Hello There, Guest! (LoginRegister)

Post Reply 
Okay, So What Happens Next? Permutations for Big 12 & ACC with Discussion:
Author Message
Bookmark and Share
JRsec Offline
Super Moderator
*

Posts: 37,886
Joined: Mar 2012
Reputation: 7737
I Root For: SEC
Location:
Post: #21
RE: Okay, So What Happens Next? Permutations for Big 12 & ACC with Discussion:
(11-09-2014 03:00 AM)He1nousOne Wrote:  Why not have in your 16 team SEC scenario, Tennessee, Virginia Tech, Kentucky and Vanderbilt together? That way both Tennessee and Virginia Tech are best utilized.

You put the Alabama schools and Mississippi schools together. You put Georgia, Florida, South Carolina and NC State together. Then you have your last four schools together out West.

Keeping Tennesse and Alabama together and Auburn and Georgia together allow for each to maintain rivalries. If/when we move to 16 then obviously you will play the tree schools in your division and 4 schools from another division annually. If you have 1 permanent rival in each of the two divisions you don't play that year then you can keep 6 teams permanently on your schedule. Therefore dividing the quads has to be handled so that no more than 1 rival is in each of the other pods.
11-09-2014 03:06 AM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
He1nousOne Offline
The One you Love to Hate.
*

Posts: 13,285
Joined: Oct 2011
Reputation: 215
I Root For: Iowa/ASU
Location: Arizona
Post: #22
RE: Okay, So What Happens Next? Permutations for Big 12 & ACC with Discussion:
Alabama and Tennessee are not rivals. They may have a match up that they call a rivalry game but they are not rivals at all. In that set up, they never will again be true rivals. Tennessee will just continue to be Alabama's *****.
11-09-2014 09:12 AM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
CintiFan Offline
2nd String
*

Posts: 386
Joined: Nov 2013
Reputation: 45
I Root For: Ohio St./ Cinti
Location:
Post: #23
RE: Okay, So What Happens Next? Permutations for Big 12 & ACC with Discussion:
(11-09-2014 02:00 AM)JRsec Wrote:  
(11-07-2014 02:20 AM)JRsec Wrote:  
(11-07-2014 02:04 AM)jhawkmvp Wrote:  I'd be happy with this and ESPN probably would as well since they would own the ND/UT conference's network and the B1G T1. Just not sure the ACC core VA and NC schools would want it at all or ND if they did not get the NE exposure they wanted. I think the B12 little brothers might like getting out of the shadow of their bigger brothers as well, as long as the games continued OOC. I think that FOX might be the one getting 50% of the PACN, while ESPN gets the B16N in this scenario. I think ESPN would do that trade-off in a New York minute to have the combo of ND and TX and a handful of other national FB and BB brands.

The B12 going bigger to add schools in the NE where ND has it's strongest following, outside of Chicago, might be likely though. Assuming they wanted more of a NE presence and the B1G did not block it by offering first, you might have a big 18.

East: ND, Syracuse, BC, Pitt, Duke, Miami (Duke and Miami would prefer this division I think and all private but for Pitt which is semi-private)
South: FSU, Clemson, GT, WV, Louisville, Cincinnati
West: Texas, OU, KU, ISU, Baylor, BYU, Tulane (could be replaced by many schools if ESPN wanted)

Every division would have a TX or FL school for recruiting. ND gets a division I think they would love. OU and UT stay in the same division. Adds another BB power. Adds NY and MA into the new conference network. Either the 16 or 18 would be a fun conference to follow. Eighteen would probably be ND's favorite so would probably be the pick.

Take a deep breath and answer this sobering question, "In the great scheme of things will North Carolina, Duke, and Virginia be missed in college football?" No.

Would North Carolina, Duke, and Virginia like to give up football and join the Big East? No.

If the other ACC schools get better homes in the SEC and Big 12 what better basketball conference could North Carolina and Virginia join other than the Big 12 where they are reunited with Maryland.

What I'm saying that is sobering here is that North Carolina's, Duke's, and Virginia's gravitas is in academics (U.N.C. presently suffering here) and in hoops. They carry no weight in football matters. The attendance leaders in the ACC are Clemson, F.S.U., Virginia Tech and N.C. State in that order. Their only power in this matter is in their heads. In the end they will shut up, take the money, be thankful for the basketball, and in Carolina's case be thankful for association with the CIC. Duke may or may not be happy in the Big 12, but heck if they Virginia and UNC insisted upon it maybe the Big 10 gives up their only non AAU member to the Big 12 so that Duke can join.

And the question I've posed elsewhere is this, "If you are ESPN do you want to build a viable football conference by placing two powerhouses like N.D. and Texas on the periphery of a major basketball core, or do you put other football teams around a core of two football giants like Oklahoma and Texas?"

*****
Now for those reading the thread we are talking about a P4 loosely arranged like this:

Big 10:
Maryland, North Carolina, Penn State, Virginia
Indiana, Ohio State, Purdue, Rutgers
Illinois, Michigan, Michigan State, Northwestern
Iowa, Minnesota, Nebraska, Wisconsin
(at 18 Boston College and Duke)

SEC:
Kentucky, N.C. State, South Carolina, Virginia Tech
Auburn, Florida, Georgia, Vanderbilt
Alabama, Mississippi, Mississippi State, Tennessee
Arkansas, Louisiana State, Missouri, Texas A&M
(at 18 West Virginia and Baylor)

Big 12(16):
Clemson, Florida State, Georgia Tech, Miami
Duke, Notre Dame, Pittsburgh, West Virginia
Baylor, Brigham Young, Texas, Tulane
Iowa State, Kansas, Louisville, Oklahoma
(at 18 Cincinnati and Syracuse)

PAC 16:
Kansas State, Oklahoma State, T.C.U., Texas Tech
Arizona, Arizona State, Colorado, Utah
California, Cal Los Angeles, Southern California, Stanford
Oregon, Oregon State, Washington, Washington State
(at 18 New Mexico or a Nevada school)
(if Duke is lost to the Big 10 then Colorado State or East Carolina)

So Let's refresh this a bit. At 16 per conference we have:

Big 10:
Maryland, North Carolina, Penn State, Virginia
Indiana, Ohio State, Purdue, Rutgers
Illinois, Michigan, Michigan State, Northwestern
Iowa, Minnesota, Nebraska, Wisconsin

At 18 per conference the Big 10 looks like this:
Duke, Maryland, North Carolina, Notre Dame (or Syracuse), Penn State, Virginia
Indiana, Michigan, Michigan State, Ohio State, Purdue, Rutgers
Illinois, Iowa, Minnesota, Nebraska, Northwestern, Wisconsin
**********************************************************************

SEC 16:
Kentucky, N.C. State, South Carolina, Virginia Tech
Auburn, Florida, Georgia, Vanderbilt
Alabama, Mississippi, Mississippi State, Tennessee
Arkansas, Louisiana State, Missouri, Texas A&M

SEC 18:
Kentucky, N.C. State, South Carolina, Vanderbilt, Virginia Tech, West Virginia
Alabama, Auburn, Florida, Georgia, Mississippi State, Tennessee
Arkansas, Baylor, Louisiana State, Mississippi, Missouri, Texas A&M
**********************************************************************

Big 16:
Clemson, Florida State, Georgia Tech, Miami
Duke, Notre Dame, Pittsburgh, West Virignia
Baylor, Birgham Young, Texas, Tulane
Iowa State, Kansas, Louisville, Oklahoma

Big 18:
Boston College, Cincinnati, Connecticut, Louisville, Pittsburgh, Syracuse (or Notre Dame)
Clemson, East Carolina/Wake Forest, Florida State, Georgia Tech, Miami, Tulane
Brigham Young, Colorado State/Rice, Iowa State, Kansas, Oklahoma, Texas
**********************************************************************

PAC 16:
Kansas State, Oklahoma State, T.C.U., Texas Tech
Arizona, Arizona State, Colorado, Utah
California, Cal Los Angeles, Southern California, Stanford
Oregon, Oregon State, Washington, Washington State

PAC 18:
Colorado, Kansas State, Oklahoma State, T.C.U., Texas Tech, Utah
Arizona, Arizona State, Cal Los Angeles, Nevada, New Mexico, Southern California
California, Oregon, Oregon State, Stanford, Washington, Washington State
**************************************************************************

Okay let's now use this as a starting points for conversation. Which do you prefer the 16 or 18 team models and why or why not

I don't realistically see it as an either/or proposition. For the SEC and BIG, an 18 team conference works if they get the right schools, but definitely not for the PAC.

Getting to 18, and maybe even 16, for the PAC dilutes its academic standing too much and like the BIG, the presidents care about that. Texas Tech is a good engineering school, but the PAC would probably rather have Iowa State, an AAU school, than Kansas State. The PAC may need to compromise their standard somewhat to get to 16, but 18 is a bridge too far with not enough academically qualified institutions in the geographic area.

The 16's for the BIG, SEC and Big 16 work, except I'd take issue with Tulane. If ND is in the conference, they will want to add their traditional rival BC instead.

At 16, though, there are still some good teams, or at least good locations, on the outside, including Syracuse, Cincinnati, U. Conn, Wake and Rice. Going to 18, at least under the suggested alignment, requires lots of movement that seems not likely at least today. For example, I don't see ND joining the BIG, particularly if they have an option to form a Big 16 conference, play in Texas and Florida on a regular basis, and still have east coast conference games.

The SEC and BIG will go to 18 only if the two teams bring something significant to the table. For the SEC, that might be your combination of WVU and a second Texas team, Brigham Young.

I don't see the BIG going to 18 with Duke and Syracuse for several reasons. Both are private schools, not the larger state schools that the BIG favors. Syracuse lost its AAU status and adding Duke would double up in North Carolina. The BIG does not need to get to 18 and will go there only if the the right teams are available. If the BIG could add Kansas and Georgia Tech to get to 18, I think they do it.

If the Big 16 get poached in order for the SEC and BIG to get to 18, it will need to add 4 teams to get back to 16. Syracuse, U. Conn, and Cincinnati should get the nods, and maybe Wake/ECU take spot #16. Going to 18 then means adding a lesser team (Tulane) or doubling up markets (Rice) and that happens only if ESPN/Fox are willing to pay up for the additional programming.

So I think the SEC and BIG wind up at 18 if the cards fall the right way, with the PAC at 16 (at most) and the new Big 16 at 16.
11-09-2014 11:06 AM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
He1nousOne Offline
The One you Love to Hate.
*

Posts: 13,285
Joined: Oct 2011
Reputation: 215
I Root For: Iowa/ASU
Location: Arizona
Post: #24
RE: Okay, So What Happens Next? Permutations for Big 12 & ACC with Discussion:
The thing about Notre Dame is that it appears as if they are trying to distance themselves somewhat from some of their past traditions. Of course that doesn't include Navy but Notre Dame had a chance to make permanent yearly rival match ups against Pitt and Boston College but they passed on that. That leaves no explanation other than Notre Dame doesn't value Boston College as a rival as much as they used to.
11-09-2014 12:01 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
XLance Offline
Hall of Famer
*

Posts: 14,231
Joined: Mar 2008
Reputation: 762
I Root For: Carolina
Location: Greensboro, NC
Post: #25
RE: Okay, So What Happens Next? Permutations for Big 12 & ACC with Discussion:
(11-09-2014 12:01 PM)He1nousOne Wrote:  The thing about Notre Dame is that it appears as if they are trying to distance themselves somewhat from some of their past traditions. Of course that doesn't include Navy but Notre Dame had a chance to make permanent yearly rival match ups against Pitt and Boston College but they passed on that. That leaves no explanation other than Notre Dame doesn't value Boston College as a rival as much as they used to.

BC vs Notre Dame is a relatively new "rivalry" for the Irish. They haven't played much more than 20 times in a series that started in the mid 70's.
What it shows is that Notre Dame is preparing their alumni for what is likely to come sometime in the future.
11-09-2014 03:23 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
CintiFan Offline
2nd String
*

Posts: 386
Joined: Nov 2013
Reputation: 45
I Root For: Ohio St./ Cinti
Location:
Post: #26
RE: Okay, So What Happens Next? Permutations for Big 12 & ACC with Discussion:
(11-09-2014 12:01 PM)He1nousOne Wrote:  The thing about Notre Dame is that it appears as if they are trying to distance themselves somewhat from some of their past traditions. Of course that doesn't include Navy but Notre Dame had a chance to make permanent yearly rival match ups against Pitt and Boston College but they passed on that. That leaves no explanation other than Notre Dame doesn't value Boston College as a rival as much as they used to.

I agree the BC/ND rivalry doesn't have a lot of tradition, and if ND needs to leave a rival behind when it joins a conference, then BC is a clearly candidate. But the Big 16 scenario posed has Tulane as a member and there is no Tulane/ND rivalry at all, nor is there a Tulane/FSU or Tulane/Texas rivalry. If BC joins the conference instead, ND can keep one rivalry intact and continue playing in front of all the Irish Catholics in Boston. There's no question the better choice from ND's perspective is BC, and I don't think they get any resistance to that move from the other 800 pound gorillas in the conference.
11-09-2014 09:01 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
JRsec Offline
Super Moderator
*

Posts: 37,886
Joined: Mar 2012
Reputation: 7737
I Root For: SEC
Location:
Post: #27
RE: Okay, So What Happens Next? Permutations for Big 12 & ACC with Discussion:
(11-09-2014 09:01 PM)CintiFan Wrote:  
(11-09-2014 12:01 PM)He1nousOne Wrote:  The thing about Notre Dame is that it appears as if they are trying to distance themselves somewhat from some of their past traditions. Of course that doesn't include Navy but Notre Dame had a chance to make permanent yearly rival match ups against Pitt and Boston College but they passed on that. That leaves no explanation other than Notre Dame doesn't value Boston College as a rival as much as they used to.

I agree the BC/ND rivalry doesn't have a lot of tradition, and if ND needs to leave a rival behind when it joins a conference, then BC is a clearly candidate. But the Big 16 scenario posed has Tulane as a member and there is no Tulane/ND rivalry at all, nor is there a Tulane/FSU or Tulane/Texas rivalry. If BC joins the conference instead, ND can keep one rivalry intact and continue playing in front of all the Irish Catholics in Boston. There's no question the better choice from ND's perspective is BC, and I don't think they get any resistance to that move from the other 800 pound gorillas in the conference.

Tulane was proposed as a geographical bridge that connects the old Southwest and the Southeast. New Orleans is a destination city, has significant bowl ties that a presence in the city would really help, and Tulane has upgraded facilities and is AAU. They certainly aren't a must add school but they do bring a lot to the table for the Big 12 with regards to the kind of expansion of which we are speaking.

There are six solid additions in the Northeast in that scenario, six in the Southwest, but finding the 6th for the Southeast is a bit trickier.
(This post was last modified: 11-09-2014 09:09 PM by JRsec.)
11-09-2014 09:06 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
He1nousOne Offline
The One you Love to Hate.
*

Posts: 13,285
Joined: Oct 2011
Reputation: 215
I Root For: Iowa/ASU
Location: Arizona
Post: #28
RE: Okay, So What Happens Next? Permutations for Big 12 & ACC with Discussion:
(11-09-2014 09:01 PM)CintiFan Wrote:  
(11-09-2014 12:01 PM)He1nousOne Wrote:  The thing about Notre Dame is that it appears as if they are trying to distance themselves somewhat from some of their past traditions. Of course that doesn't include Navy but Notre Dame had a chance to make permanent yearly rival match ups against Pitt and Boston College but they passed on that. That leaves no explanation other than Notre Dame doesn't value Boston College as a rival as much as they used to.

I agree the BC/ND rivalry doesn't have a lot of tradition, and if ND needs to leave a rival behind when it joins a conference, then BC is a clearly candidate. But the Big 16 scenario posed has Tulane as a member and there is no Tulane/ND rivalry at all, nor is there a Tulane/FSU or Tulane/Texas rivalry. If BC joins the conference instead, ND can keep one rivalry intact and continue playing in front of all the Irish Catholics in Boston. There's no question the better choice from ND's perspective is BC, and I don't think they get any resistance to that move from the other 800 pound gorillas in the conference.

