Do you have adblock enabled?
If you can read this, either the style sheet didn't load or you have an older browser that doesn't support style sheets. Try clearing your browser cache and refreshing the page.

(SB Nation)   Relegation: why college football needs to embrace cannibalism   (sbnation.com) divider line 54
    More: Interesting, pacemakers, college football, NBA Playoffs, Wolverhampton, missions, Man City, EPL, National College of Natural Medicine  
•       •       •

1953 clicks; posted to Sports » on 16 May 2012 at 1:02 PM (3 years ago)   |  Favorite    |   share:  Share on Twitter share via Email Share on Facebook   more»



54 Comments   (+0 »)
   
View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest

Archived thread

First | « | 1 | 2 | » | Last | Show all
 
2012-05-16 01:09:25 PM  
I've been saying this for years, but now it's too mainstream.

Also:

Man City would win the title, but only after nearly coughing up the title on goal differential to crosstown rivals Manchester United when City went down 2 to 1 to Queen's Park Rangers, a not-very-good team with very good motivation to play kamikaze to Man City's championship hopes.

Yeah, that's not quite what happened. They won based on goad differential, but had they lost to QPR, they would have lost on overall record/points and it woudn't have gone to the goal differential tiebreaker.
 
2012-05-16 01:13:25 PM  
Relegation will never happen in the US for more reasons than can be put in in article, starting with "nobody will participate if they could lose money, idiot".
 
2012-05-16 01:16:20 PM  
Ah yes. Since 1990, "the national title and subsequent BCS titles have been shared between 14 teams..." Terrible, as opposed to the model EPL, where the championship for the last 20 years has been shared by 4 teams. Brilliant. That said, I like the idea of relegation for CFB, but don't pretend the EPL isn't just as dynasty-supporting as any other system.
 
2012-05-16 01:18:53 PM  
a) relegation is stupid, and people that continually espouse it have no idea how to run a league. The EPL is the least tumultuous league in the world at the top.
b) "only 14 different teams have won since 1990"...um, that's 22 years. 14 different champions in 22 years does not mean everyone else is screwed over.

Number of champions in the last 22 years:

NCAA basketball: 12
MLB: 12
NFL: 13
NBA: 8
NHL: 13
EPL: 6

Yeah, clearly relegation is the answer.
 
2012-05-16 01:21:03 PM  
Relegation is awesome. I'd love to see it used in college football but there's as much chance of that happening as there is a championship tournament that doesn't require someone to arbitrarily vote to see who gets in.
 
2012-05-16 01:21:49 PM  

Reynald: Ah yes. Since 1990, "the national title and subsequent BCS titles have been shared between 14 teams..." Terrible, as opposed to the model EPL, where the championship for the last 20 years has been shared by 4 teams. Brilliant. That said, I like the idea of relegation for CFB, but don't pretend the EPL isn't just as dynasty-supporting as any other system.


It certainly is, but the competition is still equal among the clubs. Anyone can win it. Now you see the title probables expanded to about 6 or perhaps 7 teams in the EPL. Money is certainly a huge factor, which doesn't play into CFB (legally anyway).

However, I do see the recruiting being similar to what money is in the EPL. In the EPL, if someone, say, Man City offers more money for a player over Man United, the player will more likely go to City. In college football, if USC is recruiting you, but so is Rutgers, you're going to choose USC.
 
2012-05-16 01:23:16 PM  

IAmRight: Number of champions in the last 22 years:

NCAA basketball: 12
MLB: 12
NFL: 13
NBA: 8
NHL: 13
EPL: 6

Yeah, clearly relegation is the answer.


You do realize that relegation has nothing to do with Championships right?
 
2012-05-16 01:28:39 PM  
I sometimes wonder - does Europe have an equivalent group of contrarians who are constantly pushing for European leagues to adopt a franchise system and a draft?

Because I'm getting a bit annoyed by the people who are always calling for promotion/relegation in North American sports.
 
