Compiled Idea's for I am compiling all the idea's in this on post for easy access. As I find them, I will add them to the list. I will include all idea's unless there is strong opposition to a particular idea. IF several people (more than 4) say the same thing somewhere, it will go at the bottom. Decided to try and keep all the idea's in one location as I find them. 1.) No preseason -- there is no preseason in NCCA College Football. 2.) You only play a team once during the season. 3.) You play everyone in your own division, then more teams from other divisions sprinkled in. (determined after it is known how many teams & divisions) 5.) Season ends with a division/conference championship game. 6.) Maybe we should implement what should have always been implemented in College football which is a playoff for the championship. Of course the playoff, should not be half the league as that is not realistic. 7.) 6 Divisions - 5 Teams You play the Teams in your Division. 4 Games Then Play 1 Team Randomly chosen from the Other 5 Divisions. 5 Games *** 9 Games Played then the Playoffs. *** 7.1) 18 game season with 2 games per week. *** 8.) 1 game a week played *** 8.1.) 2 games per week 9.) keep some of the teams from the same conference in the same divisions, that way we can still have rivalry games 10.) The BCS shouldn't be used in any way to determine the champion. We could maybe have it to set the top 25 rankings but that those would be used just for fun. 11.) No more than 5 teams per division. 12.) Top 10 teams go to playoffs 13.) Fair Top 10 ranking system 14.) keep as much like college as possible, not the NFL. 15.) instead of two leagues, have one big one like 48 - 60 teams. 16.) I would like to see it just like real College Football as far as Conferences. Like the Big 12, Big 10, ACC, Pac 10. I think it would be cool to keep it as real as possible. I think we should stick with the main conferences though because I don't think it would be too hard to fill them up as there are not that many bad ones. 17.) No bye weeks in the playoffs 18.) I know for sure that the Pac 10 and BigTen don't have title games. I think that we should keep the same conference names and then apply the same rules under those conference names. So people in the BigXII will have a title game where people in the BigTen won't. 19.) So what they then do is move teams that Geographically would fit into that conference in there and still keep the same names, SEC, BigTen, Big XII, and so on. 20.) I think that we need two polls, one being the Coach's Poll (Members), and then the second could be our AP Poll, which I see two ways of doing. One could be a BCS type system, or we could have people that aren't in the league look at the box scores and schedule and other perameters and then vote on rankings. 21.) 3 Conferences have Championship games (Big 12, SEC, MAC) Is that right? If we had it set this way you put the 3 with championships into 1 overall bracket for playoffs and the other 3 conferences in the other bracket. You could do seeding based on the outcome of the championship games and the seedings for the other ones could be done based on their season records. To sum it up. You have 9 Reg. season games followed by 3 Conference championship games, followed by a playoff system to determine the champion. But, if the MAC is not one of the Conferences we chose then i guess that leaves us with 2 Conference title games if we go that route. *** 22.) I say allow people to play ahead if they want. That would allow those with time to play more and those who cannot to just meet the goal of 1 game a week. *** 23.) The only thing I'd see wrong with letting people play ahead is if we have a coaches poll or ap poll of some kind each week it wouldn't work because one team could have play 6 games while another team has only played 2 or 3 games. *** 24.) what about ALLOWING members to SET SCHEDULES - like real college **** 25.) It could be set up to where if you complete your game for the week next weeks game will unlock, but you could only play no more than 1 week ahead. 26.) regardless of who goes to the playoffs, there be a "Conference Championship" where the #1 & #2 teams for each conference play each other the final week. 27.) Before the playoffs, we can have a Conference Championship. The 8 team leagues would just matchup best to worst (record) and the 7 team conferences (could be 8 if we get 32) could have the number 1 seed have a by or something, but I think we need to have that as well. It could maybe take a week and a half at most. 28.) I would just like to say that I'd like to see more "veteran" members allowed in the league. I would prefer this for season 1 if possible 29.) we need to play somewhere around 16 or so games just like in the real NCAA. So if we have 6 conferences with 5 teams each, this is if we decide to have only 30 people. So you have 4 conference games. And then you could play 2 teams from 4 of the other conferences, and then 3 teams from another conference, preferably a rival conference. So that leaves you with 15 total games. To get to 16 you have the conference title game. I think that would be a great way to have everything scheduled. But I think that 2 games a week is necessary More idea's as they come by way of you guys. Idea's heavily supported - Playoff System - Rival Teams in same Conference - No more than 5 teams per Conference - Keep like Real College Football, not like NFL - Keep Real College Football Conferences - Conference Championship for ALL conferences regardless of playoffs Idea's somewhat supported *** "means conflict (disagreement) with idea between members"
Yeh that is for sure, I think we need to designate one thread as the thread to post stuff in and close the others, then reinsert the ideas into the one that is open, cuz this Forum is already getting a little cluttered with the same stuff.
