BCS-Plus: A College Football Postseason Reform Alternative

The College Football Playoff replaced the much-maligned BCS system for organizing college football's postseason in 2014, and it seems that there is no going back. Most discussions about reforming this system focus on expanding the playoff from four to eight schools. The common proposal here is to guarantee bids for each Power 5 conference champion, the highest ranked Group of 5 school, and two at-large schools.

However, I recently started thinking about what the college football postseason might look like if the BCS system still existed in some form, with reforms. What I came up with consisted of three core changes from the BCS system:

1. The moving of the #1 vs #2 national championship game to after the bowl games.

2. The expansion of the BCS from 4 to 8 bowl games.

3. The replacement of the BCS poll with a committee ranking, similar to the current CFP approach.

On the first point, it's worth noting that the main goal of the BCS (like the Bowl Coalition and Bowl Alliance before it) was to produce a #1 vs #2 national championship game. Originally this was done in one of the bowl games themselves (Rose, Orange, Sugar or Fiesta), and later was made into its own game separate from the bowls. But what if this match-up was a plus-one game that took place after the bowls? This would allow the bowl games to be used to determine who the #1 vs #2 match-up should be, as the rankings could be redone one final time after the bowls. This is similar to the CFP approach, but would mean that theoretically any two teams could be selected for the national championship, not just the four teams who play the semifinal bowls. This would give each Power 5 conference champ a shot at the title, along with Group of 5 teams, without necessarily having an eight-team playoff. Additionally, more bowl games would be relevant to the national title conversation in any given season, at least three if not four or more.

Expanding from 4 to 8 bowl games would increase the overall number of high-quality bowl match-ups, especially when at-large berths are in play. In addition to the four original BCS bowls, we could see the Peach and Fiesta bowls (which are part of the CFP's New Year's Six), the Citrus Bowl in Orlando (which was considered as a potential BCS bowl), and the Holiday Bowl in San Diego (which was a finalist for being a CFP bowl site). Under this proposal, we would guarantee bids for the five Power 5 conference champions, the next highest ranked team from each Power 5 conference, a Group of 5 school, and five at-large bids. The selection process would be as follows:

1. Power 5 conference champions are assigned to designated bowl games (Big Ten/Pac-12 to Rose, ACC to Orange, SEC/Big 12 to Sugar)

2. Next highest ranked team receives the at-large bid to the Orange Bowl.

3. Next highest ranked team from each Power 5 conference is assigned to their designated bowl game (Big Ten/SEC to Citrus, ACC to Peach, Big 12 to Cotton, Pac-12 to Holiday).

4. Highest ranked (remaining) Group of 5 school is assigned to Fiesta Bowl.

5. Bowl games with unfilled at-large bids (Peach, Cotton, Holiday, Fiesta) are assigned order of selection based on the ranking of their auto-bid team.

6. At-large bids are assigned, based on rankings, down the order of selection, avoiding match-ups of teams from same conference/regular season rematches as needed.

Compared to the current New Year's Six Bowls, this would produce more top-10 and top-16 bowl match-ups. Here are the possible scenarios during the CFP era, using the actual conference champions and CFP rankings:

2014
Rose: #2 Oregon vs #4 Ohio State

Sugar: #1 Alabama vs #5 Baylor

Orange: #3 Florida State vs #6 TCU
Citrus: #7 Miss. St. vs #8 Michigan State

Holiday: #10 Arizona vs #9 Ole Miss

Cotton: #11 Kansas State vs #13 Georgia

Peach: #12 Georgia Tech vs #14 UCLA

Fiesta: #20 Boise St. vs #15 Arizona St.

2015
Rose: #6 Stanford vs #3 Michigan State
Sugar: #2 Alabama vs #4 Oklahoma
Orange: #1 Clemson vs #5 Iowa
Citrus: #12 Ole Miss vs #7 Ohio State
Peach: #9 Florida State vs #8 Notre Dame
Cotton: #11 TCU vs #10 UNC
Holiday: #15 Oregon vs #13 Northwestern
Fiesta: #18 Houston vs #14 Michigan

2016
Rose: #4 Washington vs #5 Penn State
Sugar: #1 Alabama vs #7 Oklahoma
Orange: #2 Clemson vs #3 Ohio State
Citrus: #14 Auburn vs #6 Michigan
Holiday: #9 USC vs #8 Wisconsin
Peach: #11 Florida State vs #10 Colorado
Cotton: #12 Okla. St. vs #13 Louisville
Fiesta: #15 W. Michigan vs #16 West Virginia

2017
Rose: #8 USC vs #5 Ohio State
Sugar: #3 Georgia vs #2 Oklahoma
Orange: #1 Clemson vs #4 Alabama
Citrus: #7 Auburn vs #6 Wisconsin
Peach: #10 Miami vs #9 Penn State
Holiday: #11 Wash. vs #14 Notre Dame
Fiesta: #12 UCF vs #13 Stanford
Cotton: #15 TCU vs #16 Michigan State

2018
Rose: #9 Washington vs #6 Ohio State
Sugar: #1 Alabama vs #4 Oklahoma
Orange: #2 Clemson vs #3 Notre Dame
Citrus: #5 Georgia vs #7 Michigan
Fiesta: #8 UCF vs #10 Florida
Holiday: #13 Wash. St. vs #11 LSU
Cotton: #15 Texas vs #12 Penn State
Peach: #20 Syracuse vs #14 Kentucky

