If College Football worked in tiers

[thespleenenator]

So, I've been hearing a lot of talk on how college football would be like if it were in tiers. Well, it just so happens I was wondering the same question my self. So I went out to see what it would be like. I call it: THE COLLEGE FOOTBALL TIER REALIGNMENT PROJECT (if you have a better name, please suggest it)

The Goal: How different would the college football landscape be today if, starting at the 1996 season, all the schools were grouped into tiers?

How it works: I started by looking at the final computer rankings of the 1995 season. The top 12 went to division A, the nest 12 the Division B, etc. Each school would play a round robin 11 game schedule. The top 4 teams would go to a playoff to determine who would be promoted (or in the case of division A, win the national championship), and the top two would be promoted, a play a division championship game. This game would not affect who was promoted, but it would serve as something to play for, instead of just playing a playoff game and then wondering who would win a game between the two best teams. The bottom two teams would be demoted, and play in the divisions lower than the one they played in before, the next season (so for instance, the 11th place team in Division D would play in division E the following season). At the very bottom there is the scraps division. It's technically not a division, but a place where the absolute worst teams in the country compete to actually play for a division the next season. They have no playoff, and only the top two teams actually move up, while the rest remain stagnant.

How I'm doing it: I'm using the What If Sports simulator, and in order to eliminate some lingering variables, I made every game a neutral site game.

I realize that there are flaws to this idea, but this is more of a for fun thing that anything else. So with out further adieu, enjoy!

1996: There was no scraps division, as I decided that there needs to be at least 4 school in order for it to exist.

1996

Division A

*FSU 9-4

Tenn 9-4

Florida 9-3

Neb 7-5

Colorado 7-4

Ohio State 6-5

KSU 5-6

VT 5-6

NW 4-7

T A&M 4-7

-USC 4-7

-Kansas 1-10

Division B

*+Virginia 9-4

+Miami Fl. 9-4

Syracuse 10-2

Oregon 8-4

Penn State 7-4

Notre Dame 7-4

Iowa 6-5

Michigan 5-6

TT 4-7

Texas 3-8

-ECU 1-10

-Toledo 0-11

Division C

*+Alabama 12-1

+Nevada 8-5

Utah 7-5

Washington 7-5

LSU 6-5

ASU 6-5

Auburn 5-6

Miami Oh. 5-6

Baylor 4-7

CSU 4-7

-Stanford 3-8

-Clemson 2-9

Division D

*+SDSU 12-1

+Michigan State 9-4

UCLA 8-4

BYU 8-4

UGA 6-5

Air Force 5-6

Louisville 5-6

Arizona 5-6

UNC 4-7

WMU 4-7

-Arkansas 1-10

-Illinois 1-10

Division E

*+Cincy 12-1

+Wyoming 10-3

Wisconsin 8-4

GT 6-6

Army 5-6

USM 5-6

Maryland 5-6

TCU 5-6

Ole Miss 4-7

Purdue 4-7

-Ball State 2-9

-ULL 2-9

Division F

*+LT 11-2

+WVU 11-2

Fresno State 8-4

South Carolina 7-5

Ark State 7-4

Oklahoma 6-5

EMU 5-6

BC 5-6

Kentucky 3-8

Rutgers 3-8

-Hawaii 2-9

-Navy 1-10

Division G

*+UNM 10-3

+Cal 9-4

Ok State 7-5

WSU 7-5

CMU 6-5

Miss State 6-5

NC State 6-5

Minn 6-5

Tulsa 5-6

USU 4-7

-Duke 2-9

-BGSU 1-10

Division H

*+Houston 10-3

+Pitt 8-5

Missouri 10-2

Tulane 8-4

Rice 7-4

Ohio 6-5

Iowa State 5-6

Memphis 4-7

NM State 4-7

Vandy 3-8

-SJSU 3-8

-NIU 1-10

Division I

*+UAB 9-4

+UCF 8-5

SMU 9-3

Oregon State 8-4

IU 7-4

Akron 6-5

Temple 5-6

Wake 5-6

ULM 3-8

Kent 2-9

-UTEP 2-9

-UNLV 1-10

*= National/Division champion

+= promotion

-= demotion

That's all I got so far. This season alone took 1 1/2 to complete, but thankfully I don't have to set up the divisions, so I'll hopefully have 1997 done sooner rather than later.

Please tell me if this is worth pursuing, or just a stupid idea! I want to know if it's worth continuing, as it's very time consuming.

[DelayedPenalty]

I have no idea what this is supposed to be...

[McCall]

Rainman without the hidden intelligence?

[HedleyLamarr]

It's a stupid idea.

[Lights Out]

On top of the stupidity of the idea, you also forgot Boise State and Idaho, both of whom moved up to I-A in 1996.

[Sport]

I suggested using a tiered system in the NCAA football thread, but this makes no sense and why did you start it in 1996?

My suggestion was to group the MAC, WAC, Mountain West, Sun Belt, and CUSA into a second tier that competed for their own championship. That's how everyone looks at those conferences anyway, might as well define it. It seems silly to me that although they are all apart of the FBS, they aren't allowed to compete for the FBS championship. That was my idea.

[The_Admiral]

College football is in tiers

[thespleenenator]

I suggested using a tiered system in the NCAA football thread, but this makes no sense and why did you start it in 1996?

My suggestion was to group the MAC, WAC, Mountain West, Sun Belt, and CUSA into a second tier that competed for their own championship. That's how everyone looks at those conferences anyway, might as well define it. It seems silly to me that although they are all apart of the FBS, they aren't allowed to compete for the FBS championship. That was my idea.

This is supposed to be like the promotion system in English Soccer. The main reason for this was because every game would matter for something. There would be no cupcakes, and every team, though it may take time, has a chance to move up into the elite standings. But the biggest reason for this system is because it would group teams that were all approximately the same level. I think that would make for some exciting football. I mean, what's more exciting: Florida State vs Nebraska, or Florida State vs Samford?

[Funky Bunky]

This is a terrible idea.....

let's say Team A wins Tier B, and they get to move up next year, but then all of their starters leave. They might suck next year. So you might have teams that shouldn't be in the national championship game, winning the god damn national championship.

or here is another bad scenario , why would any of the top recruits go anywhere but a tier a school? All of the best players will be going to tier a schools, and the other schools will never have a chance.... they're won't be any parody (which is the best part of NCAA football imo).

There is no good outcome to this.

[Funky Bunky]

I suggested using a tiered system in the NCAA football thread, but this makes no sense and why did you start it in 1996?

My suggestion was to group the MAC, WAC, Mountain West, Sun Belt, and CUSA into a second tier that competed for their own championship. That's how everyone looks at those conferences anyway, might as well define it. It seems silly to me that although they are all apart of the FBS, they aren't allowed to compete for the FBS championship. That was my idea.

This is supposed to be like the promotion system in English Soccer. The main reason for this was because every game would matter for something. There would be no cupcakes, and every team, though it may take time, has a chance to move up into the elite standings. But the biggest reason for this system is because it would group teams that were all approximately the same level. I think that would make for some exciting football. I mean, what's more exciting: Florida State vs Nebraska, or Florida State vs Samford?

That works because players are able to stay with teams for decades.... in college football, players are only around for a few years. You would have teams trying to compete to win so next year's team, who might not even be as good, can be in a better tier. The English soccer teams are more constant.