2012-05-16 01:30:34 PM  
TonnageVT,

I agree with you that's its all about resources and attractiveness. Although from IAmRight's chart, it looks like the EPL has a way to go to before it has a similar championship distribution. Having a pool of possibles means nothing if those possibles can't get there. I know this is a non-unique problem, but -to me- the EPL is top heavy. That's also not a bad thing. My point was more about how every system has its favorites, no one should judge. As for CFB, I'd be mad if my Badgers got sent down, but anything that can be done to shake up the current SEC-bias is fine with me.
 
2012-05-16 01:33:34 PM  
FTA: And what a magnificent, carnivorous world that will be. Please, if you would, imagine the splendor of Clemson attempting to relegate South Carolina on the final weekend of a season, a matchup fraught with spite potent enough that you can scrape off your television, allow it to dry to a fine white powder and then snort for an unparalleled high.

I thought this was clever.
 
2012-05-16 01:36:15 PM  

meanmutton: Relegation is awesome. I'd love to see it used in college football but there's as much chance of that happening as there is a championship tournament that doesn't require someone to arbitrarily vote to see who gets in.


This is exactly what promotion and relegation would accomplish.

If you create an NCAA D-1A Premier League, then have those teams play each other in a superconference for the title -- there'd be no more biatching about soft schedules or not winning your conference or who gets to play in the title game. Granted, you'd have to abolish the current conference system to do it, which provides the monetary barrier right now.

There could also be no more than three tiers to the pyramid as well so that any given class could go from the bottom to the top in one graduating class, and with 120 D-1A schools, that's perfectly possible.

What about the bowls? Keep playing them as you do now -- they'd have the same meaning as they did before (that is, nothing). Sure, the conference affiliations would be lost, but that's not unrecoverable.
 
2012-05-16 01:36:25 PM  

Donnchadha: Yeah, that's not quite what happened. They won based on goad differential, but had they lost to QPR, they would have lost on overall record/points and it woudn't have gone to the goal differential tiebreaker.


Man U won their game, so MC would have lost on points if they didn't beat QPR.
 
2012-05-16 01:38:33 PM  

Angry Buddha: Donnchadha: Yeah, that's not quite what happened. They won based on goad differential, but had they lost to QPR, they would have lost on overall record/points and it woudn't have gone to the goal differential tiebreaker.

Man U won their game, so MC would have lost on points if they didn't beat QPR.


Yes... that's what I said.

Short of Man U winning 10-0, Man City would have the GD tiebreaker no matter what.
 
2012-05-16 01:39:23 PM  
No, no, no - you guys have it all wrong. There is absolutely no comparison between those money-grubbing euro leagues and the totally amateur, hard-studying student athletes of the NCAA who participate in sports only as a mere diversion, an extra-curricular activity. I mean, really - you can see it right there on your TV every Saturday, when the NCAA showcases the students of their participating universities and explains how they are students first.

College athletics are just a bunch of kids playing ball. Just because some bad apples among the alumni make it look like money is involved...

Sheesh.
 
2012-05-16 01:40:28 PM  

TonnageVT: You do realize that relegation has nothing to do with Championships right?


It does, indirectly.

Promotion and relegation are inherently incompatible with the franchise model of professional sports organization. The franchise model means that each member franchise benefits from the success of the league as a whole (as opposed to the European model, where each team is a more or less independent entity, and the league is a voluntary association of clubs). Therefore, a league operating under a franchise model is more likely to support things such as salary caps, salary floors, revenue sharing, and a reverse-order draft, all of which are designed to have the effect of increasing parity and competitive balance. And competitive balance means that it is feasible for bad teams to rebuild into championship contenders, and extremely unlikely for a small handful of teams to dominate the championship year after year.
 
2012-05-16 01:42:11 PM  

Doc Daneeka: I sometimes wonder - does Europe have an equivalent group of contrarians who are constantly pushing for European leagues to adopt a franchise system and a draft?

Because I'm getting a bit annoyed by the people who are always calling for promotion/relegation in North American sports.


No. Never. Rewarding the team who finishes last with the best pick is dumb.

Reynald: TonnageVT,

I agree with you that's its all about resources and attractiveness. Although from IAmRight's chart, it looks like the EPL has a way to go to before it has a similar championship distribution. Having a pool of possibles means nothing if those possibles can't get there. I know this is a non-unique problem, but -to me- the EPL is top heavy. That's also not a bad thing. My point was more about how every system has its favorites, no one should judge. As for CFB, I'd be mad if my Badgers got sent down, but anything that can be done to shake up the current SEC-bias is fine with me.


