(02-23-2022 11:19 PM)SouthEastAlaska Wrote:  Thank you for posting the article, interesting read. Pretty much parrots what JR has been saying on this site for years so good on ya JR.

They dropped my thought on the PAC and Big12 forming a super conference, that's actually one step further than I take it but the point still stands, The PAC/Big12 becomes the tweener conference and the ACC gets eaten by the SEC and B1G.

I had the PAC6 becoming a division of the B1G in a scenario where the B1G and SEC both have four six team divisions.

B!G:
Notre Dame, Penn State, North Carolina, Duke, Virginia and Maryland
Ohio State, Michigan, Michigan State, Indiana, Purdue and Rutgers
Wisconsin, Iowa, Nebraska, Northwestern, Minnesota, Illinois
Oregon, Stanford, Washington, Southern Cal, UCLA and Cal

SEC:
Oklahoma, Oklahoma State, Texas A&M, Missouri, Texas and Kansas
Alabama, LSU, Auburn, Mississippi State, Ole Miss and Arkansas
Georgia, Florida, South Carolina, Tennessee, Kentucky, and Vanderbilt
Clemson, Florida State, Virginia Tech, Miami, Georgia Tech and NC State

That leaves, for a third wheel:

Boise State, Utah, Arizona St, BYU, Arizona, Washington St, San Diego St, Oregon St, Colorado
TCU, Kansas State, Baylor, Texas Tech, Iowa State, Houston, Memphis, SMU
West Virginia, Louisville, UCF, Cincinnati, Boston College, Pitt, Syracuse, Wake Forest, USF

(02-24-2022 02:40 PM)ken d Wrote:  

(02-23-2022 11:19 PM)SouthEastAlaska Wrote:  Thank you for posting the article, interesting read. Pretty much parrots what JR has been saying on this site for years so good on ya JR.

They dropped my thought on the PAC and Big12 forming a super conference, that's actually one step further than I take it but the point still stands, The PAC/Big12 becomes the tweener conference and the ACC gets eaten by the SEC and B1G.

I had the PAC6 becoming a division of the B1G in a scenario where the B1G and SEC both have four six team divisions.

B!G:
Notre Dame, Penn State, North Carolina, Duke, Virginia and Maryland
Ohio State, Michigan, Michigan State, Indiana, Purdue and Rutgers
Wisconsin, Iowa, Nebraska, Northwestern, Minnesota, Illinois
Oregon, Stanford, Washington, Southern Cal, UCLA and Cal

SEC:
Oklahoma, Oklahoma State, Texas A&M, Missouri, Texas and Kansas
Alabama, LSU, Auburn, Mississippi State, Ole Miss and Arkansas
Georgia, Florida, South Carolina, Tennessee, Kentucky, and Vanderbilt
Clemson, Florida State, Virginia Tech, Miami, Georgia Tech and NC State

That leaves, for a third wheel:

Boise State, Utah, Arizona St, BYU, Arizona, Washington St, San Diego St, Oregon St, Colorado
TCU, Kansas State, Baylor, Texas Tech, Iowa State, Houston, Memphis, SMU
West Virginia, Louisville, UCF, Cincinnati, Boston College, Pitt, Syracuse, Wake Forest, USF

I think your plan could come to fruition if the leaders of these conferences and all of the network executives saw eye to eye. Unfortunately as we just witnessed with the CFP they do not. Also IMO if we go to 3 conferences they will be as regional as possible.

I think we agree that the networks want to consolidate as many of the top products as they can into 3-4 conferences and then create a new level of college football. The ACC after how the CFP was handled will be eaten by the two giants on their borders, and the PAC will be incentivized out of pure survival to prey on the Big12.

For fun here's my take at what I think might happen. Please note I'm basing this off the assumption that all of the schools in the current P conferences are interested in playing at this new level. That might not be reality, we'll see...

This is the 76 team set up. In the pay for play future I don't think we'll see more than this.

