Hello There, Guest! (LoginRegister)

Post Reply 
What role will politics play in realignment?
Author Message
Bookmark and Share
AllTideUp Offline
Heisman
*

Posts: 5,154
Joined: Jul 2015
Reputation: 559
I Root For: Alabama
Location:
Post: #1
What role will politics play in realignment?
Politics, the term comes from the combination of two words...

“Poli” a Latin word meaning "many" and "tics" meaning "bloodsucking creatures."

One of the all time great lines by Robin Williams.

Anyway, what role will politicians, namely state politicians, play in the upcoming realignment?

We've seen it before. TX politicians got involved in the formation of the Big 12. VA politicians got involved in ACC expansion back in the early 2000s. There are numerous stories of elected officials making calls and even debating with one another over who gets into what conference. There are probably other cases of which I'm not aware.

In the upcoming moves, I'm going to bet that both OK and TX politicians will flex their muscles to make sure certain little brothers are protected from the abyss of relegation.

I'm also going to bet that certain TX officials will seek to influence Texas A&M to help out in this process rather than allowing them to be a deterrent.

How do you think it's going to do down?

What might happen that none of us are particularly expecting?

Are KS politicians powerful enough to get Kansas State in?

What about Iowa State? Might IA leaders look to influence the Hawkeyes?
09-29-2017 08:26 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
Advertisement


murrdcu Offline
1st String
*

Posts: 1,969
Joined: Aug 2014
Reputation: 144
I Root For: Arkansas
Location:
Post: #2
RE: What role will politics play in realignment?
(09-29-2017 08:26 PM)AllTideUp Wrote:  Politics, the term comes from the combination of two words...

“Poli” a Latin word meaning "many" and "tics" meaning "bloodsucking creatures."

One of the all time great lines by Robin Williams.

Anyway, what role will politicians, namely state politicians, play in the upcoming realignment?

We've seen it before. TX politicians got involved in the formation of the Big 12. VA politicians got involved in ACC expansion back in the early 2000s. There are numerous stories of elected officials making calls and even debating with one another over who gets into what conference. There are probably other cases of which I'm not aware.

In the upcoming moves, I'm going to bet that both OK and TX politicians will flex their muscles to make sure certain little brothers are protected from the abyss of relegation.

I'm also going to bet that certain TX officials will seek to influence Texas A&M to help out in this process rather than allowing them to be a deterrent.

How do you think it's going to do down?

What might happen that none of us are particularly expecting?

Are KS politicians powerful enough to get Kansas State in?

What about Iowa State? Might IA leaders look to influence the Hawkeyes?

I assume the Big 12 implodes in this example. If the first move is either Texas or Oklahoma, then there will be major political pressure to protect the remaining state schools in that conference. Now, if it's anyone else, I don't think the B12 gets too scared and works with TV to find the best replacement.

If Texas and OU leave, all remaining schools have to fend for themselves. I think Iowa State and Kansas could find a home in the Big Ten as they've been mentioned repeatedly over the years. If not, then the remaining Big 12 could rebuild with AAC and MWC schools or simply break apart. It really depends on the market value of that TV contract and the costs of operating between these conferences.
09-29-2017 09:31 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
AllTideUp Offline
Heisman
*

Posts: 5,154
Joined: Jul 2015
Reputation: 559
I Root For: Alabama
Location:
Post: #3
RE: What role will politics play in realignment?
My expectations are essentially this:

I think Oklahoma and Oklahoma State will stick together because that's OSU's only chance of remaining in a Power conference.

I also think Texas and Texas Tech will stick together for much the same reason. That and we've already seen TX politicians intervene on behalf of TTU in order to get them into the original Big 12.

The wildcard for me is the University of Houston. Remember that UT officials spoke publicly in favor of UH being added to the Big 12. I know the whole 'Houston to the Big 12' thing was more of a political ploy than a movement, I get that. It's also true though that UH now has considerable influence in the TX Legislature. While it seems that UT has given up on its effort to place a campus in Houston(in fact the Chancellor has ordered the land in Houston be sold off), it's also true the earnest effort to utilize that land on behalf of UT-Austin was snuffed out in the Legislature by a coalition interested in the long term prospects for UH.

Point being, I think there's a legitimate question here over whether there is enough power in the TX Legislature in support of UH's interests to force UT's hand during the next round of realignment. I think that is especially true given Baylor's predicament...

Baylor is likely done. It's their own fault, of course, for not cleaning up their house and for mitigating the problem rather than dealing swiftly and decisively. The rub here is that TX politicians are used to having a large number of their schools in Power conferences. This is good for business for a lot of reasons. More Power teams means more exposure and more money flowing into not only the school but the communities and state at large. When it comes to Baylor specifically, the Baptist church is an influential demographic in TX...like most Southern states. Well, if that population loses a little exposure by having their school relegated then it's not the end of the world for the state. It's a private school after all. But what if the same thing happens to TCU?

TCU got into the Big 12 on a Hail Mary because the league was going to fall apart without decent partners to help maintain its TV contract. TCU was likely helped by their relationship with UT and obviously their proximity to the powers of the league. Problem is that no other league is going to need TCU specifically. No other league is going to need an extra TX school to maintain its TV contract. That's not to say TCU isn't a potentially valuable piece, but I don't know how likely it is for any league to go very far outside their footprint for this particular fan base.

So to recap, Baylor is nuclear despite their influence and history. TCU is not a necessary piece for any league unless UT demands their presence. I don't know how likely that is, but I can't see UT really owing TCU any favors. Point is, I'm sure the TX politicians want as many TX schools as they can get into the Power leagues, but reality is probably going to hit TX much the same way it hit the SWC nearly 30 years ago.

Bottom line is that state leaders aren't going to want to lose the exposure, tourism, and overall economic benefit of having a large number of schools in Power leagues. Their hand will be forced to some degree, but that doesn't mean they don't have a play.

As far as I can see it, the easiest move TX leaders could make is to hamstring UT and perhaps even A&M into saving both Texas Tech and Houston. They both have significant influence in the Legislature for one. And being that they are state schools, the public education system of the state stands to benefit tremendously by their inclusion...especially Houston as they were not previously in.

I know that all seems a little crazy, but just consider this as one final point...the TX politicians have nothing to lose. The next round of realignment will likely cut out several schools from the highest ranks of college athletics and may set the stage for another culling at a later date. In other words, the stakes have never been higher. If the Legislature was willing to act decisively 20 years ago to preserve the fates of Texas Tech and Baylor then how much more might they be willing to do the same now?

In other words, when logical and influential people are faced with the same circumstances then what course of action do they take?
09-29-2017 10:23 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
JRsec Offline
Super Moderator
*

Posts: 37,901
Joined: Mar 2012
Reputation: 7737
I Root For: SEC
Location:
Post: #4
RE: What role will politics play in realignment?
(09-29-2017 10:23 PM)AllTideUp Wrote:  My expectations are essentially this:

I think Oklahoma and Oklahoma State will stick together because that's OSU's only chance of remaining in a Power conference.

I also think Texas and Texas Tech will stick together for much the same reason. That and we've already seen TX politicians intervene on behalf of TTU in order to get them into the original Big 12.

The wildcard for me is the University of Houston. Remember that UT officials spoke publicly in favor of UH being added to the Big 12. I know the whole 'Houston to the Big 12' thing was more of a political ploy than a movement, I get that. It's also true though that UH now has considerable influence in the TX Legislature. While it seems that UT has given up on its effort to place a campus in Houston(in fact the Chancellor has ordered the land in Houston be sold off), it's also true the earnest effort to utilize that land on behalf of UT-Austin was snuffed out in the Legislature by a coalition interested in the long term prospects for UH.

Point being, I think there's a legitimate question here over whether there is enough power in the TX Legislature in support of UH's interests to force UT's hand during the next round of realignment. I think that is especially true given Baylor's predicament...

Baylor is likely done. It's their own fault, of course, for not cleaning up their house and for mitigating the problem rather than dealing swiftly and decisively. The rub here is that TX politicians are used to having a large number of their schools in Power conferences. This is good for business for a lot of reasons. More Power teams means more exposure and more money flowing into not only the school but the communities and state at large. When it comes to Baylor specifically, the Baptist church is an influential demographic in TX...like most Southern states. Well, if that population loses a little exposure by having their school relegated then it's not the end of the world for the state. It's a private school after all. But what if the same thing happens to TCU?

TCU got into the Big 12 on a Hail Mary because the league was going to fall apart without decent partners to help maintain its TV contract. TCU was likely helped by their relationship with UT and obviously their proximity to the powers of the league. Problem is that no other league is going to need TCU specifically. No other league is going to need an extra TX school to maintain its TV contract. That's not to say TCU isn't a potentially valuable piece, but I don't know how likely it is for any league to go very far outside their footprint for this particular fan base.

