Page 1 of 3 123 LastLast
Results 1 to 15 of 37

Thread: Pac-12 scheduling idea: 3 divisions

  1. #1

    Pac-12 scheduling idea: 3 divisions

    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.

  2. #2
    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.

  3. #3

    This is a GREAT idea!

    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.

  4. #4
    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.

  5. #5
    True Blue Golden Bear FiatSlug's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2008
    Location
    city named for a Bishop of Cloyne
    Posts
    8,079

    I'm all in favor of it.

    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.

  6. #6
    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.

  7. #7
    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.

  8. #8
    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

  9. #9
    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.

  10. #10
    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

  11. #11
    Loyal Bear oskihasahearton's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2008
    Location
    By the edge where the trees meet the sea.
    Posts
    4,316
    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.
    Last edited by oskihasahearton; 06-15-2010 at 09:04 PM.
    "You ain't got nothing if you ain't got swagger." __

  12. #12
    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.

  13. #13
    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.

  14. #14
    Love it, DD. Please email to Larry and Sandy.

  15. #15
    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!

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •