09252017

Proposed college football re-alignment: Creating a true National Champion

Facebooktwittergoogle_pluspinterestmail

It’s time to get rid of the conferences and divide up teams according to geography. That way, rivalries that have been destroyed in recent years can be restored.

In my better-than-reality remake of college football schedules, the division champions of the eight conferences create an eight-team playoff that sets up a “Final Four” and a bonafide championship game. Read how I think college football needs to change here, and scroll down for my proposal on how Division I college football should look:

WEST

Pacific Division

USC
UCLA
Washington
Washington State
Oregon
Oregon State
Stanford
California

Mountain Division

Arizona
Arizona State
Colorado
Colorado State
Utah
BYU
Boise State
Air Force

 

MIDWEST

North Division

Michigan
Ohio State
Michigan State
Minnesota
Northwestern
Nebraska
Notre Dame
Indiana

 

South Division

Texas
Texas A&M
Oklahoma
Oklahoma State
Kansas State
Louisville
Houston
Baylor

 

EAST

Atlantic Division

Clemson
South Carolina
Pittsburgh
Penn State
North Carolina
North Carolina State
Duke
Maryland

 

Coastal Division

Virginia Tech
Boston College
Syracuse
Virginia
Virginia Tech
West Virginia
Cincinnati
Navy

 

SOUTH

East Division

Alabama
Florida
Tennessee
Miami
Auburn
Georgia
Georgia Tech
Florida State

 

West Division

Ole Miss
Mississippi State
Arkansas
Texas Tech
TCU
Missouri
Kentucky
Louisiana State

Sample College Football Playoff

Like this story(0)

3 Responses to "Proposed college football re-alignment: Creating a true National Champion"

  1. Chris says:

    Creative and interesting suggestion. You leave out San Diego State, Wyoming, Memphis, the directional schools from Michigan and Florida, Connecticut — all from the G5 — and drop Rutgers, who is in the B1G, Vanderbilt from the SEC, and Wake Forest from the ACC. Nice ideas also need to be at least a bit realistic. The teams that are already in the P5 conferences need to be included, worthy or not. But I also think your additions of Navy, Cincinnati, Houston, BYU, Air Force, Colorado St. (CSU is iffy), and Boise State are worthy inclusions. I think you should add to your brackets the same thing they did with the NCCA BBall tourney — a play-in. Create a ninth Division with the three P5 teams you dropped and five others (South Florida, Central Florida, San Diego State, Connecticut, Wyoming or Memphis). These non-geographic teams will play non-Divisional schools and Divisional schools during the year, and then a play-off at end of shorter season for their Division 9 champ). They will play non-Divisional G5 champ determined by play-off of their own, in a “play-in” game, winner to face highest seeded Division winner in first round. That way every D1 school has a chance to win it all.

  2. Bryan says:

    And where is Wisconsin….? If I recall they play some pretty good football in Badgerland. Number 9 in the final poll this year. Leaving them off your list seems to show a lot of short comings in this idea, much less current P5 teams Rutgers, Vandy & Wake Forest. Might as well leave off Northwestern, Iowa St., Kansas, Boston College, and every other bottom feeder from the P5 conferences. None of those schools really have a chance anyway.

  3. Jonathan says:

    I like the concept, but the execution is where it will bog down. Some of those issues were brought up in the previous replies. May divisions of 9 teams (instead of 8) is needed to include more teams. I like the idea of dropping the lowest ranked team of each division to a division II (or 1a) and bring up the highest ranked teams from a lower division. Maybe a transition period of a couple of years with 10 team divisions and only dropping a team from each division for a couple of years (without bringing a team up) until divisions get down to 8 teams. That way all current P5 teams could start out in the upper division and have a reason to be sent down to a lower division. Just some thoughts. To actually get something like this through, the $ brought in on a single TV deal would have to dwarf the combined $ brought in the individual conference deals, otherwise there’s no way to get it past the bureaucracy. Even then, I suspect many top teams would prefer the status quo of making less money in exchange for having more than other teams.

Leave a Reply

Submit Comment