B1G
Michigan, Michigan St, Nebraska, Minnesota, Northwestern, Ohio St, Iowa, Illinois, Purdue, Wisconsin, Penn St, Indiana, Maryland, Rutgers
Additions- Notre Dame, Virginia, North Carolina, Duke, Georgia Tech, Miami

SEC
South Carolina, Georgia, Florida, Alabama, Auburn, Tennessee, Vanderbilt, Kentucky, LSU, Arkansas, Ole Miss, Mississippi St, Texas A&M, Missouri, Oklahoma, Texas
Additions- Clemson, FSU, N.C. State, Virginia Tech


PAC
UW, WSU, Oregon, Oregon St, Cal, Stanford, USC, UCLA, Arizona St, Arizona, Utah, Colorado
Additions- Iowa St, Kansas, Oklahoma St, Texas Tech, TCU, Houston

The Coast to Coast Leftovers
Pitt, Boston College, Syracuse, Louisville, Wake Forest, West Virginia, Cincinnati, UCF, Kansas St, Baylor, BYU
Best of G adds- USF, Memphis, SMU, Colorado St, Boise St, San Diego St, ECU

If it's only 3 conferences, it will be 72 or less.

3 conference setting, Add Cincinnati, Pitt, Boston College, and Syracuse to the B1G. Add West Virginia, Louisville, UCF, and Wake Forest to the SEC. For the PAC I don't think they would make it to 24 so add Kansas St, Baylor, BYU, and Colorado St.

(02-24-2022 11:50 PM)SouthEastAlaska Wrote:  

(02-24-2022 02:40 PM)ken d Wrote:  

(02-23-2022 11:19 PM)SouthEastAlaska Wrote:  Thank you for posting the article, interesting read. Pretty much parrots what JR has been saying on this site for years so good on ya JR.

They dropped my thought on the PAC and Big12 forming a super conference, that's actually one step further than I take it but the point still stands, The PAC/Big12 becomes the tweener conference and the ACC gets eaten by the SEC and B1G.

I had the PAC6 becoming a division of the B1G in a scenario where the B1G and SEC both have four six team divisions.

B!G:
Notre Dame, Penn State, North Carolina, Duke, Virginia and Maryland
Ohio State, Michigan, Michigan State, Indiana, Purdue and Rutgers
Wisconsin, Iowa, Nebraska, Northwestern, Minnesota, Illinois
Oregon, Stanford, Washington, Southern Cal, UCLA and Cal

SEC:
Oklahoma, Oklahoma State, Texas A&M, Missouri, Texas and Kansas
Alabama, LSU, Auburn, Mississippi State, Ole Miss and Arkansas
Georgia, Florida, South Carolina, Tennessee, Kentucky, and Vanderbilt
Clemson, Florida State, Virginia Tech, Miami, Georgia Tech and NC State

That leaves, for a third wheel:

Boise State, Utah, Arizona St, BYU, Arizona, Washington St, San Diego St, Oregon St, Colorado
TCU, Kansas State, Baylor, Texas Tech, Iowa State, Houston, Memphis, SMU
West Virginia, Louisville, UCF, Cincinnati, Boston College, Pitt, Syracuse, Wake Forest, USF

I think your plan could come to fruition if the leaders of these conferences and all of the network executives saw eye to eye. Unfortunately as we just witnessed with the CFP they do not. Also IMO if we go to 3 conferences they will be as regional as possible.

I think we agree that the networks want to consolidate as many of the top products as they can into 3-4 conferences and then create a new level of college football. The ACC after how the CFP was handled will be eaten by the two giants on their borders, and the PAC will be incentivized out of pure survival to prey on the Big12.

For fun here's my take at what I think might happen. Please note I'm basing this off the assumption that all of the schools in the current P conferences are interested in playing at this new level. That might not be reality, we'll see...

This is the 76 team set up. In the pay for play future I don't think we'll see more than this.

