One problem I’m seeing is lack of talented teams in Great Plains Kansas state would arguably be the best team in that conference and the lack of talent would get less recognition and less attraction from recruits regardless of a cfp spot
I had this kind of Idea as well but with a few changes. I said basically 64 teams in, let's call it D1, and the rest are in D2. I was arranging them in 4-16 team conferences with an east/west division or north/south. Where the winner of a division would play the other side of their conference for a shot at an auto bid in the playoff. So 4 auto bids and 8 at Large bids. But having more auto bids may be the way to go. As for the schools that may feel left out of the D1 I think a relegation system, like English football, were the worst of a D1 division and the best of the D2 would switch places in the following year. So maybe 4 teams would loose their place in a year if they were the worst in their conference. IF you wanna be in D1 you gotta win. It could be something a bit different but I really like the idea of a D2 team playing really well replacing a bad D1 team. Maybe they have to play for the spot.
After WW2, Henry Morgenthau proposed what would later be known as the Morgenthau Plan. To prevent Germany from become a major power again after the war, they were going to cut it up into smaller pieces--divide it against itself, and give important pieces away to rival powers. Looking at you map, I can't help but wonder who the SEC invaded to deserve getting Morgenthau'd. Putting Alabama, Georgia, Tennessee and Kentucky in separate conferences is insane. Regional conferences are important, I agree--which is why breaking up what it probably the most important and most cross-linked regional conference is crazy. People care because of shared history, because families are split between schools--not because bus tickets are cheap. Not because of sheer proximity. E.g., Kansas has no history with Minnesota. Kansas has a long and rich history with OU. Why aren't they in the same conference? And even then, you managed to avoid re-creating some of the great lost rivalries. Where is the Backyard Brawl? Where's Nebraska-Kansas? And I'm not even sure that there would be more wins to go around in smaller conferences. Texas + A&M won half of the SWC championships between them. Nebraska and Oklahoma won a full 70 percent of all Big Eight championships. Blue bloods are blue bloods because they were the mid-sized fish in small ponds for most of the 20th century. And even then, this entire plan completely ignores all the other considerations schools have when choosing conferences. E.g., NDSU is a relatively poor school with a narrow athletic budget, and they probably can't afford the much increased travel expenses. Because it's not just football that now has to travel to all those other schools, but also baseball, and basketball, and swimming, and cross country, and all the rest. Or how the Big 10 is also an academic and research-sharing alliance. All in all: good idea and I look forward to seeing your second draft.
This just got bumped into my feed, excited to see if your thoughts have changed at all. I think there’s a lot of good ideas here, but also some of conferences feel wildly lopsided. Like this basically canonizes the B1G east and west into separate conferences but the west has been dying on the vine with Michigan, MSU, OSU, and PSU all in the East. I do think keeping the historical conferences in mind to help maintain some rivalries would be good. So like in our home conference example, the B1G teams from before the expansion began with Penn State are pretty geographically centered. Not sure what’s in your edit but my idea that would maybe be possible would be expand back out to six major conferences (ten teams each) and they get bids to the new 8 team playoff with two at larges. The 8 team playoff is already set so we’re halfway there. So schools like Penn State, Notre Dame, Maryland, Rutgers can hop in with some of those New England schools they have played a lot historically, I think the southwest and Northwoods ones are solid ideas, maybe some of the NorCal ones join the Northwoods and the southwest grabs some more teams that are slightly eastward. I won’t go through the whole map but I think something like that would be a halfway point that conferences might actually go for.
As *wildly* unrealistic as it would be, I would love to see some sort of formal year-to-year promotion and relegation between "Power Five" conferences, "Group of Five" conferences, and "FCS" conferences
Solution for this is not every year but every five years. Any team with a losing record that hasn't won a conference title in those 5 years is demoted for the closest G5 team with the highest winning percentage over that time frame. You could also realign the G5 and Div 2 and Div 3 schools so that you could fall to a Div 3 football program if you're not performing over a 20-year stretch.
@@JR-ub2wt were they to be controlled by the NCAA, the conferences wouldn't be making money on their own anymore. So, something like that could happen in a world where that is the case.
@@blueredlover1060 that’s never gonna happen. The entire point of why independent conferences were made was to break away from NCAA controlled broadcasting rights in the 80s. The supreme court ruled this was legal and the NCAA can do nothing about it. This will never be possible and it’s a good thing for schools.
The only issue I have with this is that teams in the group conferences would never really have a chance at making the playoff. If the playoff is 3 weeks anyways, you could expand it to 16 teams, 1 from each conference, and then 2 at large. This allows the smaller schools to still get exposure. There’s a reason march madness works so well, and it’s because ANYONE has a shot.
Yeah, I think having a tournament of all the conference champs plus some wildcards would make it more entertaining. You could relatively easily remove a few of the cupcake games from almost everyone's schedules and reserve those for the post season tournament. If you're school doesn't make it, maybe they can do some non-tournament postseason games
Well the main reason is, is that they would lose right away. in March madness the 1 seed has only lost to the 64 seed once. Bama still crushes 3 and 4 seeds so they’d practically 64-0 a 15 or 16 seed
16 is too much. 12 would be the most ideal. You are far more likely to get at least one Group 5 Team in every year than the current system, and it encourages teams to crack the top 4 for a Bye Week.
@@joshlien2118 Any number can work so long as you know how to eliminate properly. Any odd or even number not divisible by 2^x... can be utilized simply by reducing the proper amount of teams to 2^x. In other words, 5-8 teams gets reduced to 4, 9-16 teams gets reduced to 8, 17-24 teams gets reduced to 16. This is done by giving the top teams byes according to the number of odd teams in. 7 teams would give 1 team a bye while the other 6 duke it out. 5 teams gives team 1, 2, and 3 byes while 4 and 5 duke it out. 12 teams is the same way. 1-4 have byes and 5-12 face off until only eight teams remain.
A simple solution was keeping the single National Championship BUT save it for AFTER all of the Bowl Games. That way results matter for everybody while supporting parity
Are you saying that the 2 best teams after all the bowls are going to play? That's barely going to change anything. Maybe you'll have #5 and #6 competing for a NCG spot with the bowl game instead of just 1-4, and if polls are any indication, that's going to be hard for #5 or #6 to break into a Top 2 spot.
Greed is a lesson that EVERY function, group, or culture needs to experience to disastrous levels before they reawaken to the stupidity of allowing only a few to succeed at the penalty of the masses.
@@sarahmccoy1941 Well, then expect the NCAA to die within 20 years. There's no reason for those of us who are fans of "lesser" schools to pay attention anymore.
Low key one of the greatest videos I have EVER seen!!! It's been a while since the PAC12 has been to the playoffs and this system would be so cool!!! Conference of Champs needs another chance!!!
The only issue with your conference breakdown is missing out on some of the rivalry games. Georgia would have to spend 2/3 of out of conference schedule to play South Carolina and Auburn, leading to no new challenges or anything different year over year. Alabama would spend one week of the three allotted every year to play Tennessee. I think there’s a way to manage the conferences to keep all the historical rivals together while still being regional and competitive. I like the breakdown just missing the rivals.
@@ericfolmar7338 I saw the map of his conferences and I just thought wtf with wvu being added to the Carolina conferences. Pinning wvu against Pitt not only makes sense for rivalry’s sake, but for the sake of region too
Back in the 1980s and 1990s, the hopes of every school, outside of the independents, was to win your conference. USC, Michigan, Ohio State, their goal was to make it to the Rose Bowl. Florida, Georgia, Alabama, all wanted to make it to the Sugar Bowl. Texas was the Cotton Bowl. Oklahoma or Nebraska, the Orange Bowl. BYU wanted to make it to the Holiday Bowl. Fresno State and Central Michigan wanted to make it to the California Raisin Bowl. If you happened to be voted a national champion at the end of the year, that was even better. But the goal was to win your conference. The game was so much more interesting back then. Also, I know that today, outside of Notre Dame, Independence seems like a killer. But it was kind of fun when you had a bunch of very high profile independent schools. Back in the 1980s and early 1990s, and even earlier, Penn State, Florida State, Miami, West Virginia, Virginia Tech, Syracuse, Louisville, and many others, were all independent. Because these schools were independent, you could end up with some great intersectional matchups, even late in the season. Yeah, college football is just boring now.
You nailed it jsmith, college football is increasingly just an NFL clone and the NFL has *NEVER* had the spirit and rivalry to compare to old time college football.
I wouldn't go as far to say college football is boring now, at least if you're an actual college student. Rivalry games still hold weight with the fanbases. However, I agree that revisions need to be made to make it interesting to people who aren't students/alumni.
@Andre Jarboe I'm in between. The magic of College Football comes from 2 losses basically ending your season, 3 for sure. The 12 teams would ruin that, I think 6 largely keeps that intact. There's rarely if ever been a non top 6 team where you feel they were robbed. Also this allows for a bie week that keeps 1 and 2 important and gives an incentive to go undefeated. Baseball gave up the whole "every game matters" thing in favor of a large playoff and it ruined the sport. CF is different more teams so there should be a larger playoff. But the new plan will ruin the sport IMO. Too many teams.
@J Smith I know I am in the minority (and a very small one at that) but I would love for college football to go back to the pre-BCS days. Maybe it's a product of age (I was born in '84) so I remember the game before the BCS and CFP, but I am worried that one of the most unique thing about the sport, and one of the things that make it the best sport by far, is how meaningful and important the regular season is. Bow, schools consider any season where they don't make the CFP a total failure. It may seem counterintuitive since I'd like a pre-BCS set up but since the CFP is going nowhere, I think it must be expanded. 4 teams is just the worst of both worlds. A 16 team playoff (with games on campus until the semis and final) would help with parity so much. More elite layers will be willing to go to schools that are traditionally in the #10-25 range now because they know they have a shot at the title. The 4 team playoff hurt parity so much because players know only those 4-6 teams are likely to make it. And since success is now viewed strictly through the CFP the elite only went there. Anyway, like I said most people probably disagree with my first point, maybe a few more agree with the second. Either way, I love College Football and and both sad and excited that November games are here!
