Chat Room
Go Back   The Bear Insider - Covering Cal Sports 24 x 7 > The Public Place where "CyberBears" Growl > Football
Reload this Page Pac-12 scheduling idea: 3 divisions
Notices
Reply
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
  (#1) Old
calumnus calumnus is offline
True Blue Golden Bear
 
Posts: 12,123
Join Date: Jul 2008
Pac-12 scheduling idea: 3 divisions - 06-15-2010, 05:02 PM

California, PNW, and Southwest

You play everyone in your division and 3 of 4 in the other divisions for 9 conference games. The teams with the two best records (with some tie breaker formula) play in the conference title game. Rivalries are preserved, regional travel is maximized, everyone gets a trip (or two) to California each year.
Reply With Quote
  (#2) Old
ColoradoBear1 ColoradoBear1 is online now
True Blue Golden Bear
 
ColoradoBear1's Avatar
 
Posts: 8,576
Join Date: Jul 2008
06-15-2010, 05:06 PM

Well it has been said many times before... a CCG waiver from the NCAA needs two divisions of 6 or more teams with a round robin. And it does make sense. How legitimate would it be for a team to be chosen over another for the CCG when they haven't played. That's the whole idea of a CCG - a legitimate champion.
Reply With Quote
  (#3) Old
GldnBear71 GldnBear71 is offline
True Blue Golden Bear
 
GldnBear71's Avatar
 
Posts: 20,313
Join Date: Jul 2008
This is a GREAT idea! - 06-15-2010, 05:27 PM

I wish I had thought of it.

It preserves the tradition of Cal vs all the California schools on an annual basis. It preserves Oregon vs Washington on an annual basis.

It means all the non-divisional schools will play each other on a very regular basis.

I forwarded it to Sandy Barbour and recommended she pass it along to Larry Scott.

I think this is a better solution than a north-south or east-west solution.
Reply With Quote
  (#4) Old
calumnus calumnus is offline
True Blue Golden Bear
 
Posts: 12,123
Join Date: Jul 2008
06-15-2010, 05:54 PM

Quote:
Originally Posted by ColoradoBear1 View Post
Well it has been said many times before... a CCG waiver from the NCAA needs two divisions of 6 or more teams with a round robin. And it does make sense. How legitimate would it be for a team to be chosen over another for the CCG when they haven't played. That's the whole idea of a CCG - a legitimate champion.
The NCAA rules have not contemplated it, but they can be changed and it does make some sense. With three divisions you would need a CCG to decide the conference champion. The only issue is which of the three divisional champions get left out. It would be rare that they all finish with the same record. In deciding between two, 75% of the time they will have played head to head. In the other 25% they will each have played all the other teams in each others' division, so combined divisional record can be taken into account. They will both have likely played the #1 school, so that can be used too. I think it is workable, but I acknowledge it would take petitioning the NCAA.

Last edited by calumnus; 06-15-2010 at 05:56 PM.
Reply With Quote
  (#5) Old
FiatSlug FiatSlug is online now
True Blue Golden Bear
 
FiatSlug's Avatar
 
Posts: 7,857
Join Date: Jul 2008
Location: city named for a Bishop of Cloyne
I'm all in favor of it. - 06-15-2010, 06:34 PM

Quote:
Originally Posted by calumnus View Post
California, PNW, and Southwest

You play everyone in your division and 3 of 4 in the other divisions for 9 conference games. The teams with the two best records (with some tie breaker formula) play in the conference title game. Rivalries are preserved, regional travel is maximized, everyone gets a trip (or two) to California each year.
In fact, geeedub proposed the same idea back in this thread:

If the Pac were to go to 12 teams...

Since then, I have come to understand that if a conference wants a conference championship game, the NCAA requires two divisions of at least 6 teams each (Bylaw 17.9.5.2 (c) in the NCAA Division I Manual; page 241 of the 2009-2010 edition).

Given that restriction, I came up with a pod rotation that achieves the same results that first appeared in this thread:

Number of conference games in new PAC-1(6,5)?


