Hello There, Guest! (LoginRegister)

Post Reply 
Alternate History and Future College Sports Realignment Scenarios
Author Message
Nerdlinger Offline
Realignment Enthusiast
*

Posts: 4,908
Joined: May 2017
Reputation: 423
I Root For: Realignment!
Location: Schmlocation
Post: #861
RE: Alternate History and Future College Sports Realignment Scenarios
(03-16-2022 10:04 PM)Fighting Muskie Wrote:  Going to 20 seems like an unnecessary move for the Big 12. Wouldn’t it make more sense to swallow the ACC survivors, then add one more if they’ve got an odd number?

Going to 20 is partly to demonstrate some measure of equality with the Big Ten and SEC, and partly to scoop up the remaining worthy schools outside the power conference structure. Influenced by the cable/streaming media "partners".
03-17-2022 09:58 AM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
chargeradio Offline
Vamos Morados
*

Posts: 7,467
Joined: Mar 2007
Reputation: 121
I Root For: ALA, KY, USA
Location: Louisville, KY
Post: #862
RE: Alternate History and Future College Sports Realignment Scenarios
The American raids C-USA within days of losing schools to the Big 12, causing the MVC to pause its talks with Belmont. Instead C-USA adds the entire MVC sans Loyola Chicago (A-10), plus NDSU and SDSU from the Summit:

C-USA (takes MVC name)
NDSU, SDSU, UNI, Drake*, Bradley*, LTU, Missouri State
Valparaiso*, Indiana State*, WKU, MTSU, Evansville*, Illinois State, SIU
Football only: UTEP, NMSU, FIU

With the original MVC gone, the OVC holds on to Belmont and Murray State. The MVFC adds WIU as a full member, plus Indiana State and Youngstown State for football only:

OVC
North - SIUE*, WIU, EIU, USI*, Morehead State*, Lindenwood
South - Murray State, UTM, Belmont*, TN State, TN Tech, SEMO
Football only (North): Indiana State, Youngstown State

The Summit adds UALR. UND and USD join the WAC for football only.

Summit
Denver, UMKC, ORU, UALR, Omaha, St. Thomas, UND, USD

WAC
Pacific - Cal Baptist*, GCU*, Seattle*, UVU*, Utah Tech, SUU, NMSU, UTEP
Central - Tarleton State, Lamar, Sam Houston, Stephen F. Austin, Abilene Christian, UTRGV*, UT Arlington*, Incarnate Word
04-03-2022 11:04 AM
Visit this user's website Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
BePcr07 Offline
All American
*

Posts: 4,900
Joined: Dec 2015
Reputation: 342
I Root For: Boise St & Zags
Location:
Post: #863
RE: Alternate History and Future College Sports Realignment Scenarios
(04-03-2022 11:04 AM)chargeradio Wrote:  The American raids C-USA within days of losing schools to the Big 12, causing the MVC to pause its talks with Belmont. Instead C-USA adds the entire MVC sans Loyola Chicago (A-10), plus NDSU and SDSU from the Summit:

C-USA (takes MVC name)
NDSU, SDSU, UNI, Drake*, Bradley*, LTU, Missouri State
Valparaiso*, Indiana State*, WKU, MTSU, Evansville*, Illinois State, SIU
Football only: UTEP, NMSU, FIU

With the original MVC gone, the OVC holds on to Belmont and Murray State. The MVFC adds WIU as a full member, plus Indiana State and Youngstown State for football only:

OVC
North - SIUE*, WIU, EIU, USI*, Morehead State*, Lindenwood
South - Murray State, UTM, Belmont*, TN State, TN Tech, SEMO
Football only (North): Indiana State, Youngstown State

The Summit adds UALR. UND and USD join the WAC for football only.

Summit
Denver, UMKC, ORU, UALR, Omaha, St. Thomas, UND, USD

WAC
Pacific - Cal Baptist*, GCU*, Seattle*, UVU*, Utah Tech, SUU, NMSU, UTEP
Central - Tarleton State, Lamar, Sam Houston, Stephen F. Austin, Abilene Christian, UTRGV*, UT Arlington*, Incarnate Word

Where does FIU go for non-football? I presume ASUN.
04-03-2022 05:39 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
Nerdlinger Offline
Realignment Enthusiast
*

Posts: 4,908
Joined: May 2017
Reputation: 423
I Root For: Realignment!
Location: Schmlocation
Post: #864
RE: Alternate History and Future College Sports Realignment Scenarios
Suppose that the ACC, after losing Maryland to the Big Ten, did not have Louisville available as a replacement? Let's say the Big 12 actually did get back to 12 in 2012 with the additions of Cincinnati, Louisville, TCU, and WVU. The best available add for the ACC at that point is arguably UConn. But ostensibly FB-first members like FSU and Clemson would have blown a gasket over an add like that. There's also UConn's history as a ringleader in the lawsuits against the ACC. So the ACC stands pat at 13 full members, plus Notre Dame.

In this scenario, perhaps the ACC gets creative with their conference schedule to ensure they follow NCAA regs for a CCG by having 2 divisions as evenly balanced in number as possible, and in both divisions a full round-robin is completed. This can be done while permitting each full member to have the same number of conference games and not skipping or doubling up any intradivision matches. How, you might ask? With Notre Dame, of course!

As most here know, in reality, ND agreed to 5 ACC games per season. Here perhaps the ACC finagles one more game out of them, which allows ND to serve as a quasi-full member, although still not eligible for the CCG (not until they're up to 8 conference games anyway). Games against ND count as conference games but don't matter for the in-division round robin because ND isn't a full FB member.

