Central » Sports » College Football

Actually, the root cause of this whole mess is the existence of overtime during the regular season! If some games were allowed to end in a tie, euther one of the three head-to-head games involving the three 7-1 teams would have ended in a tie, or at least one of the three teams would have tied some other conference game, leaving that team, at 6-1-1, a half-game behind the other two, whose tie could then be broken simply by the result of their head-to-head game.

Just the same, no one would want to see too many tie games. The solution: Run a 15-minute clock during the overtime (in regular-season games only), whose present rules would not otherwise change; and if the time expires and the score is still tied, that's the way the game ends.

Another possibility is a three-division setup! In the Big 12, that could involve a Southern Division consisting of the four Texas teams (Baylor, Texas, Texas A&M and Texas Tech), a Central Division consisting of the four Kansas and Oklahoma teams (Kansas, Kansas State, Oklahoma and Oklahoma State), and a Northern Division consisting of the remaining four teams (Colorado, Iowa State, Missouri and Nebraska).

In this format, the number of "regular-season" conference games is reduced from eight to seven (with each team playing its three division rivals every year and the teams from the other two divisions every other year), with the three division winners and one wild card team advancing to the conference semifinals, at the sites of the two division winners with the best records, the winners therein to meet in the championship game, which would continue to be held at a pre-determined venue.

As for the eight conference teams which do not qualify for the semifinals: All of the other major conferences that currently have two-division alignments could switch to the three-division format, and these teams could play one another, so that no team plays one fewer game (Arkansas, for example, could agree to play one of the Texas teams that does not advance to the Big 12 semifinals, in years where the Razorbacks also don't make it to the SEC semifinals. Pairs of teams in the SEC and ACC, etc., could forge similar agreements).

This way, if any team goes 6-1 in conference play, they are essentially certain to make the new conference semifinals as at least a wild card. Try it.

In college football, we have to focus on simple solutions, because the college football world is generally incapable of even the most menial of tasks. They are also risk- and change-averse, so this could never happen. The other logistics problem is that those are a lot of unplanned games, and neutral site or not, that's going to be tough, esp for the bottom teams.

That said, we aren't bound by the idiots here, so lets look at it. It would be an interesting experiment, moving up some rivalry games. First, the pairings are all correct. I would consider going with Ok, Ok St, Col, and Neb. in a West div, and Kan, K-St, Mizzou, ISU in the East. It doesn't break up your North with a ton of travel across Kansas. It also keeps a Mizzou/Kansas rivalry together, and reunites in division the OU-Neb rivalry, which has a ton of history.

If balancing program strength is important, you couldn't do it, though. The East would be wretched, with no true power programs. Neb and Colo are both historically stronger than the East, and sticking them with Ok and Ok St would be cruel to all involved.

But, Ok and Ok St with Iowa St and Mizzou might work best, with a West of KSU, KU, Neb and Col. No annual Neb-to-Iowa treks and the balance is restored. Mizzou would get the worst of all this, drawing tough OK schools and no rival in division. (ISU is no ones rival). OU has no Texas or Neb; just OSU/Bedlam, so they are not thrilled rivalry-wise, either.

Just too convoluted. Still say simple is better. But fun to ramble through little fantasy worlds.

It wasn't my intention to debate the merits of one specific alignment over another, and this would not be confined exclusively to the Big 12, as the SEC, ACC and the Big Ten, should Notre Dame finally see the light and join the latter conference, would be in the same scenario as well.

And if the unplanned games do pose an insuperable problem, then all 12 of the teams in these conferences could simply add one more non-conference game to their schedules, to make up for the one fewer conference game; and if this means the four teams who do make the semifinals in these conferences end up playing 14 games or whatever, then so be it - isn't the NFL now all but certain to go to an 18-game regular season by 2011 at the latest? (At least my translation of Goodell-speak convinces me that the NFL is indeed headed in that direction).

Simplicity is for the simple-minded - and besides, this is hardly calculus we're discussing.

First, simple-minded seems to quite accurately describe the people running college football.

As for catchy sayings, there are also sayings like: the simplest explaination is usually the right one, and that the most brilliant ideas are often the simplest ones. Adding complexity usually does two things- creates unforseen consequences, and creates more mechanisms and moving parts with the potential to not work.

The problem is simple. The best two teams aren't in the B12 title game. The reason is simple. A weak division winner automatically qulifies. The solution is simple. Put the best two teams in the title games. Divsions don't matter.

Your first post brought in OT. Neither team played an OT game this year, so how is that relevant. Then you posted a three division scenario that could theoretically have an even weaker team in the playoffs, a shorter conference schedule/unplanned finale with potential to be half empty, among other things. If the breaks are squeaky you don't need to replace the car. Just get the breaks fixed.