(07-02-2015 09:45 AM)bluesox Wrote:  Maybe everybody should jump to 18. Format 5-2-2 with a 2 game playoff of pod winners. ND/navy can share some games. For other sports, the leagues break off into 9 team divisions that each hold tournaments.



ACC

UVA, V tech, UNC, Duke, NC state, Wake

Cincy, Lville, Clemson, Gtech, FSU, Miami

BC, Uconn, ND, Cuse, Pitt, WVU

SEC

Alabama, Auburn, Ole Miss, Miss State, LSU, Arkansas

Texas, Texas A&M, Texas Tech, Baylor, OU, Okla State

Kentucky, Tenn, Vandy, UGA, Scar, UF



Big 10

Rutgers, Maryland, Penn State, Ohio State, IU, Purdue

Michigan, MSU, NW, Illinois, Wisconsin, Minnesota

Iowa, Io State, Kansas, Kan State, Nebraska, Missouri

pac 18

Wash, Wash State, Oreg, Oreg State, Boise, UNLV

Cal, Stanford, USC, UCLA, Ariz, Ariz State

Utah, Byu, Colorado, Col state, New Mexico, TCU

I just don't see that happening.

(07-02-2015 08:15 AM)bullet Wrote:  If you believe Cougar message board posters (red and blue) know what they are talking about (yes, I know-a big stretch that ANY message board poster really knows what they are talking about), there is an outline for a different type of collusion. BYU's admin supposedly believes they will end up in the Pac. UH is being talked to by Pac, Big 10 and Big 12. Big 12 is looking east and not towards BYU for various reasons, thinking about red cougars and bearcats. Could the reason be cooperation? BYU + 1 (UNLV if you go by finances) to Pac. UH + Cincinnati to Big 12. Then you've got 4X14 + 1X12. And the finish of this is when ND finally decides they want to join the ACC and the ACC has to farm out Louisville to the Big 12.

And if you want to throw in Fox and ESPN, both have basically the same stake in the Big 12 and Pac 12, splitting the Tier I & II equally.

Wow, you are projecting CR out over 50-100 years into the future? Bravo! :)

(07-02-2015 10:36 AM)TerryD Wrote:  

(07-02-2015 08:15 AM)bullet Wrote:  If you believe Cougar message board posters (red and blue) know what they are talking about (yes, I know-a big stretch that ANY message board poster really knows what they are talking about), there is an outline for a different type of collusion. BYU's admin supposedly believes they will end up in the Pac. UH is being talked to by Pac, Big 10 and Big 12. Big 12 is looking east and not towards BYU for various reasons, thinking about red cougars and bearcats. Could the reason be cooperation? BYU + 1 (UNLV if you go by finances) to Pac. UH + Cincinnati to Big 12. Then you've got 4X14 + 1X12. And the finish of this is when ND finally decides they want to join the ACC and the ACC has to farm out Louisville to the Big 12.

And if you want to throw in Fox and ESPN, both have basically the same stake in the Big 12 and Pac 12, splitting the Tier I & II equally.

Wow, you are projecting CR out over 50-100 years into the future? Bravo! :)

I expect Notre Dame to be in the ACC in the next 20 years. Maybe by 2027. Notre Dame is special and the only one who could pull it off, but that specialness is wearing off as college sports changes. Independence exists now only in football and hasn't in any other sport for a generation. And the "national" schedule is an NBC creation of the last generation. Notre Dame previously scheduled heavily in the Chicago to Boston corridor effectively creating a "conference" schedule of various Big 10 and Eastern independents.

The linchpin in this whole scenario is Texas. Does Texas want to give up running it own conference and just be another pretty face amongst many others. My bet, is they do not. I believe Texas likes being the whale in the ocean it's in, that is the B12 ocean. All they have to do, to keep the B12 together, is make OU happy,(which I believe they will do) to prevent them from bolting. Boren talk in the paper and going public with his differences is to seek resolution (expansion) not dissolution, but dissolution ( if he cannot get expansion) of the B12. I believe he gets what he wants. Then maybe in 10 years there will be further alignment or as I prefer to say realignment as the GOR's run out. The Commissioners of each of these conferences are the puppeteers (excepting Bowlsby) as Delany showed ESPN (when they called his bluff on starting a network, unless ESPN paid the B1G what they wanted ) in launching the BTN, the Presidents of these institutions are the puppets, being manipulated by these commissioners, (ESPN and Fox try to influence as much as the Commissioners and Presidents allow them, but not always, except in the case of the B12, where Bowlsby is a stool pigeon for UT.