I'll copy the post I made there, below:

I'll be very frank: the traditional ways of forming divisions along geographic lines and making them permanent present intractable problems in a Pac-12.

I've put some thought into this and I think the most equitable way to resolve this is to go to a pod system where new divisions are formed either [1] every year or [2] once every two years.

PODS
There would be six pods corresponding with geographical pairings: the Bay Area schools, the Los Angeles schools, the Arizona schools, the Oregon schools, the Washington schools, and the Rockies schools (Colorado and Utah).

Each pod would be paired with another pod for scheduling purposes. The paired pods would never be in the same division, although the schools in the paired pods would play each other every year.

The pod pairings would be:

Bay Area and Los Angeles
Oregon and Washington
Arizona and Rockies

DIVISIONS
Using the parameters above, and using the California schools as the permanent residents of Division A (LA) and Division B (Bay Area), here's a rotation:

ROTATION 1
Division A____Division B
Oregon______Washington
Los Angeles__Bay Area
Arizona______Rockies

ROTATION 2
Division A____Division B
Oregon______Washington
Los Angeles__Bay Area
Rockies______Arizona

ROTATION 3
Division A____Division B
Washington__Oregon
Los Angeles__Bay Area
Rockies______Arizona

ROTATION 4
Division A____Division B
Washington__Oregon
Los Angeles__Bay Area
Arizona______Rockies

In each rotation, a school would also play the opponents of a pod in the other division that is not one of your permanent opponents. That would be determined in the following way:
Bay Area schools would play the Division A pod that does rotate into Division B in the next rotation.
Los Angeles schools would play the Division B pod that does NOT rotate into Division A in the next rotation.
The Division B pod that does rotate into Division A in the next rotation plays the Division A pod that stays in Division A in the next rotation.

For example, in Rotation 1, the non-permanent opponent matchups would be:
Cal & Stanford vs. Arizona and Arizona State
UCLA & USC vs. Washington & Wazzu
Oregon & Oregon State vs. Colorado & Utah

Those matchups in Rotation 1 would be in addition to all the opponents in your same Division and your permanent opponents. 9 conference games total; same number as now.

This would ensure that every non-California school would play both the Bay Area and LA schools 6 times in any 8-year period. In fact, aside from permanent opponents, each school plays the other 8 schools 6 times in any 8-year period. It's equitable all the way around.

This is thinking in a non-traditional way (the cliched equivalent is "thinking outside the box"), but I think it provides an equitable scheduling set for everyone and allows schools to maintain traditional rivalries.
Reply With Quote
  (#6) Old
grandmastapoop grandmastapoop is online now
Golden Bear
 
Posts: 7,237
Join Date: Jul 2008
06-15-2010, 06:52 PM

Quote:
Originally Posted by calumnus View Post
California, PNW, and Southwest

You play everyone in your division and 3 of 4 in the other divisions for 9 conference games. The teams with the two best records (with some tie breaker formula) play in the conference title game. Rivalries are preserved, regional travel is maximized, everyone gets a trip (or two) to California each year.
Right, a fantastic idea right up until the first time some team who won its division and loses out on the conference title game on some tiebreaker and howls for years about it. Which will happen almost every year.

Next.
Reply With Quote
  (#7) Old
southseasbear southseasbear is offline
Loyal Bear
 
Posts: 4,386
Join Date: Jul 2008
06-15-2010, 06:53 PM

Brilliant! (You must have gone to Cal!)

Quote:
Originally Posted by DavidDempster View Post
...I came up with a pod rotation that achieves the same results that first appeared in this thread:

Number of conference games in new PAC-1(6,5)?


I'll copy the post I made there, below:

I'll be very frank: the traditional ways of forming divisions along geographic lines and making them permanent present intractable problems in a Pac-12.

I've put some thought into this and I think the most equitable way to resolve this is to go to a pod system where new divisions are formed either [1] every year or [2] once every two years.

