Menu
What's new
By:
Filters
AllBuffs | Unofficial fan site for the University of Colorado at Boulder Athletics programs

This is a sample guest message. Register a free account today to become a member! Once signed in, you'll be able to participate on this site by adding your own topics and posts, as well as connect with other members through your own private inbox!

  • Prime Time. Prime Time. Its a new era for Colorado football. Consider signing up for a club membership! For $20/year, you can get access to all the special features at Allbuffs, including club member only forums, dark mode, avatars and best of all no ads ! But seriously, please sign up so that we can pay the bills. No one earns money here, and we can use your $20 to keep this hellhole running. You can sign up for a club membership by navigating to your account in the upper right and clicking on "Account Upgrades". Make it happen!

My official Pac-12 schedule proposal

OKCBuff

OKCBuff

Well-Known Member
Let me preface this by saying I ended up going on a tangent late last night/this morning -- trying to figure out a Pac-12 scheduling format that was fair for every school in the league -- and by the end I was pretty tired. So if I messed up badly somewhere, eff you. :smile2:

That said, I've felt (and mentioned on here, with several voices of support) an East/West divisional structure with a NorCal and SoCal school in each division being the fairest for every team, no matter their location.

In the past few days, I have pushed for a setup like this:

Pac-12 East: CU, Utah, Arizona State, Arizona, UCLA, Cal
Pac-12 West: USC, Stanford, Oregon State, Oregon, Washington, Washington State

This setup would keep a mostly regional format with two California schools in each division for recruiting/showcase purposes. The rival California schools had to be split to do this, but there's a solution to that below.

The schedule structure would go: 5 intra-divisional games, TWO locked cross-division games, and two cross-divisional games that rotate every two years. Obviously this means a nine-game schedule.

Someone might have proposed two locked cross-division games already, but if they have, I missed it. Late last night it occurred to me that having two locked cross-division games (and a nine-game schedule) would be the ONLY way a truly fair Pac-12 schedule could be designed. This means every team, no matter if they're far north or far south, would get a SoCal or NorCal team every year. And, they'd get the other SoCal or NorCal team two years in a row home and away before trading them for the other NorCal/SoCal school for the next two years. Then, I split up the others in such a way that every team plays in a state/region all the time as well to maximize recruiting/exposure.

Anyway, I'm explaining this too much. I have posted an Excel example for the board to check out and voice their opinion.

I also included a mock CU schedule format (sans H/A -- that can be decided by the league office) and an example of how the Buff's schedule might rotate every few years:

pac12compositepicphixr.jpg


Thoughts?
 
not a bad sched. I like the idea of 9 games in conference, and I think your proposal is the best I've seen. It provides for a cohesive and equal conference where everyone will play everyone often enough to keep the division format from splitting the conference (which was part of the problem in the B12)
 
SnowBuff said:
not a bad sched. I like the idea of 9 games in conference, and I think your proposal is the best I've seen. It provides for a cohesive and equal conference where everyone will play everyone often enough to keep the division format from splitting the conference (which was part of the problem in the B12)
Click to expand...
I agree. The old Pac-10 schools need to get over the fact that they won't play in LA every season. This type of schedule seems to provide the most balance and put everyone on an equal footing. And, it seems. 9 conference games is also necessary to provide the balance. Well done, OKC.
 
Great job OKC. This is exactly the format I've long been a proponent of as well.
 
Last edited:
Looks okay. We're just subbing Cal in for USC which is okay in my book. Washington State/Oregon are our inter-divisional rivals... ok with Oregon, nobody really wants WSU in all this but I guess somebody has to have em'.

This might be a player in the overall grand scheme of things.

South/North is still better to me personally (no offense to your hard work or thought you put into this) but it seems like the NorCal teams are going to bitch until they get their way.
 
I am still betting what happens is the PAC does a schedule like the one that Bohn presented. It just makes the most sense and keeps the most rivals together. CU and UTah obviously need to be in the same division with ASU and UA for the simple fact that the geography makes the most sense. Then the next closest are the two LA schools. This allows for the NW schools to at least make the trip to NorCal every year.

The other format that comes in second place in terms of making sense is to put CU and Utah in with the 4 NW schools and keep all the CA schools in the other division with the two Zonas and I really dont think the NW schools will go for that.

Anything other than those two formats and you break up too many rivals or are just making it too awkward and basing things off of the current competitive levels which shouldn't play into this at all.
 
Thanks. I'm sure someone smarter than me will come up with the optimal solution. But I just wanted to see how a detailed conference schedule could look. Ultimately, I based this off two things:

1. Keeping all the California schools playing each other annually (its only fair to them)
2. Ensuring that there's one NorCal and one SoCal school in each division so that all schools have ties to both sides of the state every year. It's important for exposure and recruiting.

Yeah, so I saddled CU with WSU. Obviously they can put together whoever they want into the fixed format. I tried to do this as a neutral observer so I like to think I was fair to all 12 schools.
 
I like the zipper and the North/South and the Nik option.

It got me thinking about what would be a worse case scenario might look like. Now that the threat of replacing Baylor and joining the B12S has come and gone, it's tough to define a worst case scenario.

#1 worst case: Play 11 conference schools and CSU
#2 Be placed in a division that consists of WSU, UU, OSU, UA and ASU.

Fortunately, neither of those lousy options are even being discussed.
 
I like it. It has CU playing somewhere in California every year - either NoCal or SoCal. There's plenty of CU alumni in NoCal too and that's a good recruiting area as well, so anything that would get us more exposure across the state is fine with me.
 
I like the proposal. The only problem is that 9 conference games means that half the league gets the advantage of an extra home game each year. But I don't think that is insurmountable.
 
Illuminatus! said:
I like the proposal. The only problem is that 9 conference games means that half the league gets the advantage of an extra home game each year. But I don't think that is insurmountable.
Click to expand...
Pac-10 has that situation now, so they are accustomed to it. Personally, I don't care as long as we're in the Pac-12 in 2011.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top