The divisions stay as they were in 2013, except Pitt agrees to alternate between divisions every year, with ND acting as their counterpart in the other division. Protected crossovers are as in reality except we have Syracuse/UVA and ND/Pitt. Each year, besides Pitt, ND plays 5 games against the division without Pitt, rotating back and forth between divisions and cycling through the schools so that within a 12-year span, they've played Pitt 12 times, 6 other schools (3 from each division) 6 times each, and the remaining 6 schools 4 times each. Here's the schedule matrix for a full 12-year cycle:

[Image: QqGM6Qk.png]

As for basketball, with an even number of total members, there can be 3 protected opponents (meaning played home and away every year) per team rather than 2. So with an 18-game schedule, it takes 5 years for a complete cycle, in which all teams play their protected opponents 10 times each and everyone else 6 times each:

[Image: dfmPkZv.png]

Any thoughts as to the plausibility of this scenario?
(This post was last modified: 05-06-2022 08:22 PM by Nerdlinger.)
05-06-2022 08:16 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
Wahoowa84 Offline
All American
*

Posts: 3,418
Joined: Oct 2017
Reputation: 486
I Root For: UVa
Location:
Post: #865
RE: Alternate History and Future College Sports Realignment Scenarios
(05-06-2022 08:16 PM)Nerdlinger Wrote:  Suppose that the ACC, after losing Maryland to the Big Ten, did not have Louisville available as a replacement? Let's say the Big 12 actually did get back to 12 in 2012 with the additions of Cincinnati, Louisville, TCU, and WVU. The best available add for the ACC at that point is arguably UConn. But ostensibly FB-first members like FSU and Clemson would have blown a gasket over an add like that. There's also UConn's history as a ringleader in the lawsuits against the ACC. So the ACC stands pat at 13 full members, plus Notre Dame.

In this scenario, perhaps the ACC gets creative with their conference schedule to ensure they follow NCAA regs for a CCG by having 2 divisions as evenly balanced in number as possible, and in both divisions a full round-robin is completed. This can be done while permitting each full member to have the same number of conference games and not skipping or doubling up any intradivision matches. How, you might ask? With Notre Dame, of course!

As most here know, in reality, ND agreed to 5 ACC games per season. Here perhaps the ACC finagles one more game out of them, which allows ND to serve as a quasi-full member, although still not eligible for the CCG (not until they're up to 8 conference games anyway). Games against ND count as conference games but don't matter for the in-division round robin because ND isn't a full FB member.

The divisions stay as they were in 2013, except Pitt agrees to alternate between divisions every year, with ND acting as their counterpart in the other division. Protected crossovers are as in reality except we have Syracuse/UVA and ND/Pitt. Each year, besides Pitt, ND plays 5 games against the division without Pitt, rotating back and forth between divisions and cycling through the schools so that within a 12-year span, they've played Pitt 12 times, 6 other schools (3 from each division) 6 times each, and the remaining 6 schools 4 times each. Here's the schedule matrix for a full 12-year cycle:

[Image: QqGM6Qk.png]

As for basketball, with an even number of total members, there can be 3 protected opponents (meaning played home and away every year) per team rather than 2. So with an 18-game schedule, it takes 5 years for a complete cycle, in which all teams play their protected opponents 10 times each and everyone else 6 times each:

[Image: dfmPkZv.png]

Any thoughts as to the plausibility of this scenario?
I like the innovation. The all-in members should be good. Pitt loses the scheduling predictability from being in a division, but they gain an annual game versus Notre Dame. Pitt also has a relatively recent history with scheduling as an independent. This is definitely a better option for the ACC than expanding with a school that would alienate FSU or Clemson.

The unknown is ND. Would they consider a 6 game commitment too burdensome for their football brand? During the turmoil of 2012-2013 they may have done it to solidify their overall independence. The options were not appealing.
05-07-2022 08:08 AM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
andybible1995 Offline
All American
*

Posts: 3,432
Joined: Apr 2022
Reputation: 258
I Root For: TN, MTSU, MD
Location:
Post: #866
RE: Alternate History and Future College Sports Realignment Scenarios
(08-04-2017 04:27 PM)Nerdlinger Wrote:  While I have nothing against the AAC, its formation/continuation did cause a cascade of realignment that resulted in an almost complete membership turnover of CUSA and the Sun Belt. Could the creation of the AAC have been averted? Perhaps the announced exodus of WVU, Pitt, and Syracuse is somehow delayed by about a year, by which point Rutgers and Louisville would have secured future homes in the Big Ten and ACC, respectively. By then you'd have at least 75% of the 16 members potentially in favor of dissolving the conference, assuming at least 7 of the 8 Catholic non-football schools are fine with starting up a new "Big East" as in our timeline. Only UConn, Cincy, USF, and possibly ND would be opposed. This could prevent financial penalties for the departing schools, though the legal details are beyond me, and I'm sure some hush money is exchanged in any case. In theory, UConn, Cincy, and USF could still start up a new conference, but I think it would have been a lot harder to do so. Maybe instead they join CUSA or go football independent. Notre Dame likely half-commits to the ACC as in our timeline.

Alternately, perhaps the restocking Big 12 is in a more expansive mood, taking on Cincinnati and Louisville in addition to WVU. Pitt and Syracuse are still bound for the ACC, and Rutgers for the Big Ten. With Louisville taken, the ACC probably taps UConn to replace outgoing Maryland. This leaves USF as the only football member of the Big East. The non-football schools vote to drop football from the conference. USF football is picked up by CUSA. Notre Dame makes the same deal with the ACC as it did in our timeline.

In either scenario, CUSA doesn't lose any members and potentially gains at least one Big East survivor. This means no need to prey on the Sun Belt, which in turn has less need to draw additional members from FCS. The WAC is also given a reprieve, but I still think they'll end up dropping football due to having too few members.

