(10-30-2017 11:22 AM)BePcr07 Wrote:  B1G
West: Arizona, California, Oregon, Stanford, UCLA, USC, Washington
Central: Colorado, Illinois, Iowa, Minnesota, Nebraska, Northwestern, Wisconsin
North: Indiana, Michigan, Michigan St, Notre Dame, Ohio St, Penn St, Purdue
East: Duke, Georgia Tech, Maryland, Miami, North Carolina, Rutgers, Virginia

I'd rather drop to the AAC or even FCS than play in that conference. And I mean that.

(10-30-2017 06:15 PM)georgia_tech_swagger Wrote:  

(10-30-2017 11:22 AM)BePcr07 Wrote:  B1G
West: Arizona, California, Oregon, Stanford, UCLA, USC, Washington
Central: Colorado, Illinois, Iowa, Minnesota, Nebraska, Northwestern, Wisconsin
North: Indiana, Michigan, Michigan St, Notre Dame, Ohio St, Penn St, Purdue
East: Duke, Georgia Tech, Maryland, Miami, North Carolina, Rutgers, Virginia

I'd rather drop to the AAC or even FCS than play in that conference. And I mean that.

well dang

(10-30-2017 05:21 PM)GoldenWarrior11 Wrote:  The P5 undergoes a consolidation, where the top football programs in the country unite to form its own 24-team football league.

Alabama
Arkansas
Auburn
Clemson
Florida
Florida State
Georgia
LSU
Miami
Michigan
Michigan State
Nebraska
Notre Dame
Ohio State
Oklahoma
Oregon
Penn State
Stanford
Tennessee
Texas
Texas A&M
UCLA
USC
Washington
Wisconsin


With the top-24 off the board, conferences within football become smaller and associated by geography and program strength. For example, you could have a Northeast Conference that features Syracuse, Pittsburgh, Rutgers, Boston College, West Virginia, Maryland, Virginia, and Virginia Tech. You could also have a Midwestern Conference that has Illinois, Indiana, Purdue, Minnesota, Iowa, Iowa State, Missouri, Northwestern and Kansas.

For the new top-tiered division, every game during the season becomes a "power" game, which leads to increased fan interest and media distribution deals. For the new second-tiered-division, travel costs are significantly reduced from the creation of regional conferences for football-only, while still creating a very strong and impactful schedule.

This won't happen. There is far too little inventory for the top-level schools to sell a tv package competitively to whatever streaming/TV/mobile platforms are around. The playoff would also almost certainly yield rematches. Plus, the P5 cartel exists to protect all its members. Lastly, even if you were to engage in that thought exercise, in no sane world can Arkansas, UCLA, Tennessee, A&M or, most importantly, Nebraska be considered to be among the best programs in the country, now or at any time In the last 15 years.

(10-30-2017 09:23 PM)CarlSmithCenter Wrote:  

(10-30-2017 05:21 PM)GoldenWarrior11 Wrote:  The P5 undergoes a consolidation, where the top football programs in the country unite to form its own 24-team football league.

Alabama
Arkansas
Auburn
Clemson
Florida
Florida State
Georgia
LSU
Miami
Michigan
Michigan State
Nebraska
Notre Dame
Ohio State
Oklahoma
Oregon
Penn State
Stanford
Tennessee
Texas
Texas A&M
UCLA
USC
Washington
Wisconsin


With the top-24 off the board, conferences within football become smaller and associated by geography and program strength. For example, you could have a Northeast Conference that features Syracuse, Pittsburgh, Rutgers, Boston College, West Virginia, Maryland, Virginia, and Virginia Tech. You could also have a Midwestern Conference that has Illinois, Indiana, Purdue, Minnesota, Iowa, Iowa State, Missouri, Northwestern and Kansas.

For the new top-tiered division, every game during the season becomes a "power" game, which leads to increased fan interest and media distribution deals. For the new second-tiered-division, travel costs are significantly reduced from the creation of regional conferences for football-only, while still creating a very strong and impactful schedule.

