FWIW, I think it's interesting how the membership votes don't become part of the public releases, or are curiously unanimous nowadays. Like, I have to believe the "near miss" Penn State had with the Big Ten was more a public scolding for the way PSU "stepped out of bounds" airing its private conversations. It made a mess of the whole thing; nearly a decade of talks at risk because some administrators already thought the school had made the big time. The vote was tabled a year AND the tally aired.

Nebraska was voted out of the AAU by at least two or three Big Ten schools, but the same presidents were fine with them as CIC colleagues in a vote that was said to be unanimous? You don't say!

Same with the one dissenting vote against TCU for Big East membership. Gee, can you tell there was some bitterness within the conference?

(08-06-2017 06:30 PM)megadrone Wrote:  

(08-06-2017 04:58 PM)nzmorange Wrote:  

(08-06-2017 06:26 AM)Hokie Mark Wrote:  What if... when the ACC was first formed, let's say VT had not been in charge of the SoCon when it broke up, and the ACC leaders had the foresight to put in a "no more than 2 schools per state" rule - so UNC and Duke are in, but NC State and Wake are out (NC State eventually ending up in the SEC)? With VT in and only 2 schools in North Carolina, some of the expansion votes which were blocked actually get approved now...

Original ACC: Maryland, VT, Virginia, UNC, Duke, Clemson, S Carolina

Let's say they quickly move to add Pitt, Penn State, WVU and Syracuse, then shortly thereafter add GT, FSU and Miami.

In this scenario Rutgers and BC never really grow into P5 programs, but Louisville still does, so the ACC grabs them along with a Notre Dame program which was temporarily down as well.

Hypothetical ACC: Syracuse, Penn State, Pitt, Maryland, WVU, Louisville, Notre Dame, VT, Virginia, UNC, Duke, Clemson, S Carolina, GT, FSU, Miami

That would've been a very strong ACC with those additions (and 2 less teams in NC), in my opinion.

To be fair to BC:
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/1941_Sugar_Bowl

But in the 80s the BC program grew, then had some bad years under Bicknell, then grew again when Coughlin got there, then sputtered again, then O'Brien brought them back. BC needs the right coach but can put good teams on the field.

That's true w/ any high-level FBS program.

My point is that BC wasn't a nobody program before the ACC's 1950's formation.

(08-06-2017 01:41 PM)RutgersGuy Wrote:  Instead of the 4 Big XII members joining the BE the 8 FB playing members of the BE join the XII along with TCU and UCF making a 14 team Big XIV. The BE now a non-FB conference keeps ND and invites Xavier, Creighton, Butler and Saint Louis.

Big XIV:

East- Rutgers, UConn, Cuse, UCF, USF, Pitt, WVU

West- TCU, Baylor, ISU, KSU, KU, Cincy, UofL

Rutgers still gets poached by the B1G and Temple is their replacement.

The interesting thing to consider with this hypothetical is whether Notre Dame still joins the ACC as a member. The biggest draw to ND was not only non-Olympics like basketball, lacrosse and other like-minded sports, but also the football arrangement. In the ACC today, they are with close past affiliations in Syracuse, Pittsburgh, Boston College, and Miami, as well as academic and athletic peers in Duke, Georgia Tech, Florida State and UNC.

With this set-up, would ND prefer a Big XIV similar setup instead? They maintain exposure in the Northeast, Florida and Texas, and would still get their 3 rivalries with Stanford, USC and Navy.

Terry would obviously have more insight, but I would think they would still prefer the ACC (even without Syracuse, Pittsburgh and Louisville) because of UNC, Duke, Georgia Tech, Miami and Florida State. If ND had, instead, stayed with the Big East, then I don't think the C8 invite Butler as well. Saint Louis, Creighton and Xavier were no-brainers, but I would think they would have preferred Dayton in order to create an all-Catholic Conference. I'm not sure though, maybe the Presidents would still have preferred Butler over Dayton.

Or perhaps, Notre Dame might not have wanted to elevate another program in their home state of Indiana.

(08-06-2017 02:00 PM)Nerdlinger Wrote:  

(08-06-2017 08:31 AM)esayem Wrote:  Virginia Tech and West Virginia were voted-in like UNC pushed for during the formation of the conference. SC was allowed to return, Georgia Tech and either FSU or Miami invited for numbers 11 and 12.