The thing is, it keeps teams playing. It's not about only a few teams winning championships. Relegation/Promotion is about playing until the bitter end so you don't get punished. Take a look at Newcastle. 2 years ago they were playing in the Championship, and this year, they were battling for 3rd place.

Of course, in football, there are plenty of other "prizes" to play for. 2nd place gets automatic berth into Champions League, 3rd and 4th also have a chance to play in the Champions League.

So I guess in CFB, one could say that 1st would be champions, 2nd-5th could play in other Bowl games or playoffs.
 
2012-05-16 01:44:23 PM  
The conference realignment stuff that has been going on for the last few years is already stupid, relegation would just turn it into full blown pants-on-head retarded.
 
2012-05-16 01:44:53 PM  

Donnchadha: Angry Buddha: Donnchadha: Yeah, that's not quite what happened. They won based on goad differential, but had they lost to QPR, they would have lost on overall record/points and it woudn't have gone to the goal differential tiebreaker.

Man U won their game, so MC would have lost on points if they didn't beat QPR.

Yes... that's what I said.

Short of Man U winning 10-0, Man City would have the GD tiebreaker no matter what.


Yeesh. I totally misread your post. My apologies!
 
2012-05-16 01:44:54 PM  
If my alma mater (University of Minnesota) was subject to relegation... we would have the newest, most expensive class-A high school football stadium in the Midwest.
 
2012-05-16 01:49:11 PM  

TonnageVT: No. Never. Rewarding the team who finishes last with the best pick is dumb.


On the contrary. It's really smart from the league's perspective.

The goal of the league needs to be to keep as many fans of as many teams as possible engaged. And that means giving them something to be excited about during bad seasons and giving them a credible path to be able to return to title contention, with good management.

You will likely reply that such a system encourages tanking, but I think such concerns are overblown. No self-respecting player or coach ever plays to lose, and besides, they have their own jobs to worry about. Any small risk of tanking is adequately deterred by draft lotteries such as the NBA and NHL use, in which even the worst team is not guaranteed to have the best pick.
 
2012-05-16 01:51:32 PM  
I agree with Tonnage, relegation has very little to do with overall championships. The reason the EPL (as well as most other European Leagues) is so top heavy is because of the Champions League, something that wouldn't make a difference in CFB. Finishing in the top 4 leads to a shiat ton more money as well as exposure and allows teams that consistently make it (United, Arsenal, Chelsea, Liverpool) to sign high profile players.
 
2012-05-16 01:51:33 PM  
Relegation/promotion would only work if it's in place from the beginning. You can't just throw it into an established sports league and expect it to be cool.
 
2012-05-16 01:54:04 PM  
Please, if you would, imagine the splendor of Clemson attempting to relegate South Carolina on the final weekend of a season, a matchup fraught with spite potent enough that you can scrape off your television, allow it to dry to a fine white powder and then snort for an unparalleled high.


And then imagine the accountants' faces when they realize that instead of a sold out game against South Carolina next season, they'll be hosting Florida International. Hooray!
 
2012-05-16 01:58:03 PM  
Three worst ideas from Europe: relegation, six episode television seasons, and naziism. Not in my america pal
 
2012-05-16 02:04:26 PM  

Donnchadha: Yeah, that's not quite what happened. They won based on goad differential, but had they lost to QPR, they would have lost on overall record/points and it woudn't have gone to the goal differential tiebreaker.


I don't follow EPL at all, and even I knew they were tied for points going into the final gameday.
 
2012-05-16 02:09:40 PM  
I'm a little iffy on relegation, but anything to make the top 8, 16, whatever college football teams play each other every single year... I'm all for it.

Lets face it... there ARE many different levels of teams in Division I (or whatever the hell its called nowadays).

A team of the calliber of Tulane should not be in the same league as Ohio, LSU and the like. Just like the NY Yankees don't play games that count against the New Orleans Zephyrs.

One national super conference that actually plays each other. And some system to drop teams and add teams to said super conference.

How is this such a crazy idea?
 
