(02-21-2018 07:27 PM)Love and Honor Wrote:  Didn't Louisiana Tech refuse an Independence Bowl bid in their backyard after a nine-win season because they'd be playing ULM and ended up getting shut out when no one else invited them?

If I remember correctly, their AD was convinced that they (Louisiana Tech) would get a bid to the more prestigious Liberty Bowl due to bowl bid dominoes. That bid never came and the Bulldogs were out of a bowl. I think he lost his job.

How about this one: what if the Metro 7 had sponsored football?

(02-23-2018 10:36 AM)DFW HOYA Wrote:  How about this one: what if the Metro 7 had sponsored football?

By Metro 7, do you mean the 1990 group of Cincinnati, Memphis, Louisville, Tulane, Florida St, Virginia Tech, and South Carolina?

If so, and presuming they stuck around, I would think going to 12 in the 90's would've been the goal for CCG. Independents in football and SWC "leftovers" would likely be their target. I don't think Big East football becomes a thing.

Penn St still heads to the B1G. Miami, Pittsburgh, Syracuse, and Boston College go to the ACC. West Virginia, East Carolina, Rutgers, Houston, and TCU join the Metro.

ACC
Atlantic: Miami, Georgia Tech, North Carolina, Duke, Virginia, Maryland
Coastal: Clemson, North Carolina St, Wake Forest, Pittsburgh, Syracuse, Boston College

Metro
West: TCU, Houston, Tulane, Memphis, Louisville, Cincinnati
East: Florida St, South Carolina, East Carolina, West Virginia, Virginia Tech, Rutgers

Revisiting a successful Texoma gambit by the Pac in 2010. Here the ACC and Big 12 are gutted. The remnants band together with Notre Dame, TCU, and a few BE football schools to survive as a power conference. Baylor is left out in the cold.

ACC/Big 16
East: Boston College, Florida State, Miami-FL, Syracuse
North: Louisville, Notre Dame, Pittsburgh, West Virginia
South: Clemson, Duke, Georgia Tech, Wake Forest
West: Iowa State, Kansas, Kansas State, TCU

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

Pac-16
East: Oklahoma, Oklahoma State, Texas, Texas Tech
North: Oregon, Oregon State, Washington, Washington State
South: Arizona, Arizona State, Colorado, Utah
West: California, Stanford, UCLA, USC

SEC
East: Florida, Georgia, NC State, South Carolina
North: Kentucky, Tennessee, Vanderbilt, Virginia Tech
South: Alabama, Auburn, Mississippi State, Ole Miss
West: Arkansas, LSU, Missouri, Texas A&M

The non-power schools align pretty much the same as in our timeline. What's particularly interesting to me about this scenario is how strong the "leftover" conference is. The weighted mean Sagarin rating (WMSR*) for football from 1998-2017 for the average team in each P4 conference:

SEC: 79.59
Pac-16: 78.64
ACC/Big 16: 76.01
Big Ten: 74.90

* How to calculate current WMSR for a school, using Youngstown State as an example:

Year: Sagarin rating * Weight = Weighted Sagarin rating
1998: 48.76 * 1 = 48.76
1999: 64.47 * 2 = 128.94
2000: 57.43 * 3 = 172.29
2001: 55.00 * 4 = 220.00
2002: 57.94 * 5 = 289.70
2003: 49.54 * 6 = 297.24
2004: 46.25 * 7 = 323.75
2005: 62.39 * 8 = 499.12
2006: 68.55 * 9 = 616.95
2007: 60.83 * 10 = 608.30
2008: 43.52 * 11 = 478.72
2009: 51.71 * 12 = 620.52
2010: 52.29 * 13 = 679.77
2011: 60.01 * 14 = 840.14
2012: 63.57 * 15 = 953.55
2013: 60.39 * 16 = 966.24
2014: 60.15 * 17 = 1,022.55
2015: 58.88 * 18 = 1,059.84
2016: 69.48 * 19 = 1,320.12
2017: 62.34 * 20 = 1,246.80

Sum of weighted Sagarin ratings for 1998-2017 = 12,393.30
Sum of weights for 1998-2017 = 210
Weighted mean Sagarin rating (WMSR) for 1998-2017 = 12,393.30 / 210 = 59.02

Note: 1998 is the first year Sagarin rating came out for football

(02-22-2018 10:28 AM)BePcr07 Wrote:  

(02-21-2018 07:27 PM)Love and Honor Wrote:  Didn't Louisiana Tech refuse an Independence Bowl bid in their backyard after a nine-win season because they'd be playing ULM and ended up getting shut out when no one else invited them?