This won't happen. There is far too little inventory for the top-level schools to sell a tv package competitively to whatever streaming/TV/mobile platforms are around. The playoff would also almost certainly yield rematches. Plus, the P5 cartel exists to protect all its members. Lastly, even if you were to engage in that thought exercise, in no sane world can Arkansas, UCLA, Tennessee, A&M or, most importantly, Nebraska be considered to be among the best programs in the country, now or at any time In the last 15 years.

For the record, Nebraska ranks #17 among P5 schools in win% over the past 7 seasons. Texas A&M is #18.

The problem that the P5 are going to eventually hit is that programs and fanbases that are used to winning will no longer be able to win as consistently.

(10-30-2017 11:53 AM)Frog in the Kitchen Sink Wrote:  I do think smaller conferences is as likely as bigger ones if the bubble bursts.

I'd agree, the current conference size growth is strongly tied to TV/media rights. If the bubble bursts then I absolutely think there is a strong chance that smaller leagues reappear as schools with historical ties to each other who no longer play annually due to 14 team leagues split off.

My "ideal" world would be 8, 10 team leagues giving us 80 teams at the top level of CFB. Each league plays round robin 9 league games giving you a champion of each league that actually played every team. 3 OOC match ups result in a 12 team regular season.

12 team playoff, 8 autobids for each league champ and 4 wild cards with the top 4 seeds getting byes.

Works nicely for basketball as well with 18 conference games giving a home/home with each conference school.

Just a radical thought.....

Does anyone see the conferences eventually breaking down based on individual sports?

To use the B1G as example, they have Johns Hopkins as part of the conference for Lacrosse. They added ND (and rumor is they're trying to add North Dakota) for hockey.

Could you eventually see schools being in multiple conferences for each individual sport?

(10-30-2017 06:15 PM)georgia_tech_swagger Wrote:  

(10-30-2017 11:22 AM)BePcr07 Wrote:  B1G
West: Arizona, California, Oregon, Stanford, UCLA, USC, Washington
Central: Colorado, Illinois, Iowa, Minnesota, Nebraska, Northwestern, Wisconsin
North: Indiana, Michigan, Michigan St, Notre Dame, Ohio St, Penn St, Purdue
East: Duke, Georgia Tech, Maryland, Miami, North Carolina, Rutgers, Virginia

I'd rather drop to the AAC or even FCS than play in that conference. And I mean that.

So you'd rather play us than play pretty much the same schools you already play under a different Conference Name?

(10-30-2017 06:15 PM)georgia_tech_swagger Wrote:  

(10-30-2017 11:22 AM)BePcr07 Wrote:  B1G
West: Arizona, California, Oregon, Stanford, UCLA, USC, Washington
Central: Colorado, Illinois, Iowa, Minnesota, Nebraska, Northwestern, Wisconsin
North: Indiana, Michigan, Michigan St, Notre Dame, Ohio St, Penn St, Purdue
East: Duke, Georgia Tech, Maryland, Miami, North Carolina, Rutgers, Virginia

I'd rather drop to the AAC or even FCS than play in that conference. And I mean that.

If I'm reading this correctly you'd rather play UConn, Cinci, Temple, ECU, UCF, USF, Houston, Tulsa, and Tulane than Duke MD, Miami, UNC, Rutgers and Virginia.

(10-31-2017 10:45 AM)Huskies12 Wrote:  

(10-30-2017 06:15 PM)georgia_tech_swagger Wrote:  

(10-30-2017 11:22 AM)BePcr07 Wrote:  B1G
West: Arizona, California, Oregon, Stanford, UCLA, USC, Washington
Central: Colorado, Illinois, Iowa, Minnesota, Nebraska, Northwestern, Wisconsin
North: Indiana, Michigan, Michigan St, Notre Dame, Ohio St, Penn St, Purdue
East: Duke, Georgia Tech, Maryland, Miami, North Carolina, Rutgers, Virginia

I'd rather drop to the AAC or even FCS than play in that conference. And I mean that.