B1G
Michigan, Michigan St, Nebraska, Minnesota, Northwestern, Ohio St, Iowa, Illinois, Purdue, Wisconsin, Penn St, Indiana, Maryland, Rutgers
Additions- Notre Dame, Virginia, North Carolina, Duke, Georgia Tech, Miami

SEC
South Carolina, Georgia, Florida, Alabama, Auburn, Tennessee, Vanderbilt, Kentucky, LSU, Arkansas, Ole Miss, Mississippi St, Texas A&M, Missouri, Oklahoma, Texas
Additions- Clemson, FSU, N.C. State, Virginia Tech


PAC
UW, WSU, Oregon, Oregon St, Cal, Stanford, USC, UCLA, Arizona St, Arizona, Utah, Colorado
Additions- Iowa St, Kansas, Oklahoma St, Texas Tech, TCU, Houston

The Coast to Coast Leftovers
Pitt, Boston College, Syracuse, Louisville, Wake Forest, West Virginia, Cincinnati, UCF, Kansas St, Baylor, BYU
Best of G adds- USF, Memphis, SMU, Colorado St, Boise St, San Diego St, ECU

If it's only 3 conferences, it will be 72 or less.

3 conference setting, Add Cincinnati, Pitt, Boston College, and Syracuse to the B1G. Add West Virginia, Louisville, UCF, and Wake Forest to the SEC. For the PAC I don't think they would make it to 24 so add Kansas St, Baylor, BYU, and Colorado St.

However all this shakes out, one thing is clear to me. The rule of the jungle is that the big cats are going to eat. Whatever they leave behind for the scavengers may be enough for them to survive. So the B1G and the SEC will jockey for position with the desirable properties in the ACC. Whatever happens after that will be inconsequential in the big picture.

(02-24-2022 11:50 PM)SouthEastAlaska Wrote:  

(02-24-2022 02:40 PM)ken d Wrote:  

(02-23-2022 11:19 PM)SouthEastAlaska Wrote:  Thank you for posting the article, interesting read. Pretty much parrots what JR has been saying on this site for years so good on ya JR.

They dropped my thought on the PAC and Big12 forming a super conference, that's actually one step further than I take it but the point still stands, The PAC/Big12 becomes the tweener conference and the ACC gets eaten by the SEC and B1G.

I had the PAC6 becoming a division of the B1G in a scenario where the B1G and SEC both have four six team divisions.

B!G:
Notre Dame, Penn State, North Carolina, Duke, Virginia and Maryland
Ohio State, Michigan, Michigan State, Indiana, Purdue and Rutgers
Wisconsin, Iowa, Nebraska, Northwestern, Minnesota, Illinois
Oregon, Stanford, Washington, Southern Cal, UCLA and Cal

SEC:
Oklahoma, Oklahoma State, Texas A&M, Missouri, Texas and Kansas
Alabama, LSU, Auburn, Mississippi State, Ole Miss and Arkansas
Georgia, Florida, South Carolina, Tennessee, Kentucky, and Vanderbilt
Clemson, Florida State, Virginia Tech, Miami, Georgia Tech and NC State

That leaves, for a third wheel:

Boise State, Utah, Arizona St, BYU, Arizona, Washington St, San Diego St, Oregon St, Colorado
TCU, Kansas State, Baylor, Texas Tech, Iowa State, Houston, Memphis, SMU
West Virginia, Louisville, UCF, Cincinnati, Boston College, Pitt, Syracuse, Wake Forest, USF

I think your plan could come to fruition if the leaders of these conferences and all of the network executives saw eye to eye. Unfortunately as we just witnessed with the CFP they do not. Also IMO if we go to 3 conferences they will be as regional as possible.

I think we agree that the networks want to consolidate as many of the top products as they can into 3-4 conferences and then create a new level of college football. The ACC after how the CFP was handled will be eaten by the two giants on their borders, and the PAC will be incentivized out of pure survival to prey on the Big12.