@@Jon.A.Scholt - I agree with you 100%. The sport was far more appealing pre-BCS. While most businesses and organizations are focused on making the sport as appealing as possible to as many people as possible, college football is focused on reducing the appeal to just five or six schools.
@@universenerdd Yeah, maybe, maybe not. Statistically it's looking like a coinflip, but I'd be very happy either way. I only want UT to go to the CFP for recruiting exposure lol
College football has the worst parity in all of American sports. That distinction used to belong to women's college basketball, but parity in that sport has improved in recent years, while it's gone in the opposite direction with college football. And most discouraging of all is that the powers that be in college football seem to be hell-bent on killing off whatever parity that still remains.
I think this season has more parity than the previous 3-4 but yeah it's still the worst hands down, but there are signs of improvement with Alabama and Clemson essentially being out. NIL deals and the transfer portal and 12 team playoff will go a long way in helping to make things more interesting.
I might actually be interested in college football if it was structured this way. My biggest gripes with it is that there is not a good structure for determining who is the best team and most games don't seem to hold very much importance.
He is too young to remember all of the controversies surrounding the BCS Title games and who should or should not be in. It was far from a perfect system, and the future expanded playoff will fix the current system even more. And actually improve on what he thought was good about the old BCS system which was "letting more teams in to big bowls". The biggest issue with CFB is the lack of money being properly spread around. That's why the NFL is "any given sunday". Salary Cap. Teams like Alabama, LSU, Georgia, Ohio State, Michigan, Florida, etc etc have absolutely MASSIVE budgets in comparison to 95% of other schools out there, including ones in their own conferences. They are on TV during prime time every weekend, so yeah.... kids growing up want to play for these big schools who they are currently seeing every weekend and in every playoff game. You can't really fault the kids for that, and I don't know how to fix that issue, you probably can't. Because if kids coming out of college were able to pick which Pro Team they played for, there would be like 4-5 amazingly talented teams with the rest getting the "scraps" and it just wouldn't be fair. That's CFB in a nutshell right there.
@@horatiohornblower3757 Yeah i feel like people are forgetting how shitty the BCS was. Also these new rules with paying players just made the problem you brought up in the second paragraph magnitudes worse. As an oregon fan, i don't mind it cuz we got money, But as a college football fan, i hate it, as I realize that not every school has a phil nite.
I love this idea, the conference and playoff system reminds on nfl Divisions. As an Eagles fan, there have been a couple times where despite not being very good we could still make the playoff by winning our division. This structure kept me interested even though my team probably wouldn't have made very high on power rankings. The college football structure has caused me to completely stop being a fan of a team and rather just watch the sport as a neutral observer. As much as I'd love to have a favorite team the truth is that only around 10% of teams have a real shot at making the playoff, so I'd either feel like a bandwagon or have to try and make myself interested in games that are essentially pointless.
I love the conference layout! I think that for the teams that don’t really quite fit in anywhere they could be an independent kinda like what we have right now so if teams need filler games before conference play they can schedule them
I proposed something along these lines before. Creation of eight conferences of 16 teams with two sub-conferences with 8 teams each for a total of 128 teams. No independent schools in the system. You can play 3 or 4 games outside of conference but they have no bearing on conference standings. Winner of each sub-conference plays for the conference championship, essentially the first round of the playoff. Then conference champions compete in the round of 8. Then a round of 4, then a championship game as normal. No polls, no cigar smoke filled room with "experts" choosing the participants like a Miss America contest. The champion is determined on the field of play like, oh I don't know, the NFL for example. I like the idea of relegation to give up and coming teams a chance and to provide perennial doormats the incentive to invest in their programs.
I like your idea of CFB realignment. Imo, it's a good thing for recruitment when the university in your area can attract local top tier talent instead of having them head elsewhere. Case in point is San Diego county (and nearby Imperial co.) where HS standouts leave for the Power Five conferences. If San Diego State were in the PAC-12 or BIG-12 they'd be able attract not only local top tier talent but other top talent as well. For years, San Diego in the past has been raided by USC, UCLA and other major PAC-12 schools. Now with PAC-12 dominance waning, our HS standout players are heading for greener pastures in the BIG1O, BIG-12 and SEC.
I'd love that as well, but that would require decoupling sports from conferences and potentially the university itself. Duke may get relegated in football but that doesn't mean their basketball team should also get relegated to a G5 equivalent. Conferences also aren't just about sports, there are also academics and research benefits which is why the Pac 12 requires schools to be a Tier 1 research institutes and an AAU member.
As much as I’m a fan of promotion/relegation schemes, I don’t think it’s fair to penalize incoming freshmen for what the previous season’s seniors were responsible for. If there was a way to do it mid season, that could work, but you’re dealing with small sample sizes AND finalizing your schedule on the fly.
always used to do this in NCAA football games legacy mode, go into custom conferences at the end of the season and promote the best mountain west team to the pac-12, worst sec team down to c-usa, was fun
I realize that logistically and financially it’s be hard, but I don’t know that it would be unfair to freshmen, unless you argue that it was unfair to Idaho’s freshmen when they dropped back down plus you can prove your team is good now by bouncing back up immediately. You can also have different divisions (for lack of a better word) for each sport, basically your demoting/promoting the program, not the school. Appreciate the counter arguments, breeds nice conversation
I think right now the biggest issue is, like you said, the fact that every school/conference is more independent. I think the CFP should have more control over how games are scheduled…. Like it doesn’t make sense to me that it’s nearly impossible for both Michigan and Ohio state to make the playoffs bc one of them is guaranteed to loose the last game, whereas Alabama and Georgia can both make the playoffs because they don’t always play, and if they do it’s earlier in the season
this reminds me of when the big 12 always got f'd over cuz they didn't play a conference championship game, leaving the schools that won their conference with a 1 win advantage
Great idea, great video, well done. Add in a relegation system between the 9 regional conferences and the 5 group conferences and I think it's perfect. Still a good system but with the added chaos of some teams getting relegated and some teams getting promoted. I found it really cool that an Ohio State fan, a team that has benefitted from the current system, is proposing this kind of change. Shows you care more about the integrity of the sport. P.S. Good luck on the 26th, it'll be a hell of a game. GO BLUE!
Freakin' brilliant, kid! Add a relegation system to move teams up and down between the top-tier Regional conferences and the "Group" conferences and you make college football more rational and more attractive to more fans than ever. Schools in the Power 5, particularly those in the middle or bottom, would resist relegation, but it would be better for them in the end to drop down in certain eras and have fun winning their way upward. That's an experience that TCU actually had after the old SWC broke up and they were left out of the Big XII, but your plan, plus relegation would make that an opportunity (and a risk) for every school playing at the current Power Five and Group of Five levels (and maybe even those below).
I love how you have a conference called the New England conference when only 1 team in that conference is even in New England. Might as well call it the east coast conference
Created something similar awhile ago, with 8 conferences. But recently updated it to where they would turn into pods and the big conferences would be over the pods. Great vid man!
I think this is a great idea. It would be awesome if this were implemented. Just an idea to add onto that, I noticed that there were a handful of teams that missed out being in the power 9 conferences but are still quite good. It could be a good idea that the bottom one or two teams in the power 9 conferences gets demoted to the conference below it, and the top one or two teams in the lower conference get boosted up to the better conference. That would give schools that aren't as big a goal to shoot for.
I tend to agree with your points. I've actually worked on something similar to this, but took a slightly different approach. 1. Rather than permanent conferences, I proposed that every team be paired with a dedicated travel team - Ohio State & Michigan, for example. 2. These pairs then would be grouped with geographic rivals as well as pairs of teams from very different geographies. 3. Each team would play a total of 10 games a season & since everyone is playing everyone else in your alignment, you've got a 'conference' champion. 4. Those champs then head into a 32 team playoff. 5. Finally, and most important, every 4 years the alignment of your conference shifts - one pair of teams is shifted out & a new pair is shifted in. The only team you always play is your dedicated rival - So Ohio State would always play Michigan.
Border War is a 115-year rivalry (Colorado State- University of Wyoming), and you want to break it up. Also, we, as Wyoming, could not afford to compete with pack 12 schools. Oregon Ducks just got a new $350 million FOOTBALL-ONLY facility. Wyoming JUST got a new $40 Million ALL SPORTS facility.
That was my main problem with his realignment. All of the Pac schools have way more money than MW schools. Apart from maybe Boise, none of the MW schools would consistently compete for a conference title.
Wish this would happen. As a Pitt fan, we could still have the OOC game against WVU and play other teams. This idea also helps with traveling fans, more people going to games also means more money. Too bad this will never happen with the current deals every conference has 😕
Love the video, and a lot of it’s valid! But the #1 cause for a lack of parody is that some schools are simply more invested and have a better head coach at the helm. We can change the playoff and realign conferences all we want, but at the end of the day the cream still rises to the top. Resources and potential between the top 20-30 programs are all very even. Some programs are just more invested and better run than others, that won’t change until the Miami’s, USC’s, and Auburn’s of the world start stepping-up (which they’re starting too)
Expanding the playoffs is a great idea. I have thought for years that an 8 team playoff would be much better. It would eliminate the need for an undefeated regular season as a prerequisite for the playoffs, and the short straw situations of decided which one-loss team is better than the multiple others, or choosing a one-loss larger school over an undefeated smaller school, for a 4 team playoff. The politics of rankings being decided off the field needs to be curtailed so the players and coaches can decide who’s the best on the field. A lot of benefit by adding only 1 more week to the playoffs. Your video has me reconsidering the first round bye, I initially dismissed, with your suggestion of a 12 team playoff. Four first round byes will reward undefeated regular season teams. A 12 team playoff would reinvigorate the importance of a conference championship. How great would it be to have the potential of the greatest rivalries to meet twice in a season, once in the regular and the other in the playoffs? Then we could potential see the likes of Mich. and OSU twice, where one team wins the regular season game and the other extracts revenge in the playoffs. The bowl games don’t have the luster and excitement that they used to have. Making the bowls a part of a larger playoff structure could change that. And end the 3-5 week downtime that exists now. Let the regular season play into the first week of Dec. Then have a conference championship round as part of the first week of the playoffs. Conference championship is an automatic bid into the rest of the playoffs; and still give the top four ranked teams a bye in the next round. With this set up, there’s even a potential for a third rivalry meetup (which is something to consider altogether). For example, Mich. and OSU meet in the regular season undefeated. After that game, they are still the top 2 teams in the B1G, so they play for the conference championship. The regular season losing team extracts revenge and gets the automatic bid into the next round; and the other continues in the playoffs based upon ranking. This is a controversial scenario that would result, and need for consideration. But, it would allow for conference title games to be played the holiday weekend around Christmas. Then have bowl games as the next phase of the playoffs on Jan. 1; which would be the bye week for the top four teams. Then the next two rounds follow to decide the national champion. Expanding the playoffs is the smart idea. I don’t think implementing a new conference structure will be welcomed by the existing conferences. But, improving balance among the conferences can be achieved by expanding the playoffs and giving automatic playoff bids to the champions. You have some good ideas in the video that I think many college football fans would like to see.
Love it. This is more to my liking. Another benefit of the regional conferences is save the schools and fans money on travel. And it make the environment knobs happy. Win win win.
Loved changing conferences in the old NCAA video game. Liked these conferences but it’ll never happen lol I think 12 teams will help a lot with getting more teams engaged longer
This would be a great idea. I approve of this. You should show this video to the NCAA headquarters in Indianapolis. Those are the people who run college football and control the sport. I say do it man.
Virginia (all schools) should not be in a New England conference, they should be in a Mid-Atlantic or Upper South conference. They have far more in common traditionally with rivals in the Carolinas and West Virginia than they do with schools as far north as Boston. Also, you completely forgot James Madison, who are new to FBS this year and in the Sun Belt. If you mention NDSU, JMU has been right on their heels in FCS for the past 10-15 years and has two national championships of their own (2004, 2016) and they have finally moved up whereas NDSU hasn't yet. (But should.)
technically GSU is the largest school in GA now since it absorbed a lot of it's perimeter college students. Georgia State definitely doesn't deserve to be in a power conference just yet, but it's for sure hard to get 9 teams from just Georgia and Florida. There would definitely need to be some shifting of all the different conferences, but this would be a very neat idea.
I think they would do just find i live in atl and i believe that if they were pushed up they would in turn get more recruits and they already are a big school
Super solid video dude! Not sure if I agree with your division solution, but it's very clear that you put a lot of work and thought into this video. Thanks for sharing :)
As a Kentucky fan. This destroys us as a football program. It would make more logical sense to fold. Your putting us up with the other teams in our recruiting area.
This is a great solution, as difficult as it would be to get rolling. A lot of teams would play each other they normally don’t. A lot of great year-to-year rivalries, and because it’s regional there’s an opportunity to save money on travel!
This is a really good point. For the majority of college football programs there is really no chance to reach the playoffs. The conference championships are pretty much meaningless. We all know the Bowl games are worthless. I wonder how much longer fans will remain interested in the sport?
As a UCF fan, we have better chances getting to the playoffs being in the big 12 than we do beating out Georgia Florida Florida state and Miami in a year. The sunpeach conference is no joke
Glad to see NDSU on the list for FBS teams on the video, as they have been rocking it the past decade. They have been far past their competition for years and I'm hoping they get moved up soon.
These are some interesting ideas. I don't think it will fix the issues with college football though. A lot of people want the playoff to be expanded. Currently the college football semi final games have been almost always non-competitive. Adding more teams won't fix this issue, it just creates more blowouts that we have to watch. It will in theory give more teams hope/motivation to go for it, but this isn't necessarily a good thing. Right now with the 4 team structure. Teams outside of the SEC and Big 10 know that they need to rack up a strong strength of schedule to get into the playoff. This leads to more aggressive scheduling. If there are 12 teams in the playoff, and conference champions are automatic bids, there is literally no incentive to schedule any difficult out of conference games. This cheapens the regular season, which is the heart of college football. if Oregon knew that they could get in as a top 12 team, no way they would've taken on Kirby Smart's bull dogs. They would have just dusted their way through the barely power 5 PAC 12 and found out in January just how much worse they are than a team that can actually win a championship for the whole world to see.
Analysts are actually saying that Oregon should not have scheduled the Dawgs anyways… that they would be ranked higher and in better position to make the playoff. I’m a fan of ‘be the best by beating the best’ and don’t mind that Oregon scheduled Georgia. They learned where they had to go and it probably helped them be the team they are now.
I don’t hate these solutions but splitting up the traditional sec schools is a big mistake. Auburn, Georgia, Alabama, Florida, Tennessee, Kentucky, ole miss, and Mississippi state need to stick together.
That was my main issue too. It's difficult to create parity in the southeast because so many power players are rivals with each other. UGA's rivalries would get eviscerated by this plan
I think the best and easiest solution right now in college football is just expanding the playoffs. If they expand the playoffs to 16 teams, the 10 conference winners and then have 6 at large bids it fixes the issues you mentioned. It gives all of these other schools and conferences something to play for and causes the recruits to spread out. It will also appease the big schools because they can get a few extra teams in through at large spots. Have a committee made up of officials from every conference rank the team 1-16 and the first round the higher seed gets to host a playoff game. This format would be fun and exciting and give a lot of teams something to play for.
Worst 3 words ever: "Expand the Playoffs." Let's just shorten the season to 10 games and have a 64 team field. Nobody's hope gets eliminated until their 4th loss. (Gag!) 😝
@@mikebronicki8264 you do realize the playoff system submitted to the NCAA in 2009 was for an 8 team playoff. And yet in 2014 we went with a 4 team playoff. The idea that everyone wanted 4 is really not true
I still play NCAA Football 14 on my PS3 and every time I start a new dynasty, I always make these regional conferences. All in-state teams in same conference and some neighbors too. All Florida teams in one, All 12 Texas teams in one, All California teams in one and so on. Turns out great.
My solution for college football: Extend the boundaries of field along the heading of each stadium until the 53 1/3 yard wide line touches the sea or a national border. Stepping out of bounds results in disqualification. Teams can move along their own field (which is now arbitrarily long but 53 1/3 yards wide) and onto any intersecting field at the point of intersection. Remove time limits, quarters and downs. All colleges in America play one game, indefinitely. Each school begins the game with one football. The game ends when one team possesses every football. I think this will solve every problem mentioned in the video, which I have yet to watch. Please enjoy and most importantly, have fun!
Paterno proposed an Eastern conference in the early 80's similar to what you have with Penn State, Pitt, SU, West Virginia, Maryland, BC, Temple, and Rutgers. Size wise PSU is a better fit in the Big Ten so might have been poached eventually but imagine if they stayed long enough to go to the ACC instead of the Big Ten.
The issue with that was that the proposal called for teams splitting basketball money while keeping all of their football money. It was a big deal back then because football wasn't the financial powerhouse it is now compared to basketball, and the other teams in the proposal saw it as a grift that would benefit Penn State, who didn't make much money from basketball, by allowing them to keep all of their football money while sharing in the basketball revenue they weren't seeing. Had the proposal been for a true all-sports conference it may have worked, but the biased financial structure was a deal-breaker for any school with sizeable basketball revenue.
I love all your proposed conferences, but splitting up the SEC like that would be an abomination. Tennessee, Bama, Florida, Georgia, Auburn, and LSU have to be in the same conference together
This is kinda coming to fruition with the 12 team playoff having auto bids for the conference champions, and allowing the best GO5 team to have an autobid as well, with 6 at Larges. Makes things better
Since there are 10 conferences that play D1 football, expand the playoffs to 8, but they all have to be conference champions. I would drop independents, if you want to get into the dance, you have to join a conference. I think this would bring some entertaining results.
I am NOT a Buckeye fan. I am a Duck fan. The first playoff, Oregon was knocked out by you in the Rose Bowl. In reality, it was a fantastic game. I just wish we could find a perfect season, at least in the conference. SOMEONE always gives us a loss in the conference, usually knocking us out of the playoff. Ohio State is always dominating in the Big Ten.
honestly this is one of the reasons i like watching the fcs. every conference winner makes the playoffs (plus a few at-large bids). that means more chances for teams to make a run. last year the 8 seed made it all the way to the final
Craziest part is, is that this 9 conference system already exists in the NCAA, in track and XC. There are 9 “regions” that have nothing to do with conferences, and the top 2 teams from each regional championship advance to nationals. This system spreads the power and has allowed smaller schools to become top contenders such as NAU, BYU, Tulsa, Villanova, Montana State, Georgetown, and Butler. All of these schools are ranked in the top 30 as I’m writing this, and sure XC is much like basketball in which you only need a handful of players to be successful, but the proof is still there.