If I remember correctly, their AD was convinced that they (Louisiana Tech) would get a bid to the more prestigious Liberty Bowl due to bowl bid dominoes. That bid never came and the Bulldogs were out of a bowl. I think he lost his job.

2012. Interesting situation actually.
Louisiana Tech officials claimed they thought the Liberty was going to invite them.
Meanwhile Liberty folks were at Arkansas State for the AState-MTSU game to determine the Sun Belt title and the word was winner was headed to Memphis and loser to Mobile.
NIU ends up busting the BCS and instead of Big XII just covering all their slots, they end up with an excess team and Iowa State goes to Liberty since Liberty was already trying to sign the Big XII.

Suppose that the Big Ten and SEC had really had their way with the ACC during the Great Realignment. The Big Ten takes UNC and UVA in addition to UMD (and Rutgers), while the SEC helps itself to VT and NCSU. With the ACC reeling, the southern contingent hooks up with the depleted Big 12. The remnant ACC absorbs the Big East football schools, obviating the formation of the AAC. Thus after the dust settles, we have something like this by 2018:

ACC
Atlantic: Boston College, Connecticut, Pittsburgh, South Florida, Syracuse, West Virginia
Coastal: Louisville, Wake Forest, Cincinnati, Central Florida, Duke, TCU

Big 12 (many possibilities for divisional alignment here)
Leaders: Florida State, Iowa State, Kansas State, Miami-FL, Texas, Texas Tech
Legends: Clemson, Oklahoma State, Kansas, Georgia Tech, Oklahoma, Baylor

Big Ten
East: Maryland, Michigan, Michigan State, North Carolina, Ohio State, Penn State, Rutgers, Virginia
West: Illinois, Indiana, 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, NC State, South Carolina, Tennessee, Vanderbilt, Virginia Tech
Western: Alabama, Arkansas, Auburn, LSU, Mississippi State, Missouri, Ole Miss, Texas A&M

CUSA
East: Charlotte, East Carolina, FIU, Marshall, Memphis, Southern Miss, UAB
West: Houston, Navy* (Patriot), Rice, SMU, Tulane, Tulsa, UTEP
Non-FB: Wichita State

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, Georgia State, Middle Tennessee, South Alabama, Troy, Western Kentucky
West: Arkansas State, Louisiana-Lafayette, Louisiana-Monroe, New Mexico State* (WAC), North Texas, UTSA
Non-FB: Little Rock

FBS Ind
Army* (Patriot), BYU* (WCC), Liberty* (ASUN), Louisiana Tech* (WAC), Notre Dame* (Big East), Texas State* (WAC)

Maybe the Big Ten and SEC would opt for a WAC-16 style pod setup.

Plausible?

(04-16-2018 05:02 PM)Nerdlinger Wrote:  Suppose that the Big Ten and SEC had really had their way with the ACC during the Great Realignment. The Big Ten takes UNC and UVA in addition to UMD (and Rutgers), while the SEC helps itself to VT and NCSU. With the ACC reeling, the southern contingent hooks up with the depleted Big 12. The remnant ACC absorbs the Big East football schools, obviating the formation of the AAC. Thus after the dust settles, we have something like this:

ACC
Atlantic: Boston College, Connecticut, Duke, Pittsburgh, Syracuse, Wake Forest, West Virginia
"Coastal": Central Florida, Cincinnati, Houston, Louisville, Memphis, South Florida, TCU

Big 12 (many possibilities for divisional alignment here)
The One With Oklahoma: Baylor, Clemson, Georgia Tech, Kansas, Oklahoma, Oklahoma State
The One With Texas: Texas Tech, Florida State, Miami-FL, Kansas State, Texas, Iowa State

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

Pac-12 (same as in our timeline)
North: California, Oregon, Oregon State, Stanford, Washington, Washington State
South: Arizona, Arizona State, Colorado, UCLA, USC, Utah

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

Maybe the Big Ten and SEC would opt for a WAC-16 style pod setup.

Plausible?

I don't think it's plausible because I don't see Tobacco Road ever splitting up under any circumstances.