For fun here's my take at what I think might happen. Please note I'm basing this off the assumption that all of the schools in the current P conferences are interested in playing at this new level. That might not be reality, we'll see...

This is the 76 team set up. In the pay for play future I don't think we'll see more than this.

B1G
Michigan, Michigan St, Nebraska, Minnesota, Northwestern, Ohio St, Iowa, Illinois, Purdue, Wisconsin, Penn St, Indiana, Maryland, Rutgers
Additions- Notre Dame, Virginia, North Carolina, Duke, Georgia Tech, Miami

SEC
South Carolina, Georgia, Florida, Alabama, Auburn, Tennessee, Vanderbilt, Kentucky, LSU, Arkansas, Ole Miss, Mississippi St, Texas A&M, Missouri, Oklahoma, Texas
Additions- Clemson, FSU, N.C. State, Virginia Tech


PAC
UW, WSU, Oregon, Oregon St, Cal, Stanford, USC, UCLA, Arizona St, Arizona, Utah, Colorado
Additions- Iowa St, Kansas, Oklahoma St, Texas Tech, TCU, Houston

The Coast to Coast Leftovers
Pitt, Boston College, Syracuse, Louisville, Wake Forest, West Virginia, Cincinnati, UCF, Kansas St, Baylor, BYU
Best of G adds- USF, Memphis, SMU, Colorado St, Boise St, San Diego St, ECU

If it's only 3 conferences, it will be 72 or less.

3 conference setting, Add Cincinnati, Pitt, Boston College, and Syracuse to the B1G. Add West Virginia, Louisville, UCF, and Wake Forest to the SEC. For the PAC I don't think they would make it to 24 so add Kansas St, Baylor, BYU, and Colorado St.

At 76 schools, my list is the same except I have Temple in place of Colorado St.

PAC 12
B1G 14
XII 12
SEC 16
ACC 14
ND USF MEM SMU TEM BSU SDSU ECU

After some reshuffling for football-only purposes, we end up with 2 high power conferences (B1G, SEC) and 2 mid power conferences (ACC, PAC).

B1G
Central: Arizona, Arizona St, Colorado, Iowa, Nebraska, Utah
East: Michigan, Michigan St, Minnesota, Ohio St, Penn St, Wisconsin
West: California, Oregon, Stanford, UCLA, USC, Washington

SEC
Central: Alabama, Auburn, Florida, Georgia, South Carolina, Tennessee
East: Clemson, Florida St, Georgia Tech, Miami, Notre Dame, Virginia Tech
West: LSU, Mississippi, Mississippi St, Oklahoma, Texas, Texas A&M

ACC
East: Central Florida, East Carolina, Maryland, South Florida, West Virginia
North: Boston College, Pittsburgh, Rutgers, Syracuse, Temple
South: Duke, North Carolina, North Carolina St, Virginia, Wake Forest
West: Cincinnati, Kentucky, Louisville, Memphis, Vanderbilt

PAC
East: Illinois, Indiana, Iowa St, Northwestern, Purdue
North: Arkansas, Kansas, Kansas St, Missouri, Oklahoma St
South: Baylor, Houston, SMU, TCU, Texas Tech
West: Boise St, BYU, Oregon St, San Diego St, Washington St

(02-25-2022 10:32 AM)BePcr07 Wrote:  

(02-24-2022 11:50 PM)SouthEastAlaska Wrote:  

(02-24-2022 02:40 PM)ken d Wrote:  

(02-23-2022 11:19 PM)SouthEastAlaska Wrote:  Thank you for posting the article, interesting read. Pretty much parrots what JR has been saying on this site for years so good on ya JR.

They dropped my thought on the PAC and Big12 forming a super conference, that's actually one step further than I take it but the point still stands, The PAC/Big12 becomes the tweener conference and the ACC gets eaten by the SEC and B1G.

