[Papa John]

Per John Canzano of the Oregonian, the conference might eliminate the North and South divisions for football and have the two best teams play in the conference championship game.

Don't really know how you establish the two best teams short of a round-robin, 11-game conference schedule. But it's an interesting idea.

[twitter]https://twitter.com/johncanzanobft/status/1451272990071549967]https://twitter.com/johncanzanobft/status/1451272990071549967[/twitter]

[Papa John]

Per John Canzano of the Oregonian, the conference might eliminate the North and South divisions for football and have the two best teams play in the conference championship game.

Don't really know how you establish the two best teams short of a round-robin, 11-game conference schedule. But it's an interesting idea.

[twitter]https://twitter.com/johncanzanobft/status/1451272990071549967]https://twitter.com/johncanzanobft/status/1451272990071549967[/twitter]

[Phogge]

I like it but I also would love to see a gladiator fight to the death between Cal and Stanford.

[Phogge]

I like it but I also would love to see a gladiator fight to the death between Cal and Stanford.

[Papa John]

Nice. And the Big Game gladiators would salute you as well, right Phogge?

[Papa John]

Nice. And the Big Game gladiators would salute you as well, right Phogge?

[martyup]

I never liked the two division set up.  Dump it.

[martyup]

I never liked the two division set up.  Dump it.

[Papa John]

As I understand it, the thinking is that the Pac-12 needs to do what it can to get a team into the college football playoff. 

Consider 2012. Stanford was first in the Pac-12 North with a 10-2 (8-1) record and UCLA was first in the Pac-12 South with a 9-3 (6-3) mark. Stanford got only a slight bump (8th to 6th) in the BCS rankings from winning the conference championship game against a slightly-better-than-mediocre opponent.

In the new system, the 2012 conference championship game would have been a rematch with Oregon, which was 11-1 (8-1). Back then we only had a two-team BCS championship game, so if Oregon had won they might have squeezed into that game--Oregon finished the regular season ranked 4th.

I think that for most years the Pac-12 championship game does feature the two teams with the best conference records. But, as I noted above with 2012, there are a few exceptions.

[Papa John]

As I understand it, the thinking is that the Pac-12 needs to do what it can to get a team into the college football playoff. 

Consider 2012. Stanford was first in the Pac-12 North with a 10-2 (8-1) record and UCLA was first in the Pac-12 South with a 9-3 (6-3) mark. Stanford got only a slight bump (8th to 6th) in the BCS rankings from winning the conference championship game against a slightly-better-than-mediocre opponent.

In the new system, the 2012 conference championship game would have been a rematch with Oregon, which was 11-1 (8-1). Back then we only had a two-team BCS championship game, so if Oregon had won they might have squeezed into that game--Oregon finished the regular season ranked 4th.

I think that for most years the Pac-12 championship game does feature the two teams with the best conference records. But, as I noted above with 2012, there are a few exceptions.

[Snorlax94]

Wouldn’t it be fairer to Stanford and Cal, swapping out fewer games against Oregon and Washington and more games against Arizona and Colorado.

I imagine Stanford will continue to insist on playing all CA teams every year (ie, UCLA and US.c) but still it’d be more even across the conference.

[Snorlax94]

Wouldn’t it be fairer to Stanford and Cal, swapping out fewer games against Oregon and Washington and more games against Arizona and Colorado.

I imagine Stanford will continue to insist on playing all CA teams every year (ie, UCLA and US.c) but still it’d be more even across the conference.

[Phogge]

Stanford can't beat Utah or Colorado. How about dumping them both and playing eight conference games and two creampuffs like the SEC? Or even three creampuffs?

[Phogge]

Stanford can't beat Utah or Colorado. How about dumping them both and playing eight conference games and two creampuffs like the SEC? Or even three creampuffs?

[OutsiderFan]

If the Pac-12 wants to be bold, it would introduce an 11-team round robin and give each team one OOC game. But the only way this really works is if the playoff expands to take all FBS conference champions. I'm bored of the conference championship games and would much, much, much rather see expanded playoffs replace conference championship games.

I'd be happy with Stanford playing a set schedule of Pac-12 + Notre Dame every year. USC would probably be OK with that too.

Oregon, Washington, Cal, UCLA and the rest can schedule whoever they want OOC, as long as they play one OOC road game every other season.

[OutsiderFan]

If the Pac-12 wants to be bold, it would introduce an 11-team round robin and give each team one OOC game. But the only way this really works is if the playoff expands to take all FBS conference champions. I'm bored of the conference championship games and would much, much, much rather see expanded playoffs replace conference championship games.

I'd be happy with Stanford playing a set schedule of Pac-12 + Notre Dame every year. USC would probably be OK with that too.

Oregon, Washington, Cal, UCLA and the rest can schedule whoever they want OOC, as long as they play one OOC road game every other season.

[Canalejas]

This has to be so we can go down to 8 games and make the Alliance scheduling work, right?

Doing away with divisions might be the way we get to keep the other CA schools on the schedule every year if there are only 8 conference games.

[Canalejas]

This has to be so we can go down to 8 games and make the Alliance scheduling work, right?

Doing away with divisions might be the way we get to keep the other CA schools on the schedule every year if there are only 8 conference games.