pac 12 big 12 big 10

washington iowa state iowa
washington state byu minnesota
oregon louisville nebraska
oregon state missouri illinois
utah kansas purdue
colorado kansas state northwestern
cal oklahoma michigan
ucla texas ohio state
usc texas tech indiana
arizona texas a&m penn state
arizona baylor wisconsin
stanford oklahoma state michigan state

sec

alabama
auburn
arkansas
lsu
mississippi state
mississippi
kentucky
vanderbuilt
tennessee
georgia
florida

acc big east cusa

boston college rutgers utep
maryland syracuse tulsa
virginia pitt rice
virginia tech west virginia smu
north carolina temple southern miss
north carolina state cinncinatti ecu
duke tcu old dominion
georgia tech memphis marshall
clemson centraL florida louisiana tech
florida state uconn tulane
wake forest usf florida atlantic
miami houston utsa

mountain west mac sun belt

hawaii akron texas state
san jose state ball state north texas
fresno state bowling green louisiana monroe
san diego state buffalo louisiana la fayette
unlv central michigan arkansas state
nevada eastern michigan western kentucky
utah state kent state middle tennessee
wyoming miami ohio troy
colorado state northern illinois south alabama
air force ohio georgia state
new mexico state toledo florida internatioal
boise state western michigan appilattion state

independent

notre dame
army
navy


hey guys this is my first thred/post. this is how i think college football should have expanded. i think there should be no divisions so you would get the top 2 teams every year, even though you might get an 6-6 team you would still get the top 2 team.
what do you guys think.

Hard to tell what I think. You probably need to reformat the post.

(07-15-2013 11:35 PM)ucla Wrote:  pac 12 big 12 big 10 sec acc

washington iowa state iowa alabama boston college
washington state byu minnesota auburn maryland
oregon louisville nebraska arkansas virginia
oregon state missouri illinois lsu virginia tech
utah kansas purdue mississippi north carolina
colorado kansas state northwestern mississippi duke
cal oklahoma michigan kentucky georgia tech
ucla texas ohio state tennessee clemson
usc texas tech indiana georgia florida state
arizona texas a&m penn state florida miami
arizona state baylor wisconsin south carolina wake forest
stanford oklahoma state michigan state vanderbuilt north carolina state

big east cusa mountain west mac sun belt

rutgers utep hawaii akron texas state
syracuse tulsa san jose state ball state north texas
pitt louisiana tech fresno state bowling green louisiana monroe
west virginia rice san diego state buffalo louisiana la fayette
temple smu unlv central michigan arkansas state
cinncinatti southern miss nevada eastern michigan western kentucky
tcu marshall utah state kent state middle tennessee
memphis ecu wyoming miami ohio troy
centraL florida old dominion colorado state northern illinois south alabama
usf tulane air force ohio georgia state
uconn utsa new mexico state toledo florida internatioal
houston florida atlantic boise state western michigan appilattion state

independent

notre dame
army
navy


hey guys this is my first thred/post. this is how i think college football should have expanded. i think there should be no divisions so you would get the top 2 teams every year, even though you might get an 6-6 team you would still get the top 2 team.
what do you guys think.

When's the start date?
1990: SU, PSU, WVU, Pitt, and BC should all be together.
2000: Those schools minus PSU should all be together (I would still include PSU, but they're in the B1G)
2010: I think that SU is happier with Pitt, BC, and ND (kind of) than Pitt, UCONN, and Rutgers. As a SU fan, I also don't think that SU has a ton in common with TCU, Memphis, Houston, or UCF, although I was for UCF joining the BIG EAST. The BIG EAST also kicked Temple FB out once, so none of the old BE members were particularly enthused with them coming back.