Maryland
West Virginia
Virginia
Virginia Tech
Wake Forest
North Carolina
Duke
NC State
South Carolina
Clemson
Georgia Tech
FSU/Miami

Play four permanent rivals each year and rotate the rest. Championship game cannot be a rematch of rivalry week.

So if the teams that end up #1 and #2 are rivals and happen to play on the last week of the regular season, does #3 play #1 in the championship? I'm not sure that would go over well. I suppose the teams would just avoid scheduling rivalry games the last week of the regular season, but it seems like an unnecessary restriction for a relatively rare event. I'm not even sure what's so bad about a conference championship game after the teams already played the prior week.

Enough is bad about it to make the Big 10 change their division format to avoid it. In this situation the rivalry game becomes a semi-final game.

(08-07-2017 06:43 AM)esayem Wrote:  

(08-06-2017 02:00 PM)Nerdlinger Wrote:  

(08-06-2017 08:31 AM)esayem Wrote:  Virginia Tech and West Virginia were voted-in like UNC pushed for during the formation of the conference. SC was allowed to return, Georgia Tech and either FSU or Miami invited for numbers 11 and 12.

Maryland
West Virginia
Virginia
Virginia Tech
Wake Forest
North Carolina
Duke
NC State
South Carolina
Clemson
Georgia Tech
FSU/Miami

Play four permanent rivals each year and rotate the rest. Championship game cannot be a rematch of rivalry week.

So if the teams that end up #1 and #2 are rivals and happen to play on the last week of the regular season, does #3 play #1 in the championship? I'm not sure that would go over well. I suppose the teams would just avoid scheduling rivalry games the last week of the regular season, but it seems like an unnecessary restriction for a relatively rare event. I'm not even sure what's so bad about a conference championship game after the teams already played the prior week.

Enough is bad about it to make the Big 10 change their division format to avoid it. In this situation the rivalry game becomes a semi-final game.

OK, so if they changed their rules to avoid a rematch, why did they do so?

Incidentally, I've been digging around for a source stating such a rule exists, but can't find anything.

(08-06-2017 10:04 PM)GoldenWarrior11 Wrote:  

(08-06-2017 01:41 PM)RutgersGuy Wrote:  Instead of the 4 Big XII members joining the BE the 8 FB playing members of the BE join the XII along with TCU and UCF making a 14 team Big XIV. The BE now a non-FB conference keeps ND and invites Xavier, Creighton, Butler and Saint Louis.

Big XIV:

East- Rutgers, UConn, Cuse, UCF, USF, Pitt, WVU

West- TCU, Baylor, ISU, KSU, KU, Cincy, UofL

Rutgers still gets poached by the B1G and Temple is their replacement.

The interesting thing to consider with this hypothetical is whether Notre Dame still joins the ACC as a member. The biggest draw to ND was not only non-Olympics like basketball, lacrosse and other like-minded sports, but also the football arrangement. In the ACC today, they are with close past affiliations in Syracuse, Pittsburgh, Boston College, and Miami, as well as academic and athletic peers in Duke, Georgia Tech, Florida State and UNC.

With this set-up, would ND prefer a Big XIV similar setup instead? They maintain exposure in the Northeast, Florida and Texas, and would still get their 3 rivalries with Stanford, USC and Navy.

Terry would obviously have more insight, but I would think they would still prefer the ACC (even without Syracuse, Pittsburgh and Louisville) because of UNC, Duke, Georgia Tech, Miami and Florida State. If ND had, instead, stayed with the Big East, then I don't think the C8 invite Butler as well. Saint Louis, Creighton and Xavier were no-brainers, but I would think they would have preferred Dayton in order to create an all-Catholic Conference. I'm not sure though, maybe the Presidents would still have preferred Butler over Dayton.

Yeah but Butler coming off of those NCG and actually being in Indianapolis compared to ND who while in Indiana is closer to being a Chicago fan base. Dayton actually doubles up a market and I originally had them in as #12 but figured at that point SLU was playing well and would bring a new market to the conference.

So if the Pac's gambit in 2010 to gut the Big 12 actually succeeded, how would everything have gone down? I'm guessing that CU and the Texoma 4 (OU/OSU/UT/TT) wouldn't move until 2012. This would allow time for the other Big 12 schools to make arrangements with other conferences and permit the Big 12 to dissolve itself without anyone paying exit fees. This might also have delayed the departure of NU until 2012, but I'm not sure about that. Missouri and Texas A&M are picked up by the SEC in 2012 as actually occurred, while Baylor, ISU, KU, and KSU join the Big East.

