The SEC isn't going to be a dumping ground for homeless B12 schools.

The SECs priority will continue to be getting some combo of UNC/Duke/NCSU/UVA/VT

Getting into those two states is almost the equivalent of adding a 2nd Florida to the footprint which is much more valuable for a money making perspective than adding small market Big 12 states or doubling up in a state you are already getting paid for by your network.

(08-09-2014 07:26 AM)10thMountain Wrote:  The SEC isn't going to be a dumping ground for homeless B12 schools.

The SECs priority will continue to be getting some combo of UNC/Duke/NCSU/UVA/VT

Getting into those two states is almost the equivalent of adding a 2nd Florida to the footprint which is much more valuable for a money making perspective than adding small market Big 12 states or doubling up in a state you are already getting paid for by your network.

I don't see the SEC as having any interest in neighboring state schools save for UVA, UNC, Duke, Oklahoma, and Texas.

As long as you are doing that, drop the 2 Iowa schools, no one pays attention to them, and add the 2 fla giants to Big instead. Bigger upside and better recruiting for B10.

(08-09-2014 03:11 AM)ChrisLords Wrote:  How I would break up the Big 12 conference :
I consider it a given that the Pac-12 won't expand without Texas and Texas has stated they'd rather go east and not be in the SEC.

If P5 goes to an 11 game P5 +1 Go5 schedule, football only mega conferences become much more doable. A league of 32 teams would have 8 pods of 4 historic rivals. There would be 4 divisions with one member of each historic rivalry in each division. The schedule would be 3 Rival, 7 Division, 1 P5 a la carte, 1 Go5.

Take USC in a B1G PAC mega conference. They would play 3 rivals (UCLA, Cal, Stanford), 7 division games [UW (NW), CU (SW), UT (Texahoma), KU (Plains), UI (prairie), MSU (Lakes), UMD (Atlantic)], 1 a la carte P5 (ND), and 1 Go5 (SDSU).

That's increased national exposure, wider market coverage, and preservation of primary rivalries at the expense of secondary rivalries (I.e USC no loner playing 3 of the NW PAC schools regularly). The secondary rivalries would be retained in BBall and Olympic Sports.

I took Hawkeye Fan's advice and twisted it by breaking up EVERYBODY. Under my rules, no current P5 conference could have more than 4 current members in any one league, those with 14 members could do so in two leagues, while the Big 12 and Pac-12 could only have one such instance. I also adjusted the alignments to make sure that there was only one school per state within a certain group(except that Texas A&M was allowed to co-exist with any Big12 team from Texas). Here's how it came out:

GROUP 1:
Alabama, Arizona, Colorado, Georgia Tech
Iowa State, Kentucky, Michigan, Minnesota
Nebraska, Northwestern, Southern California, Syracuse
Texas A&M, Texas Tech, Vanderbilt, Wake Forest

GROUP 2:
Auburn, Baylor, California, Clemson
Florida, Illinois, Kansas, Louisiana State
Louisville, Michigan State, North Carolina, Oregon State
Penn State, Virginia Tech, Washington, Wisconsin

GROUP 3:
Arizona State, UCLA, Florida State, Georgia
Iowa, Mississippi State, Missouri, North Carolina State
Oklahoma, Pittsburgh, Purdue, Rutgers
Texas, Utah, Virginia, Washington State

GROUP 4:
Arkansas, Boston College, Duke, Indiana
Kansas State, Maryland, Miami, Mississippi
Ohio State, Oklahoma State, Oregon, South Carolina
Stanford, Tennessee, Texas Christian, West Virginia

Breakdown by groups
ACC: 3/4/4/3
B1G: 4/4/3/3
B12: 2/2/2/4
P12: 3/3/4/2
SEC: 4/3/3/4

(08-09-2014 09:05 AM)Rube Dali Wrote:  I took Hawkeye Fan's advice and twisted it by breaking up EVERYBODY. Under my rules, no current P5 conference could have more than 4 current members in any one league, those with 14 members could do so in two leagues, while the Big 12 and Pac-12 could only have one such instance. I also adjusted the alignments to make sure that there was only one school per state within a certain group(except that Texas A&M was allowed to co-exist with any Big12 team from Texas). Here's how it came out:

GROUP 1:
Alabama, Arizona, Colorado, Georgia Tech
Iowa State, Kentucky, Michigan, Minnesota
Nebraska, Northwestern, Southern California, Syracuse
Texas A&M, Texas Tech, Vanderbilt, Wake Forest

GROUP 2:
Auburn, Baylor, California, Clemson
Florida, Illinois, Kansas, Louisiana State
Louisville, Michigan State, North Carolina, Oregon State
Penn State, Virginia Tech, Washington, Wisconsin

GROUP 3:
Arizona State, UCLA, Florida State, Georgia
Iowa, Mississippi State, Missouri, North Carolina State
Oklahoma, Pittsburgh, Purdue, Rutgers
Texas, Utah, Virginia, Washington State

GROUP 4:
Arkansas, Boston College, Duke, Indiana
Kansas State, Maryland, Miami, Mississippi
Ohio State, Oklahoma State, Oregon, South Carolina
Stanford, Tennessee, Texas Christian, West Virginia

Breakdown by groups
ACC: 3/4/4/3
B1G: 4/4/3/3
B12: 2/2/2/4
P12: 3/3/4/2
SEC: 4/3/3/4

Great tv contracts leagues get teams
SEC VA TECH and NC ST
BIG 10 UVA and Ga Tech
ACC losses Va Tech and NC St and gains WVU and UConn
PAC 12 gets UTexas,Texas tech,Oklahoma,OSU
5 big 12 leftovers merge with AAC(-UCONN)

Thus P4 plus the expanded AAC

(08-09-2014 06:04 AM)quo vadis Wrote:  

(08-08-2014 08:10 PM)He1nousOne Wrote:  

(08-08-2014 08:08 PM)bullet Wrote:  

(08-08-2014 07:53 PM)quo vadis Wrote:  

(08-08-2014 07:50 PM)He1nousOne Wrote:  I really wish I could defend the Hawkeye fan.

The appeal of college football is based more on tradition than any other major sport, even MLB. Any ideas about breaking the conferences up in to "pods" or whatnot would shatter the conference ties that, while having been frayed somewhat by realignment, are still very powerful symbols of continuity with that tradition. For example, while I have never, ever been a fan of the Big 10, I thoroughly respect its longstanding rivalries and traditions and consider them to be integral to the fabric of the game.

I would hate to see that change.

That is what has made the Big 10 and the SEC the strongest conferences financially. They're messing with it.

Their fans and alumni are not going to stop supporting them. If anything they will gain more general football fans. If they lose any of their old traditionals, they will gain many more by having a much more interesting product.

People love tournaments. It is a very simple truth.

I don't see how SEC or B1G football can be any more interesting than they already are. They are thoroughly interesting to me. Smashing them up into "pods" in order to feed some techno-cratic desire to see a more "rational" competitive or geographic structure is an alienating thought to me. I admit I do not care at all who wins the Old Oaken Bucket game, but the fact that this game exists and that Purdue and Indiana fans care about it makes me happy. It's part of college football.

So far, lots of changes have occurred: Compared to say 25 years ago, the SEC now has 14 schools not 10, it is split into divisions and has a conference title game, and it no longer sends its champion automatically to the Sugar Bowl.

And yet, the cumulative effects of all these changes has not altered the essential character of the conference and its competitive traditions. These "pod" systems would, and to me that price is too high to pay.

Well, I can understand and everyone will have their own opinion on this kind of system. I don't begrudge anyone for having their own opinion if it differs from mine. I certainly do not have a hand in all of this coming to be, its just the direction in which I see things moving.

Thankfully the days of talking about it are drawing to a close relatively soon. The timing of the official autonomy announcement and the settlement between Maryland and The ACC is more proof that this could all go quicker than most here think.

Look how long that ACC and Maryland issue dragged out, we had zero word on it in regards to it coming to a close. The autonomy gets finalized and BAM a settlement is reached with a number that is closer to the older exit fee amount than to the new one. There is no way that those two events are not interconnected.