PODS
There would be six pods corresponding with geographical pairings: the Bay Area schools, the Los Angeles schools, the Arizona schools, the Oregon schools, the Washington schools, and the Rockies schools (Colorado and Utah).

Each pod would be paired with another pod for scheduling purposes. The paired pods would never be in the same division, although the schools in the paired pods would play each other every year.

The pod pairings would be:

Bay Area and Los Angeles
Oregon and Washington
Arizona and Rockies

DIVISIONS
Using the parameters above, and using the California schools as the permanent residents of Division A (LA) and Division B (Bay Area), here's a rotation:

ROTATION 1
Division A____Division B
Oregon______Washington
Los Angeles__Bay Area
Arizona______Rockies

ROTATION 2
Division A____Division B
Oregon______Washington
Los Angeles__Bay Area
Rockies______Arizona

ROTATION 3
Division A____Division B
Washington__Oregon
Los Angeles__Bay Area
Rockies______Arizona

ROTATION 4
Division A____Division B
Washington__Oregon
Los Angeles__Bay Area
Arizona______Rockies

In each rotation, a school would also play the opponents of a pod in the other division that is not one of your permanent opponents. That would be determined in the following way:
Bay Area schools would play the Division A pod that does rotate into Division B in the next rotation.
Los Angeles schools would play the Division B pod that does NOT rotate into Division A in the next rotation.
The Division B pod that does rotate into Division A in the next rotation plays the Division A pod that stays in Division A in the next rotation.

For example, in Rotation 1, the non-permanent opponent matchups would be:
Cal & Stanford vs. Arizona and Arizona State
UCLA & USC vs. Washington & Wazzu
Oregon & Oregon State vs. Colorado & Utah

Those matchups in Rotation 1 would be in addition to all the opponents in your same Division and your permanent opponents. 9 conference games total; same number as now.

This would ensure that every non-California school would play both the Bay Area and LA schools 6 times in any 8-year period. In fact, aside from permanent opponents, each school plays the other 8 schools 6 times in any 8-year period. It's equitable all the way around.

This is thinking in a non-traditional way (the cliched equivalent is "thinking outside the box"), but I think it provides an equitable scheduling set for everyone and allows schools to maintain traditional rivalries.
Reply With Quote
  (#8) Old
geeedub geeedub is offline
Active Bear
 
geeedub's Avatar
 
Posts: 311
Join Date: Jul 2008
06-15-2010, 07:11 PM

Great idea! I posted on this a while back. I think DD linked it above.

As I understand there are some BCS rules that prohibit this, but I think it would be a good way to go - especially good at reducing a lopsided championship game.

GW
Reply With Quote
  (#9) Old
OskiDeLaHoya OskiDeLaHoya is offline
Active Bear
 
OskiDeLaHoya's Avatar
 
Posts: 289
Join Date: Jul 2008
06-15-2010, 07:23 PM

Quote:
Originally Posted by DavidDempster View Post
In fact, geeedub proposed the same idea back in this thread:

If the Pac were to go to 12 teams...

Since then, I have come to understand that if a conference wants a conference championship game, the NCAA requires two divisions of at least 6 teams each (Bylaw 17.9.5.2 (c) in the NCAA Division I Manual; page 241 of the 2009-2010 edition).

Given that restriction, I came up with a pod rotation that achieves the same results that first appeared in this thread:

Number of conference games in new PAC-1(6,5)?


I'll copy the post I made there, below:

I'll be very frank: the traditional ways of forming divisions along geographic lines and making them permanent present intractable problems in a Pac-12.

I've put some thought into this and I think the most equitable way to resolve this is to go to a pod system where new divisions are formed either [1] every year or [2] once every two years.

PODS
There would be six pods corresponding with geographical pairings: the Bay Area schools, the Los Angeles schools, the Arizona schools, the Oregon schools, the Washington schools, and the Rockies schools (Colorado and Utah).