I doubt that the Big East's expansion would slow the decline of the conference. If anything, I think adding such far-flung schools of dubious value (besides KU) would accelerate the decline. TCU was scheduled to join the Big East in 2012, but that would put the conference at 13 football members. Perhaps TCU's entrance would be delayed? I believe Pitt and Syracuse would still have left for the ACC in 2013, which was the more stable of the two major east coast conferences at the time. TCU joins in 2013 to keep the conference at 12 football members. Here the Big East is not as desperate to add schools as they were in our timeline, so Boise and SDSU don't receive an invite, while of the C-USA schools, only Houston is invited.

I think ND is given the same deal by the ACC as they actually were and so departs in 2013 too. Rutgers will leave for the Big Ten in 2014. Maryland is still going to be poached by the Big Ten, so the ACC is still going to seek a replacement, and Louisville is still likely to be that replacement. WVU is technically up for grabs too, but their academics are worse than Louisville. Would there be a split between the Catholic 7 and the football schools? I really don't know, though I'm inclined to say yes. They will take the Big East name, while the football schools might possibly pick up the discarded but valuable Big 12 name. In 2014, Louisville and Rutgers are replaced by UCF and Navy, the latter of which joins a year earlier than scheduled in reality.

Another question is does the Big East/Big 12 retain its "power" status with the advent of the CFP? My guess is that the conference is no longer considered a power, as it's not all that much better off than the American in our timeline.

The evolution of the (old) Big East/(new) Big 12:

2011 Big East
FB: Cincinnati, Louisville, Pitt, Rutgers, Syracuse, UConn, USF, WVU
NFB: DePaul, Georgetown, Marquette, Notre Dame, Providence, Seton Hall, St. John's, Villanova

2012 Big East
FB (East): Pitt, Rutgers, Syracuse, UConn, USF, WVU
FB (West): Baylor, Cincinnati, ISU, Kansas, KSU, Louisville
NFB: DePaul, Georgetown, Marquette, Notre Dame, Providence, Seton Hall, St. John's, Villanova

2013 Big 12
East: Cincinnati, Louisville, Rutgers, UConn, USF, WVU
West: Baylor, Houston, ISU, Kansas, KSU, TCU

2014 Big 12
East: Cincinnati, ISU, UCF, UConn, USF, WVU
West: Baylor, Houston, Kansas, KSU, Navy (FB only), TCU

I wonder how C-USA would replace UCF and Houston. They haven't been raided as extensively as in our timeline, so there is less need to add as many schools as possible. Perhaps this decreased desperation would lead them to stay put at 10. I suppose they could add FAU and/or FIU to get back into Florida.

Any thoughts?

(08-07-2017 09:23 AM)Nerdlinger Wrote:  

(08-07-2017 06:43 AM)esayem Wrote:  

(08-06-2017 02:00 PM)Nerdlinger Wrote:  

(08-06-2017 08:31 AM)esayem Wrote:  Virginia Tech and West Virginia were voted-in like UNC pushed for during the formation of the conference. SC was allowed to return, Georgia Tech and either FSU or Miami invited for numbers 11 and 12.

Maryland
West Virginia
Virginia
Virginia Tech
Wake Forest
North Carolina
Duke
NC State
South Carolina
Clemson
Georgia Tech
FSU/Miami

Play four permanent rivals each year and rotate the rest. Championship game cannot be a rematch of rivalry week.

So if the teams that end up #1 and #2 are rivals and happen to play on the last week of the regular season, does #3 play #1 in the championship? I'm not sure that would go over well. I suppose the teams would just avoid scheduling rivalry games the last week of the regular season, but it seems like an unnecessary restriction for a relatively rare event. I'm not even sure what's so bad about a conference championship game after the teams already played the prior week.

Enough is bad about it to make the Big 10 change their division format to avoid it. In this situation the rivalry game becomes a semi-final game.

OK, so if they changed their rules to avoid a rematch, why did they do so?

Incidentally, I've been digging around for a source stating such a rule exists, but can't find anything.

Rule? It is well documented the Big 10 wanted to avoid it so they changed the divisions.

(08-19-2017 05:30 PM)esayem Wrote:  

(08-07-2017 09:23 AM)Nerdlinger Wrote:  

(08-07-2017 06:43 AM)esayem Wrote:  

(08-06-2017 02:00 PM)Nerdlinger Wrote:  

(08-06-2017 08:31 AM)esayem Wrote:  Virginia Tech and West Virginia were voted-in like UNC pushed for during the formation of the conference. SC was allowed to return, Georgia Tech and either FSU or Miami invited for numbers 11 and 12.

