(04-26-2015 02:04 AM)DavidSt Wrote: (04-25-2015 11:29 PM)JRsec Wrote: (04-20-2015 10:06 AM)jgkojak Wrote: If the SEC wanted to make it interesting, they would make a play for WVU and TCU (for Dallas/FW/recruiting). Both would fit in well w/SEC. Considering that OU and OSU have made it clear they're not going to the SEC (same for Texas), you take out those two teams and what does the B12 do?
Add BYU and Colorado State?
How about we finish this, move to a P4, include the most worthy G5, and enter a 4 champs model.
SEC: Florida State, Oklahoma, E.C.U. & West Virginia
Big 10: Kansas, Virginia Tech, Connecticut, Iowa State
ACC: Texas, Baylor, Texas Tech, Cincinnati, Tulane, and Notre Dame.
PAC: Brigham Young, Kansas State, Nevada Las Vegas, Oklahoma State, Rice, T.C.U.
The Tobacco Road crowd gets rid of F.S.U. as the chief malcontent in the ACC. They gain huge markets and lose none of their footprint and gain one powerful network and arguably two of the best 4 or 5 brands in the nation (certainly the best two programs still on the board).
The SEC adds content, picks up DFW, promotes E.C.U. for which ESPN agrees to give full credit for North Carolina to the SECN, and gains a slither of what they had hoped to gain with a Virginia school.
The Big 10 gets a football brand and two basketball brands while picking up 2 AAU schools and a couple of more with potential. They also get a larger foothold in New England and New York and gain Virginia.
The PAC gets time zones and markets for the PACN and the schools they add are very respectable as a whole. And, nobody who is in the P5 now gets left out. Connecticut, Cincinnati, East Carolina, Nevada Las Vegas, and academic additions Rice and Tulane all get in. The vast majority of the board goes home happy and we just get on with football.
Still BYU will not get in the PAC until they play on Sundays. If BYU refuses, replace them with Boise State. A powerhouse in football and their basketball is on the rise.
1. I would think B.Y.U. has a better chance of getting into the PAC than Boise. The differences between B.Y.U. and the PAC can at least be compromised upon. Boise State doesn't offer what the PAC wants in the way of all sports and the academic issue is real.
2. My post above was a touch tongue in cheek. There are so many here that always speak of G5 inclusion so I thought I would give it a good effort and then illustrate what the P4 would really look like should it happen. It's not bad, but neither is it going to happen. If you check the gross revenue chart that I have linked in this thread you will see where the cutoff numbers should be for the P4 or P5. Below 60 million gross revenue things start getting dicey and you run the risk of having a school in a conference where their earnings will never allow them to keep up.
Colorado, Utah, and Washington State are below that mark but all are in the PAC where these kinds of issues, while important, are not as crucial as in the other P conferences. The chart doesn't include the privates but Boston College, Syracuse, Miami, Vanderbilt, Stanford, Duke, U.S.C., Northwestern, Baylor, T.C.U., and Notre Dame of course all make more than two of those three schools (at least by figures that are two years old). Wake might not but was close either way. UConn makes enough to be included in the P5. B.Y.U.'s earnings were around where Colorado is in the High 50's two years ago and may be more now. But that is why 60,000,000 is going to be your Mendoza line of College Football's upper division when this is over and done with and it is why I called this thread realignment by the numbers.
It is my opinion that revenue, attendance, television ratings, and market demographics, and finally geography will combine to decide how all of this plays out.
That is why the SEC will likely only consider the following school:
Texas and Oklahoma both of which are major TV ratings schools that both match or exceed the SEC's gross revenue numbers and enhance slightly the SEC's attendance numbers.
A North Carolina and Virginia school which provides large new markets although they would be a drain on our mean numbers in almost every other way.
and possible members if a companion school is needed:
Florida State as a content add with attendance numbers near our mean and revenue numbers within our range.
Clemson as a content add with attendance numbers above our mean and revenue numbers within our lower range.
Oklahoma state with revenue numbers within our range and a market penetration by which we could profit.
The Big 10's targets are essentially the same minus Oklahoma State and Clemson and with Kansas and Georgia Tech added to the mix.
The ACC has much more latitude but would want essentially the same schools (minus their own). Other potentials for them might include Cincinnati and Connecticut.
That's why we are at a present impasse.