So to recap, Baylor is nuclear despite their influence and history. TCU is not a necessary piece for any league unless UT demands their presence. I don't know how likely that is, but I can't see UT really owing TCU any favors. Point is, I'm sure the TX politicians want as many TX schools as they can get into the Power leagues, but reality is probably going to hit TX much the same way it hit the SWC nearly 30 years ago.

Bottom line is that state leaders aren't going to want to lose the exposure, tourism, and overall economic benefit of having a large number of schools in Power leagues. Their hand will be forced to some degree, but that doesn't mean they don't have a play.

As far as I can see it, the easiest move TX leaders could make is to hamstring UT and perhaps even A&M into saving both Texas Tech and Houston. They both have significant influence in the Legislature for one. And being that they are state schools, the public education system of the state stands to benefit tremendously by their inclusion...especially Houston as they were not previously in.

I know that all seems a little crazy, but just consider this as one final point...the TX politicians have nothing to lose. The next round of realignment will likely cut out several schools from the highest ranks of college athletics and may set the stage for another culling at a later date. In other words, the stakes have never been higher. If the Legislature was willing to act decisively 20 years ago to preserve the fates of Texas Tech and Baylor then how much more might they be willing to do the same now?

In other words, when logical and influential people are faced with the same circumstances then what course of action do they take?

Texas / Texas Tech; Oklahoma / Oklahoma State; Kansas; Iowa State; West Virginia are the ones most likely to get out and into a P conference.

Why not Baylor and T.C.U. or even Houston? Because Texas has learned a valuable lesson. Too many P5 schools from the Lone Star state hurts their ability to recruit the number of talented players from their state that they want or need in a given year.

It was hard enough when it was just A&M. By promoting all of them the SWC cannibalized itself. Then adding Baylor and T.C.U. back into the mix of the Big 12 not only dried up Texas recruits for Texas, but cut into Oklahoma's distribution as well. Both suffered for the offense. I don't see them making that mistake a third time.

So if the SEC and ACC were both to move to 18 I think those 7 I listed might come into play plus 1 from somewhere else, like Notre Dame.
09-29-2017 10:52 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
AllTideUp Offline
Heisman
*

Posts: 5,154
Joined: Jul 2015
Reputation: 559
I Root For: Alabama
Location:
Post: #5
RE: What role will politics play in realignment?
(09-29-2017 10:52 PM)JRsec Wrote:  
(09-29-2017 10:23 PM)AllTideUp Wrote:  My expectations are essentially this:

I think Oklahoma and Oklahoma State will stick together because that's OSU's only chance of remaining in a Power conference.

I also think Texas and Texas Tech will stick together for much the same reason. That and we've already seen TX politicians intervene on behalf of TTU in order to get them into the original Big 12.

The wildcard for me is the University of Houston. Remember that UT officials spoke publicly in favor of UH being added to the Big 12. I know the whole 'Houston to the Big 12' thing was more of a political ploy than a movement, I get that. It's also true though that UH now has considerable influence in the TX Legislature. While it seems that UT has given up on its effort to place a campus in Houston(in fact the Chancellor has ordered the land in Houston be sold off), it's also true the earnest effort to utilize that land on behalf of UT-Austin was snuffed out in the Legislature by a coalition interested in the long term prospects for UH.

Point being, I think there's a legitimate question here over whether there is enough power in the TX Legislature in support of UH's interests to force UT's hand during the next round of realignment. I think that is especially true given Baylor's predicament...

Baylor is likely done. It's their own fault, of course, for not cleaning up their house and for mitigating the problem rather than dealing swiftly and decisively. The rub here is that TX politicians are used to having a large number of their schools in Power conferences. This is good for business for a lot of reasons. More Power teams means more exposure and more money flowing into not only the school but the communities and state at large. When it comes to Baylor specifically, the Baptist church is an influential demographic in TX...like most Southern states. Well, if that population loses a little exposure by having their school relegated then it's not the end of the world for the state. It's a private school after all. But what if the same thing happens to TCU?

TCU got into the Big 12 on a Hail Mary because the league was going to fall apart without decent partners to help maintain its TV contract. TCU was likely helped by their relationship with UT and obviously their proximity to the powers of the league. Problem is that no other league is going to need TCU specifically. No other league is going to need an extra TX school to maintain its TV contract. That's not to say TCU isn't a potentially valuable piece, but I don't know how likely it is for any league to go very far outside their footprint for this particular fan base.

So to recap, Baylor is nuclear despite their influence and history. TCU is not a necessary piece for any league unless UT demands their presence. I don't know how likely that is, but I can't see UT really owing TCU any favors. Point is, I'm sure the TX politicians want as many TX schools as they can get into the Power leagues, but reality is probably going to hit TX much the same way it hit the SWC nearly 30 years ago.

Bottom line is that state leaders aren't going to want to lose the exposure, tourism, and overall economic benefit of having a large number of schools in Power leagues. Their hand will be forced to some degree, but that doesn't mean they don't have a play.

As far as I can see it, the easiest move TX leaders could make is to hamstring UT and perhaps even A&M into saving both Texas Tech and Houston. They both have significant influence in the Legislature for one. And being that they are state schools, the public education system of the state stands to benefit tremendously by their inclusion...especially Houston as they were not previously in.

I know that all seems a little crazy, but just consider this as one final point...the TX politicians have nothing to lose. The next round of realignment will likely cut out several schools from the highest ranks of college athletics and may set the stage for another culling at a later date. In other words, the stakes have never been higher. If the Legislature was willing to act decisively 20 years ago to preserve the fates of Texas Tech and Baylor then how much more might they be willing to do the same now?

In other words, when logical and influential people are faced with the same circumstances then what course of action do they take?

Texas / Texas Tech; Oklahoma / Oklahoma State; Kansas; Iowa State; West Virginia are the ones most likely to get out and into a P conference.

Why not Baylor and T.C.U. or even Houston? Because Texas has learned a valuable lesson. Too many P5 schools from the Lone Star state hurts their ability to recruit the number of talented players from their state that they want or need in a given year.

It was hard enough when it was just A&M. By promoting all of them the SWC cannibalized itself. Then adding Baylor and T.C.U. back into the mix of the Big 12 not only dried up Texas recruits for Texas, but cut into Oklahoma's distribution as well. Both suffered for the offense. I don't see them making that mistake a third time.

So if the SEC and ACC were both to move to 18 I think those 7 I listed might come into play plus 1 from somewhere else, like Notre Dame.

I get what you're saying and I certainly agree that from UT's perspective they don't really have anything to gain by promoting Houston or even saving Texas Tech for that matter. My contention would be that the Legislature might not give any great credence to those sorts of interests.

If the elected leaders in question were made up of nothing more than UT and A&M grads then I think it would turn out precisely as you are predicting. But TX is so diverse, so wealthy, and so populated with people representing different interests that I think there's a chance the politicians push the issue.

Of course I could be wrong, but I think it makes sense.

Let's look at it like this...

What if UT and A&M are "encouraged" to partner in order to save Texas Tech and Houston? What if the SEC is willing to go along with it as long as the other moves make financial sense? What if enough schools are cut off from TX recruiting that this new arrangement doesn't adversely affect UT or A&M's ability to bring down the biggest stars in TX?

For example, while Kansas makes a lot of sense for the SEC in certain respects, their program along with all the other Big 8 schools relied heavily on TX athletes. Nebraska and Colorado are already out of the picture. Let's say that the agreement is struck to keep Kansas, Kansas State, and Iowa State out of the picture as well. What about Oklahoma and Oklahoma State?

Well, Texas probably wants Oklahoma in the same league and Oklahoma probably needs Oklahoma State to come along so no ground gained there. If both Baylor and TCU are dropped then that's 2 programs out of the way. One is replaced by Houston in this scenario, but Texas Tech is not a great threat to bring down major in-state talent. That's 4 Power programs in the state as opposed to the current 5 so that's a gain there.

What if the other addition has to come from the East so that recruiting in Texas is less likely to begin with? West Virginia fits the bill. What's important about that move is that WVU's proximity to OH, PA, MD, VA, NJ, and to some extent NC is an aid for the rest of the conference. There's plenty of talent in that region of the country and most of it does not belong to the SEC. Right now, SEC schools are raiding TX because of the access A&M gave them. I think this is actually what hurts UT more than the presence of schools like Baylor and TCU. UT has to find a way to counteract that phenomenon and the only way to do it is to go to the SEC.

If this sort of move was made then UT, A&M, and OU are the major players in TX recruiting. The PAC, ACC, and B1G are all cut off. Schools like Oklahoma State, Arkansas, and LSU have the ability to pick a few players here and there. Houston and Texas Tech mop up the rest. Other SEC schools will get players as well...Alabama has had success recently getting a top notch player or two for example. That's not going to change because that bottle has been uncorked.