Assuming the latter of the two scenarios above takes place, here's how the FBS might look by 2018.

ACC
Atlantic: Boston College, Clemson, Connecticut, Florida State, NC State, Syracuse, Wake Forest
Coastal: Duke, Georgia Tech, Miami-FL, North Carolina, Pittsburgh, Virginia, Virginia Tech
NFB: Notre Dame

Big 12
North: Cincinnati, Iowa State, Kansas, Kansas State, Louisville, West Virginia
South: Baylor, Oklahoma, Oklahoma State, TCU, Texas, Texas Tech

Big Ten
East: Indiana, Maryland, Michigan, Michigan State, Ohio State, Penn State, Rutgers
West: Illinois, Iowa, Minnesota, Nebraska, Northwestern, Purdue, Wisconsin

Pac-12
North: California, Oregon, Oregon State, Stanford, Washington, Washington State
South: Arizona, Arizona State, Colorado, UCLA, USC, Utah

SEC
Eastern: Florida, Georgia, Kentucky, Missouri, South Carolina, Tennessee, Vanderbilt
Western: Alabama, Arkansas, Auburn, LSU, Mississippi State, Ole Miss, Texas A&M

FBS Independent
Army* (Patriot), BYU* (WCC), Louisiana Tech* (WAC), New Mexico State* (WAC), Notre Dame* (ACC), Texas State* (WAC)

CUSA
East: Central Florida, East Carolina, Marshall, Memphis, South Florida* (Big East), Southern Miss, UAB
West: Houston, Navy* (Patriot), Rice, SMU, Tulane, Tulsa, UTEP

MAC
East: Akron, Buffalo, Kent State, Massachusetts* (A-10), Miami-OH, Ohio, Temple* (A-10)
West: Ball State, Bowling Green, Central Michigan, Eastern Michigan, Northern Illinois, Toledo, Western Michigan

MWC
Mountain: Air Force, Boise State, Colorado State, New Mexico, Utah State, Wyoming
West: Fresno State, Hawaii* (Big West), Nevada, San Diego State, San Jose State, UNLV

Sun Belt
East: FAU, FIU, Georgia State, Middle Tennessee, Troy, Western Kentucky
West: Arkansas State, Louisiana-Lafayette, Louisiana-Monroe, South Alabama, North Texas, UTSA* (WAC)
NFB: Little Rock

* = football only (primary conference)

Any thoughts?

I use this scenario a lot when I play NCAA Football 14. I think it's the most realistic lineup that would exist today should the AAC had not come to fruition. However, there's a few changes to this that I would make.

C-USA would add USF as a full member, and they may have chosen LA Tech over Navy as a full member as well. Texas State would be added as a full member over UTSA since the Sunbelt added them in reality when the WAC collapsed. They also might have been more strict on their full membership and UALR might have been forced to leave either for the Southland or the OVC.

I'm not sure what happens to UTSA. Either they go the independent route in the FBS and stay in the WAC with NMSU, or they drop back down to the Southland.

It would also be interesting to see what happens with this lineup should Texas and Oklahoma still move to the SEC. Who would the Big 12 add as their replacements?
(This post was last modified: 05-07-2022 11:54 AM by andybible1995.)
05-07-2022 11:45 AM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
Erictelevision Offline
All American
*

Posts: 3,253
Joined: Jan 2016
Reputation: 52
I Root For: Uconn hoops
Location:
Post: #867
RE: Alternate History and Future College Sports Realignment Scenarios
What if: when the ACC raided the Big East, they took West Virginia or Pitt instead of BC?
05-07-2022 01:32 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
BePcr07 Offline
All American
*

Posts: 4,900
Joined: Dec 2015
Reputation: 342
I Root For: Boise St & Zags
Location:
Post: #868
RE: Alternate History and Future College Sports Realignment Scenarios
(05-07-2022 11:45 AM)andybible1995 Wrote:  
(08-04-2017 04:27 PM)Nerdlinger Wrote:  While I have nothing against the AAC, its formation/continuation did cause a cascade of realignment that resulted in an almost complete membership turnover of CUSA and the Sun Belt. Could the creation of the AAC have been averted? Perhaps the announced exodus of WVU, Pitt, and Syracuse is somehow delayed by about a year, by which point Rutgers and Louisville would have secured future homes in the Big Ten and ACC, respectively. By then you'd have at least 75% of the 16 members potentially in favor of dissolving the conference, assuming at least 7 of the 8 Catholic non-football schools are fine with starting up a new "Big East" as in our timeline. Only UConn, Cincy, USF, and possibly ND would be opposed. This could prevent financial penalties for the departing schools, though the legal details are beyond me, and I'm sure some hush money is exchanged in any case. In theory, UConn, Cincy, and USF could still start up a new conference, but I think it would have been a lot harder to do so. Maybe instead they join CUSA or go football independent. Notre Dame likely half-commits to the ACC as in our timeline.

Alternately, perhaps the restocking Big 12 is in a more expansive mood, taking on Cincinnati and Louisville in addition to WVU. Pitt and Syracuse are still bound for the ACC, and Rutgers for the Big Ten. With Louisville taken, the ACC probably taps UConn to replace outgoing Maryland. This leaves USF as the only football member of the Big East. The non-football schools vote to drop football from the conference. USF football is picked up by CUSA. Notre Dame makes the same deal with the ACC as it did in our timeline.

In either scenario, CUSA doesn't lose any members and potentially gains at least one Big East survivor. This means no need to prey on the Sun Belt, which in turn has less need to draw additional members from FCS. The WAC is also given a reprieve, but I still think they'll end up dropping football due to having too few members.

Assuming the latter of the two scenarios above takes place, here's how the FBS might look by 2018.

