Hello There, Guest! (LoginRegister)

Post Reply 
10 Reasons Realignment Is Not Over
Author Message
Bookmark and Share
JRsec Offline
Super Moderator
*

Posts: 37,901
Joined: Mar 2012
Reputation: 7737
I Root For: SEC
Location:
Post: #1
10 Reasons Realignment Is Not Over
1. In the history of the NCAA there have been less than a handful of years in which no movement has taken place. Realignment is the norm, not an aberration.

2. History has shown that once conferences are raided the raids do not stop. Conferences are seldom able to replace a taken team with one of equal value in terms of all of the components: academics, sports profile, geographical and cultural fit.

3. Realignment is cyclical and it seems that the oldest most brand recognizable schools tend to cluster, break into social groups in which their brand is among a few peers and is perceived as a king, and then in tough times reform clusters with other top brand schools. The economy has not been as robust and dynamic as it needs to be, wealth is shifting from the middle class to the elite and property from the hands of individuals to corporations. We are presently reforming clusters for the grouping of the largest audiences to avail ourselves of advertising revenue and to push joint research projects for grants.

4. Realignment tends to consolidate those schools which benefit most from each other's mutual objectives. Right now income is the main objective, geographical fit due to travel expenses and overhead reduction for minor sports is the second objective, and academic fit is third. There is too much potential for growing disparity because of the future of college conference television networks. Divisions will replace the geographical boundaries that small conferences once provided and a confederation of brands selected for market size will optimize the profits from advertising. The tighter the grouping the more regional advertising money will be made. National advertising will be there anyway.

5. The economic reasons to consolidate still exist for the conferences and networks.

6. The two conference networks most likely to succeed and the one conference network least likely to have direct competition for its product all still remain in need of content and market additions. And since coming economic disparity favors them further change is still likely. I look for the Big 10, SEC and PAC to expand. I also look for the LHN to be utilized for the creation of a new conference anchored by Texas and Oklahoma or to be utilized as the conference network for an existing conference that is not the Big 12.

7. The GOR's basically put the issue of realignment in the hands of the entities that further realignment could benefit the most, the networks. Since networks control the worth of conference contracts they are in the best position to use that control to limit the amount of damage that any member institution suffers as the result of the move of another while also being in the best position to find work around compensatory solutions to the new conference home of the moving schools. GOR's basically insure the existing contracts of schools remaining in a conference and give the networks a tool with which to complete realignment which maximizes their market penetration and enhances their revenue.

8. I do not believe that the top 64 - 72 schools will want to continue to share revenue from their #2 money making sport disproportionately with smaller less invested institutions. I think that ultimately basketball revenue (including particularly tournament income) will lead to separation between the upper division and lower division of basketball and therefore possibly separation between the schools and the NCAA. But I do not look for the division to be as confined as it will be for college football. Whereas college football might be headed for an upper division of between 60 to 72 schools I think college basketball may be headed for a division of between 80 to 100 schools. Return on investment will drive this movement.

9. Everything is constantly changing in life. Only inanimate objects appear not to change and really they do as well, just not as perceptibly. Sports will adapt to their changing environments the same as all life and objects.

10. Demographics, the economy, and the changing need for highly skilled labor will create a downturn in traditional college training. Downsizing or consolidation is just beginning in the realm of higher education. More efficient and cost effective models for higher education will replace what we have now, but it will take some time.
(This post was last modified: 03-04-2014 06:52 PM by JRsec.)
03-04-2014 06:00 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
Advertisement


bigblueblindness Offline
1st String
*

Posts: 2,073
Joined: Apr 2013
Reputation: 53
I Root For: UK, Lipscomb
Location: Kentucky
Post: #2
RE: 10 Reasons Realignment Is Not Over
JR, Auburn should let you teach a Realignment 101 course as an elective, similar to Joe Lunardi's "Bracketology 101" class at Saint Joseph's University. Point #10 is of the most interest to me as a young person, and I agree with you. Once the bubble bursts and traditional university loans are not heavily subsidized by the federal government, focus will change to licensure learning and the most talented will enter the workforce more immediately in entrepreneurial fields.
03-04-2014 06:08 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
USAFMEDIC Offline
Heisman
*

Posts: 5,914
Joined: Jun 2010
Reputation: 189
I Root For: MIZZOU/FSU/USM
Location: Biloxi, MS
Post: #3
RE: 10 Reasons Realignment Is Not Over
(03-04-2014 06:08 PM)bigblueblindness Wrote:  JR, Auburn should let you teach a Realignment 101 course as an elective, similar to Joe Lunardi's "Bracketology 101" class at Saint Joseph's University. Point #10 is of the most interest to me as a young person, and I agree with you. Once the bubble bursts and traditional university loans are not heavily subsidized by the federal government, focus will change to licensure learning and the most talented will enter the workforce more immediately in entrepreneurial fields.
How true #10 is Jr. I found out the value of technical schools/trade schools when I recently paid my plumber, electrician, and heating/air guys. Wow.....
03-04-2014 11:52 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
BewareThePhog Offline
1st String
*

Posts: 1,881
Joined: Sep 2011
Reputation: 137
I Root For: KU
Location:
Post: #4
RE: 10 Reasons Realignment Is Not Over
(03-04-2014 11:52 PM)USAFMEDIC Wrote:  
(03-04-2014 06:08 PM)bigblueblindness Wrote:  JR, Auburn should let you teach a Realignment 101 course as an elective, similar to Joe Lunardi's "Bracketology 101" class at Saint Joseph's University. Point #10 is of the most interest to me as a young person, and I agree with you. Once the bubble bursts and traditional university loans are not heavily subsidized by the federal government, focus will change to licensure learning and the most talented will enter the workforce more immediately in entrepreneurial fields.
How true #10 is Jr. I found out the value of technical schools/trade schools when I recently paid my plumber, electrician, and heating/air guys. Wow.....
And unlike some fields, you can't outsource your plumber to India or other far-flung lands...
03-05-2014 11:19 AM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
10thMountain Offline
Heisman
*

Posts: 7,358
Joined: Jan 2008
Reputation: 357
I Root For: A&M, TCU
Location:
Post: #5
RE: 10 Reasons Realignment Is Not Over
Academics naturally downplay the trades. They want you to spend 60K a semester getting a worthless degree in Lesbian Studies to keep their job well funded instead of learning a useful, well paying and highly in demand skill like electrician for 15K at Lincoln Tech. So of course their message is going to be "every child in America needs a college education (and then say its racist to suggest otherwise to cow us into silence acceptance)
03-05-2014 12:47 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
JRsec Offline
Super Moderator
*

Posts: 37,901
Joined: Mar 2012
Reputation: 7737
I Root For: SEC
Location:
Post: #6
RE: 10 Reasons Realignment Is Not Over
Realignment will begin again as soon as these issues are resolved:
1. The Form that the new Autonomy will take is determined: D4 or Break Away.
2. The O'Bannon case is settled and the ramifications are known.
3. The exit fee for Maryland is determined and settled.
4. The networks have decided on a format for the playoff structure.

The player's union issue may or may not get off the ground and is ancillary in that many of its demands would be met by the proposals of those seeking autonomy anyway.

When these issues are settled the 10 reasons above will again be in play.
06-16-2014 12:04 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
Advertisement


XLance Offline
Hall of Famer
*

Posts: 14,233
Joined: Mar 2008
Reputation: 762
I Root For: Carolina
Location: Greensboro, NC
Post: #7
RE: 10 Reasons Realignment Is Not Over
Was it over when the German's bombed Pearl Harbor?
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=V8lT1o0sDwI
06-16-2014 12:30 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
JRsec Offline
Super Moderator
*

