National Expansion For College Football: PART III

National Expansion For College Football: PART III - “A Regular Season Bracketed Playoff For College Football.”

I appreciate the feedback and concerns I’ve received from dozen’s of email’s around the country concerning the national expansion issue. Since beginning this research project for a book manuscript that I am writing (”The Grass Ain’t Blue in Georgia - The Story Behind The BCS Controversy.”, the college football world has unwittingly validated my work via the conference expansions that have taken place (a.k.a. - The Big-East and ACC reshuffle). You see, national expansion or national realignment is very much needed to solve the BCS controversy, which is sure to lift off again when the 2007 college football season rolls around on August 30th.

The straw for this drink is beginning to swirl again with the rumors of Jim Delaney and the Big-10 (11) leaking the possibility of adding another team, which would boost the marketing struggles of the Big-10 Television Network. This all fits very nicely into the “bracketed regular season playoff plan” I began to orchestrate 4 years ago after Texas overcame California in the final regular season poll.

We need to end the secret coaches polls, incomprehensible computer formula’s, right of birth “BCS Gold Card” passages (a.k.a. - Notre Dame), the smoke filled room variables of the bowl selection committee’s and the national steering and smearing campaigns orchestrated by the television networks who desire certain traditional match-ups to drive up corporate advertising and television ratings. Conference realignment, or expansion if you will, is the key to the process.

We have certain constraints in our current system that need to be over-hauled. All conferences need to become two division conferences consisting of 6-to-7 teams per division. This would allow every conference to truly identify a conference champion with all teams across the country following a consistent protocol and set of criteria.

In the BCSBusters world of college football, every team - 120 total - would begin the 2007 season with their conference slate. In a 12 team, two division conference like the SEC and ACC, each team would play their divisional rivals in weeks one through five. During the mid-point of the season, in weeks six, seven and eight, they would play cross-over games with their sister division. Let’s use the ACC for example.

Atlantic Division	Coastal Division
1. Wake Forest	1. Georgia Tech
2. Boston College	2. Virginia Tech
3. Clemson	3. Virginia
4. Maryland	4. Miami
5. Florida State	5. N. Carolina
6. NC State	6. Duke

Wake Forest would have the following schedule (not necessarily in this order) in weeks 1-5 of the 2007 Season.

Week #1: @ Boston College (9/1/07)

Week #2: @ Clemson (9/8/07)

Week #3: Maryland (9/15/07)

Week #4: Florida State 9/22/07)

Week #5: North Carolina State (9/29/07)

In weeks 6-8, they would play their three cross over games with their sister Coastal Division of the ACC.

Week #6: @ Georgia Tech (10/13/07)

Week #7: Virginia Tech (10/20/07)

Week #8: @ Virginia (10/27/07)

I’m sure you noticed that Wake Forest does not have Miami, North Carolina and Duke on their Schedule. They would play these teams in 2009 after the home-and-home series beginning in 2007 is completed in 2008. In 2009, Wake Forest would begin a home-and-home series with Miami, North Carolina and Duke, thus ommitting Virginia, Virginia Tech and Georgia Tech in the two-year rotation.

I’m sure you are equally adept in recognizing that the Demon-Deacons have 4 home games, 4 travel games and one bye week during the first 8 games of the season - which would be the same for the ACC, SEC, BIG-12, PAC-12, BIG-East and the newly named Magnificent-12 (former Big-10 (11) conference).

All of the “BCS” Conferences would be 12-team two division conferences, and ALL would play only conference games during the first 8 games. However, if you wanted to schedule a non-conference game during your bye week, ultimately creating a possible 14 game season if you include the possibility of a bowl game, this would be up to each individual institution.

The key point is that the BCSBusters model has a platform set up for the SEC - Sun Belt Conference, PAC-10 - WAC, BIG-10 (Magnificent-12) - MAC and ACC - CUSA slaughter house games that are played on an annual basis. The only purpose of this is to keep the lower tier teams from these stigmitazed non-BCS conferences afloat. I say this without a hint of sarcasm, because this is exactly why these games are played and this minor speed bump will have to be accounted for when considering any systematic proposal presented to the BCS administrators.

I’m sure you also noticed that the magical creation of the Rocky Mountain Conference and the metamorphasis of C-USA includes 14 members within twin 7-team divisions. The difference here, when comparing to the above ACC example, is that each division member would play 6 divisional games and only two cross-over games with its sister division, as compared to 5 divisional games and 3 cross-over games with its sister divison found in the BCS conferences.

For example, TCU would have the following schedule (not necessarily in this order) in weeks 1-6 of the 2007 Season.

West Division	East Division
1. Boise St	1. TCU
2. Hawaii	2. Houston
3. Fresno St	3. Rice
4. Nevada	4. Tulsa
5. Wyoming	5. SMU
6. Air Force	6. UTEP
7. Colorado St	7. Southern Mississippi

Week #1: @ Houston (9/1/07)

Week #2: @ Rice (9/8/07)

Week #3: Tulsa (9/15/07)

Week #4: SMU 9/22/07)

Week #5: UTEP (9/29/07)

Week #6: @ Southern Miss. (10/13/07)

In weeks 7-8, they would play their two cross over games with their sister Western Division of the Rocky Montain Conference.

Week #7: Air Force (10/20/07)

Week #8: @ Colorado State (10/27/07)

A minor hurdle here is that TCU will not play 5 teams in its sister division on a yearly basis, and there will be a significant period of time (more than 4 years) before some of these teams would be aligned for competition if we follow the similar protocol utilized when comparing the 12-team, two division ACC model as discussed above.

It is certainly not a perfect scenario for these teams, but given the fact that they can earn their schedule, a BCS or Upper-Tier Bowl opportunity, as well as a possible national championship game berth, I think the trade off is justified.

There is, however, an opportunity to iron this out as will be explained when we get into bracket play, but I don’t have time to get into this within this article. It will be explained in great detail in a coming article. Given this minor road block, the Horned-Frogs still have 4 home games, 4 travel games and one bye week during the first 8 games of the season - which is still the same as the ACC, SEC, BIG-12, PAC-12, BIG-East and the newly named Magnificent-12 (former Big-10 (11) conference).

What we have created here is a consistent protocol for all teams to determine conference superiority - AND - save time in the regular season (last 4 weeks) for the best teams in the country to square off on the field. In fact, all 120 teams would be involved in one of four brackets, and all 120 teams would be guaranteed 4 games within the final four weeks. The importance here is that every team would be capable of completing a 12 game regular season, which wouldn’t happen if you were utilizing the much thought of NFL style loser out playoff scenario.

One final note, the Sun-Belt Conference would be an 8-team conference and each team would play each other (7 games total), and I’m sure the bottom feeders of the PAC-12, SEC, ACC, Big-EAST, Magnificent-12 or the Big-12 would find a way to schedule these patsies during the bye week, which would allow this conference to complete an 8 game schedule before entering bracket play in weeks 9-12 of the regular season.

In Part IV, I will discuss the overall layout of the BCS Bracket, which will be one of the most energizing and revolutionary concepts ever invented for college football.