2019
Rose: #6 Oregon vs #2 Ohio State
Sugar: #1 LSU vs #4 Oklahoma
Orange: #3 Clemson vs #5 Georgia
Citrus: #9 Florida vs #8 Wisconsin
Cotton: #7 Baylor vs #10 Penn State
Holiday: #11 Utah vs #12 Auburn
Fiesta: #17 Memphis vs #13 Alabama
Peach: #24 Virginia vs #14 Michigan

This system can also be applied retroactively to the BCS era itself. Because of the existence of the Big East, that conference would get the auto-bid to the Orange Bowl in place of the at-large berth, and their second team would go the Gator Bowl, which would serve as the ninth BCS bowl. Thus, the selection process would have been as follows:

1. Conference champions from AQ conferences are assigned to designated bowl games (Big Ten/Pac-10 to Rose, Big East/ACC to Orange, SEC/Big 12 to Sugar)

2. Highest ranked non-champion from each AQ conference is assigned to their designated bowl game (Big Ten/SEC to Citrus, ACC to Peach, Big 12 to Cotton, Big East to Gator, Pac-10 to Holiday).

3. Highest ranked non-AQ school is assigned to Fiesta Bowl.

4. Bowl games with at-large bids (Peach, Cotton, Gator, Holiday, Fiesta) are assigned order of selection based on the ranking of their auto-bid team.

5. At-large bids are assigned, based on rankings, down the order of selection, avoiding match-ups of teams from same conference/regular season rematches as needed.

Compared to the CFP era, using this system in the BCS era would have been more chaotic, due to the absence of the at-large bid in the Orange Bowl and the greater unevenness between conferences. Also, some of the stronger non-AQ schools (ie Utah and TCU) have since made their way into Power 5 conferences. Thus, we could have expected more bowl games (and more teams) to have been relevant to determining the national title game match-up.

Yet Another College Football Realignment Scheme: The 1991 Scenario

I have already posted multiple college football realignment proposals, but constantly come up with more, so here I am yet again. This proposal returns to the 8 10-team conference concept I've visited before. In this case, I've drawn heavily on the actual alignment scheme from the 1991 season, with a few modifications. I've chosen 1991 for a few reasons: 1) this was the first year that the Big East sponsored football; 2) this was the last year before the SEC expanded and split into divisions; 3) Penn State had not yet joined the Big Ten; and 4) the Southwest Conference still existed. 

Here's what I've come up with:

Big Ten
Ohio State, Michigan, Michigan State, Indiana, Purdue, Illinois, Northwestern, Wisconsin, Minnesota, Iowa

SEC
Georgia, Florida, Alabama, Auburn, Kentucky, Tennessee, Vanderbilt, Ole Miss, Mississippi State, LSU

Pac-10

Washington, Washington State, Oregon, Oregon State, California, Stanford, UCLA, USC, Arizona, Arizona State

These three conferences would all just be their alignments exactly as they were in 1991.

SWC
Texas, Texas A&M, Texas Tech, Baylor, TCU, SMU, Rice, Houston, Arkansas, Tulane

The reborn Southwest Conference would consist of the 9 teams it had in 1991, along with one newcomer: Tulane. Tulane seems like a reasonable pick here. Geographically, Louisiana borders on both Arkansas and Texas, and adding Tulane would bring both the New Orleans media market and the state's recruiting territory more into the fold. Tulane is a private school like 4 existing SWC schools (Baylor, TCU, SMU, and Rice), and the school was cited as a potential expansion pick for the SWC at the end of it's existence. Lastly, Tulane does have an SEC pedigree, having been a founding member.

ACC
Maryland, Virginia, UNC, NC State, Duke, Wake Forest, Clemson, South Carolina, Georgia Tech, Florida State

The ACC would consist of the eight schools here in 1991, with two additions to get it to 10. Florida State is an obvious choice here, since they joined the ACC the following year anyway. South Carolina rejoins the ACC in this scenario, where it was a founding member, instead of joining the SEC. This restores the Clemson-South Carolina rivalry as a conference game.

Big Eight
Iowa State, Missouri, Nebraska, Kansas, Kansas State, Oklahoma, Oklahoma State, Colorado, Utah, BYU

This one was slightly more challenging, as the Big Eight obviously had only 8 teams in 1991. Utah and BYU are the additions here. While this does expand the Big Eight's footprint, Utah does border on Colorado so it's not a huge deal. Utah currently plays in the Pac-12 with Colorado, and since the Pac-10 already has 10 schools this is only other logical place to put them. Adding BYU with Utah allows that rivalry to become a conference game. It's also worth noting that BYU was mentioned as a possible school to the join the Big 12 during the Big Eight/SWC merger talks.

Big East
Boston College, Syracuse, Rutgers, Temple, Penn State, Pittsburgh, West Virginia, Virginia Tech, Miami, Notre Dame

This version of the Big East consists of the founding football members from 1991, plus two additions: Penn State and Notre Dame. Penn State fits well here both geographically and in terms of potential rivalry games, especially since they're locked out of the Big Ten in this scenario. As I've previously mentioned, Penn State missed admission to the Big East during the 1980s by one vote. Notre Dame also works well, as they are another strong independent program, similar in profile to Miami and Penn State pre-1991. Also worth noting that Notre Dame was a Big East member in all sports except football for quite a while. These two additions make this conference much stronger and more viable than the actual Big East was in practice.

