Jump to content

NCAA Super League With Relegation


Stoney

Recommended Posts

40 minutes ago, Valhalla said:

I like this idea, but if you are going to have 16 then you have to get creative with scheduling. 

You don't necessarily have to. You could just do 8 team divisions with 2 rotating cross division games. That's 9 conference games.

One thing that could be done that would make the game more interesting though is rotating divisions. Let's say you swap 2 teams from each division into the other every season. Or you could possibly have a system where each year the teams are seeded into divisions like a tournament based off the previous years results. Essentially you're always keeping balanced divisions and not allowing one to get overpowered. 

 

It would break a lot of rivalries and be a pain for future scheduling, but it would be good football. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

16 minutes ago, WETSU said:

You don't necessarily have to. You could just do 8 team divisions with 2 rotating cross division games. That's 9 conference games.

One thing that could be done that would make the game more interesting though is rotating divisions. Let's say you swap 2 teams from each division into the other every season. Or you could possibly have a system where each year the teams are seeded into divisions like a tournament based off the previous years results. Essentially you're always keeping balanced divisions and not allowing one to get overpowered. 

 

It would break a lot of rivalries and be a pain for future scheduling, but it would be good football. 

No you can make this happen with what you said.  Play your 7 inter-division games and 3 at large against anyone.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

25 minutes ago, WETSU said:

You don't necessarily have to. You could just do 8 team divisions with 2 rotating cross division games. That's 9 conference games.

One thing that could be done that would make the game more interesting though is rotating divisions. Let's say you swap 2 teams from each division into the other every season. Or you could possibly have a system where each year the teams are seeded into divisions like a tournament based off the previous years results. Essentially you're always keeping balanced divisions and not allowing one to get overpowered. 

 

It would break a lot of rivalries and be a pain for future scheduling, but it would be good football. 

I was thinking more a pod system.

4 four team pods

You play the three teams in your pod and then you play 2 teams from each of the other three pods each season. 

Then seed the 4 "pod" winners and have your playoff.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just now, Valhalla said:

I was thinking more a pod system.

4 four team pods

You play the three teams in your pod and then you play 2 teams from each of the other three pods each season. 

Then seed the 4 "pod" winners and have your playoff.

That's a good idea. Would also probably make the most sense geographicaly. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

23 hours ago, Stoney said:

Guy must be a Bulldog because that’s the only reason I see Mississippi State getting in.

In four years it could happen.  Check Mike Leach's coaching career at Tech and Washington State.  He usually has his team with a 9 win year, and finally gets 11 wins after 9 season and then 7 seasons.  I've heard some soccer leagues have relegation, and I think it's a good idea even for College Football for their conferences.  They should remove a bottom feeder for the winner of a non power 5 conference Champion to move into a conference that is within those regions and remove the last place teams to replace them.  I know it would mess up some rivalries, but are they really rivalries if both teams are bad except for the fans of those teams ?  The rest of the country doesn't usually care about The Egg Bowl, Iron Skillet, or Bayou Bucket.  I know there are more, but I'm not going to list them all just one's that come to the top of my head.  I'd like to see it even in the NBA, because the Knicks wouldn't be talked about as much as they have been over the last 5 years.  They were in the news today that Zion Williamson might want to play there since he loves MSG.  

Link to comment
Share on other sites

5 hours ago, Valhalla said:

I like this idea, but if you are going to have 16 then you have to get creative with scheduling. 

Just swap schedules for the team moving up and the team moving.  Maybe leave one open date for rivalries that generate money with the fan bases that usually pack the stadiums for those games.  

Link to comment
Share on other sites

perfect would be 48 teams in 4 -> 12 team regions playing say 11 games in region and then go from there...with playoff (8 team - top team from each region and then 4 best at large). 

every couple 2-3 yrs bottom couple teams in a region could be relegated out and new, successful teams move in...I would even give the FCS champions & runner-ups the option to jump in to their closest region if an opening is there. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

so if you went to a 48 team regional pod system, could it look like this or tweak it as you'd see fit...I defer to some great brains: (so you would probably constantly have a top 20 regional power poll going - all divisions).

Southeast: 

(1) Alabama (2) Clemson (3) Georgia (4) Florida (5) Auburn (6) Miami, FL (7) Ole Miss (8) North Carolina (9) Mississippi State (10) UCF (11) Florida State/Tennessee (12) Coastal Carolina/UAB/Troy/Kennesaw State 

Northeast:

(1) Ohio State (2) Notre Dame (3) Cincinnati (4) Penn State (5) Michigan (6) Wisconsin (7) West Virginia (8) Louisville (9) Michigan State (10) Virginia Tech (11) Army/Navy/Pitt (12) Old Dominion/James Madison/Richmond

Mid:

(1) Oklahoma (2) Texas A&M (3) Texas (4) LSU (5) Oklahoma State (6) Baylor (7) Memphis (8) Arkansas (9) Iowa State (10) Texas Tech/TCU (11) Houston/SMU (12) Sam Houston/Arkansas State/Louisiana/Nicholls

West:

(1) USC (2) Oregon (3) Utah (4) Washington (5) Boise State (6) Arizona State (7) Colorado/Arizona/UCLA/Cal (8) BYU (9) San Diego State/San Jose State/Fresno/Air Force (10) North Dakota State/South Dakota State (11) Montana State (12) Idaho/North Dakota/UC-Davis   

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 hours ago, CoachPelvisPresley said:

so if you went to a 48 team regional pod system, could it look like this or tweak it as you'd see fit...I defer to some great brains: (so you would probably constantly have a top 20 regional power poll going - all divisions).