(07-02-2015 10:43 AM)bullet Wrote:  

(07-02-2015 10:36 AM)TerryD Wrote:  

(07-02-2015 08:15 AM)bullet Wrote:  If you believe Cougar message board posters (red and blue) know what they are talking about (yes, I know-a big stretch that ANY message board poster really knows what they are talking about), there is an outline for a different type of collusion. BYU's admin supposedly believes they will end up in the Pac. UH is being talked to by Pac, Big 10 and Big 12. Big 12 is looking east and not towards BYU for various reasons, thinking about red cougars and bearcats. Could the reason be cooperation? BYU + 1 (UNLV if you go by finances) to Pac. UH + Cincinnati to Big 12. Then you've got 4X14 + 1X12. And the finish of this is when ND finally decides they want to join the ACC and the ACC has to farm out Louisville to the Big 12.

And if you want to throw in Fox and ESPN, both have basically the same stake in the Big 12 and Pac 12, splitting the Tier I & II equally.

Wow, you are projecting CR out over 50-100 years into the future? Bravo! :)

I expect Notre Dame to be in the ACC in the next 20 years. Maybe by 2027. Notre Dame is special and the only one who could pull it off, but that specialness is wearing off as college sports changes. Independence exists now only in football and hasn't in any other sport for a generation. And the "national" schedule is an NBC creation of the last generation. Notre Dame previously scheduled heavily in the Chicago to Boston corridor effectively creating a "conference" schedule of various Big 10 and Eastern independents.

I agree with everything but your first two sentences. That, and you left out the Southern Cal games every year since 1926 (except 1942) as part of that ND "national schedule".

(07-01-2015 08:54 PM)JRsec Wrote:  The whole reason for the push to 16 and a P4 is to offer the American public a competitive 4 regions of college athletics, but to do so for the networks bottom line. If one conference becomes too strong that balance is lost and along with it potentially the interest of a whole region. That does not maximize advertising rates, it lowers them.

'Strong' in terms of what? The SEC and Big 10 are WAY ahead here in terms of FB 'kings' and 'barons', athletic budgets, TV revenue, etc. If the powers at be want to maintain the 'status quo', then having OU goto the SEC or Big 10 with Texas to the other (Big 10 or SEC) further solidifies all of that. How does that help interest in college FB in the the West Coast and 'Mid-Atlantic'/Northeast?

I disagree with the collusion theory.

$ rules. Conferences still control and gain too much power as individual entities to acquiesce to some "larger" force of TV networks or the pathetic NCAA. Until I see the Big Ten/SEC/Pac-12 surrender some of their power to a "central office," I won't believe in collusion.

(07-02-2015 10:50 AM)BIgCatonProwl Wrote:  The linchpin in this whole scenario is Texas. Does Texas want to give up running it own conference and just be another pretty face amongst many others. My bet, is they do not. I believe Texas likes being the whale in the ocean it's in, that is the B12 ocean. All they have to do, to keep the B12 together, is make OU happy,(which I believe they will do) to prevent them from bolting. Boren talk in the paper and going public with his differences is to seek resolution (expansion) not dissolution, but dissolution ( if he cannot get expansion) of the B12. I believe he gets what he wants. Then maybe in 10 years there will be further alignment or as I prefer to say realignment as the GOR's run out. The Commissioners of each of these conferences are the puppeteers (excepting Bowlsby) as Delany showed ESPN (when they called his bluff on starting a network, unless ESPN paid the B1G what they wanted ) in launching the BTN, the Presidents of these institutions are the puppets, being manipulated by these commissioners, (ESPN and Fox try to influence as much as the Commissioners and Presidents allow them, but not always, except in the case of the B12, where Bowlsby is a stool pigeon for UT.

You hit the nail on the head. Which scenario best serves Texas?

My proposal--OU and Kansas to Big Ten while Texas goes independent in football (to ACC in Olympic sports)--might be fine for UT football...it really sacrifices a TON for its other sports. Thus, I think it should be taken off the table.

I think you convinced me that the Big 12 is going to add 2...keep some stability for the next decade. The TV companies (tier 1 and tier 2) are simply looking for quality content. Two more teams mean they get like 20% more games each season as "Big 12 games."