Each pod would be paired with another pod for scheduling purposes. The paired pods would never be in the same division, although the schools in the paired pods would play each other every year.

The pod pairings would be:

Bay Area and Los Angeles
Oregon and Washington
Arizona and Rockies

DIVISIONS
Using the parameters above, and using the California schools as the permanent residents of Division A (LA) and Division B (Bay Area), here's a rotation:

ROTATION 1
Division A____Division B
Oregon______Washington
Los Angeles__Bay Area
Arizona______Rockies

ROTATION 2
Division A____Division B
Oregon______Washington
Los Angeles__Bay Area
Rockies______Arizona

ROTATION 3
Division A____Division B
Washington__Oregon
Los Angeles__Bay Area
Rockies______Arizona

ROTATION 4
Division A____Division B
Washington__Oregon
Los Angeles__Bay Area
Arizona______Rockies

In each rotation, a school would also play the opponents of a pod in the other division that is not one of your permanent opponents. That would be determined in the following way:
Bay Area schools would play the Division A pod that does rotate into Division B in the next rotation.
Los Angeles schools would play the Division B pod that does NOT rotate into Division A in the next rotation.
The Division B pod that does rotate into Division A in the next rotation plays the Division A pod that stays in Division A in the next rotation.

For example, in Rotation 1, the non-permanent opponent matchups would be:
Cal & Stanford vs. Arizona and Arizona State
UCLA & USC vs. Washington & Wazzu
Oregon & Oregon State vs. Colorado & Utah

Those matchups in Rotation 1 would be in addition to all the opponents in your same Division and your permanent opponents. 9 conference games total; same number as now.

This would ensure that every non-California school would play both the Bay Area and LA schools 6 times in any 8-year period. In fact, aside from permanent opponents, each school plays the other 8 schools 6 times in any 8-year period. It's equitable all the way around.

This is thinking in a non-traditional way (the cliched equivalent is "thinking outside the box"), but I think it provides an equitable scheduling set for everyone and allows schools to maintain traditional rivalries.
+1. Love this idea! Somehow, tho, I have low hopes of the Pac-10 office embracing such innovative scheduling.
Reply With Quote
  (#10) Old
calumnus calumnus is offline
True Blue Golden Bear
 
Posts: 12,123
Join Date: Jul 2008
06-15-2010, 07:44 PM

Quote:
Originally Posted by DavidDempster View Post
In fact, geeedub proposed the same idea back in this thread:

If the Pac were to go to 12 teams...

Since then, I have come to understand that if a conference wants a conference championship game, the NCAA requires two divisions of at least 6 teams each (Bylaw 17.9.5.2 (c) in the NCAA Division I Manual; page 241 of the 2009-2010 edition).

Given that restriction, I came up with a pod rotation that achieves the same results that first appeared in this thread:

Number of conference games in new PAC-1(6,5)?


I'll copy the post I made there, below:

I'll be very frank: the traditional ways of forming divisions along geographic lines and making them permanent present intractable problems in a Pac-12.

I've put some thought into this and I think the most equitable way to resolve this is to go to a pod system where new divisions are formed either [1] every year or [2] once every two years.

PODS
There would be six pods corresponding with geographical pairings: the Bay Area schools, the Los Angeles schools, the Arizona schools, the Oregon schools, the Washington schools, and the Rockies schools (Colorado and Utah).

Each pod would be paired with another pod for scheduling purposes. The paired pods would never be in the same division, although the schools in the paired pods would play each other every year.

