(01-24-2014 02:43 PM)bigblueblindness Wrote:  

(01-24-2014 01:43 PM)JRsec Wrote:  

(01-24-2014 12:50 PM)bigblueblindness Wrote:  Good breakdown, JR. I agree that your 1st and 2nd realignment possibilities are not preferred or practical in the long run. We have spelled out Option 3 in previous threads, and I agree that it is the most harmonious. Option 4 is an abomination, and I hope it does not come to that. Option 5 would fracture the conferences so much that the SEC may just end up playing itself, which would actually be fine with me at some level. It would not be good for college athletics, though. For those who have not been playing along, Option 3 would look something like this (JR, give your modifications where needed):

PAC - existing 12 plus Texas, Texas Tech, Oklahoma, Oklahoma State, Kansas, Kansas State (18 schools)
Big 10 - existing 14 plus BC, Pitt, Syracuse, UVA, and UNC (19 schools)
SEC - existing 14 plus FSU, Georgia Tech, Clemson, NC State, and Virginia Tech (19 schools)

Iowa State and Duke are finding homes. Notre Dame can name their home if they want it or be independent with BYU. Neither Notre Dame or BYU will be left out of top tier football. Like JR said, the only caveat is that at least 8 have to leave the Big 12 and 12 have to leave the ACC.

The PAC would have to pick two from Iowa State, Baylor, and TCU or a Notre Dame agreeing out of spite toward the Big 10 and SEC.
The Big 10 would have to pick from Iowa State, Duke, or a pissed off Notre Dame.
The SEC could fit anyone left. I think the order of preference would be Duke, Iowa State, West Virginia, Louisville, Miami, Baylor, TCU, or Wake Forest, assuming Notre Dame would rather cancel athletics than join.

I think you are right in that N.D. would head West.

Add these 8 to the PAC: Texas, Texas Tech, Oklahoma, Oklahoma State, Kansas, Kansas State, Iowa State, Notre Dame. (to 24 in time they could develop New Mexico, Nevada/UNLV, San Diego State, B.Y.U., or T.C.U.)

SEC add these 6: Clemson, Florida State, Georgia Tech, North Carolina State, Virginia Tech, and either West Virginia/Louisville/or Miami.
(to 24 the SEC adds the two left off of number 20 choice plus Baylor and possibly Cincinnati/Wake Forest)

The Big 10 adds these 6: Boston College, Duke, North Carolina, Pittsburgh, Syracuse, Virginia. (to 24 they can develop Buffalo, Connecticut, Massachusetts, Temple if they desire, but they will not.)

That is a pretty good deal for everyone, JR. If the PAC were to take Notre Dame under such circumstances, they better not deny BYU with a straight face. The SEC and Big 10 will be fine; the PAC has got to find a way to make this or something comparable work.

Again, product will become available to the PAC when they permit a network, or networks, to buy into the PAC network rather than just leasing product. If FOX or ESPN place their brands in the PAC in a realignment then they could lose their investments in those schools if the PAC changes leases. If they own a percentage of the PACN they won't be so hesitant to encourage Texas or N.D., or anyone else to move there. They'll know by their vested interest that they have access to that product. IMO that is why nothing further has happened for the PAC and won't until they relent on that point.

(01-24-2014 01:43 PM)JRsec Wrote:  

(01-24-2014 12:50 PM)bigblueblindness Wrote:  Good breakdown, JR. I agree that your 1st and 2nd realignment possibilities are not preferred or practical in the long run. We have spelled out Option 3 in previous threads, and I agree that it is the most harmonious. Option 4 is an abomination, and I hope it does not come to that. Option 5 would fracture the conferences so much that the SEC may just end up playing itself, which would actually be fine with me at some level. It would not be good for college athletics, though. For those who have not been playing along, Option 3 would look something like this (JR, give your modifications where needed):

PAC - existing 12 plus Texas, Texas Tech, Oklahoma, Oklahoma State, Kansas, Kansas State (18 schools)
Big 10 - existing 14 plus BC, Pitt, Syracuse, UVA, and UNC (19 schools)
SEC - existing 14 plus FSU, Georgia Tech, Clemson, NC State, and Virginia Tech (19 schools)

Iowa State and Duke are finding homes. Notre Dame can name their home if they want it or be independent with BYU. Neither Notre Dame or BYU will be left out of top tier football. Like JR said, the only caveat is that at least 8 have to leave the Big 12 and 12 have to leave the ACC.