(07-02-2015 01:47 AM)jrj84105 Wrote:  I can get to 30 each in the B1G and SEC as sort of the balancing point from absorbing most but still leaving some redundancies behind.
SEC
West: A&M, Baylor, OU, OKSU, KSU, Ark, Mizzou, LSU, Miss, MSU
South: Alabama, Auburn, Florida, UGA, SCar, UT, Vandy, Ky, FSU, L'Ville
East: Miami, WVU, Clemson, UNC, NCSU, VT, BC, Pitt, Syr, GT
+ND arrangement

B1G
East: UVA, Duke, PSU, OSU, UMD, RU, UM, MSU, PU, IU
Central: UI, NW, WI, UMN, Iowa, ISU, Nebraska, KU, TTU, UT
West: UW, UO, Cal, Furd, USC, UCLA, ASU, UA, UU, CU

Out: WSU, OrSU, TCU, WF,

While it's a long shot at best, I could see an eventual P2 emerging along these lines: Basically, the Big Ten and PAC 12 merge, as do the SEC and ACC. Between them, they split up the Big 12 schools. Where it gets dicey for me is how to do it so you have a semblance of competitive balance while still keeping some cultural and geographic affinity. Where I come down requires that some schools hold their nose and make some sacrifices. The school that probably makes the biggest sacrifice is the one that many consider the linchpin to the whole realignment mess - Texas.

My solution is a P2, each with four 8-team divisions. Notre Dame gets left out by choice.

Big Ten/PAC

Oregon, Stanford, USC, Washington, Oregon St, UCLA, Cal, Washington St

Oklahoma, Texas, Kansas St, Arizona St, Arizona, Utah, Kansas, Colorado

Wisconsin, Nebraska, Iowa, Northwestern, Iowa St, Minnesota, Illinois, Indiana

Ohio St, Michigan St, Penn St, Michigan, Pitt, Rutgers, Maryland, Purdue


SEC/ACC

Alabama, FSU, Auburn, Miss St, Miami, Ole Miss, Tennessee, Vanderbilt

South Carolina, Florida, Georgia, Clemson, UNC, Georgia Tech, Duke, Virginia

LSU, Oklahoma St, TCU, Texas A&M, Missouri, Arkansa, Baylor, Texas Tech

Virginia Tech, WVU, Louisville, Syracuse, NC State, BC, Kentucky, Wake Forest

Essentially, the two big dogs split the Big 12 with five to each, and to make the numbers work, Pitt moves from the ACC to the Big Ten. The teams are listed for each 8-team division in order of their average power ratings for the past six years, with the highest rating first. Some are mildly surprising, and I wouldn't say that I expect that's how they will rank over the next six years. That's the cyclical nature of football.

Clearly, while the two P2 conferences are relatively balanced, some divisions are stronger/weaker than others. I don't see any good way to fix that while still maintaining some sort of geographic logic. Fact is, the northeast is relatively weak, and no reconfiguring of schools is going to change that. I tried to have divisions where most of the schools feel they have a legitimate chance to compete within their division, and that means some will be more stacked than others. All 8 divisions have schools that could be legitimate playoff contenders.

I could see the network divisions involving ESPN taking the primary role in the SEC/ACC and Fox doing the same with the B1G/PAC, while each has a secondary presence in the other league.

I have no idea where Notre Dame would want to hang its hat if this were to come to pass. But that's their problem.

It is possible that ND will have a say in this as they are NBC's only property. The only way ND joins the ACC is if a Conference Championship Model is adopted. The best way to defeat that measure would be if Texas went independent like ND.

Now, that doesn't mean Texas would join the ACC. They could step out of the Big 12 and let them expand to 12 or 14 with whomever they could get and still have 5-7 football games with The expanded conference and keep all their Olympic sports with them.

I don't think the SEC wants the conference Championship model to pass either because that would limit them to 1 team in the playoffs.

Oklahoma is now the big dog of the Big 12 with the easiest path to the CFP.

If it doesn't shake down something along these lines, I'm inclined to think Texohoma goes to the PAC.

I tend to agree with the theory that OU is worried about their ability to keep up financially with the SEC and B1G. They know that UT isnt worried about because they'll still be able to be roughly competitive with the SEC and B1G for awhile longer.

So now they want to force a choice: expand, but more importantly, roll LHN into a new Big 12 network so that the rest of the Big 12 can also be financially competitive with the SEC and B1G in the foreseeable future...or they leave for either the SEC and B1G themselves.