B1G
Kansas State
Kansas
Iowa State
Iowa
Nebraska

Minnesota
Wisconsin
Northwestern
Illinois
Purdue

Indiana
Michigan
Michigan State
Ohio State
Buffalo

Maryland
Rutgers
Connecticut
Penn State
Army (Football Only) (Villanova Olympic Sports)

SEC
TCU
Texas A&M
Oklahoma State
Arkansas
Missouri

LSU
Memphis
Tulane
Ole Miss
Mississippi State

Kentucky
Vanderbilt
Tennessee
Auburn
Alabama

Florida
Georgia
South Carolina
East Carolina
Clemson

ACC
Florida State
Miami
UCF
South Florida
Georgia Tech

North Carolina
NC State
Wake Forest
Duke
Virginia

Virginia Tech
West Virginia
Pitt
Cincinnati
Louisville

Notre Dame
Syracuse
Boston College
Temple
Navy (Football Only) Georgetown (Olympic Sports)

PAC-20
Washington
Washington State
Oregon
Oregon State
Boise State

Stanford
Cal
USC
UCLA
Arizona State

Arizona
Colorado
Utah
BYU
Air Force

Texas
Texas Tech
Houston
Baylor
Oklahoma

(08-09-2014 10:06 AM)He1nousOne Wrote:  

(08-09-2014 06:04 AM)quo vadis Wrote:  And yet, the cumulative effects of all these changes has not altered the essential character of the conference and its competitive traditions. These "pod" systems would, and to me that price is too high to pay.

Well, I can understand and everyone will have their own opinion on this kind of system. I don't begrudge anyone for having their own opinion if it differs from mine. I certainly do not have a hand in all of this coming to be, its just the direction in which I see things moving.

Well, I sure hope not. But you may very well be correct. The whole edifice does seem to be in flux and I certainly don't have a crystal ball.

One thing I don't get: The P5 conferences have a good thing going, so what would their motivation be to radically realign into these four-conference pods?

(08-09-2014 10:57 AM)quo vadis Wrote:  

(08-09-2014 10:06 AM)He1nousOne Wrote:  

(08-09-2014 06:04 AM)quo vadis Wrote:  And yet, the cumulative effects of all these changes has not altered the essential character of the conference and its competitive traditions. These "pod" systems would, and to me that price is too high to pay.

Well, I can understand and everyone will have their own opinion on this kind of system. I don't begrudge anyone for having their own opinion if it differs from mine. I certainly do not have a hand in all of this coming to be, its just the direction in which I see things moving.

Well, I sure hope not. But you may very well be correct. The whole edifice does seem to be in flux and I certainly don't have a crystal ball.

One thing I don't get: The P5 conferences have a good thing going, so what would their motivation be to radically realign into these four-conference pods?

It wouldn't. Next change will be media driven just like the earlier major changes. And that media change is coming. Just when and what it looks like is very unpredictable.

The better move would be to consolidate into 1 conference, 6 divisions of 10 with a 100% owned network. Reality is someday it might get down to 2 leagues, the big 10 and sec but that would take a lot of moves. Now if your talking 1 league out of the p5 getting zapped, i think it would be the big 12. I could see ESPN send texas, texas tech, ou and Ok state to the sec to form 3 pods of 6 with a 2 game playoff of pod winners.

A: Texas, Texas Tech, OU, Ok state, Missouri, Arkansas
B: Alabama, Auburn, Ole Miss, Miss State, LSU, Texas A&M
C: Kentucky, Tennessee, Vanderbilt, S Carolina, UGA, UF

format 5-2-2

The ACC could also jump to 18 with uconn, WVU and Cincy. Send Kansas to the big 10 with tcu, baylor, k state and iowa state probably going to the AAC. I guess the big 10 would need another team, maybe send missouri to the big 10 with baylor going to the sec.

