(06-19-2017 11:00 AM)ken d Wrote:  

(06-18-2017 10:26 AM)JRsec Wrote:  I would suggest that then all 4 of the remaining conferences could look for G5 promotions to round out to 18 and have 3 divisions at some point in the future. This permits each conference to have a "best at large" entrant into the semi-finals which keeps far more fan bases energized deep into the season and could reward the strongest division within the conference with that at large birth. This permits geographical groupings without having to jump the shark to try to balance divisions. For instance in the ACC there would be no reason why Clemson and Florida State couldn't be in the same division since both could make the conference semis.

I had started to piece together something along those lines. I started with several assumptions:

1. Oklahoma must be paired with either Texas or OK State.
2. Baylor is a pariah, and will be left out.
3. Notre Dame must join the ACC.
4. B1G still values AAU.
5. Some G5 invites could be for football only.

SEC divisions:
Oklahoma, OK State, LSU, Missouri, Arkansas, Texas A&M
Alabama, Auburn, Ole Miss, Mississippi St, Vanderbilt, Memphis
Georgia, Florida, Tennessee, South Carolina, West Virginia, Kentucky

PAC divisions:
Stanford, USC, UCLA, Cal, Arizona, Arizona St
Washington, Washington St, Oregon, Oregon St, Boise St, Colorado
Utah, BYU, TCU, Kansas St, Texas Tech, Houston

B1G divisions:
Penn St, Indiana, Purdue, Maryland, Rutgers, UConn
Ohio St, Michigan, Michigan St, Northwestern, Illinois, Kansas
Wisconsin, Nebraska, Iowa, Texas, Minnesota, Iowa St

ACC divisions:
Clemson, Florida St, Ga Tech, Miami, Central Florida, South Florida
Virginia Tech, Virginia, North Carolina, Duke, NC State, Wake Forest
Notre Dame, Louisville, Pitt, Cincinnati, Syracuse, Boston College

These divisions were assembled with geography as the first priority. Second, I tried to be sure there was at least one of the top 8 conference teams by strength in each division. That leaves a couple of weak divisions (though they are fairly balanced within the division). Looking at the conferences as a whole, the SEC and PAC would be significantly stronger than either the B1G or the ACC in football.

They are much more balanced, however, if you just look at the top teams in each conference. Using the average Sagarin rating for each of the past five years, I ranked the top 8 teams from each conference (as these would likely be the most frequent participants in a four team playoff). They were (in order from strongest to weakest):

SEC: Alabama, Oklahoma, LSU, Georgia, Texas A&M, Oklahoma St, Ole Miss, Auburn
PAC: Stanford, Oregon, USC, Washington, TCU, Kansas St, UCLA, Utah
ACC: Clemson, Florida St, Notre Dame, Louisville, Ga Tech, Miami, Va Tech, UNC
B1G: Ohio St, Wisconsin, Michigan St, Michigan, Nebraska, Penn St, Iowa, Texas

Looking over the final result, one team (besides Baylor, of course) who would be the unhappiest stood out to me: Texas. I tried to fix that by putting them in the SEC instead, but I couldn't find a good substitute for the B1G. The only possibility I saw was moving Missouri to the B1G. That works competitively (if you only look at the past five years data), but leaves the B1G without a football brand addition.

Bottom line - this is really hard to do. IMO, too hard for it to happen.

If the SEC was going to dip into the G5 I think our debate would be between South Florida (improving research) and East Carolina (market and decent attendance). I don't see us going for Memphis to take a third Tennessee school. We need a presence in South Florida and between UCF and South Florida the Gulf coast is probably more natural for the SEC and Tampa is probably as close as we could get to S.Florida. East Carolina would grow significantly in the SEC. I could see them hit 70,000 in attendance within their first 5 years in. 77,500 would put them at our MEAN.

Now that said I think the SEC would be more likely to pick up a second Texas school than any of the above or Memphis. But other than that it's not a bad breakdown to 18 for the ACC / SEC / & Big 10.