Maryland
West Virginia
Virginia
Virginia Tech
Wake Forest
North Carolina
Duke
NC State
South Carolina
Clemson
Georgia Tech
FSU/Miami

Play four permanent rivals each year and rotate the rest. Championship game cannot be a rematch of rivalry week.

So if the teams that end up #1 and #2 are rivals and happen to play on the last week of the regular season, does #3 play #1 in the championship? I'm not sure that would go over well. I suppose the teams would just avoid scheduling rivalry games the last week of the regular season, but it seems like an unnecessary restriction for a relatively rare event. I'm not even sure what's so bad about a conference championship game after the teams already played the prior week.

Enough is bad about it to make the Big 10 change their division format to avoid it. In this situation the rivalry game becomes a semi-final game.

OK, so if they changed their rules to avoid a rematch, why did they do so?

Incidentally, I've been digging around for a source stating such a rule exists, but can't find anything.

Rule? It is well documented the Big 10 wanted to avoid it so they changed the divisions.

Yes, that documentation is what I can't find evidence of -- more specifically, the semifinal rule you mention. Are you simply referring to when they went from Legends/Leaders to East/West? The competitive balance approach of Legends/Leaders wasn't popular, so the conference took the opportunity to realign geographically when Rutgers and Maryland were added. The realignment alone didn't change the likelihood of a CCG rematch, although increasing the conference size by 2 teams did drop the likelihood somewhat.

(08-05-2017 10:00 AM)Nerdlinger Wrote:  

(08-05-2017 09:49 AM)Gibson Tiger Wrote:  I haven't read this entire thread so this may sound similar to earlier posts.At one time the Metro Conference considered adding football and with the plan college football would've looked very different with conference alignment.The Big East would've never had football and the ACC would've stayed with the same membership it had after Georgia Tech joined.

North:Penn St.,Pittsburgh,Syracuse,Connecticut,Rutgers
Mideast:Temple,West Virginia,Boston College,Cincinnati,Louisville
South:East Carolina,South Carolina,Virginia Tech,Florida St.,Miami
Midwest:Memphis,Southern Mississippi,Tulane,Tulsa,Houston

I don't remember the exact list of schools being considered at the time but there's my 20.

The arrangement would have supposedly been like so:

North: Boston College, Cincinnati, Pittsburgh, Rutgers, Syracuse, Temple, Virginia Tech, West Virginia
South: East Carolina, Florida State, Louisville, Memphis (State), Miami, South Carolina, Southern Miss, Tulane

This was after Penn State had already accepted the Big Ten invite, though. At the time of the proposal (1990), Houston was still in the Southwest Conference, and Connecticut was still in the I-AA Yankee Conference.

I would have favored a 4-division alignment:

East: Boston College, Rutgers, Syracuse, Temple
North: Cincinnati, Pittsburgh, Virginia Tech, West Virginia
South: East Carolina, Florida State, Miami, South Carolina
West: Louisville, Memphis (State), Southern Miss, Tulane

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Metro_Conf...conference


North Division: Boston College, Cincinnati, Pittsburgh, Rutgers, Syracuse, Temple, Virginia Tech, West Virginia (Penn St originally included)

South Division: Tulane, East Carolina, Florida State, Louisville, Memphis State, Miami ,South Carolina, Southern Mississippi

http://www.sportsbusinessdaily.com/Journ...rence.aspx

(07-13-2017 12:46 PM)Nerdlinger Wrote:  New alternate history scenario! The earliest differences from our timeline are the Big Ten's rejection of Penn State for membership in 1990 and Notre Dame's TV deal not panning out. This leads the Irish to join the Big Ten, while Penn State creates a new eastern conference that prevents the addition of football to the Big East.

