Hello There, Guest! (LoginRegister)

Post Reply 
Could This Year's CFP Speed Up Realignment?
Author Message
Bookmark and Share
Win5002 Offline
Bench Warmer
*

Posts: 182
Joined: Oct 2015
Reputation: 5
I Root For: Big 12 & B1G
Location:
Post: #71
RE: Could This Year's CFP Speed Up Realignment?
(01-10-2018 09:15 PM)JRsec Wrote:  
(01-10-2018 08:41 PM)XLance Wrote:  
(01-10-2018 06:24 PM)vandiver49 Wrote:  
(01-09-2018 02:08 PM)BePcr07 Wrote:  
(01-09-2018 01:55 PM)murrdcu Wrote:  Or the B1G follows in the SEC’s footsteps when Sankey met with the SEC AD’s and they worked out plan to improve their abysmal basketball conference to what it’s improved to today.

The B1G already added Nebraska to “fix” the West. If they add just Oklahoma to the west, how can the B1G hope OU won’t dip considerably like NU did?

I'm not quite sure the reasoning behind the addition of Nebraska was to balance the East and West. Nebraska, at the time, had come off several decades of consistent dominance. The B1G also went to the Leaders/Legends format which kind of negates any idea that the idea was always for an East/West format. Also, at the time, a conference needed 12 schools for a CCG.

If I were the B1G during that time period, I would've sent a mass offer to Nebraska, Kansas, Missouri, Oklahoma, and Texas. There was a report that the B1G received a package offer from a combination of Iowa St, Nebraska, Kansas, Oklahoma, and Texas A&M.

Had the B1G gone my way with N/K/M/O/T, they'd look like:

West: Texas, Oklahoma, Kansas, Missouri, Nebraska, Iowa, Minnesota, Wisconsin
East: Illinois, Northwestern, Indiana, Purdue, Michigan, Michigan St, Ohio St, Penn St

Fairly balanced with a bunch of state flagships.

Texas A&M still heads to the SEC. Colorado still heads to the PAC with Utah. Perhaps Oklahoma St goes with Texas A&M instead of Missouri? Who knows. The SEC said a lot by taking Missouri and made the Tigers feel welcomed in a way the B1G was idiotic not to do. It also gave the SEC stronger borders with Oklahoma football and Kansas basketball.

I doubt the SEC would've taken Missouri for the sole sake of spiting the B1G, but sometimes realignment moves are more like chess - you might not make the best move in the world but you're setting yourself up for the win.

I always felt the B1G picked NU over Mizzou because They felt they would still be there. If Maryland hasn’t made their financial woes public, then I think the picks are KU and the Tigers.


Simple strategy that was also used by the ACC.
Take your farthest target first and work back into the center.
The most logical targets for the B1G were like a push out along their outer perimeter.
(Nebraska, Kansas, Missouri, Kentucky, West Virginia/Virginia Tech, Pitt/Rutgers/Maryland/Syracuse)

The strategies worked out for both of you about the same. Maryland and Rutgers two footprint adds when the pay model was changing. About the same as Syracuse and Pitt, or Boston College and Miami.

I really think there was more to the B1G taking Maryland and Rutgers than just the traditional market additions. I'm not saying that as market additions was not a factor at the time but not the only thing.

1. The B1G needed more recruiting grounds. Marlyand/DC area and New Jersey are as good or better than any existing states in their footpring.
2. They were also taken to solidify the PSU brand. Delaney and Alvarez were on record as saying this. PSU has also improved dramatically the last 2 years and the B1G has reaped some monster tv ratings games from it.