Thanks for the video and your personal insights into how you think it would be best to fix CFB. I agree that it needs fixed in many areas. I too am an Ohio State fan by the way. Below are my additional thoughts or slight modifications to your proposed 9 conference system. The biggest thing that plagues college football (IMO), at large, is one thing - subjectivity. This subjectivity comes in many forms - such as the playoff committee picking teams based off no actual objective criteria...they get to pick and choose who they put in and cherry pick reasons to apply to the teams that make it in. The subjectivity though comes into play far before a single regular season game is even played...that being with preseason rankings. I would suggest that there be NO rankings, ever. Do you ever hear from the analysts/commentators about the NFL teams and how badly they beat a team, or lost to a team, or their strength of schedule? No. Why? Because all the NFL teams know BEFORE THE SEASON BEGINS, what the OBJECTIVE criteria is to make it into the playoff. They know they have to win their division (even if a team has a losing record). The point here isn't so much what the objective criteria is but moreso that there should be an objective metric that determines who makes the playoff - and in your solution, you have done that by making the conference winners and championship games matter. Preseason rankings also inflate teams that likely don't deserve to be ranked in the first place, or as high as initially ranked. Some will say that the rankings change to reflect the results so it doesn't matter much in the end, but it DOES matter because it influences the thoughts and opinions of the committee and the general public about college football's best teams...it also effects how every team's schedule is viewed. For instance, the SEC having 9 ranked teams to begin the season...even if they don't deserve to be, inflates all the other SEC team's Strength of Schedule metric, as the system and preseason rankings have already deemed them worthy of a ranking (so then the SEC says they look good or are good, solely because they've claimed that aura right off the bat without even playing any games). This allows them for when one team loses, the losing team gets to claim a loss to a ranked opponent, and the winner gets to claim a solid win over a ranked opponent. The teams then play each other, lose and win against each other, and simply replace one another in the Top 25 rankings (ALL BASED OFF of what the preseason rankings started with). Preseason rankings literally set the preconceived notions of teams, which greatly effects how the teams are viewed later on, especially since the current method for the playoff is based on nothing but subjectivity and an ever changing/different set of criteria. The order in which things take place in CFB is inverted. The games and their results should tell us who the best teams are - not that we decide who the best teams are based off returning starters, recruiting classes, and brands, only to have those teams fail on the field. Let the games be played, and the teams are placed into table/standings board just like every other sport known to man. For all we know, the coaching staffs or players will get swell heads at a bigger school and not play as well as their talent should indicate (examples, any Jimbo Fisher coached team, especially 2022 Texas A&M). So why should that team be ranked in the Top 25? They shouldn't. But what's the point in the rankings in the first place? There is none except to keep lobbying for opinions and biases that exist already. Just let the games be played, and remove the preseason rankings altogether (and in season rankings as well). Rankings could exist solely for the purpose of talking - the NFL shows all have these, but they're not influential in any way to the actual playoff teams. If Washington wins the NFC East with a 6-9 record, then they go to the playoffs, regardless of what some talk show says or what a newspaper poll ranks them. Lastly, my idea for CFB was to have it go to four super conferences...but after hearing your take on it, I LOVE the nine conference idea. It does (or would) keep the ENTIRE country still interested in it. Right now, not many people out west who have been fans of CFB are into it anymore, as the PAC has had a rough go of making the playoff, or succeeding when there. The nine conferences really gives the opportunity for all areas of the country to get a representative to the playoff, and they'll be interested in the on field result whenever the playoff came around. I may change some of the teams in the conferences you selected or change the names of said conferences, but again - the idea to have more 'power' conferences is a good one - as going to four super-conferences would completely eliminate interest from average to lesser schools currently existing in CFB. However, I will say that the current group of five schools should just be made into Division 2, the current Division 2 should go to Division 3, and current Division 3 can be made into Division 4. Thanks again for the video! Go Buckeyes!
This makes perfect sense. As a West Virginia fan I would say they need to be in the New England Conference because it would put them in line with more of the old Big East teams such as Pitt, Syracuse, Boston College, Virginia Tech and such
West Virginia should’ve went to the ACC instead of the big 12. They would’ve done great in football and basketball based on the talent that comes out of there
@@Mrcharles. 100% agree. It would make travel a lot easier for the teams since they would pretty much stay on the east coast during conference play instead of traveling to Iowa, Kansas, Oklahoma and Texas every other week.
2022 is promising to unseat those common teams. Alabama is out. Auburn is out. Still need to do something to check OSU up. The transfer portal caused the seasons this year. Alabama wasn't able to keep a hold on players they never intended to play, for example.
I've been watching Japanese college football cause I was kinda curious (hey the quality's pretty good, but it kinda varies between NAIA and D1 FCS) and I gotta say they're doing it right. The biggest conferences, namely the Kanto and Kansai leagues, have promotion and relegation. The top Kansai tier is divided into two divisions, Top 8 and Big 8 while the top Kanto tier only has one division. Kanto and Kansai are like the SEC and Big 10 of Japanese college football. The teams with the lowest record in the division go down one tier, and replaced by the below tier's winners.
I'd have a bit of a different conference alignment (as a VT fan, the NE conference doesn't make much sense), but I definitely like the overall structure. What made CFB so different from the NFL is how localized it was. Even if people didn't go to those schools, they felt like the team represented their community or region of the state.
CFB needs something like the NFL has where the season champ drafts last. It's not a penalty per se, but something that forces parity. Maybe prohibit Natty game participants from accepting transfers that year.
@@ektran4205 didn't say it was. I was just making a comparison to how Super Bowl teams draft last outside of a trade as a way to make it harder for the better teams to get better players every year.
@@martintabora127 what makes you think I am suggesting this? I just suggested limiting incoming transfers. This would prevent the top teams from poaching top talent from other schools year after year. They would still recruit out of high school
as a bsu fan id love us to play oregon every year its a great challenge and i would love for us to beat them even though it probably wont happen if it does i can make fun of all my oregon fan friends
16 teams, no bye week, 7 at-large. Makes for a slower progression but eventual participation in playoffs becomes more representative and, structurally, better able to withstand future challenge. Cinderella comes to The Dance.
Eight conferences with 12 teams, two divisions. Play each team in your conference. Division winners go to conference championship. Conference winners go into playoff.
REALLY LOVED THE VIDEO. I hope people at the heads of the NCAA see this video, and rethink their actions, coz the state of Collage Football right now is a JOKE.
I'm big on the auto qualifying, I wanted a 6 or 8 team playoff with the 5 power conference champs auto qualifying. I have heard that 12 is likely, though. The conference realignment won't happen the way you said because of money, but 12 will get us back to the state where, like BCS bowls, any team can have a realistic goal of making it within the next few years if all goes well.
The bigger problem at hand is the devide between the power and Group conferences, something you don’t address at all. When only the power 5 or 9 schools are getting national attention and going to the cfp it just ends up hurting the group teams
It’s also kinda nonsense because there’s a lot of G5 schools that either weren’t historically G5 schools or shouldn’t be G5 schools. A great example of this is SMU. From 1912 to 1994 SMU played in a conference with A&M, Arkansas, Texas, Houston, Texas Tech, Baylor, TCU. They won this conference 3rd most times behind Texas and Arkansas. Then they got the death penalty (which really the NCAA owes them compensation now), Texas didn’t want them in their conference, the B12 didn’t want a destroyed team anymore. So for the last 27 years they’ve been G5. Yet what’s insane to me is when SMu was competing in the AAC the media had the idea to say SMU is trying to show they are as good as the P5. What? SMU played in the power conference for 82 YEARS……
Joseph I like your ambition and creativity with this I agree conferences should be more regional than they are but as a wise man Josh Pate once said let's not pretend all these G5 schools are competing for the same thing as everyone else. They deserve their own playoff so teams like UCF and Tulane actually get rewarded for great seasons like this. To just completely redraw all conferences and just dilute all of the P5 with some other teams will just artificially inflate mid tier programs records. UGA vs Georgia State will just never be a competitive game nor does it need to be. The fact that it's currently five and five makes a neat symmetrical system that lays out clearly who's good and who's not. The best G5 teams then get relegated to join P5 like we have with the big 12
Sounds reasonable. Every division aside from '1-A' or BCS level has a functioning playoff system and has for decades. I'd like to see what you would do, should the 'Power Five' split from the NCAA. How would '1-A NCAA' rebalance itself?
"I was in elementary school sorry if that makes you feel old." I wasn't even in school then. Also Utah in 2021 we were happy to win the conference and go to the rose bowl. And it's the same this year. Not all teams expect to make the playoffs. Some hope to make a high renown bowl.
I'm curious, past history and the like indicates that this would generate controversy because your "group" conferences don't have a playoff bid. Would you support giving them a playoff bid in this system?
Hey everyone! It’s been a while since I launched this video. Keep an eye out for Version 2 coming soon!
How did you stick a historic non-power program like ECU out of the main conferences but put Liberty and Georgia State
One problem I’m seeing is lack of talented teams in Great Plains Kansas state would arguably be the best team in that conference and the lack of talent would get less recognition and less attraction from recruits regardless of a cfp spot
I had this kind of Idea as well but with a few changes. I said basically 64 teams in, let's call it D1, and the rest are in D2. I was arranging them in 4-16 team conferences with an east/west division or north/south. Where the winner of a division would play the other side of their conference for a shot at an auto bid in the playoff. So 4 auto bids and 8 at Large bids. But having more auto bids may be the way to go. As for the schools that may feel left out of the D1 I think a relegation system, like English football, were the worst of a D1 division and the best of the D2 would switch places in the following year. So maybe 4 teams would loose their place in a year if they were the worst in their conference. IF you wanna be in D1 you gotta win. It could be something a bit different but I really like the idea of a D2 team playing really well replacing a bad D1 team. Maybe they have to play for the spot.
After WW2, Henry Morgenthau proposed what would later be known as the Morgenthau Plan. To prevent Germany from become a major power again after the war, they were going to cut it up into smaller pieces--divide it against itself, and give important pieces away to rival powers.
Looking at you map, I can't help but wonder who the SEC invaded to deserve getting Morgenthau'd.
Putting Alabama, Georgia, Tennessee and Kentucky in separate conferences is insane. Regional conferences are important, I agree--which is why breaking up what it probably the most important and most cross-linked regional conference is crazy. People care because of shared history, because families are split between schools--not because bus tickets are cheap. Not because of sheer proximity.
E.g., Kansas has no history with Minnesota. Kansas has a long and rich history with OU. Why aren't they in the same conference?
And even then, you managed to avoid re-creating some of the great lost rivalries. Where is the Backyard Brawl? Where's Nebraska-Kansas?
And I'm not even sure that there would be more wins to go around in smaller conferences. Texas + A&M won half of the SWC championships between them. Nebraska and Oklahoma won a full 70 percent of all Big Eight championships. Blue bloods are blue bloods because they were the mid-sized fish in small ponds for most of the 20th century.