American
Army, Navy, UCF, USF, Cincinnati, Louisville, Memphis, Air Force, Boise State, San Diego State

This is the one conference I had to make up from scratch, as no such alignment remotely existed in 1991. These are some of the strongest Group of 5 schools currently. Five schools here currently play in the American (Navy, UCF, USF, Cincinnati, and Memphis), while Louisville was a founding member before joining the ACC the following year. Joining Navy here are the other two service academies. Boise State and San Diego State were two of the schools the Big East tried to recruit as it was collapsing and transitioning to the American. Despite having only one current Power 5 school, this conference had 6 different schools finish in the final AP top 25 in 2019.

In terms of the postseason bowls, this proposal would use the same regional structure as my previous eight 10-team conference alignment, with the following conferences corresponding to each region's bowls:

West: Pac-10 vs. Big Ten
Southwest: SWC vs. Big Eight
Southeast: SEC vs. ACC
East: Big East vs American

One difference here is that I would use a similar playoff structure as I proposed for the 96-team alignment. So the quarterfinals would be:

Rose Bowl: Pac-10 vs. Big Ten
Cotton Bowl: SWC vs. Big Eight
Sugar Bowl: SEC vs. ACC
Orange Bowl: Big East vs American

As before, the Rose and Cotton Bowl winners would play in the Fiesta Bowl, and the Sugar and Orange winners would play in the Peach Bowl. The Fiesta and Peach winners would play in the national championship game.

Because the Fiesta and Peach Bowls are serving as semifinals, the Las Vegas and Independence Bowls replace them in their respective regions. Also, with the Rose, Cotton, Sugar and Orange Bowls serving as quarterfinals, the fifth place team in each conference would not get a bowl berth in this scenario.

A Modification to My Radical Realignment Scheme

Earlier this year, I published what I termed a "radical" realignment scheme for college football, consisting of 16 6-team conferences that would play double-round robin conference schedules. At the time, I mentioned that the postseason could simply be a seeded, 16-team "March Madness"-style playoff tournament consisting of the conference champions. However, I realize that a different approach may actually prove even more interesting.

Each of the 16 6-team conferences can easily be paired with another to form a two-division, 12-team conference. Here's what that would look like:

Pacific 12 Conference
North Division: Washington, Washington State, Oregon, Oregon State, Utah, BYU
South Division: Stanford, Cal, UCLA, USC, Arizona, Arizona State

Mountain West Conference
West Division: Hawaii, San Jose State, Fresno State, San Diego State, Nevada, UNLV
Mountain Division: Boise State, Utah State, Wyoming, Colorado State, Air Force, New Mexico

Big 12 Conference

North Division: Colorado, Nebraska, Kansas, Kansas State, Missouri, Arkansas
South Division: Oklahoma, Oklahoma State, Texas, Texas A&M, Texas Tech, Houston

Big Ten Conference
West Division: Minnesota, Iowa, Iowa State, Wisconsin, Northwestern, Illinois
East Division: Purdue, Indiana, Notre Dame, Michigan, Michigan State, Ohio State

Big East Conference
West Division: Syracuse, Boston College, Pitt, Penn State, West Virginia, Maryland
East Division: UConn, UMass, Army, Rutgers, Temple, Navy

Atlantic Coast Conference
North Division: Virginia, Virginia Tech, UNC, NC State, Duke, Wake Forest
South Division: Clemson, South Carolina, Georgia Tech, Florida State, Florida, Miami

Southeastern Conference
South Division: LSU, Ole Miss, Mississippi State, Alabama, Auburn, Georgia
North Division: Cincinnati, Louisville, Memphis, Kentucky, Vanderbilt, Tennessee

American Athletic Conference
East Division: Appalachian State, East Carolina, Central Florida, South Florida, FAU, FIU
West Division: Tulsa, TCU, Baylor, Rice, SMU, Tulane

Under this modified proposal, each division would still play a double-round robin regular season schedule. The winner of each division would play each other for the conference championship. The winners of each conference championship would advance to the playoff quarterfinals, with set bowl match-ups against another conference champion, as follows:

Rose Bowl: Pac-12 vs Big Ten

Cotton Bowl: Mountain West vs American

Sugar Bowl: SEC vs Big 12

Orange Bowl: ACC vs Big East

The semifinals would pit the Rose and Cotton Bowl winners against each other in the Fiesta Bowl, while the Sugar and Orange Bowl winners would play in the Peach Bowl. The winners of the Fiesta and Peach Bowls would then play each other for the national championship.