As long as Tulane continues to build it's program then it is exactly the kind of future relationship that Notre Dame would be interested in building upon. They are right down there smack dab in the middle of some very Catholic friendly territory that also is a hotbed for recruiting.
11-09-2014 09:56 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
JRsec Offline
Super Moderator
*

Posts: 37,886
Joined: Mar 2012
Reputation: 7737
I Root For: SEC
Location:
Post: #29
RE: Okay, So What Happens Next? Permutations for Big 12 & ACC with Discussion:
(11-09-2014 02:00 AM)JRsec Wrote:  
(11-07-2014 02:20 AM)JRsec Wrote:  
(11-07-2014 02:04 AM)jhawkmvp Wrote:  I'd be happy with this and ESPN probably would as well since they would own the ND/UT conference's network and the B1G T1. Just not sure the ACC core VA and NC schools would want it at all or ND if they did not get the NE exposure they wanted. I think the B12 little brothers might like getting out of the shadow of their bigger brothers as well, as long as the games continued OOC. I think that FOX might be the one getting 50% of the PACN, while ESPN gets the B16N in this scenario. I think ESPN would do that trade-off in a New York minute to have the combo of ND and TX and a handful of other national FB and BB brands.

The B12 going bigger to add schools in the NE where ND has it's strongest following, outside of Chicago, might be likely though. Assuming they wanted more of a NE presence and the B1G did not block it by offering first, you might have a big 18.

East: ND, Syracuse, BC, Pitt, Duke, Miami (Duke and Miami would prefer this division I think and all private but for Pitt which is semi-private)
South: FSU, Clemson, GT, WV, Louisville, Cincinnati
West: Texas, OU, KU, ISU, Baylor, BYU, Tulane (could be replaced by many schools if ESPN wanted)

Every division would have a TX or FL school for recruiting. ND gets a division I think they would love. OU and UT stay in the same division. Adds another BB power. Adds NY and MA into the new conference network. Either the 16 or 18 would be a fun conference to follow. Eighteen would probably be ND's favorite so would probably be the pick.

Take a deep breath and answer this sobering question, "In the great scheme of things will North Carolina, Duke, and Virginia be missed in college football?" No.

Would North Carolina, Duke, and Virginia like to give up football and join the Big East? No.

If the other ACC schools get better homes in the SEC and Big 12 what better basketball conference could North Carolina and Virginia join other than the Big 12 where they are reunited with Maryland.

What I'm saying that is sobering here is that North Carolina's, Duke's, and Virginia's gravitas is in academics (U.N.C. presently suffering here) and in hoops. They carry no weight in football matters. The attendance leaders in the ACC are Clemson, F.S.U., Virginia Tech and N.C. State in that order. Their only power in this matter is in their heads. In the end they will shut up, take the money, be thankful for the basketball, and in Carolina's case be thankful for association with the CIC. Duke may or may not be happy in the Big 12, but heck if they Virginia and UNC insisted upon it maybe the Big 10 gives up their only non AAU member to the Big 12 so that Duke can join.

And the question I've posed elsewhere is this, "If you are ESPN do you want to build a viable football conference by placing two powerhouses like N.D. and Texas on the periphery of a major basketball core, or do you put other football teams around a core of two football giants like Oklahoma and Texas?"

*****
Now for those reading the thread we are talking about a P4 loosely arranged like this:

Big 10:
Maryland, North Carolina, Penn State, Virginia
Indiana, Ohio State, Purdue, Rutgers
Illinois, Michigan, Michigan State, Northwestern
Iowa, Minnesota, Nebraska, Wisconsin
(at 18 Boston College and Duke)

SEC:
Kentucky, N.C. State, South Carolina, Virginia Tech
Auburn, Florida, Georgia, Vanderbilt
Alabama, Mississippi, Mississippi State, Tennessee
Arkansas, Louisiana State, Missouri, Texas A&M
(at 18 West Virginia and Baylor)

Big 12(16):
Clemson, Florida State, Georgia Tech, Miami
Duke, Notre Dame, Pittsburgh, West Virginia
Baylor, Brigham Young, Texas, Tulane
Iowa State, Kansas, Louisville, Oklahoma
(at 18 Cincinnati and Syracuse)

PAC 16:
Kansas State, Oklahoma State, T.C.U., Texas Tech
Arizona, Arizona State, Colorado, Utah
California, Cal Los Angeles, Southern California, Stanford
Oregon, Oregon State, Washington, Washington State
(at 18 New Mexico or a Nevada school)
(if Duke is lost to the Big 10 then Colorado State or East Carolina)

So Let's refresh this a bit. At 16 per conference we have:

Big 10:
Maryland, North Carolina, Penn State, Virginia
Indiana, Ohio State, Purdue, Rutgers
Illinois, Michigan, Michigan State, Northwestern
Iowa, Minnesota, Nebraska, Wisconsin

At 18 per conference the Big 10 looks like this:
Duke, Maryland, North Carolina, Notre Dame (or Syracuse), Penn State, Virginia
Indiana, Michigan, Michigan State, Ohio State, Purdue, Rutgers
Illinois, Iowa, Minnesota, Nebraska, Northwestern, Wisconsin
**********************************************************************

SEC 16:
Kentucky, N.C. State, South Carolina, Virginia Tech
Auburn, Florida, Georgia, Vanderbilt
Alabama, Mississippi, Mississippi State, Tennessee
Arkansas, Louisiana State, Missouri, Texas A&M

SEC 18:
Kentucky, N.C. State, South Carolina, Vanderbilt, Virginia Tech, West Virginia
Alabama, Auburn, Florida, Georgia, Mississippi State, Tennessee
Arkansas, Baylor, Louisiana State, Mississippi, Missouri, Texas A&M
**********************************************************************

Big 16:
Clemson, Florida State, Georgia Tech, Miami
Duke, Notre Dame, Pittsburgh, West Virignia
Baylor, Birgham Young, Texas, Tulane
Iowa State, Kansas, Louisville, Oklahoma

Big 18:
Boston College, Cincinnati, Connecticut, Louisville, Pittsburgh, Syracuse (or Notre Dame)
Clemson, East Carolina/Wake Forest, Florida State, Georgia Tech, Miami, Tulane
Brigham Young, Colorado State/Rice, Iowa State, Kansas, Oklahoma, Texas
**********************************************************************

PAC 16:
Kansas State, Oklahoma State, T.C.U., Texas Tech
Arizona, Arizona State, Colorado, Utah
California, Cal Los Angeles, Southern California, Stanford
Oregon, Oregon State, Washington, Washington State

PAC 18:
Colorado, Kansas State, Oklahoma State, T.C.U., Texas Tech, Utah
Arizona, Arizona State, Cal Los Angeles, Nevada, New Mexico, Southern California
California, Oregon, Oregon State, Stanford, Washington, Washington State
**************************************************************************

Okay let's now use this as a starting points for conversation. Which do you prefer the 16 or 18 team models and why or why not

Now let's compare the radical reconstruction of a New Big 12 with a simple dissolution of the ACC with no Big 12 placement to create markets:

Big 10:
Duke, Maryland, North Carolina, Notre Dame, Rutgers, Virginia
Indiana, Michigan, Michigan State, Ohio State, Penn State, Purdue
Illinois, Iowa, Minnesota, Nebraska, Northwestern, Wisconsin
(Additions: Duke, North Carolina, Notre Dame, Virginia)

SEC:
Auburn, Florida, Georgia, N.C. State, South Carolina, Wake Forest
Alabama, Kentucky, Miami, Tennessee, Vanderbilt, Virginia Tech
Arkansas, Louisiana State, Mississippi, Mississippi State, Missouri, Texas A&M
(Additions: Miami, N.C. State, Virginia Tech, Wake Forest)

Big 12:
Baylor, Clemson, Florida State, Georgia Tech, Texas, T.C.U.
Iowa State, Kansas, Kansas State, Oklahoma, Oklahoma State, Texas Tech
Boston College, Cincinnati, Louisville, Pittsburgh, Syracuse, West Virginia
(Additions: Boston College, Clemson, Florida State, Georgia Tech, Louisville, Pittsburgh, Syracuse and Cincinnati)

PAC:
California, Oregon, Oregon State, Stanford, Washington, Washington State
Arizona, Arizona State, California Los Angeles, Colorado, Southern California, Utah
(No Additions)

Total Membership of P4: 66

Now Compare that to trying to go to three conferences of 18 out of the Big 12

Big 10:
Indiana, Maryland, Ohio State, Penn State, Purdue, Rutgers
Illinois, Michigan, Michigan State, Minnesota, Northwestern, Wisconsin
Iowa, Iowa State, Kansas, Oklahoma, Nebraska, Texas

SEC:
Auburn, Florida, Georgia, Kentucky, South Carolina, Vanderbilt
Alabama, Louisiana State, Mississippi, Mississippi State, Tennessee, Texas A&M
Arkansas, Baylor, Kansas State, Missouri, Oklahoma State, Texas Tech

ACC:
Boston College, Connecticut, Notre Dame, Pittsburgh, Syracuse, West Virginia
Cincinnati, Duke, Louisville, North Carolina, Virginia, Virginia Tech
Clemson, Florida State, Georgia Tech, Miami, N.C. State, Wake Forest


PAC:
California, Oregon, Oregon State, Stanford, Washington, Washington State
Arizona, Arizona State, California Los Angeles, Colorado, Southern California, Utah


In are Cincinnati and Connecticut. Out is T.C.U. (unless the PAC takes them.) And this distribution doesn't include what Texas might want to do or whether or not the SEC and ESPN would sit back and let all 3 of the jewels of the Big 12 go to the Big 10 just to meet their AAU requirements.