What Texas has to do to lock down talent is make sure no other major conference is in the region. This also lines up with network interests as well at this point.

Now obviously Houston's inclusion isn't really necessary for this plan to work. If the politicians get involved though then this is the sort of plan than mitigates any impact a school like Houston would have on UT recruiting.

1. Lock down Texas
2. Lock down every major brand in the region
3. Add WVU to open up recruiting in the Mid-Atlantic so that fewer SEC schools go hunting in TX in the first place.
09-29-2017 11:50 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
murrdcu Offline
1st String
*

Posts: 1,969
Joined: Aug 2014
Reputation: 144
I Root For: Arkansas
Location:
Post: #6
RE: What role will politics play in realignment?
(09-29-2017 10:52 PM)JRsec Wrote:  
(09-29-2017 10:23 PM)AllTideUp Wrote:  My expectations are essentially this:

I think Oklahoma and Oklahoma State will stick together because that's OSU's only chance of remaining in a Power conference.

I also think Texas and Texas Tech will stick together for much the same reason. That and we've already seen TX politicians intervene on behalf of TTU in order to get them into the original Big 12.

The wildcard for me is the University of Houston. Remember that UT officials spoke publicly in favor of UH being added to the Big 12. I know the whole 'Houston to the Big 12' thing was more of a political ploy than a movement, I get that. It's also true though that UH now has considerable influence in the TX Legislature. While it seems that UT has given up on its effort to place a campus in Houston(in fact the Chancellor has ordered the land in Houston be sold off), it's also true the earnest effort to utilize that land on behalf of UT-Austin was snuffed out in the Legislature by a coalition interested in the long term prospects for UH.

Point being, I think there's a legitimate question here over whether there is enough power in the TX Legislature in support of UH's interests to force UT's hand during the next round of realignment. I think that is especially true given Baylor's predicament...

Baylor is likely done. It's their own fault, of course, for not cleaning up their house and for mitigating the problem rather than dealing swiftly and decisively. The rub here is that TX politicians are used to having a large number of their schools in Power conferences. This is good for business for a lot of reasons. More Power teams means more exposure and more money flowing into not only the school but the communities and state at large. When it comes to Baylor specifically, the Baptist church is an influential demographic in TX...like most Southern states. Well, if that population loses a little exposure by having their school relegated then it's not the end of the world for the state. It's a private school after all. But what if the same thing happens to TCU?

TCU got into the Big 12 on a Hail Mary because the league was going to fall apart without decent partners to help maintain its TV contract. TCU was likely helped by their relationship with UT and obviously their proximity to the powers of the league. Problem is that no other league is going to need TCU specifically. No other league is going to need an extra TX school to maintain its TV contract. That's not to say TCU isn't a potentially valuable piece, but I don't know how likely it is for any league to go very far outside their footprint for this particular fan base.

So to recap, Baylor is nuclear despite their influence and history. TCU is not a necessary piece for any league unless UT demands their presence. I don't know how likely that is, but I can't see UT really owing TCU any favors. Point is, I'm sure the TX politicians want as many TX schools as they can get into the Power leagues, but reality is probably going to hit TX much the same way it hit the SWC nearly 30 years ago.

Bottom line is that state leaders aren't going to want to lose the exposure, tourism, and overall economic benefit of having a large number of schools in Power leagues. Their hand will be forced to some degree, but that doesn't mean they don't have a play.

As far as I can see it, the easiest move TX leaders could make is to hamstring UT and perhaps even A&M into saving both Texas Tech and Houston. They both have significant influence in the Legislature for one. And being that they are state schools, the public education system of the state stands to benefit tremendously by their inclusion...especially Houston as they were not previously in.

I know that all seems a little crazy, but just consider this as one final point...the TX politicians have nothing to lose. The next round of realignment will likely cut out several schools from the highest ranks of college athletics and may set the stage for another culling at a later date. In other words, the stakes have never been higher. If the Legislature was willing to act decisively 20 years ago to preserve the fates of Texas Tech and Baylor then how much more might they be willing to do the same now?

In other words, when logical and influential people are faced with the same circumstances then what course of action do they take?

Texas / Texas Tech; Oklahoma / Oklahoma State; Kansas; Iowa State; West Virginia are the ones most likely to get out and into a P conference.

Why not Baylor and T.C.U. or even Houston? Because Texas has learned a valuable lesson. Too many P5 schools from the Lone Star state hurts their ability to recruit the number of talented players from their state that they want or need in a given year.

It was hard enough when it was just A&M. By promoting all of them the SWC cannibalized itself. Then adding Baylor and T.C.U. back into the mix of the Big 12 not only dried up Texas recruits for Texas, but cut into Oklahoma's distribution as well. Both suffered for the offense. I don't see them making that mistake a third time.

So if the SEC and ACC were both to move to 18 I think those 7 I listed might come into play plus 1 from somewhere else, like Notre Dame.

at some point UT can't prop up that turd of a conference with more major losses. UT-A's best bet is to follow the money and look out for themselves, especially if their next B22 TV contract looks bad.
09-30-2017 12:02 AM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
Advertisement


JRsec Offline
Super Moderator
*

Posts: 37,901
Joined: Mar 2012
Reputation: 7737
I Root For: SEC
Location:
Post: #7
RE: What role will politics play in realignment?
(09-30-2017 12:02 AM)murrdcu Wrote:  
(09-29-2017 10:52 PM)JRsec Wrote:  
(09-29-2017 10:23 PM)AllTideUp Wrote:  My expectations are essentially this:

I think Oklahoma and Oklahoma State will stick together because that's OSU's only chance of remaining in a Power conference.

I also think Texas and Texas Tech will stick together for much the same reason. That and we've already seen TX politicians intervene on behalf of TTU in order to get them into the original Big 12.

The wildcard for me is the University of Houston. Remember that UT officials spoke publicly in favor of UH being added to the Big 12. I know the whole 'Houston to the Big 12' thing was more of a political ploy than a movement, I get that. It's also true though that UH now has considerable influence in the TX Legislature. While it seems that UT has given up on its effort to place a campus in Houston(in fact the Chancellor has ordered the land in Houston be sold off), it's also true the earnest effort to utilize that land on behalf of UT-Austin was snuffed out in the Legislature by a coalition interested in the long term prospects for UH.

Point being, I think there's a legitimate question here over whether there is enough power in the TX Legislature in support of UH's interests to force UT's hand during the next round of realignment. I think that is especially true given Baylor's predicament...

Baylor is likely done. It's their own fault, of course, for not cleaning up their house and for mitigating the problem rather than dealing swiftly and decisively. The rub here is that TX politicians are used to having a large number of their schools in Power conferences. This is good for business for a lot of reasons. More Power teams means more exposure and more money flowing into not only the school but the communities and state at large. When it comes to Baylor specifically, the Baptist church is an influential demographic in TX...like most Southern states. Well, if that population loses a little exposure by having their school relegated then it's not the end of the world for the state. It's a private school after all. But what if the same thing happens to TCU?

TCU got into the Big 12 on a Hail Mary because the league was going to fall apart without decent partners to help maintain its TV contract. TCU was likely helped by their relationship with UT and obviously their proximity to the powers of the league. Problem is that no other league is going to need TCU specifically. No other league is going to need an extra TX school to maintain its TV contract. That's not to say TCU isn't a potentially valuable piece, but I don't know how likely it is for any league to go very far outside their footprint for this particular fan base.

So to recap, Baylor is nuclear despite their influence and history. TCU is not a necessary piece for any league unless UT demands their presence. I don't know how likely that is, but I can't see UT really owing TCU any favors. Point is, I'm sure the TX politicians want as many TX schools as they can get into the Power leagues, but reality is probably going to hit TX much the same way it hit the SWC nearly 30 years ago.

Bottom line is that state leaders aren't going to want to lose the exposure, tourism, and overall economic benefit of having a large number of schools in Power leagues. Their hand will be forced to some degree, but that doesn't mean they don't have a play.

As far as I can see it, the easiest move TX leaders could make is to hamstring UT and perhaps even A&M into saving both Texas Tech and Houston. They both have significant influence in the Legislature for one. And being that they are state schools, the public education system of the state stands to benefit tremendously by their inclusion...especially Houston as they were not previously in.

I know that all seems a little crazy, but just consider this as one final point...the TX politicians have nothing to lose. The next round of realignment will likely cut out several schools from the highest ranks of college athletics and may set the stage for another culling at a later date. In other words, the stakes have never been higher. If the Legislature was willing to act decisively 20 years ago to preserve the fates of Texas Tech and Baylor then how much more might they be willing to do the same now?

In other words, when logical and influential people are faced with the same circumstances then what course of action do they take?

Texas / Texas Tech; Oklahoma / Oklahoma State; Kansas; Iowa State; West Virginia are the ones most likely to get out and into a P conference.