In addition to the playoff bowls, each conference would send three other teams to bowl games, for a total of 32 bowl berths among the 96 teams in this proposal. The conference championship losers would play in the following bowl games:

Holiday Bowl: Pac-12 vs Big Ten

Bluebonnet Bowl: Mountain West vs American

Liberty Bowl: SEC vs Big 12

Citrus Bowl: ACC vs Big East

The runners-up in each division per conference would play each other in a play-in game for the next set of bowls:

Aloha Bowl: Pac-12 vs Big Ten

Sun Bowl: Mountain West vs American

All-American Bowl: SEC vs Big 12

Gator Bowl: ACC vs Big East

Finally, the third place finishers in each division would also play each other for the spots in this set of bowls:

Las Vegas Bowl: Pac-12 vs Big Ten

Alamo Bowl: Mountain West vs American

Independence Bowl: SEC vs Big 12

Hall of Fame Bowl: ACC vs Big East

An Even More Radical College Football Realignment Scheme

Nearly two years ago, I laid out my proposal for a dramatic realignment of the FBS level of NCAA football. Today, inspired by Sports Illustrated's recent (and, frankly, awful) realignment plan, I've gone back to the drawing board and come up with something even more radical than before. After playing around with ideas for modifying the existing conference structures, I kept coming up with a group of six northeastern schools that would be difficult to fit into conferences: UConn, UMass, Army, Rutgers, Temple, and Navy. I thought it would be interesting if they had a little conference of their own, and even more interesting if they played a double-round robin conference schedule (ie two games against each conference opponent, one home and one away, for a total of ten conference games). Spurred on by this idea, I decided to try to see if I could do something similar with other groupings of schools. This is what formed the basis of the proposal laid out below.

As I've already mentioned the core concept here is the six-team conference playing a double round-robin schedule. From this, I was able to come up with 16 such conferences, for a total of 96 schools. This includes every Power Five school, all of the schools from the Mountain West and American Conferences, and some independent, CUSA and Sun Belt Conference schools to round out the list. As I see it, this plan represents a throwback to the past, a continuation of current trends, and something completely novel all at once.

In terms of being a return to college football tradition, the conferences are all heavily based on geography, and more specifically geographic rivalries. This is a far cry from the sprawling, geographically nonsensical conference alignments of the present day (why on Earth is West Virginia in the Big 12??). Travel distances would be greatly reduced in every conference, with most schools not having to go more than a state or two over to play a conference game. In the age of COVID-19, this kind of arrangement may well become necessary to begin with.

As a continuation of current trends, this proposal would see the expansion of the College Football Playoff from four to sixteen teams. Let's consider that an expansion to eight teams is almost an inevitability at this point, so sixteen isn't really all that far-fetched, and would only meaning adding one potential game to a given team's schedule if we get rid of conference championship games. I for one would love to see a "March Madness" style FBS tournament, especially if it gives smaller schools an opportunity to play Cinderella while still generally seeing the blue bloods come out on top, as this proposal likely would.

The novel element of this plan is the double round-robin conference schedule. As far as I'm aware this has not been implemented by an FBS conference before, certainly not in recent times. Usually the only time two teams would play each other twice is if they met again in a conference title game. The only example I could find of this being done intentionally in the regular season is the current series between New Mexico State and Liberty - and that one is only because both teams are independents who need to fill out their schedules. Yet I don't think this plan is as outlandish as it may seem at first. Divisional rivals in the NFL get to play each other twice despite playing only a 16-game schedule, and college basketball conferences have traditionally used a double round-robin format. I don't think anyone would argue that getting to see a Cowboys-Giants or Duke-UNC game twice a year is a bad thing. Now imagine if you could have Ohio State-Michigan or Alabama-Auburn twice a year, instead of having one of those games being Ohio State-Rutgers or Alabama-Vanderbilt instead. Having smaller conferences would make this possible, while still allowing for two non-conference games to be played every year. And even with the smaller conferences, I found that most of the major rivalries within conferences could still be maintained.

So, without any further ado, here's what these conferences would look like. Note that the conference names are just placeholders to help distinguish the conferences from one another:

Northwest Conference
Washington, Washington State, Oregon, Oregon State, Utah, BYU

Made up of five Pac-12 schools (four from the North division alone) and one independent, this conference would have the potential to be one of the strongest in this new alignment. The key rivalries here are the in-state ones: Washington-Washington State, Oregon-Oregon State, and Utah-BYU, the latter of which would be a conference game for the first time since 2010; Washington-Oregon would be the other key rivalry. This would be one of the few conferences where the states are not geographically contiguous.

Far West Conference
Stanford, Cal, UCLA, USC, Arizona, Arizona State

This conference would be completely composed of schools from the Pac-12, four of them from the South division. The four California schools are all reunited here with their key rivalries (Stanford-Cal, Cal-UCLA, UCLA-USC, and USC-Stanford), while Arizona and Arizona State are kept together.

Pacific West Conference
Hawaii, San Jose State, Fresno State, San Diego State, Nevada, UNLV

This is literally the West division of the Mountain West Conference. Fresno State maintains its rivalries with San Diego State, San Jose State, and Hawaii, while Nevada and UNLV are also kept together. Probably one of the weaker conferences here.

Rocky Mountain Conference
Boise State, Utah State, Wyoming, Colorado State, Air Force, New Mexico

This is likewise the Mountain division of the MWC, and also a relatively weak conference. We see a fairly low concentration of major rivalries, the biggest being Utah State-Wyoming, Wyoming-Colorado State, and Colorado State-Air Force. I would have liked to put Boise State elsewhere (as I did with my previous proposal) but can't really make that work here.