So you'd rather play us than play pretty much the same schools you already play under a different Conference Name?

The identity of that conference is culturally and politically separated by an intergalactic rift from the culture and identity of the ACC/SEC/Big 12. Maryland is a traitor. Zero interest in Rutgers. Miami is only good for hating between their penchant for cheating and having a former UGAg'er as coach. So really GT gets three: Duke, UNC, and UVA. Duke is good, we'll take that one annually please. UNC is not too bad. UVA is better than most. But all three wouldn't even make the Top 5 of who GT fans are interested in playing. That looks something like this:

U[sic]GA (big gap) Clemson, Auburn, Tennessee, Florida State (big gap) Virginia Tech, Duke, UNC, USC-e (big gap) UVA, SEC Potluck (except Bama, because Bear Bryant is a liar and a scoundrel).

(10-31-2017 11:52 AM)georgia_tech_swagger Wrote:  

(10-31-2017 10:45 AM)Huskies12 Wrote:  

(10-30-2017 06:15 PM)georgia_tech_swagger Wrote:  

(10-30-2017 11:22 AM)BePcr07 Wrote:  B1G
West: Arizona, California, Oregon, Stanford, UCLA, USC, Washington
Central: Colorado, Illinois, Iowa, Minnesota, Nebraska, Northwestern, Wisconsin
North: Indiana, Michigan, Michigan St, Notre Dame, Ohio St, Penn St, Purdue
East: Duke, Georgia Tech, Maryland, Miami, North Carolina, Rutgers, Virginia

I'd rather drop to the AAC or even FCS than play in that conference. And I mean that.

So you'd rather play us than play pretty much the same schools you already play under a different Conference Name?

The identity of that conference is culturally and politically separated by an intergalactic rift from the culture and identity of the ACC/SEC/Big 12. Maryland is a traitor. Zero interest in Rutgers. Miami is only good for hating between their penchant for cheating and having a former UGAg'er as coach. So really GT gets three: Duke, UNC, and UVA. Duke is good, we'll take that one annually please. UNC is not too bad. UVA is better than most. But all three wouldn't even make the Top 5 of who GT fans are interested in playing. That looks something like this:

U[sic]GA (big gap) Clemson, Auburn, Tennessee, Florida State (big gap) Virginia Tech, Duke, UNC, USC-e (big gap) UVA, SEC Potluck (except Bama, because Bear Bryant is a liar and a scoundrel).

So it's kind of a "the South will rise again" thing

(10-31-2017 12:25 PM)Huskies12 Wrote:  So it's kind of a "the South will rise again" thing

It's a "it's most fun to play against the other people who have a culture of it mattering, particularly against your neighbors." It's a return to the days of playing mostly within your region so that you don't need a Delta Unobtainium Medallion to see nearly all your road games in person. I want a return of being able to drive to nearly any road game. That restraint just by itself means I'll be playing dramatically more games I'm interested in not just because GT is playing but who they're playing against.

This falls on red/blue political lines because it's a cultural difference. In New England you've had pro teams since the jump. Down South we were ignored by the NFL and MLB and, to some extent, still pretty much are totally ignored today. According to pro sports until the new millenium the South consists of Atlanta and New Orleans. (South of I-4 aint the South ... and I'm not giving credit to Tampa teams ... half credit there at best, and their own fans don't watch them that much.) According to MLB it is still that way today. This, btw, is why the Braves stadium is perpetually empty yet every single game they have is on cable TV here. It's because the Braves are the South's team because there are literally no other teams for hundreds of miles. The Braves fan base isn't just not in Downtown Atlanta ... most of it isn't even in the state of Georgia! But back to football: All your serious fans and tailgaters show up to Patriots and Jets and Giants games. All our serious fans and tailgaters show up to Tiger and Tide and Seminole games.