The PAC would have to pick two from Iowa State, Baylor, and TCU or a Notre Dame agreeing out of spite toward the Big 10 and SEC.
The Big 10 would have to pick from Iowa State, Duke, or a pissed off Notre Dame.
The SEC could fit anyone left. I think the order of preference would be Duke, Iowa State, West Virginia, Louisville, Miami, Baylor, TCU, or Wake Forest, assuming Notre Dame would rather cancel athletics than join.

I think you are right in that N.D. would head West.

Add these 8 to the PAC: Texas, Texas Tech, Oklahoma, Oklahoma State, Kansas, Kansas State, Iowa State, Notre Dame. (to 24 in time they could develop New Mexico, Nevada/UNLV, San Diego State, B.Y.U., or T.C.U.)

SEC add these 6: Clemson, Florida State, Georgia Tech, North Carolina State, Virginia Tech, and either West Virginia/Louisville/or Miami.
(to 24 the SEC adds the two left off of number 20 choice plus Baylor and possibly Cincinnati/Wake Forest)

The Big 10 adds these 6: Boston College, Duke, North Carolina, Pittsburgh, Syracuse, Virginia. (to 24 they can develop Buffalo, Connecticut, Massachusetts, Temple if they desire, but they will not.)

"I think you are right in that N.D. would head West."

Given the resistance to the religious universities by the PAC 12, would they accept Notre Dame?

I know it's crazy, but in a scenario in which Notre Dame is "forced" to find a conference home for football, I'd love to see them in the SEC. They have always recruited nationally, so I don't think being in the same conference as Texas and Florida schools would make much difference. However, if the SEC was adding Iowa State, North Carolina, Duke and Florida State (among others), I could see them being attracted to the combination of top academic schools, top football schools and top basketball schools. Personally, (assuming a move to 24) I would love a scenario in which the SEC took the bulk of the old ACC (UNC, Duke, NCSU, Georgia Tech, Clemson and Virginia or Virginia Tech), plus Kansas, Iowa State, Florida State and Notre Dame. I'd like it even better if they substituted Oklahoma for NCSU. I know none of that is as reasonable as other scenarios, but that would totally blow away any combination the other conferences could cobble together.

(01-24-2014 11:18 AM)JRsec Wrote:  

(01-24-2014 10:39 AM)bigblueblindness Wrote:  

(01-23-2014 06:12 PM)JRsec Wrote:  

(01-23-2014 05:49 PM)SeaBlue Wrote:  

(01-23-2014 04:11 PM)JRsec Wrote:  I think you are missing his point. What BBB is asking is if the SEC didn't seek North Carolina, Duke, Virginia, Kansas, Oklahoma or Texas and operated under the assumption that Delany would like to have them would there be any great opposition to the SEC expanding with Oklahoma State, Kansas State, Iowa State, Colorado State, N.C. State, and Virginia Tech? If Scott finally wanted in on the action I'm sure we could negotiate out the product. Each conference with a network would benefit from additional content and new markets. So if we opted for the low hanging fruit would that not facilitate resolution?

But he's talking about the SEC going it alone into the realm of 24 teams, correct? I don't think that would sit well with Scott and Delany.

But sure, on the surface most of the schools mentioned look like schools that would be accepted as peers in the Big Ten and the absence of football history might be acceptable to the Execs given the academic strength.

The question presupposes simultaneous moves by the Big 10 and PAC to move to a P3 arrangement absorbing the Big 12 and ACC between us. It is not about the SEC going it alone.

Thinking it through, I'm not sure the PAC could survive in the scenario I set up unless the Big 10 did not push any further west. If we took Iowa St, Oklahoma St, and Kansas St, the PAC would have to get all of Texas, Oklahoma, and Kansas to even be in the conversation with the SEC and Big 10. Otherwise, they can't get to 16 teams worth a toot, much less 20 or 24. They would be left with Texas Tech, Baylor, TCU, and the cream of the MWC (some of which double existing footprints).

I'm just trying to think of an arrangement that makes the PAC, Big 10, and SEC happy. JR has done a good job of it in recent posts. Maybe the best approach is a list of "Stay away from" rather than "We want". For the SEC, I think that list is the following in order:

SEC "Stay away from"
1) FSU
2) Clemson
3) Georgia Tech
4) Leave at least one of UNC or NC State
5) Leave at least one of UVA or VT

I really think from the SEC's standpoint, that is all we would ask of the Big 10. Assuming the PAC goes only as far east as the existing Big 12 footprint, I don't think there is anyone that we must have them stay away from.