Great Plains Conference
Colorado, Nebraska, Kansas, Kansas State, Missouri, Arkansas

This conference is loaded with rivalries from the old Big Eight - Nebraska alone would have rivalry games against Colorado, Kansas, Kansas State, and Missouri, while we also have Kansas-Kansas State and Kansas-Missouri. Arkansas is a bit of an awkward fit, though at least they'd have the opportunity to continue building their rivalry with Missouri.

Central Conference
Minnesota, Iowa, Iowa State, Wisconsin, Northwestern, Illinois

Five of these six schools hail from the Big Ten West, giving us a number of rivalries: Minnesota-Wisconsin, Wisconsin-Iowa, Iowa-Minnesota, and Northwestern-Illinois. Meanwhile, Iowa-Iowa State is made a conference game. Arguably one of the stronger conferences in this alignment.

Great Lakes Conference
Purdue, Indiana, Notre Dame, Michigan, Michigan State, Ohio State

Probably one of the two strongest conferences here (along with the Deep South). Five of the schools are from the Big Ten, and four from the East division alone. Michigan-Ohio State is one of the greatest rivalries in sports, while you also maintain the Michigan-Michigan State, Purdue-Indiana, and Indiana-Michigan State rivalries. Adding Notre Dame to the mix allows them to play existing rivals Michigan, Michigan State, and Purdue, and potentially build an in-state rivalry with Indiana.

Appalachian Conference
Syracuse, Boston College, Pitt, Penn State, West Virginia, Maryland

We restore four core schools of the old Big East here. A very high concentration of rivalry games, as Syracuse, Pitt, Penn State ,and West Virginia are all rivals with each other. We also see the Boston College-Syracuse, Penn State-Maryland, and West Virginia-Maryland rivalries here.

North Atlantic Conference
UConn, UMass, Army, Rutgers, Temple, Navy

The conference that formed the basis for this whole idea, this may ironically be the weakest of all of them. This also has the fewest rivalry games, with only UConn-UMass and Army-Navy counting as such currently. However, I believe Rutgers-Temple would have obvious rivalry potential, and the geographic proximity and relatively similar strength of these programs overall makes me think this could actually work quite well.

Tidewater Conference
Virginia, Virginia Tech, UNC, NC State, Duke, Wake Forest

Another conference with a high concentration of rivalries, mainly due to all of the Tobacco Road schools being each other's rivals. We also have the Virginia-Virginia Tech and UNC-Virginia rivalries here. I think these ACC schools would benefit greatly from being out of the shadow of the Clemson Goliath.

South Atlantic Conference
Clemson, South Carolina, Georgia Tech, Florida State, Florida, Miami

This conference combines four ACC and two SEC schools, although South Carolina was actually a founding member of the ACC as well. The three Florida schools are all each other's rivals, and we also get Clemson's rivalries with Florida State, South Carolina and Georgia Tech. I would have loved to fit Georgia in here somehow, but I think this works nonetheless.

Deep South Conference
LSU, Ole Miss, Mississippi State, Alabama, Auburn, Georgia

Not only is this the strongest conference here - consisting entirely of SEC blue bloods - but also the one with the highest concentration of rivalries. Literally every single one of Alabama's conference games would be considered a rivalry game. We also get LSU's rivalries with Mississippi State, Ole Miss, and Auburn, as well as the Ole Miss-Mississippi State rivalry. Georgia has the fewest here, counting "just" Alabama and Auburn as rivals. This would be an extremely entertaining conference schedule to watch.

Upland Conference
Cincinnati, Louisville, Memphis, Kentucky, Vanderbilt, Tennessee

An interesting conference with a relatively high rivalry density, I'm sure many of these programs would be glad to have their own spotlight for once, especially the three SEC schools here. Louisville, Cincinnati, and Memphis are all rivals of each other, as are Kentucky, Vanderbilt, and Tennessee. Louisville-Kentucky would be made a conference game for the first time, and Memphis would have the opportunity to build rivalries with its in-state foes as well.

Magnolia Conference
Tulsa, TCU, Baylor, Rice, SMU, Tulane

A riff off of the old "Southern Ivies" concept of the 1950s and 1960s, all of these are private schools based in the South. These schools are historically connected through their various associations in the SWC, CUSA, and the American Conference. There's already a few rivalries here, including Baylor-TCU, TCU-SMU, and SMU-Rice.

Red River Conference
Oklahoma, Oklahoma State, Texas, Texas A&M, Texas Tech, Houston

Five of these six schools have direct ties to the Big 12, while Houston played in the SWC, the Big 12's predecessor. Texas, Texas A&M and Texas Tech all have rivalries with each other, while Oklahoma's rivalries with Texas and Oklahoma State are also present.

Southern Coast Conference
Appalachian State, East Carolina, Central Florida, South Florida, FAU, FIU

I feel like this conference could be called "The Leftovers", as we are forced to throw together the three remianing American Conference schools with schools from CUSA and the Sun Belt in order to round out our 96-school pool. This produces one of the only non-contiguous conferences in this proposal. However, these schools are actually decently strong, with FAU and App State dominating their respective conferences over the past few years and UCF emerging as one of the best Group of Five schools in the country. There's also a couple of rivalries here, particularly UCF-USF and FAU-FIU, as well as a burgeoning rivalry between UCF and ECU. I could see in-state rivalries forming between App State and ECU as well as between the four Florida schools as a whole.


