Does UConn need a partner if deregulation passes?

[TruthNnumbers]

15 works fine if there’s no need for divisions...4 yearly rivals and play the other 10 over 2 years 5 and 5. Is there an advantage to divisions beyond deregulation or do I not understand the “deregulation” changes that are coming? Seems you would be more likely to have the 2 best teams play for the title. Each school would play every other school in a 2 year period, 4 rival games covers most of the biggest rivals better than divisions can. Am I missing something? I know it may make scheduling for some sports more difficult but difficult doesn’t mean impossible. Even the tournaments for other sports could be handled by giving the regular season champion a bye. If you don't need divisions all UConn needs to be B1G is deregulation and a willingness by the B1G to think outside of divisions.

 

[pj]

You are missing that 15 teams cannot play 9 games each ... that makes 15*9 / (2 teams per game) or 67.5 games.

So one team, i.e. UConn, would have to play an even number of games (e.g. 6, 8, or 10) to make this work, and so would need a special calculation to determine place in standings.

But, UConn would be fine with a temporarily disadvantaged position until partner was found. So it could be done.

Personally, I think it makes sense and the B1G should do it.

 

[jostar1]

This is what Delany said:

"I'd like to know what it is people want to do," Big Ten commissioner Jim Delany said. "I don't think deregulating it just for the sake of deregulation is good. We could end up with 20-team conferences and four five-team pods. What are we trying to do? If somebody wanted to identify what it is they wanted to do, and if it were reasonable, I would say, why not?

"I'm open to creativity and deregulation, but I'm not open to just a blank check to reorganize the regular season however you choose."

A regular poster on CSNBBS posted this:

Remember when I told you folks that The Big Ten was looking at the idea of a 20 team conference with FOUR DIVISIONS of FIVE TEAMS? Well there you go. He didn't just pull all of that out of his ass. That was the concept before the ACC GoR. You guys keep coming up with concepts of 2 divisions per conference after expansion to 16. Now you see that other concepts are on the mind of Commish Delany. I do not mislead you guys.

That last statement of his that I put in bold is the killer statement. Delany didn't even bother to put on his hood before taking up the headman's axe.
HeinousOne

The legislation was developed by the Big12 and the ACC. Bowlsby said that he thinks the ACC wants to play three divisions. In the article, Dennis Dodd said:
The ACC’s ultimate intentions with a 14-team league in football, one which already holds a championship game, are not clear.
http://mweb.cbssports.com/ncaaf/wri...nship-game-restrictions-to-be-relaxed-by-2016

 

[DarthGrumpy]

I think deregulation with regards to allowing a conference to pick who it wants to play in its conference championship will happen as it increases the likelihood for the conference championship winner getting into the Football playoff assuming the two best teams are selected. After all success is cyclical and one division could be turn out to be significant weaker than the other. Using the B1G as an example, say Northwestern and Iowa both loose at least 1 game by the end of the season while Michigan goes undefeated, including handing Ohio St's only loss. A rematch between a likely top 5 Michigan team and a top 10 defending national champion Ohio St team will more likely than not provide the winner with one of the 4 playoff spots. On the other hand, a 1 loss Iowa team upsetting Michigan in the B1G may not get one of those coveted spots when in competition with an undefeated Clemson from the ACC, a 1 loss PAC Champion Stanford, a 1 loss SEC champion Alabama and an undefeated XII team in Baylor or TCU.

That said, the XII is dreaming if deregulation will allow a conference to host a conference championship with less than 12 teams. The other 4 conferences have heavily invested in expanding to 12 teams an beyond and its not their fault that the folks in Austin don't want to share their pie. This is especially the case for the ACC as most feel that at the end of the day there will be only 4 Power conferences and without a conference championship, the XII is likely to fall apart before the ACC does.

As for the B1G, moving to 20 teams has been rumored for a while now and I think its a good thing for UConn as UConn shoudl be well within the top 6 schools that the B1G wants (some combination of Oklahoma, Kansas, Texas, Missouri, ND [only if the ACC folds], UConn, UVA, V Tech, UNC, G Tech and Florida St) and if the B1G does not pick UConn, then UConn would be a likely fill in for the ACC should they loose a few members.

 

[SubbaBub]

The ACC will vote for 10 of only to hold off future expansion as they are the most likely to be raided.

 

[TruthNnumbers]

You are missing that 15 teams cannot play 9 games each ... that makes 15*9 / (2 teams per game) or 67.5 games.
.

Yep, I was so focused on the 1+4+5+5 = 15 I didn't stop to think that it only works over a 2 year period. One team would have to play 10 and then 8 in back to back years for it to work. It may be time to change my user name...lol.