I think the SEC would welcome OU with open arms but think OU wants the B1G more and has a better chance with them since their contract renegotiation is coming up here. OU vs NU every year would be a big boon for the B1G and OU would keep the UT game in Dallas for recruiting because there is simply no way UT can afford to pull the "well you left so we cant play you" crap with the OU game. With Arkansas and A&M gone, the OU game is the only game left on their schedule their fans care one fig for or drives season ticket sales still.

OU gets the academic conference Boren wants and the B1G's help with becoming AAU.

So the real question is, will UT give in and if so, who and how many does the Big 12 add?

Assuming they are expanding to facilitate a conference network, markets are a must.

I see Cincinnati and a U_F school if they stop at 12 and Memphis and Tulane (LA recruiting, good academics and an easier game for the South teams) if they go to 14 (and remember, they own the rights to "The Big 14" even if they dont use it)

Big 12 North:

Kansas
Kansas State
Iowa State
West Virginia
U_F
Cincinnati
(Memphis)

Big 12 South

Oklahoma
Oklahoma State
Texas
Texas Christian
Baylor
Texas Tech
(Tulane)

JRsec, let compliment you on your OP in this thread. I wish all posters would post such well thought out messages and none of this off the wall stuff. I think you make a great point about the balance of power, however I think it would take an awful lot to tip the balance of power away from the SEC and the BIG.

There is one point you mention that Texas might join the ACC in football and place all of their other sports in the AAC. I do not think there is anyway this could possibly happen. IMO Texas values it other sports,especially basketball and baseball too much to down grade them into a G5 conference. Also, for that reason I do not believe Texas will ever go Independent, nor do I beleive they would do like Notre Dame and partially join the ACC in football and their other sports become full time members. Being so isolated would would put a tremendous travel burden on their other sports. I know Deloss Dodds made some noise about the ACC when Boren was trying to push them into the PAC, but I do not think it meant anything. Just his way of pushing back.

I think that Texas can most likely pick which conference they want and I am convinced that their pride will not let them follow the Aggies to the SEC. For that and other reasons I do not see them joining the SEC.

So that leaves the BIG and the PAC. I think they might prefer the BIG because of the time zones, creating less of a travel problem. If they go to the PAC I am almost certain they will want to take some of their neighbors with them. i.e. OU, OSU, Tech and maybe KU and KSU to form a 6 team division. In the first discussions of the Big12 schools to the PAC, IIRC Larry Scott showed a great affection for Kansas basketball.

Lastly, I think OU would only go to the SEC if there was no opportunity with the BIG or the PAC.

Of course this is all dependent onthe Big12 disolving. Looking at it from a strictly balancing power standpoint both OU and Texas should probably go to the ACC.

Those are my thoughts and I certainly enjoyed reading your post.

(07-02-2015 11:57 AM)IberianPanther Wrote:  

(07-01-2015 08:54 PM)JRsec Wrote:  The whole reason for the push to 16 and a P4 is to offer the American public a competitive 4 regions of college athletics, but to do so for the networks bottom line. If one conference becomes too strong that balance is lost and along with it potentially the interest of a whole region. That does not maximize advertising rates, it lowers them.

'Strong' in terms of what? The SEC and Big 10 are WAY ahead here in terms of FB 'kings' and 'barons', athletic budgets, TV revenue, etc. If the powers at be want to maintain the 'status quo', then having OU goto the SEC or Big 10 with Texas to the other (Big 10 or SEC) further solidifies all of that. How does that help interest in college FB in the the West Coast and 'Mid-Atlantic'/Northeast?

That's not what I wrote. I was placing the top brand in either the PAC or ACC. I specifically said that they simply couldn't go together to the SEC or Big 10 and that it would be best for Texas to wind up with either the PAC or ACC. Such a move would bring more balance.

(07-02-2015 03:02 PM)SMUmustangs Wrote:  JRsec, let compliment you on your OP in this thread. I wish all posters would post such well thought out messages and none of this off the wall stuff. I think you make a great point about the balance of power, however I think it would take an awful lot to tip the balance of power away from the SEC and the BIG.

