Expansions! Expansions!! EXPANSIONS!!!! - Fantasy Football Cafe 2014 Fantasy Football Cafe


Return to College Football

Expansions! Expansions!! EXPANSIONS!!!!

Moderator: Football Moderators

Re: Expansions! Expansions!! EXPANSIONS!!!!

Postby Metroid » Wed Jun 23, 2010 6:53 pm

knapplc wrote:Not pretentious because of the nickname, pretentious because of the exclusivity of it for most of my life, the importance that Big 10 and Pac-10 teams put on it, and how many times I was bashed over the head with it by the national media, when the fact is that it rarely played a role in the MNC chase.

I'm not saying it was a well-thought-out and rational impression, it was just the impression I had. :-D

haha, okay then. :-b
Image
Metroid
Moderator
Moderator

User avatar
ModeratorCafeholicCafe RankerGraphics ExpertEagle Eye
Posts: 22544
Joined: 9 Oct 2005
Home Cafe: Football
Location: Bringing the funk in P-Town!

Re: Expansions! Expansions!! EXPANSIONS!!!!

Postby Sandrock » Wed Jul 28, 2010 2:53 am

The Pac-10 meetings are about to take place and we'll soon have a better picture of the realignment scenarios. I thought I'd go back and take a look at my zipper idea, since it seems that idea has caught fire since we last talked about this subject.

In my last theorizing I suggested splitting the league into three blocks and splitting the secondary and dominant pairs of each natural rivalry within the block into separate divisions. After taking Mets suggestions into consideration and also the musings from the two Beaver boards I posted this on, I have come up with a fine solution. The main issue I found was that schools that have played each other for almost 100 years would no longer be doing so on a yearly basis. A lot of people seemed more upset about that than anything else. So I've changed the zipper idea just slightly.


Let's take a look at the blocks again with natural dominant and secondary partners:

North Block

Washington (dominant) Washington State (secondary)

Oregon (dominant) Oregon State (secondary)

East Block

Colorado (dominant) Utah (secondary)

Arizona (secondary) Arizona State (dominant)

California Block

UCLA (secondary) USC (dominant)

California (dominant) Stanford (secondary)


So with my zipper suggestion splitting up the dominant and secondary partners of each block we are left with divisions that look like this:

Pac-10 Pacific Division

Washington (dominant), Oregon State (secondary), Colorado (dominant), Arizona (secondary), California (dominant), UCLA (secondary)

Pac-10 Mountain Division

Washington State (secondary), Oregon (dominant), Utah (secondary), Arizona State (dominant), Stanford (secondary), USC (dominant)


The original idea was to play everyone within your division, your natural rival and three random teams from the other division. In order to continue with traditional games that are approaching 100 years (the Pacific Northwest schools and the California schools), the new format would change just slightly. Every school would now play every team within their Division and every team within their natural block. That leaves two more conference games from the other division, one within each block. Since we are left with a dominant and secondary pair from each of the two blocks, if the first of the two remaining games is scheduled against a dominant part, then your second will be against a secondary part.

I understand that last section may have been a bit confusing, so we'll do a breakdown of a specific team. We'll go with Washington State for this example. Their yearly schedule will contain every team within their division and their natural block, so these are the teams they will play every single year:

Washington, Oregon, Oregon State, Utah, Arizona State, Stanford, USC

That leaves two conference games each year to split between four teams; they are listed below:

Colorado (dominant), Arizona (secondary), California (dominant), UCLA (secondary)

Colorado and Arizona are from the East block and California and UCLA are from the California block. Since we are splitting the two games between the two blocks, it makes sense to play the dominant part of one block and the secondary part of the other block. So with those changes in mind, the Washington State schedule would look like this:

Year 1

Washington, Oregon, Oregon State, Utah, Arizona State, Stanford, USC, Colorado, UCLA

Year 2

Washington, Oregon, Oregon State, Utah, Arizona State, Stanford, USC, Arizona, California


Rinse and repeat. This would be the schedule for UCLA, as a second example:

Year 1

Washington, Oregon State, Colorado, California, Arizona, Stanford, USC, Washington State, Arizona State

Year 2

Washington, Oregon State, Colorado, California, Arizona, Stanford, USC, Oregon, Utah


I understand this was a pretty long read and probably pretty boring if you're not a Pac-10 adherent. Let me know what you guys think, hate it, love it or otherwise.
Image
Sandrock
Head Coach
Head Coach

User avatar
Eagle EyeMatchup Meltdown SurvivorCafe Blackjack Weekly Winner
Posts: 1422
Joined: 1 Sep 2004
Home Cafe: Football
Location: Reser Stadium; lamenting the D-Line for 2011

Re: Expansions! Expansions!! EXPANSIONS!!!!