The Big 10 still have a big wishlist to go to 22.

Kansas
Oklahoma
Texas
Vanderbilt
Missouri
Virginia
North Carolina
Clemson
Notre Dame
Georgia Tech
Florida State

SEC have on their wishlist are":
Oklahoma
Virginia Tech
North Carolina State

Big 12's wishlist:
Nebraska
Colorado
Miami Florida
Florida State
Georgia Tech
Clemson
Notre Dame
BYU
Cincinnati
Louisville

The rejects fro the ACc and Big 12.
Syracuse
Boston College
Pittsburgh
Wake Forest
Duke

Iowa State
Baylor
TCU
Kansas State
Oklahoma State
West Virginia
Texas Tech

PAC 12's wishlist:
Oklahoma
Texas

They really had no interests in Oklahoma State and Texas Tech.

PAC 12's backup plans?
Boise State
San Diego State
New Mexico
Colorado State

I always wondered why the ACC was interested in acquiring Boston College when they expanded beyond 9 members. I can imagine what dominoes might have fallen if they had gone in a different direction in 2003.

At that time, the ACC had 9 members, and the Big East had 8. Nobody had more than 12, like the SEC and Big 12 had. The PAC had 10, and the B1G had 11 (a number which almost cried out for expansion to get to a CCG.

In my scenario, the following steps take place, in this order. First, the ACC expands to 12 by adding Miami, Virginia Tech and Pitt. That dropped the Big East to five football members, and they respond by bringing UConn up from FCS and adding two strong basketball programs (to placate the basketball only schools) in Louisville and Cincinnati to get back to 8.

The B1G, not to be outdone, goes past 12 by snapping up not just one, but three Big 12 schools: Nebraska, Missouri and Kansas. This takes them to 14 (the first to do so) and drops the Big 12 down to a still viable 9 members. When the PAC snaps up Utah and Colorado to qualify for a CCG, the B12 is now down to a barely viable 8 members.

Seeing that the marketplace is in some turmoil, the B1G decides not to wait to address their interest in establishing a beachhead in two key markets where a lot of their alumni reside. They pull the trigger on Maryland and Rutgers, dropping the Big East to 7 and the ACC to 11 members.

The ACC responds to the loss of Maryland by taking West Virginia, putting the Big East in a serious bind. To avoid the possibility of a breakup of their conference, the Big East invites UCF, USF and ECU as football only members, getting them up to 9 members with a balanced round robin in football and 12 members in arguably the stongest basketball lineup of 12 schools (including Notre Dame, which remains independent in football).

The SEC matches the B1G at 16 by delivering a coup de grace to the Big 12, taking Texas, Texas A&M, Oklahoma and Oklahoma State. The remaining B12 members survive extinction by taking TCU, SMU, Houston and Memphis to get back to 8 members.

At this point, the B1G and SEC stand at 16, the PAC and ACC at 12, the Big 12 at 8 (at which point they go back to the Big 8 name they still own) and the Big East is at 9 for football, and 12 for hoops. And there aren't any more moves left on the board for any of the original AQ conferences of the BCS, and most of their internal divisional issues are largely resolved.

Whew! My work here is done.

(04-16-2018 06:28 PM)ken d Wrote:  I always wondered why the ACC was interested in acquiring Boston College when they expanded beyond 9 members. I can imagine what dominoes might have fallen if they had gone in a different direction in 2003.

At that time, the ACC had 9 members, and the Big East had 8. Nobody had more than 12, like the SEC and Big 12 had. The PAC had 10, and the B1G had 11 (a number which almost cried out for expansion to get to a CCG.

In my scenario, the following steps take place, in this order. First, the ACC expands to 12 by adding Miami, Virginia Tech and Pitt. That dropped the Big East to five football members, and they respond by bringing UConn up from FCS and adding two strong basketball programs (to placate the basketball only schools) in Louisville and Cincinnati to get back to 8.

The B1G, not to be outdone, goes past 12 by snapping up not just one, but three Big 12 schools: Nebraska, Missouri and Kansas. This takes them to 14 (the first to do so) and drops the Big 12 down to a still viable 9 members. When the PAC snaps up Utah and Colorado to qualify for a CCG, the B12 is now down to a barely viable 8 members.