Posts: 37,901
Joined: Mar 2012
Reputation: 7737
I Root For: SEC
Location:
Post: #8
RE: 10 Reasons Realignment Is Not Over
(06-16-2014 12:30 PM)XLance Wrote:  Was it over when the German's bombed Pearl Harbor?
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=V8lT1o0sDwI
This calls for a stupid and pointless gesture on someone's part and the P5 are just the guys to do it. It's time for a breakaway party, (complete with Togas).
06-16-2014 01:12 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
john01992 Offline
Former ESPNer still in recovery mode

Posts: 16,277
Joined: Jul 2013
I Root For: John0 out!!!!
Location: The Worst P5 Program
Post: #9
RE: 10 Reasons Realignment Is Not Over
realignment has always come in waves triggered by a single action.

that action could come at anytime
06-16-2014 07:14 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
XLance Offline
Hall of Famer
*

Posts: 14,233
Joined: Mar 2008
Reputation: 762
I Root For: Carolina
Location: Greensboro, NC
Post: #10
RE: 10 Reasons Realignment Is Not Over
I am beginning to think that we are done for a while...................unless the networks want to rebuild the Big 12 into a 12 team conference.
Take one school from column A (nebraska) and one school from column B (arkansas) and Fox/ESPN could make a fortune, plus have much more Class A inventory than if those same schools stayed in their respective conferences.
Texas isn't going to the PAC so we aren't going to have 4 x 16, maybe 5 good conferences is the solution if we can't divide into four great ones.
06-16-2014 08:15 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
JRsec Offline
Super Moderator
*

Posts: 37,901
Joined: Mar 2012
Reputation: 7737
I Root For: SEC
Location:
Post: #11
RE: 10 Reasons Realignment Is Not Over
(06-16-2014 08:15 PM)XLance Wrote:  I am beginning to think that we are done for a while...................unless the networks want to rebuild the Big 12 into a 12 team conference.
Take one school from column A (nebraska) and one school from column B (arkansas) and Fox/ESPN could make a fortune, plus have much more Class A inventory than if those same schools stayed in their respective conferences.
Texas isn't going to the PAC so we aren't going to have 4 x 16, maybe 5 good conferences is the solution if we can't divide into four great ones.
Hey, I will concede that what you suggest is possible (the being done for a while part), but I don't think that scenario is very likely at all. I'll give you a 10% chance of being right. I believe that there are still too many stressors for things to be over with for more than 2 to 3 years.
06-16-2014 11:09 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
Advertisement


USAFMEDIC Offline
Heisman
*

Posts: 5,914
Joined: Jun 2010
Reputation: 189
I Root For: MIZZOU/FSU/USM
Location: Biloxi, MS
Post: #12
RE: 10 Reasons Realignment Is Not Over
Jr....going back to the original post on your thread here, item #6 brings me to ask a question. You stated that the LHN would become a network for a new conference anchored by UT and OU. Who would be your picks to fill in the blanks in this new conference? Of course I assume the "State" and "Tech"schools" of the Big XII would follow, along with Baylor and TCU. Not sure about WVU... Also...what if OU jumps with KU to the BIG? Would UT try to start a new conference without them? There are some good reasons for the B1G to take OU, and some good reasons for OU to accept. Of course if UT and OU move to the B1G it would be a massive win for the B1G and the Big XII would cease to exist as a P5 player. Nebraska would really benefit by OU/UT membership as well. 04-cheers
(This post was last modified: 06-17-2014 11:33 AM by USAFMEDIC.)
06-17-2014 11:29 AM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
JRsec Offline
Super Moderator
*

Posts: 37,901
Joined: Mar 2012
Reputation: 7737
I Root For: SEC
Location:
Post: #13
RE: 10 Reasons Realignment Is Not Over
(06-17-2014 11:29 AM)USAFMEDIC Wrote:  Jr....going back to the original post on your thread here, item #6 brings me to ask a question. You stated that the LHN would become a network for a new conference anchored by UT and OU. Who would be your picks to fill in the blanks in this new conference? Of course I assume the "State" and "Tech"schools" of the Big XII would follow, along with Baylor and TCU. Not sure about WVU... Also...what if OU jumps with KU to the BIG? Would UT try to start a new conference without them? There are some good reasons for the B1G to take OU, and some good reasons for OU to accept. Of course if UT and OU move to the B1G it would be a massive win for the B1G and the Big XII would cease to exist as a P5 player. Nebraska would really benefit by OU/UT membership as well. 04-cheers