And even then, this entire plan completely ignores all the other considerations schools have when choosing conferences. E.g., NDSU is a relatively poor school with a narrow athletic budget, and they probably can't afford the much increased travel expenses. Because it's not just football that now has to travel to all those other schools, but also baseball, and basketball, and swimming, and cross country, and all the rest. Or how the Big 10 is also an academic and research-sharing alliance.
All in all: good idea and I look forward to seeing your second draft.
This just got bumped into my feed, excited to see if your thoughts have changed at all. I think there’s a lot of good ideas here, but also some of conferences feel wildly lopsided. Like this basically canonizes the B1G east and west into separate conferences but the west has been dying on the vine with Michigan, MSU, OSU, and PSU all in the East. I do think keeping the historical conferences in mind to help maintain some rivalries would be good. So like in our home conference example, the B1G teams from before the expansion began with Penn State are pretty geographically centered.
Not sure what’s in your edit but my idea that would maybe be possible would be expand back out to six major conferences (ten teams each) and they get bids to the new 8 team playoff with two at larges. The 8 team playoff is already set so we’re halfway there. So schools like Penn State, Notre Dame, Maryland, Rutgers can hop in with some of those New England schools they have played a lot historically, I think the southwest and Northwoods ones are solid ideas, maybe some of the NorCal ones join the Northwoods and the southwest grabs some more teams that are slightly eastward. I won’t go through the whole map but I think something like that would be a halfway point that conferences might actually go for.
As *wildly* unrealistic as it would be, I would love to see some sort of formal year-to-year promotion and relegation between "Power Five" conferences, "Group of Five" conferences, and "FCS" conferences
SoCon promotes to SunBelt promotes to SEC
Solution for this is not every year but every five years. Any team with a losing record that hasn't won a conference title in those 5 years is demoted for the closest G5 team with the highest winning percentage over that time frame. You could also realign the G5 and Div 2 and Div 3 schools so that you could fall to a Div 3 football program if you're not performing over a 20-year stretch.
well confrences are invite only and they make their money off of big brand programs, so yeah not gonna happen
@@JR-ub2wt were they to be controlled by the NCAA, the conferences wouldn't be making money on their own anymore. So, something like that could happen in a world where that is the case.
@@blueredlover1060 that’s never gonna happen. The entire point of why independent conferences were made was to break away from NCAA controlled broadcasting rights in the 80s. The supreme court ruled this was legal and the NCAA can do nothing about it. This will never be possible and it’s a good thing for schools.
The only issue I have with this is that teams in the group conferences would never really have a chance at making the playoff. If the playoff is 3 weeks anyways, you could expand it to 16 teams, 1 from each conference, and then 2 at large. This allows the smaller schools to still get exposure. There’s a reason march madness works so well, and it’s because ANYONE has a shot.
Yeah, I think having a tournament of all the conference champs plus some wildcards would make it more entertaining. You could relatively easily remove a few of the cupcake games from almost everyone's schedules and reserve those for the post season tournament. If you're school doesn't make it, maybe they can do some non-tournament postseason games
Well the main reason is, is that they would lose right away. in March madness the 1 seed has only lost to the 64 seed once. Bama still crushes 3 and 4 seeds so they’d practically 64-0 a 15 or 16 seed
16 is too much. 12 would be the most ideal. You are far more likely to get at least one Group 5 Team in every year than the current system, and it encourages teams to crack the top 4 for a Bye Week.
@@troybaxter 12 wouldn’t work because it’d go from 12 to 6 to 3 so there’d have to be an extra game to determine the 2 top teams
@@joshlien2118 Any number can work so long as you know how to eliminate properly.
Any odd or even number not divisible by 2^x... can be utilized simply by reducing the proper amount of teams to 2^x.
In other words, 5-8 teams gets reduced to 4, 9-16 teams gets reduced to 8, 17-24 teams gets reduced to 16.
This is done by giving the top teams byes according to the number of odd teams in. 7 teams would give 1 team a bye while the other 6 duke it out. 5 teams gives team 1, 2, and 3 byes while 4 and 5 duke it out. 12 teams is the same way. 1-4 have byes and 5-12 face off until only eight teams remain.
A simple solution was keeping the single National Championship BUT save it for AFTER all of the Bowl Games. That way results matter for everybody while supporting parity
Are you saying that the 2 best teams after all the bowls are going to play? That's barely going to change anything. Maybe you'll have #5 and #6 competing for a NCG spot with the bowl game instead of just 1-4, and if polls are any indication, that's going to be hard for #5 or #6 to break into a Top 2 spot.
Nobody cares about the crappy bowls.
Greed is a lesson that EVERY function, group, or culture needs to experience to disastrous levels before they reawaken to the stupidity of allowing only a few to succeed at the penalty of the masses.
The truly strong schools should not have to suffer so that a few weaker schools can get playoff participation ribbons.
@@sarahmccoy1941 Well, then expect the NCAA to die within 20 years. There's no reason for those of us who are fans of "lesser" schools to pay attention anymore.
@@sarahmccoy1941 its gonna change because they're losing money, fans are no longer interested, which at the end of the day, money is what matters
@@sarahmccoy1941 I think truly great teams, aka the top 4, can stand to play 1 more game in the playoff 💀
Low key one of the greatest videos I have EVER seen!!! It's been a while since the PAC12 has been to the playoffs and this system would be so cool!!! Conference of Champs needs another chance!!!
The only issue with your conference breakdown is missing out on some of the rivalry games. Georgia would have to spend 2/3 of out of conference schedule to play South Carolina and Auburn, leading to no new challenges or anything different year over year. Alabama would spend one week of the three allotted every year to play Tennessee. I think there’s a way to manage the conferences to keep all the historical rivals together while still being regional and competitive. I like the breakdown just missing the rivals.
New rivalries get created. Simple. Things change. The new generations will grow up with new rivalries and won’t know any different.
Why would UGA have to play South Carolina, they're not really a strong historical rivalry
I don’t see why you’d split up Pitt-wvu
@@ericfolmar7338 I don't see why these schools decided to split IRL!
@@ericfolmar7338 I saw the map of his conferences and I just thought wtf with wvu being added to the Carolina conferences. Pinning wvu against Pitt not only makes sense for rivalry’s sake, but for the sake of region too
Bro, this is badass! Regional football with a 12 team play off system!!!
Back in the 1980s and 1990s, the hopes of every school, outside of the independents, was to win your conference. USC, Michigan, Ohio State, their goal was to make it to the Rose Bowl. Florida, Georgia, Alabama, all wanted to make it to the Sugar Bowl. Texas was the Cotton Bowl. Oklahoma or Nebraska, the Orange Bowl. BYU wanted to make it to the Holiday Bowl. Fresno State and Central Michigan wanted to make it to the California Raisin Bowl. If you happened to be voted a national champion at the end of the year, that was even better. But the goal was to win your conference. The game was so much more interesting back then.
Also, I know that today, outside of Notre Dame, Independence seems like a killer. But it was kind of fun when you had a bunch of very high profile independent schools. Back in the 1980s and early 1990s, and even earlier, Penn State, Florida State, Miami, West Virginia, Virginia Tech, Syracuse, Louisville, and many others, were all independent. Because these schools were independent, you could end up with some great intersectional matchups, even late in the season.
Yeah, college football is just boring now.
You nailed it jsmith, college football is increasingly just an NFL clone and the NFL has *NEVER* had the spirit and rivalry to compare to old time college football.
I wouldn't go as far to say college football is boring now, at least if you're an actual college student. Rivalry games still hold weight with the fanbases. However, I agree that revisions need to be made to make it interesting to people who aren't students/alumni.
@Andre Jarboe I'm in between. The magic of College Football comes from 2 losses basically ending your season, 3 for sure. The 12 teams would ruin that, I think 6 largely keeps that intact. There's rarely if ever been a non top 6 team where you feel they were robbed. Also this allows for a bie week that keeps 1 and 2 important and gives an incentive to go undefeated. Baseball gave up the whole "every game matters" thing in favor of a large playoff and it ruined the sport. CF is different more teams so there should be a larger playoff. But the new plan will ruin the sport IMO. Too many teams.
@J Smith I know I am in the minority (and a very small one at that) but I would love for college football to go back to the pre-BCS days. Maybe it's a product of age (I was born in '84) so I remember the game before the BCS and CFP, but I am worried that one of the most unique thing about the sport, and one of the things that make it the best sport by far, is how meaningful and important the regular season is. Bow, schools consider any season where they don't make the CFP a total failure.
It may seem counterintuitive since I'd like a pre-BCS set up but since the CFP is going nowhere, I think it must be expanded. 4 teams is just the worst of both worlds. A 16 team playoff (with games on campus until the semis and final) would help with parity so much. More elite layers will be willing to go to schools that are traditionally in the #10-25 range now because they know they have a shot at the title. The 4 team playoff hurt parity so much because players know only those 4-6 teams are likely to make it. And since success is now viewed strictly through the CFP the elite only went there.
Anyway, like I said most people probably disagree with my first point, maybe a few more agree with the second. Either way, I love College Football and and both sad and excited that November games are here!
@@Jon.A.Scholt - I agree with you 100%. The sport was far more appealing pre-BCS. While most businesses and organizations are focused on making the sport as appealing as possible to as many people as possible, college football is focused on reducing the appeal to just five or six schools.
LSU was in no way at the beginning of this year shooting for the playoff. The fact that they’re even close is a miracle
Tennessee as well tbh; we were expected to go 8-4, loving the year the programs are having!
@@johnodell8692 they still probs won't make it
@@universenerdd Yeah, maybe, maybe not. Statistically it's looking like a coinflip, but I'd be very happy either way. I only want UT to go to the CFP for recruiting exposure lol
College football has the worst parity in all of American sports. That distinction used to belong to women's college basketball, but parity in that sport has improved in recent years, while it's gone in the opposite direction with college football. And most discouraging of all is that the powers that be in college football seem to be hell-bent on killing off whatever parity that still remains.
???
I think this season has more parity than the previous 3-4 but yeah it's still the worst hands down, but there are signs of improvement with Alabama and Clemson essentially being out. NIL deals and the transfer portal and 12 team playoff will go a long way in helping to make things more interesting.