Seeing that the marketplace is in some turmoil, the B1G decides not to wait to address their interest in establishing a beachhead in two key markets where a lot of their alumni reside. They pull the trigger on Maryland and Rutgers, dropping the Big East to 7 and the ACC to 11 members.

The ACC responds to the loss of Maryland by taking West Virginia, putting the Big East in a serious bind. To avoid the possibility of a breakup of their conference, the Big East invites UCF, USF and ECU as football only members, getting them up to 9 members with a balanced round robin in football and 12 members in arguably the stongest basketball lineup of 12 schools (including Notre Dame, which remains independent in football).

The SEC matches the B1G at 16 by delivering a coup de grace to the Big 12, taking Texas, Texas A&M, Oklahoma and Oklahoma State. The remaining B12 members survive extinction by taking TCU, SMU, Houston and Memphis to get back to 8 members.

At this point, the B1G and SEC stand at 16, the PAC and ACC at 12, the Big 12 at 8 (at which point they go back to the Big 8 name they still own) and the Big East is at 9 for football, and 12 for hoops. And there aren't any more moves left on the board for any of the original AQ conferences of the BCS, and most of their internal divisional issues are largely resolved.

Whew! My work here is done.

Interesting! I would think that if they didn't go for BC, the ACC would have pursued Syracuse instead of Pitt. BC remaining in the Big East would make it more difficult for UConn to get the football invite, but it would probably happen anyway to help staunch the bleeding.

Your scenario is very similar to the one faced by the Big East in 2004-05 in our timeline, and even then they still booted out Temple. So I'm not sure why they'd keep them here, let alone make them a full member.

You have the ACC taking WVU to replace UMD when both Syracuse and Louisville are available. If they didn't take WVU over either of those in our timeline, why would they do so here?

If the Big 12 is down to just Baylor, ISU, KSU, and TT, a merger with the Big East football schools might be in the cards before resorting to raiding CUSA. If they decide to rebuild with non-power schools, they would probably aim for 10 schools and not just 8, though I don't know which two additional schools they'd go for. Tulane and Tulsa are available....

(04-16-2018 06:54 PM)Nerdlinger Wrote:  

(04-16-2018 06:28 PM)ken d Wrote:  I always wondered why the ACC was interested in acquiring Boston College when they expanded beyond 9 members. I can imagine what dominoes might have fallen if they had gone in a different direction in 2003.

At that time, the ACC had 9 members, and the Big East had 8. Nobody had more than 12, like the SEC and Big 12 had. The PAC had 10, and the B1G had 11 (a number which almost cried out for expansion to get to a CCG.

In my scenario, the following steps take place, in this order. First, the ACC expands to 12 by adding Miami, Virginia Tech and Pitt. That dropped the Big East to five football members, and they respond by bringing UConn up from FCS and adding two strong basketball programs (to placate the basketball only schools) in Louisville and Cincinnati to get back to 8.

The B1G, not to be outdone, goes past 12 by snapping up not just one, but three Big 12 schools: Nebraska, Missouri and Kansas. This takes them to 14 (the first to do so) and drops the Big 12 down to a still viable 9 members. When the PAC snaps up Utah and Colorado to qualify for a CCG, the B12 is now down to a barely viable 8 members.

Seeing that the marketplace is in some turmoil, the B1G decides not to wait to address their interest in establishing a beachhead in two key markets where a lot of their alumni reside. They pull the trigger on Maryland and Rutgers, dropping the Big East to 7 and the ACC to 11 members.

The ACC responds to the loss of Maryland by taking West Virginia, putting the Big East in a serious bind. To avoid the possibility of a breakup of their conference, the Big East invites UCF, USF and ECU as football only members, getting them up to 9 members with a balanced round robin in football and 12 members in arguably the stongest basketball lineup of 12 schools (including Notre Dame, which remains independent in football).

The SEC matches the B1G at 16 by delivering a coup de grace to the Big 12, taking Texas, Texas A&M, Oklahoma and Oklahoma State. The remaining B12 members survive extinction by taking TCU, SMU, Houston and Memphis to get back to 8 members.

At this point, the B1G and SEC stand at 16, the PAC and ACC at 12, the Big 12 at 8 (at which point they go back to the Big 8 name they still own) and the Big East is at 9 for football, and 12 for hoops. And there aren't any more moves left on the board for any of the original AQ conferences of the BCS, and most of their internal divisional issues are largely resolved.