ACC
Atlantic: Boston College, Clemson, Connecticut, Florida State, NC State, Syracuse, Wake Forest
Coastal: Duke, Georgia Tech, Miami-FL, North Carolina, Pittsburgh, Virginia, Virginia Tech
NFB: Notre Dame

Big 12
North: Cincinnati, Iowa State, Kansas, Kansas State, Louisville, West Virginia
South: Baylor, Oklahoma, Oklahoma State, TCU, Texas, Texas Tech

Big Ten
East: Indiana, Maryland, Michigan, Michigan State, Ohio State, Penn State, Rutgers
West: Illinois, Iowa, Minnesota, Nebraska, Northwestern, Purdue, Wisconsin

Pac-12
North: California, Oregon, Oregon State, Stanford, Washington, Washington State
South: Arizona, Arizona State, Colorado, UCLA, USC, Utah

SEC
Eastern: Florida, Georgia, Kentucky, Missouri, South Carolina, Tennessee, Vanderbilt
Western: Alabama, Arkansas, Auburn, LSU, Mississippi State, Ole Miss, Texas A&M

FBS Independent
Army* (Patriot), BYU* (WCC), Louisiana Tech* (WAC), New Mexico State* (WAC), Notre Dame* (ACC), Texas State* (WAC)

CUSA
East: Central Florida, East Carolina, Marshall, Memphis, South Florida* (Big East), Southern Miss, UAB
West: Houston, Navy* (Patriot), Rice, SMU, Tulane, Tulsa, UTEP

MAC
East: Akron, Buffalo, Kent State, Massachusetts* (A-10), Miami-OH, Ohio, Temple* (A-10)
West: Ball State, Bowling Green, Central Michigan, Eastern Michigan, Northern Illinois, Toledo, Western Michigan

MWC
Mountain: Air Force, Boise State, Colorado State, New Mexico, Utah State, Wyoming
West: Fresno State, Hawaii* (Big West), Nevada, San Diego State, San Jose State, UNLV

Sun Belt
East: FAU, FIU, Georgia State, Middle Tennessee, Troy, Western Kentucky
West: Arkansas State, Louisiana-Lafayette, Louisiana-Monroe, South Alabama, North Texas, UTSA* (WAC)
NFB: Little Rock

* = football only (primary conference)

Any thoughts?

I use this scenario a lot when I play NCAA Football 14. I think it's the most realistic lineup that would exist today should the AAC had not come to fruition. However, there's a few changes to this that I would make.

C-USA would add USF as a full member, and they may have chosen LA Tech over Navy as a full member as well. Texas State would be added as a full member over UTSA since the Sunbelt added them in reality when the WAC collapsed. They also might have been more strict on their full membership and UALR might have been forced to leave either for the Southland or the OVC.

I'm not sure what happens to UTSA. Either they go the independent route in the FBS and stay in the WAC with NMSU, or they drop back down to the Southland.

It would also be interesting to see what happens with this lineup should Texas and Oklahoma still move to the SEC. Who would the Big 12 add as their replacements?

I think Houston and Central Florida still get in the XII. CUSA would sit at 12.

XII
East: Central Florida, Cincinnati, Houston, Louisville, TCU, West Virginia
West: Baylor, Iowa St, Kansas, Kansas St, Oklahoma St, Texas Tech
05-07-2022 09:06 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
Milwaukee Offline
All American
*

Posts: 3,787
Joined: Jun 2021
Reputation: 212
I Root For: many teams
Location:
Post: #869
RE: Alternate History and Future College Sports Realignment Scenarios
(08-04-2017 04:27 PM)Nerdlinger Wrote:  While I have nothing against the AAC, its formation/continuation did cause a cascade of realignment that resulted in an almost complete membership turnover of CUSA and the Sun Belt. Could the creation of the AAC have been averted? Perhaps the announced exodus of WVU, Pitt, and Syracuse is somehow delayed by about a year, by which point Rutgers and Louisville would have secured future homes in the Big Ten and ACC, respectively. By then you'd have at least 75% of the 16 members potentially in favor of dissolving the conference, assuming at least 7 of the 8 Catholic non-football schools are fine with starting up a new "Big East" as in our timeline. Only UConn, Cincy, USF, and possibly ND would be opposed. This could prevent financial penalties for the departing schools, though the legal details are beyond me, and I'm sure some hush money is exchanged in any case. In theory, UConn, Cincy, and USF could still start up a new conference, but I think it would have been a lot harder to do so. Maybe instead they join CUSA or go football independent. Notre Dame likely half-commits to the ACC as in our timeline.

Alternately, perhaps the restocking Big 12 is in a more expansive mood, taking on Cincinnati and Louisville in addition to WVU. Pitt and Syracuse are still bound for the ACC, and Rutgers for the Big Ten. With Louisville taken, the ACC probably taps UConn to replace outgoing Maryland. This leaves USF as the only football member of the Big East. The non-football schools vote to drop football from the conference. USF football is picked up by CUSA. Notre Dame makes the same deal with the ACC as it did in our timeline.

In either scenario, CUSA doesn't lose any members and potentially gains at least one Big East survivor. This means no need to prey on the Sun Belt, which in turn has less need to draw additional members from FCS. The WAC is also given a reprieve, but I still think they'll end up dropping football due to having too few members.

Any thoughts?