No matter how you carve up this turkey the PAC has to have the Big 12 to survive without tremendous disparity with the SEC and Big 10. Delany and Slive need to both expand with 12 of the ACC teams between the two of them. If they did this the GOR in the ACC is void. The PAC could take 8 of the Big 12 schools and dissolve them. We would each have 20 at that point. Then if networks were willing to pay for more schools each of us could add 4 more schools at our own discretion.

The PAC with Oklahoma, Kansas, Texas, Texas Tech, T.C.U. Iowa State, Kansas State, and Oklahoma State could stop and try to develop San Diego State, Nevada, New Mexico, or Hawaii if they wanted to. Or they might get concessions from B.Y.U. to be able to add them.

If the SEC added 4 more it could be any of the 3 remaining ACC schools or Baylor, West Virginia and Cincinnati.

I agree that we must make it clear to the Big 10 that we will pick up at least one Virginia and North Carolina school and that Clemson and F.S.U. are off limits, but Georgia Tech I'm ambivalent about. Even if the Big 10 had Georgia Tech it wouldn't affect who owns Atlanta.

Truthfully and simply there are only 4 ways for realignment to play out.

1. All 5 P5 conferences stay in spite of growing disparity. Some of them add project schools and some do not.

The problem here is that the Big 10 and SEC will distance themselves from the PAC which will distance itself from the Big 12 and ACC in income.

2. A P4 emerges the only way that it can. The ACC takes in West Virginia. The SEC takes Oklahoma and a school it otherwise might not have wanted from the Big 12 (either Baylor or T.C.U. or possibly Oklahoma State). The PAC takes Texas, Texas Tech, Oklahoma State and Kansas State (or possibly T.C.U.). The Big 10 takes Kansas and Iowa State. The ACC reconnects their footprint, and each of the top 3 get 1 National brand school.

The problem here is that there is simply not the motivation for that kind of brokered move to take place.

3. The three conferences with networks work out the division of the remaining schools and do so with geography for the sake of minor sports in mind.
This could work. The Big 12 might even accept being able to move essentially intact. The ACC will fight it tooth and nail. What you would wind up with were 3 relatively equal strength conferences comprised of between 20 to 24 schools depending.

In my opinion this is the only outcome that will bring a lasting peace.

4. The Big 10 and SEC both take what they want from the Big 12 to grow the disparity between themselves and the ACC. When the income disparity is right they will strike dividing the ACC between them. The only problem now is that they both dwarf the PAC. The eventual outcome is that the California schools with Washington and Colorado would move to the Big 10 and the SEC West would have to pick up the Arizona's, Utah's, and likely the Oregon's. Yech! What we would wind up with are two 32 to 36 team leagues that are so spread out that minor sports would suffer terribly.

Excuse me but there is a 5th option. ESPN could choose to hold the ACC intact and glean what it desires from the Big 12 to be placed in the SEC so that it has immediate access to the largest television market (ACC) and the most viewed product (SEC). If all FOX gains is a piece of the PAC (least watched) and a piece of the Big 10 (weakest on field performance) then ESPN wins. The network angle should never be underestimated.

#6 (most likely)
Notre Dame will stay independent but still attached to the ACC.
The ACC will accept one transfer from the SEC (South Carolina, Vanderbilt or Kentucky) and also take West Virginia.
The SEC will get Kansas State, Oklahoma State and either TCU or Baylor.
The B1G takes Iowa State and Kansas.
The PAC gets Texas, Texas Tech, Oklahoma and either TCU or Baylor.

We're just waiting for the paperwork to get sorted out.

(01-25-2014 01:56 PM)XLance Wrote:  

(01-24-2014 11:18 AM)JRsec Wrote:  [quote='bigblueblindness' pid='10336548' dateline='1390577998']
[quote='JRsec' pid='10333417' dateline='1390518764']
[quote='SeaBlue' pid='10333354' dateline='1390517353']

#6 (most likely)
Notre Dame will stay independent but still attached to the ACC.
The ACC will accept one transfer from the SEC (South Carolina, Vanderbilt or Kentucky) and also take West Virginia.
The SEC will get Kansas State, Oklahoma State and either TCU or Baylor.
The B1G takes Iowa State and Kansas.
The PAC gets Texas, Texas Tech, Oklahoma and either TCU or Baylor.