definitely keep real conferences... also, what about ALLOWING members to SET SCHEDULES - like real college. as Rutgers, my job would be to try to play UCONN, and maybe Notre Dame wouldnt play me and so on... teams could play 12 or 13 games (6-8 in conference) and be required to schedule the rest themselves. we could all be ATHLETIC DIRECTORS too, and post threads looking for games until our schedule is set. schedule would have to be set prior to the season, so maybe we could have 2 weeks prior to the start to SET SCHEDULES... i think this factor (while being difficult to manage) would CREATE an awesome element to controlling your team!
Good idea about setting our own schedule, but I see some major problems with that, but I will only list 2 of them: 1.) People would organize them wrong and make themselves playing people in weeks they are already playing, and have multiple games in one week, or not have weeks filled up. 2.) Some people might play others and see who they can beat the majority of the time and just place these players in there schedule, as that way they can go 12-0 throughout the season, going undefeated and only being challenged in the playoff system. Would be lame! The first reason obviously isn't as much of a concern as the second reason, but I could see both of which happening. If idea 1 seems kind of weird, sorry, I couldn't really think of the words that I wanted to use to properly describe my feeling toward it. That is just my criticism towards goalie's idea, but don't be hurt or anything goalie, that's what ideas are for, see how they do, how other people feel about them, and to see if they would work. Without ideas, nothing would be possible, so lets get some more guys
well - sometimes! but your "rankings" might be affected by only beating weaker opponents (see TCU, 2003)
A problem I see is with the Big Ten and Pac 10 that don't have playoff games, believe me, i'm an Iowa fan and there are ties every other year for the conference championship. The tie breaker rules are usually pretty odd, including one where the the tied teamwho has gone the longest without winning a conf. championship wins the tie breaker. You obviously can't do this with this scenario. Easy thing to do, add an Independent like Notre Dame to the Big Ten and split up into two separate divisions and have a conference champ game. Your setting yourself up for problems if you don't do this. This way you won't have conference ties and you don't have problems with independents like Notre Dame. Everything else is well thought out, I think 60 is a bit ambitious however, maybe wait and see how the turnout ends up. Getting people to take teams like Vandy, Duke, Northwestern, Indiana might prove to be a challenge if you want to keep a "True" NCAA league. Big 12 = 12 teams Big 10 + 1 indy = 12 teams SEC = 12 teams Pac 10 + 2 indy = 12 teams ACC = 12 teams Big East = ?
Yeah, that is true. See USC also, they got ripped, should have been there, but lets not start that argument on here again
macteago Looking at the list there your showing some 60 plus teams. At this point there's only roughly 35 or 36 who even expressed an interest in the game and some of those, myself included, are not going to play the game if it incorporates some type of " Pay to Play". I doubt seriously the first season will have that many teams.
He was just saying how many teams are in each of those conferences in real life.:wink: The statement above it he acknowledged that 60 teams was ambitious.
It would be great if we could get 36 solid members cuz then it would make scheduling a lot easier. I definitely like the idea of setting your own schedules. In last year's game I always did that, scheduling games with the highest seeds possible. If people decide to only put pushover teams in their schedule then that will hurt them in their rankings. And in order to make the rankings important I think we should use them as a way to set the seeds for the playoffs. So those that win their conference and have the two highest rankings get byes, or if we use wildcards play the wildcards, etc.
I would just like to say that I'd like to see more "veteran" members allowed in the league. I would prefer this for season 1 if possible.