Medic while there is an outside chance that OU could move to the Big 10 I don't see any that Texas will. Remember who owns the rights to whom. Texas is an ESPN product and Oklahoma is partially a FOX product. Kansas is partially an ESPN product. If the Big 10 wants Kansas ESPN locked up their third tier in my opinion to have bartering material for Oklahoma since the two contracts are of essentially equal value.

If the LHN is used to bolster a conference by becoming the network for that conference then the conference in question would be the ACC. If however Maryland's settlement doesn't discourage Big 10 interest in Virginia and North Carolina as market states and the SEC remains interested as well, then ESPN might indeed use Texas and the Big 12 as a repository for 6 or so of the leftover ACC schools. Let's say the SEC took Virginia Tech and North Carolina and Virginia and Syracuse went Big 10 (just a hypothetical not a prediction), then N.C. State, Georgia Tech, Clemson, and Miami make sense for the Big 12 as do Pitt and Louisville. I think at that point that you might see the Big 10 step in and take B.C. as well and either another ACC school or possibly UConn. If that happened F.S.U. and Duke might be attractive to the SEC or might not. Either way I think the SEC and Big 10 would expand and the remnants whomever they might be would help reform a viable Big 12.

However, I do not consider that potential as likely as the simple parsing of the Big 12. Texas to the ACC like N.D. Iowa State, Kansas State, Texas Tech, and T.C.U. to the pack and possibly Baylor and Oklahoma State to the SEC and Kansas and OU to the Big 10 (or some other version of the division again just speculation).

So in answering your question the only thing that is not likely is Texas to a FOX owned network (Big 10). If Texas went west I think they would be used to gain ESPN a share of the PACN. Otherwise it would be either the ACC or SEC and I would bet on the ACC.
06-17-2014 04:41 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
Transic_nyc Offline
1st String
*

Posts: 2,401
Joined: Jun 2014
Reputation: 194
I Root For: Return To Stability
Location:
Post: #14
RE: 10 Reasons Realignment Is Not Over
I see UT, OU and KU sticking together, regardless of what happens to the Big XII. Should those three decide that the BXII is no longer viable, they'd make a move together. That would mean that the likely destination is the PAC. Texas Tech is brought along for the ride. Iowa State could end up in the B1G in the process. The B1G doesn't get a new state but it does:

- Bring in another AAU institution, which is very important to the academic elitists
- An old Big 8 rival to help Nebraska feel less isolated
- Frees up Iowa's OOC schedule (very important for a traditional football program going forward)
- A good basketball program, not at Kansas' level but decent as long as they can recruit in the better basketball markets in the North

As for #16, I have to think that similar deal would happen in the East. That would mean a school like Pitt.

- An old rival to Penn State
- Another AAU institution
- Eastern program to solidify to move to the Eastern region
- Another good basketball program and more amenable to the academic elitists than UConn
- The core ACC schools will hold steady, thereby that conference survives

I am of the thought that North Carolina State has the potential to be another "A&M"-type move for the SEC, meaning the chance to move out of the shadow of a Big Brother school. If the core ACC schools hold then I think the SEC could still benefit from moving into a fast-growing state through NCSU. Maybe by that time, NCSU would have new leadership and would be more willing to chart a new course. Another thing it does is further diminishes the power of TR in that conference, which means it gets easier for a school like West Virginia to be admitted into the ACC. FSU and Clemson would be happy to admit WVU in, thereby all the more likely to stick around. All it matters is the SEC gets into the state of NC. Virginia Tech may like the ACC so much that they won't leave, so I think Oklahoma State would be #16.
06-18-2014 02:58 AM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
JRsec Offline
Super Moderator
*