Postby knapplc » Wed Jul 28, 2010 8:25 am

Sand, the biggest problem with that schedule is that dominant teams don't always stay dominant. Most teams go through cycles, and are neither very good nor very bad for very long.

You're going to want to set up a schedule that works for the next 50 years. You cannot label Washington a dominant team for that time frame, nor can you label Arizona State, Oregon, etc. as such.

Maybe I'm misunderstanding the dominant/secondary labels.
Image
How 'bout them Huskers!
knapplc
Hall of Fame Hero
Hall of Fame Hero

User avatar
Cafe WriterCafe RankerGolden Eagle EyeCafe MusketeerCafe Blackjack Weekly Winner
Posts: 18961
Joined: 27 Dec 2004
Home Cafe: Football
Location: It's an L, not an I

Re: Expansions! Expansions!! EXPANSIONS!!!!

Postby Metroid » Wed Jul 28, 2010 3:03 pm

I think you're understanding right knapp, that's the way I understand it too and that is indeed the difficult part of this. Just because a team is dominant now doesn't mean they always will be. Hell a team can go from top of the Pac to doormat in one season.

I'll assume you're looking at overall record or winning percentage to decide dominant vs. secondary? Right? Because we certainly can't use current trends. I mean take Washington vs. Washington State: one would think the Cougars are clearly the weaker of the two schools. However, since 2002 the Cougars have won more games than the Huskies (43-30), had more winning seasons (2-1), and are even in head to head match ups.

I guess I just don't know if I can agree with labeling one team as dominant and the other as secondary based on a winning percentage that has been accumulated over 100 years. Football is too much of a "what have you done lately" sport. You know? :-?

Look at Arizona vs. Arizona St., their winning percentages are so close to each other. In just a couple seasons Arizona could be the dominant team...hell they could flip flop every few years.

That said, I don't think your idea is a bad one at all. No restructuring is going to be perfect. But as a Ducks fan, I still don't like the idea of not having the opportunity of Huskies every year. :-B
Image
Metroid
Moderator
Moderator

User avatar
ModeratorCafeholicCafe RankerGraphics ExpertEagle Eye
Posts: 22544
Joined: 9 Oct 2005
Home Cafe: Football
Location: Bringing the funk in P-Town!

Re: Expansions! Expansions!! EXPANSIONS!!!!

Postby Sandrock » Wed Jul 28, 2010 4:02 pm

I realize that things in CFB are cyclical, but I needed a way to split the blocks into separate divisions and still find a way to get every team to Southern California at least every other year and playing a Southern California team every year. Both Oregon and Washington administrations have already expressed concern about not playing in Southern California, so I felt it had to be addressed in my scenario.

Met, Oregon would play the Huskies every year with my new proposal. The main reason for the change was to keep the 100 year games intact (northwest teams vs each other/california teams vs each other).It was tough to explain, especially sandwiched within all that text. I'll breakdown Oregon's two year cycle.

Teams Oregon plays every year through Division and Block:

Washington State, Washington, Oregon State, Utah, Arizona State, Stanford, USC

Year 1:

Washington State, Washington, Oregon State, Utah, Arizona State, Stanford, USC, Colorado, UCLA

Year 2:

Washington State, Washington, Oregon State, Utah, Arizona State, Stanford, USC, Arizona, California

This means that Oregon would not play Colorado/UCLA in odd numbered years and Arizona/California in even numbered years or vice versa. Every other team is played on a yearly basis.
Image
Sandrock
Head Coach
Head Coach

User avatar
Eagle EyeMatchup Meltdown SurvivorCafe Blackjack Weekly Winner
Posts: 1422
Joined: 1 Sep 2004
Home Cafe: Football
Location: Reser Stadium; lamenting the D-Line for 2011

Re: Expansions! Expansions!! EXPANSIONS!!!!