The pod pairings would be:

Bay Area and Los Angeles
Oregon and Washington
Arizona and Rockies

DIVISIONS
Using the parameters above, and using the California schools as the permanent residents of Division A (LA) and Division B (Bay Area), here's a rotation:

ROTATION 1
Division A____Division B
Oregon______Washington
Los Angeles__Bay Area
Arizona______Rockies

ROTATION 2
Division A____Division B
Oregon______Washington
Los Angeles__Bay Area
Rockies______Arizona

ROTATION 3
Division A____Division B
Washington__Oregon
Los Angeles__Bay Area
Rockies______Arizona

ROTATION 4
Division A____Division B
Washington__Oregon
Los Angeles__Bay Area
Arizona______Rockies

In each rotation, a school would also play the opponents of a pod in the other division that is not one of your permanent opponents. That would be determined in the following way:
Bay Area schools would play the Division A pod that does rotate into Division B in the next rotation.
Los Angeles schools would play the Division B pod that does NOT rotate into Division A in the next rotation.
The Division B pod that does rotate into Division A in the next rotation plays the Division A pod that stays in Division A in the next rotation.

For example, in Rotation 1, the non-permanent opponent matchups would be:
Cal & Stanford vs. Arizona and Arizona State
UCLA & USC vs. Washington & Wazzu
Oregon & Oregon State vs. Colorado & Utah

Those matchups in Rotation 1 would be in addition to all the opponents in your same Division and your permanent opponents. 9 conference games total; same number as now.

This would ensure that every non-California school would play both the Bay Area and LA schools 6 times in any 8-year period. In fact, aside from permanent opponents, each school plays the other 8 schools 6 times in any 8-year period. It's equitable all the way around.

This is thinking in a non-traditional way (the cliched equivalent is "thinking outside the box"), but I think it provides an equitable scheduling set for everyone and allows schools to maintain traditional rivalries.
Brilliant
Reply With Quote
  (#11) Old
oskihasahearton oskihasahearton is offline
Loyal Bear
 
oskihasahearton's Avatar
 
Posts: 4,045
Join Date: Jul 2008
Location: By the edge where the trees meet the sea.
06-15-2010, 08:45 PM

What's the matter with a PAC-12 where every team plays every conference team plus one OoC game (total 12 games in a regular season until the NCAA ups it again)?

If you want a CcG, take the top two teams or forget it.

Let's say Cal beats the Farm by 27 pts in conference in the last game of the season, and they end up playing in the CcG for the Championship. If the Farm loses or wins the CcG by less than 27 points, the crystal dish goes to Cal. If Farm wins the CcG by exactly 27 pts, then that's too bad --- dish to Cal. If Farm wins by 28+ pts, they get the crystal dish and the mysterious PAC-12 Cc.*

*Footnote: USc not mentioned here because they don't have a clue and will be denying sanctions for 40-years, and will appeal the recent ruling for the next 36-years. In other words, they are irrelevent.


"I cannot be certain of the answer in that regard." -PdS __

Last edited by oskihasahearton; 06-15-2010 at 09:04 PM.
Reply With Quote
  (#12) Old
grandmastapoop grandmastapoop is online now
Golden Bear
 
Posts: 7,237
Join Date: Jul 2008
06-15-2010, 08:50 PM

Quote:
Originally Posted by oskihasahearton View Post
What's the matter with a PAC-12 where every team plays every conference team plus two OoC games (total 13 games in a regular season)?

If you want a CcG, take the top two teams or forget it.

Let's say Cal beats the Farm by 27 pts in conference in the last game of the season, and they end up playing in the CcG for the Championship. If the Farm loses or wins the CcG by less than 27 points, the crystal dish goes to Cal. If Farm wins the CcG by exactly 27 pts, then that's too bad --- dish to Cal. If Farm wins by 28+ pts, they get the crystal dish and the mysterious PAC-12 Cc.*

*Footnote: USc not mentioned here because they don't have a clue and will be denying sanctions for 40-years, and will appeal the recent ruling for the next 36-years. In other words, they are irrelevent.

Well, 13 games is against the rules. So we can start with that.
Reply With Quote
  (#13) Old
dupdadee dupdadee is offline
True Blue Golden Bear
 
dupdadee's Avatar
 
Posts: 8,023
Join Date: Jul 2008
06-16-2010, 06:37 AM

really well thought out post, dd.



Quote:
Originally Posted by DavidDempster View Post
In fact, geeedub proposed the same idea back in this thread:

If the Pac were to go to 12 teams...