The AAC wasn't the cause of all the devastation. The fundamental cause of all the problems was the expansion of the ACC, Big Ten, and SEC. With regard to the implosion of the Big East, the ACC was the primary cause, since it was the ACC that absorbed 6 teams from the Big East.
(This post was last modified: 05-07-2022 10:09 PM by Milwaukee.)
05-07-2022 10:09 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
andybible1995 Offline
All American
*

Posts: 3,432
Joined: Apr 2022
Reputation: 258
I Root For: TN, MTSU, MD
Location:
Post: #870
RE: Alternate History and Future College Sports Realignment Scenarios
(05-07-2022 09:06 PM)BePcr07 Wrote:  
(05-07-2022 11:45 AM)andybible1995 Wrote:  
(08-04-2017 04:27 PM)Nerdlinger Wrote:  While I have nothing against the AAC, its formation/continuation did cause a cascade of realignment that resulted in an almost complete membership turnover of CUSA and the Sun Belt. Could the creation of the AAC have been averted? Perhaps the announced exodus of WVU, Pitt, and Syracuse is somehow delayed by about a year, by which point Rutgers and Louisville would have secured future homes in the Big Ten and ACC, respectively. By then you'd have at least 75% of the 16 members potentially in favor of dissolving the conference, assuming at least 7 of the 8 Catholic non-football schools are fine with starting up a new "Big East" as in our timeline. Only UConn, Cincy, USF, and possibly ND would be opposed. This could prevent financial penalties for the departing schools, though the legal details are beyond me, and I'm sure some hush money is exchanged in any case. In theory, UConn, Cincy, and USF could still start up a new conference, but I think it would have been a lot harder to do so. Maybe instead they join CUSA or go football independent. Notre Dame likely half-commits to the ACC as in our timeline.

Alternately, perhaps the restocking Big 12 is in a more expansive mood, taking on Cincinnati and Louisville in addition to WVU. Pitt and Syracuse are still bound for the ACC, and Rutgers for the Big Ten. With Louisville taken, the ACC probably taps UConn to replace outgoing Maryland. This leaves USF as the only football member of the Big East. The non-football schools vote to drop football from the conference. USF football is picked up by CUSA. Notre Dame makes the same deal with the ACC as it did in our timeline.

In either scenario, CUSA doesn't lose any members and potentially gains at least one Big East survivor. This means no need to prey on the Sun Belt, which in turn has less need to draw additional members from FCS. The WAC is also given a reprieve, but I still think they'll end up dropping football due to having too few members.

Assuming the latter of the two scenarios above takes place, here's how the FBS might look by 2018.

ACC
Atlantic: Boston College, Clemson, Connecticut, Florida State, NC State, Syracuse, Wake Forest
Coastal: Duke, Georgia Tech, Miami-FL, North Carolina, Pittsburgh, Virginia, Virginia Tech
NFB: Notre Dame

Big 12
North: Cincinnati, Iowa State, Kansas, Kansas State, Louisville, West Virginia
South: Baylor, Oklahoma, Oklahoma State, TCU, Texas, Texas Tech

Big Ten
East: Indiana, Maryland, Michigan, Michigan State, Ohio State, Penn State, Rutgers
West: Illinois, Iowa, Minnesota, Nebraska, Northwestern, Purdue, Wisconsin

Pac-12
North: California, Oregon, Oregon State, Stanford, Washington, Washington State
South: Arizona, Arizona State, Colorado, UCLA, USC, Utah

SEC
Eastern: Florida, Georgia, Kentucky, Missouri, South Carolina, Tennessee, Vanderbilt
Western: Alabama, Arkansas, Auburn, LSU, Mississippi State, Ole Miss, Texas A&M

FBS Independent
Army* (Patriot), BYU* (WCC), Louisiana Tech* (WAC), New Mexico State* (WAC), Notre Dame* (ACC), Texas State* (WAC)

CUSA
East: Central Florida, East Carolina, Marshall, Memphis, South Florida* (Big East), Southern Miss, UAB
West: Houston, Navy* (Patriot), Rice, SMU, Tulane, Tulsa, UTEP

MAC
East: Akron, Buffalo, Kent State, Massachusetts* (A-10), Miami-OH, Ohio, Temple* (A-10)
West: Ball State, Bowling Green, Central Michigan, Eastern Michigan, Northern Illinois, Toledo, Western Michigan

MWC
Mountain: Air Force, Boise State, Colorado State, New Mexico, Utah State, Wyoming
West: Fresno State, Hawaii* (Big West), Nevada, San Diego State, San Jose State, UNLV

Sun Belt
East: FAU, FIU, Georgia State, Middle Tennessee, Troy, Western Kentucky
West: Arkansas State, Louisiana-Lafayette, Louisiana-Monroe, South Alabama, North Texas, UTSA* (WAC)
NFB: Little Rock

* = football only (primary conference)

Any thoughts?

I use this scenario a lot when I play NCAA Football 14. I think it's the most realistic lineup that would exist today should the AAC had not come to fruition. However, there's a few changes to this that I would make.

C-USA would add USF as a full member, and they may have chosen LA Tech over Navy as a full member as well. Texas State would be added as a full member over UTSA since the Sunbelt added them in reality when the WAC collapsed. They also might have been more strict on their full membership and UALR might have been forced to leave either for the Southland or the OVC.

I'm not sure what happens to UTSA. Either they go the independent route in the FBS and stay in the WAC with NMSU, or they drop back down to the Southland.

It would also be interesting to see what happens with this lineup should Texas and Oklahoma still move to the SEC. Who would the Big 12 add as their replacements?

I think Houston and Central Florida still get in the XII. CUSA would sit at 12.