I had the PAC6 becoming a division of the B1G in a scenario where the B1G and SEC both have four six team divisions.

B!G:
Notre Dame, Penn State, North Carolina, Duke, Virginia and Maryland
Ohio State, Michigan, Michigan State, Indiana, Purdue and Rutgers
Wisconsin, Iowa, Nebraska, Northwestern, Minnesota, Illinois
Oregon, Stanford, Washington, Southern Cal, UCLA and Cal

SEC:
Oklahoma, Oklahoma State, Texas A&M, Missouri, Texas and Kansas
Alabama, LSU, Auburn, Mississippi State, Ole Miss and Arkansas
Georgia, Florida, South Carolina, Tennessee, Kentucky, and Vanderbilt
Clemson, Florida State, Virginia Tech, Miami, Georgia Tech and NC State

That leaves, for a third wheel:

Boise State, Utah, Arizona St, BYU, Arizona, Washington St, San Diego St, Oregon St, Colorado
TCU, Kansas State, Baylor, Texas Tech, Iowa State, Houston, Memphis, SMU
West Virginia, Louisville, UCF, Cincinnati, Boston College, Pitt, Syracuse, Wake Forest, USF

I think your plan could come to fruition if the leaders of these conferences and all of the network executives saw eye to eye. Unfortunately as we just witnessed with the CFP they do not. Also IMO if we go to 3 conferences they will be as regional as possible.

I think we agree that the networks want to consolidate as many of the top products as they can into 3-4 conferences and then create a new level of college football. The ACC after how the CFP was handled will be eaten by the two giants on their borders, and the PAC will be incentivized out of pure survival to prey on the Big12.

For fun here's my take at what I think might happen. Please note I'm basing this off the assumption that all of the schools in the current P conferences are interested in playing at this new level. That might not be reality, we'll see...

This is the 76 team set up. In the pay for play future I don't think we'll see more than this.

B1G
Michigan, Michigan St, Nebraska, Minnesota, Northwestern, Ohio St, Iowa, Illinois, Purdue, Wisconsin, Penn St, Indiana, Maryland, Rutgers
Additions- Notre Dame, Virginia, North Carolina, Duke, Georgia Tech, Miami

SEC
South Carolina, Georgia, Florida, Alabama, Auburn, Tennessee, Vanderbilt, Kentucky, LSU, Arkansas, Ole Miss, Mississippi St, Texas A&M, Missouri, Oklahoma, Texas
Additions- Clemson, FSU, N.C. State, Virginia Tech


PAC
UW, WSU, Oregon, Oregon St, Cal, Stanford, USC, UCLA, Arizona St, Arizona, Utah, Colorado
Additions- Iowa St, Kansas, Oklahoma St, Texas Tech, TCU, Houston

The Coast to Coast Leftovers
Pitt, Boston College, Syracuse, Louisville, Wake Forest, West Virginia, Cincinnati, UCF, Kansas St, Baylor, BYU
Best of G adds- USF, Memphis, SMU, Colorado St, Boise St, San Diego St, ECU

If it's only 3 conferences, it will be 72 or less.

3 conference setting, Add Cincinnati, Pitt, Boston College, and Syracuse to the B1G. Add West Virginia, Louisville, UCF, and Wake Forest to the SEC. For the PAC I don't think they would make it to 24 so add Kansas St, Baylor, BYU, and Colorado St.

At 76 schools, my list is the same except I have Temple in place of Colorado St.

PAC 12
B1G 14
XII 12
SEC 16
ACC 14
ND USF MEM SMU TEM BSU SDSU ECU

After some reshuffling for football-only purposes, we end up with 2 high power conferences (B1G, SEC) and 2 mid power conferences (ACC, PAC).