Thoughts and discussion?

IMO the division of the ACC into the Big 10, Big 12, and SEC yields 3 conferences of relative equal value. Therefore it brings stability. The PAC's worth is not as important because they truly are protected by geography.

It is also my opinion that the division of the Big 12 would create relatively inequitable conferences and just eventually lead to further instability and further moves. There aren't enough quality academic institutions for the Big 10 and SEC and the ACC is too remote to be very active in the division.

Therefore it is my conclusion that if Realignment is to come to a lengthy end it would be best for the parsing of the ACC to be involved and better to build around the core of Texas, Oklahoma and Kansas than to throw those schools who desire to stay together into a single conference thereby creating yet another unstable environment.

So from my point of view the question is whether you thin the concentration of Texas schools from the current Big 12 and look to replace them with multiple market additions, or do you just simply divide out the ACC?
(This post was last modified: 11-10-2014 12:15 AM by JRsec.)
11-09-2014 11:25 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
jhawkmvp Offline
2nd String
*

Posts: 443
Joined: Dec 2013
Reputation: 35
I Root For: Kansas
Location: Over the Rainbow
Post: #30
RE: Okay, So What Happens Next? Permutations for Big 12 & ACC with Discussion:
Some comments:

(11-07-2014 06:12 PM)He1nousOne Wrote:  The PAC isn't really a big dog. It has considerable stability due to geography but the failures that it had in it's very public attempts to tear apart the Big 12 show that it isn't exactly a big dog. Honestly they shouldn't have been so public with their attempt. When looking at the actions of the likes of the Big Ten, SEC and even to some degree with the ACC...the PAC's methodology looks very amateur.

That means desperation. The PAC was desperate because they knew that when the Eastern conferences fully compete, they wouldn't get the best additions from The Big 12. They tried to jump the gun.

This is spot on. The PAC is actually weaker than the B12 by many metrics. It is just protected by geography. Some points:

1) They lag behind the SEC, B1G, and B12 by a fair amount currently in conference and TV revenue and will continue to lag unless their network takes off, which is not certain without the help of ESPN or FOX.
2) The B12 schools are solidly ahead of them in AD revenue both median and average.
3) Their ratings are in the ballpark of the B12 and ACC; however, the B12 has great market penetration in its small footprint while the PAC and ACC do not. However, the PAC is hurt by its time zone issues.
4) Time zone issues. They have a major eastern exposure, TV ratings, and travel problems due to being in the mountain and pacific time zones.
5) They only have one football national brand in USC and one basketball blue blood in UCLA. They really need Oregon (or another school) to win a title or two to ascend to a national FB brand. The B12 has OU and Texas, plus Kansas in basketball.
6) Most importantly, by solely owning their network they have set themselves up as a direct competitor of both ESPN and FOX in partial T2 and T3. Moving valuable schools (Texas, OU, or even Kansas) to the PAC is the last thing those networks want at this time. They would prefer the money programs go to the three eastern conferences or remain in the B12 rather than move to the PAC. Thus, the PAC is looking at left overs in expansion since they blew 2010 and 2011 expansion. If the PAC wants to improve their expansion position/options, and get their network picked up faster, they really should get ESPN/FOX on the line and offer them half their network.

(11-09-2014 11:25 PM)JRsec Wrote:  So from my point of view the question is whether you thin the concentration of Texas schools from the current Big 12 and look to replace them with multiple market additions, or do you just simply divide out the ACC?[/b]

The latter. A new ND/Texas conference would benefit more by being a modern conference by avoiding duplicate markets as much as possible, in order to add more schools and markets of higher value. If those B12 little brothers were willing to go to the PAC, that would be best for the PAC and the new conference. The PAC would get some unglamorous additions, but those additions would open up a lot of new territory for its network, provide more eastern exposure by providing 2 CST game slots each week, and give new recruiting grounds exposure in Texas. Any combo of 4 smaller B12 schools is still better than the other expansion options in the west by far. A new, from "scratch" conference would give Texas the ability to shed some B12 schools who would not add value when you already have UT, OU, and KU.

If it would happen really depends on the Texas schools dynamics. Texas originally preferred the B12 only add A&M and UT and go to 10 schools, but were forced by TX politics to take BU and TTU at the time. Unless things have changed drastically, Texas is willing to downsize the TX presence in it's conference. I think they would prefer to be in a conference with 1-2 other TX schools ideally. I could see TTU agreeing to go to the PAC to get out from under UT's long shadow like A&M did. They likely would often compete for conference titles in the PAC, something they have struggled to do in the B12 with UT and OU. I think Baylor and TCU would do whatever helped them keep a spot in the P5. Baylor I think prefers to remain with Texas, but that is just a guess. TCU is a perfect candidate to move to the PAC or ACC as DFW is an airline hub and would make travel easier.

For the other non-TX B12 schools, I think OSU would be open to being in a different conference than OU for the same reasons as TTU. KSU would do whatever guaranteed they remain a P5 school, whether that means separating from KU or not. ISU, of course, will do whatever keeps them in the P5. WVU has the ACC and SEC as options and will also do whatever keeps them in the P5 (see the B12 move and current island situation).

(11-09-2014 09:06 PM)JRsec Wrote:  
(11-09-2014 09:01 PM)CintiFan Wrote:  I agree the BC/ND rivalry doesn't have a lot of tradition, and if ND needs to leave a rival behind when it joins a conference, then BC is a clearly candidate. But the Big 16 scenario posed has Tulane as a member and there is no Tulane/ND rivalry at all, nor is there a Tulane/FSU or Tulane/Texas rivalry. If BC joins the conference instead, ND can keep one rivalry intact and continue playing in front of all the Irish Catholics in Boston. There's no question the better choice from ND's perspective is BC, and I don't think they get any resistance to that move from the other 800 pound gorillas in the conference.

Tulane was proposed as a geographical bridge that connects the old Southwest and the Southeast. New Orleans is a destination city, has significant bowl ties that a presence in the city would really help, and Tulane has upgraded facilities and is AAU. They certainly aren't a must add school but they do bring a lot to the table for the Big 12 with regards to the kind of expansion of which we are speaking.

There are six solid additions in the Northeast in that scenario, six in the Southwest, but finding the 6th for the Southeast is a bit trickier.

(11-09-2014 09:56 PM)He1nousOne Wrote:  As long as Tulane continues to build it's program then it is exactly the kind of future relationship that Notre Dame would be interested in building upon. They are right down there smack dab in the middle of some very Catholic friendly territory that also is a hotbed for recruiting.

Tulane is in the mix (albeit as a dark horse) if the B12 goes to 12 (I doubt the B12 expands unless the ACC comes apart though) along with a bunch of other schools including Cincinnati. The B12 AAU schools were stung by the loss of 4 AAU schools to other conferences. Texas especially would like an academic upgrade, if possible. JRSec and H1 both made good points about Tulane. They fit in some realignment scenarios due to geographical fit, LA being the best FB recruiting in the country per capita, the New Orleans travel destination, and their academics (AAU). However, like any other non-P5 school (and even some of the weaker P5 members) they could easily be replaced by any number of G5 or P5 schools depending on what the conference needed or the politics involved (i.e. making ND and Texas happy).
(This post was last modified: 11-10-2014 01:36 AM by jhawkmvp.)
11-10-2014 01:20 AM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
XLance Offline
Hall of Famer
*

Posts: 14,231
Joined: Mar 2008
Reputation: 762
I Root For: Carolina
Location: Greensboro, NC
Post: #31
RE: Okay, So What Happens Next? Permutations for Big 12 & ACC with Discussion:
(11-09-2014 11:25 PM)JRsec Wrote:  
(11-09-2014 02:00 AM)JRsec Wrote:  
(11-07-2014 02:20 AM)JRsec Wrote:  
(11-07-2014 02:04 AM)jhawkmvp Wrote:  I'd be happy with this and ESPN probably would as well since they would own the ND/UT conference's network and the B1G T1. Just not sure the ACC core VA and NC schools would want it at all or ND if they did not get the NE exposure they wanted. I think the B12 little brothers might like getting out of the shadow of their bigger brothers as well, as long as the games continued OOC. I think that FOX might be the one getting 50% of the PACN, while ESPN gets the B16N in this scenario. I think ESPN would do that trade-off in a New York minute to have the combo of ND and TX and a handful of other national FB and BB brands.