We're just waiting for the paperwork to get sorted out.

If any existing school leaves the Big 10, SEC, or PAC, I will retire from this topic; it would be like be a physicist without being able to trust in gravity. If the ACC does not survive for some reason, I can definitely see Notre Dame having a BYU type of agreement with the new Big East and full independence in football.

(01-25-2014 01:56 PM)XLance Wrote:  

(01-24-2014 11:18 AM)JRsec Wrote:  

(01-24-2014 10:39 AM)bigblueblindness Wrote:  

(01-23-2014 06:12 PM)JRsec Wrote:  

(01-23-2014 05:49 PM)SeaBlue Wrote:  But he's talking about the SEC going it alone into the realm of 24 teams, correct? I don't think that would sit well with Scott and Delany.

But sure, on the surface most of the schools mentioned look like schools that would be accepted as peers in the Big Ten and the absence of football history might be acceptable to the Execs given the academic strength.

The question presupposes simultaneous moves by the Big 10 and PAC to move to a P3 arrangement absorbing the Big 12 and ACC between us. It is not about the SEC going it alone.

Thinking it through, I'm not sure the PAC could survive in the scenario I set up unless the Big 10 did not push any further west. If we took Iowa St, Oklahoma St, and Kansas St, the PAC would have to get all of Texas, Oklahoma, and Kansas to even be in the conversation with the SEC and Big 10. Otherwise, they can't get to 16 teams worth a toot, much less 20 or 24. They would be left with Texas Tech, Baylor, TCU, and the cream of the MWC (some of which double existing footprints).

I'm just trying to think of an arrangement that makes the PAC, Big 10, and SEC happy. JR has done a good job of it in recent posts. Maybe the best approach is a list of "Stay away from" rather than "We want". For the SEC, I think that list is the following in order:

SEC "Stay away from"
1) FSU
2) Clemson
3) Georgia Tech
4) Leave at least one of UNC or NC State
5) Leave at least one of UVA or VT

I really think from the SEC's standpoint, that is all we would ask of the Big 10. Assuming the PAC goes only as far east as the existing Big 12 footprint, I don't think there is anyone that we must have them stay away from.

No matter how you carve up this turkey the PAC has to have the Big 12 to survive without tremendous disparity with the SEC and Big 10. Delany and Slive need to both expand with 12 of the ACC teams between the two of them. If they did this the GOR in the ACC is void. The PAC could take 8 of the Big 12 schools and dissolve them. We would each have 20 at that point. Then if networks were willing to pay for more schools each of us could add 4 more schools at our own discretion.

The PAC with Oklahoma, Kansas, Texas, Texas Tech, T.C.U. Iowa State, Kansas State, and Oklahoma State could stop and try to develop San Diego State, Nevada, New Mexico, or Hawaii if they wanted to. Or they might get concessions from B.Y.U. to be able to add them.

If the SEC added 4 more it could be any of the 3 remaining ACC schools or Baylor, West Virginia and Cincinnati.

I agree that we must make it clear to the Big 10 that we will pick up at least one Virginia and North Carolina school and that Clemson and F.S.U. are off limits, but Georgia Tech I'm ambivalent about. Even if the Big 10 had Georgia Tech it wouldn't affect who owns Atlanta.

Truthfully and simply there are only 4 ways for realignment to play out.

1. All 5 P5 conferences stay in spite of growing disparity. Some of them add project schools and some do not.

The problem here is that the Big 10 and SEC will distance themselves from the PAC which will distance itself from the Big 12 and ACC in income.

2. A P4 emerges the only way that it can. The ACC takes in West Virginia. The SEC takes Oklahoma and a school it otherwise might not have wanted from the Big 12 (either Baylor or T.C.U. or possibly Oklahoma State). The PAC takes Texas, Texas Tech, Oklahoma State and Kansas State (or possibly T.C.U.). The Big 10 takes Kansas and Iowa State. The ACC reconnects their footprint, and each of the top 3 get 1 National brand school.

The problem here is that there is simply not the motivation for that kind of brokered move to take place.

3. The three conferences with networks work out the division of the remaining schools and do so with geography for the sake of minor sports in mind.
This could work. The Big 12 might even accept being able to move essentially intact. The ACC will fight it tooth and nail. What you would wind up with were 3 relatively equal strength conferences comprised of between 20 to 24 schools depending.