XII
East: Central Florida, Cincinnati, Houston, Louisville, TCU, West Virginia
West: Baylor, Iowa St, Kansas, Kansas St, Oklahoma St, Texas Tech

I figured as much. The Big 12 would add two teams from a combination of Houston, Memphis, SMU, UCF, and USF. Houston and UCF would be the two teams added from that combination as they would be the strongest candidates from this group of 5.
05-08-2022 04:29 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
Nerdlinger Offline
Realignment Enthusiast
*

Posts: 4,908
Joined: May 2017
Reputation: 423
I Root For: Realignment!
Location: Schmlocation
Post: #871
RE: Alternate History and Future College Sports Realignment Scenarios
(05-06-2022 08:16 PM)Nerdlinger Wrote:  Suppose that the ACC, after losing Maryland to the Big Ten, did not have Louisville available as a replacement? Let's say the Big 12 actually did get back to 12 in 2012 with the additions of Cincinnati, Louisville, TCU, and WVU. The best available add for the ACC at that point is arguably UConn. But ostensibly FB-first members like FSU and Clemson would have blown a gasket over an add like that. There's also UConn's history as a ringleader in the lawsuits against the ACC. So the ACC stands pat at 13 full members, plus Notre Dame.

In this scenario, perhaps the ACC gets creative with their conference schedule to ensure they follow NCAA regs for a CCG by having 2 divisions as evenly balanced in number as possible, and in both divisions a full round-robin is completed. This can be done while permitting each full member to have the same number of conference games and not skipping or doubling up any intradivision matches. How, you might ask? With Notre Dame, of course!

As most here know, in reality, ND agreed to 5 ACC games per season. Here perhaps the ACC finagles one more game out of them, which allows ND to serve as a quasi-full member, although still not eligible for the CCG (not until they're up to 8 conference games anyway). Games against ND count as conference games but don't matter for the in-division round robin because ND isn't a full FB member.

The divisions stay as they were in 2013, except Pitt agrees to alternate between divisions every year, with ND acting as their counterpart in the other division. Protected crossovers are as in reality except we have Syracuse/UVA and ND/Pitt. Each year, besides Pitt, ND plays 5 games against the division without Pitt, rotating back and forth between divisions and cycling through the schools so that within a 12-year span, they've played Pitt 12 times, 6 other schools (3 from each division) 6 times each, and the remaining 6 schools 4 times each. Here's the schedule matrix for a full 12-year cycle:

[Image: QqGM6Qk.png]

As for basketball, with an even number of total members, there can be 3 protected opponents (meaning played home and away every year) per team rather than 2. So with an 18-game schedule, it takes 5 years for a complete cycle, in which all teams play their protected opponents 10 times each and everyone else 6 times each:

[Image: dfmPkZv.png]

Any thoughts as to the plausibility of this scenario?

Here's how things could have worked if the ACC-13 had opted for divisions in this scenario, without officially counting ND games as part of the conference schedule.

[Image: 6dYJzXf.png]

This represents the number of games played between each pair of teams over a 12-year schedule cycle. Because of the 6/7 imbalance, 2 pairs of teams in the division of 6 (here the Atlantic) play each other twice every season, although those pairings change from year to year. But this is the only way you can have complete in-division round robins and have all teams play the same number of conference games.