While this proposal may have originated simply as a curiosity, I genuinely feel that this plan has legitimate merit. Think of all the advantages over the current system: a higher concentration of rivalry games, stronger overall quality of games, a fairer shot for more teams to be in contention for a championship, and far more more games that are relevant late into the season. What more could you ask for?

Rethinking the Bowl Games

Yesterday, I outlined my plan for realigning the FBS level of college football. One aspect that I neglected to address is the postseason playoff and bowl game structure. Under this new alignment system, the bowl sites currently serving as the New Year's Six bowls would now serve as the quarterfinal and semifinal rounds of the playoff, on a rotating basis; however, these games would no longer be considered bowl games themselves. These sites are as follows: Pasadena, CA; New Orleans, LA; Miami Gardens, FL; Dallas, TX; Atlanta GA; and Glendale, AZ. Higher-seeded schools would get first choice in terms of site selection for these rounds. The final would also remain as a designated national championship game, to be played annually at AT&T Stadium in Arlington, TX. The quarterfinal round would be played on the first Saturday following the end of the regular season (currently conference championship week). The semifinal round would be played two weeks later, and the championship would be held two weeks after that.

Additionally, there would be 16 bowl games comprising the rest of the postseason, meaning that 40 teams in total (half of the reduced FBS) would be postseason eligible. Bowl sites are chosen based on geography (ie location south of the 36th parallel) and historical significance; corporate naming rights for bowl games would be prohibited. Bowl eligibility would still be determined by overall record, requiring 6 wins over FBS opponents. However, bowls would now be divided into regions, and each of the four regions would have a designated conference tie-in. Bowl eligible schools would be seeded 2-5 within each conference (with the playoff representatives being the #1 seed), and would play the same seed from the assigned opposing conference for that region, as follows:

East Region

Orange Bowl - Miami Gardens, FL - ACC #2 vs Big East #2

Citrus Bowl - Orlando, FL - ACC #3 vs Big East #3

Gator Bowl - Jacksonville, FL - ACC #4 vs Big East #4

Hall of Fame Bowl - Tampa, FL - ACC #5 vs Big East #5

Southeast Region

Sugar Bowl - New Orleans, LA - SEC #2 vs Big Ten #2

Peach Bowl - Atlanta, GA - SEC #3 vs Big Ten #3

Liberty Bowl - Memphis, TN - SEC #4 vs Big Ten #4

All American Bowl - Birmingham, AL - SEC #5 vs Big Ten #5

Southwest Region

Cotton Bowl - Dallas, TX - SWC #2 vs Big Eight #2

Sun Bowl - El Paso, TX - SWC #3 vs Big Eight #3

Bluebonnet Bowl - Houston, TX - SWC #4 vs Big Eight #4

Alamo Bowl - San Antonio, TX - SWC #5 vs Big Eight #5

West Region

Rose Bowl - Pasadena, CA - Pac-10 #2 vs American #2

Fiesta Bowl - Glendale, AZ - Pac-10 #3 vs American #3

Holiday Bowl - San Diego, CA - Pac-10 #4 vs American #4

Aloha Bowl - Honolulu, HI - Pac-10 #5 vs American #5

Note that if a conference does not have enough bowl-eligible schools to fill its bowl bids, a bowl-eligible school from another conference may be assigned instead.

These bowl games would take place across four consecutive days between the playoff semifinal and national championship game, with the final day being New Year's Day (if any of these days happen to fall on Sunday, that day would be skipped). Games in the East region would be held at 12:00 ET on ESPN, Southeast at 2:30 ET on CBS, Southwest at 5:00 ET on FOX, and West at 7:30 ET on ABC. A similar schedule would be used for the playoff quarterfinal games; semifinals would be held at 3:30 ET and 7:30 ET on ABC, while the national championship would be at 7:30 ET on ABC.

Overall, this vision of a new postseason would serve several purposes. First of all, it would detach the bowl games from the playoff and national championship contests, restoring them to their original purpose of being simply exhibition contests. Second, the money-driven glut of corporate sponsored bowl games would be massively curtailed, while still maintaining the most historically significant games. Third, and perhaps most interestingly, the bowl games would now serve as a greater source of interconference competition than ever before, with the explicit, consistent conference tie-ins that this proposal would employ. In a sense, bowl season would be transformed into "conference pride week". 

While the likelihood of a system like this ever being implemented is as low as the realignment scheme itself - after all, why would the Rose Bowl ever willingly give up its traditional role of hosting the Pac-8/10/12 and Big Ten champions - it's still something worth considering.

The (Almost) Perfect NCAA FBS Realignment Plan

In today's college football landscape, the trend is toward increasingly consolidated superconferences. For instance, the last wave of realignment led to the expansion of the Big Ten, ACC, and SEC to 14 teams each, while the Pac-10 expanded to 12 and was renamed the Pac-12. These moves mostly came at the expense of the Big 12, which contracted to 10 teams, and the Big East, which split into a basketball conference and a football conference (the current American Athletic Conference). When the next wave of realignment comes (likely in the 2020s), it is quite possible that the ACC, Big Ten, SEC, and Pac-12 expand to 16 teams each, with the Big 12 possibly ceasing to exist altogether.