The B12 going bigger to add schools in the NE where ND has it's strongest following, outside of Chicago, might be likely though. Assuming they wanted more of a NE presence and the B1G did not block it by offering first, you might have a big 18.

East: ND, Syracuse, BC, Pitt, Duke, Miami (Duke and Miami would prefer this division I think and all private but for Pitt which is semi-private)
South: FSU, Clemson, GT, WV, Louisville, Cincinnati
West: Texas, OU, KU, ISU, Baylor, BYU, Tulane (could be replaced by many schools if ESPN wanted)

Every division would have a TX or FL school for recruiting. ND gets a division I think they would love. OU and UT stay in the same division. Adds another BB power. Adds NY and MA into the new conference network. Either the 16 or 18 would be a fun conference to follow. Eighteen would probably be ND's favorite so would probably be the pick.

Take a deep breath and answer this sobering question, "In the great scheme of things will North Carolina, Duke, and Virginia be missed in college football?" No.

Would North Carolina, Duke, and Virginia like to give up football and join the Big East? No.

If the other ACC schools get better homes in the SEC and Big 12 what better basketball conference could North Carolina and Virginia join other than the Big 12 where they are reunited with Maryland.

What I'm saying that is sobering here is that North Carolina's, Duke's, and Virginia's gravitas is in academics (U.N.C. presently suffering here) and in hoops. They carry no weight in football matters. The attendance leaders in the ACC are Clemson, F.S.U., Virginia Tech and N.C. State in that order. Their only power in this matter is in their heads. In the end they will shut up, take the money, be thankful for the basketball, and in Carolina's case be thankful for association with the CIC. Duke may or may not be happy in the Big 12, but heck if they Virginia and UNC insisted upon it maybe the Big 10 gives up their only non AAU member to the Big 12 so that Duke can join.

And the question I've posed elsewhere is this, "If you are ESPN do you want to build a viable football conference by placing two powerhouses like N.D. and Texas on the periphery of a major basketball core, or do you put other football teams around a core of two football giants like Oklahoma and Texas?"

*****
Now for those reading the thread we are talking about a P4 loosely arranged like this:

Big 10:
Maryland, North Carolina, Penn State, Virginia
Indiana, Ohio State, Purdue, Rutgers
Illinois, Michigan, Michigan State, Northwestern
Iowa, Minnesota, Nebraska, Wisconsin
(at 18 Boston College and Duke)

SEC:
Kentucky, N.C. State, South Carolina, Virginia Tech
Auburn, Florida, Georgia, Vanderbilt
Alabama, Mississippi, Mississippi State, Tennessee
Arkansas, Louisiana State, Missouri, Texas A&M
(at 18 West Virginia and Baylor)

Big 12(16):
Clemson, Florida State, Georgia Tech, Miami
Duke, Notre Dame, Pittsburgh, West Virginia
Baylor, Brigham Young, Texas, Tulane
Iowa State, Kansas, Louisville, Oklahoma
(at 18 Cincinnati and Syracuse)

PAC 16:
Kansas State, Oklahoma State, T.C.U., Texas Tech
Arizona, Arizona State, Colorado, Utah
California, Cal Los Angeles, Southern California, Stanford
Oregon, Oregon State, Washington, Washington State
(at 18 New Mexico or a Nevada school)
(if Duke is lost to the Big 10 then Colorado State or East Carolina)

So Let's refresh this a bit. At 16 per conference we have:

Big 10:
Maryland, North Carolina, Penn State, Virginia
Indiana, Ohio State, Purdue, Rutgers
Illinois, Michigan, Michigan State, Northwestern
Iowa, Minnesota, Nebraska, Wisconsin

At 18 per conference the Big 10 looks like this:
Duke, Maryland, North Carolina, Notre Dame (or Syracuse), Penn State, Virginia
Indiana, Michigan, Michigan State, Ohio State, Purdue, Rutgers
Illinois, Iowa, Minnesota, Nebraska, Northwestern, Wisconsin
**********************************************************************

SEC 16:
Kentucky, N.C. State, South Carolina, Virginia Tech
Auburn, Florida, Georgia, Vanderbilt
Alabama, Mississippi, Mississippi State, Tennessee
Arkansas, Louisiana State, Missouri, Texas A&M

SEC 18:
Kentucky, N.C. State, South Carolina, Vanderbilt, Virginia Tech, West Virginia
Alabama, Auburn, Florida, Georgia, Mississippi State, Tennessee
Arkansas, Baylor, Louisiana State, Mississippi, Missouri, Texas A&M
**********************************************************************

Big 16:
Clemson, Florida State, Georgia Tech, Miami
Duke, Notre Dame, Pittsburgh, West Virignia
Baylor, Birgham Young, Texas, Tulane
Iowa State, Kansas, Louisville, Oklahoma

Big 18:
Boston College, Cincinnati, Connecticut, Louisville, Pittsburgh, Syracuse (or Notre Dame)
Clemson, East Carolina/Wake Forest, Florida State, Georgia Tech, Miami, Tulane
Brigham Young, Colorado State/Rice, Iowa State, Kansas, Oklahoma, Texas
**********************************************************************

PAC 16:
Kansas State, Oklahoma State, T.C.U., Texas Tech
Arizona, Arizona State, Colorado, Utah
California, Cal Los Angeles, Southern California, Stanford
Oregon, Oregon State, Washington, Washington State

PAC 18:
Colorado, Kansas State, Oklahoma State, T.C.U., Texas Tech, Utah
Arizona, Arizona State, Cal Los Angeles, Nevada, New Mexico, Southern California
California, Oregon, Oregon State, Stanford, Washington, Washington State
**************************************************************************

Okay let's now use this as a starting points for conversation. Which do you prefer the 16 or 18 team models and why or why not

Now let's compare the radical reconstruction of a New Big 12 with a simple dissolution of the ACC with no Big 12 placement to create markets:

Big 10:
Duke, Maryland, North Carolina, Notre Dame, Rutgers, Virginia
Indiana, Michigan, Michigan State, Ohio State, Penn State, Purdue
Illinois, Iowa, Minnesota, Nebraska, Northwestern, Wisconsin
(Additions: Duke, North Carolina, Notre Dame, Virginia)

SEC:
Auburn, Florida, Georgia, N.C. State, South Carolina, Wake Forest
Alabama, Kentucky, Miami, Tennessee, Vanderbilt, Virginia Tech
Arkansas, Louisiana State, Mississippi, Mississippi State, Missouri, Texas A&M
(Additions: Miami, N.C. State, Virginia Tech, Wake Forest)

Big 12:
Baylor, Clemson, Florida State, Georgia Tech, Texas, T.C.U.
Iowa State, Kansas, Kansas State, Oklahoma, Oklahoma State, Texas Tech
Boston College, Cincinnati, Louisville, Pittsburgh, Syracuse, West Virginia
(Additions: Boston College, Clemson, Florida State, Georgia Tech, Louisville, Pittsburgh, Syracuse and Cincinnati)

PAC:
California, Oregon, Oregon State, Stanford, Washington, Washington State
Arizona, Arizona State, California Los Angeles, Colorado, Southern California, Utah
(No Additions)

Total Membership of P4: 66

Now Compare that to trying to go to three conferences of 18 out of the Big 12

Big 10:
Indiana, Maryland, Ohio State, Penn State, Purdue, Rutgers
Illinois, Michigan, Michigan State, Minnesota, Northwestern, Wisconsin
Iowa, Iowa State, Kansas, Oklahoma, Nebraska, Texas

SEC:
Auburn, Florida, Georgia, Kentucky, South Carolina, Vanderbilt
Alabama, Louisiana State, Mississippi, Mississippi State, Tennessee, Texas A&M
Arkansas, Baylor, Kansas State, Missouri, Oklahoma State, Texas Tech

ACC:
Boston College, Connecticut, Notre Dame, Pittsburgh, Syracuse, West Virginia
Cincinnati, Duke, Louisville, North Carolina, Virginia, Virginia Tech
Clemson, Florida State, Georgia Tech, Miami, N.C. State, Wake Forest


PAC:
California, Oregon, Oregon State, Stanford, Washington, Washington State
Arizona, Arizona State, California Los Angeles, Colorado, Southern California, Utah


In are Cincinnati and Connecticut. Out is T.C.U. (unless the PAC takes them.) And this distribution doesn't include what Texas might want to do or whether or not the SEC and ESPN would sit back and let all 3 of the jewels of the Big 12 go to the Big 10 just to meet their AAU requirements.