Also, i don't see Texas headed to the Big 10 alone and while under contract to ESPN:

Maybe something like this instead:

Big 10:
East: Connecticut, Maryland, Ohio State, Penn State, Purdue, Rutgers
Central: Illinois, Indiana, Michigan, Michigan State, Northwestern, Wisconsin
West: Colorado State, Iowa, Iowa State, Kansas, Nebraska, Minnesota

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

SEC:
East: East Carolina, Florida, Georgia, Kentucky, South Carolina, Tennessee
Central: Alabama, Auburn, Mississippi, Mississippi State, South Florida, Vanderbilt
West: Arkansas, L.S.U., Oklahoma, Oklahoma State, Missouri, Texas A&M

PAC:
East: Brigham Young, Colorado, Kansas State, Texas, T.C.U., Texas Tech
North: Oregon, Oregon State, Stanford, Utah, Washington, Washington State
South: Arizona, Arizona State, California, U.C.L.A., U.N.L.V., U.S.C.

Fortunately, the NCAA doesn't allow three divisions.

Probably just a matter of time before 3 or more divisions are allowed with a 2 game playoff. The key rule change to really change the landscape would be if division of 8 or more could host a separate hoop tourney and get an auto bid.

(06-20-2017 10:04 AM)bluesox Wrote:  Probably just a matter of time before 3 or more divisions are allowed with a 2 game playoff. The key rule change to really change the landscape would be if division of 8 or more could host a separate hoop tourney and get an auto bid.

This honestly probably wouldn't even change how many teams from a major conference get in.

Think about it with this plausible example: B1G adds Kansas and Connecticut

West: Kansas, Iowa, Nebraska, Minnesota, Wisconsin, Illinois Northwestern, Purdue

East: Indiana, Michigan, Michigan St, Ohio St, Penn St, Maryland, Rutgers, Connecticut

Most years the West would have at least Kansas, Minnesota, Wisconsin, and Purdue and the East would have at least Indiana, Michigan, Michigan St, Ohio St, Maryland, and Connecticut in the NCAAs. That wouldn't necessarily change if it acted as a single conference.

This may give smaller conferences the idea to "merge" and create larger divisions to get in more teams.

What is so plausible about the B1G adding Kansas and Connecticut? A lot of people like to throw them in there because they are geographically congruent, but the top conference targets as a whole are to add blueblood football programs and top new media market near the conference borders. Neither school does either of that and just basically take up slots in the conference. I could see one of them (Kansas), definitely not both at the same time, being a partner with say Texas or Oklahoma, or Texas AND Oklahoma in a package with Mizzou as well. But Kansas and UConn together is not happening at all. Nothing seriously wrong with their schools and they have fantastic athletic programs (other than terrible football), but they don't really bring much to the table for the conference. Barring the NCAA creating some sort of crazy forced P4 rule, the conference is not expanding without at least one of if not both of Texas and Oklahoma.

(06-20-2017 02:48 PM)AntiG Wrote:  What is so plausible about the B1G adding Kansas and Connecticut? A lot of people like to throw them in there because they are geographically congruent, but the top conference targets as a whole are to add blueblood football programs and top new media market near the conference borders. Neither school does either of that and just basically take up slots in the conference. I could see one of them (Kansas), definitely not both at the same time, being a partner with say Texas or Oklahoma, or Texas AND Oklahoma in a package with Mizzou as well. But Kansas and UConn together is not happening at all. Nothing seriously wrong with their schools and they have fantastic athletic programs (other than terrible football), but they don't really bring much to the table for the conference. Barring the NCAA creating some sort of crazy forced P4 rule, the conference is not expanding without at least one of if not both of Texas and Oklahoma.

It was just an example but the ACC generally dominates the B1G in the Northeast with Boston College, Syracuse, Notre Dame, and Pittsburgh. Yes, the B1G has Penn St and Rutgers, but adding Connecticut would bring a larger Northeast presence to the conference. Also, under the idea of splitting divisions to get more basketball auto-bids, I think Connecticut is good option.

My personal preference is for Connecticut to be able to keep football in the American or be able to survive independence well, while everything else goes into the Big East.