Here's a variant on the scenario referenced above wherein all conferences reach 16 football schools. The present-day Division I-A:

B16
East: Michigan, Michigan State, Notre Dame, Ohio State
North: Iowa, Iowa State, Minnesota, Wisconsin
South: Illinois, Indiana, Northwestern, Purdue
West: Colorado, Kansas, Missouri, Nebraska
Protected crossover: Notre Dame/Purdue

EAC
East: Boston College, Rutgers, Syracuse, Temple
North: Maryland, Penn State, Pittsburgh, West Virginia
South: Clemson, Florida State, Georgia Tech, Miami-FL
West: Duke, North Carolina, Virginia, Virginia Tech

PAC
East: Houston, Texas, Texas A&M, Texas Tech
North: Oregon, Oregon State, Washington, Washington State
South: Arizona, Arizona State, Colorado State, Utah
West: California, Stanford, UCLA, USC

SEC
East: Florida, Georgia, NC State, South Carolina
North: Cincinnati, Kentucky, Tennessee, Vanderbilt
South: Alabama, Auburn, Mississippi State, Ole Miss
West: Arkansas, LSU, Oklahoma, Oklahoma State
Protected crossovers: Alabama/Tennessee, Auburn/Georgia

SWC
East: Central Florida, East Carolina, South Florida, Wake Forest
North: Kansas State, Louisville, Memphis, Tulsa
South: Louisiana Tech, Southern Miss, Tulane, UAB
West: Baylor, Rice, SMU, TCU

WAC
East: Air Force, BYU, Utah State, Wyoming
North: Boise State, Idaho, Nevada, UNLV
South: New Mexico, New Mexico State, North Texas, UTEP
West: Fresno State, Hawaii, San Diego State, San Jose State

MAC
East: Army, Buffalo, Connecticut, Navy
North: Akron, Bowling Green, Kent State, Toledo
South: Ball State, Marshall, Miami-OH, Ohio
West: Central Michigan, Eastern Michigan, Northern Illinois, Western Michigan

SAC
East: FAU, FIU, Georgia Southern, Georgia State
North: Appalachian State, Charlotte, Coastal Carolina, Old Dominion
South: Middle Tennessee, South Alabama, Troy, Western Kentucky
West: Arkansas State, Louisiana-Lafayette, Louisiana-Monroe, Texas State

Notable annual interconference matchups: BYU/Utah, Cincinnati/Miami-OH, Clemson/South Carolina, Colorado/Colorado State, Florida/Florida State, Georgia/Georgia Tech, Kansas/Kansas State, Navy/Notre Dame, NC State/North Carolina, Notre Dame/USC, Oklahoma/Texas

The initial EAC lineup in 1991 was BC, FSU, Miami, PSU, Pitt, Rutgers, Syracuse, Temple, VT, and WVU. The Big 12 formed in 1996 as in our timeline, but Nebraska defected to the Big Ten, and Houston was tapped to replace them. The 6 power conferences were stable for the next 15 years, although there was some movement in the non-power conferences. Unlike in our timeline, the remnant SWC survived and preempted the creation of C-USA and the eastward growth of the WAC.

Then things broke wide open in 2010, when the Pac-10 announced an eastward expansion, into the territory of the increasingly fragile Big 12. Houston, Texas, A&M, and TT joined the newly-renamed PAC (Pacific Athletic Conference) and CSU and Utah from the WAC.

The Big Ten capitalized on the situation by annexing Colorado, ISU, Kansas, and Missouri, becoming the Big 16. The SEC picked off the OK schools while helping themselves to Cincinnati from the SWC and NC State from the small and vulnerable ACC. With the ACC destabilized, the EAC opened its doors to the remaining ACC schools, aside from WF.

The Southern Athletic Conference (SAC) is a Sun Belt analog that formed from the eastern wing of the widely-dispersed Big West after the western wing defected to the WAC. Similar to the Sun Belt, the SAC filled out its ranks by drawing from I-AA. The last independent holdouts, Army and Navy, joined the MAC as football affiliates, leading to eight 16-team I-A conferences.

(08-21-2017 09:35 AM)Nerdlinger Wrote:  

(07-13-2017 12:46 PM)Nerdlinger Wrote:  New alternate history scenario! The earliest differences from our timeline are the Big Ten's rejection of Penn State for membership in 1990 and Notre Dame's TV deal not panning out. This leads the Irish to join the Big Ten, while Penn State creates a new eastern conference that prevents the addition of football to the Big East.