Postby knapplc » Thu Jul 29, 2010 7:27 am

Hold the phone, because we may not be done with Expansion. At this point the Big 12 should be considered a 12-way shotgun marriage. In this scenario, Texas A&M may be the Lorena Bobbitt of brides:

A&M says Big 12 must fulfill pledge
Legal action, another look at SEC possible if league doesn’t pay $20 million


COLLEGE STATION— The Big 12 Conference promised Texas A&M $20 million annually and the Aggies intend to collect, A&M president R. Bowen Loftin said Wednesday.

“A key part of Texas A&M’s decision to remain in the Big 12 earlier this summer was the commissioner’s commitment that Texas A&M would receive a minimum of $20 million annually in future conference distributions,” Loftin said in a statement. “We remain committed to the conference and fully anticipate that the Big 12 will honor its commitment to Texas A&M.”

And what happens if the Big 12 doesn’t honor its $20 million pledge? A high-ranking A&M official said late Wednesday that every legal avenue would be explored first, with the potential of bolting for the Southeastern Conference coming after.

Loftin issued the pointed proclamation in response to Big 12 commissioner Dan Beebe’s explanation on Tuesday to reporters gathered for the league’s media days in Irving how part of the plan to save the besieged conference is set up.

Part of the arrangement in the Big 12 surviving, as ABC/ESPN and Fox Sports stepped up financially (verbally to this point), hinged on league heavyweights Texas, Oklahoma and A&M each receiving $20 million annually in coming years, thanks to upgraded TV deals for the conference.

Nebraska and Colorado announced in June they are leaving the Big 12 for the Big Ten and Pacific 10, respectively, with the Cornhuskers set to leave next year (and Colorado to be determined).

The two schools will have reported exit fees of between $30 million and $40 million combined, and in keeping the league intact, five of the schools that would have been left behind had the conference dissolved — Baylor, Missouri, Iowa State, Kansas and Kansas State — had agreed to give up their parts of the departing schools’ fees to the “big three” to make sure they reached the $20 million.

Beebe said Tuesday that Texas and Oklahoma had declined that offer from the five schools, but that A&M — whose athletic department is in the early stages of paying back a $16 million loan to the university — had not. He added that the issue would be discussed further this fall.

The A&M official said Wednesday it wasn’t the school’s “concern” how the Big 12 got its money together for the revenue distribution — just that it lived up to its promise of $20 million annually, starting in 2012-13. The league’s pledge is oral, and the A&M official said the school’s lawyers are working to get the commitment in writing.

A&M strongly considered joining the SEC when it appeared the Big 12 would dissolve in early June. But UT, stung by the idea of perhaps joining the Pac 10 without its primary in-state rival, renewed its pledge to the beleaguered Big 12, and the nine remaining schools followed suit, in keeping the league together thanks mainly to the promise of an enriched annual payout.

The seven other schools are expected to receive between $14 million and $17 million annually. Big 12 schools have received between $7 million and $12 million annually in recent years.
Image
How 'bout them Huskers!
knapplc
Hall of Fame Hero
Hall of Fame Hero

User avatar
Cafe WriterCafe RankerGolden Eagle EyeCafe MusketeerCafe Blackjack Weekly Winner
Posts: 18961
Joined: 27 Dec 2004
Home Cafe: Football
Location: It's an L, not an I

Re: Expansions! Expansions!! EXPANSIONS!!!!

Postby Metroid » Thu Jul 29, 2010 4:31 pm

Sandrock wrote:I realize that things in CFB are cyclical, but I needed a way to split the blocks into separate divisions and still find a way to get every team to Southern California at least every other year and playing a Southern California team every year. Both Oregon and Washington administrations have already expressed concern about not playing in Southern California, so I felt it had to be addressed in my scenario.

Met, Oregon would play the Huskies every year with my new proposal. The main reason for the change was to keep the 100 year games intact (northwest teams vs each other/california teams vs each other).It was tough to explain, especially sandwiched within all that text. I'll breakdown Oregon's two year cycle.

Teams Oregon plays every year through Division and Block:

Washington State, Washington, Oregon State, Utah, Arizona State, Stanford, USC

Year 1:

Washington State, Washington, Oregon State, Utah, Arizona State, Stanford, USC, Colorado, UCLA

Year 2:

Washington State, Washington, Oregon State, Utah, Arizona State, Stanford, USC, Arizona, California

This means that Oregon would not play Colorado/UCLA in odd numbered years and Arizona/California in even numbered years or vice versa. Every other team is played on a yearly basis.