I love how you posted this months ago, and its just now blowing up! Good video!
Right?!?
I might actually be interested in college football if it was structured this way. My biggest gripes with it is that there is not a good structure for determining who is the best team and most games don't seem to hold very much importance.
He is too young to remember all of the controversies surrounding the BCS Title games and who should or should not be in. It was far from a perfect system, and the future expanded playoff will fix the current system even more. And actually improve on what he thought was good about the old BCS system which was "letting more teams in to big bowls".
The biggest issue with CFB is the lack of money being properly spread around. That's why the NFL is "any given sunday". Salary Cap. Teams like Alabama, LSU, Georgia, Ohio State, Michigan, Florida, etc etc have absolutely MASSIVE budgets in comparison to 95% of other schools out there, including ones in their own conferences. They are on TV during prime time every weekend, so yeah.... kids growing up want to play for these big schools who they are currently seeing every weekend and in every playoff game. You can't really fault the kids for that, and I don't know how to fix that issue, you probably can't. Because if kids coming out of college were able to pick which Pro Team they played for, there would be like 4-5 amazingly talented teams with the rest getting the "scraps" and it just wouldn't be fair. That's CFB in a nutshell right there.
@@horatiohornblower3757 Yeah i feel like people are forgetting how shitty the BCS was.
Also these new rules with paying players just made the problem you brought up in the second paragraph magnitudes worse. As an oregon fan, i don't mind it cuz we got money, But as a college football fan, i hate it, as I realize that not every school has a phil nite.
I love this idea, the conference and playoff system reminds on nfl Divisions. As an Eagles fan, there have been a couple times where despite not being very good we could still make the playoff by winning our division. This structure kept me interested even though my team probably wouldn't have made very high on power rankings. The college football structure has caused me to completely stop being a fan of a team and rather just watch the sport as a neutral observer. As much as I'd love to have a favorite team the truth is that only around 10% of teams have a real shot at making the playoff, so I'd either feel like a bandwagon or have to try and make myself interested in games that are essentially pointless.
Go Birds
I love the conference layout! I think that for the teams that don’t really quite fit in anywhere they could be an independent kinda like what we have right now so if teams need filler games before conference play they can schedule them
I proposed something along these lines before. Creation of eight conferences of 16 teams with two sub-conferences with 8 teams each for a total of 128 teams. No independent schools in the system. You can play 3 or 4 games outside of conference but they have no bearing on conference standings. Winner of each sub-conference plays for the conference championship, essentially the first round of the playoff. Then conference champions compete in the round of 8. Then a round of 4, then a championship game as normal. No polls, no cigar smoke filled room with "experts" choosing the participants like a Miss America contest. The champion is determined on the field of play like, oh I don't know, the NFL for example. I like the idea of relegation to give up and coming teams a chance and to provide perennial doormats the incentive to invest in their programs.
I like your idea of CFB realignment. Imo, it's a good thing for recruitment when the university in your area can attract local top tier talent instead of having them head elsewhere. Case in point is San Diego county (and nearby Imperial co.) where HS standouts leave for the Power Five conferences. If San Diego State were in the PAC-12 or BIG-12 they'd be able attract not only local top tier talent but other top talent as well. For years, San Diego in the past has been raided by USC, UCLA and other major PAC-12 schools. Now with PAC-12 dominance waning, our HS standout players are heading for greener pastures in the BIG1O, BIG-12 and SEC.
This video is very well made! Helped explain US college football to a Canadian.
Feels like a TED talk, a TED talk about CFB…..awesome
I’d love to see relegation style conferences
I'd love that as well, but that would require decoupling sports from conferences and potentially the university itself. Duke may get relegated in football but that doesn't mean their basketball team should also get relegated to a G5 equivalent. Conferences also aren't just about sports, there are also academics and research benefits which is why the Pac 12 requires schools to be a Tier 1 research institutes and an AAU member.
As much as I’m a fan of promotion/relegation schemes, I don’t think it’s fair to penalize incoming freshmen for what the previous season’s seniors were responsible for. If there was a way to do it mid season, that could work, but you’re dealing with small sample sizes AND finalizing your schedule on the fly.
always used to do this in NCAA football games legacy mode, go into custom conferences at the end of the season and promote the best mountain west team to the pac-12, worst sec team down to c-usa, was fun
Agree and make it a four tier league with 32 teams in it
I realize that logistically and financially it’s be hard, but I don’t know that it would be unfair to freshmen, unless you argue that it was unfair to Idaho’s freshmen when they dropped back down plus you can prove your team is good now by bouncing back up immediately. You can also have different divisions (for lack of a better word) for each sport, basically your demoting/promoting the program, not the school.
Appreciate the counter arguments, breeds nice conversation
Petition to make this man the head of the NCAAF.
Very good video, coherent the whole though & you wrapped it up well at the end. Bravo!
Would love to see it happen!!
This video is so put to together, keep up the good work!
I think right now the biggest issue is, like you said, the fact that every school/conference is more independent. I think the CFP should have more control over how games are scheduled…. Like it doesn’t make sense to me that it’s nearly impossible for both Michigan and Ohio state to make the playoffs bc one of them is guaranteed to loose the last game, whereas Alabama and Georgia can both make the playoffs because they don’t always play, and if they do it’s earlier in the season
this reminds me of when the big 12 always got f'd over cuz they didn't play a conference championship game, leaving the schools that won their conference with a 1 win advantage
Great idea, great video, well done. Add in a relegation system between the 9 regional conferences and the 5 group conferences and I think it's perfect. Still a good system but with the added chaos of some teams getting relegated and some teams getting promoted. I found it really cool that an Ohio State fan, a team that has benefitted from the current system, is proposing this kind of change. Shows you care more about the integrity of the sport.
P.S. Good luck on the 26th, it'll be a hell of a game. GO BLUE!
This system sounds lit and would probably bring me back to college football, make winning your conference actually matter again!
Freakin' brilliant, kid! Add a relegation system to move teams up and down between the top-tier Regional conferences and the "Group" conferences and you make college football more rational and more attractive to more fans than ever.
Schools in the Power 5, particularly those in the middle or bottom, would resist relegation, but it would be better for them in the end to drop down in certain eras and have fun winning their way upward. That's an experience that TCU actually had after the old SWC broke up and they were left out of the Big XII, but your plan, plus relegation would make that an opportunity (and a risk) for every school playing at the current Power Five and Group of Five levels (and maybe even those below).
I love how you have a conference called the New England conference when only 1 team in that conference is even in New England. Might as well call it the east coast conference
Created something similar awhile ago, with 8 conferences. But recently updated it to where they would turn into pods and the big conferences would be over the pods. Great vid man!
I think this is a great idea. It would be awesome if this were implemented. Just an idea to add onto that, I noticed that there were a handful of teams that missed out being in the power 9 conferences but are still quite good. It could be a good idea that the bottom one or two teams in the power 9 conferences gets demoted to the conference below it, and the top one or two teams in the lower conference get boosted up to the better conference. That would give schools that aren't as big a goal to shoot for.
The whole video I kept saying “he’s not wrong”
Excellent work
I tend to agree with your points. I've actually worked on something similar to this, but took a slightly different approach.
1. Rather than permanent conferences, I proposed that every team be paired with a dedicated travel team - Ohio State & Michigan, for example.
2. These pairs then would be grouped with geographic rivals as well as pairs of teams from very different geographies.
3. Each team would play a total of 10 games a season & since everyone is playing everyone else in your alignment, you've got a 'conference' champion.
4. Those champs then head into a 32 team playoff.
5. Finally, and most important, every 4 years the alignment of your conference shifts - one pair of teams is shifted out & a new pair is shifted in. The only team you always play is your dedicated rival - So Ohio State would always play Michigan.
What people don't understand about college football is that what matters is not the playoff or the championship but the 12 Saturdays in the Fall.
💯. With the BCS system, every game mattered.
Border War is a 115-year rivalry (Colorado State- University of Wyoming), and you want to break it up.
Also, we, as Wyoming, could not afford to compete with pack 12 schools.
Oregon Ducks just got a new $350 million FOOTBALL-ONLY facility.
Wyoming JUST got a new $40 Million ALL SPORTS facility.
That was my main problem with his realignment. All of the Pac schools have way more money than MW schools. Apart from maybe Boise, none of the MW schools would consistently compete for a conference title.
Wish this would happen. As a Pitt fan, we could still have the OOC game against WVU and play other teams. This idea also helps with traveling fans, more people going to games also means more money. Too bad this will never happen with the current deals every conference has 😕
Love the video, and a lot of it’s valid! But the #1 cause for a lack of parody is that some schools are simply more invested and have a better head coach at the helm. We can change the playoff and realign conferences all we want, but at the end of the day the cream still rises to the top. Resources and potential between the top 20-30 programs are all very even. Some programs are just more invested and better run than others, that won’t change until the Miami’s, USC’s, and Auburn’s of the world start stepping-up (which they’re starting too)
Expanding the playoffs is a great idea. I have thought for years that an 8 team playoff would be much better. It would eliminate the need for an undefeated regular season as a prerequisite for the playoffs, and the short straw situations of decided which one-loss team is better than the multiple others, or choosing a one-loss larger school over an undefeated smaller school, for a 4 team playoff. The politics of rankings being decided off the field needs to be curtailed so the players and coaches can decide who’s the best on the field. A lot of benefit by adding only 1 more week to the playoffs.
Your video has me reconsidering the first round bye, I initially dismissed, with your suggestion of a 12 team playoff. Four first round byes will reward undefeated regular season teams. A 12 team playoff would reinvigorate the importance of a conference championship.
How great would it be to have the potential of the greatest rivalries to meet twice in a season, once in the regular and the other in the playoffs? Then we could potential see the likes of Mich. and OSU twice, where one team wins the regular season game and the other extracts revenge in the playoffs.
The bowl games don’t have the luster and excitement that they used to have. Making the bowls a part of a larger playoff structure could change that. And end the 3-5 week downtime that exists now.