Here's a variant on the scenario referenced above wherein all conferences reach 16 football schools. The present-day Division I-A:

B16
East: Michigan, Michigan State, Notre Dame, Ohio State
North: Iowa, Iowa State, Minnesota, Wisconsin
South: Illinois, Indiana, Northwestern, Purdue
West: Colorado, Kansas, Missouri, Nebraska
Protected crossover: Notre Dame/Purdue

EAC
East: Boston College, Rutgers, Syracuse, Temple
North: Maryland, Penn State, Pittsburgh, West Virginia
South: Clemson, Florida State, Georgia Tech, Miami-FL
West: Duke, North Carolina, Virginia, Virginia Tech

PAC
East: Houston, Texas, Texas A&M, Texas Tech
North: Oregon, Oregon State, Washington, Washington State
South: Arizona, Arizona State, Colorado State, Utah
West: California, Stanford, UCLA, USC

SEC
East: Florida, Georgia, NC State, South Carolina
North: Kentucky, Louisville, Tennessee, Vanderbilt
South: Alabama, Auburn, Mississippi State, Ole Miss
West: Arkansas, LSU, Oklahoma, Oklahoma State
Protected crossovers: Alabama/Tennessee, Auburn/Georgia

SWC
East: Central Florida, South Florida, Southern Miss, UAB
North: Cincinnati, East Carolina, Memphis, Wake Forest
South: Kansas State, Louisiana Tech, Tulane, Tulsa
West: Baylor, Rice, SMU, TCU

WAC
East: Air Force, BYU, Utah State, Wyoming
North: Boise State, Idaho, Nevada, UNLV
South: New Mexico, New Mexico State, North Texas, UTEP
West: Fresno State, Hawaii, San Diego State, San Jose State

MAC
East: Army, Buffalo, Connecticut, Navy
North: Akron, Bowling Green, Kent State, Toledo
South: Ball State, Marshall, Miami-OH, Ohio
West: Central Michigan, Eastern Michigan, Northern Illinois, Western Michigan

SAC
East: FAU, FIU, Georgia Southern, Georgia State
North: Appalachian State, Charlotte, Coastal Carolina, Old Dominion
South: Middle Tennessee, South Alabama, Troy, Western Kentucky
West: Arkansas State, Louisiana-Lafayette, Louisiana-Monroe, Texas State

The Southern Athletic Conference (SAC) is a C-USA/Sun Belt analog.

Thank God that didn't happen.

(08-21-2017 09:59 AM)TerryD Wrote:  Thank God that didn't happen.

ND is actually doing quite well in this timeline as a full Big Ten (later Big 16) member. They have remained nationally relevant as one of the most dominant teams in the conference and in all of college football. Not only have they been able to keep up their rivalries with Michigan, MSU, and Purdue as annual in-conference games, but also those OOC rivalries with USC and Navy. Here they never started up an annual series with Stanford but have instead added Ohio State as one of their top rivals. The recent increase in conference games from 8 to 9 has stunted their formerly biennial rivalries with Pitt and BC, however.

Another alternate history scenario: Metro Conference football is a go in 1991! Feeling inadequate, the Pac-10 raids the Big 8 and becomes simply the PAC (Pacific Athletic Conference; ISU and KSU are left out). The Big Ten picks up PSU and ND. The SEC raids the SWC, taking Arkansas, UT, TAMU, and Houston. The enfeebled SWC restocks but is no longer considered a power. The ACC stands pat at 8 schools. Here's 1993:

Big Ten
East: Michigan, Michigan State, Notre Dame, Ohio State, Penn State, Purdue
West: Illinois, Indiana, Iowa, Minnesota, Northwestern, Wisconsin
Protected crossover: Indiana/Purdue

Metro
North: Boston College, Cincinnati, Pittsburgh, Rutgers, Syracuse, Temple, Virginia Tech, West Virginia
South: East Carolina, Florida State, Louisville, Memphis State, Miami-FL, South Carolina, Southern Miss, Tulane
(At first, all the new schools are FB-only affiliates except Miami and ECU. Eventually all the rest but Temple join as full members.)

PAC
East: Arizona, Arizona State, Colorado, Kansas, Missouri, Nebraska, Oklahoma, Oklahoma State
West: California, Oregon, Oregon State, Stanford, UCLA, USC, Washington, Washington State

SEC
East: Alabama, Auburn, Florida, Georgia, Kentucky, Tennessee, Vanderbilt
West: Arkansas, Houston, LSU, Mississippi State, Ole Miss, Texas, Texas A&M

SWC
Baylor, Iowa State, Kansas State, Rice, SMU, TCU, Texas Tech, Tulsa

The ACC, Big West, MAC, and WAC are the same as in our timeline.

~~~~~~

Notable changes in the years after the big realignment:

• Several eastern schools form the Eastern Athletic Conference (EAC), a I-A non-power conference
• Big West drops football due to lack of football schools
• Big Ten adds Rutgers and Syracuse from Metro and Maryland and Virginia from ACC
• SEC adds Clemson and NC State from ACC
• Metro boots out Temple and restocks by adding Duke, Georgia Tech, North Carolina
• ACC dissolves; Wake Forest joins EAC
  