Thoughts and discussion?

IMO the division of the ACC into the Big 10, Big 12, and SEC yields 3 conferences of relative equal value. Therefore it brings stability. The PAC's worth is not as important because they truly are protected by geography.

It is also my opinion that the division of the Big 12 would create relatively inequitable conferences and just eventually lead to further instability and further moves. There aren't enough quality academic institutions for the Big 10 and SEC and the ACC is too remote to be very active in the division.

Therefore it is my conclusion that if Realignment is to come to a lengthy end it would be best for the parsing of the ACC to be involved and better to build around the core of Texas, Oklahoma and Kansas than to throw those schools who desire to stay together into a single conference thereby creating yet another unstable environment.

So from my point of view the question is whether you thin the concentration of Texas schools from the current Big 12 and look to replace them with multiple market additions, or do you just simply divide out the ACC?

JR, your reasoning is as solid as a rock IF you were only talking about college football. BUT since you and I know that this thing is really in the hands of the networks (ESPN) and they have a different agenda.
Not only are the networks concerned with inventory from Labor Day through Thanksgiving Weekend (plus the bowl season), they are also concerned about inventory in other seasons of the year. Different conferences have been constructed to compete in sports other than football.
With increased competition from the NFL (see Thursday night games), college sports might have to take a different marketing strategy in order to survive in the marketplace. Football may drive the bus for now, but the networks have hedged their bets to diversify their holdings in college sports franchises for the future.
11-10-2014 08:43 AM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
vandiver49 Offline
Heisman
*

Posts: 8,589
Joined: Aug 2011
Reputation: 315
I Root For: USNA/UTK
Location: West GA
Post: #32
RE: Okay, So What Happens Next? Permutations for Big 12 & ACC with Discussion:
My preferred option would to build around 18 schools if possible. But the real question is whether the ACC is viable without VT, Clemson and FSU. I really don't think so IMO and as such find it difficult to see ESPN parting the conference out. You couldn't find acceptable homes for schools like 'Cuse, Pitt and BC and they definitely wouldn't be worth paying $20 million/yr to.

That is why I think the elimination of the B12 still remains the best option.
11-10-2014 10:03 AM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
JRsec Offline
Super Moderator
*

Posts: 37,886
Joined: Mar 2012
Reputation: 7737
I Root For: SEC
Location:
Post: #33
RE: Okay, So What Happens Next? Permutations for Big 12 & ACC with Discussion:
(11-10-2014 08:43 AM)XLance Wrote:  
(11-09-2014 11:25 PM)JRsec Wrote:  
(11-09-2014 02:00 AM)JRsec Wrote:  
(11-07-2014 02:20 AM)JRsec Wrote:  
(11-07-2014 02:04 AM)jhawkmvp Wrote:  I'd be happy with this and ESPN probably would as well since they would own the ND/UT conference's network and the B1G T1. Just not sure the ACC core VA and NC schools would want it at all or ND if they did not get the NE exposure they wanted. I think the B12 little brothers might like getting out of the shadow of their bigger brothers as well, as long as the games continued OOC. I think that FOX might be the one getting 50% of the PACN, while ESPN gets the B16N in this scenario. I think ESPN would do that trade-off in a New York minute to have the combo of ND and TX and a handful of other national FB and BB brands.

The B12 going bigger to add schools in the NE where ND has it's strongest following, outside of Chicago, might be likely though. Assuming they wanted more of a NE presence and the B1G did not block it by offering first, you might have a big 18.

East: ND, Syracuse, BC, Pitt, Duke, Miami (Duke and Miami would prefer this division I think and all private but for Pitt which is semi-private)
South: FSU, Clemson, GT, WV, Louisville, Cincinnati
West: Texas, OU, KU, ISU, Baylor, BYU, Tulane (could be replaced by many schools if ESPN wanted)

Every division would have a TX or FL school for recruiting. ND gets a division I think they would love. OU and UT stay in the same division. Adds another BB power. Adds NY and MA into the new conference network. Either the 16 or 18 would be a fun conference to follow. Eighteen would probably be ND's favorite so would probably be the pick.

Take a deep breath and answer this sobering question, "In the great scheme of things will North Carolina, Duke, and Virginia be missed in college football?" No.

Would North Carolina, Duke, and Virginia like to give up football and join the Big East? No.

If the other ACC schools get better homes in the SEC and Big 12 what better basketball conference could North Carolina and Virginia join other than the Big 12 where they are reunited with Maryland.

What I'm saying that is sobering here is that North Carolina's, Duke's, and Virginia's gravitas is in academics (U.N.C. presently suffering here) and in hoops. They carry no weight in football matters. The attendance leaders in the ACC are Clemson, F.S.U., Virginia Tech and N.C. State in that order. Their only power in this matter is in their heads. In the end they will shut up, take the money, be thankful for the basketball, and in Carolina's case be thankful for association with the CIC. Duke may or may not be happy in the Big 12, but heck if they Virginia and UNC insisted upon it maybe the Big 10 gives up their only non AAU member to the Big 12 so that Duke can join.

And the question I've posed elsewhere is this, "If you are ESPN do you want to build a viable football conference by placing two powerhouses like N.D. and Texas on the periphery of a major basketball core, or do you put other football teams around a core of two football giants like Oklahoma and Texas?"

*****
Now for those reading the thread we are talking about a P4 loosely arranged like this:

Big 10:
Maryland, North Carolina, Penn State, Virginia
Indiana, Ohio State, Purdue, Rutgers
Illinois, Michigan, Michigan State, Northwestern
Iowa, Minnesota, Nebraska, Wisconsin
(at 18 Boston College and Duke)

SEC:
Kentucky, N.C. State, South Carolina, Virginia Tech
Auburn, Florida, Georgia, Vanderbilt
Alabama, Mississippi, Mississippi State, Tennessee
Arkansas, Louisiana State, Missouri, Texas A&M
(at 18 West Virginia and Baylor)

Big 12(16):
Clemson, Florida State, Georgia Tech, Miami
Duke, Notre Dame, Pittsburgh, West Virginia
Baylor, Brigham Young, Texas, Tulane
Iowa State, Kansas, Louisville, Oklahoma
(at 18 Cincinnati and Syracuse)

PAC 16:
Kansas State, Oklahoma State, T.C.U., Texas Tech
Arizona, Arizona State, Colorado, Utah
California, Cal Los Angeles, Southern California, Stanford
Oregon, Oregon State, Washington, Washington State
(at 18 New Mexico or a Nevada school)
(if Duke is lost to the Big 10 then Colorado State or East Carolina)

So Let's refresh this a bit. At 16 per conference we have:

Big 10:
Maryland, North Carolina, Penn State, Virginia
Indiana, Ohio State, Purdue, Rutgers
Illinois, Michigan, Michigan State, Northwestern
Iowa, Minnesota, Nebraska, Wisconsin

At 18 per conference the Big 10 looks like this:
Duke, Maryland, North Carolina, Notre Dame (or Syracuse), Penn State, Virginia
Indiana, Michigan, Michigan State, Ohio State, Purdue, Rutgers
Illinois, Iowa, Minnesota, Nebraska, Northwestern, Wisconsin
**********************************************************************

SEC 16:
Kentucky, N.C. State, South Carolina, Virginia Tech
Auburn, Florida, Georgia, Vanderbilt
Alabama, Mississippi, Mississippi State, Tennessee
Arkansas, Louisiana State, Missouri, Texas A&M

SEC 18:
Kentucky, N.C. State, South Carolina, Vanderbilt, Virginia Tech, West Virginia
Alabama, Auburn, Florida, Georgia, Mississippi State, Tennessee
Arkansas, Baylor, Louisiana State, Mississippi, Missouri, Texas A&M
**********************************************************************

Big 16:
Clemson, Florida State, Georgia Tech, Miami
Duke, Notre Dame, Pittsburgh, West Virignia
Baylor, Birgham Young, Texas, Tulane
Iowa State, Kansas, Louisville, Oklahoma