Note that here, Virginia is the odd team out, since they're the ones who actually lost their protected crossover. So the other teams all have a protected crossover, while UVA plays each team in the other division 4 times over the 12-year cycle.

~~~~~~~~~~~~

And finally, here's with 6/7 divisions but without a complete round robin in the division of 7. Two pairs of teams in the division of 7 must avoid playing each year, though as with the teams that had to play twice in the previous scenario, the pairings change from year to year. Note that the schedule cycle here is only 6 years due to the less frequent in-division matchups and that UVA, as the odd one out lacking a protected crossover, plays all division mates 6 times in those 6 years.

[Image: LVYvCvM.png]
(This post was last modified: 06-03-2022 09:28 PM by Nerdlinger.)
05-30-2022 10:00 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
Nerdlinger Offline
Realignment Enthusiast
*

Posts: 4,908
Joined: May 2017
Reputation: 423
I Root For: Realignment!
Location: Schmlocation
Post: #872
RE: Alternate History and Future College Sports Realignment Scenarios
When the SEC reached 12 schools in 1992 and started up their divisions, they had 2 protected crossovers per school despite having only 8 conference games.

[Image: D20tbDJ.png]

The first protected crossover listed is the one that was retained after 2002 when the league dropped the second crossover.

When the ACC hit 12 in 2005, they retained just 1 protected crossover per team (the first one listed in the table below). But suppose they had opted for 2 like the SEC initially did -- what would have been each team's protected crossovers? My educated guess:

[Image: yTLM5jW.png]

This permits all the NC schools to play each other annually and also does the same for the 3 Big East defectors.
(This post was last modified: 06-04-2022 01:18 PM by Nerdlinger.)
06-04-2022 12:21 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
BePcr07 Offline
All American
*

Posts: 4,900
Joined: Dec 2015
Reputation: 342
I Root For: Boise St & Zags
Location:
Post: #873
RE: Alternate History and Future College Sports Realignment Scenarios
(06-04-2022 12:21 PM)Nerdlinger Wrote:  When the SEC reached 12 schools in 1992 and started up their divisions, they had 2 protected crossovers per school despite having only 8 conference games.

[Image: D20tbDJ.png]

The first protected crossover listed is the one that was retained after 2002 when the league dropped the second crossover.

When the ACC hit 12 in 2005, they retained just 1 protected crossover per team (the first one listed in the table below). But suppose they had opted for 2 like the SEC initially did -- what would have been each team's protected crossovers? My educated guess:

[Image: yTLM5jW.png]

This permits all the NC schools to play each other annually and also does the same for the 3 Big East defectors.

If the PAC did 2 protected crossovers?

North
California: UCLA, USC
Oregon: Arizona, Utah
Oregon St: Arizona St, Colorado
Stanford: UCLA, USC
Washington: Arizona, Colorado
Washington St: Arizona St, Utah

South
Arizona: Oregon, Washington
Arizona St: Oregon St, Washington St
Colorado: Oregon St, Washington
UCLA: California, Stanford
USC: California, Stanford
Utah: Oregon, Washington St

Protect the California schools (which already are). Non-AAU Arizona St gets both non-AAU Northwest schools. AAU Arizona gets both AAU Northwest schools. Newbies Colorado/Utah each get a non-AAU Northwest school plus a AAU Northwest school.
06-04-2022 03:02 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
andybible1995 Offline
All American
*

Posts: 3,432
Joined: Apr 2022
Reputation: 258
I Root For: TN, MTSU, MD
Location:
Post: #874
RE: Alternate History and Future College Sports Realignment Scenarios
(05-08-2022 04:29 PM)andybible1995 Wrote:  
(05-07-2022 09:06 PM)BePcr07 Wrote:  
(05-07-2022 11:45 AM)andybible1995 Wrote:  
(08-04-2017 04:27 PM)Nerdlinger Wrote:  While I have nothing against the AAC, its formation/continuation did cause a cascade of realignment that resulted in an almost complete membership turnover of CUSA and the Sun Belt. Could the creation of the AAC have been averted? Perhaps the announced exodus of WVU, Pitt, and Syracuse is somehow delayed by about a year, by which point Rutgers and Louisville would have secured future homes in the Big Ten and ACC, respectively. By then you'd have at least 75% of the 16 members potentially in favor of dissolving the conference, assuming at least 7 of the 8 Catholic non-football schools are fine with starting up a new "Big East" as in our timeline. Only UConn, Cincy, USF, and possibly ND would be opposed. This could prevent financial penalties for the departing schools, though the legal details are beyond me, and I'm sure some hush money is exchanged in any case. In theory, UConn, Cincy, and USF could still start up a new conference, but I think it would have been a lot harder to do so. Maybe instead they join CUSA or go football independent. Notre Dame likely half-commits to the ACC as in our timeline.

Alternately, perhaps the restocking Big 12 is in a more expansive mood, taking on Cincinnati and Louisville in addition to WVU. Pitt and Syracuse are still bound for the ACC, and Rutgers for the Big Ten. With Louisville taken, the ACC probably taps UConn to replace outgoing Maryland. This leaves USF as the only football member of the Big East. The non-football schools vote to drop football from the conference. USF football is picked up by CUSA. Notre Dame makes the same deal with the ACC as it did in our timeline.

In either scenario, CUSA doesn't lose any members and potentially gains at least one Big East survivor. This means no need to prey on the Sun Belt, which in turn has less need to draw additional members from FCS. The WAC is also given a reprieve, but I still think they'll end up dropping football due to having too few members.

Assuming the latter of the two scenarios above takes place, here's how the FBS might look by 2018.

ACC
Atlantic: Boston College, Clemson, Connecticut, Florida State, NC State, Syracuse, Wake Forest
Coastal: Duke, Georgia Tech, Miami-FL, North Carolina, Pittsburgh, Virginia, Virginia Tech
NFB: Notre Dame

Big 12
North: Cincinnati, Iowa State, Kansas, Kansas State, Louisville, West Virginia
South: Baylor, Oklahoma, Oklahoma State, TCU, Texas, Texas Tech

Big Ten
East: Indiana, Maryland, Michigan, Michigan State, Ohio State, Penn State, Rutgers
West: Illinois, Iowa, Minnesota, Nebraska, Northwestern, Purdue, Wisconsin

Pac-12
North: California, Oregon, Oregon State, Stanford, Washington, Washington State
South: Arizona, Arizona State, Colorado, UCLA, USC, Utah

SEC
Eastern: Florida, Georgia, Kentucky, Missouri, South Carolina, Tennessee, Vanderbilt
Western: Alabama, Arkansas, Auburn, LSU, Mississippi State, Ole Miss, Texas A&M

FBS Independent
Army* (Patriot), BYU* (WCC), Louisiana Tech* (WAC), New Mexico State* (WAC), Notre Dame* (ACC), Texas State* (WAC)

CUSA
