If Swofford's "anticipation" is indeed correct [and we all know what a wonderfully astute anticipator he has been ;)], and they do not form divisions, is there any other way to have a championship game other than the two top teams?

The only requirement is that you play everyone in your division. The MAC with 13 played 8 or 9 games, but only counted the games in division.

One other feature to divisions that I forgot to mention; Under the notion that conf. championships could be repeats, divisonal play allows you to at least avoid immediate replays. Simply have all your inter-divisional games at the front of the schedule and then finish with your 4-5 divisional rivals.

THE PC APPROACH

Atlantic Division - UMd, UVa, UNC, NCSU, WAKE, DUKE
East Division - VT, GT, FSU, Miami, CU

Could any of the BigXII or SEC folks on this board tell us whether either of these conferences try to follow this approach?

I know the SEC doesn't. I'm pretty sure UGA won the east division last year during their game with Auburn, which is in the west division.

In the Big 12 the last game is a division rival, but the 3 games vs. the other division are mixed in with the games vs. your own division.

BigE, sure you had your coffee today?

This article is dated 6/12, when it was still anticipated that on July 1 there would be 12 ACC schools...
:D

ACC plans for 11 team basketball tournament following the Big Ten Format (maybe)

http://www.timesdispatch.com/frontpage/MGBM7C4ZKID.html

Thanks for the article, Big E. Interesting. I favor the 20 game, double round-robin myself. It's more of a true league when everybody plays everybody else under the same conditions (home & home). The ACC RPs will take a beating, however, with 4 games against VA Tech & Miami added to the schedule.

In regard to the tournament, some other leagues have come up with interesting formats to give greater weight to the regular season championship. Here's one model that might be interesting for them to schedule:

Day 1 - 8 teams, 4 games. seeds 4 - 11, top 3 seeds get byes.

Day 2 - 7 teams left, 6 teams play 3 games - 4 first round winners + seeds 2 & 3, top seed gets another bye.

Day 3 - final four - 3 winners from Day 2 + top seed.

Day 4 - finals

Barakat said he didn't know another way to do it, so there's one. Besides giving putting the top seed right into the semi-finals, it gives them an extra day of rest, so they're not as tired going into the NCAA tournament. Each model has its pros & cons.

With the SEC and Big12, the divisional splits were fairly clear to formulate. And, the SEC later modified its interdivisional play by moving to two rotations rather than one, yet maintaining one permanent other division opponent for each team (football).
If you look at the Big10 or the ACC with 11 (or even if they had 12), finding the divisional arrangements are more complicated or perhaps subject to enhanced controversy. For example, an eastern division in the football Big10 would have Penn State, Ohio State, and Michigan together. In the ACC, trying not to split the NC 4 when they are in the middle of the ACC has its perplexing moments.
While the SEC East appears to have dominant teams in GA, Tenn., and Fla., the SEC West seems more balanced. Every team in the SEC West has played in a SEC Championship game, to date, with the exception of Ole Miss--and their chance may come soon.
Perhaps the ACC can achieve balance somewhat. There are the perrenial powers FSU and now Miami (ok Va Tech too), and Duke on the other end of the spectrum. The others, are frequently up and down in between. In basketball, the senario may be considerably reversed. Hope the ACC will be more estute in figuring this out than they were in intiating expansion ::).






S