Big 18:
Boston College, Cincinnati, Connecticut, Louisville, Pittsburgh, Syracuse (or Notre Dame)
Clemson, East Carolina/Wake Forest, Florida State, Georgia Tech, Miami, Tulane
Brigham Young, Colorado State/Rice, Iowa State, Kansas, Oklahoma, Texas
**********************************************************************

PAC 16:
Kansas State, Oklahoma State, T.C.U., Texas Tech
Arizona, Arizona State, Colorado, Utah
California, Cal Los Angeles, Southern California, Stanford
Oregon, Oregon State, Washington, Washington State

PAC 18:
Colorado, Kansas State, Oklahoma State, T.C.U., Texas Tech, Utah
Arizona, Arizona State, Cal Los Angeles, Nevada, New Mexico, Southern California
California, Oregon, Oregon State, Stanford, Washington, Washington State
**************************************************************************

Okay let's now use this as a starting points for conversation. Which do you prefer the 16 or 18 team models and why or why not

Now let's compare the radical reconstruction of a New Big 12 with a simple dissolution of the ACC with no Big 12 placement to create markets:

Big 10:
Duke, Maryland, North Carolina, Notre Dame, Rutgers, Virginia
Indiana, Michigan, Michigan State, Ohio State, Penn State, Purdue
Illinois, Iowa, Minnesota, Nebraska, Northwestern, Wisconsin
(Additions: Duke, North Carolina, Notre Dame, Virginia)

SEC:
Auburn, Florida, Georgia, N.C. State, South Carolina, Wake Forest
Alabama, Kentucky, Miami, Tennessee, Vanderbilt, Virginia Tech
Arkansas, Louisiana State, Mississippi, Mississippi State, Missouri, Texas A&M
(Additions: Miami, N.C. State, Virginia Tech, Wake Forest)

Big 12:
Baylor, Clemson, Florida State, Georgia Tech, Texas, T.C.U.
Iowa State, Kansas, Kansas State, Oklahoma, Oklahoma State, Texas Tech
Boston College, Cincinnati, Louisville, Pittsburgh, Syracuse, West Virginia
(Additions: Boston College, Clemson, Florida State, Georgia Tech, Louisville, Pittsburgh, Syracuse and Cincinnati)

PAC:
California, Oregon, Oregon State, Stanford, Washington, Washington State
Arizona, Arizona State, California Los Angeles, Colorado, Southern California, Utah
(No Additions)

Total Membership of P4: 66

Now Compare that to trying to go to three conferences of 18 out of the Big 12

Big 10:
Indiana, Maryland, Ohio State, Penn State, Purdue, Rutgers
Illinois, Michigan, Michigan State, Minnesota, Northwestern, Wisconsin
Iowa, Iowa State, Kansas, Oklahoma, Nebraska, Texas

SEC:
Auburn, Florida, Georgia, Kentucky, South Carolina, Vanderbilt
Alabama, Louisiana State, Mississippi, Mississippi State, Tennessee, Texas A&M
Arkansas, Baylor, Kansas State, Missouri, Oklahoma State, Texas Tech

ACC:
Boston College, Connecticut, Notre Dame, Pittsburgh, Syracuse, West Virginia
Cincinnati, Duke, Louisville, North Carolina, Virginia, Virginia Tech
Clemson, Florida State, Georgia Tech, Miami, N.C. State, Wake Forest


PAC:
California, Oregon, Oregon State, Stanford, Washington, Washington State
Arizona, Arizona State, California Los Angeles, Colorado, Southern California, Utah


In are Cincinnati and Connecticut. Out is T.C.U. (unless the PAC takes them.) And this distribution doesn't include what Texas might want to do or whether or not the SEC and ESPN would sit back and let all 3 of the jewels of the Big 12 go to the Big 10 just to meet their AAU requirements.

Thoughts and discussion?

IMO the division of the ACC into the Big 10, Big 12, and SEC yields 3 conferences of relative equal value. Therefore it brings stability. The PAC's worth is not as important because they truly are protected by geography.

It is also my opinion that the division of the Big 12 would create relatively inequitable conferences and just eventually lead to further instability and further moves. There aren't enough quality academic institutions for the Big 10 and SEC and the ACC is too remote to be very active in the division.

Therefore it is my conclusion that if Realignment is to come to a lengthy end it would be best for the parsing of the ACC to be involved and better to build around the core of Texas, Oklahoma and Kansas than to throw those schools who desire to stay together into a single conference thereby creating yet another unstable environment.

So from my point of view the question is whether you thin the concentration of Texas schools from the current Big 12 and look to replace them with multiple market additions, or do you just simply divide out the ACC?

JR, your reasoning is as solid as a rock IF you were only talking about college football. BUT since you and I know that this thing is really in the hands of the networks (ESPN) and they have a different agenda.
Not only are the networks concerned with inventory from Labor Day through Thanksgiving Weekend (plus the bowl season), they are also concerned about inventory in other seasons of the year. Different conferences have been constructed to compete in sports other than football.
With increased competition from the NFL (see Thursday night games), college sports might have to take a different marketing strategy in order to survive in the marketplace. Football may drive the bus for now, but the networks have hedged their bets to diversify their holdings in college sports franchises for the future.

The basketball would still be there, just rearranged a bit. Besides, it's basketball that is trending down everywhere.
(This post was last modified: 11-10-2014 01:47 PM by JRsec.)
11-10-2014 01:14 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
oliveandblue Offline
Heisman
*

Posts: 7,779
Joined: Jan 2013
Reputation: 251
I Root For: Tulane
Location:
Post: #34
RE: Okay, So What Happens Next? Permutations for Big 12 & ACC with Discussion:
(11-10-2014 08:43 AM)XLance Wrote:  JR, your reasoning is as solid as a rock IF you were only talking about college football. BUT since you and I know that this thing is really in the hands of the networks (ESPN) and they have a different agenda.
Not only are the networks concerned with inventory from Labor Day through Thanksgiving Weekend (plus the bowl season), they are also concerned about inventory in other seasons of the year. Different conferences have been constructed to compete in sports other than football.
With increased competition from the NFL (see Thursday night games), college sports might have to take a different marketing strategy in order to survive in the marketplace. Football may drive the bus for now, but the networks have hedged their bets to diversify their holdings in college sports franchises for the future.

Pre-tournament basketball doesn't deliver the kind of TV ratings necessary to move mountains or shake up football conferences. The vast majority of games receive a sub-1.0 rating.

...however, I think you still have a point IF these conferences are competing entities in the future (as they are right now). NCAA tournament bids (and the exposure and $$$ that they bring) are an open competition between leagues - which means that basketball additions are worth decent money.

Here's the catch: A lot of what you guys are suggesting involves putting all of the conferences in the hands of 1-2 TV networks. In such a scenario, the ACC/SEC/PAC/B1G are not really competing with one another anymore - but rather are cooperating with each other like they are in the NFL (AFC and NFC are in bed with each other).

The PAC-12 isn't like the other conferences in that they haven't gone completely in bed with a major network yet. That may or may not change depending how all of these new lawsuits and pieces of FBS legislation go.

I wish all conferences behaved like the PAC-12. College football would still feel kind of normal.
(This post was last modified: 11-10-2014 01:17 PM by oliveandblue.)
11-10-2014 01:16 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
murrdcu Offline
1st String
*

Posts: 1,969
Joined: Aug 2014
Reputation: 144
I Root For: Arkansas
Location:
Post: #35
RE: Okay, So What Happens Next? Permutations for Big 12 & ACC with Discussion:
@MHver3 tweeted last week that the B1G would like to add 2-4 new markets possibly by the spring. He mentioned that one low level SEC school, Vandy IMHO, was targeted. That got me thinking, let's say the B1G expanded with UVA and Vandy. What would the SEC's response be? I would offer Virginia Tech, UNC and Duke. Solid additions academically, two storied basketball programs that would help the SECN's quality in the winter months, and you've grabbed the most popular programs in the states of NC and VA plus entered the DC market.
11-10-2014 06:06 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
JRsec Offline
Super Moderator
*

Posts: 37,886
Joined: Mar 2012
Reputation: 7737
I Root For: SEC
Location:
Post: #36
RE: Okay, So What Happens Next? Permutations for Big 12 & ACC with Discussion:
(11-10-2014 06:06 PM)murrdcu Wrote:  @MHver3 tweeted last week that the B1G would like to add 2-4 new markets possibly by the spring. He mentioned that one low level SEC school, Vandy IMHO, was targeted. That got me thinking, let's say the B1G expanded with UVA and Vandy. What would the SEC's response be? I would offer Virginia Tech, UNC and Duke. Solid additions academically, two storied basketball programs that would help the SECN's quality in the winter months, and you've grabbed the most popular programs in the states of NC and VA plus entered the DC market.

