• You do not need to register if you are not going to pay the yearly fee to post. If you register please click here or log in go to "settings" then "my account" then "User Upgrades" and you can renew.

HuskerMax readers can save 50% on  Omaha Steaks .

Here Is How I would Fix Football:

Crusty

Crusty

Perfectly Unorthodox
5 Year Member
11 Game regular Season Over A 13 Week Period
Conference Championship Games Played On The 2nd Weekend In December
All Other Bowls Played Between CCGs And Before 1st Round
All Major Bowls (Rose, Fiesta, Orange, Sugar, Cotton, Peach) Played Around NYD
Best 4 Teams Get Picked From Major Bowls And Play A Week Later
Winners Play A Week After

Eliminates Waiting Times
Makes The Other Bowls More Exciting
Hopefully Less BS
 
Last edited:

Sounds workable. Kind of like it. I gotta think on waiting two weeks to play conference championship games. Maybe that's good. The need for revenue may not allow the schedule to shrink to 11 games.
 
Last edited:
izzycohen said:
Sounds workable. Kind of like it. I gotta think on waiting two weeks to play conference championship games. Maybe that's good. The need for revenue may not allow the schedule to shrink to 11 games. If revenue is the driving force for the 12 game schedule, maybe players should be paid. But I digress.
Click to expand...
I guess I should of specified. CCG would be played 1 week after regular season.
 
Sixteen team playoff, season about same length.
Start with conference games or only one non-conference game.
Conferences with Championship games would play that game in a bye week for all other teams, between the conference games and the bracket games. The Top 16 would be selected before the conference championship games and those games would only determine conf champs and not affect rankings.
After conference games send Top 16 into Championship Bracket and the rest into regional brackets. After 3 weeks of bracket-play, there would be two undefeated teams per bracket. The Champ bracket would be for National Championship, the other bracket undefeateds would get major/good bowls as would the 2-1 teams in the Championship Bracket.
All teams not in bowls (6 wins wouldn't be qualifier, placement in bracket would be) finishes season by playing fourth bracket game, bowl teams wait for bowl season.
By the time conference play was over, we'd have good idea who Top 16 are. Number 17 would be placated by being a top dog in a regional bracket and good chance of playin way into good bowl instead of being bottom feeder in Champ bracket and receiving crappy bowl bid.

The nice thing about bracket play would be that teams would be matched up winners vs winners and losers vs losers. Teams would be playing against teams at their level instead of current non-conference games where people feast on cupcakes. In other words, the competition would always be good. There would still be a non-conference season so to speak, it would just be latter part of season and mean something.
All teams would need to be in a conference. Anyone not in a conference can go play Canadian teams with fat balls and oversized end zones.
Sure, travel would be determined only after finding out which bracket and after winning or losing bracket game, but they do it in bball. It could work.
 
Last edited:



We should open up the playoffs to ALL teams. Then we could name it something wacky, like "The Regular Seaon."
 




How does the time frame work out for taking final exams (if I remember correctly, it was called "Dead Week")?
 
anotherdumbprediction said:
Sixteen team playoff, season about same length.
Start with conference games or only one non-conference game.
Conferences with Championship games would play that game in a bye week for all other teams, between the conference games and the bracket games. The Top 16 would be selected before the conference championship games and those games would only determine conf champs and not affect rankings.
After conference games send Top 16 into Championship Bracket and the rest into regional brackets. After 3 weeks of bracket-play, there would be two undefeated teams per bracket. The Champ bracket would be for National Championship, the other bracket undefeateds would get major/good bowls as would the 2-1 teams in the Championship Bracket.
All teams not in bowls (6 wins wouldn't be qualifier, placement in bracket would be) finishes season by playing fourth bracket game, bowl teams wait for bowl season.
By the time conference play was over, we'd have good idea who Top 16 are. Number 17 would be placated by being a top dog in a regional bracket and good chance of playin way into good bowl instead of being bottom feeder in Champ bracket and receiving crappy bowl bid.

The nice thing about bracket play would be that teams would be matched up winners vs winners and losers vs losers. Teams would be playing against teams at their level instead of current non-conference games where people feast on cupcakes. In other words, the competition would always be good. There would still be a non-conference season so to speak, it would just be latter part of season and mean something.
All teams would need to be in a conference. Anyone not in a conference can go play Canadian teams with fat balls and oversized end zones.
Sure, travel would be determined only after finding out which bracket and after winning or losing bracket game, but they do it in bball. It could work.
Click to expand...
Too inbred if you are almost only playing conference games. There isn't enough out of conference play to find out which conferences are good and which aren't. Plus you give no opportunity for the G5 teams to create a better schedule. They only get to play one team against P5 and that is assuming P5 teams would even play them if they have historical rivalries like Iowa and Iowa State. Forcing teams into conferences wouldn't work. There is no reason they should have to join one of the messed up issues with college football. If everyone wants divisions do it like Nebraska high school football where districts and a point system are set up separately from conferences.
 
BigRedAvenger said:
Make all conferences play the same number of conference games and play by the same recruiting rules.
Click to expand...
Everyone used to play 8 but then the B1G and the Big 12 decided to play more by their choice. Should the NCAA be able to mandate that we only play 8? Or should they be mandating everyone else have to adopt the rules that two conferences decided to exceed?
 
Hville said:
Everyone used to play 8 but then the B1G and the Big 12 decided to play more by their choice. Should the NCAA be able to mandate that we only play 8? Or should they be mandating everyone else have to adopt the rules that two conferences decided to exceed?
Click to expand...

They should set a number and all conferences should schedule that many. They already set limits on scheduling for things like how many FCS teams can count for bowl eligibility, how many games can be played in total, etc.
 



BigRedAvenger said:
They should set a number and all conferences should schedule that many. They already set limits on scheduling for things like how many FCS teams can count for bowl eligibility, how many games can be played in total, etc.
Click to expand...
So if they set it at 8 that no conferences should be able to choose to do more?
 
Hville said:
So if they set it at 8 that no conferences should be able to choose to do more?
Click to expand...

Conferences can’t decide to play 15 conference games. The NCAA already places limits on games. This wouldn’t be much of a stretch. The NCAA has a problem that isn’t going to correct itself. 2 conferences that already have built in advantages, are playing by different rules that make the situation worse. Without some kind action to level the playing field from a rules standpoint, you will see more and more people lose interest each year.
 

BigRedAvenger said:
Conferences can’t decide to play 15 conference games. The NCAA already places limits on games. This wouldn’t be much of a stretch. The NCAA has a problem that isn’t going to correct itself. 2 conferences that already have built in advantages, are playing by different rules that make the situation worse. Without some kind action to level the playing field from a rules standpoint, you will see more and more people lose interest each year.
Click to expand...
You are missing this because you are looking at it wrong. First there are no built in advantages. There are 10 conferences and the standard conference schedule had been at 8 games for many years. A few years back.....three of the 10 conferences, by their own choosing, decided to switch to 9 game schedules. Its not the responsibility of the NCAA to tell the other 7 conferences they need to do it also. Even if the NCAA decided 9 would be the standard that doesn't prevent any conference from exceeding it and going to 10 like the did the last time. Does that mean that all the other conferences have to go to 10?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

GET TICKETS


Get 50% off on Omaha Steaks

Back
Top