I have spent a lot of time through the years thinking about how to make this or that better, in large part, to no good end. For example, I think all power lines should be underground. It would be a significant aesthetic improvement, would lead to fewer automobile accidents involving utility poles, and would result in fewer power outages, which are often caused by falling trees or tree limbs. It’s a great idea, certainly not original to me. Though I have no authority to implement the concept, it is fun to think about.
Recently Bill James, the patron saint of baseball analytics, engaged in a thought experiment. He thinks the NBA should consider a significant tweak to its draft to lessen the incentive for teams to tank seasons. His idea, in short form, is to allow each player eligible for the draft to be drafted by up to three teams. Then the teams that draft a player could negotiate with him and he could sign for the best situation, most dollars, or some combination of the two. The scheme calls for a cap on dollars that can be spent on draft picks over a time period, say five years. It’s just a thought experiment, if a good one, so all of the potential kinks have not been analyzed.
Steven Goldleaf recently offered his own thought experiment on Bill James Online. He wants us to consider the impact of a new scheme governing walks in baseball. Again, in short form, he envisions each team having nine free balls per inning. The tenth ball would be a walk, as would each subsequent ball. He believes (almost certainly correctly) that this scheme would lead to more hittable pitches, more balls in play, more runs scored, and a vastly different record book. It’s an interesting idea and like most thought experiments is unlikely to be implemented. It hearkens to a bygone age when the pitcher was supposed to initiate the action, not dominate it.
There are many others thought experiments out there. Some, like Brexit, have real world impact – whether for good or bad remains to be determined. Today I offer my own thought experiment.
There has been much talk lately about whether the Big 12 should expand. Much of the discussion has centered on football. My idea is to leave the conference as is, meaning that we do nothing to change the structure of any sport, whether baseball, soccer, basketball, etc. — except for football. I believe we should consider distributing the Big 12’s football teams to the other four conferences that comprise the so-called Power 5 (SEC, Big Ten, PAC-12, ACC and Big 12).
The Big 12 has been getting picked apart for years anyway. Primarily based on football considerations, the conference lost Nebraska to the Big Ten, Colorado to the PAC-12, and Texas A&M and Missouri to the SEC. The Big 12 is no longer the force it once was, though, to be fair, each year the conference’s top teams remain among the best in the country.
My idea of distributing the Big 12 teams to the other conferences dovetails nicely with my belief that college football should have an eight-team playoff. As currently constituted, the ACC has 14 teams, the Big Ten has 14 teams, the PAC-12 has 12 teams, the SEC has 14 teams, and the Big 12 has 10 teams. That’s a total of 64 teams. Remind you of anything?
It reminds me of the NCAA basketball tournament in its most perfect form, before the abomination of the First Four was invented. The only good thing about the First Four is that they no longer call it the First Round.
If the Power 5 became the Power 4, or some better name please, and each conference has 16 teams, then we are most of the way to an eight-team playoff. The winner of each division would play in a quarterfinal game. Whether the two division winners from each conference play each other or the eight teams are seeded by the current playoff committee doesn’t really matter. What matters is having eight teams determined by the results on the field, which then determine a champion on the field.
Because this is my thought experiment, I would seed the eight teams and hold the four quarterfinal games at the home field of the higher seed. The stadiums would be packed and we would likely see matchups that college football fans can now only dream of. The semis and the championship game could remain in rotation with the existing bowls.
There are a few issues outstanding. (Yea, right, just a few.)
First, the Big 12 teams have to be distributed. I would do it essentially by geography. The easiest decision is West Virginia, which would join the ACC along with Iowa State; Kansas and Kansas State would join the Big Ten; Texas, TCU, Texas Tech, and Baylor would join the PAC-12; and Oklahoma and Oklahoma State would join to the SEC. That’s not perfect, but if you look at a map, it makes a lot of sense.
Second, some pretty good football schools have been left out. It may have occurred to you, for instance, that Notre Dame’s football team isn’t in any of these conferences. This is football’s chance to convince Notre Dame to join a conference. ND won’t have to, but if they don’t, they will be ineligible for the national championship. Others schools of note on the outside include: Boise State, Louisville, Hawaii, Cincinnati, Connecticut, Northern Illinois, and the University of Central Florida. Each of these teams has played in at least one BCS bowl within the last ten years.
Third, scheduling is always tricky, but this format allows the powers that be to enforce some standards. Each team would of necessity play the seven teams in its division each year. In addition, each team would be required to play at least two games against teams from its conference’s other division or from the other Power 4 conferences. I would require each of the Power 4 matchups to be home and home. Teams would still have the opportunity to schedule two or three revenue games against teams from outside the Power 64.
Fourth, strength of schedule and the eye test would become things of the past. There would still be much discussion about whether this team is better than that team, but there would be only one crystal-clear criterion for advancing to the year-end tournament: division record. The two-way tie-breaker would be head to head performance. Multiple team tie-breakers would have to be established, let’s say fewest points allowed against the teams in the tie.
Fifth (and most controversially?), relegation should be adopted. This is a large topic deserving of its own post, but I’ll be brief anyway. Because there are so many good teams on the outside looking in and because there are some many bad teams on the inside, there should be a process to replace the bad with the good. There are many valid ways to approach this issue and they are all disruptive. But, again, it’s my thought experiment, so here is my idea:
Every five years, the two teams in the Power 64 (“P64”) with the fewest wins against P64 schools should be replaced by the two teams outside the P64 with the most wins against P64 teams. That’s not perfect and it could lead to serious geographical dislocation, but not likely much worse than West Virginia having the entire Big Ten between it and the Big 12. A tiebreaker could be paid attendance.
Sixth, let’s face it: football is different. It is (roughly) the cash cow of college sports, though men’s and women’s basketball also provide healthy revenues. In the main, the other sports do not. There is no reason football can’t be treated differently, as a separate entity with a sort of super-structure imposed outside the current conference format. And, let’s face it, conferences have changed frequently throughout the years, there is nothing sacrosanct about the current structure, nor should there be.
Seventh, however bizarre relegation would be, it would provide a new arena of intense interest as schools battle to avoid relegation and others battle to gain admission to the P64. Instead of tracking wins, we might instead track football related revenues. That may well be a bit more honest than we want to be.
Eighth, Texas will want to retain the Longhorn Network. They can, but football will be outside that network.
Ninth, Notre Dame will likely succumb, which means we have 65 schools. Someone must go. I would nominate either Vanderbilt or Wake Forest. It’s a favor to whichever gets booted. Wake and Vandy are the only two schools in the P64 with a student enrollment under 10,000 and they play in two of the smallest stadiums, only Washington State is close. Perhaps one of them would volunteer to become an independent.
Tenth, of course it will never happen. Who cares? As my friend Parker likes to say, discuss and debate.
Here is a wrinkle for you:
A play in tournament (toilet bowl) game. For example, The last place in a conference or division would have to play and beat a non p64 team in order to remain in the P64. ND would be in the after the first year, perhaps at BC’s expense. N.I. would, too, maybe at U.Ill’s expense. Imagine the crowds for those 2 games.
I like that angle. That might be the only way for BC to draw a crowd.