2012-05-16 02:14:41 PM  

bennett311: FTA: And what a magnificent, carnivorous world that will be. Please, if you would, imagine the splendor of Clemson attempting to relegate South Carolina on the final weekend of a season, a matchup fraught with spite potent enough that you can scrape off your television, allow it to dry to a fine white powder and then snort for an unparalleled high.

I thought this was clever.


South Carolina would have been relegated in 1998 or 1999 when they went 1-21 over those two years. We didn't win a game until my sophomore year. I believe that had they been relegated after one of those seasons, it would have been nearly impossible to have the kind of success they enjoy now with recruiting, beating Clemson, and beating traditional SEC East rivals. As much as I like the concept of relegation, I'm not sure it would work.
 
2012-05-16 02:17:08 PM  

downstairs: I'm a little iffy on relegation, but anything to make the top 8, 16, whatever college football teams play each other every single year... I'm all for it.

Lets face it... there ARE many different levels of teams in Division I (or whatever the hell its called nowadays).

A team of the calliber of Tulane should not be in the same league as Ohio, LSU and the like. Just like the NY Yankees don't play games that count against the New Orleans Zephyrs.

One national super conference that actually plays each other. And some system to drop teams and add teams to said super conference.

How is this such a crazy idea?


Because the universities would then have to admit that those teams are professionals, and a major revenue stream. Never happen.
 
2012-05-16 02:28:08 PM  
I don't think promotion/relegation would work as well with NCAA football, much as I'd like to think it would. In England you've generally got three kinds of teams which get promoted or relegated into the Premier League:

1. Teams which are not good enough to be in the top 15 or so of the PL, but too good to stay in the Championship. I'm thinking of teams like West Ham or Bolton which yo-yo between the Premier League and the Championship.

2. Teams which shell out a shedload of cash to get their team to the top--teams like Fulham or Manchester City (yep, they were down in Division One before the big-money men showed up).

3. Teams which go through financial crises and can't compete any more. Leeds United and Portsmouth for example.

The picture here is that the teams that spend a lot get promoted, the teams that can't get relegated, and then you've got a layer of teams which seem to spend every other year going back and forth. In other words, you've got teams whose fan loyalty is going to be bled dry by playing one set of teams one year and a whole different set the next, and others who are going to spend piles of cash in an effort to get to the top table. All in all, not a pleasant future for college football.
 
2012-05-16 02:31:44 PM  

Benevolent Misanthrope: Because the universities would then have to admit that those teams are professionals, and a major revenue stream. Never happen.


How are these things connected. While I believe players should be paid, my concept of a super-conference has zero to do with that. I'm just saying let the best teams play each other, so we know who's the best and don't have to just guess via flawed polling and flawed computer models.

The payment argument is for another day.
 
2012-05-16 02:34:04 PM  
The reason why relegation/promotion works in football is because it is the only sport in which the season is a true marathon. Most points at the end of the season wins. Everyone plays each other twice, and it's a fair shot (technically) for everyone.

Would it work in CFB? Well, there are something like 110 Division 1 teams, right? Obviously you would have to break them down. If you had even 20 teams in 1 division, you'd still have to play 38 games, which is not possible for college football.

Though, if it brought around the chance for Rutgers to play LSU, USC, Alabama et. al. in a season at Rutgers Stadium, the place will be packed.
 
2012-05-16 02:34:27 PM  

hp6sa: If my alma mater (University of Minnesota) was subject to relegation... we would have the newest, most expensive class-A high school MAC football stadium in the Midwest.

 
2012-05-16 02:36:33 PM  

downstairs: I'm a little iffy on relegation, but anything to make the top 8, 16, whatever college football teams play each other every single year... I'm all for it.

Lets face it... there ARE many different levels of teams in Division I (or whatever the hell its called nowadays).

A team of the calliber of Tulane should not be in the same league as Ohio, LSU and the like. Just like the NY Yankees don't play games that count against the New Orleans Zephyrs.

One national super conference that actually plays each other. And some system to drop teams and add teams to said super conference.

How is this such a crazy idea?


Here's the fact that will always kill it: college football is 100% wedded to the idea of a poll of people determining who the champion is. I don't understand it, but for some reason you can't just have teams compete on the field; you need to ask around and get everyone's opinion.
 