Let the regular season play into the first week of Dec. Then have a conference championship round as part of the first week of the playoffs. Conference championship is an automatic bid into the rest of the playoffs; and still give the top four ranked teams a bye in the next round.
With this set up, there’s even a potential for a third rivalry meetup (which is something to consider altogether). For example, Mich. and OSU meet in the regular season undefeated. After that game, they are still the top 2 teams in the B1G, so they play for the conference championship. The regular season losing team extracts revenge and gets the automatic bid into the next round; and the other continues in the playoffs based upon ranking. This is a controversial scenario that would result, and need for consideration.
But, it would allow for conference title games to be played the holiday weekend around Christmas. Then have bowl games as the next phase of the playoffs on Jan. 1; which would be the bye week for the top four teams. Then the next two rounds follow to decide the national champion.
Expanding the playoffs is the smart idea.
I don’t think implementing a new conference structure will be welcomed by the existing conferences. But, improving balance among the conferences can be achieved by expanding the playoffs and giving automatic playoff bids to the champions.
You have some good ideas in the video that I think many college football fans would like to see.
Love it. This is more to my liking. Another benefit of the regional conferences is save the schools and fans money on travel. And it make the environment knobs happy. Win win win.
Love this video concept. Sadly we can't just wave a wand and realign conferences, but if I could I'd do this.
Loved changing conferences in the old NCAA video game. Liked these conferences but it’ll never happen lol I think 12 teams will help a lot with getting more teams engaged longer
This would be a great idea. I approve of this. You should show this video to the NCAA headquarters in Indianapolis. Those are the people who run college football and control the sport. I say do it man.
... Thew people and money who run the NCAA want to be the ones making the 'good ideas '.. you won't get the credit you'd deserve if this happened...
The NCAA is not involved with Div 1 football. Period.
Definitely some stuff here that I would like to see!
Virginia (all schools) should not be in a New England conference, they should be in a Mid-Atlantic or Upper South conference. They have far more in common traditionally with rivals in the Carolinas and West Virginia than they do with schools as far north as Boston. Also, you completely forgot James Madison, who are new to FBS this year and in the Sun Belt. If you mention NDSU, JMU has been right on their heels in FCS for the past 10-15 years and has two national championships of their own (2004, 2016) and they have finally moved up whereas NDSU hasn't yet. (But should.)
I was also surprised that he didn't have WVU and Pitt in the same conference to revive the backyard brawl. Like in Western PA that Is THE rivalry
technically GSU is the largest school in GA now since it absorbed a lot of it's perimeter college students. Georgia State definitely doesn't deserve to be in a power conference just yet, but it's for sure hard to get 9 teams from just Georgia and Florida. There would definitely need to be some shifting of all the different conferences, but this would be a very neat idea.
I think they would do just find i live in atl and i believe that if they were pushed up they would in turn get more recruits and they already are a big school
Dude this is awesome, an nfl style playoffs, that would be epic
Super solid video dude! Not sure if I agree with your division solution, but it's very clear that you put a lot of work and thought into this video. Thanks for sharing :)
13:52 Mormon Bowl brought to you by the state of Utah
Love this analysis, conferences should a max of 12 teams. I'm a P6, then G6 guy. Big 10, SEC, ACC, Big East, Big 12, Pac
As a Kentucky fan. This destroys us as a football program. It would make more logical sense to fold. Your putting us up with the other teams in our recruiting area.
This is a great solution, as difficult as it would be to get rolling. A lot of teams would play each other they normally don’t. A lot of great year-to-year rivalries, and because it’s regional there’s an opportunity to save money on travel!
Very admirable that an Ohio State fan (who arguably benefitted from the playoff) still wants to change the system for the sake of parity.
This is a really good point. For the majority of college football programs there is really no chance to reach the playoffs. The conference championships are pretty much meaningless. We all know the Bowl games are worthless. I wonder how much longer fans will remain interested in the sport?
As a UCF fan, we have better chances getting to the playoffs being in the big 12 than we do beating out Georgia Florida Florida state and Miami in a year. The sunpeach conference is no joke
This is very well done and I agree with the oeverall premise but you need to get Pitt and WVU in the same conference.
Great video man, first time watching your stuff.
Glad to see NDSU on the list for FBS teams on the video, as they have been rocking it the past decade. They have been far past their competition for years and I'm hoping they get moved up soon.
These are some interesting ideas. I don't think it will fix the issues with college football though. A lot of people want the playoff to be expanded. Currently the college football semi final games have been almost always non-competitive. Adding more teams won't fix this issue, it just creates more blowouts that we have to watch. It will in theory give more teams hope/motivation to go for it, but this isn't necessarily a good thing. Right now with the 4 team structure. Teams outside of the SEC and Big 10 know that they need to rack up a strong strength of schedule to get into the playoff. This leads to more aggressive scheduling. If there are 12 teams in the playoff, and conference champions are automatic bids, there is literally no incentive to schedule any difficult out of conference games. This cheapens the regular season, which is the heart of college football. if Oregon knew that they could get in as a top 12 team, no way they would've taken on Kirby Smart's bull dogs. They would have just dusted their way through the barely power 5 PAC 12 and found out in January just how much worse they are than a team that can actually win a championship for the whole world to see.
Analysts are actually saying that Oregon should not have scheduled the Dawgs anyways… that they would be ranked higher and in better position to make the playoff. I’m a fan of ‘be the best by beating the best’ and don’t mind that Oregon scheduled Georgia. They learned where they had to go and it probably helped them be the team they are now.
I don’t hate these solutions but splitting up the traditional sec schools is a big mistake. Auburn, Georgia, Alabama, Florida, Tennessee, Kentucky, ole miss, and Mississippi state need to stick together.
That was my main issue too. It's difficult to create parity in the southeast because so many power players are rivals with each other. UGA's rivalries would get eviscerated by this plan
I think the best and easiest solution right now in college football is just expanding the playoffs. If they expand the playoffs to 16 teams, the 10 conference winners and then have 6 at large bids it fixes the issues you mentioned. It gives all of these other schools and conferences something to play for and causes the recruits to spread out. It will also appease the big schools because they can get a few extra teams in through at large spots. Have a committee made up of officials from every conference rank the team 1-16 and the first round the higher seed gets to host a playoff game. This format would be fun and exciting and give a lot of teams something to play for.
You can bet ESPN will push to have the six at large bids come exclusively from the SEC.
Worst 3 words ever: "Expand the Playoffs."
Let's just shorten the season to 10 games and have a 64 team field. Nobody's hope gets eliminated until their 4th loss. (Gag!) 😝
@@mikebronicki8264 you do realize the playoff system submitted to the NCAA in 2009 was for an 8 team playoff.
And yet in 2014 we went with a 4 team playoff. The idea that everyone wanted 4 is really not true
Honestly this makes too much sense… they will never do it 😢
I still play NCAA Football 14 on my PS3 and every time I start a new dynasty, I always make these regional conferences. All in-state teams in same conference and some neighbors too. All Florida teams in one, All 12 Texas teams in one, All California teams in one and so on. Turns out great.
My solution for college football: Extend the boundaries of field along the heading of each stadium until the 53 1/3 yard wide line touches the sea or a national border. Stepping out of bounds results in disqualification. Teams can move along their own field (which is now arbitrarily long but 53 1/3 yards wide) and onto any intersecting field at the point of intersection. Remove time limits, quarters and downs. All colleges in America play one game, indefinitely. Each school begins the game with one football. The game ends when one team possesses every football. I think this will solve every problem mentioned in the video, which I have yet to watch. Please enjoy and most importantly, have fun!
Respecting Boise State
My guy
Paterno proposed an Eastern conference in the early 80's similar to what you have with Penn State, Pitt, SU, West Virginia, Maryland, BC, Temple, and Rutgers.
Size wise PSU is a better fit in the Big Ten so might have been poached eventually but imagine if they stayed long enough to go to the ACC instead of the Big Ten.
The issue with that was that the proposal called for teams splitting basketball money while keeping all of their football money. It was a big deal back then because football wasn't the financial powerhouse it is now compared to basketball, and the other teams in the proposal saw it as a grift that would benefit Penn State, who didn't make much money from basketball, by allowing them to keep all of their football money while sharing in the basketball revenue they weren't seeing. Had the proposal been for a true all-sports conference it may have worked, but the biased financial structure was a deal-breaker for any school with sizeable basketball revenue.
I really like this. The only issue? It makes too much sense. I feel like if we had a perfect system, it would almost get boring after a while
I love all your proposed conferences, but splitting up the SEC like that would be an abomination. Tennessee, Bama, Florida, Georgia, Auburn, and LSU have to be in the same conference together
This is kinda coming to fruition with the 12 team playoff having auto bids for the conference champions, and allowing the best GO5 team to have an autobid as well, with 6 at Larges. Makes things better
Since there are 10 conferences that play D1 football, expand the playoffs to 8, but they all have to be conference champions. I would drop independents, if you want to get into the dance, you have to join a conference. I think this would bring some entertaining results.
I am NOT a Buckeye fan. I am a Duck fan. The first playoff, Oregon was knocked out by you in the Rose Bowl. In reality, it was a fantastic game. I just wish we could find a perfect season, at least in the conference. SOMEONE always gives us a loss in the conference, usually knocking us out of the playoff. Ohio State is always dominating in the Big Ten.
I love it because there are so many dominant teams and having more conf champs and 12 team playoffs would be great
honestly this is one of the reasons i like watching the fcs. every conference winner makes the playoffs (plus a few at-large bids). that means more chances for teams to make a run. last year the 8 seed made it all the way to the final
Craziest part is, is that this 9 conference system already exists in the NCAA, in track and XC. There are 9 “regions” that have nothing to do with conferences, and the top 2 teams from each regional championship advance to nationals. This system spreads the power and has allowed smaller schools to become top contenders such as NAU, BYU, Tulsa, Villanova, Montana State, Georgetown, and Butler. All of these schools are ranked in the top 30 as I’m writing this, and sure XC is much like basketball in which you only need a handful of players to be successful, but the proof is still there.