Posts: 37,901
Joined: Mar 2012
Reputation: 7737
I Root For: SEC
Location:
Post: #15
RE: 10 Reasons Realignment Is Not Over
(06-18-2014 02:58 AM)Transic_nyc Wrote:  I see UT, OU and KU sticking together, regardless of what happens to the Big XII. Should those three decide that the BXII is no longer viable, they'd make a move together. That would mean that the likely destination is the PAC. Texas Tech is brought along for the ride. Iowa State could end up in the B1G in the process. The B1G doesn't get a new state but it does:

- Bring in another AAU institution, which is very important to the academic elitists
- An old Big 8 rival to help Nebraska feel less isolated
- Frees up Iowa's OOC schedule (very important for a traditional football program going forward)
- A good basketball program, not at Kansas' level but decent as long as they can recruit in the better basketball markets in the North

As for #16, I have to think that similar deal would happen in the East. That would mean a school like Pitt.

- An old rival to Penn State
- Another AAU institution
- Eastern program to solidify to move to the Eastern region
- Another good basketball program and more amenable to the academic elitists than UConn
- The core ACC schools will hold steady, thereby that conference survives

I am of the thought that North Carolina State has the potential to be another "A&M"-type move for the SEC, meaning the chance to move out of the shadow of a Big Brother school. If the core ACC schools hold then I think the SEC could still benefit from moving into a fast-growing state through NCSU. Maybe by that time, NCSU would have new leadership and would be more willing to chart a new course. Another thing it does is further diminishes the power of TR in that conference, which means it gets easier for a school like West Virginia to be admitted into the ACC. FSU and Clemson would be happy to admit WVU in, thereby all the more likely to stick around. All it matters is the SEC gets into the state of NC. Virginia Tech may like the ACC so much that they won't leave, so I think Oklahoma State would be #16.

That's an interesting perspective I've not heard before. Originality around here counts. Thanks.
06-18-2014 12:07 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
XLance Offline
Hall of Famer
*

Posts: 14,233
Joined: Mar 2008
Reputation: 762
I Root For: Carolina
Location: Greensboro, NC
Post: #16
RE: 10 Reasons Realignment Is Not Over
(06-18-2014 02:58 AM)Transic_nyc Wrote:  I see UT, OU and KU sticking together, regardless of what happens to the Big XII. Should those three decide that the BXII is no longer viable, they'd make a move together. That would mean that the likely destination is the PAC. Texas Tech is brought along for the ride. Iowa State could end up in the B1G in the process. The B1G doesn't get a new state but it does:

- Bring in another AAU institution, which is very important to the academic elitists
- An old Big 8 rival to help Nebraska feel less isolated
- Frees up Iowa's OOC schedule (very important for a traditional football program going forward)
- A good basketball program, not at Kansas' level but decent as long as they can recruit in the better basketball markets in the North

As for #16, I have to think that similar deal would happen in the East. That would mean a school like Pitt.

- An old rival to Penn State
- Another AAU institution
- Eastern program to solidify to move to the Eastern region
- Another good basketball program and more amenable to the academic elitists than UConn
- The core ACC schools will hold steady, thereby that conference survives

I am of the thought that North Carolina State has the potential to be another "A&M"-type move for the SEC, meaning the chance to move out of the shadow of a Big Brother school. If the core ACC schools hold then I think the SEC could still benefit from moving into a fast-growing state through NCSU. Maybe by that time, NCSU would have new leadership and would be more willing to chart a new course. Another thing it does is further diminishes the power of TR in that conference, which means it gets easier for a school like West Virginia to be admitted into the ACC. FSU and Clemson would be happy to admit WVU in, thereby all the more likely to stick around. All it matters is the SEC gets into the state of NC. Virginia Tech may like the ACC so much that they won't leave, so I think Oklahoma State would be #16.

