The regular season for college football will remain at 12 games for the Super 6 teams. Since a full-slate of only Super 6 teams would result in an insufficient amount of home games and with teams too far under .500 each year, a maximum of two non-Super 6 teams (now called the NCAA schools) would be allowed on each team’s schedule. By limiting the number of NCAA schools on the schedule, the Super 6 is limiting the exposure and thus potential success of the competition (the NCAA). The bowl season is outlined here, but bowl eligibility would still be the same. With 16 bowls remaining (including the national semifinal games which are incorporated in the BCS bowls), 32 teams would achieve post-season play out of the 74 teams in the Super 6. That means 43% of the Super 6 teams make the post-season, which is only slightly less than the current number of BCS conference teams in bowls. (Teams left in the old NCAA will participate in a tournament to maximize revenue and minimize the losses that the bowls inflicted on them.)
The college basketball regular season will remain capped at 32 games. Outside of a team’s conference, each team can play no more than 6 non-Super 6 teams. With just 74 teams eligible for the Super 6’s March Madness, a 64 team tournament would be a joke. However, by reducing to a 32 team format, the same number of teams from major conferences (roughly 42% with the current 68 team tournament system) would still participate in the championship tournament. Rather than having an opening weekend for rounds 1 and 2 at a neutral site, perhaps those first 16 games can be played at the highest seed’s home court, and the games could be spread out over the four days for maximum TV exposure and excitement. Once 16 teams remain, then the current wonderful system can be utilized again.
Again, my proposal allows the same number of teams from major conferences–in both men’s basketball and football–to participate in the post-season as the current system does.