I gotcha now Sandy, I totally read through your post too fast and didn't fully grasp what you were laying down. I think overall your scheduling scenario is sound. I can't really pick it apart too much. I mean it's still unfortunate that there will be teams that won't play each other every year but there's really no way around that.

Personally, as long as the Ducks get to play your Beavs, USC, and UW every year I'm cool. :-B
Image
Metroid
Moderator
Moderator

User avatar
ModeratorCafeholicCafe RankerGraphics ExpertEagle Eye
Posts: 22544
Joined: 9 Oct 2005
Home Cafe: Football
Location: Bringing the funk in P-Town!

Re: Expansions! Expansions!! EXPANSIONS!!!!

Postby Sandrock » Thu Jul 29, 2010 5:12 pm

Unfortunately my lazy summer is coming to an end, so I won't have as much time to think up crazy scenarios. In the scenario I laid out, my Beavs would miss USC every other year. I don't actually think that would be a bad thing in the expanded Pac-10. With the expansion, more money will start pouring into the coffers. But I also think expansion really hurts Oregon State and especially Washington State, which are already incredibly hard places to bring in recruits. Both schools have had recent small runs of success, but in each instance those teams were filled with JC transfers and coaches that told them "it might suck to live here, but it's only one-two years of your life. Suck it up, win and get yourself ready for the NFL." Other than that, Oregon State has done everything with kids nobody wanted and Washington State has fallen flat on their faces. It certainly won't be easier for Wulff or Riley to grab kids out of Utah now that they can stay close to home and play in a power conference. And if your choices are Denver or Pullman, where would you be heading?

The more I think about this expansion, the more it seems that the rich get richer and WSU and OSU (and to some extent Arizona) start heading down the drain. It wouldn't surprise me to open my paper in ten years and see that the Mountain West is extending invites to OSU and WSU. The unfortunate thing is that OSU would never consider leaving since the Pac-10 has the academic reputation and OSU has become a top tier research university in the last forty years and untouchable in Oceanography research. But with Riley leaving this decade and Wulff not looking like the answer, the writing on the wall seems grim. I'd be overjoyed to be proven absolutely wrong.
Image
Sandrock
Head Coach
Head Coach

User avatar
Eagle EyeMatchup Meltdown SurvivorCafe Blackjack Weekly Winner
Posts: 1422
Joined: 1 Sep 2004
Home Cafe: Football
Location: Reser Stadium; lamenting the D-Line for 2011

Re: Expansions! Expansions!! EXPANSIONS!!!!

Postby Metroid » Thu Jul 29, 2010 7:23 pm

I hope you are proven wrong too. As a Ducks fan I like to see the Beavs on the short end of the winning stick, when our teams are playing each other that is. As a college football fan, and more precisely a Pac 10 fan, I'd like to see them continue to do well. I like when the Beavs are a formidable force in the Pac 10. I'd love nothing more than for our schools to go on a tear for the next 10 years where the Civil War decides the Pac 10 title....and in a couple years the pacific division representative in the title game.

Also, I really hope Wazzu get's their program turned around, I hate having a doormat that bad in the division. The future doesn't look that bright for the Cougs though.
Image
Metroid
Moderator
Moderator

User avatar
ModeratorCafeholicCafe RankerGraphics ExpertEagle Eye
Posts: 22544
Joined: 9 Oct 2005
Home Cafe: Football
Location: Bringing the funk in P-Town!

Re: Expansions! Expansions!! EXPANSIONS!!!!

Postby Metroid » Thu Sep 23, 2010 7:01 pm

Pac-10 considering Las Vegas for the title game, which I fully support. I am not in favor of of the game being played in Cali or Seattle at all. I could handle the game being played at the higher seeded teams house, or a rotating venue schedule I guess. :-?

Linkage
Image
Metroid
Moderator
Moderator

User avatar
ModeratorCafeholicCafe RankerGraphics ExpertEagle Eye
Posts: 22544
Joined: 9 Oct 2005
Home Cafe: Football
Location: Bringing the funk in P-Town!

PreviousNext

Return to College Football

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 0 guests

Forums Articles & Tips Start & Sit Sleepers Rankings Leagues


Get Ready...
The 2014 NFL season kicks off in 20:59 hours
(and 34 days)
2014 NFL Schedule


  • Fantasy Football
  • Article Submissions
  • Privacy Statement
  • Site Survey 
  • Contact