There is one point you mention that Texas might join the ACC in football and place all of their other sports in the AAC. I do not think there is anyway this could possibly happen. IMO Texas values it other sports,especially basketball and baseball too much to down grade them into a G5 conference. Also, for that reason I do not believe Texas will ever go Independent, nor do I beleive they would do like Notre Dame and partially join the ACC in football and their other sports become full time members. Being so isolated would would put a tremendous travel burden on their other sports. I know Deloss Dodds made some noise about the ACC when Boren was trying to push them into the PAC, but I do not think it meant anything. Just his way of pushing back.

I think that Texas can most likely pick which conference they want and I am convinced that their pride will not let them follow the Aggies to the SEC. For that and other reasons I do not see them joining the SEC.

So that leaves the BIG and the PAC. I think they might prefer the BIG because of the time zones, creating less of a travel problem. If they go to the PAC I am almost certain they will want to take some of their neighbors with them. i.e. OU, OSU, Tech and maybe KU and KSU to form a 6 team division. In the first discussions of the Big12 schools to the PAC, IIRC Larry Scott showed a great affection for Kansas basketball.

Lastly, I think OU would only go to the SEC if there was no opportunity with the BIG or the PAC.

Of course this is all dependent onthe Big12 disolving. Looking at it from a strictly balancing power standpoint both OU and Texas should probably go to the ACC.

Those are my thoughts and I certainly enjoyed reading your post.

Where did you get "AAC" from? I stated that Texas might keep their minor sports affiliated with a conference nearby. This is an Emily Latella moment, "Nevermind." And no matter what people think about the Big 10 ESPN is not going to let their top property profit their rival FOX. If the continue to split Texas in the PAC that's possible. I really don't see how Texas goes Big 10 as long as ESPN pays them 15 million a year for the LHN and has them under contract until June 2031.

Has anyone considered the possibility that Cowherd and Finebaum both who are under contract to ESPN might just be baiting the ACC with this tweet? Oklahoma in the SEC even without Texas only makes the ACC fall farther behind. Even if Oklahoma went to the Big 10 the same thing would happen. The thought that the Sooners could bolt to either will only pressure Chapel Hill to rethink saying no to Texas and Oklahoma and a couple of friends. If that ploy works then the SEC might wind up in Virginia and North Carolina yet.

(07-02-2015 04:58 PM)JRsec Wrote:  

(07-02-2015 03:02 PM)SMUmustangs Wrote:  JRsec, let compliment you on your OP in this thread. I wish all posters would post such well thought out messages and none of this off the wall stuff. I think you make a great point about the balance of power, however I think it would take an awful lot to tip the balance of power away from the SEC and the BIG.

There is one point you mention that Texas might join the ACC in football and place all of their other sports in the AAC. I do not think there is anyway this could possibly happen. IMO Texas values it other sports,especially basketball and baseball too much to down grade them into a G5 conference. Also, for that reason I do not believe Texas will ever go Independent, nor do I beleive they would do like Notre Dame and partially join the ACC in football and their other sports become full time members. Being so isolated would would put a tremendous travel burden on their other sports. I know Deloss Dodds made some noise about the ACC when Boren was trying to push them into the PAC, but I do not think it meant anything. Just his way of pushing back.

I think that Texas can most likely pick which conference they want and I am convinced that their pride will not let them follow the Aggies to the SEC. For that and other reasons I do not see them joining the SEC.

So that leaves the BIG and the PAC. I think they might prefer the BIG because of the time zones, creating less of a travel problem. If they go to the PAC I am almost certain they will want to take some of their neighbors with them. i.e. OU, OSU, Tech and maybe KU and KSU to form a 6 team division. In the first discussions of the Big12 schools to the PAC, IIRC Larry Scott showed a great affection for Kansas basketball.

Lastly, I think OU would only go to the SEC if there was no opportunity with the BIG or the PAC.

Of course this is all dependent onthe Big12 disolving. Looking at it from a strictly balancing power standpoint both OU and Texas should probably go to the ACC.

Those are my thoughts and I certainly enjoyed reading your post.

Where did you get "AAC" from? I stated that Texas might keep their minor sports affiliated with a conference nearby. This is an Emily Latella moment, "Nevermind." And no matter what people think about the Big 10 ESPN is not going to let their top property profit their rival FOX. If the continue to split Texas in the PAC that's possible. I really don't see how Texas goes Big 10 as long as ESPN pays them 15 million a year for the LHN and has them under contract until June 2031.

Excuse me for interpeting your comment, but was I wrong? What other nearby conference is there besides the AAC? Surely you do not mean the Sunbelt or CUSA. I thought Houston and SMU were the best nearby schools to affiliate with.