So you can paper over all that intricate detail with the Dukes of Hazard if you'd like ... but that simplistic dismissal fails to address the real underlying issues. Phrased differently: Want UCONN football to have a full 50,000 seat stadium all the time and membership in the ACC? Ban the NFL from having a team north of the Potomac for a few decades and voila you're there!

(10-30-2017 06:15 PM)georgia_tech_swagger Wrote:  

(10-30-2017 11:22 AM)BePcr07 Wrote:  B1G
West: Arizona, California, Oregon, Stanford, UCLA, USC, Washington
Central: Colorado, Illinois, Iowa, Minnesota, Nebraska, Northwestern, Wisconsin
North: Indiana, Michigan, Michigan St, Notre Dame, Ohio St, Penn St, Purdue
East: Duke, Georgia Tech, Maryland, Miami, North Carolina, Rutgers, Virginia

I'd rather drop to the AAC or even FCS than play in that conference. And I mean that.

In my 2 X 28 scenario, I had Tech on the SEC team. My SEC looks like this (division names are flexible, so I'll just use numbers).

SEC 1: Alabama, Auburn, Ole Miss, Miss State, LSU, Arkansas, and Texas A&M

SEC 2: Kentucky, Vanderbilt, Tennessee, South Carolina, Georgia, Florida and Louisville

SEC 3: Penn State, Maryland, West Virginia, Pitt, Virginia Tech, Notre Dame and Syracuse

SEC 4: Virginia, UNC, Georgia Tech, Florida State, Clemson, NC State, and Miami.

I would protect the obvious permanent partners (like Georgia-GT), but beyond that I wouldn't try to establish a rotation that has everybody playing everybody else every X years. There are some schools it wouldn't make any sense to force to play each other. Let the schools work out for themselves who they play OOD as long as everybody plays the same number of league games.

(10-31-2017 12:57 PM)georgia_tech_swagger Wrote:  But back to football: All your serious fans and tailgaters show up to Patriots and Jets and Giants games. All our serious fans and tailgaters show up to Tiger and Tide and Seminole games.

And all of the above heavily subsidized by the taxpayer (either through stadiums or deductible donations, or in some cases both).

The whole Florida coaching charade has irritated me greatly, since we're probably looking at somewhere north of $20 million when this is all done, between buyouts and salaries and whatever else. All covered by donors, all of them deducting it. This pisses me off. Eventually, will it piss others off as well? They want to throw away their own money, fine. They want to do so and call it a charity, this is wrong.

I could easily see the whole semi-pro model of college sports collapsing by 2026 under pressure from streaming (why should bammer share its revenue with Miss State?) on the one flank and angry tax activists on the other.

(10-31-2017 03:39 PM)58-56 Wrote:  And all of the above heavily subsidized by the taxpayer (either through stadiums or deductible donations, or in some cases both).

I completely agree and I would love to see the taxpayers removed in *all* forms, including but not limited to student athletic fees.

I really have waited a long time for this because I wanted to try to get some facts together, but I finally said forget it. Here is how I see things unfolding:

Big 12: after all the posturing & trash talking, the University of Texas president gets together with the president of the University of Oklahoma and asks if they really want to leave the conference, leave without Texas, etc. If the Big 12 never or hardly ever makes the playoffs between now and at that point in the future, I'm thinking Oklahoma says yes, we are leaving and you are welcome to come along, but we are still leaving. I would look for the old Texoma Four (Texas, Oklahoma, Oklahoma State, and Texas Tech) to bolt for the PAC 12. Now, if the Big 12 does make some playoff runs and captures a few NCs, then I look for Oklahoma to tell Texas that they are willing to stay if Texas is, which, I believe the 'Horns would be willing to stay....to be continued in another post.