~~~~~~

And today's I-A lineup:

Big Ten
East: Maryland, Rutgers, Syracuse, Virginia
North: Michigan, Michigan State, Northwestern, Notre Dame
South: Indiana, Ohio State, Penn State, Purdue
West: Minnesota, Illinois, Iowa, Wisconsin
Protected crossovers: Illinois/Northwestern, Michigan/Ohio State, Notre Dame/Purdue

Metro
East: Duke, East Carolina, North Carolina, Virginia Tech
North: Boston College, Cincinnati, Pittsburgh, West Virginia
South: Florida State, Georgia Tech, Miami-FL, South Carolina
West: Louisville, Memphis, Southern Miss, Tulane

PAC
East: Colorado, Kansas, Missouri, Nebraska
North: Oregon, Oregon State, Washington, Washington State
South: Arizona, Arizona State, Oklahoma, Oklahoma State
West: California, Stanford, UCLA, USC
Protected crossover: Nebraska/Oklahoma

SEC
East: Clemson, Florida, Georgia, NC State
North: Arkansas, Kentucky, Tennessee, Vanderbilt
South: Alabama, Auburn, Mississippi State, Ole Miss
West: Houston, LSU, Texas, Texas A&M
Protected crossovers: Alabama/Tennessee, Auburn/Georgia

EAC
North: Army, Buffalo, Connecticut, Massachusetts, Navy, Temple
South: Central Florida, Charlotte, James Madison, Marshall, South Florida, Wake Forest

MAC
East: Akron, Bowling Green, Kent State, Miami-OH, Ohio, Youngstown State
West: Ball State, Central Michigan, Eastern Michigan, Northern Illinois, Toledo, Western Michigan
Protected crossover: Bowling Green/Toledo

SWC
East: Arkansas State, Iowa State, Kansas State, Louisiana Tech, Tulsa, UAB
West: Baylor, North Texas, Rice, SMU, TCU, Texas Tech

WAC
Mountain: Air Force, Boise State, Colorado State, New Mexico, UTEP, Wyoming
Pacific: BYU, Fresno State, Hawaii, San Diego State, UNLV, Utah

(08-27-2017 04:52 PM)Nerdlinger Wrote:  Another alternate history scenario: Metro Conference football is a go in 1991! Feeling inadequate, the Pac-10 raids the Big 8 and becomes simply the PAC (Pacific Athletic Conference; ISU and KSU are left out). The Big Ten picks up PSU and ND. The SEC raids the SWC, taking Arkansas, UT, TAMU, and Houston. The enfeebled SWC restocks but is no longer considered a power. The ACC stands pat at 8 schools. Here's 1993:

Big Ten
East: Michigan, Michigan State, Notre Dame, Ohio State, Penn State, Purdue
West: Illinois, Indiana, Iowa, Minnesota, Northwestern, Wisconsin

Metro
North: Boston College, Cincinnati, Pittsburgh, Rutgers, Syracuse, Temple, Virginia Tech, West Virginia
South: East Carolina, Florida State, Louisville, Memphis State, Miami-FL, South Carolina, Southern Miss, Tulane
(At first, all the new schools are FB-only affiliates except Miami and ECU. Eventually all the rest but Temple join as full members.)

PAC
East: Arizona, Arizona State, Colorado, Kansas, Missouri, Nebraska, Oklahoma, Oklahoma State
West: California, Oregon, Oregon State, Stanford, UCLA, USC, Washington, Washington State

SEC
East: Alabama, Auburn, Florida, Georgia, Kentucky, Tennessee, Vanderbilt
West: Arkansas, Houston, LSU, Mississippi State, Ole Miss, Texas, Texas A&M

SWC: Baylor, Iowa State, Kansas State, Rice, SMU, TCU, Texas Tech, Tulsa

The ACC, Big West, MAC, and WAC are the same as in our timeline.

~~~~~~

Notable changes in the years after the big realignment:

• Several eastern schools form the Eastern Athletic Conference (EAC), a I-A non-power conference
• Big West drops football due to lack of football schools
• Big Ten adds Rutgers and Syracuse from Metro and Maryland and Virginia from ACC
• SEC adds Clemson and NC State from ACC
• Metro boots out Temple and restocks by adding Duke, Georgia Tech, North Carolina
• ACC dissolves; Wake Forest joins EAC
  

