Change Ad Consent
Do not sell my data
Reply to thread | The Boneyard
Menu
Forums
New posts
Search forums
What's new
New posts
Latest activity
Chat
UConn Football Chat
UConn Men's Basketball
UConn Women's Basketball
Media
The Uconn Blog
Verbal Commits
This is UConn Country
Field of 68
CT Scoreboard Podcasts
A Dime Back
Sliders and Curveballs Podcast
Storrs Central
Men's Basketball
News
Roster
Schedule
Standings
Women's Basketball
News
Roster
Schedule
Standings
Football
News
Roster
Depth Chart
Schedule
Football Recruiting
Offers
Commits
Donate
Log in
Register
What's new
Search
Search
Search titles only
By:
New posts
Search forums
Menu
Log in
Register
Install the app
Install
Forums
UConn Athletics
Conference Realignment Board
Non-Key Tweets
JavaScript is disabled. For a better experience, please enable JavaScript in your browser before proceeding.
You are using an out of date browser. It may not display this or other websites correctly.
You should upgrade or use an
alternative browser
.
Reply to thread
Message
[QUOTE="clmssun, post: 1109361, member: 2729"] With CCG deregulation, there is no constraint on "division" structure; by eliminating divisions, the implementation of "fair" and "balanced" schedules becomes much [B]easier[/B]. With 15 teams: Each team plays 2 annual rivals every year (hence the "annual rival" designation). In odd-years, teams play "Half A" (one group of 6 of the 12 remaining teams). In even-years, teams play "Half B" (other group of 6 of the remaining 12 teams). (Yes, for each team the composition of "annual rivals", "Half A", and "Half B" is unique, and it is *not* tied to "divisions" or "pods".) An even number of conference games is inherently more "fair" than an odd number of conference games. (Equal quantity of home and away conference games) -- If the B1G goes to ten conference games (to reach an even number), that leaves *2* games for OOC. Keep in mind there are presently 125 in FBS and 65 in P5. So the B1G could conceivably intermingle with the rest of the country twice a year???? With the method I described above, *everybody* plays *everybody* over the course of two years. Therefore, Iowa and Wisconsin end up playing Ohio State and Michigan more frequently in that structure than in the present structure even if not "annual rivals". (With two divisions, this *requires* the ten-game schedule [not 9] to ensure that with 14 teams, and a ten-game schedule is [I]in[/I]sufficient to ensure that with 16 teams.) The issues at hand are not limited to Iowa and Wisconsin losing games with Ohio State and Michigan. Now Ohio State and Michigan are forced to play Maryland and Rutgers every year. Many Buckeyes are not enamored of this, either. Presuming Maryland and/or Rutgers are not designated as "annual rivals" for Ohio State and/or Michigan, the 15-team league with 8 conference games featuring 2 annual rivals resolves all of these issues. ("15" also addresses issues about "expansion partners" and the limited pool of "desirable candidates" for expansion). The only problem I can think of with a 15-team league is that you never have the whole conference playing one another at a given time on the schedule. And that is just not that big a deal: Don't forget that ACC had 9 for awhile, B1G had 11 for awhile, ACC basketball now has 15, Big East basketball used to have 17. [/QUOTE]
Verification
First name of men's bb coach
Post reply
Forums
UConn Athletics
Conference Realignment Board
Non-Key Tweets
This site uses cookies to help personalise content, tailor your experience and to keep you logged in if you register.
By continuing to use this site, you are consenting to our use of cookies.
Accept
Learn more…
Top
Bottom