(10-31-2017 12:57 PM)georgia_tech_swagger Wrote:  

(10-31-2017 12:25 PM)Huskies12 Wrote:  So it's kind of a "the South will rise again" thing

It's a "it's most fun to play against the other people who have a culture of it mattering, particularly against your neighbors." It's a return to the days of playing mostly within your region so that you don't need a Delta Unobtainium Medallion to see nearly all your road games in person. I want a return of being able to drive to nearly any road game. That restraint just by itself means I'll be playing dramatically more games I'm interested in not just because GT is playing but who they're playing against.

This falls on red/blue political lines because it's a cultural difference. In New England you've had pro teams since the jump. Down South we were ignored by the NFL and MLB and, to some extent, still pretty much are totally ignored today. According to pro sports until the new millenium the South consists of Atlanta and New Orleans. (South of I-4 aint the South ... and I'm not giving credit to Tampa teams ... half credit there at best, and their own fans don't watch them that much.) According to MLB it is still that way today. This, btw, is why the Braves stadium is perpetually empty yet every single game they have is on cable TV here. It's because the Braves are the South's team because there are literally no other teams for hundreds of miles. The Braves fan base isn't just not in Downtown Atlanta ... most of it isn't even in the state of Georgia! But back to football: All your serious fans and tailgaters show up to Patriots and Jets and Giants games. All our serious fans and tailgaters show up to Tiger and Tide and Seminole games.

So you can paper over all that intricate detail with the Dukes of Hazard if you'd like ... but that simplistic dismissal fails to address the real underlying issues. Phrased differently: Want UCONN football to have a full 50,000 seat stadium all the time and membership in the ACC? Ban the NFL from having a team north of the Potomac for a few decades and voila you're there!

Very true and I can give an an excellent example of that: the latest NCAA football video game, even used copies, mind you!!!, went for a lot at local GameStop stores where I live. Copies of Madden NFL were pretty reasonably priced, if not dirt cheap!!

People in the South just don’t care about the NFL by and large. There are more Cowboys or Patriots fans in South Carolina than there are Panthers or Falcons fans

(11-02-2017 06:42 AM)Gamecock Wrote:  People in the South just don’t care about the NFL by and large. There are more Cowboys or Patriots fans in South Carolina than there are Panthers or Falcons fans

I would agree with that.

(10-30-2017 09:17 AM)BadgerMJ Wrote:  

(10-29-2017 09:26 PM)shizzle787 Wrote:  I find realignment threads to be the most fun by far. We all know it is likely that the CFB world will see a massive realignment in 2025, but what will it be?

Here's mine.

B1G: same 14 members
ACC: same 15 members
SEC: same 14 members

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

Big 12
West: Kansas, Kansas St., BYU, TCU, Baylor, SMU, Houston
East: UConn, Cincy, WVU, UCF, USF, Memphis, Iowa State

American
West: UAB, LaTech, WKU, Southern Miss, Marshall, Tulane
East: East Carolina, Temple, FAU, FIU, MTSU, ODU

*Navy goes back to being independent and Wichita State moves to the A-10 in basketball.

Mountain West
West: Utah State, Fresno State, San Diego State, UNLV, Nevada, Hawaii, New Mexico
East: Tulsa, UTEP, Rice, Boise State, Colorado State, Wyoming, Air Force

*San Jose State drops football due to financial concerns and California's anti-football agenda and joins the Big West

MAC: same 12 members

Sun Belt:
West: UTSA, North Texas, Texas State, Louisiana, Louisiana Monroe, Arkansas State
East: Appalachian State, Troy, Coastal Carolina, South Alabama, Georgia Southern, Georgia State

Indies: Notre Dame, Army, Navy, Liberty

Charlotte, UMass, and NMSU (and SJSU) give up and punt on football.
This would mean there would be 9 conferences and 126 schools.

While I don't see the XII crew heading west, if, for argument's sake, they do, then Kansas is off the the B1G.

Agreed, and add Iowa State to the B1G list too. AAU school with awesome support.