If you look at my setup it guarantees a game in Texas every year for every team. And the pods are for geography and building made for TV rivalries both money makes which is king.
2 Likes
All this talk about podsâŠ
5 Likes
Alright thatâs enough from you. Time for you to take a nap, do the worry you will fell much better very soon.
The hateful 8 are 100% aligned and ISU is not getting screwed out of their legacy rivals to appease a Texas pod. No freaking way.
Did not say anything about putting all Texas teams in one division.
Just that if you have TCU - BU playing every year, they should be in the same division otherwise you really mess up the non-divisional rotation.
This is another reason I like permanent rivals. There are not power blocks created as easily for voting on conference issues.
1 Like
It allows for everybody to play everybody every 2 years. Doing divisions with 16 teams could lead to an unbalanced schedule and also going several years without playing opponents in the other division.
Permanent rivals gives the exact same play everybody every two years. Just means that you donât have some rivalry or preferred opponent get left out of the yearly rotation.
People here should read some history of the WAC. Pods are a part of why the MWC formed.
My bad, I was looking at the scenarios in a 9 game conference scenario with divisions.
I wanted to make sure everyone played everyone in a 4 year period so each recruiting class gets at least 1 game against everyone.
The other formula would be each team has a scenario of guaranteed protected rivalries
2 protected annual rivalries and 7 teams
3 protected annual rivalries and 6 teams
1 Like
I guess I donât fully understand your model. 7 out of 8 or 9 conference games are played against a division rival every year leaving 1-2 conference games left against an opponent in the other division. How can you play everyone in 2 years when there are 8 teams in the other division? It would take 4 years to accomplish that in a 9 game conference model and 8 years in an 8 game conference model.
Are you saying permanent rivals are included from the other division?
My model is not divisions but permanent rivals. I gave a detailed example earlier in this thread of how it could work.
As tcoog list right above, 3 permanent rivals (same number as in a pod) and play 6 of the remaining 12 teams each year.
The difference is that with rivals, they do not all have to be the same as in a pod.
6 Likes
The SEC, ACC, Big 10 with 14 teams still have not found the secret formula for scheduling.
Even to this day, Georgia still has not played a game in College Station against A&M.
Even the ACC has non-conference games within teams in their own conference.
I would bet this is the model theyâll use. The SEC, Big 10, and ACC have all dropped divisions and have a similar model.
2 Likes
Do we need to play everyone? The big 10 has to answer that question too. Real chance Oregon and Wash dont get to play ohio state/michigan regularly due to logistics
I feel the conference might reduce ole UH to utah trips for logistics. Im down as a clown either way. *i was pulling for UH to be a western slotted team so we played colorado-arizona-asu-utah every year, with tech
1 Like
I hope they keep a rotation of playing everyone home and home every 4 years. I think not seeing another school for 6 or 8 years really weakens the conference from a unity stand point. Hence the change from divisions in the SEC.
4 Likes
Teach would have to go west.
^^^This
The Big 12 has completely restructured itself with the addition of 8 new schools. The worst thing that could happen for the conference is following the SEC model of two divisions and having a common opponent from the opposite division. That works for them, but this wonât work for the Big 12. They are a distant 3rd in conference prowess, so they need to come up with something new. Provide exposure and visibility for all the fans to embrace and enjoy.
It would be bad business for them to be in a situation where we donât host Utah until 2031. That would suck.
1 Like
Dont go add 18 for the sake of adding 18, but 18/3 = 6 team pods, which would significantly help with regionality
Aligned on what exactly? The only teams that gets moved out of a recognized rivalry is Iowa St. and they donât have any power compared to the rest. Money trumps any of what Iowa wants. They donât have any other valid complaints for it not to be that way. Traditionally all the Texas schools have been in one division in the Big 12 anyway.
However if it was really a big deal, you just swap Iowa and Colorado. This would then maintain all of the recognized current and traditional rivalries. Would it be slightly more travel for Colorado each year? Ya but they would get over it.
This could work too. But you would have to figure out who your rivals would be.