2012-05-16 02:37:10 PM  

Donnchadha: I've been saying this for years, but now it's too mainstream.


So now you're saying this other obscure thing that none of us have heard of, and it's way better?
 
2012-05-16 02:39:57 PM  

downstairs: Benevolent Misanthrope: Because the universities would then have to admit that those teams are professionals, and a major revenue stream. Never happen.

How are these things connected. While I believe players should be paid, my concept of a super-conference has zero to do with that. I'm just saying let the best teams play each other, so we know who's the best and don't have to just guess via flawed polling and flawed computer models.

The payment argument is for another day.


You know that the players are paid, right? Aside from tuition, they get room, board, tuition, clothes, medical insurance, personal trainers, free vacations, oh, and cash. What else do you think they deserve?
 
2012-05-16 02:42:18 PM  
There are other sports than football.
 
2012-05-16 02:46:18 PM  

meanmutton: You know that the players are paid, right? Aside from tuition, they get room, board, tuition, clothes, medical insurance, personal trainers, free vacations, oh, and cash. What else do you think they deserve?


A fair cut of the revenue they bring in. Its painfully clear that the top players do not get what they bring in.
 
2012-05-16 02:46:51 PM  

lacrossestar83: Donnchadha: I've been saying this for years, but now it's too mainstream.


So now you're saying this other obscure thing that none of us have heard of, and it's way better?


The Samoan rugby league system is best. It's pretty rare, you probably haven't heard of it.
 
2012-05-16 03:14:30 PM  

TonnageVT: You do realize that relegation has nothing to do with Championships right?


Right, I'm sure that the idea that a team might not even be in the EPL next year really encourages players to even take a chance on a contract with those teams. Yeah, everyone's buying their way to titles, but relegation just helps keep everyone else churning below them.
 
2012-05-16 03:16:11 PM  
I've always said that the MLS won't be taken seriously until there's a relegation system in place
 
2012-05-16 03:22:47 PM  

lacrossestar83: Donnchadha: I've been saying this for years, but now it's too mainstream.


So now you're saying this other obscure thing that none of us have heard of, and it's way better?


No. Now I support the original 1998 BCS system, but only ironically.
 
2012-05-16 04:00:15 PM  

Doc Daneeka: I sometimes wonder - does Europe have an equivalent group of contrarians who are constantly pushing for European leagues to adopt a franchise system and a draft?


Oh Lord, no. Relocation is a four-letter word in Europe. You try it, you will find your fans gone before you even manage to call the moving company. By the time you leave town, your fans will have already founded a replacement club carrying as much of their old club's history and heritage as they can carry, knowing full well that they can win their way back up to where they were in the first place.
 
2012-05-16 04:56:37 PM  

Gosling: Doc Daneeka: I sometimes wonder - does Europe have an equivalent group of contrarians who are constantly pushing for European leagues to adopt a franchise system and a draft?

Oh Lord, no. Relocation is a four-letter word in Europe. You try it, you will find your fans gone before you even manage to call the moving company. By the time you leave town, your fans will have already founded a replacement club carrying as much of their old club's history and heritage as they can carry, knowing full well that they can win their way back up to where they were in the first place.


AFC Wimbledon, anybody?

What is amusing to me is that some European hockey leagues have moved away from the promotion/relegation system at the highest level, with the lower divisions operating as farm clubs in some cases - notably the KHL.
 
2012-05-16 05:01:44 PM  

Donnchadha: lacrossestar83: Donnchadha: I've been saying this for years, but now it's too mainstream.


So now you're saying this other obscure thing that none of us have heard of, and it's way better?

No. Now I support the original 1998 BCS system, but only ironically.


Okay, I lol'd.
 
2012-05-16 06:21:22 PM  

Resolute: Gosling: Doc Daneeka: I sometimes wonder - does Europe have an equivalent group of contrarians who are constantly pushing for European leagues to adopt a franchise system and a draft?

Oh Lord, no. Relocation is a four-letter word in Europe. You try it, you will find your fans gone before you even manage to call the moving company. By the time you leave town, your fans will have already founded a replacement club carrying as much of their old club's history and heritage as they can carry, knowing full well that they can win their way back up to where they were in the first place.