Why not Baylor and T.C.U. or even Houston? Because Texas has learned a valuable lesson. Too many P5 schools from the Lone Star state hurts their ability to recruit the number of talented players from their state that they want or need in a given year.

It was hard enough when it was just A&M. By promoting all of them the SWC cannibalized itself. Then adding Baylor and T.C.U. back into the mix of the Big 12 not only dried up Texas recruits for Texas, but cut into Oklahoma's distribution as well. Both suffered for the offense. I don't see them making that mistake a third time.

So if the SEC and ACC were both to move to 18 I think those 7 I listed might come into play plus 1 from somewhere else, like Notre Dame.

at some point UT can't prop up that turd of a conference with more major losses. UT-A's best bet is to follow the money and look out for themselves, especially if their next B22 TV contract looks bad.

Yes. And the Texas lawmakers know it. Slive once said in a speech he gave in Dallas that the SEC would love to have any of their state schools.

I think the best that the legislature could hope for is that Texas and Texas Tech get a place to park their programs. Remember the Texas legislature only parks oil endowment money at Austin and College Station. I think their preferences have been made public already in that regard.

Plus if the SEC lands Oklahoma then Texas has to do something in kind or risk losing influence in their own home state.

Now to go political, most states are beginning to downsize higher education spending. In the state of Texas the research money goes to Texas, and to Texas A&M. Tech is trying hard to play catch up.
09-30-2017 01:50 AM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
AllTideUp Offline
Heisman
*

Posts: 5,154
Joined: Jul 2015
Reputation: 559
I Root For: Alabama
Location:
Post: #8
RE: What role will politics play in realignment?
(09-30-2017 01:50 AM)JRsec Wrote:  
(09-30-2017 12:02 AM)murrdcu Wrote:  
(09-29-2017 10:52 PM)JRsec Wrote:  
(09-29-2017 10:23 PM)AllTideUp Wrote:  My expectations are essentially this:

I think Oklahoma and Oklahoma State will stick together because that's OSU's only chance of remaining in a Power conference.

I also think Texas and Texas Tech will stick together for much the same reason. That and we've already seen TX politicians intervene on behalf of TTU in order to get them into the original Big 12.

The wildcard for me is the University of Houston. Remember that UT officials spoke publicly in favor of UH being added to the Big 12. I know the whole 'Houston to the Big 12' thing was more of a political ploy than a movement, I get that. It's also true though that UH now has considerable influence in the TX Legislature. While it seems that UT has given up on its effort to place a campus in Houston(in fact the Chancellor has ordered the land in Houston be sold off), it's also true the earnest effort to utilize that land on behalf of UT-Austin was snuffed out in the Legislature by a coalition interested in the long term prospects for UH.

Point being, I think there's a legitimate question here over whether there is enough power in the TX Legislature in support of UH's interests to force UT's hand during the next round of realignment. I think that is especially true given Baylor's predicament...

Baylor is likely done. It's their own fault, of course, for not cleaning up their house and for mitigating the problem rather than dealing swiftly and decisively. The rub here is that TX politicians are used to having a large number of their schools in Power conferences. This is good for business for a lot of reasons. More Power teams means more exposure and more money flowing into not only the school but the communities and state at large. When it comes to Baylor specifically, the Baptist church is an influential demographic in TX...like most Southern states. Well, if that population loses a little exposure by having their school relegated then it's not the end of the world for the state. It's a private school after all. But what if the same thing happens to TCU?

TCU got into the Big 12 on a Hail Mary because the league was going to fall apart without decent partners to help maintain its TV contract. TCU was likely helped by their relationship with UT and obviously their proximity to the powers of the league. Problem is that no other league is going to need TCU specifically. No other league is going to need an extra TX school to maintain its TV contract. That's not to say TCU isn't a potentially valuable piece, but I don't know how likely it is for any league to go very far outside their footprint for this particular fan base.

So to recap, Baylor is nuclear despite their influence and history. TCU is not a necessary piece for any league unless UT demands their presence. I don't know how likely that is, but I can't see UT really owing TCU any favors. Point is, I'm sure the TX politicians want as many TX schools as they can get into the Power leagues, but reality is probably going to hit TX much the same way it hit the SWC nearly 30 years ago.

Bottom line is that state leaders aren't going to want to lose the exposure, tourism, and overall economic benefit of having a large number of schools in Power leagues. Their hand will be forced to some degree, but that doesn't mean they don't have a play.

As far as I can see it, the easiest move TX leaders could make is to hamstring UT and perhaps even A&M into saving both Texas Tech and Houston. They both have significant influence in the Legislature for one. And being that they are state schools, the public education system of the state stands to benefit tremendously by their inclusion...especially Houston as they were not previously in.

I know that all seems a little crazy, but just consider this as one final point...the TX politicians have nothing to lose. The next round of realignment will likely cut out several schools from the highest ranks of college athletics and may set the stage for another culling at a later date. In other words, the stakes have never been higher. If the Legislature was willing to act decisively 20 years ago to preserve the fates of Texas Tech and Baylor then how much more might they be willing to do the same now?

In other words, when logical and influential people are faced with the same circumstances then what course of action do they take?

Texas / Texas Tech; Oklahoma / Oklahoma State; Kansas; Iowa State; West Virginia are the ones most likely to get out and into a P conference.

Why not Baylor and T.C.U. or even Houston? Because Texas has learned a valuable lesson. Too many P5 schools from the Lone Star state hurts their ability to recruit the number of talented players from their state that they want or need in a given year.

It was hard enough when it was just A&M. By promoting all of them the SWC cannibalized itself. Then adding Baylor and T.C.U. back into the mix of the Big 12 not only dried up Texas recruits for Texas, but cut into Oklahoma's distribution as well. Both suffered for the offense. I don't see them making that mistake a third time.

So if the SEC and ACC were both to move to 18 I think those 7 I listed might come into play plus 1 from somewhere else, like Notre Dame.

at some point UT can't prop up that turd of a conference with more major losses. UT-A's best bet is to follow the money and look out for themselves, especially if their next B22 TV contract looks bad.

Yes. And the Texas lawmakers know it. Slive once said in a speech he gave in Dallas that the SEC would love to have any of their state schools.

I think the best that the legislature could hope for is that Texas and Texas Tech get a place to park their programs. Remember the Texas legislature only parks oil endowment money at Austin and College Station. I think their preferences have been made public already in that regard.

Plus if the SEC lands Oklahoma then Texas has to do something in kind or risk losing influence in their own home state.

Now to go political, most states are beginning to downsize higher education spending. In the state of Texas the research money goes to Texas, and to Texas A&M. Tech is trying hard to play catch up.

I think that's the crux of it with Houston.

What I read a while back is that the state wanted to raise the profile of both Texas Tech and Houston. Now certainly UT and A&M will always be the big dogs, but a single university(or two in this case) can only grow so large and serve the needs of so many. In a state so large, I can see how leaders might want add to their roster of elite schools assuming it's feasible. CA, for example, has several AAU schools even though many of them are not in FBS conferences.

Anyway, as it stands, TX is one of the few economies that is consistently growing. It's the 2nd largest state in the country and doesn't appear to be slowing down. Add to that, many of the state's kids are leaving for out of state schools because there simply aren't enough good options in-state. Alabama has recruited heavily in TX in recent years, for example. I'm sure there are others.

TX has a large number of state schools mind you. There are a ton of them dotting the map and it's true they won't all receive more money or an elevation in status, but Tech and UH aren't that far off the pace relatively speaking.

The question for me is do the state politicians have anything to lose? They could sell out to try to get both Tech and UH in and it might not work, but if I was a leader in that state then that is precisely the sort of plan I'd be working on. They have at their back the leverage that the value of both UT and A&M bring. It's like you said JR, the money is getting tighter which means it will become ever more important to get "into the club" of high exposure universities.
09-30-2017 07:40 AM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
AllTideUp Offline
Heisman
*

Posts: 5,154
Joined: Jul 2015
Reputation: 559
I Root For: Alabama
Location:
Post: #9
RE: What role will politics play in realignment?
Let me throw a scenario out there...

I know that 20 would be an awfully big number unless the right brands were aboard. What if 18 is all it takes and you don't have to take Oklahoma State?

Let's say the TX Legislature is dead set on getting both Texas Tech and Houston in. They could pressure Texas and Texas A&M to cooperate and pitch the deal. How could Oklahoma come aboard at 18 without having to worry about Oklahoma State?

We've discussed the idea of OU and OSU coming on in order to force Texas into a decision to choose the SEC. Surely UT knows the game so what if they counter?

"Hey guys, we know you've got us checked, but we're getting a lot of pressure from our leaders to include some little brothers. How about you just take us 3 and then offer OU by themselves? Wouldn't it be better to have those extra games in TX? And wouldn't it be easier for OU to just play OSU out of conference?"

