I don't understand why crossover games should count in determining the Division championship. It makes for an uneven playing field. Have the Division championship determined by division games only with head-to-head being the #1 tie breaker. Overall record within the conference could be one of the tie breakers in the event of a three way tie.
Crossover or crossed up?
- Thread starter xrugger
- Start date
I don't have a problem with the crossover games counting. I don't necessarily care for how they are assigned though. Why not just rotate them evenly? All of the big "rivals" are in the same divisions. No trophies would be affected
A bird in the hand is worth two in the bush.
All's well that ends well.
A penny saved is a penny earned.
Look before you leap.
Fun thought:
- Expand to 18 teams (you pick from Kansas, Oklahoma, Texas, Connecticut, etc.) to make up two 9-team divisions. (Four conferences of 18 teams would take care of all current Power 5 teams, Notre Dame, BYU and some other major-minors like Boise, Houston and Cincinnati.)
- Play an eight-game round-robin in each division to determine the division champ.
- Schedule two inter-divisional games that will count only in the event of an inconclusive three- or four-way tie for the division title. (A two-way would yield a clear champion based on head-to-head competition.)
- Schedule two more games against other Power 4 teams for a balanced 12-game schedule for all 72 teams. In the event of ties not being broken by inter-divisional games, these will count toward division title tiebreakers.
- Scheduling will be determined every February by the playoff committee so a team can't load up on patsies (think Kansas, Baylor and Oregon State) in the inter-divisional and non-conference games.
- Play conference championships (Big Ten, ACC, Pac-18, SEC) as the national quarterfinals on the second Saturday of December.
- Finish the season with the current playoff format, with the other teams, including quarterfinal losers eligible to play in exhibition non-playoff bowl games.
- Have the NCAA send royalty checks to me, Fred Garvin.
Exactly, count how many times we play Ohio State compared to Indiana or Like Maryland since we joined the B1G.
Need to play every team evenly in the East Division for every team in the B1G West...
I like BTN Coach DeNardo's idea, if you go 6-0 in your division, you win, otherwise, best B1G record, which seems practical.
Here's why I would have a problem with not counting crossover games. Say Team A in the West goes 3-0 against the 3 East teams they face, but goes 5-1 against the other teams in the West. That one team they lose to, Team B goes 0-3 against the 3 East teams they face, but goes 6-0 against the other teams in the West. Team B wins the Division Championship with a 6-3 conference record, over Team A, who has a 8-1 conference record, simply because they won all of their Divisional games. That makes no sense to me. It would essentially be saying the fact Team A went 3-0 in cross-division games and Team B went 0-3 is meaningless. Shouldn't you be rewarded for doing that well in cross-division games? If you don't count the cross-divisional games for championship purposes, then they're essentially second-tier games importance-wise, and really not much difference than a non-conference game. I think the solution is balancing out the cross-divisional games better, and not just counting the Divisional games for championship purposes.
Depending on the situation, not practical at all. To expand on my scenario above, what if Team B's 3 losses in cross-division games were to mediocre/bad teams, and Team A's 3 wins in cross-division games were over great teams. Team B doesn't get punished at all for losing to 3 mediocre/bad teams and Team A gets no credit for beating 3 great teams-solely because those 3 games were against teams from the other division. That doesn't seem practical to me at all. A more practical solution to me if you don't like the way the cross-divisional games balance out would be to eliminate the divisions altogether and just play 9 teams at random(maybe with a designated rival you play every year) and take the two best teams and meet in the CCG.
Last edited:
Yeah, nice way to take what I said out of context and just ignore the other points I made. By that logic, MLB should give division titles to the teams that win the most games in their division and the other games shouldn't count. Because after all-doesn't that make sense-the team that wins the most games in the division should win the division title?Yeah, makes no sense at all..