East: Central Florida, East Carolina, Marshall, Memphis, South Florida* (Big East), Southern Miss, UAB
West: Houston, Navy* (Patriot), Rice, SMU, Tulane, Tulsa, UTEP

MAC
East: Akron, Buffalo, Kent State, Massachusetts* (A-10), Miami-OH, Ohio, Temple* (A-10)
West: Ball State, Bowling Green, Central Michigan, Eastern Michigan, Northern Illinois, Toledo, Western Michigan

MWC
Mountain: Air Force, Boise State, Colorado State, New Mexico, Utah State, Wyoming
West: Fresno State, Hawaii* (Big West), Nevada, San Diego State, San Jose State, UNLV

Sun Belt
East: FAU, FIU, Georgia State, Middle Tennessee, Troy, Western Kentucky
West: Arkansas State, Louisiana-Lafayette, Louisiana-Monroe, South Alabama, North Texas, UTSA* (WAC)
NFB: Little Rock

* = football only (primary conference)

Any thoughts?

I use this scenario a lot when I play NCAA Football 14. I think it's the most realistic lineup that would exist today should the AAC had not come to fruition. However, there's a few changes to this that I would make.

C-USA would add USF as a full member, and they may have chosen LA Tech over Navy as a full member as well. Texas State would be added as a full member over UTSA since the Sunbelt added them in reality when the WAC collapsed. They also might have been more strict on their full membership and UALR might have been forced to leave either for the Southland or the OVC.

I'm not sure what happens to UTSA. Either they go the independent route in the FBS and stay in the WAC with NMSU, or they drop back down to the Southland.

It would also be interesting to see what happens with this lineup should Texas and Oklahoma still move to the SEC. Who would the Big 12 add as their replacements?

I think Houston and Central Florida still get in the XII. CUSA would sit at 12.

XII
East: Central Florida, Cincinnati, Houston, Louisville, TCU, West Virginia
West: Baylor, Iowa St, Kansas, Kansas St, Oklahoma St, Texas Tech

I figured as much. The Big 12 would add two teams from a combination of Houston, Memphis, SMU, UCF, and USF. Houston and UCF would be the two teams added from that combination as they would be the strongest candidates from this group of 5 teams.

Alternatively, the Big 12 could go with this division lineup:

North: Cincinnati, Iowa State, Louisville, Kansas, Kansas State, West Virginia
South: Baylor, Houston, Oklahoma State, TCU, Texas Tech, UCF

I wanted to add this as well. Would USC and UCLA still leave the Pac-12 for the Big Ten in this universe? If so, would the Pac-12 be able to set their differences aside and added BYU to the fold? Would they be able to add another member to the fold, say San Diego State? Or, would they be the only Power 5 conference that operates with less than 12 members?
(This post was last modified: 09-04-2022 09:58 AM by andybible1995.)
09-04-2022 09:53 AM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
schmolik Offline
CSNBB's Big 10 Cheerleader
*

Posts: 8,576
Joined: Sep 2019
Reputation: 640
I Root For: UIUC, PSU, Nova
Location: Philadelphia Suburbs
Post: #875
RE: Alternate History and Future College Sports Realignment Scenarios
If interested, I can start a new thread for this one.

The "Super SEC" forms in the 1990s. Both Florida State and Miami are interested in the SEC and they have mutual interest. Texas and Texas A&M both want to join the SEC and no Texas politicians interfere.

East: Florida State, Miami, Florida, Georgia, South Carolina, Kentucky, Tennessee, Vanderbilt
West: Texas, Texas A&M, Alabama, Auburn, LSU, Arkansas, Mississippi, Mississippi State

(You can do a scenario without Arkansas and South Carolina as well).

The SWC is down Texas and Texas A&M. The Big 8 is still intact and has no incentive to take the rest of the Texas schools. Does the Big Ten add Pittsburgh along with Penn State? Maybe add Boston College and Syracuse as well (the remaining Big East schools)? Do they raid the Big 8 instead? Does the ACC add them instead to expand to the Northeast even though Miami isn't involved in the expansion?

Which SEC 16 is better? Florida State and Miami or Oklahoma and Missouri?
09-16-2022 11:13 AM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
BePcr07 Offline
All American
*

Posts: 4,900
Joined: Dec 2015
Reputation: 342
I Root For: Boise St & Zags
Location:
Post: #876
RE: Alternate History and Future College Sports Realignment Scenarios
(09-16-2022 11:13 AM)schmolik Wrote:  If interested, I can start a new thread for this one.

The "Super SEC" forms in the 1990s. Both Florida State and Miami are interested in the SEC and they have mutual interest. Texas and Texas A&M both want to join the SEC and no Texas politicians interfere.

East: Florida State, Miami, Florida, Georgia, South Carolina, Kentucky, Tennessee, Vanderbilt
West: Texas, Texas A&M, Alabama, Auburn, LSU, Arkansas, Mississippi, Mississippi State

(You can do a scenario without Arkansas and South Carolina as well).

The SWC is down Texas and Texas A&M. The Big 8 is still intact and has no incentive to take the rest of the Texas schools. Does the Big Ten add Pittsburgh along with Penn State? Maybe add Boston College and Syracuse as well (the remaining Big East schools)? Do they raid the Big 8 instead? Does the ACC add them instead to expand to the Northeast even though Miami isn't involved in the expansion?

Which SEC 16 is better? Florida State and Miami or Oklahoma and Missouri?

Arkansas and South Carolina still join the SEC. B1G (10) adds Penn St, Pittsburgh, Rutgers, and Syracuse for 14. PAC (10) adds Colorado, Kansas, Missouri, Nebraska, Oklahoma, and Oklahoma St for 16. ACC (8) adds Boston College, Temple, Virginia Tech, and West Virginia (12). ACC also adds 6 non-football members. SWC (6) adds Cincinnati, East Carolina, Iowa St, Kansas St, Louisville, Memphis, Southern Miss, and Tulane (14) and rebrands as CUSA and also adds 4 non-football members.

SEC
East: Florida, Florida St, Georgia, Kentucky, Miami, South Carolina, Tennessee, Vanderbilt
West: Alabama, Arkansas, Auburn, LSU, Mississippi, Mississippi St, Texas, Texas A&M

B1G
East: Michigan, Michigan St, Ohio St, Penn St, Pittsburgh, Rutgers, Syracuse
West: Illinois, Indiana, Iowa, Minnesota, Northwestern, Purdue, Wisconsin

PAC
East: Arizona, Arizona St, Colorado, Kansas, Missouri, Nebraska, Oklahoma, Oklahoma St
West: California, Oregon, Oregon St, Stanford, UCLA, USC, Washington, Washington St

ACC
Atlantic: Clemson, Maryland, North Carolina St, Temple, Wake Forest, West Virginia
Coastal: Boston College, Duke, Georgia Tech, North Carolina, Virginia, Virginia Tech
Non-Football: Georgetown, Notre Dame, Providence, Seton Hall, St. John's, Villanova

CUSA
East: Cincinnati, East Carolina, Iowa St, Louisville, Memphis, Southern Miss, Tulane
West: Baylor, Houston, Kansas St, Rice, SMU, TCU, Texas Tech
Non-Football: Charlotte, DePaul, Marquette, Saint Louis
09-16-2022 12:14 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
Post Reply 




User(s) browsing this thread: 5 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.