Pac-12 format question: Divisional setup

[OKCBuff]

Just wondering what most on here would want if it turns out the Pac only adds Utah and it becomes the Pac-12.

In my mind, I see four options:

1. North/South setup (CU, UU, UO, OSU, UW, WSU vs. Cal, Stan, UCLA, USC, UA, ASU)
2. East/West setup (CU, UU, ASU, UA, USC, UCLA vs. Cal, Stan, UO, OSU, UW, WSU)
3. Zipper format (City/state rivals placed in opposite divisions, but schedule is such that cross-divisional rivals play annually:
CU-UU
UA-ASU
UCLA-USC
CAL-STAN
UO-OSU
UW-WSU
4. Something else (please explain)

So, what do you think? I believe the NW schools would never go for all of the California teams in one division, so I think Nos. 2 or 3 is more likely than anything else.

 

[Buffnik]

It's got to be a zipper format.

That's the only way that every team gets at least 1 game in California every year and 1 game in southern California every other year.

I'd do it so that each team had 2 paired rivals. For instance, based on the zipper you put together, CU's schedule would be the following:

Division (5 games):
Arizona
UCLA
Cal
Oregon
Washington

Fixed Rivals (2 games):
Utah
Arizona State

Rotating Games (2 games - play each team 2/4 years):
USC
Stanford
Oregon State
Washington State

 

[OKCBuff]

I'd love that setup, Buffnik. Since we have the wonder of the airplane, I think this should be the way to go.

Hell, I'd push for this in a Pac-16. I want both sides to mesh together.

 

[NashBuff]

I think East-West should be considered because the SEC has done well with an EAST-WEST format where the North-South format didn't work too well in the Big 12.

I think there should be two California schools in each division not four in one division.

 

[Bone Buff]

I would prefer a rotating pod system.

4 groups with 4 teams.
Each group is paired with another group. All teams play play every team in that group. These groups are your "division".
Division winners go to play the conference title game.

 

[Fred]

OK, looks like North and South Div.
North: UW, Wazzu, Oregon, OSU, CU and UU.
South: Cal, Stanford, USC, UCLA, ASU, UA.

One game each year with NorCal, SoCal, Arizona.

 

[Junction]

I would prefer a rotating pod system.

4 groups with 4 teams.
Each group is paired with another group. All teams play play every team in that group. These groups are your "division".
Division winners go to play the conference title game.

That was my preference with a Pac-16. Doesn't work as well for the 12-Pac.

I've been thinking they'd probably go east/west, but I'm not sure how that splits. The logical thing is CU, UU, ASU and UofA in the east along with the LA schools (just because they are close to the AZ schools..) The "west" schools might complain about being separated from the LA schools, but if you look at how it plays out in a Big XII style schedule, those schools would be playing in LA every other year. And I'm not sure there's a way to schedule this where somebody isn't going a year without playing at USC or UCLA. To do that those teams would have to combine for 11 conference home games a year out of the 18 they'd probably play in total... :huh:

 

[Scotch]

Division 1:
USC
UCLA
UA
ASU
CU
UU

Division 2:

Cal
Stanford
UO
OSU
UW
WSU

Format the scheduling like the Big 12 did and every team will have at least 1 game in Cali a year. 1 game in SoCal every other year, I think anyway.

 

[Junction]

Division 1:
USC
UCLA
UA
ASU
CU
UU

Division 2:

Cal
Stanford
UO
OSU
UW
WSU

Format the scheduling like the Big 12 did and every team will have at least 1 game in Cali a year. 1 game in SoCal every other year, I think anyway.

It should guarantee a game in California every year, since every team would have 2 California schools in their division and would presumably alternate home and away with those team. For the "Division 2" teams, they would have U$C in one "group" and UCLA in the other as far as interdivisional play goes. 3 teams in each group, you play home and homes with each team over 2 years, then switch groups, just like the Big XII has done. With a SoCal team in each group, you'd be playing them there every other year. And to me it gets a little less complicated than the "zipper" alignment.

The nice thing is that CU would see every team in the Pac by their third season in the league. With a Pac-16 and 2 divisions with 8 teams, that was going to take forever...

 

[ScottyBuff]

I had published an article on B/R about this a few months ago and still favor that lineup:

Place the 4 NW schools in one "Pacific" division.

Place the 4 Mountain time zone schools in one "Western" Division

Then zipper the California schools.

USC and Stanford in one of the divisions, UCLA and Cal in the other with "locked" rivalry games for USC-UCLA and Cal-Stanford.

 

[BuffsRising]

No divisions. You play one rival every year, and play 8 out of the other 10 teams on a rotating basis, with the top two teams in the standings playing in the championship game. that way everybody gets to play USC, for example, 4 out of 5 years, and everybody gets exposure in all of the Pac-12 recruiting areas.

But three pods would be fine too. But two divisions would suck, in my opinion.

 

[Bone Buff]

That was my preference with a Pac-16. Doesn't work as well for the 12-Pac.

I could have sworn this thread was once called Pac-16 Format........ Was I drinking that early thing morning?

 

[ScottyBuff]

Guess it is out now, based on the other thread. And I don't think anyone could have wished on a better divisional setup for us.