Great thread and insight JR! Appreciate ya!

(07-02-2015 02:59 PM)10thMountain Wrote:  I tend to agree with the theory that OU is worried about their ability to keep up financially with the SEC and B1G. They know that UT isnt worried about because they'll still be able to be roughly competitive with the SEC and B1G for awhile longer.

So now they want to force a choice: expand, but more importantly, roll LHN into a new Big 12 network so that the rest of the Big 12 can also be financially competitive with the SEC and B1G in the foreseeable future...or they leave for either the SEC and B1G themselves.

I think the SEC would welcome OU with open arms but think OU wants the B1G more and has a better chance with them since their contract renegotiation is coming up here. OU vs NU every year would be a big boon for the B1G and OU would keep the UT game in Dallas for recruiting because there is simply no way UT can afford to pull the "well you left so we cant play you" crap with the OU game. With Arkansas and A&M gone, the OU game is the only game left on their schedule their fans care one fig for or drives season ticket sales still.

OU gets the academic conference Boren wants and the B1G's help with becoming AAU.

So the real question is, will UT give in and if so, who and how many does the Big 12 add?

Assuming they are expanding to facilitate a conference network, markets are a must.

I see Cincinnati and a U_F school if they stop at 12 and Memphis and Tulane (LA recruiting, good academics and an easier game for the South teams) if they go to 14 (and remember, they own the rights to "The Big 14" even if they dont use it)

Big 12 North:

Kansas
Kansas State
Iowa State
West Virginia
U_F
Cincinnati
(Memphis)

Big 12 South

Oklahoma
Oklahoma State
Texas
Texas Christian
Baylor
Texas Tech
(Tulane)

Forget Tulane. New Orleans is not the same market like it was before the hurricane in 2005. Most people have not returned to that area. We still have people from New Orleans still in our area. It got to be East Carolina and Northern Illinois as number 14, 15 and maybe Old Dominion as number 16 for the Norfolk market could bring the tv markets for the Big 12 Network.

(07-02-2015 01:27 PM)ken d Wrote:  

(07-02-2015 01:47 AM)jrj84105 Wrote:  I can get to 30 each in the B1G and SEC as sort of the balancing point from absorbing most but still leaving some redundancies behind.
SEC
West: A&M, Baylor, OU, OKSU, KSU, Ark, Mizzou, LSU, Miss, MSU
South: Alabama, Auburn, Florida, UGA, SCar, UT, Vandy, Ky, FSU, L'Ville
East: Miami, WVU, Clemson, UNC, NCSU, VT, BC, Pitt, Syr, GT
+ND arrangement

B1G
East: UVA, Duke, PSU, OSU, UMD, RU, UM, MSU, PU, IU
Central: UI, NW, WI, UMN, Iowa, ISU, Nebraska, KU, TTU, UT
West: UW, UO, Cal, Furd, USC, UCLA, ASU, UA, UU, CU

Out: WSU, OrSU, TCU, WF,

While it's a long shot at best, I could see an eventual P2 emerging along these lines: Basically, the Big Ten and PAC 12 merge, as do the SEC and ACC. Between them, they split up the Big 12 schools. Where it gets dicey for me is how to do it so you have a semblance of competitive balance while still keeping some cultural and geographic affinity. Where I come down requires that some schools hold their nose and make some sacrifices. The school that probably makes the biggest sacrifice is the one that many consider the linchpin to the whole realignment mess - Texas.

My solution is a P2, each with four 8-team divisions. Notre Dame gets left out by choice.

Big Ten/PAC

Oregon, Stanford, USC, Washington, Oregon St, UCLA, Cal, Washington St

Oklahoma, Texas, Kansas St, Arizona St, Arizona, Utah, Kansas, Colorado

Wisconsin, Nebraska, Iowa, Northwestern, Iowa St, Minnesota, Illinois, Indiana

Ohio St, Michigan St, Penn St, Michigan, Pitt, Rutgers, Maryland, Purdue


SEC/ACC

Alabama, FSU, Auburn, Miss St, Miami, Ole Miss, Tennessee, Vanderbilt

South Carolina, Florida, Georgia, Clemson, UNC, Georgia Tech, Duke, Virginia

LSU, Oklahoma St, TCU, Texas A&M, Missouri, Arkansa, Baylor, Texas Tech

Virginia Tech, WVU, Louisville, Syracuse, NC State, BC, Kentucky, Wake Forest

Essentially, the two big dogs split the Big 12 with five to each, and to make the numbers work, Pitt moves from the ACC to the Big Ten. The teams are listed for each 8-team division in order of their average power ratings for the past six years, with the highest rating first. Some are mildly surprising, and I wouldn't say that I expect that's how they will rank over the next six years. That's the cyclical nature of football.