It is understandable why the so-called "power" conferences want to expand: more programs means more television markets, which in turn means greater television revenue. As just one example, how else could we explain the Big Ten's addition of Rutgers other than the desire of the Big Ten to expand into the New York City television market?

Whatever benefits the conferences and individual programs may accrue from these trends, I would argue that college football as a whole is negatively affected. Conference expansion has broken up traditional regional conference rivalries. Expansion has also necessitated the creation of divisions within conferences, leading to unbalanced conference schedules and lopsided outcomes in conference championship games. The concentration of the strongest programs in just a handful of conferences means that most games at the FBS level have little if any meaning in terms of determining a national champion.

On the other hand, one of the more positive recent trends in college football has been the creation of the four team College Football Playoff (CFP) to replace the old top-two BCS system for determining a national champion. The BCS itself replaced a system in which there was no national championship game at all and champions were determined purely through the highly subjective polls. However, the new CFP system still has glaring issues - at least one Power Five conference champion will not have a chance to play for a national championship in any given year, while it's still nearly impossible for a Group of Five school to make it in at all (as we saw happen to an undefeated UCF team last year). Even a potential expansion of the playoff to eight teams would not fully resolve the issues with the system - consider how much subjectivity would still go into determining the two at-large spots under that hypothetical scenario.

With these points in mind, I set out to completely revamp the FBS level of NCAA college football. The system I devised would be fairly simple: there would now be eight 10-team conferences, with the winner of each conference getting an automatic bid to an eight team playoff to determine the national championship. Each team would play a single round-robin against the other nine teams in its conference during the regular season, and the team with the best conference record would be named the conference champion. (Ties would be broken by head-to-head record.) No conference would be divided into divisions, and no conference championship games would be played. Subjective rankings would be used only to determine the seeds for the playoff. Even with the addition of an extra playoff round, teams would still only play a maximum of 15 games in a season due to the elimination of the conference championships. In addition to the nine conference games, teams would schedule three non-conference games, including a maximum of one game against an FCS opponent. With the contraction of the FBS from 130 to 80 programs, the other 50 programs (all of them Group of Five schools) would be dropped down to the FCS.

The conference alignment system I've created is based on historical conference affiliations, rivalries, geography, and program strength. The new conferences are summarized as follows.

Big East Conference
Rutgers, Temple, Penn State, Pittsburgh, West Virginia, Maryland, Virginia Tech, Virginia, South Florida, UCF

The six italicized programs played in the Big East at some point in its history. Additionally, UCF currently plays in the American, the Big East's successor. Penn State sought to join the Big East in the 1980s when it was a basketball-only conference, but was rejected. Had it joined and then became a founding football member in the 1990s, the Big East may well have survived as a football conference. Maryland and Virginia have been cited as schools that may have followed Penn State into the Big East. There are a number of great intrastate rivalries here, including UCF-USF, Virginia-Virginia Tech, and Pitt-Penn State, as well as interstate rivalries like Pitt-West Virignia.

Atlantic Coast Conference (ACC)
Duke, Wake Forest, North Carolina, North Carolina State, Clemson, South Carolina, Georgia Tech, Florida, Florida State, Miami

The eight italicized programs currently play in the ACC. South Carolina was a founding member of the ACC; rejoining the conference would make Clemson-South Carolina a conference game again. Florida would join in-state rivals Florida State and Miami, while the four North Carolina schools are able to maintain their rivalries.

Southeastern Conference (SEC)
Kentucky, Louisville, Memphis, Tennessee, Vanderbilt, Ole Miss, Mississippi State, Alabama, Auburn, Georgia

The eight italicized programs currently play in the SEC. Louisville joins in-state rival Kentucky, while Memphis is given the opportunity to build rivalries with Tennessee and Vanderbilt and play in conference with rival Ole Miss. Great intrastate rivalries like Auburn-Alabama and Ole Miss-Mississippi State are preserved, along with interstate rivalries like Alabama-Georgia.

Big Ten Conference
Ohio State, Cincinnati, Michigan, Michigan State, Indiana, Purdue, Illinois, Wisconsin, Minnesota, Iowa

The nine italicized programs currently play in the Big Ten. The only new face is Cincinnati, which would be given the chance to build an in-state rivalry with Ohio State. A number of great interstate and intrastate rivalries are preserved, including Ohio State-Michigan, Michigan-Michigan State, and Minnesota-Wisconsin.

Big Eight Conference
Colorado, Nebraska, Iowa State, Missouri, Kansas, Kansas State, Oklahoma, Oklahoma State, Tulsa, Arkansas

The eight italicized programs were the original members of the Big Eight Conference. Tulsa would now be in conference with in-state rival Oklahoma State, while Arkansas could continue to build its rivalry with Missouri. Rivalries like Colorado-Nebraska and Missouri-Kansas are restored as conference games, while in-state rivalries are maintained in Kansas-Kansas State and Oklahoma-Oklahoma State.

Southwest Conference (SWC)
Texas, Texas A&M, Texas Tech, Houston, Baylor, Rice, SMU, TCU, LSU, Tulane

The eight italicized programs were members of the original SWC. Bringing these eight Texas schools back together in the same conference would restore a number of in-state rivalries, including Houston-Rice, SMU-TCU, and Texas-Texas A&M. LSU-Tulane is also restored as a conference rivalry, while LSU would be able to maintain its rivalry with Texas A&M.