I'm sure the B1G still held out hope ND would finally come and help intensify the NY and NE market penetrations also.
01-11-2018 03:36 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
JRsec Offline
Super Moderator
*

Posts: 14,489
Joined: Mar 2012
Reputation: 738
I Root For: SEC
Location:
Post: #72
RE: Could This Year's CFP Speed Up Realignment?
(01-11-2018 03:36 PM)Win5002 Wrote:  
(01-10-2018 09:15 PM)JRsec Wrote:  
(01-10-2018 08:41 PM)XLance Wrote:  
(01-10-2018 06:24 PM)vandiver49 Wrote:  
(01-09-2018 02:08 PM)BePcr07 Wrote:  I'm not quite sure the reasoning behind the addition of Nebraska was to balance the East and West. Nebraska, at the time, had come off several decades of consistent dominance. The B1G also went to the Leaders/Legends format which kind of negates any idea that the idea was always for an East/West format. Also, at the time, a conference needed 12 schools for a CCG.

If I were the B1G during that time period, I would've sent a mass offer to Nebraska, Kansas, Missouri, Oklahoma, and Texas. There was a report that the B1G received a package offer from a combination of Iowa St, Nebraska, Kansas, Oklahoma, and Texas A&M.

Had the B1G gone my way with N/K/M/O/T, they'd look like:

West: Texas, Oklahoma, Kansas, Missouri, Nebraska, Iowa, Minnesota, Wisconsin
East: Illinois, Northwestern, Indiana, Purdue, Michigan, Michigan St, Ohio St, Penn St

Fairly balanced with a bunch of state flagships.

Texas A&M still heads to the SEC. Colorado still heads to the PAC with Utah. Perhaps Oklahoma St goes with Texas A&M instead of Missouri? Who knows. The SEC said a lot by taking Missouri and made the Tigers feel welcomed in a way the B1G was idiotic not to do. It also gave the SEC stronger borders with Oklahoma football and Kansas basketball.

I doubt the SEC would've taken Missouri for the sole sake of spiting the B1G, but sometimes realignment moves are more like chess - you might not make the best move in the world but you're setting yourself up for the win.

I always felt the B1G picked NU over Mizzou because They felt they would still be there. If Maryland hasn’t made their financial woes public, then I think the picks are KU and the Tigers.


Simple strategy that was also used by the ACC.
Take your farthest target first and work back into the center.
The most logical targets for the B1G were like a push out along their outer perimeter.
(Nebraska, Kansas, Missouri, Kentucky, West Virginia/Virginia Tech, Pitt/Rutgers/Maryland/Syracuse)

The strategies worked out for both of you about the same. Maryland and Rutgers two footprint adds when the pay model was changing. About the same as Syracuse and Pitt, or Boston College and Miami.

I really think there was more to the B1G taking Maryland and Rutgers than just the traditional market additions. I'm not saying that as market additions was not a factor at the time but not the only thing.

1. The B1G needed more recruiting grounds. Marlyand/DC area and New Jersey are as good or better than any existing states in their footpring.
2. They were also taken to solidify the PSU brand. Delaney and Alvarez were on record as saying this. PSU has also improved dramatically the last 2 years and the B1G has reaped some monster tv ratings games from it.

I'm sure the B1G still held out hope ND would finally come and help intensify the NY and NE market penetrations also.

You have to understand that when I'm replying to X sometimes I'm dead serious and sometimes I do a little needling. But yes there was more to the Maryland move than just markets. I'm not so sure about Rutgers. Maryland was about recruiting but it was also about Beltway presence and chipping at the foundation of the ACC.
01-11-2018 05:26 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
murrdcu Offline
1st String
*

Posts: 1,395
Joined: Aug 2014
Reputation: 76
I Root For: Arkansas
Location:
Post: #73
RE: Could This Year's CFP Speed Up Realignment?
(01-11-2018 05:26 PM)JRsec Wrote:  
(01-11-2018 03:36 PM)Win5002 Wrote:  
(01-10-2018 09:15 PM)JRsec Wrote:  
(01-10-2018 08:41 PM)XLance Wrote:  
(01-10-2018 06:24 PM)vandiver49 Wrote:  I always felt the B1G picked NU over Mizzou because They felt they would still be there. If Maryland hasn’t made their financial woes public, then I think the picks are KU and the Tigers.