~~~~~~

And today's FBS lineup:

Big Ten
East: Maryland, Rutgers, Syracuse, Virginia
North: Michigan, Michigan State, Northwestern, Notre Dame
South: Indiana, Ohio State, Penn State, Purdue
West: Minnesota, Illinois, Iowa, Wisconsin
Protected crossovers: Illinois/Northwestern, Michigan/Ohio State, Notre Dame/Purdue

Metro
East: Duke, East Carolina, North Carolina, Virginia Tech
North: Boston College, Cincinnati, Pittsburgh, West Virginia
South: Florida State, Georgia Tech, Miami-FL, South Carolina
West: Louisville, Memphis, Southern Miss, Tulane

PAC
East: Colorado, Kansas, Missouri, Nebraska
North: Oregon, Oregon State, Washington, Washington State
South: Arizona, Arizona State, Oklahoma, Oklahoma State
West: California, Stanford, UCLA, USC
Protected crossover: Nebraska/Oklahoma

SEC
East: Clemson, Florida, Georgia, NC State
North: Arkansas, Kentucky, Tennessee, Vanderbilt
South: Alabama, Auburn, Mississippi State, Ole Miss
West: Houston, LSU, Texas, Texas A&M
Protected crossovers: Alabama/Tennessee, Auburn/Georgia

EAC
North: Army, Buffalo, Connecticut, Massachusetts, Navy, Temple
South: Central Florida, Charlotte, James Madison, Marshall, South Florida, Wake Forest

MAC
East: Akron, Bowling Green, Kent State, Miami-OH, Ohio, Youngstown State
West: Ball State, Central Michigan, Eastern Michigan, Northern Illinois, Toledo, Western Michigan
Protected crossover: Bowling Green/Toledo

SWC
East: Arkansas State, Iowa State, Kansas State, Louisiana Tech, Tulsa, UAB
West: Baylor, North Texas, Rice, SMU, TCU, Texas Tech

WAC
Mountain: Air Force, Boise State, Colorado State, New Mexico, UTEP, Wyoming
Pacific: BYU, Fresno State, Hawaii, San Diego State, UNLV, Utah

Thank goodness that didn't happen!

(08-27-2017 09:47 PM)nzmorange Wrote:  Thank goodness that didn't happen!

I dunno, what's so bad about it?

(08-21-2017 11:58 AM)Nerdlinger Wrote:  

(08-21-2017 09:59 AM)TerryD Wrote:  Thank God that didn't happen.

ND is actually doing quite well in this timeline as a full Big Ten (later Big 16) member. They have remained nationally relevant as one of the most dominant teams in the conference and in all of college football. Not only have they been able to keep up their rivalries with Michigan, MSU, and Purdue as annual in-conference games, but also those OOC rivalries with USC and Navy. Here they never started up an annual series with Stanford but have instead added Ohio State as one of their top rivals. The recent increase in conference games from 8 to 9 has stunted their formerly biennial rivalries with Pitt and BC, however.

No thanks.

(08-27-2017 09:58 PM)Nerdlinger Wrote:  

(08-27-2017 09:47 PM)nzmorange Wrote:  Thank goodness that didn't happen!

I dunno, what's so bad about it?

Syracuse's would be schedule.

(08-28-2017 08:24 AM)nzmorange Wrote:  

(08-27-2017 09:58 PM)Nerdlinger Wrote:  

(08-27-2017 09:47 PM)nzmorange Wrote:  Thank goodness that didn't happen!

I dunno, what's so bad about it?

Syracuse's would be schedule.

If the Metro had gone to 16 teams in 1990, it would have suffered the same fate as the 16 team WAC. Broadcasting wasn't ready for it. Raycom syndication wasn't too strong in the Northeast at that time (from what I recall) and it would have caused friction.

All that would have been contingent on Syracuse, Pitt and BC possibly leaving the Big East, which wouldn't have happened at that time. The A10 schools (Rutgers, WVU and Temple) would have been game but probably wouldn' t have committed without the Big East football schools. Granted this is all speculation on my part, but Syracuse and Pitt were committed to the Big East until the 2011 timeframe.

The Metro would have only been viable if the Big East didn't expand with Miami and the ACC didn't expand with FSU. So, take those two schools, Pitt, BC and Syracuse out of the equation, and you sort of have the 2013-2014 version of the American.