I think your assessment of Virginia Tech is spot on.
As for NCSU, I don't think that ANY of the ACC folks would argue to hard or long to try to keep the wuffies from going anywhere. In fact I think the West Virginia fans are an upgrade, but that's a different story.
But if the SEC gets NCSU the ACC would have to get Kentucky, Tennessee or Vanderbilt in return.
The SEC #16 could still be Oklahoma State, but #15 will end up being Baylor.
That still leaves the ACC one short (even with West Virginia) if Pitt were to go to the B1G. I don't think Notre Dame joins as a full member without Pitt in the league (or even with Pitt). UConn does nothing for the ACC (the ACC does not need the basketball product and UConn football just drags the ACC down. South Carolina would be off of the table, the SEC would need the contiguous approach in to the heart of NC for television (besides NCSU and South Carolina have had quite a rivalry over a long period of time). I guess that really leaves us with Cincinnati to go along with Louisville, West Virginia, Kentucky/Tennessee/Vanderbilt.
But what I really think is that the B1G would be more interested in Missouri or UConn instead of Pitt.
06-18-2014 08:26 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
Advertisement


Transic_nyc Offline
1st String
*

Posts: 2,401
Joined: Jun 2014
Reputation: 194
I Root For: Return To Stability
Location:
Post: #17
RE: 10 Reasons Realignment Is Not Over
(06-18-2014 08:26 PM)XLance Wrote:  As for NCSU, I don't think that ANY of the ACC folks would argue to hard or long to try to keep the wuffies from going anywhere. In fact I think the West Virginia fans are an upgrade, but that's a different story.
But if the SEC gets NCSU the ACC would have to get Kentucky, Tennessee or Vanderbilt in return.
The SEC #16 could still be Oklahoma State, but #15 will end up being Baylor.
That still leaves the ACC one short (even with West Virginia) if Pitt were to go to the B1G. I don't think Notre Dame joins as a full member without Pitt in the league (or even with Pitt). UConn does nothing for the ACC (the ACC does not need the basketball product and UConn football just drags the ACC down. South Carolina would be off of the table, the SEC would need the contiguous approach in to the heart of NC for television (besides NCSU and South Carolina have had quite a rivalry over a long period of time). I guess that really leaves us with Cincinnati to go along with Louisville, West Virginia, Kentucky/Tennessee/Vanderbilt.

If you get WVU and Vandy, doesn't that get you back to 14? If you're thinking of pushing beyond that number then I could see Cincinnati as a candidate. The SEC w/o Vandy and with Baylor would put Missouri back to the West, where they'd face more familiar opponents. They would get to play in Texas at least and in Louisiana every other year. But I tend to think Kansas State might be favored over Baylor if it ever comes to that.

West

KSU
Missouri
MSU
Ole Miss
A&M
LSU
Ark
Oklahoma State

East

GA
FL
TN
KY
AL
Auburn
SC
NCSU

The presence of the Alabama schools would cancel out NCSU and KY in terms of football strength and reunite AL-TN and Aub-GA as division rivals. In the West, it would be a dogfight between Kansas State, A&M, Mizzou, LSU, with occasionally OK State punching above its weight. Arkansas would have more of a fighting chance but would need to recruit like crazy.

The ACC might end up looking like this:

DU, UNC, VU, UVA, VT, GT, Miami
WVU, FSU, CU, WF, SU, UL, BC

I would recommend a school like USF to be put in Miami's division. It is a rising school located in the fertile grounds of the Sunshine State. USF would give schools another shot at playing in that state. Like you said, you don't need more basketball, and that's not USF's main strength, anyway. Cincinnati can go in the other division.

