Floating Idea: Big Ten Showcase Instead of Championship

Don't worry about the critics.  People on the internet don't have ideas, only opinions.  They resent people who have ideas.

I like the idea, but what happens if Michigan plays the top 6 teams in any given season, which could happen.  If we win a good set of those, and end up a top team, having played the rest of the top teams, how would that work?

Also, how would you handle the automatic bid for the BCS?  Regular season record with a tiebreaker?  I guess I'd meet you halfway and have a B10 championship game, but supplement it with two 'showcase' games as well, one earlier on Saturday or something...

I know the NCAA guidelines state you have to have 12 teams to have a championship game so they say anything about, as you put it, a showcase of games?  If we're going to do a showcase I think we might as well just add on a couple games for pure money.

 

Have Bo 2 vs Woody 3 Saturday at noon, Bo 3 vs Woody 2 Saturday at 3:30 and have Bo 1 vs Woody 1 Saturday at 7. The Big Ten could quite literally rule the TV for an entire afternoon as big name teams go to battle for chances at BCS games (if not championship games) and rank order for the bowl games.  In that scenario you could have 3 stadiums and they'd rotate the games between them.  Indianapolis, Detroit and, say, Chicago.

 

Yeah, I'm pipe dreaming, I know :)

... but isn't the whole point of these things so that the championship is decided on the field based on who beats whom, rather than opinion polls that take "style points" and other subjective factors into consideration?

It seems like one possible variation on the idea could be to have third-place and fifth-place games.

I'm confused.  Conferences with 12+ teams are allowed to have a conference championship game, giving 2 teams a 13th game (and a 14th during bowl season).

So instead you're proposing that SIX teams get a 13th game (potentially giving SIX teams a 14th game during bowl season).

So if 50% of the teams in our conference are going to potentially play 14 games...then why not have a playoff system?  We keep adding games and adding games and adding games...eventually these kids are going to be playing an NFL schedule.

EDIT: I like your outside-the-box thinking.  I just don't think it's a good idea.

...here is how the high schools would do it.  I'm not saying this is how it should be done, but this is how the high schools do things.  (Note: I like how they do their playoff system and is something I would love to see implemented at the NCAA D-1A level.)

You take the rivals and split them up, like so:

• Michigan-Ohio State
• Michigan State-Penn State
• Nebraska-Iowa
• Wisconsin-Minnesota
• Northwestern-Illinois
• Purdue-Indiana

Next you take half of each rivalry and create divisions, like so:

Bo Division:

• Michigan
• Michigan State
• Nebraska
• Wisconsin
• Illinois
• Purdue

Woody Division:

• Ohio State
• Penn State
• Iowa
• Minnesota
• Northwestern
• Indiana

You play two crossovers the first two weeks (not including your rival), followed by your five divisional games, followed by "match-up week", and finally "rivalry week." (Two things: a) I would prefer rivalry week then match-up week and b) there is great potential for rematches on back-to-back weeks, something coaches hate.  And since playoffs is geographically determined in HS, there have been times when teams have played three weeks straight.)

During "match-up week" it's #1 Bo vs. #1 Woody, #2 Bo vs. #2 Woody, etc.  Divisions host alternating years; e.g., 2011 all the Bo division teams are at home, 2012 Woody teams host, etc.

So, let's say Michigan randomly draws Iowa and Minnesota.  The schedule might look something like:

1. Utah State
2. at ND
3. Central Michigan
4. Iowa
5. at Minnesota
6. Nebraska
7. at Wisconsin
8. Illinois
9. at Purdue
10. Michigan State
11. (match-up) #1 Michigan at #1 Ohio State
12. (rivalry) Ohio State at Michigan

 

But I think I see how it might work. On the other hand, I can just as well see the B10 illuminati deciding to draw straws or flip a coin.

Not only do I like the idea of avoiding a rematch, but you avoid a potential nightmare like they had in the Big 12 South a couple years ago when Oklahoma, Texas, and Texas Tech all only had one conference loss.  This way, ALL THREE get to play, and make their case for the national title game!  Sweet!

I think Magnus has a good point and I balk at the idea of not having the Division Champs go head-to-head to decide the title...what would be the point of splitting into divisions in that set-up?

So, I'd modify thusly: as a conference mandate that all teams drop Tomato Can U and make up the lost revenue by creating showcase week which would occur two weeks before the Championship Game with a BYE in between. All teams would be matched up with par-ish competition (repeats disallowed) within the league. That would be some big time coin. But it's a 9th conference game, so it wouldn't be seen for a few more years.

If there is no championship game why do we need divisions?  You could play your showcase with no divisions it adds nothing now.

I like the thought, but I would prefer a full round robin, 11 game schedule if we are just adding games for money.

Very interesting and a little confusing for a quick read, but I did especially like MSU finishing 1-8

If two teams can play 14 games, so can six teams. So can all 12, if we want to do that "Pipe Dream" idea of a 1v1, 2v2, etc.

That's why they call 'em rules. Under NCAA rules which all teams have agreed to, you can play 12 games, 13 if you qualify for a conference championship game. You can't just do it anyway you want simply because you think it works better.