How To Fix College Football: A Proposed New System

I’m going to throw an idea out there on how to fix college football.

It is a bit ambitious, but it would fix scheduling, add playoffs (yes, two playoffs) and make the season even more important and exciting. However, the way these conferences would work out is by region, not by skill level or traditional rivalries and conferences.

There are currently 120 Division I football teams. In the new format, there would be six super-conferences. Each super-conference would contain twenty schools. In each super-conference, there would be two divisions: the “A” division and the “B” division.

Each “A” division would have nine teams and each “B” division would have eleven teams (for scheduling purposes.) The best teams would be in the “A” division and the lower tier teams would be in the “B” division.

In each division, the top two teams qualify to play in their respective playoff. There would be an “A” playoff and a “B” playoff. Each playoff would have twelve teams. The top four teams get a bye and the remaining eight schools play in the first round. The “A” playoff determines the national champion. The “B” playoff is like college basketball’s NIT.

However, only the remaining five teams in each “A” division (third, fourth, fifth, sixth and seventh) and the remaining three teams in each “B” division (third, fourth and fifth) can qualify for bowl games. Bowl eligibility would not be determined by wins and losses like the current system.

That would make 24 bowl games. I think we can all agree that the current bowl system, with 35 bowls, is watered down. Twenty-four bowls and two 12-team playoffs would be perfect.

The worst two teams from division “A” (in division standings, not overall standings) and the top two teams from division “B” would be relegated at the end of the season. That way, ideally the best competition is in division “A” and the worst is in division “B.”

The Alabamas, USCs, Ohio States and Oklahomas would probably always be in the “A” division. However, they still have to compete and play well each week. A team can’t rest on their laurels and expect to stay in the top division. This also gives smaller schools the opportunity to win the “B” division and try to stay in the “A” division.

It keeps every single game interesting, “A” or “B.”

Scheduling would be much better too. In this college football system, each division “A” team has to play twelve games: eight division games and four non-division games. Each division “B” team still has to play twelve games, but they play ten division games and two non-division games.

“B” teams would focus more on their division and try to relegate up to the “A” division. The non-division games would have to be at the same level though. A “B” team can’t play any DII or “A” team, and an “A” team can’t play any “B” or DII teams.

Before the scheduling starts, the NCAA has to decide which each league will play their non-division games against conference X, Y and Z. (In order to add rivalries and consistency, each super-conference must agree to play one of their non-division games against another super-conference for a decade or so.)

The other three specified super-conferences will change every year—even if they overlap with the agreed ten-year super-conference.

In order to schedule quickly and fairly, rankings from the previous year determine which team chooses, and in which order. For instance, if the top team in the country from last year’s final rankings wants to play its rival from the other division, it can choose that school and the school has to accept. The schools can schedule “cupcakes” or powerhouse teams.

These games can’t affect whether a school qualifies for a playoff, they can be tie-breakers in some cases though. Otherwise, it can only affect seeding for the playoff and rankings throughout the season.

This type of scheduling rewards successful teams and adds another element of strategy. Scheduling would work like the NFL draft. The best school from last year picks who they want to play in one of their non-division games, then the second-best school, then the third-best school, until every single school has a set non-division game.

Then it goes around again and again.

Schools can pick their partner games first, so that scheduling can go quicker and they can have some idea of who they want next. A school must pick two home games and two away games. The home games will alternate between the agreed conferences, but the remaining non-division games will be random as to whether a school wants to play away or at home.

For example, if conference “H” has agreed to play conference “Q” for the next ten years and a team from conference “H” played last year’s game against conference “Q” at home, they must play this year’s game against conference “Q” away. Make sense? Set "home and home" games do not work because a team might get relegated.

One of the problems is that the conferences have to be even and regionally based. However, we all know football in the South is different than football in the New England. Football in the Southwest is different than football in the Midwest. There are more teams in Florida than there are in New Mexico.

I’m not sure how they would separate all 120 football teams into six regional super-conferences either. Some super-conferences would cover twice the square miles as others. Also, some schools would feel culturally closer to other super-conferences.

Also, TV contracts drive the present day conferences. I would not know how the conferences would set up television contracts, but it can work. As long as the NCAA sets up a system where each team has to stay in their conference, it can work out. But who would know until it actually happened? This is just a hypothetical college football system, there are going to be flaws and better aspects.

Another problem this system has is consistency. We all know that college teams have their “rebuilding” years. We all know that a traditional powerhouse team might not have a great year because they got a new coach or any other reason. The problem with my college football system is that teams can get punished tremendously for rebuilding.

It is bad because one bad year in the “A” division can force next year’s team to be stuck in the “B” division without national championship hopes.

There are a lot of controversial parts in my proposed system. However, there are a lot of flaws in today’s system. In my system, there would be a playoff, fair and consistent scheduling and an added level of conference competition.

In my system, the best teams reap the rewards, not just the big name schools.