(07-15-2013 11:43 PM)Attackcoog Wrote:  Hard to tell what I think. You probably need to reformat the post.

this is my first post. i did not know it would look like this untill i posted it. so i will try too reformat it.

thanks bryan

(07-15-2013 11:44 PM)nzmorange Wrote:  

(07-15-2013 11:35 PM)ucla Wrote:  pac 12 big 12 big 10 sec acc

washington iowa state iowa alabama boston college
washington state byu minnesota auburn maryland
oregon louisville nebraska arkansas virginia
oregon state missouri illinois lsu virginia tech
utah kansas purdue mississippi north carolina
colorado kansas state northwestern mississippi duke
cal oklahoma michigan kentucky georgia tech
ucla texas ohio state tennessee clemson
usc texas tech indiana georgia florida state
arizona texas a&m penn state florida miami
arizona state baylor wisconsin south carolina wake forest
stanford oklahoma state michigan state vanderbuilt north carolina state

big east cusa mountain west mac sun belt

rutgers utep hawaii akron texas state
syracuse tulsa san jose state ball state north texas
pitt louisiana tech fresno state bowling green louisiana monroe
west virginia rice san diego state buffalo louisiana la fayette
temple smu unlv central michigan arkansas state
cinncinatti southern miss nevada eastern michigan western kentucky
tcu marshall utah state kent state middle tennessee
memphis ecu wyoming miami ohio troy
centraL florida old dominion colorado state northern illinois south alabama
usf tulane air force ohio georgia state
uconn utsa new mexico state toledo florida internatioal
houston florida atlantic boise state western michigan appilattion state

independent

notre dame
army
navy


hey guys this is my first thred/post. this is how i think college football should have expanded. i think there should be no divisions so you would get the top 2 teams every year, even though you might get an 6-6 team you would still get the top 2 team.
what do you guys think.

When's the start date?
1990: SU, PSU, WVU, Pitt, and BC should all be together.
2000: Those schools minus PSU should all be together (I would still include PSU, but they're in the B1G)
2010: I think that SU is happier with Pitt, BC, and ND (kind of) than Pitt, UCONN, and Rutgers. As a SU fan, I also don't think that SU has a ton in common with TCU, Memphis, Houston, or UCF, although I was for UCF joining the BIG EAST. The BIG EAST also kicked Temple FB out once, so none of the old BE members were particularly enthused with them coming back.

as for the start date, i was going for 2013 or 2014
also i was going for 12 teams per conference to try to mske everything equal
as for the big east kicking out temple, ya they did do that but they did invite them back, so thats
why i added them.

thanks, bryan

come on OP

syracuse, pitt, & wvu are in a much higher tier of programs than ucf, usf, memphis etc. heck those 3 programs have more history/wins/alumni than most bcs schools.

this thread is a perfect example of what im talking about with my big east overrated thread the other day

(07-16-2013 12:02 AM)ucla Wrote:  as for the start date, i was going for 2013 or 2014
also i was going for 12 teams per conference to try to mske everything equal
as for the big east kicking out temple, ya they did do that but they did invite them back, so thats
why i added them.

thanks, bryan

That is true, but Temple only got the invite after SU, WVU, and Pitt left. I would have preferred Army, Navy, UCF, and Temple (grudgingly). Army and Navy aren't great, but they have history, national followings, and there's a certain amount of respect/class associated with playing them. UCF is a sleeping giant and Temple is more out of location. As noted earlier, all of the older BIG EAST schools would be less/were than enthused with their addition. I'm pretty sure that half the conference would be praying for an ACC/B1G/Big XII invite, while the other half prayed that all the conferences stabilized.

I have a question for you. As a UCLA fan, if the Pac went to 16, what four teams would you want? And, if it's Texahoma, what four teams would you want, assuming that Texas and Oklahoma were off the table (already taken)?

Changes, I'd make. No championship game loop hole. So conferences stay at 9 or 10.

VT joins ACC in 1953.
Penn State and the Eastern Independents form the Eastern Seaboard Conference.
USC and Arkansas do not join the SEC
Only Texas and Texas A&M join the Big 8
Utah and Colorado don't join Pac-10
so that leaves

ACC
-----
Clemson
Duke
Florida State
Georgia Tech
Maryland
North Carolina
North Carolina State
Virginia
Virginia Tech
Wake Forest

SEC
-----
Alabama
Auburn
Florida
Georgia
Kentucky
Louisiana State
Mississippi
Mississippi State
Tennessee
Vanderbilt

Big 10
----
Illinois
Indiana
Iowa
Michigan
Michigan State
Minnesota
Northeastern
Ohio State
Purdue
Wisconsin

Big 8
-----
Colorado
Kansas
Kansas State
Iowa State
Missouri
Nebraska
Oklahoma
Oklahoma State
Texas
Texas A&M