What is OU going to do in response? Well, they could head to the PAC with OSU, but the PAC probably won't take the deal. They could go to the B1G with Kansas and that would be fine as the SEC could simply offer West Virginia as the 4th and the deal could be done. Or they can simply tell the powers that be in OK that they've lost their leverage to save OSU. They can't get them in and the only other choice is to stay in the Big 12.

The SEC wanted OU by themselves previously and frankly OSU just doesn't bring that much inherent value to the table. Not that I mind having them, but they don't really do anything for us.
09-30-2017 09:13 AM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
Lenvillecards Offline
Heisman
*

Posts: 6,458
Joined: Nov 2013
Reputation: 376
I Root For: Louisville
Location:
Post: #10
What role will politics play in realignment?
I wouldn't underestimate Kentucky politicians. The UofL is one of the major economic drivers for the city of Louisville & the largest employer in downtown Louisville. The city of Louisville is the primary economic driver for the state of Kentucky. With the recent basketball scandal it has left many wondering how the death penalty would empact the city of Louisville & the state of Kentucky. With the Yum Center losing its primary tenant even for 1 year it would cause many area bars & restaurants to close. It would cause a negative impact not just on the city but the entire state. I don't see the state politicians letting the UofL get demoted without a fight. Let's not forget about Mitch McConnell either. Politicians will continue to play a role in realignment.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
09-30-2017 11:14 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: #11
RE: What role will politics play in realignment?
(09-30-2017 11:14 AM)Lenvillecards Wrote:  I wouldn't underestimate Kentucky politicians. The UofL is one of the major economic drivers for the city of Louisville & the largest employer in downtown Louisville. The city of Louisville is the primary economic driver for the state of Kentucky. With the recent basketball scandal it has left many wondering how the death penalty would empact the city of Louisville & the state of Kentucky. With the Yum Center losing its primary tenant even for 1 year it would cause many area bars & restaurants to close. It would cause a negative impact not just on the city but the entire state. I don't see the state politicians letting the UofL get demoted without a fight. Let's not forget about Mitch McConnell either. Politicians will continue to play a role in realignment.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

I don't think U of L is going anywhere - the NCAA is very gun-shy about the death penalty.

That said, if anyone expresses interest in sharing the Yum Center, it would be in the University's best interest not to push back on it, even if it's the NBA (which probably is at best not happening before the 2021-22 season). U of L may lose some ground with the T-shirt fans, but quietly rebuilding things up the right way will pay dividends in the long run.

Besides, as long as the football team isn't affected, even if Louisville gets the boot from the ACC, I think the Big 12 is still in a position where they can't say no. The Big 12 could even strike pre-emptively by adding Connecticut and Louisville and immediately tie the ACC's hands into adding Cincinnati.

Big 12 North: UConn, WVU, Louisville, Iowa State, Kansas, Kansas State
Big 12 South: Texas, Texas Tech, Baylor, TCU, Oklahoma, Oklahoma State
09-30-2017 10:38 PM
Visit this user's website Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
Advertisement


Lenvillecards Offline
Heisman
*

Posts: 6,458
Joined: Nov 2013
Reputation: 376
I Root For: Louisville
Location:
Post: #12
What role will politics play in realignment?
(09-30-2017 10:38 PM)chargeradio Wrote:  
(09-30-2017 11:14 AM)Lenvillecards Wrote:  I wouldn't underestimate Kentucky politicians. The UofL is one of the major economic drivers for the city of Louisville & the largest employer in downtown Louisville. The city of Louisville is the primary economic driver for the state of Kentucky. With the recent basketball scandal it has left many wondering how the death penalty would empact the city of Louisville & the state of Kentucky. With the Yum Center losing its primary tenant even for 1 year it would cause many area bars & restaurants to close. It would cause a negative impact not just on the city but the entire state. I don't see the state politicians letting the UofL get demoted without a fight. Let's not forget about Mitch McConnell either. Politicians will continue to play a role in realignment.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

I don't think U of L is going anywhere - the NCAA is very gun-shy about the death penalty.

That said, if anyone expresses interest in sharing the Yum Center, it would be in the University's best interest not to push back on it, even if it's the NBA (which probably is at best not happening before the 2021-22 season). U of L may lose some ground with the T-shirt fans, but quietly rebuilding things up the right way will pay dividends in the long run.

Besides, as long as the football team isn't affected, even if Louisville gets the boot from the ACC, I think the Big 12 is still in a position where they can't say no. The Big 12 could even strike pre-emptively by adding Connecticut and Louisville and immediately tie the ACC's hands into adding Cincinnati.

Big 12 North: UConn, WVU, Louisville, Iowa State, Kansas, Kansas State
Big 12 South: Texas, Texas Tech, Baylor, TCU, Oklahoma, Oklahoma State


With new leadership coming in at the UofL I don't think you would see much pushback regarding the NBA. Nothing as furious as Pitino & Jurich anyway. Having an NBA team along with the UofL in the Yum would go along way in solving its financial issues. I'm just not sure if the city can realistically attract an NBA team.

If a "death penalty" is ever warranted it's in Louisville case for sure. I don't think it will happen & I hope it doesn't, I see a multi year postseason ban & drastic scholarship reductions coming & there's zero chance of keeping the 2013 banner now.

In your scenario I think the B12 would be better off taking Cincinnati rather than UCONN. Louisville & Cincinnati are more football rivals for WV than UCONN is & there's geography. UCONN would be a tougher pill to swallow for the ACC than Cincinnati would be I believe.

Getting back on topic, McConnell & a few in Frankfurt would put pressure on UK to support the UofL inclusion. How much pressure would depend on the depth & ramifications of the scandal though. I think there would be a lot of political pressure & so I think there would be more teams in then people think. The state of Ohio is to big to just have only 1 power school, though I can see OSU pushing for that without much political pushback.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
(This post was last modified: 10-01-2017 08:52 AM by Lenvillecards.)
10-01-2017 08:48 AM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
JRsec Offline
Super Moderator
*

Posts: 37,901
Joined: Mar 2012
Reputation: 7737
I Root For: SEC
Location:
Post: #13
RE: What role will politics play in realignment?
(10-01-2017 08:48 AM)Lenvillecards Wrote:  
(09-30-2017 10:38 PM)chargeradio Wrote:  
(09-30-2017 11:14 AM)Lenvillecards Wrote:  I wouldn't underestimate Kentucky politicians. The UofL is one of the major economic drivers for the city of Louisville & the largest employer in downtown Louisville. The city of Louisville is the primary economic driver for the state of Kentucky. With the recent basketball scandal it has left many wondering how the death penalty would empact the city of Louisville & the state of Kentucky. With the Yum Center losing its primary tenant even for 1 year it would cause many area bars & restaurants to close. It would cause a negative impact not just on the city but the entire state. I don't see the state politicians letting the UofL get demoted without a fight. Let's not forget about Mitch McConnell either. Politicians will continue to play a role in realignment.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

I don't think U of L is going anywhere - the NCAA is very gun-shy about the death penalty.

That said, if anyone expresses interest in sharing the Yum Center, it would be in the University's best interest not to push back on it, even if it's the NBA (which probably is at best not happening before the 2021-22 season). U of L may lose some ground with the T-shirt fans, but quietly rebuilding things up the right way will pay dividends in the long run.

Besides, as long as the football team isn't affected, even if Louisville gets the boot from the ACC, I think the Big 12 is still in a position where they can't say no. The Big 12 could even strike pre-emptively by adding Connecticut and Louisville and immediately tie the ACC's hands into adding Cincinnati.

Big 12 North: UConn, WVU, Louisville, Iowa State, Kansas, Kansas State
Big 12 South: Texas, Texas Tech, Baylor, TCU, Oklahoma, Oklahoma State


With new leadership coming in at the UofL I don't think you would see much pushback regarding the NBA. Nothing as furious as Pitino & Jurich anyway. Having an NBA team along with the UofL in the Yum world go along way to solving its financial issues. I'm just not sure if the city can realistically attract an NBA team.

If a "death penalty" is ever warranted it's in Louisville case for sure. I don't think it will happen & I hope it doesn't, I see a multi year postseason ban & drastic scholarship reductions coming & there's zero chance of keeping the 2013 banner now.

In your scenario I think the B12 would be better off taking Cincinnati rather than UCONN. Louisville & Cincinnati are more football rivals for WV than UCONN is & there's geography. UCONN would be a tougher pill to swallow for the ACC than Cincinnati would be I believe.