In my opinion this is the only outcome that will bring a lasting peace.

4. The Big 10 and SEC both take what they want from the Big 12 to grow the disparity between themselves and the ACC. When the income disparity is right they will strike dividing the ACC between them. The only problem now is that they both dwarf the PAC. The eventual outcome is that the California schools with Washington and Colorado would move to the Big 10 and the SEC West would have to pick up the Arizona's, Utah's, and likely the Oregon's. Yech! What we would wind up with are two 32 to 36 team leagues that are so spread out that minor sports would suffer terribly.

Excuse me but there is a 5th option. ESPN could choose to hold the ACC intact and glean what it desires from the Big 12 to be placed in the SEC so that it has immediate access to the largest television market (ACC) and the most viewed product (SEC). If all FOX gains is a piece of the PAC (least watched) and a piece of the Big 10 (weakest on field performance) then ESPN wins. The network angle should never be underestimated.

#6 (most likely)
Notre Dame will stay independent but still attached to the ACC.
The ACC will accept one transfer from the SEC (South Carolina, Vanderbilt or Kentucky) and also take West Virginia.
The SEC will get Kansas State, Oklahoma State and either TCU or Baylor.
The B1G takes Iowa State and Kansas.
The PAC gets Texas, Texas Tech, Oklahoma and either TCU or Baylor.

We're just waiting for the paperwork to get sorted out.

Absurdity is a form of humor I suppose. In realignment the movement is toward more money. It's a lot like gravity in that respect. What we need XLance is option 5. You guys move to 20. Notre Dame joins in full because Texas joins you in full and brings 4 more Western Big 12 members with them. Texas, T.C.U., Texas Tech, Oklahoma State, and Kansas State. The SEC adds Oklahoma, Iowa State, Kansas, Baylor and West Virginia, plus a sixth growth project school like East Carolina, Central Florida, South Florida, or Cincinnati. That way we both max out our footprints eliminate the 5th wheel, and shelter the property ESPN wants between us.

You do know if something like that doesn't happen you guys stay on the menu?

Anyway if something like this happened here's what we would look like:

ACC:

Boston College, Louisville, Notre Dame, Pittsburgh, Syracuse

Duke, North Carolina, N.C. State, Virginia, Virginia Tech

Clemson, Florida State, Georgia Tech, Miami, Wake Forest

Kansas State, Oklahoma State, Texas, T.C.U., Texas Tech

SEC:

Baylor, Iowa State, Kansas, Missouri, Oklahoma

Arkansas, Louisiana State, Mississippi, Mississippi State, Texas A&M

Alabama, Auburn, (U.C.F., E.C.U., U.S.F. or Cincy), Tennessee, Vanderbilt

Florida, Georgia, Kentucky South Carolina, West Virginia

That makes Oklahoma essentially a king of their own division (which would appease Bobby Stoops). It sets up even more ACC/SEC annual year end rivalries, it allows the ACC to take over the other position in the Sugar Bowl (80 million payout) and ends realignment in the Southeast. You could still bundle the cable packages of the SEC/ACC utilizing the entire footprint. It's a win/win.

I could see the PAC poaching the B12 which triggers the SEC/B1G to poach the ACC and the ACC/B12 leftovers combining with some American teams to create a new league that is still a "power" league but is the definite low man on the totem pole with this being the result:

SEC East: South Carolina/Clemson/North Carolina State/Vanderbilt/Kentucky/Virginia Tech
SEC Central: Alabama/Auburn/Tennessee/Florida/Florida State/Georgia
SEC West: Texas A&M/Louisiana State/Arkansas/Missouri/Ole Miss/Miss State

PAC
UO/OSU/UW/WSU/CAL/STAN
USC/UCLA/UA/ASU/CU/UU
UT/TT/OU/OSU/KU/KSU

B1G
UW/UMN/NU/UIA/UIL/NW
UIN/PU/UMI/MSU/OSU/ND (or SU)
PSU/RU/UMD/UVA/UNC/Duke

Big Atlantic Whatever
ISU/UC/UL/WVU/Pitt/Memphis
BC/SU/Temple/Uconn/UCF/USF
GT/WF/TCU/BU/SMU/Houston