Since then, I have come to understand that if a conference wants a conference championship game, the NCAA requires two divisions of at least 6 teams each (Bylaw 17.9.5.2 (c) in the NCAA Division I Manual; page 241 of the 2009-2010 edition).

Given that restriction, I came up with a pod rotation that achieves the same results that first appeared in this thread:

Number of conference games in new PAC-1(6,5)?


I'll copy the post I made there, below:

I'll be very frank: the traditional ways of forming divisions along geographic lines and making them permanent present intractable problems in a Pac-12.

I've put some thought into this and I think the most equitable way to resolve this is to go to a pod system where new divisions are formed either [1] every year or [2] once every two years.

PODS
There would be six pods corresponding with geographical pairings: the Bay Area schools, the Los Angeles schools, the Arizona schools, the Oregon schools, the Washington schools, and the Rockies schools (Colorado and Utah).

Each pod would be paired with another pod for scheduling purposes. The paired pods would never be in the same division, although the schools in the paired pods would play each other every year.

The pod pairings would be:

Bay Area and Los Angeles
Oregon and Washington
Arizona and Rockies

DIVISIONS
Using the parameters above, and using the California schools as the permanent residents of Division A (LA) and Division B (Bay Area), here's a rotation:

ROTATION 1
Division A____Division B
Oregon______Washington
Los Angeles__Bay Area
Arizona______Rockies

ROTATION 2
Division A____Division B
Oregon______Washington
Los Angeles__Bay Area
Rockies______Arizona

ROTATION 3
Division A____Division B
Washington__Oregon
Los Angeles__Bay Area
Rockies______Arizona

ROTATION 4
Division A____Division B
Washington__Oregon
Los Angeles__Bay Area
Arizona______Rockies

In each rotation, a school would also play the opponents of a pod in the other division that is not one of your permanent opponents. That would be determined in the following way:
Bay Area schools would play the Division A pod that does rotate into Division B in the next rotation.
Los Angeles schools would play the Division B pod that does NOT rotate into Division A in the next rotation.
The Division B pod that does rotate into Division A in the next rotation plays the Division A pod that stays in Division A in the next rotation.

For example, in Rotation 1, the non-permanent opponent matchups would be:
Cal & Stanford vs. Arizona and Arizona State
UCLA & USC vs. Washington & Wazzu
Oregon & Oregon State vs. Colorado & Utah

Those matchups in Rotation 1 would be in addition to all the opponents in your same Division and your permanent opponents. 9 conference games total; same number as now.

This would ensure that every non-California school would play both the Bay Area and LA schools 6 times in any 8-year period. In fact, aside from permanent opponents, each school plays the other 8 schools 6 times in any 8-year period. It's equitable all the way around.

This is thinking in a non-traditional way (the cliched equivalent is "thinking outside the box"), but I think it provides an equitable scheduling set for everyone and allows schools to maintain traditional rivalries.
Reply With Quote
  (#14) Old
GinFizzBear GinFizzBear is offline
Real Bear
 
GinFizzBear's Avatar
 
Posts: 1,649
Join Date: Jul 2008
06-16-2010, 06:44 AM

Love it, DD. Please email to Larry and Sandy.
Reply With Quote
  (#15) Old
MinotStateBeav MinotStateBeav is online now
Loyal Bear
 
MinotStateBeav's Avatar
 
Posts: 4,135
Join Date: Jul 2008
Location: Redmond, Oregon
06-16-2010, 06:59 AM

It took me a minute to wrap my mind around what the pod system is ..how it worked...but its early in the morning! lol. Now that I've read it..I think its a kind of cool and innovative way to schedule. You should Copyright it!! heh. Definitely pass that to higher ups...lets keep the innovation goin!
Reply With Quote
Reply

Thread Tools
Display Modes

Forum Jump




Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.7.2
Copyright ©2000 - 2014, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
vBulletin Skin developed by: vBStyles.com
Ad Management by RedTyger