still can't believe I'm writing this... Southern Miss. (I know they're depressed and I'm depressed for them. I'm sure I'm not alone.)
So, for those three, advocates of the value of going undefeated will appreciate that it's entirely possible that in many if not most years, all four of those schools automatically qualifying will get through the first phase in good shape. No, it doesn't do much for strength of schedule, but the way I justify that is to compare it to status quo, and as-is, ADs anticipate at least a couple of easier conference games and at least one easier OOC game; so, by virtue of them having the additional inventory (6 OOC slots, not just 4), they can adjust for that to their own discretion of what is best given the current realities of their program.
then re-seeding for the next 3, not knowing who you play or where,
Correct. You would know who you might play, of course, because there are brackets. But because there would be a goal of having everyone play 3 home, 3 away through the whole process, there could be times when lower seeds in the pool end up with home field advantage--it just depends on who wins each week, obviously.
including cross-conference against the MAC teams.
No. This one doesn't prescribe involvement with the MAC. It's left open that there could be a challenge pair of prearranged games at the end of the playoff, but not necessarily against the MAC's two best.
Also, as noted before, it might be great to play top ranked MAC teams, but it also means that the bottom feeders play the bottom feeders of the MAC with little notice. If you think MAC crowds are bad now, send UAB to Eastern Michigan with nothing to play for late in the season.
While the MAC part is actually askew, still, I want to take the opportunity this one presents to bring up another important point that too easily avoids people when they're shooting holes in this or any other idea that I or anyone else ever proposes...
And it's encompassed in this question:
"How is that not exactly the same as it is now anyhow?"Even if we accept the premise that UAB wouldn't be more interesting than Akron to Eastern Michigan fans, a crowd of only 2000 instead of 3000 really isn't anything worth making a major issue over... hope we can agree on that.
And another thing that this gives me opportunity to highlight... on the positive side...
In this environment, teams desperately do not want to be one of those worst two teams because of the consequence that being one of those in one year means the most you can hope to achieve the next year is elevation to the Stripes Pool instead of having to be fish food for the sharks in the Stars Pool.
Sports is like life... and just like in life, there are consequences for failing to perform, and when you're down that low, you need some small victories to help get you out of the hole you're in... and ascension to the Stripes Pool is that small victory.
Why am I droning on and on about this? Because herein is another benefit to this structure...
Under current conditions, if you're bad on October 31st, you've got nothing to play for but pride in November, right?
But under this structure, if you're bad on October 31st, you've got a whole lot to play for in November... ie, avoiding being one of those two worst teams, or said more positively, to lock yourself in to a spot in the Stripes Pool when you kickoff for next season.
The proposal at hand is nice if a #17 ranked MU is playing a #20 Ranked BGSU then a #15 ranked NIU to get attention of the committee, but you have to consider that in this scenario, the rich get richer and the poor get poorer. The top teams are consistently year to year paired with the poor teams so they have an easy ride. This is great for the top teams, but what about the lesser ones and their opportunities to win a division, ever?
Not sure if I'm getting you, or if this is based on some misunderstanding, but we both agree that you want a system where bad teams have some rungs on the ladder just above them that can help them out of their ditch, good teams have to earn their keep, and yet at the same time, where the very best team receives the greatest bounce from conference play that is possible.
Based on just that, it could be argued the biggest conference weekend of the year is going to be that first weekend of Red, White & Blue play, when the four Stripes teams face the four Stars teams... since those games have the consequence of defining who is in the Stars Pool next season.
There's a detectable theme building here. And it is that there's so much built-in excitement when your conference season has this playoff element embedded in it... everyone has plenty of reason to keep playing hard well into November, if not the last regular season Saturday even.
Further, if the idea is to strengthen SOS for the committee, seeding the conference in such a way as to have the strong feed on the weak would seem to counteract the goal.
You're talking to the guy who thinks the Great 8 is still the best idea, all things being equal. So, this point isn't lost on me, believe me. Which is why I said what I already said...
"...No, it doesn't do much for strength of schedule, but the way I justify that is to compare it to status quo, and as-is, ADs anticipate at least a couple of easier conference games and at least one easier OOC game; so, by virtue of them having the additional inventory (6 OOC slots, not just 4), they can adjust for that to their own discretion of what is best given the current realities of their program."Also, IMO, scheduling OOC is enough of a nightmare. Programs form conferences in large part to minimize their need to schedule more games dealing with permutations of time, alliances, opportunities, etc. To ask our administrators to schedule 6 OOC games rather than 4, and expect them to come up with quality competition that doesn't offset any potential benefit of playing a MAC team at the end of the rainbow, and especially having one OOC need at the end of the season as outlined, is certainly far-fetched if not impossible.
7.
For the two finalists for the championship game, assuming that's what you're talking about, that particular end-of-season OOC challenge game would be a 7th.
I don't mean to be dismissive, but I'll stand where I've stood on this one.
Where's that?
If you're in the 4th of 5 conferences, and one that is too perilously close to #5 to feel all that comfortable, given that so many of your members came from that #5 conference in the first place... what's that about "quality competition?"... hey, really, you can't do much worse having those two extra slots available, and... glass-half-full... you can do a
whole lot better.
If I'm FIU or Southern Miss.. I'm saying please give me that flexibility... give me every opportunity to try to better myself. Or if I'm Rice or Marshall, same.
I suppose I might take the assertion of "far-fetched-ness" more seriously if we were in a conference with more to lose instead of staring up at 8 other Division I conferences of 10.
Seems there is also no conference championship game which can give a team a 13 game season (if undefeated probably better than playing a MAC team) and the inherent money it brings.
The regular season is 12 games. Conference championship is a 13th.
Home
Help
Members
View the memberlist
Search For Members
Login
Register