That would be a nice grab. And Vandy to the Big 10 wouldn't be a total shock either. It's just that I take little of what MHver3 says seriously. But you don't have to look totally to the East for that grab either. Kansas and Vanderbilt could open the door for Texas, Oklahoma & one more as well. Now that said I doubt either of those scenairos happen. But the Vanderbilt move to either the ACC or Big 10 has been speculated about to make room for one of the supposed trios (UVa, UNC, Duke) or (Texas, OU, OSU). The real problem with this concept is that if UNC and UVa are leaving the ACC then the whole conference is up for grabs and you might well be looking for the SEC and Big 10 to jump on about 4 properties each and the Big 12 looking strongly at the other 7. In such a big move scenario I just don't see a Vanderbilt or any SEC school being involved. But it is interesting to speculate about.

What could create a Virginia move to the Big 10 or SEC? North Carolina's loss of accreditation or extreme sanctions against the basketball and football programs could really put a damper on the ACC's earnings for a while. Throw in the Title IX investigation against Winston at FSU, his recent point shaving allegations, and the case being made against Syracuse and the ACC could potentially have three top programs in different sports on the sidelines for post season play, ouch. Add that to the contract disparity and earnings disparity and their lack of a network and the pressure could be mounting that would lead to something shocking. We'll see.

But if I had to guess if there were four schools to move to the Big 10 and the ACC was involved, I would look for North Carolina (looking to boost their academic issues), Virginia, and Duke to be three of them. The fourth could be Syracuse (because of lacrosse and other associations) or Ahab's white whale, Notre Dame.

If that occurred I could see the SEC taking N.C. State and Virginia Tech with a second Florida school for a stronger recruiting presence for other conference teams making the trip to play there. Other than that who knows? I do know that there has been as much Virginia Tech talk to the Big 10 as there has been Virginia talk. If the Hokies left for the Big 10 and Vanderbilt left with them then I could see UVa, Duke, & UNC possibly coming as a package to the SEC. It would be an interesting compromise for sure. If that happened then I think the Big 12 gets built up quite nicely with the remainder. BTW having Duke in the SEC then replaces Vandy as the only private and keeps our cover from the freedom of information on earnings.
11-10-2014 06:34 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
He1nousOne Offline
The One you Love to Hate.
*

Posts: 13,285
Joined: Oct 2011
Reputation: 215
I Root For: Iowa/ASU
Location: Arizona
Post: #37
RE: Okay, So What Happens Next? Permutations for Big 12 & ACC with Discussion:
(11-10-2014 06:06 PM)murrdcu Wrote:  @MHver3 tweeted last week that the B1G would like to add 2-4 new markets possibly by the spring. He mentioned that one low level SEC school, Vandy IMHO, was targeted. That got me thinking, let's say the B1G expanded with UVA and Vandy. What would the SEC's response be? I would offer Virginia Tech, UNC and Duke. Solid additions academically, two storied basketball programs that would help the SECN's quality in the winter months, and you've grabbed the most popular programs in the states of NC and VA plus entered the DC market.

Never.....NEVER talk about MHver as if he knows anything. At best...and I absolutely mean this, at best he is connected and is a misinformation specialist. That is me giving him as much credit as possible.

More likely, and I am basing this entirely upon his actions online, he is a pathetic man who will say anything and everything on this topic if he thinks it will get him more views on twitter. Why would he do that? He once ran his own internet radio talk show and he probably thought that was the coolest f'n thing ever and loves getting invited to another internet radio talk show that very few people actually listen to.

You take your pick, either choice. Either way though, he is full of ****. Either purposefully, or sadly.
11-10-2014 07:51 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
JRsec Offline
Super Moderator
*

Posts: 37,886
Joined: Mar 2012
Reputation: 7737
I Root For: SEC
Location:
Post: #38
RE: Okay, So What Happens Next? Permutations for Big 12 & ACC with Discussion:
(11-10-2014 07:51 PM)He1nousOne Wrote:  
(11-10-2014 06:06 PM)murrdcu Wrote:  @MHver3 tweeted last week that the B1G would like to add 2-4 new markets possibly by the spring. He mentioned that one low level SEC school, Vandy IMHO, was targeted. That got me thinking, let's say the B1G expanded with UVA and Vandy. What would the SEC's response be? I would offer Virginia Tech, UNC and Duke. Solid additions academically, two storied basketball programs that would help the SECN's quality in the winter months, and you've grabbed the most popular programs in the states of NC and VA plus entered the DC market.

Never.....NEVER talk about MHver as if he knows anything. At best...and I absolutely mean this, at best he is connected and is a misinformation specialist. That is me giving him as much credit as possible.

More likely, and I am basing this entirely upon his actions online, he is a pathetic man who will say anything and everything on this topic if he thinks it will get him more views on twitter. Why would he do that? He once ran his own internet radio talk show and he probably thought that was the coolest f'n thing ever and loves getting invited to another internet radio talk show that very few people actually listen to.

You take your pick, either choice. Either way though, he is full of ****. Either purposefully, or sadly.

H1, I'm surprised that you were so gentle on MHver3! You're slipping.
11-10-2014 08:11 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
He1nousOne Offline
The One you Love to Hate.
*

Posts: 13,285
Joined: Oct 2011
Reputation: 215
I Root For: Iowa/ASU
Location: Arizona
Post: #39
RE: Okay, So What Happens Next? Permutations for Big 12 & ACC with Discussion:
(11-10-2014 08:11 PM)JRsec Wrote:  
(11-10-2014 07:51 PM)He1nousOne Wrote:  
(11-10-2014 06:06 PM)murrdcu Wrote:  @MHver3 tweeted last week that the B1G would like to add 2-4 new markets possibly by the spring. He mentioned that one low level SEC school, Vandy IMHO, was targeted. That got me thinking, let's say the B1G expanded with UVA and Vandy. What would the SEC's response be? I would offer Virginia Tech, UNC and Duke. Solid additions academically, two storied basketball programs that would help the SECN's quality in the winter months, and you've grabbed the most popular programs in the states of NC and VA plus entered the DC market.

Never.....NEVER talk about MHver as if he knows anything. At best...and I absolutely mean this, at best he is connected and is a misinformation specialist. That is me giving him as much credit as possible.

More likely, and I am basing this entirely upon his actions online, he is a pathetic man who will say anything and everything on this topic if he thinks it will get him more views on twitter. Why would he do that? He once ran his own internet radio talk show and he probably thought that was the coolest f'n thing ever and loves getting invited to another internet radio talk show that very few people actually listen to.

You take your pick, either choice. Either way though, he is full of ****. Either purposefully, or sadly.

H1, I'm surprised that you were so gentle on MHver3! You're slipping.

Yes, I'm getting softer as I age. A couple years ago and it would have been worse. 07-coffee3

Funny thing is though that you very likely laughed and you know what I said about him is very likely to be true. I don't believe in "political correctness". I don't believe in Evil but if there is anything that is actually evil, it is running away from truth simply because people cant handle it.
11-10-2014 08:38 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
CintiFan Offline
2nd String
*

Posts: 386
Joined: Nov 2013
Reputation: 45
I Root For: Ohio St./ Cinti
Location:
Post: #40
RE: Okay, So What Happens Next? Permutations for Big 12 & ACC with Discussion:
(11-10-2014 06:06 PM)murrdcu Wrote:  @MHver3 tweeted last week that the B1G would like to add 2-4 new markets possibly by the spring. He mentioned that one low level SEC school, Vandy IMHO, was targeted. That got me thinking, let's say the B1G expanded with UVA and Vandy. What would the SEC's response be? I would offer Virginia Tech, UNC and Duke. Solid additions academically, two storied basketball programs that would help the SECN's quality in the winter months, and you've grabbed the most popular programs in the states of NC and VA plus entered the DC market.

MHver3 has been consistently wrong in his predictions. Vandy doesn't fit the BIG profile, although they may be a great addition to the ACC. If UVA does go 'north' and UNC doesn't go with them, then who knows what team takes the 16th slot, but it's not Vanderbilt.
11-10-2014 10:03 PM
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.