Or

Have three locked games a year and rotate among the rest

SU: BC, USF, VT
BC: SU, WF, Miami
UL: UC, CU, WVU
UVA: UNC, VT, GT
UNC: UVA, DU, VU
WF: VU, BC, DU
DU: UNC, GT, WF
WVU: UL, VT, FSU
CU: GT, UL, FSU
GT: DU, CU, UVA
FSU: CU, Miami, WVU
UC: UL, VU, USF
VU: WF, UNC, UC
Miami: FSU, BC, USF
VT: UVA, SU, WVU
USF: Miami, UC, SU
06-19-2014 02:09 AM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
XLance Offline
Hall of Famer
*

Posts: 14,233
Joined: Mar 2008
Reputation: 762
I Root For: Carolina
Location: Greensboro, NC
Post: #18
RE: 10 Reasons Realignment Is Not Over
(06-19-2014 02:09 AM)Transic_nyc Wrote:  
(06-18-2014 08:26 PM)XLance Wrote:  As for NCSU, I don't think that ANY of the ACC folks would argue to hard or long to try to keep the wuffies from going anywhere. In fact I think the West Virginia fans are an upgrade, but that's a different story.
But if the SEC gets NCSU the ACC would have to get Kentucky, Tennessee or Vanderbilt in return.
The SEC #16 could still be Oklahoma State, but #15 will end up being Baylor.
That still leaves the ACC one short (even with West Virginia) if Pitt were to go to the B1G. I don't think Notre Dame joins as a full member without Pitt in the league (or even with Pitt). UConn does nothing for the ACC (the ACC does not need the basketball product and UConn football just drags the ACC down. South Carolina would be off of the table, the SEC would need the contiguous approach in to the heart of NC for television (besides NCSU and South Carolina have had quite a rivalry over a long period of time). I guess that really leaves us with Cincinnati to go along with Louisville, West Virginia, Kentucky/Tennessee/Vanderbilt.

If you get WVU and Vandy, doesn't that get you back to 14? If you're thinking of pushing beyond that number then I could see Cincinnati as a candidate. The SEC w/o Vandy and with Baylor would put Missouri back to the West, where they'd face more familiar opponents. They would get to play in Texas at least and in Louisiana every other year. But I tend to think Kansas State might be favored over Baylor if it ever comes to that.

West

KSU
Missouri
MSU
Ole Miss
A&M
LSU
Ark
Oklahoma State

East

GA
FL
TN
KY
AL
Auburn
SC
NCSU

The presence of the Alabama schools would cancel out NCSU and KY in terms of football strength and reunite AL-TN and Aub-GA as division rivals. In the West, it would be a dogfight between Kansas State, A&M, Mizzou, LSU, with occasionally OK State punching above its weight. Arkansas would have more of a fighting chance but would need to recruit like crazy.

The ACC might end up looking like this:

DU, UNC, VU, UVA, VT, GT, Miami
WVU, FSU, CU, WF, SU, UL, BC

I would recommend a school like USF to be put in Miami's division. It is a rising school located in the fertile grounds of the Sunshine State. USF would give schools another shot at playing in that state. Like you said, you don't need more basketball, and that's not USF's main strength, anyway. Cincinnati can go in the other division.

Or

Have three locked games a year and rotate among the rest

SU: BC, USF, VT
BC: SU, WF, Miami
UL: UC, CU, WVU
UVA: UNC, VT, GT
UNC: UVA, DU, VU
WF: VU, BC, DU
DU: UNC, GT, WF
WVU: UL, VT, FSU
CU: GT, UL, FSU
GT: DU, CU, UVA
FSU: CU, Miami, WVU
UC: UL, VU, USF
VU: WF, UNC, UC
Miami: FSU, BC, USF
VT: UVA, SU, WVU
USF: Miami, UC, SU

Kansas State?
If the SEC gives up Vandy then they (as JR is fond of saying) need at least one private school to avoid full disclosure. Hince Baylor. Besides, if you have Texas, Oklahoma, and Texas Tech going to the PAC, your going to have to try to capture as much of the Texas market as you can.
06-19-2014 05:11 AM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
ohio1317 Offline
Moderator
*

Posts: 5,675
Joined: Mar 2008
Reputation: 358
I Root For: Ohio State
Location:
Post: #19
RE: 10 Reasons Realignment Is Not Over
While I will predict a vastly different college sports landscape in 30 years than the one of today, I personally put the odds of any realignment at the power 5 level over the next 4 years at only about 10%. That 10% is if the Big 12 fairs badly in the playoff committees eyes and they decide they are better off with 12. Reasons are the following:

1. Realignment is a constant, but you get periods of a lot of movement followed by a period of very little. Rarely do you see massive change year after year after year.