Clearly, while the two P2 conferences are relatively balanced, some divisions are stronger/weaker than others. I don't see any good way to fix that while still maintaining some sort of geographic logic. Fact is, the northeast is relatively weak, and no reconfiguring of schools is going to change that. I tried to have divisions where most of the schools feel they have a legitimate chance to compete within their division, and that means some will be more stacked than others. All 8 divisions have schools that could be legitimate playoff contenders.

I could see the network divisions involving ESPN taking the primary role in the SEC/ACC and Fox doing the same with the B1G/PAC, while each has a secondary presence in the other league.

I have no idea where Notre Dame would want to hang its hat if this were to come to pass. But that's their problem.

The point of what you guys are doing are adding dead wights to the P2 who will not help the conferences at all, and leave out teams that could bring a watchable product.

I would leave out Baylor, Northwestern, Washington State, Oregon State, Duke, Wake Forest, Miami Florida, Colorado and Vanderbilt.
I would add Boise State, Fresno State, UNR, Houston, Northern Illinois, Cincinnati, Memphis, Toledo, Marshall, Arkansas State, Ohio U. East Carolina, Eastern Washington, UTSA, North Dakota State, UCF, USF, U. Mass., Georgia Southern, La. Tech, Colorado State and some others in G5.

(07-02-2015 09:25 AM)arkstfan Wrote:  

(07-02-2015 02:45 AM)33laszlo99 Wrote:  I am still not convinced that there is any "Master Plan" to morph into a 4 x 16 configuration. Yes, the media companies would love to have everything wrapped up with ribbons and permanently settled. That would allow them to collude on rights deals and maximize their haul. But the conferences retain their bargaining power by each simply pursuing its own maximum configuration, both in membership and in media partners. If you don't think so, take a long look at the ACC's marriage to ESPN.
Most of us believe that the Big12 should expand. But maybe ten is the optimum number for this conference in this geography. I'm glad they are not rushing into any rash changes. (I think they moved too quickly with WV & TCU) Deliberation is sensible. These conferences have likely learned that while they're competing against each other, they should beware of media companies bearing gifts. ESPN is not necessarily your enemy, but they are definitely not your friend.

There is no master plan and there hasn't been one.

Some people have understood the direction of things and taken advantage by making smart moves.

We could eventually end up with 60 team conferences if the numbers work or we could end up with most everyone becoming an independent if the numbers work.

If the price of Texas is taking three other Big XII schools (and one of the three is OU), the SEC would have no qualms being an 18 team league and if a year later UNC, Duke, Florida State and VaTech came knocking the SEC wouldn't hesitate to go to 22.

There isn't a magic number of members, the magic is in creating the demand for product to drive up revenue.

I dispell the idea of a Master Plan, because so many so many CR posts declare "eventually there will be four 16 team conferences or four 20 team conferences", as though it's a foregone conclusion. It would, in fact, be an extaordinary coincidence. You say that "some people... made some smart moves." Well some have been smart (Missouri & aTm, Rutgers & MD), but most have been rather questionable. TCU & WV to the Big12 were panic moves. Utah and Colorado could end up eating more than they earn. As for the ACC, it was once such a beautiful conference. Then along came ESPN: BC, Syracuse, Louisville. How very sad. Now they stand by holding ND's purse while she tries-on other possibilities.
A 60 team conference is, technically, within the realm of possibility. But it really would not be a conference, more like Bourbon Street on Mardi Gras.
You say that the "price of Texas is taking three other Big XII schools". Only ACC/ESPN would agree to that. The other conferences will invite only the team/teams that they want. Texas cannot bring along the poor relatives. I subscribe to the FrankTheTank theory that when considering CR you must think like a university president. The Conference Commissioners do the legwork, produce the plans, and address the press/public. But the presidents make the decisions and sign the checks. Presidents in most conferences will not allow just any old school to belly-up to their esteemed football buffet. I will be astonished if the SEC or the B1G expand beyond 16. I think they both want to add the states of VA and NC. But they may both rest at 14 indefinitely, unless they get just the right properties.