lets be realistic here, the bond that holds SEC, B-10 & Pac is too strong to implode
The ACC is being held together by UNC & Va, B-12 is Tex & Okla
if B-10 gets UNC & Va, SEC could grap a couple schools & B-12 sets up eastern Div
If Tex & Okla join Pac 12, 4 to 10 schools could find homes in P4 confs

Everyone talks of schools being taken by this conference or that without realizing a simple fact: A conference cannot take a school that doesn't wish to leave. Now, not only does the BigXII have a smaller number of schools that makes it easier to dissolve the conference...it also has at least three schools that've flirted with the idea of leaving and blowing up the conference before. It essentially took a bribe from ESPN in the form of the Longhorn Network to keep it from happening. As for the ACC on the other hand, only one school has displayed trepidation and that's Florida State, and even they signed the GOR willingly. None of the other schools have displayed any interest in separating.

Just food for thought. I'll await the UConn fans joining us to tell us how the ACC's going to collapse.

(08-09-2014 02:12 PM)Rabbit_in_Red Wrote:  Everyone talks of schools being taken by this conference or that without realizing a simple fact: A conference cannot take a school that doesn't wish to leave. Now, not only does the BigXII have a smaller number of schools that makes it easier to dissolve the conference...it also has at least three schools that've flirted with the idea of leaving and blowing up the conference before. It essentially took a bribe from ESPN in the form of the Longhorn Network to keep it from happening. As for the ACC on the other hand, only one school has displayed trepidation and that's Florida State, and even they signed the GOR willingly. None of the other schools have displayed any interest in separating.

Just food for thought. I'll await the UConn fans joining us to tell us how the ACC's going to collapse.

I'm not saying you're wrong but I have a source from WV that sez......

(08-09-2014 02:22 PM)TexanMark Wrote:  

(08-09-2014 02:12 PM)Rabbit_in_Red Wrote:  Everyone talks of schools being taken by this conference or that without realizing a simple fact: A conference cannot take a school that doesn't wish to leave. Now, not only does the BigXII have a smaller number of schools that makes it easier to dissolve the conference...it also has at least three schools that've flirted with the idea of leaving and blowing up the conference before. It essentially took a bribe from ESPN in the form of the Longhorn Network to keep it from happening. As for the ACC on the other hand, only one school has displayed trepidation and that's Florida State, and even they signed the GOR willingly. None of the other schools have displayed any interest in separating.

Just food for thought. I'll await the UConn fans joining us to tell us how the ACC's going to collapse.

I'm not saying you're wrong but I have a source from WV that sez......

Well played....

(08-09-2014 11:05 AM)bullet Wrote:  

(08-09-2014 10:57 AM)quo vadis Wrote:  

(08-09-2014 10:06 AM)He1nousOne Wrote:  

(08-09-2014 06:04 AM)quo vadis Wrote:  And yet, the cumulative effects of all these changes has not altered the essential character of the conference and its competitive traditions. These "pod" systems would, and to me that price is too high to pay.

Well, I can understand and everyone will have their own opinion on this kind of system. I don't begrudge anyone for having their own opinion if it differs from mine. I certainly do not have a hand in all of this coming to be, its just the direction in which I see things moving.

Well, I sure hope not. But you may very well be correct. The whole edifice does seem to be in flux and I certainly don't have a crystal ball.

One thing I don't get: The P5 conferences have a good thing going, so what would their motivation be to radically realign into these four-conference pods?

It wouldn't. Next change will be media driven just like the earlier major changes. And that media change is coming. Just when and what it looks like is very unpredictable.

Bullet said it well Quo. At this point it is dollar driven. Sure there may be talking points that say otherwise but Everything in this country is dollar driven now. All else is generally just talking points to make it sound better than the money driven reality.

Why would the system move to 5 instead of 4? From my perspective, because Texas wants to. That is number 1. From there it would be the Networks trying to fashion a move in their best interests. If ESPN guys know that Texas is looking to move either now or at the end of the GoR then they are going to try and fashion it in a way that one of their properties lands Texas. I would hazard a guess that the SEC is out of the question. The ACC is where Texas has already talked about so that is the first step by ESPN.