2. Getting involved with expansion was something the presidents only did reluctantly in the first place. Getting to 12 for the CCG was a big push, going beyond that required something special.
a) The PAC-10 could have become a monster as the PAC-16 and that was the only way to get Texas. A year later, when Oklahoma/Oklahoma State asked, they said no. They didn't want to break up the good regional conference they had.
b) The SEC got approached from one of two schools that could deliver following throughout the populous and football crazy state of Texas and even there, you have major frustration over the infrequent play across divisions.
c) The Big Ten only reluctantly expanded after first the PAC-12 alliance died (put into place to avoid expansion), after the ACC took every major east coast school except Penn State (including scheduling games with Notre Dame at the expense of the Big Ten), after the ACC literally called Big Ten members about future interest. At that point, they felt standing still was more dangerous than moving and took two east coast schools to secure Penn State.

3. The networks absolutely do NOT want realignment continuing. ESPN is paying a lot more right now for the same content they were a few years ago. Every move that consolidates conferences gives the conferences more power and ESPN less. Further it disrupts contracts they have with the conferences that are raided.

4. The Grant of Rights make any movement very, very difficult. Buying out Texas's worth of the media rights for a decade would make any previous exit penalty feel like pocket change. You are talking money that could break a school. Meanwhile the Big 12 is not going to allow Texas/Oklahoma out of that unless everyone is satisfied. There's no way that happens. No one wants most the schools in the conference and you can't offer enough money to get Baylor/Texas Tech/etc to be OK with not being in a conference with Texas/Oklahoma/etc.

5. There is a dilution of brand every time you expand. You enter a new market, but you also have fewer games/connections between existing members and that effects value too. For the right candidate, that dilution is worth it, but there's only a handful schools that would benefit most conferences to expand with and those are the same handful of schools they all want.

Wait a decade or so and we might see major changes, but I think things have settled down for now.
(This post was last modified: 06-19-2014 10:39 AM by ohio1317.)
06-19-2014 10:39 AM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
ohio1317 Offline
Moderator
*

Posts: 5,675
Joined: Mar 2008
Reputation: 358
I Root For: Ohio State
Location:
Post: #20
RE: 10 Reasons Realignment Is Not Over
Few other thoughts for when realignment occurs (not this decade):

1. Conference aren't moving together. One goes to 16 will not force the others.
2. Teams have to pay for themselves. Iowa State and Pitt add no new markets and no huge national name to the Big Ten. The Big Ten will add neither.
3. Vanderbilt would never agree to leave the SEC. The fans love the conference. Further no school would feel comfortable asking them. They don't want the situation to ever be reversed.
4. The ACC has a more solid core group of schools than most recognize. That said if you ever succeed in breaking it up and have conferences looking to expand, I'd expect North Carolina and Virginia to the Big Ten and North Carolina State and Virgina Tech to the SEC.
(This post was last modified: 06-19-2014 10:48 AM by ohio1317.)
06-19-2014 10:47 AM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
Post Reply 




User(s) browsing this thread: 1 Guest(s)


Copyright © 2002-2024 Collegiate Sports Nation Bulletin Board System (CSNbbs), All Rights Reserved.
CSNbbs is an independent fan site and is in no way affiliated to the NCAA or any of the schools and conferences it represents.
This site monetizes links. FTC Disclosure.
We allow third-party companies to serve ads and/or collect certain anonymous information when you visit our web site. These companies may use non-personally identifiable information (e.g., click stream information, browser type, time and date, subject of advertisements clicked or scrolled over) during your visits to this and other Web sites in order to provide advertisements about goods and services likely to be of greater interest to you. These companies typically use a cookie or third party web beacon to collect this information. To learn more about this behavioral advertising practice or to opt-out of this type of advertising, you can visit http://www.networkadvertising.org.
Powered By MyBB, © 2002-2024 MyBB Group.