Simple strategy that was also used by the ACC.
Take your farthest target first and work back into the center.
The most logical targets for the B1G were like a push out along their outer perimeter.
(Nebraska, Kansas, Missouri, Kentucky, West Virginia/Virginia Tech, Pitt/Rutgers/Maryland/Syracuse)

The strategies worked out for both of you about the same. Maryland and Rutgers two footprint adds when the pay model was changing. About the same as Syracuse and Pitt, or Boston College and Miami.

I really think there was more to the B1G taking Maryland and Rutgers than just the traditional market additions. I'm not saying that as market additions was not a factor at the time but not the only thing.

1. The B1G needed more recruiting grounds. Marlyand/DC area and New Jersey are as good or better than any existing states in their footpring.
2. They were also taken to solidify the PSU brand. Delaney and Alvarez were on record as saying this. PSU has also improved dramatically the last 2 years and the B1G has reaped some monster tv ratings games from it.

I'm sure the B1G still held out hope ND would finally come and help intensify the NY and NE market penetrations also.

You have to understand that when I'm replying to X sometimes I'm dead serious and sometimes I do a little needling. But yes there was more to the Maryland move than just markets. I'm not so sure about Rutgers. Maryland was about recruiting but it was also about Beltway presence and chipping at the foundation of the ACC.

Also think Penn State was telling Delaney to get them some regional neighbors or they were out of there. Maryland is definitely a Penn State election and a bridge to other ACC additions. Maryland was losing money in athletics and had to cut sports prior to their Big Ten move. The ACC Network announcement came after this probably as a means to keep the ACC from falling apart due to TV money disparities.

The Big Ten should have added Nebraska and Missouri at the same time, then look for a 16th; probably Rutgers as Maryland wasn’t that far down that road yet. Then add Maryland when they left and round out to 16 with Kansas as the Big 12 losses A&M.

Big Ten pods:
1. Kansas, Nebraska, Missouri, Illinois
2. Iowa, Minnesota, Wisconsin, Northwestern,
3. Indiana, Purdue, Michigan, Michigan State
3. Rutgers, Maryland, Penn State, Ohio State,
01-12-2018 02:31 AM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
vandiver49 Offline
Heisman
*

Posts: 6,517
Joined: Aug 2011
Reputation: 157
I Root For: USNA/UTK
Location: West GA
Post: #74
RE: Could This Year's CFP Speed Up Realignment?
(01-10-2018 06:59 PM)AllTideUp Wrote:  
(01-10-2018 06:24 PM)vandiver49 Wrote:  I always felt the B1G picked NU over Mizzou because They felt they would still be there. If Maryland hasn’t made their financial woes public, then I think the picks are KU and the Tigers.

Remember though that Missouri got snapped up a couple of years before Maryland left.

Theoretically, the B1G could have taken KU and Mizzou to move to 14 quicker, but Mizzou was off the board only one year after they acquired NU.

Your timeline is correct ATU. I’m saying simply that the B1G didn’t feel the SEC would actually accept Mizzou.
01-12-2018 12:41 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
AllTideUp Offline
1st String
*

Posts: 1,970
Joined: Jul 2015
Reputation: 79
I Root For: Alabama
Location:
Post: #75
RE: Could This Year's CFP Speed Up Realignment?
(01-12-2018 12:41 PM)vandiver49 Wrote:  
(01-10-2018 06:59 PM)AllTideUp Wrote:  
(01-10-2018 06:24 PM)vandiver49 Wrote:  I always felt the B1G picked NU over Mizzou because They felt they would still be there. If Maryland hasn’t made their financial woes public, then I think the picks are KU and the Tigers.

Remember though that Missouri got snapped up a couple of years before Maryland left.

Theoretically, the B1G could have taken KU and Mizzou to move to 14 quicker, but Mizzou was off the board only one year after they acquired NU.

Your timeline is correct ATU. I’m saying simply that the B1G didn’t feel the SEC would actually accept Mizzou.

I see what you're saying now. You're probably right about that.
01-12-2018 01:26 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
Post Reply 




User(s) browsing this thread: 1 Guest(s)


Copyright © 2002-2018 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.
Powered By MyBB, © 2002-2018 MyBB Group.