Southeast: 

(1) Alabama (2) Clemson (3) Georgia (4) Florida (5) Auburn (6) Miami, FL (7) Ole Miss (8) North Carolina (9) Mississippi State (10) UCF (11) Florida State/Tennessee (12) Coastal Carolina/UAB/Troy/Kennesaw State 

Northeast:

(1) Ohio State (2) Notre Dame (3) Cincinnati (4) Penn State (5) Michigan (6) Wisconsin (7) West Virginia (8) Louisville (9) Michigan State (10) Virginia Tech (11) Army/Navy/Pitt (12) Old Dominion/James Madison/Richmond

Mid:

(1) Oklahoma (2) Texas A&M (3) Texas (4) LSU (5) Oklahoma State (6) Baylor (7) Memphis (8) Arkansas (9) Iowa State (10) Texas Tech/TCU (11) Houston/SMU (12) Sam Houston/Arkansas State/Louisiana/Nicholls

West:

(1) USC (2) Oregon (3) Utah (4) Washington (5) Boise State (6) Arizona State (7) Colorado/Arizona/UCLA/Cal (8) BYU (9) San Diego State/San Jose State/Fresno/Air Force (10) North Dakota State/South Dakota State (11) Montana State (12) Idaho/North Dakota/UC-Davis   

 

 

48 isn't quite enough IMO. 

Needs to be 8 conferences with 10 teams apiece playing a round robin for 9 conference games and 3 non conference. The top 2 teams from each draw from a hat for seeds and are placed in a 16 team playoff.

Only adds 1 extra game for the eventually champion because you already had two playoff games and you get rid of the conference title games for a net of +1. 

Every 5 years you drop the worst conference record in each conference over the span of those 5 and replace them with top 8 teams of the newly created 48 team mid major that is a mirror of what you posted with its own title game. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 minutes ago, MavGrad99 said:

I’ve always liked the idea of D1 teams earning their spot and money

It’s a great system, because the teams at the bottom of the standings have just as much if not more incentive to perform their best as those at the top of the standings throughout the entire season.

It naturally keeps fans of those teams at the bottom fully engaged all season. 


It’s a great concept.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 minutes ago, HearEmaGrowlin said:

It’s a great system, because the teams at the bottom of the standings have just as much if not more incentive to perform their best as those at the top of the standings throughout the entire season.

It naturally keeps fans of those teams at the bottom fully engaged all season. 


It’s a great concept.

Agreed 100%. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

15 minutes ago, WETSU said:

Agreed 100%. 

I get lovingly teased about being a soccer fan from numerous folks.

I watch English Premier League and am a Chelsea Blues fan. 
Outside of the game itself, I really appreciate the relegation / promotion aspect of the sport. Teams in the Championship (2nd tier league below EPL) that get promoted to the Premier League, it’s like they’ve won the Super Bowl. 
I also really like there are zero commercials during the games and the games can easily be played in under two hours rather than possibly five hour long games.

Now, not to say I don’t enjoy a long college football game, but what really makes them so long are just all the breaks in play, just part of football at this point.

What else I like is there are no playoffs in professional soccer leagues. Everybody plays everybody else throughout the season. No one can hide from another team.

Something I highly dislike about soccer is the clock counts up to 90 minutes and the ref has full control of when the games end rather than a clock counting down to 0 seconds remaining. That drives me crazy, because a ref can be compromised and possibly give a certain team extra time to try to score a game tying or game winning goal.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, HearEmaGrowlin said:

I get lovingly teased about being a soccer fan from numerous folks.

I watch English Premier League and am a Chelsea Blues fan. 
Outside of the game itself, I really appreciate the relegation / promotion aspect of the sport. Teams in the Championship (2nd tier league below EPL) that get promoted to the Premier League, it’s like they’ve won the Super Bowl. 
I also really like there are zero commercials during the games and the games can easily be played in under two hours rather than possibly five hour long games.

Now, not to say I don’t enjoy a long college football game, but what really makes them so long are just all the breaks in play, just part of football at this point.

What else I like is there are no playoffs in professional soccer leagues. Everybody plays everybody else throughout the season. No one can hide from another team.

Something I highly dislike about soccer is the clock counts up to 90 minutes and the ref has full control of when the games end rather than a clock counting down to 0 seconds remaining. That drives me crazy, because a ref can be compromised and possibly give a certain team extra time to try to score a game tying or game winning goal.

The worst part abouT world soccer, especially the EPL and such is that there is no end of the season tournament.  Best record wins the league.  By winning the league it allows your team to participate in certain tournaments etc but there isn’t like some grand finale like the SB or NCAA title game.  They also allow ties... who the heck is happy with a “draw” or “tie”

Link to comment
Share on other sites

49 minutes ago, MavGrad99 said:

The worst part abouT world soccer, especially the EPL and such is that there is no end of the season tournament.  Best record wins the league.  By winning the league it allows your team to participate in certain tournaments etc but there isn’t like some grand finale like the SB or NCAA title game.  They also allow ties... who the heck is happy with a “draw” or “tie”

Yea with how easy a shootout format can be there's no reason for a match to ever end in a tie. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 hours ago, WETSU said:

Yea with how easy a shootout format can be there's no reason for a match to ever end in a tie. 

I like what hockey did.  End in a tie in regulation then you go to OT, tie in OT, shootout.  The tie earns the losing team 1 point but the winning team 3.  Lose in regulation, 0 points.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
×
×
  • Create New...