(01-26-2014 11:02 AM)10thMountain Wrote:  I could see the PAC poaching the B12 which triggers the SEC/B1G to poach the ACC and the ACC/B12 leftovers combining with some American teams to create a new league that is still a "power" league but is the definite low man on the totem pole with this being the result:

SEC East: South Carolina/Clemson/North Carolina State/Vanderbilt/Kentucky/Virginia Tech
SEC Central: Alabama/Auburn/Tennessee/Florida/Florida State/Georgia
SEC West: Texas A&M/Louisiana State/Arkansas/Missouri/Ole Miss/Miss State

PAC
UO/OSU/UW/WSU/CAL/STAN
USC/UCLA/UA/ASU/CU/UU
UT/TT/OU/OSU/KU/KSU

B1G
UW/UMN/NU/UIA/UIL/NW
UIN/PU/UMI/MSU/OSU/ND (or SU)
PSU/RU/UMD/UVA/UNC/Duke

Big Atlantic Whatever
ISU/UC/UL/WVU/Pitt/Memphis
BC/SU/Temple/Uconn/UCF/USF
GT/WF/TCU/BU/SMU/Houston

That would work 10th, but the SEC central is way too strong and the SEC east a bit weak.

That was done to cut down on the need for cross divisional rivalry games, but a more equitable distribution would be:

Alabama/Auburn/Tennessee/Vanderbilt/Virginia Tech/Clemson

Florida/Florida State/NC State/Kentucky/Georgia/South Carolina

Thats a lot more even but youd have to have at least one permanent rivalry game to accommodate games like Clemson/USC, UT/Vandy etc

Of course in this manner, thats easier to accommodate.

In a 9 game schedule, you play 5 divisional games, 1 permanent rivalry game and 3 rotating inter-divisional games would still allow you to play everyone once in 4 years if you do straight through instead of home/home/

3 division champs each get a AQ to the SEC tournament and an at large is there to reward the best team who didn't win their division. Seed by final ranking and give home game advantage to higher seeds to reward playing tough schedules.

(01-25-2014 03:08 PM)JRsec Wrote:  

(01-25-2014 01:56 PM)XLance Wrote:  

(01-24-2014 11:18 AM)JRsec Wrote:  

(01-24-2014 10:39 AM)bigblueblindness Wrote:  

(01-23-2014 06:12 PM)JRsec Wrote:  The question presupposes simultaneous moves by the Big 10 and PAC to move to a P3 arrangement absorbing the Big 12 and ACC between us. It is not about the SEC going it alone.

Thinking it through, I'm not sure the PAC could survive in the scenario I set up unless the Big 10 did not push any further west. If we took Iowa St, Oklahoma St, and Kansas St, the PAC would have to get all of Texas, Oklahoma, and Kansas to even be in the conversation with the SEC and Big 10. Otherwise, they can't get to 16 teams worth a toot, much less 20 or 24. They would be left with Texas Tech, Baylor, TCU, and the cream of the MWC (some of which double existing footprints).

I'm just trying to think of an arrangement that makes the PAC, Big 10, and SEC happy. JR has done a good job of it in recent posts. Maybe the best approach is a list of "Stay away from" rather than "We want". For the SEC, I think that list is the following in order:

SEC "Stay away from"
1) FSU
2) Clemson
3) Georgia Tech
4) Leave at least one of UNC or NC State
5) Leave at least one of UVA or VT

I really think from the SEC's standpoint, that is all we would ask of the Big 10. Assuming the PAC goes only as far east as the existing Big 12 footprint, I don't think there is anyone that we must have them stay away from.

No matter how you carve up this turkey the PAC has to have the Big 12 to survive without tremendous disparity with the SEC and Big 10. Delany and Slive need to both expand with 12 of the ACC teams between the two of them. If they did this the GOR in the ACC is void. The PAC could take 8 of the Big 12 schools and dissolve them. We would each have 20 at that point. Then if networks were willing to pay for more schools each of us could add 4 more schools at our own discretion.

The PAC with Oklahoma, Kansas, Texas, Texas Tech, T.C.U. Iowa State, Kansas State, and Oklahoma State could stop and try to develop San Diego State, Nevada, New Mexico, or Hawaii if they wanted to. Or they might get concessions from B.Y.U. to be able to add them.

If the SEC added 4 more it could be any of the 3 remaining ACC schools or Baylor, West Virginia and Cincinnati.