Whew! My work here is done.

Interesting! I would think that if they didn't go for BC, the ACC would have pursued Syracuse instead of Pitt. BC remaining in the Big East would make it more difficult for UConn to get the football invite, but it would probably happen anyway to help staunch the bleeding.

Your scenario is very similar to the one faced by the Big East in 2004-05 in our timeline, and even then they still booted out Temple. So I'm not sure why they'd keep them here.

You have the ACC taking WVU to replace UMD when both Syracuse and Louisville are available. If they didn't take WVU over either of those in our timeline, why would they do so here?

If the Big 12 is down to just Baylor, ISU, KSU, and TT, a merger with the Big East football schools might be in the cards before resorting to raiding CUSA. If they decide to rebuild with non-power schools, they would probably aim for 10 schools and not just 8, though I don't know which two additional schools they'd go for. Tulane and Tulsa are available....

The political realities within the ACC probably (IMO) prevented a realignment that was more optimal for most of the conferences involved. That reality centered (still does, I suppose) about the ambivalence of several charter members to embrace football as the key ingredient to the ultimate survival of the league as a power conference.

I think the Big East might have actually survived despite similar concerns on the part of the non-football schools in that league. Ironically, in the scenario I laid out, the Big East would have undoubtedly remained the premier basketball conference in the country.

I don't believe any of what I described would ever have happened. But in my fantasy, the outcome would have made more sense for more schools than what we wound up with. And I think the survival of the Big East would have been a good thing. I don't think the ACC set out to break up the Big East , but the choices the ACC made, I believe, made that breakup inevitable. What I offered was one way it might have been avoided.

(04-16-2018 06:28 PM)ken d Wrote:  I always wondered why the ACC was interested in acquiring Boston College when they expanded beyond 9 members.

It was because the ACC primarily wanted Miami, and UM's then-president Donna Shalala wanted Syracuse and BC because of UM's northeast-heavy alumni. The pro-expansion ACC schools were happy to cowtow to Shalala if they got Miami and a CCG out of it. And it gave them 2 schools in the northeast instead of one outlier.

Quote:In my scenario, the following steps take place, in this order. First, the ACC expands to 12 by adding Miami, Virginia Tech and Pitt.

Even before conference networks and carriage fees, VT was controversial because it didn't bring any additional markets that the ACC didn't already have with UVA. Many (non-Hoo) ACC fans felt another football school would be preferable, but from a financial point of view BC and Syracuse made more sense.

Not sure why Pitt wasn't more in the discussion, they brought a new market. I'm guessing maybe it was they weren't really the demographic Shalala wanted.

(04-17-2018 03:23 PM)ColKurtz Wrote:  

(04-16-2018 06:28 PM)ken d Wrote:  I always wondered why the ACC was interested in acquiring Boston College when they expanded beyond 9 members.

It was because the ACC primarily wanted Miami, and UM's then-president Donna Shalala wanted Syracuse and BC because of UM's northeast-heavy alumni. The pro-expansion ACC schools were happy to cowtow to Shalala if they got Miami and a CCG out of it. And it gave them 2 schools in the northeast instead of one outlier.

Quote:In my scenario, the following steps take place, in this order. First, the ACC expands to 12 by adding Miami, Virginia Tech and Pitt.

Even before conference networks and carriage fees, VT was controversial because it didn't bring any additional markets that the ACC didn't already have with UVA. Many (non-Hoo) ACC fans felt another football school would be preferable, but from a financial point of view BC and Syracuse made more sense.

Not sure why Pitt wasn't more in the discussion, they brought a new market. I'm guessing maybe it was they weren't really the demographic Shalala wanted.

Funny that Miami and BC ended up in different divisions. How did that happen?

(04-17-2018 04:57 PM)Nerdlinger Wrote:  

(04-17-2018 03:23 PM)ColKurtz Wrote:  

(04-16-2018 06:28 PM)ken d Wrote:  I always wondered why the ACC was interested in acquiring Boston College when they expanded beyond 9 members.

It was because the ACC primarily wanted Miami, and UM's then-president Donna Shalala wanted Syracuse and BC because of UM's northeast-heavy alumni. The pro-expansion ACC schools were happy to cowtow to Shalala if they got Miami and a CCG out of it. And it gave them 2 schools in the northeast instead of one outlier.