Getting back on topic, McConnell & a few in Frankfurt would put pressure on UK to support the UofL inclusion. How much pressure would depend on the depth & ramifications of the scandal though. I think there would be a lot of political pressure & so I think there would be more teams in then people think. The state of Ohio is to big to just have only 1 power school, though I can see OSU pushing for that without much political pushback.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

I look around at what's happening each weekend and no longer believe that the P5 will do anything but shrink. The SEC has two strong teams and may have 3 in the middle. The Big 10 at the top consists of 2 with 2 or 3 more in the middle. The PAC may wind up being the two Washington schools. Clemson stands alone in the ACC with perhaps a challenge from Miami. T.C.U. and Oklahoma will mix it up with Texas Tech and Oklahoma State.

My point being that there is such a separation between each conference's top flight schools and the also rans that I no longer believe there are enough true coaches or enough strong recruits to fill the gaps and with high school participation shrinking I believe that college football will hang on but that the distance between the haves and have nots, and the competitive and non competitive is going to grow and inversely the the number of competitors will shrink.

I wouldn't be surprised now if the P5 shrank did shrink to 3 conferences of 20, or perhaps even fewer, perhaps as few as 54.

I can't remember when the SEC has had so few beat up on so many, so badly. At our height of strength our bottom was a low as 1 or 2 non competitive teams. After yesterday, I am left questioning if there are 6 non competitive teams: Missouri, L.S.U., Mississippi State, Mississippi, Tennessee, and possibly Arkansas.

Mathematically they can't all finish as true losers, but I really don't see any of them hanging with Alabama or Georgia. The beat down of the Vols was epic. The slaughter of Ole Miss a trouncing that only Vanderbilt would have ever been expected to endure.

I've long suspected that the high school talent pool was greatly reduced. I think that college ball is now suffering from that deficit. Couple that with the significant drop off in interest in the NFL and it's growing publicity nightmare with the anthem issue and we may be witnessing the beginning of the unraveling of the sport.

It will take decades for its decline to end in a significant reduction of the sport, but 20 years or so isn't really that long. But I do think all of the indicators point to its demise.
10-01-2017 09:15 AM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
XLance Offline
Hall of Famer
*

Posts: 14,233
Joined: Mar 2008
Reputation: 762
I Root For: Carolina
Location: Greensboro, NC
Post: #14
RE: What role will politics play in realignment?
(10-01-2017 09:15 AM)JRsec Wrote:  
(10-01-2017 08:48 AM)Lenvillecards Wrote:  
(09-30-2017 10:38 PM)chargeradio Wrote:  
(09-30-2017 11:14 AM)Lenvillecards Wrote:  I wouldn't underestimate Kentucky politicians. The UofL is one of the major economic drivers for the city of Louisville & the largest employer in downtown Louisville. The city of Louisville is the primary economic driver for the state of Kentucky. With the recent basketball scandal it has left many wondering how the death penalty would empact the city of Louisville & the state of Kentucky. With the Yum Center losing its primary tenant even for 1 year it would cause many area bars & restaurants to close. It would cause a negative impact not just on the city but the entire state. I don't see the state politicians letting the UofL get demoted without a fight. Let's not forget about Mitch McConnell either. Politicians will continue to play a role in realignment.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

I don't think U of L is going anywhere - the NCAA is very gun-shy about the death penalty.

That said, if anyone expresses interest in sharing the Yum Center, it would be in the University's best interest not to push back on it, even if it's the NBA (which probably is at best not happening before the 2021-22 season). U of L may lose some ground with the T-shirt fans, but quietly rebuilding things up the right way will pay dividends in the long run.

Besides, as long as the football team isn't affected, even if Louisville gets the boot from the ACC, I think the Big 12 is still in a position where they can't say no. The Big 12 could even strike pre-emptively by adding Connecticut and Louisville and immediately tie the ACC's hands into adding Cincinnati.

Big 12 North: UConn, WVU, Louisville, Iowa State, Kansas, Kansas State
Big 12 South: Texas, Texas Tech, Baylor, TCU, Oklahoma, Oklahoma State


With new leadership coming in at the UofL I don't think you would see much pushback regarding the NBA. Nothing as furious as Pitino & Jurich anyway. Having an NBA team along with the UofL in the Yum world go along way to solving its financial issues. I'm just not sure if the city can realistically attract an NBA team.

If a "death penalty" is ever warranted it's in Louisville case for sure. I don't think it will happen & I hope it doesn't, I see a multi year postseason ban & drastic scholarship reductions coming & there's zero chance of keeping the 2013 banner now.

In your scenario I think the B12 would be better off taking Cincinnati rather than UCONN. Louisville & Cincinnati are more football rivals for WV than UCONN is & there's geography. UCONN would be a tougher pill to swallow for the ACC than Cincinnati would be I believe.

Getting back on topic, McConnell & a few in Frankfurt would put pressure on UK to support the UofL inclusion. How much pressure would depend on the depth & ramifications of the scandal though. I think there would be a lot of political pressure & so I think there would be more teams in then people think. The state of Ohio is to big to just have only 1 power school, though I can see OSU pushing for that without much political pushback.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

I look around at what's happening each weekend and no longer believe that the P5 will do anything but shrink. The SEC has two strong teams and may have 3 in the middle. The Big 10 at the top consists of 2 with 2 or 3 more in the middle. The PAC may wind up being the two Washington schools. Clemson stands alone in the ACC with perhaps a challenge from Miami. T.C.U. and Oklahoma will mix it up with Texas Tech and Oklahoma State.

My point being that there is such a separation between each conference's top flight schools and the also rans that I no longer believe there are enough true coaches or enough strong recruits to fill the gaps and with high school participation shrinking I believe that college football will hang on but that the distance between the haves and have nots, and the competitive and non competitive is going to grow and inversely the the number of competitors will shrink.

I wouldn't be surprised now if the P5 shrank did shrink to 3 conferences of 20, or perhaps even fewer, perhaps as few as 54.

I can't remember when the SEC has had so few beat up on so many, so badly. At our height of strength our bottom was a low as 1 or 2 non competitive teams. After yesterday, I am left questioning if there are 6 non competitive teams: Missouri, L.S.U., Mississippi State, Mississippi, Tennessee, and possibly Arkansas.

Mathematically they can't all finish as true losers, but I really don't see any of them hanging with Alabama or Georgia. The beat down of the Vols was epic. The slaughter of Ole Miss a trouncing that only Vanderbilt would have ever been expected to endure.

I've long suspected that the high school talent pool was greatly reduced. I think that college ball is now suffering from that deficit. Couple that with the significant drop off in interest in the NFL and it's growing publicity nightmare with the anthem issue and we may be witnessing the beginning of the unraveling of the sport.

It will take decades for its decline to end in a significant reduction of the sport, but 20 years or so isn't really that long. But I do think all of the indicators point to its demise.

FOX shows what 24 would look like in 2026.

http://www.foxsports.com/college-footbal...ame-051616
10-01-2017 09:38 AM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
AllTideUp Offline
Heisman
*

Posts: 5,154
Joined: Jul 2015
Reputation: 559
I Root For: Alabama
Location:
Post: #15
RE: What role will politics play in realignment?
(10-01-2017 09:15 AM)JRsec Wrote:  I look around at what's happening each weekend and no longer believe that the P5 will do anything but shrink. The SEC has two strong teams and may have 3 in the middle. The Big 10 at the top consists of 2 with 2 or 3 more in the middle. The PAC may wind up being the two Washington schools. Clemson stands alone in the ACC with perhaps a challenge from Miami. T.C.U. and Oklahoma will mix it up with Texas Tech and Oklahoma State.

My point being that there is such a separation between each conference's top flight schools and the also rans that I no longer believe there are enough true coaches or enough strong recruits to fill the gaps and with high school participation shrinking I believe that college football will hang on but that the distance between the haves and have nots, and the competitive and non competitive is going to grow and inversely the the number of competitors will shrink.

I wouldn't be surprised now if the P5 shrank did shrink to 3 conferences of 20, or perhaps even fewer, perhaps as few as 54.

I can't remember when the SEC has had so few beat up on so many, so badly. At our height of strength our bottom was a low as 1 or 2 non competitive teams. After yesterday, I am left questioning if there are 6 non competitive teams: Missouri, L.S.U., Mississippi State, Mississippi, Tennessee, and possibly Arkansas.

Mathematically they can't all finish as true losers, but I really don't see any of them hanging with Alabama or Georgia. The beat down of the Vols was epic. The slaughter of Ole Miss a trouncing that only Vanderbilt would have ever been expected to endure.

I've long suspected that the high school talent pool was greatly reduced. I think that college ball is now suffering from that deficit. Couple that with the significant drop off in interest in the NFL and it's growing publicity nightmare with the anthem issue and we may be witnessing the beginning of the unraveling of the sport.

It will take decades for its decline to end in a significant reduction of the sport, but 20 years or so isn't really that long. But I do think all of the indicators point to its demise.

I wouldn't be surprised to see the ranks shrink although I think most of the schools that get dropped are in the current Big 12.