The whole equal number of teams per conference and expanded number of divisions is all about creating strong rivalries like we see in NFL divisions which are smaller in size. A division of 7 to 8 teams makes it very hard to have each and every match up be meaningful. A division of four makes those match ups into very strong rivalries each and every year. That type of situation can turn a mediocre match up into a very marketable game.

If I was doing four divisions of four that lead to the four divisional winners going to the tournament, I would schedule the in division games at the end of the conference season. Tournament fever will be rising and each of those games, even the minor ones, will have a big affect on those conference tournament races. ESPN would LOVE to have that kind of coverage. That adds value to middle tier match ups and that is just as important as creating top tier match ups. That is why the four divisions and conference tournament system is a huge win for the Networks. It adds value to match ups that right now wouldn't be worth nearly as much.

I fully buy into the "ESPN is puppet master" theory, so let's tease that out. How does Texas get to the ACC? They don't want to be an island...they want to bring some "power chips" along with them?

Is the ACC the first mega-mega-conference?
UT, OU, OkSt, Kansas, Kansas State become ACCwest?
ND, BC, Syracuse, Pitt, VaTech become ACCNorth?
Florida State, Miami, Clemson, GaTech, Wake become ACCSouth?
UVA, UNC, Duke, NcSt, Louisville become ACC East?

As Terry will probably chime in in about 9 seconds, this would assume ND joins in. Otherwise, a 19 team football league looks pretty odd. I suppose they could do 20 for football and 21 for basketball/Olympics (3 divisions of 7 each. Maybe add TCU or Baylor as team 20/21?

This 4x20 is not a bad arrangement at all, I'd only have a few quibbles if it were up to me.

80 teams with 4x20 or 5x16 are both reasonable models.

The amusing ones in this thread were the 64 team models which kicked out Notre Dame.

In practice I think we won't ever see anything this clean, but rather the P5(4) grow slowly from 65 up toward 80.
But only when the $$ justifies it.

And new rules that can help justify extra tv money (pods, conference semifinals, etc) are now within reach with autonomy.

(08-09-2014 10:46 AM)Carolina_Low_Country Wrote:  B1G
Kansas State
Kansas
Iowa State
Iowa
Nebraska

Minnesota
Wisconsin
Northwestern
Illinois
Purdue

Indiana
Michigan
Michigan State
Ohio State
Buffalo

Maryland
Rutgers
Connecticut
Penn State
Army (Football Only) (Villanova Olympic Sports)

SEC
TCU
Texas A&M
Oklahoma State
Arkansas
Missouri

LSU
Memphis
Tulane
Ole Miss
Mississippi State

Kentucky
Vanderbilt
Tennessee
Auburn
Alabama

Florida
Georgia
South Carolina
East Carolina
Clemson

ACC
Florida State
Miami
UCF
South Florida
Georgia Tech

North Carolina
NC State
Wake Forest
Duke
Virginia

Virginia Tech
West Virginia
Pitt
Cincinnati
Louisville

Notre Dame
Syracuse
Boston College
Temple
Navy (Football Only) Georgetown (Olympic Sports)

PAC-20
Washington
Washington State
Oregon
Oregon State
Boise State

Stanford
Cal
USC
UCLA
Arizona State

Arizona
Colorado
Utah
BYU
Air Force

Texas
Texas Tech
Houston
Baylor
Oklahoma

If you're doing the 4x20

PAC-20
Washington
Washington State
Oregon
Oregon State
Hawaii

Stanford
Cal
USC
UCLA
SDSU

Arizona
UNLV
Utah
BYU
ASU

Texas
Texas Tech
Colorado
New Mexico
Oklahoma

4x20 SEC

LSU
Texas A&M
Missouri
Arkansas
Tulane

Alabama
Florida State
Auburn
Ole Miss
Miss State

Florida
Georgia
Tennessee
Georgia Tech
Vanderbilt

South Carolina
Clemson
Virginia Tech
North Carolina State
Kentucky

Its hard to do but thats a pretty good blend of keeping rivalries together while balancing strength