AFC Wimbledon, anybody?

What is amusing to me is that some European hockey leagues have moved away from the promotion/relegation system at the highest level, with the lower divisions operating as farm clubs in some cases - notably the KHL.


you mean MK Dons surely? Though most sensible people concede that Wimbledon FC died the day they moved to Milton Keynes, and MK Dons and AFC Wimbledon are both two completely separate clubs. If you want an earlier example of a team relocating, look at Arsenal. Okay, it was only from Woolwich to Islington, but there was never an actual arsenal in that part of London. No wonder my Spurs supporting mate calls them "The Woolwich Nomads"
 
2012-05-16 06:51:34 PM  
Consider the Super Conference--the best 12 teams in the country.

Each week there would be six games to televise. ESPN, ABC, NBC, CBS and maybe Fox gets into the picture. Let's throw in NBC Sports as the sixth. Some of the games would have to be broadcast simultaneously, but there would be a serious spread in the start times.

Most broadcasters show 2-3 games on Saturday. That gives the regional and local schools almost no broadcast time or exposure.
 
2012-05-16 08:01:08 PM  

Doc Daneeka: You will likely reply that such a system encourages tanking, but I think such concerns are overblown. No self-respecting player or coach ever plays to lose, and besides, they have their own jobs to worry about. Any small risk of tanking is adequately deterred by draft lotteries such as the NBA and NHL use, in which even the worst team is not guaranteed to have the best pick.


People who think relegation is a good idea are focused on the season as the most important period of time - they think everything happens within a season. Which is thinking that a year is the most important year of your life. None of 'em are. They set up the next ones...there's no sense in going and having the most awesome year ever, then realizing you have another year and can't afford to stay there and f*cking up the rest of your life.

So it goes with relegation - yeah, you get teams fighting to stay out of relegation for the year. But over time, all the teams that get relegated just have a harder time ever getting to the top. It really is the same as what we're trying to do with our government - protect those who are already wealthy and keep undercutting everyone who wants to make it up there, and inspiring them to fight one another (thinking people getting a few thousand dollars in welfare are bleeding us dry, ignoring the billions in corporate welfare).

Relegation just helps widen the gap.

The main point with pointing out the championships is his stupid, stupid notion of "14 champions in 22 years isn't enough parity" when it has had more different champions in that timeframe than EVERY other revenue-producing sport in the country, including college basketball, which has a free-for-all of randomness at the end of every year. And the solution? Let's look at the league with the least parity and borrow from it!

How f*cking stupid an idea is that?

Facebook doesn't go out and try to be more like MySpace. WalMart isn't going out and trying to be more like K-Mart. You don't look at leagues that fail at producing the results you want and say "hey, let's be like them!"
 
2012-05-16 08:57:34 PM  
When have people ever been worried about the bottom of college football? Jesus what a non-issue.
 
2012-05-16 09:30:27 PM  
Here's my idea that I would love to see implemented...

Drop the cupcake non-conference schedules, and have the top, middle and bottom 40 teams in Div-IA in 8 groups of 5.

Each school plays the other 4 teams in their group (2 home & 2 away) and the other 8 games are conference games for a 12 game regular season.

In the top 'super group', the 8 group winners get a one week bye, the 2nd & 3rd place teams start the knockout tournament for the National Championship, and the 4th & 5th place teams play for saving from being relegated down.

Aristocrats!
 
2012-05-16 11:44:42 PM  
Relegation in college football would be awesome just for the schadenfreude of watching the faces of 18-21 year-olds, both athletes and student fans, have their hopes and dreams crushed on national television. Sorry blue chip recruit that we red-shirted, but Texas went 3-11 in the premier league and have fun playing Appalachian State next year, home and away.
 
Displayed 50 of 54 comments

First | « | 1 | 2 | » | Last | Show all

View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest


This thread is archived, and closed to new comments.

Continue Farking
Submit a Link »
Advertisement
On Twitter






In Other Media


  1. Links are submitted by members of the Fark community.

  2. When community members submit a link, they also write a custom headline for the story.

  3. Other Farkers comment on the links. This is the number of comments. Click here to read them.

  4. Click here to submit a link.

Report