Pac - 10
------
Arizona
Arizona State
California
Oregon
Oregon State
Southern California
Stanford
UCLA
Washington
Washington State

Eastern Seaboard Conference
-----
Boston College
Connecticut
Miami
Penn State
Pittsburgh
Rutgers
Syracuse
Temple
West Virginia

Metro
-----
Alabama-Birmingham
Cincinnati
East Carolina
Houston
Louisville
Memphis
South Carolina
South Florida
Southern Miss
Tulane

SWC
-----
Arkansas
Baylor
North Texas
Rice
Southern Methodist
Texas Christian
Texas-San Antonio
Texas Tech
Tulsa
Utep

MWC
-----
Air Force
Boise State
BYU
Colorado State
New Mexico
San Diego State
UNLV
Utah
Wyoming

WAC
-----
Idaho
Fresno State
Hawaii
Montana
Nevada
New Mexico State
San Jose State
Utah State

MAC
-----
Same

SunBelt
-----
The Rest

Moved up Montana to fill out the WAC.

Would Arkansas stay in the SWC when Houston jumped to the Metro. Probably not. Would the SWC further expand into Texas? No. but I like a Texas/Oklahoma full SWC.

I figure the Metro, MWC, WAC and Sunbelt would all take schools from the SWC as they all need a Texas presence.

So You wouldn't have Louisville in the Eastern Seaboard conference ?

(07-16-2013 03:39 AM)CardFan1 Wrote:  So You wouldn't have Louisville in the Eastern Seaboard conference ?

I'm still working out the details. Yes, Louisville would have gotten in before Memphis but I've decided to put Cincy, Louisville and Memphis in the Metro.

And Pittsburgh to complete the Ohio river corridor to the Mississippi.

(07-16-2013 03:48 AM)CardFan1 Wrote:  And Pittsburgh to complete the Ohio river corridor to the Mississippi.

Oops. Left out Pittsburgh. I put them in the Eastern Seaboard Conference with PSU and WVU.

(07-16-2013 04:04 AM)ChrisLords Wrote:  

(07-16-2013 03:48 AM)CardFan1 Wrote:  And Pittsburgh to complete the Ohio river corridor to the Mississippi.

Oops. Left out Pittsburgh. I put them in the Eastern Seaboard Conference with PSU and WVU.

Lose Temple to bring us to 8 and give us Georgetown, Nova, Saint John's, and Notre Dame (with a 4 game/yr scheduling agreement and shared bowl negotiations) and you have yourself a deal. I would also be down with dropping UCONN down to FCS and picking up UMD and VT, but I feel like that might be pushing my luck.

Basketball could involve splitting into two divisions of 6 (7 if we get UMD and VT), where each team would play each team in it's division twice and each team in the other division once.

EDIT: Change the conference name to "The Conference that Shoulda, Woulda, Coulda been" and throw in JHU for lax and a basketball challenge with the ACC.

(07-16-2013 04:13 AM)nzmorange Wrote:  

(07-16-2013 04:04 AM)ChrisLords Wrote:  

(07-16-2013 03:48 AM)CardFan1 Wrote:  And Pittsburgh to complete the Ohio river corridor to the Mississippi.

Oops. Left out Pittsburgh. I put them in the Eastern Seaboard Conference with PSU and WVU.

Lose Temple to bring us to 8 and give us Georgetown, Nova, Saint John's, and Notre Dame (with a 4 game/yr scheduling agreement and shared bowl negotiations) and you have yourself a deal. I would also be down with dropping UCONN down to FCS and picking up UMD and VT, but I feel like that might be pushing my luck.

Basketball could involve splitting into two divisions of 6 (7 if we get UMD and VT), where each team would play each team in it's division twice and each team in the other division once.

EDIT: Change the conference name to "The Conference that Shoulda, Woulda, Coulda been" and throw in JHU for lax and a basketball challenge with the ACC.

You could do that or you could form a Big East with PSU and pretty much get the same thing. Also, Miami may prefer the metro since it's such an outlier in the ESC/BE.

(07-15-2013 11:35 PM)ucla Wrote:  appilattion state

(07-16-2013 05:37 AM)GaSouthern Wrote:  

(07-15-2013 11:35 PM)ucla Wrote:  appilattion state

not to mention "should of."