Quote:In my scenario, the following steps take place, in this order. First, the ACC expands to 12 by adding Miami, Virginia Tech and Pitt.

Even before conference networks and carriage fees, VT was controversial because it didn't bring any additional markets that the ACC didn't already have with UVA. Many (non-Hoo) ACC fans felt another football school would be preferable, but from a financial point of view BC and Syracuse made more sense.

Not sure why Pitt wasn't more in the discussion, they brought a new market. I'm guessing maybe it was they weren't really the demographic Shalala wanted.

Funny that Miami and BC ended up in different divisions. How did that happen?

The whole question about the alignment of the divisions remains a contentious issue for many ACC fans. Nobody seems to like the ones that exist, but nobody can find a better one. One of the goals of my alternate scenarion was to have a rational way to divide the ACC in a way that most members could live with.

In my scenario, I imagined having NC State and Wake Forest join the division that included Miami, Pitt, West Virginia and Virginia Tech.

If they had just flipped the divisions of FSU and Miami, FSU would have been able to play GT annually, and Miami and BC too. It'd be interesting to find out what the real reason was.

It would be interesting to think about what would have happened had the Missouri Valley superconference of the early 70s stuck together and schools didn't drop football.
Louisville
Memphis
North Texas
West Texas
Tulsa
Wichita St.
New Mexico St.
Drake
basketball-St. Louis, Bradley

There was talk of Cincinnati coming back and becoming a 12 team conference (don't remember who 12 was). And schools like Tulane, Virginia Tech and West Virginia might have joined. It was already a power conference in basketball. It could have become what the Big East became in the early 90s, using basketball to promote their level in football.

I seem to remember the MVC getting to 12 teams briefly, but that may have just been discussion-or Memphis and Louisville may have left before the new teams joined. Looking at wiki, it doesn't look like they got beyond 10 for basketball.

(01-24-2018 12:50 PM)indianasniff Wrote:  Fascinated the number of posts about the MAC that don't account for all of the members

Currently
East Bowling Green, Buffalo, Miami, Ohio, Kent St., Akron
West Toledo, Eastern Michigan, Western Michigan, Central Michigan, Ball State, Northern Illinois

I cannot envision a scenario where Marshall would be let back in. Any expansion of the MAC would likely go east and west with another Illinois school and maybe another NY school

If the MAC had never cut a deal with Buffalo to move up, Marshall might have stayed in the MAC.

The MAC would be on Cloud 9 if Marshall ever wanted back in, imo.

(04-17-2018 09:20 PM)bullet Wrote:  It would be interesting to think about what would have happened had the Missouri Valley superconference of the early 70s stuck together and schools didn't drop football.
Louisville
Memphis
North Texas
West Texas
Tulsa
Wichita St.
New Mexico St.
Drake
basketball-St. Louis, Bradley

There was talk of Cincinnati coming back and becoming a 12 team conference (don't remember who 12 was). And schools like Tulane, Virginia Tech and West Virginia might have joined. It was already a power conference in basketball. It could have become what the Big East became in the early 90s, using basketball to promote their level in football.

You also have Indiana State, Creighton and Southern Illinois in the fold in the 1970s.

Bradley dropped football in 1970.
Loyola Chicago dropped theirs in 1930.
Creighton dropped their football program in 1942.
Saint Louis dropped theirs in 1949.
Evansville dropped their's in 1997
Washington, Mo. dropped down to D3.
Grinnell dropped down some levels as well.

Imagine what the conference would be today if schools did not moved out or dropped football?

Midwest:
Bradley
Butler
Cincinnati
Detroit Mercy
Eastern Illinois
Evansville
Indiana State
Louisville
Loyola Chicago
Memphis
Southern Illinois
Valparaiso
Western Illinois
Youngstown State

Great Plains:
Creighton
Drake
Grinnell College
Houston
Missouri State
New Mexico State
North Dakota football only
North Dakota State football only
North Texas
Northern Iowa
Saint Louis
South Dakota football only
South Dakota State football only
Tulsa
Washburn
Washington Missouri
West Texas A&M
Wichita State

That would be even stronger than the AAC in football and men's basketball. I did not count the P5 schools that were members of this conference like Iowa, Iowa State, Kansas, Kansas State, Missouri, Nebraska, Oklahoma and Oklahoma State.