Pacific-10 Conference (Pac-10)
Washington, Washington State, Oregon, Oregon State, California, UCLA, Arizona, Arizona State, Utah, Boise State

The nine italicized programs are current members of the Pac-12. Boise State would finally be given the opportunity to play in a major conference. A number of in-state rivalries are preserved, including Washington-Washington State, Oregon-Oregon State, Cal-UCLA, and Arizona-Arizona State.

American Conference
USC, Stanford, BYU, Air Force, Northwestern, Notre Dame, Navy, Army, Syracuse, Boston College

This conference is no relation to the current American Athletic Conference. Instead, it is loosely based on the proposed "Airplane Conference" of 1959; the six italicized programs were part of that plan. This conference would bring the three service academies together in conference, as well as the seven private FBS schools of the west and north. Notre Dame, a long-time independent, would now have conference games against a number of its rivals, including Army, Navy, USC, Stanford, Northwestern, and Boston College. Meanwhile, Syracuse-Boston College and USC-Stanford are maintained as conference games. BYU, another large religious school and long-time independent, rounds out the conference nicely.

Overall, I believe this alignment would be a massive improvement over the current system. It would restore the geographic basis for conferences, bring back a number of historic conference rivalries, and potentially even create new rivalries. Having smaller conferences would reduce the concentration of the strongest programs in just a few conferences, bringing a degree of parity back to the college football landscape. Current Group of Five schools like Boise State and UCF would now have a legitimate chance to compete for a national title. Above all, conference championships would be given greater priority than subjective ranking systems, as winning the conference would give a program a bid in the playoff automatically - in other words, win and you're in. While it's highly unlikely that such an arrangement would ever actually come to pass, one can dream, right?

2018 First-Half MLB WAR-Stars

The following are mock MLB All Star rosters created based on Baseball-Reference.com Wins Above Replacement (WAR). Players in bold were selected to this year's roster.

American League:

C: Wilson Ramos, TBR – 2.4

C: Austin Romine, NYY – 1.4

1B: Matt Olson, OAK – 2.5

1B: Justin Smoak, TOR – 2.2

2B: Jose Altuve, HOU – 4.4

2B: Jed Lowrie, OAK – 3.5

SS: Francisco Lindor, CLE – 5.5

SS: Andrelton Simmons, LAA – 4.6

3B: Jose Ramirez, CLE – 6.6

3B: Alex Bregman, HOU – 4.8

OF: Mike Trout, LAA – 6.8

OF: Mookie Betts, BOS – 6.3

OF: Aaron Judge, NYY – 5.0

OF: Eddie Rosario, MIN – 4.3

OF: Mitch Haniger, SEA – 3.5

OF: Andrew Benintendi, BOS – 2.9

DH: J.D. Martinez, BOS – 4.3

DH: Shin-Soo Choo, TEX – 3.3

Bench: Manny Machado, BAL – 2.9

Bench: Whit Merrifield, KCR – 2.8

SP: Chris Sale, BOS – 5.6

SP: Luis Severino, NYY – 4.9

SP: Trevor Bauer, CLE – 4.5

SP: Corey Kluber, CLE – 4.3

SP: Blake Snell, TBR – 4.1

RP: Craig Kimbrel, BOS – 2.3

RP: Blake Treinen, OAK – 2.3

RP: Lou Trivino, OAK – 2.2

Pitcher: Justin Verlander, HOU – 3.8

Pitcher: Gerrit Cole, HOU – 3.2

Pitcher: Mike Fiers, DET – 2.3

Pitcher: Reynaldo Lopez, CHW – 1.7

National League:

C: J.T. Realmuto, MIA – 3.8

C: Wilson Contreras, CHC – 2.7

1B: Freddie Freeman, ATL – 3.9

1B: Paul Goldschmidt, ARI – 3.2

2B: Javier Baez, CHC – 3.7

2B: Ozzie Albies, ATL – 3.4

SS: Trevor Story, COL – 2.9

SS: Brandon Crawford, SFG – 2.9

3B: Nolan Arenado, COL – 3.8

3B: Eugenio Suarez, CIN – 3.6

OF: Lorenzo Cain, MIL – 4.4

OF: Nick Markakis, ATL – 3.1

OF: Brian Anderson, MIA – 2.8

OF: Starling Marte, PIT – 2.7

OF: Christian Yelich, MIL – 2.5

OF: Harrison Bader, STL – 2.5

Bench: Matt Carpenter, STL – 3.5

Bench: Brandon Belt, SFG – 3.1

Bench: Scooter Gennett, CIN – 3.1

Bench: Max Muncy, LAD – 3.0

SP: Jacob deGrom, NYM – 6.0

SP: Aaron Nola, PHI – 5.9

SP: Max Scherzer, WSN – 4.9

SP: Kyle Freeland, COL – 4.6

SP: Tyler Anderson, COL – 3.7

RP: Adam Ottavino, COL – 2.4

RP: Jared Hughes, CIN – 2.3

RP: Sean Doolittle, WSN – 2.1

Pitcher: Ross Stripling, LAD – 3.2

Pitcher: Jon Lester, CHC – 2.8

Pitcher: Miles Mikolas, STL – 2.8

Pitcher: Kirby Yates, SDP – 1.5