(07-16-2013 04:04 AM)ChrisLords Wrote:  

(07-16-2013 03:48 AM)CardFan1 Wrote:  And Pittsburgh to complete the Ohio river corridor to the Mississippi.

Oops. Left out Pittsburgh. I put them in the Eastern Seaboard Conference with PSU and WVU.

Also left out UCF.

(07-16-2013 06:06 AM)CommuterBob Wrote:  

(07-16-2013 04:04 AM)ChrisLords Wrote:  

(07-16-2013 03:48 AM)CardFan1 Wrote:  And Pittsburgh to complete the Ohio river corridor to the Mississippi.

Oops. Left out Pittsburgh. I put them in the Eastern Seaboard Conference with PSU and WVU.

Also left out UCF.

Originally, I had UCF in the Metro but I left Southern Miss out of the Metro. Adding So. Miss made 11 members so I had to drop one. Since they were an early member, they would have been in before UCF. So UCF falls to the Sunbelt.

But VT and FSU and GT were all in Metro

(07-16-2013 03:27 AM)ChrisLords Wrote:  Changes, I'd make. No championship game loop hole. So conferences stay at 9 or 10.

VT joins ACC in 1953.
Penn State and the Eastern Independents form the Eastern Seaboard Conference.
USC and Arkansas do not join the SEC
Only Texas and Texas A&M join the Big 8
Utah and Colorado don't join Pac-10
so that leaves

ACC
-----
Clemson
Duke
Florida State
Georgia Tech
Maryland
North Carolina
North Carolina State
Virginia
Virginia Tech
Wake Forest

SEC
-----
Alabama
Auburn
Florida
Georgia
Kentucky
Louisiana State
Mississippi
Mississippi State
Tennessee
Vanderbilt

Big 10
----
Illinois
Indiana
Iowa
Michigan
Michigan State
Minnesota
Northeastern
Ohio State
Purdue
Wisconsin

Big 8
-----
Colorado
Kansas
Kansas State
Iowa State
Missouri
Nebraska
Oklahoma
Oklahoma State
Texas
Texas A&M

Pac - 10
------
Arizona
Arizona State
California
Oregon
Oregon State
Southern California
Stanford
UCLA
Washington
Washington State

Eastern Seaboard Conference
-----
Boston College
Connecticut
Miami
Penn State
Pittsburgh
Rutgers
Syracuse
Temple
West Virginia

Metro
-----
Alabama-Birmingham
Cincinnati
East Carolina
Houston
Louisville
Memphis
South Carolina
South Florida
Southern Miss
Tulane

SWC
-----
Arkansas
North Texas
Rice
Southern Methodist
Texas Christian
Texas-San Antonio
Texas State
Tulsa
Utep

MWC
-----
Air Force
Boise State
BYU
Colorado State
New Mexico
San Diego State
UNLV
Utah
Wyoming

WAC
-----
Idaho
Fresno State
Hawaii
Montana
Nevada
New Mexico State
San Jose State
Utah State

MAC
-----
Same

SunBelt
-----
The Rest

Moved up Montana to fill out the WAC.

Would Arkansas stay in the SWC when Houston jumped to the Metro. Probably not. Would the SWC further expand into Texas? No. but I like a Texas/Oklahoma full SWC.

I figure the Metro, MWC, WAC and Sunbelt would all take schools from the SWC as they all need a Texas presence.

Yes, the Metro, MWC, WAC, and Sunbelt would take teams from Texas, but it's unlikely the SWC would be losing them. Under the idea that only Texas and A&M leave, then the SWC is still a fairly decent conference. I doubt Houston leaves for the Metro or that the MW could pick off any schools. In fact, the opposite would likely happen.

SWC

Texas Tech
Baylor
Houston
TCU
SMU
Arkansas

That's a pretty decent core. Then they could add these three to finish.

Tulane
Memphis
Louisville

I think something like that is more likely. Obviously, the last 3 are the actual options. So, the SWC could fill from the west and and add New Mexico, Colorado St, and BYU rather than Tulane, Memphis, Louisville. Or the SWC could stay southern and add S Miss rather than Louisville. What I don't see is N Tx or UTSA being added or Texas Tech in the Sunbelt.