I think it's noteworthy that there are quite a few Eastern schools that could survive just fine on a basketball first budget with minimal funding for an average football product. The Big East did it for many years and maybe we see a revival of a league like that. A while back, I theorized that certain ACC schools could move to the SEC and B1G while a core of them, due to their unique cultures, could survive in a basketball-centric league that was confined to the East Coast. Maybe it comes about...

All in all, I think the NFL's issues are mostly separate. While there are existential threats to the game itself and I think those are mostly CTE/health related, we're still too early in the process to know for sure what the long term effects are for participating in the game.

Compared to the NFL, the roots of college football run very deep and I think it would take much longer than 20 years for that support to evaporate. I've often compared college sports to the European soccer leagues because the teams are based in communities with long histories of organic support rather than in the biggest media markets and they don't move when the going gets tough. The NFL is 100% a cutthroat money making machine and eventually the market allows for entities like that to fade or shut down. For example, it's absolutely ridiculous that the NFL has been considering placing a team in London. Only corporations think with such arrogance and while there's nothing wrong with making a buck, eventually the money dries up for entities that aren't woven in among society's institutions.

The college game would exist whether the money was huge or not for a lot of different reasons. I could see a future where college football once again becomes the pinnacle of the game.
10-02-2017 03:33 AM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
AllTideUp Offline
Heisman
*

Posts: 5,154
Joined: Jul 2015
Reputation: 559
I Root For: Alabama
Location:
Post: #16
RE: What role will politics play in realignment?
A larger SEC and B1G?

-SEC adds

Texas, Texas Tech, Houston(pet theory), Florida State, Miami, Georgia Tech, Clemson, UNC, Duke, Virginia

-B1G adds

Oklahoma, Kansas, Notre Dame, Virginia Tech, NC State, UConn

-An Eastern league revived?

Boston College, Syracuse, Temple, Pittsburgh, West Virginia, Cincinnati, Louisville, Wake Forest, UCF, USF

-PAC stays put

That would be 66 in total and 2 of these leagues aren't going to get paid that much so I don't think the networks would balk.
10-02-2017 04:32 AM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
Advertisement


BePcr07 Offline
All American
*

Posts: 4,900
Joined: Dec 2015
Reputation: 342
I Root For: Boise St & Zags
Location:
Post: #17
RE: What role will politics play in realignment?
(10-02-2017 04:32 AM)AllTideUp Wrote:  A larger SEC and B1G?

-SEC adds

Texas, Texas Tech, Houston(pet theory), Florida State, Miami, Georgia Tech, Clemson, UNC, Duke, Virginia

-B1G adds

Oklahoma, Kansas, Notre Dame, Virginia Tech, NC State, UConn

-An Eastern league revived?

Boston College, Syracuse, Temple, Pittsburgh, West Virginia, Cincinnati, Louisville, Wake Forest, UCF, USF

-PAC stays put

That would be 66 in total and 2 of these leagues aren't going to get paid that much so I don't think the networks would balk.

Something like this may be interesting for the SEC because it is a fairly tight regional group with the 24 you proposed. Splitting schools into 4 divisions that meet each sub-region (some easier to develop than others) within the conference. The divisions are mixed each year which would allow for maximum exposure. You play each of the 5 teams in your division that season plus 2-3 annual rivals plus 2-3 other conference games for a total of 10 conference games. Here's a sample layout:

West: Texas, Florida St, Mississippi, Missouri, Duke, Georgia
East: Houston, Miami, Alabama, Arkansas, North Carolina, Clemson
South: Texas A&M, Florida, Auburn, Tennessee, Kentucky, Georgia Tech
North: Texas Tech, LSU, Mississippi St, Vanderbilt, Virginia, South Carolina

Texas' SEC schedule: Florida St, Mississippi, Missouri, Duke, Georgia, Houston, Texas A&M, Texas Tech, South Carolina, Auburn
10-02-2017 10:16 AM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
Win5002 Offline
Special Teams
*

Posts: 618
Joined: Oct 2015
Reputation: 31
I Root For: Big 12 & B1G
Location:
Post: #18
RE: What role will politics play in realignment?
(10-01-2017 09:38 AM)XLance Wrote:  
(10-01-2017 09:15 AM)JRsec Wrote:  
(10-01-2017 08:48 AM)Lenvillecards Wrote:  
(09-30-2017 10:38 PM)chargeradio Wrote:  
(09-30-2017 11:14 AM)Lenvillecards Wrote:  I wouldn't underestimate Kentucky politicians. The UofL is one of the major economic drivers for the city of Louisville & the largest employer in downtown Louisville. The city of Louisville is the primary economic driver for the state of Kentucky. With the recent basketball scandal it has left many wondering how the death penalty would empact the city of Louisville & the state of Kentucky. With the Yum Center losing its primary tenant even for 1 year it would cause many area bars & restaurants to close. It would cause a negative impact not just on the city but the entire state. I don't see the state politicians letting the UofL get demoted without a fight. Let's not forget about Mitch McConnell either. Politicians will continue to play a role in realignment.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

I don't think U of L is going anywhere - the NCAA is very gun-shy about the death penalty.

That said, if anyone expresses interest in sharing the Yum Center, it would be in the University's best interest not to push back on it, even if it's the NBA (which probably is at best not happening before the 2021-22 season). U of L may lose some ground with the T-shirt fans, but quietly rebuilding things up the right way will pay dividends in the long run.

Besides, as long as the football team isn't affected, even if Louisville gets the boot from the ACC, I think the Big 12 is still in a position where they can't say no. The Big 12 could even strike pre-emptively by adding Connecticut and Louisville and immediately tie the ACC's hands into adding Cincinnati.

Big 12 North: UConn, WVU, Louisville, Iowa State, Kansas, Kansas State
Big 12 South: Texas, Texas Tech, Baylor, TCU, Oklahoma, Oklahoma State


With new leadership coming in at the UofL I don't think you would see much pushback regarding the NBA. Nothing as furious as Pitino & Jurich anyway. Having an NBA team along with the UofL in the Yum world go along way to solving its financial issues. I'm just not sure if the city can realistically attract an NBA team.

If a "death penalty" is ever warranted it's in Louisville case for sure. I don't think it will happen & I hope it doesn't, I see a multi year postseason ban & drastic scholarship reductions coming & there's zero chance of keeping the 2013 banner now.

In your scenario I think the B12 would be better off taking Cincinnati rather than UCONN. Louisville & Cincinnati are more football rivals for WV than UCONN is & there's geography. UCONN would be a tougher pill to swallow for the ACC than Cincinnati would be I believe.

Getting back on topic, McConnell & a few in Frankfurt would put pressure on UK to support the UofL inclusion. How much pressure would depend on the depth & ramifications of the scandal though. I think there would be a lot of political pressure & so I think there would be more teams in then people think. The state of Ohio is to big to just have only 1 power school, though I can see OSU pushing for that without much political pushback.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

I look around at what's happening each weekend and no longer believe that the P5 will do anything but shrink. The SEC has two strong teams and may have 3 in the middle. The Big 10 at the top consists of 2 with 2 or 3 more in the middle. The PAC may wind up being the two Washington schools. Clemson stands alone in the ACC with perhaps a challenge from Miami. T.C.U. and Oklahoma will mix it up with Texas Tech and Oklahoma State.

My point being that there is such a separation between each conference's top flight schools and the also rans that I no longer believe there are enough true coaches or enough strong recruits to fill the gaps and with high school participation shrinking I believe that college football will hang on but that the distance between the haves and have nots, and the competitive and non competitive is going to grow and inversely the the number of competitors will shrink.

I wouldn't be surprised now if the P5 shrank did shrink to 3 conferences of 20, or perhaps even fewer, perhaps as few as 54.

I can't remember when the SEC has had so few beat up on so many, so badly. At our height of strength our bottom was a low as 1 or 2 non competitive teams. After yesterday, I am left questioning if there are 6 non competitive teams: Missouri, L.S.U., Mississippi State, Mississippi, Tennessee, and possibly Arkansas.

Mathematically they can't all finish as true losers, but I really don't see any of them hanging with Alabama or Georgia. The beat down of the Vols was epic. The slaughter of Ole Miss a trouncing that only Vanderbilt would have ever been expected to endure.

I've long suspected that the high school talent pool was greatly reduced. I think that college ball is now suffering from that deficit. Couple that with the significant drop off in interest in the NFL and it's growing publicity nightmare with the anthem issue and we may be witnessing the beginning of the unraveling of the sport.

It will take decades for its decline to end in a significant reduction of the sport, but 20 years or so isn't really that long. But I do think all of the indicators point to its demise.