I agree that we must make it clear to the Big 10 that we will pick up at least one Virginia and North Carolina school and that Clemson and F.S.U. are off limits, but Georgia Tech I'm ambivalent about. Even if the Big 10 had Georgia Tech it wouldn't affect who owns Atlanta.

Truthfully and simply there are only 4 ways for realignment to play out.

1. All 5 P5 conferences stay in spite of growing disparity. Some of them add project schools and some do not.

The problem here is that the Big 10 and SEC will distance themselves from the PAC which will distance itself from the Big 12 and ACC in income.

2. A P4 emerges the only way that it can. The ACC takes in West Virginia. The SEC takes Oklahoma and a school it otherwise might not have wanted from the Big 12 (either Baylor or T.C.U. or possibly Oklahoma State). The PAC takes Texas, Texas Tech, Oklahoma State and Kansas State (or possibly T.C.U.). The Big 10 takes Kansas and Iowa State. The ACC reconnects their footprint, and each of the top 3 get 1 National brand school.

The problem here is that there is simply not the motivation for that kind of brokered move to take place.

3. The three conferences with networks work out the division of the remaining schools and do so with geography for the sake of minor sports in mind.
This could work. The Big 12 might even accept being able to move essentially intact. The ACC will fight it tooth and nail. What you would wind up with were 3 relatively equal strength conferences comprised of between 20 to 24 schools depending.

In my opinion this is the only outcome that will bring a lasting peace.

4. The Big 10 and SEC both take what they want from the Big 12 to grow the disparity between themselves and the ACC. When the income disparity is right they will strike dividing the ACC between them. The only problem now is that they both dwarf the PAC. The eventual outcome is that the California schools with Washington and Colorado would move to the Big 10 and the SEC West would have to pick up the Arizona's, Utah's, and likely the Oregon's. Yech! What we would wind up with are two 32 to 36 team leagues that are so spread out that minor sports would suffer terribly.

Excuse me but there is a 5th option. ESPN could choose to hold the ACC intact and glean what it desires from the Big 12 to be placed in the SEC so that it has immediate access to the largest television market (ACC) and the most viewed product (SEC). If all FOX gains is a piece of the PAC (least watched) and a piece of the Big 10 (weakest on field performance) then ESPN wins. The network angle should never be underestimated.

#6 (most likely)
Notre Dame will stay independent but still attached to the ACC.
The ACC will accept one transfer from the SEC (South Carolina, Vanderbilt or Kentucky) and also take West Virginia.
The SEC will get Kansas State, Oklahoma State and either TCU or Baylor.
The B1G takes Iowa State and Kansas.
The PAC gets Texas, Texas Tech, Oklahoma and either TCU or Baylor.

We're just waiting for the paperwork to get sorted out.

Absurdity is a form of humor I suppose. In realignment the movement is toward more money. It's a lot like gravity in that respect. What we need XLance is option 5. You guys move to 20. Notre Dame joins in full because Texas joins you in full and brings 4 more Western Big 12 members with them. Texas, T.C.U., Texas Tech, Oklahoma State, and Kansas State. The SEC adds Oklahoma, Iowa State, Kansas, Baylor and West Virginia, plus a sixth growth project school like East Carolina, Central Florida, South Florida, or Cincinnati. That way we both max out our footprints eliminate the 5th wheel, and shelter the property ESPN wants between us.

You do know if something like that doesn't happen you guys stay on the menu?

Anyway if something like this happened here's what we would look like:

ACC:

Boston College, Louisville, Notre Dame, Pittsburgh, Syracuse

Duke, North Carolina, N.C. State, Virginia, Virginia Tech

Clemson, Florida State, Georgia Tech, Miami, Wake Forest

Kansas State, Oklahoma State, Texas, T.C.U., Texas Tech

SEC:

Baylor, Iowa State, Kansas, Missouri, Oklahoma

Arkansas, Louisiana State, Mississippi, Mississippi State, Texas A&M

Alabama, Auburn, (U.C.F., E.C.U., U.S.F. or Cincy), Tennessee, Vanderbilt

Florida, Georgia, Kentucky South Carolina, West Virginia

That makes Oklahoma essentially a king of their own division (which would appease Bobby Stoops). It sets up even more ACC/SEC annual year end rivalries, it allows the ACC to take over the other position in the Sugar Bowl (80 million payout) and ends realignment in the Southeast. You could still bundle the cable packages of the SEC/ACC utilizing the entire footprint. It's a win/win.

Don't shoot the messenger.