Thanks for the video and your personal insights into how you think it would be best to fix CFB. I agree that it needs fixed in many areas. I too am an Ohio State fan by the way. Below are my additional thoughts or slight modifications to your proposed 9 conference system.
The biggest thing that plagues college football (IMO), at large, is one thing - subjectivity. This subjectivity comes in many forms - such as the playoff committee picking teams based off no actual objective criteria...they get to pick and choose who they put in and cherry pick reasons to apply to the teams that make it in. The subjectivity though comes into play far before a single regular season game is even played...that being with preseason rankings. I would suggest that there be NO rankings, ever. Do you ever hear from the analysts/commentators about the NFL teams and how badly they beat a team, or lost to a team, or their strength of schedule? No. Why? Because all the NFL teams know BEFORE THE SEASON BEGINS, what the OBJECTIVE criteria is to make it into the playoff. They know they have to win their division (even if a team has a losing record). The point here isn't so much what the objective criteria is but moreso that there should be an objective metric that determines who makes the playoff - and in your solution, you have done that by making the conference winners and championship games matter.
Preseason rankings also inflate teams that likely don't deserve to be ranked in the first place, or as high as initially ranked. Some will say that the rankings change to reflect the results so it doesn't matter much in the end, but it DOES matter because it influences the thoughts and opinions of the committee and the general public about college football's best teams...it also effects how every team's schedule is viewed. For instance, the SEC having 9 ranked teams to begin the season...even if they don't deserve to be, inflates all the other SEC team's Strength of Schedule metric, as the system and preseason rankings have already deemed them worthy of a ranking (so then the SEC says they look good or are good, solely because they've claimed that aura right off the bat without even playing any games). This allows them for when one team loses, the losing team gets to claim a loss to a ranked opponent, and the winner gets to claim a solid win over a ranked opponent. The teams then play each other, lose and win against each other, and simply replace one another in the Top 25 rankings (ALL BASED OFF of what the preseason rankings started with). Preseason rankings literally set the preconceived notions of teams, which greatly effects how the teams are viewed later on, especially since the current method for the playoff is based on nothing but subjectivity and an ever changing/different set of criteria.
The order in which things take place in CFB is inverted. The games and their results should tell us who the best teams are - not that we decide who the best teams are based off returning starters, recruiting classes, and brands, only to have those teams fail on the field. Let the games be played, and the teams are placed into table/standings board just like every other sport known to man. For all we know, the coaching staffs or players will get swell heads at a bigger school and not play as well as their talent should indicate (examples, any Jimbo Fisher coached team, especially 2022 Texas A&M). So why should that team be ranked in the Top 25? They shouldn't. But what's the point in the rankings in the first place? There is none except to keep lobbying for opinions and biases that exist already. Just let the games be played, and remove the preseason rankings altogether (and in season rankings as well). Rankings could exist solely for the purpose of talking - the NFL shows all have these, but they're not influential in any way to the actual playoff teams. If Washington wins the NFC East with a 6-9 record, then they go to the playoffs, regardless of what some talk show says or what a newspaper poll ranks them.
Lastly, my idea for CFB was to have it go to four super conferences...but after hearing your take on it, I LOVE the nine conference idea. It does (or would) keep the ENTIRE country still interested in it. Right now, not many people out west who have been fans of CFB are into it anymore, as the PAC has had a rough go of making the playoff, or succeeding when there. The nine conferences really gives the opportunity for all areas of the country to get a representative to the playoff, and they'll be interested in the on field result whenever the playoff came around. I may change some of the teams in the conferences you selected or change the names of said conferences, but again - the idea to have more 'power' conferences is a good one - as going to four super-conferences would completely eliminate interest from average to lesser schools currently existing in CFB. However, I will say that the current group of five schools should just be made into Division 2, the current Division 2 should go to Division 3, and current Division 3 can be made into Division 4.
Thanks again for the video! Go Buckeyes!
This makes perfect sense. As a West Virginia fan I would say they need to be in the New England Conference because it would put them in line with more of the old Big East teams such as Pitt, Syracuse, Boston College, Virginia Tech and such
West Virginia should’ve went to the ACC instead of the big 12. They would’ve done great in football and basketball based on the talent that comes out of there
@@Mrcharles. 100% agree. It would make travel a lot easier for the teams since they would pretty much stay on the east coast during conference play instead of traveling to Iowa, Kansas, Oklahoma and Texas every other week.
Tbh this would make recruiting more regional. This would be amazing!
2022 is promising to unseat those common teams. Alabama is out. Auburn is out. Still need to do something to check OSU up. The transfer portal caused the seasons this year. Alabama wasn't able to keep a hold on players they never intended to play, for example.
I've been watching Japanese college football cause I was kinda curious (hey the quality's pretty good, but it kinda varies between NAIA and D1 FCS) and I gotta say they're doing it right. The biggest conferences, namely the Kanto and Kansai leagues, have promotion and relegation. The top Kansai tier is divided into two divisions, Top 8 and Big 8 while the top Kanto tier only has one division. Kanto and Kansai are like the SEC and Big 10 of Japanese college football.
The teams with the lowest record in the division go down one tier, and replaced by the below tier's winners.
I'd have a bit of a different conference alignment (as a VT fan, the NE conference doesn't make much sense), but I definitely like the overall structure. What made CFB so different from the NFL is how localized it was. Even if people didn't go to those schools, they felt like the team represented their community or region of the state.
CFB needs something like the NFL has where the season champ drafts last. It's not a penalty per se, but something that forces parity. Maybe prohibit Natty game participants from accepting transfers that year.
recruiting is not drafting
@@ektran4205 didn't say it was. I was just making a comparison to how Super Bowl teams draft last outside of a trade as a way to make it harder for the better teams to get better players every year.
@@ccampau why would a kid coming out of high school go to a school he doesn’t want to go to
@@martintabora127 what makes you think I am suggesting this? I just suggested limiting incoming transfers. This would prevent the top teams from poaching top talent from other schools year after year. They would still recruit out of high school
Thing is they dont get paid plus education is involved too
as a bsu fan id love us to play oregon every year
its a great challenge and i would love for us to beat them even though it probably wont happen
if it does i can make fun of all my oregon fan friends
This sounds much better than the current system.
16 teams, no bye week, 7 at-large. Makes for a slower progression but eventual participation in playoffs becomes more representative and, structurally, better able to withstand future challenge. Cinderella comes to The Dance.
I like your playoff format, it’s very similar to how college hockey creates its bracket
Eight conferences with 12 teams, two divisions. Play each team in your conference. Division winners go to conference championship. Conference winners go into playoff.
I love the idea, it's just could never happen
REALLY LOVED THE VIDEO. I hope people at the heads of the NCAA see this video, and rethink their actions, coz the state of Collage Football right now is a JOKE.
NCAA leaders are looking the other way as they would like football to be removed from their system.
Very misleading graph in the beginning. The bottom is 5, not 0. The top is 8. There's too much that graph doesn't take into account.
This needs to happen, amazing plan
I’d personally replace UNLV with Fresno state
I'm big on the auto qualifying, I wanted a 6 or 8 team playoff with the 5 power conference champs auto qualifying. I have heard that 12 is likely, though. The conference realignment won't happen the way you said because of money, but 12 will get us back to the state where, like BCS bowls, any team can have a realistic goal of making it within the next few years if all goes well.
15:11 I love how the New England conference only has one team from New England (BC).
The bigger problem at hand is the devide between the power and Group conferences, something you don’t address at all. When only the power 5 or 9 schools are getting national attention and going to the cfp it just ends up hurting the group teams
It’s also kinda nonsense because there’s a lot of G5 schools that either weren’t historically G5 schools or shouldn’t be G5 schools.
A great example of this is SMU. From 1912 to 1994 SMU played in a conference with A&M, Arkansas, Texas, Houston, Texas Tech, Baylor, TCU. They won this conference 3rd most times behind Texas and Arkansas.
Then they got the death penalty (which really the NCAA owes them compensation now), Texas didn’t want them in their conference, the B12 didn’t want a destroyed team anymore.
So for the last 27 years they’ve been G5. Yet what’s insane to me is when SMu was competing in the AAC the media had the idea to say SMU is trying to show they are as good as the P5.
What? SMU played in the power conference for 82 YEARS……
Always be skeptical of graphs that have a short x-axis and/or don’t use 0 as their baseline. They can be very easily used to mislead
Joseph I like your ambition and creativity with this I agree conferences should be more regional than they are but as a wise man Josh Pate once said let's not pretend all these G5 schools are competing for the same thing as everyone else. They deserve their own playoff so teams like UCF and Tulane actually get rewarded for great seasons like this. To just completely redraw all conferences and just dilute all of the P5 with some other teams will just artificially inflate mid tier programs records. UGA vs Georgia State will just never be a competitive game nor does it need to be. The fact that it's currently five and five makes a neat symmetrical system that lays out clearly who's good and who's not. The best G5 teams then get relegated to join P5 like we have with the big 12
As an Ohio State fan you really said get Purdue outta my conference I don’t want to deal with them anymore 😂
Say that when Purdue beats the buckeyes in basketball.
Sounds reasonable. Every division aside from '1-A' or BCS level has a functioning playoff system and has for decades. I'd like to see what you would do, should the 'Power Five' split from the NCAA. How would '1-A NCAA' rebalance itself?
The New England Conference. One school in New England.. But seriously I like the idea of the Red River Conference but including Arkansas.
@9:15 the major benefit is roster depth at probably every position..
"I was in elementary school sorry if that makes you feel old." I wasn't even in school then.
Also Utah in 2021 we were happy to win the conference and go to the rose bowl. And it's the same this year. Not all teams expect to make the playoffs. Some hope to make a high renown bowl.
Side note. Utah vs BYU is called The Holy War.
I'm curious, past history and the like indicates that this would generate controversy because your "group" conferences don't have a playoff bid. Would you support giving them a playoff bid in this system?
Yes. I considered that after making this video. One of the wild card spots would include the top group team.