FOX shows what 24 would look like in 2026.

http://www.foxsports.com/college-footbal...ame-051616

Not worth reading, this would never happen.
10-02-2017 11:31 AM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
Win5002 Offline
Special Teams
*

Posts: 618
Joined: Oct 2015
Reputation: 31
I Root For: Big 12 & B1G
Location:
Post: #19
RE: What role will politics play in realignment?
(10-01-2017 09:15 AM)JRsec Wrote:  
(10-01-2017 08:48 AM)Lenvillecards Wrote:  
(09-30-2017 10:38 PM)chargeradio Wrote:  
(09-30-2017 11:14 AM)Lenvillecards Wrote:  I wouldn't underestimate Kentucky politicians. The UofL is one of the major economic drivers for the city of Louisville & the largest employer in downtown Louisville. The city of Louisville is the primary economic driver for the state of Kentucky. With the recent basketball scandal it has left many wondering how the death penalty would empact the city of Louisville & the state of Kentucky. With the Yum Center losing its primary tenant even for 1 year it would cause many area bars & restaurants to close. It would cause a negative impact not just on the city but the entire state. I don't see the state politicians letting the UofL get demoted without a fight. Let's not forget about Mitch McConnell either. Politicians will continue to play a role in realignment.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

I don't think U of L is going anywhere - the NCAA is very gun-shy about the death penalty.

That said, if anyone expresses interest in sharing the Yum Center, it would be in the University's best interest not to push back on it, even if it's the NBA (which probably is at best not happening before the 2021-22 season). U of L may lose some ground with the T-shirt fans, but quietly rebuilding things up the right way will pay dividends in the long run.

Besides, as long as the football team isn't affected, even if Louisville gets the boot from the ACC, I think the Big 12 is still in a position where they can't say no. The Big 12 could even strike pre-emptively by adding Connecticut and Louisville and immediately tie the ACC's hands into adding Cincinnati.

Big 12 North: UConn, WVU, Louisville, Iowa State, Kansas, Kansas State
Big 12 South: Texas, Texas Tech, Baylor, TCU, Oklahoma, Oklahoma State


With new leadership coming in at the UofL I don't think you would see much pushback regarding the NBA. Nothing as furious as Pitino & Jurich anyway. Having an NBA team along with the UofL in the Yum world go along way to solving its financial issues. I'm just not sure if the city can realistically attract an NBA team.

If a "death penalty" is ever warranted it's in Louisville case for sure. I don't think it will happen & I hope it doesn't, I see a multi year postseason ban & drastic scholarship reductions coming & there's zero chance of keeping the 2013 banner now.

In your scenario I think the B12 would be better off taking Cincinnati rather than UCONN. Louisville & Cincinnati are more football rivals for WV than UCONN is & there's geography. UCONN would be a tougher pill to swallow for the ACC than Cincinnati would be I believe.

Getting back on topic, McConnell & a few in Frankfurt would put pressure on UK to support the UofL inclusion. How much pressure would depend on the depth & ramifications of the scandal though. I think there would be a lot of political pressure & so I think there would be more teams in then people think. The state of Ohio is to big to just have only 1 power school, though I can see OSU pushing for that without much political pushback.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

I look around at what's happening each weekend and no longer believe that the P5 will do anything but shrink. The SEC has two strong teams and may have 3 in the middle. The Big 10 at the top consists of 2 with 2 or 3 more in the middle. The PAC may wind up being the two Washington schools. Clemson stands alone in the ACC with perhaps a challenge from Miami. T.C.U. and Oklahoma will mix it up with Texas Tech and Oklahoma State.

My point being that there is such a separation between each conference's top flight schools and the also rans that I no longer believe there are enough true coaches or enough strong recruits to fill the gaps and with high school participation shrinking I believe that college football will hang on but that the distance between the haves and have nots, and the competitive and non competitive is going to grow and inversely the the number of competitors will shrink.

I wouldn't be surprised now if the P5 shrank did shrink to 3 conferences of 20, or perhaps even fewer, perhaps as few as 54.

I can't remember when the SEC has had so few beat up on so many, so badly. At our height of strength our bottom was a low as 1 or 2 non competitive teams. After yesterday, I am left questioning if there are 6 non competitive teams: Missouri, L.S.U., Mississippi State, Mississippi, Tennessee, and possibly Arkansas.

Mathematically they can't all finish as true losers, but I really don't see any of them hanging with Alabama or Georgia. The beat down of the Vols was epic. The slaughter of Ole Miss a trouncing that only Vanderbilt would have ever been expected to endure.

I've long suspected that the high school talent pool was greatly reduced. I think that college ball is now suffering from that deficit. Couple that with the significant drop off in interest in the NFL and it's growing publicity nightmare with the anthem issue and we may be witnessing the beginning of the unraveling of the sport.

It will take decades for its decline to end in a significant reduction of the sport, but 20 years or so isn't really that long. But I do think all of the indicators point to its demise.

Parity vs being top heavy talent wise is always cyclical. You can't make too big of sweeping conclusions about one season or even 2-3 seasons because of this.
10-02-2017 11:36 AM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
JRsec Offline
Super Moderator
*

Posts: 37,901
Joined: Mar 2012
Reputation: 7737
I Root For: SEC
Location:
Post: #20
RE: What role will politics play in realignment?
(10-02-2017 03:33 AM)AllTideUp Wrote:  
(10-01-2017 09:15 AM)JRsec Wrote:  I look around at what's happening each weekend and no longer believe that the P5 will do anything but shrink. The SEC has two strong teams and may have 3 in the middle. The Big 10 at the top consists of 2 with 2 or 3 more in the middle. The PAC may wind up being the two Washington schools. Clemson stands alone in the ACC with perhaps a challenge from Miami. T.C.U. and Oklahoma will mix it up with Texas Tech and Oklahoma State.

My point being that there is such a separation between each conference's top flight schools and the also rans that I no longer believe there are enough true coaches or enough strong recruits to fill the gaps and with high school participation shrinking I believe that college football will hang on but that the distance between the haves and have nots, and the competitive and non competitive is going to grow and inversely the the number of competitors will shrink.

I wouldn't be surprised now if the P5 shrank did shrink to 3 conferences of 20, or perhaps even fewer, perhaps as few as 54.

I can't remember when the SEC has had so few beat up on so many, so badly. At our height of strength our bottom was a low as 1 or 2 non competitive teams. After yesterday, I am left questioning if there are 6 non competitive teams: Missouri, L.S.U., Mississippi State, Mississippi, Tennessee, and possibly Arkansas.

Mathematically they can't all finish as true losers, but I really don't see any of them hanging with Alabama or Georgia. The beat down of the Vols was epic. The slaughter of Ole Miss a trouncing that only Vanderbilt would have ever been expected to endure.

I've long suspected that the high school talent pool was greatly reduced. I think that college ball is now suffering from that deficit. Couple that with the significant drop off in interest in the NFL and it's growing publicity nightmare with the anthem issue and we may be witnessing the beginning of the unraveling of the sport.

It will take decades for its decline to end in a significant reduction of the sport, but 20 years or so isn't really that long. But I do think all of the indicators point to its demise.

I wouldn't be surprised to see the ranks shrink although I think most of the schools that get dropped are in the current Big 12.

I think it's noteworthy that there are quite a few Eastern schools that could survive just fine on a basketball first budget with minimal funding for an average football product. The Big East did it for many years and maybe we see a revival of a league like that. A while back, I theorized that certain ACC schools could move to the SEC and B1G while a core of them, due to their unique cultures, could survive in a basketball-centric league that was confined to the East Coast. Maybe it comes about...

All in all, I think the NFL's issues are mostly separate. While there are existential threats to the game itself and I think those are mostly CTE/health related, we're still too early in the process to know for sure what the long term effects are for participating in the game.

Compared to the NFL, the roots of college football run very deep and I think it would take much longer than 20 years for that support to evaporate. I've often compared college sports to the European soccer leagues because the teams are based in communities with long histories of organic support rather than in the biggest media markets and they don't move when the going gets tough. The NFL is 100% a cutthroat money making machine and eventually the market allows for entities like that to fade or shut down. For example, it's absolutely ridiculous that the NFL has been considering placing a team in London. Only corporations think with such arrogance and while there's nothing wrong with making a buck, eventually the money dries up for entities that aren't woven in among society's institutions.

The college game would exist whether the money was huge or not for a lot of different reasons. I could see a future where college football once again becomes the pinnacle of the game.

If the NFL suffers significantly as a business model, it will affect college football. Most of the players in college football wouldn't fare well at all as just university students. So I'd say without the lure of the NFL they would be trying to adapt their skill sets to baseball or basketball. IMO, the death or severed impairment of the NFL will essentially gut college football as we know it. It would basically make most college teams Ivy League quality. But hey, if that happens it will actually be college sports again. The campuses would be cleaner and safer places to be and the college spirit might come back in a fuller way as the IMG's of the world pulled out.
10-02-2017 11:38 AM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
Post Reply 




User(s) browsing this thread: 1 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.