B1G
Central: Arizona, Arizona St, Colorado, Iowa, Nebraska, Utah
East: Michigan, Michigan St, Minnesota, Ohio St, Penn St, Wisconsin
West: California, Oregon, Stanford, UCLA, USC, Washington

SEC
Central: Alabama, Auburn, Florida, Georgia, South Carolina, Tennessee
East: Clemson, Florida St, Georgia Tech, Miami, Notre Dame, Virginia Tech
West: LSU, Mississippi, Mississippi St, Oklahoma, Texas, Texas A&M

ACC
East: Central Florida, East Carolina, Maryland, South Florida, West Virginia
North: Boston College, Pittsburgh, Rutgers, Syracuse, Temple
South: Duke, North Carolina, North Carolina St, Virginia, Wake Forest
West: Cincinnati, Kentucky, Louisville, Memphis, Vanderbilt

PAC
East: Illinois, Indiana, Iowa St, Northwestern, Purdue
North: Arkansas, Kansas, Kansas St, Missouri, Oklahoma St
South: Baylor, Houston, SMU, TCU, Texas Tech
West: Boise St, BYU, Oregon St, San Diego St, Washington St

If we're doing this for football purposes, no way is Illinois going to get dumped to the Pac 12 for Arizona and Colorado.

(02-24-2022 02:40 PM)ken d Wrote:  

(02-23-2022 11:19 PM)SouthEastAlaska Wrote:  Thank you for posting the article, interesting read. Pretty much parrots what JR has been saying on this site for years so good on ya JR.

They dropped my thought on the PAC and Big12 forming a super conference, that's actually one step further than I take it but the point still stands, The PAC/Big12 becomes the tweener conference and the ACC gets eaten by the SEC and B1G.

I had the PAC6 becoming a division of the B1G in a scenario where the B1G and SEC both have four six team divisions.

B!G:
Notre Dame, Penn State Rutgers, North Carolina, Duke, Virginia and Maryland
Ohio State, Michigan, Michigan State, Indiana, Purdue and Rutgers Penn State
Wisconsin, Iowa, Nebraska, Northwestern, Minnesota, Illinois
Oregon, Stanford, Washington, Southern Cal, UCLA and Cal

SEC:
Oklahoma, Oklahoma State, Texas A&M, Missouri, Texas and Kansas
Alabama, LSU, Auburn, Mississippi State, Ole Miss and Arkansas
Georgia, Florida, South Carolina, Tennessee, Kentucky, and Vanderbilt
Clemson, Florida State, Virginia Tech, Miami, Georgia Tech and NC State

That leaves, for a third wheel:

Boise State, Utah, Arizona St, BYU, Arizona, Washington St, San Diego St, Oregon St, Colorado
TCU, Kansas State, Baylor, Texas Tech, Iowa State, Houston, Memphis, SMU
West Virginia, Louisville, UCF, Cincinnati, Boston College, Pitt, Syracuse, Wake Forest, USF

Ken, Duke and Carolina (as well as UVa) have large alumni presence in NYC and also in DC with almost no history with Penn State. Notre Dame may not like being with Rutgers after the Scarlet Knights refused to move scheduled games to the Meadowlands instead of their newly renovated stadium, but Carolina, Duke and UVa would benefit vs. Penn State.

(02-25-2022 11:08 PM)XLance Wrote:  

(02-24-2022 02:40 PM)ken d Wrote:  

(02-23-2022 11:19 PM)SouthEastAlaska Wrote:  Thank you for posting the article, interesting read. Pretty much parrots what JR has been saying on this site for years so good on ya JR.

They dropped my thought on the PAC and Big12 forming a super conference, that's actually one step further than I take it but the point still stands, The PAC/Big12 becomes the tweener conference and the ACC gets eaten by the SEC and B1G.

I had the PAC6 becoming a division of the B1G in a scenario where the B1G and SEC both have four six team divisions.

B!G:
Notre Dame, Penn State Rutgers, North Carolina, Duke, Virginia and Maryland
Ohio State, Michigan, Michigan State, Indiana, Purdue and Rutgers Penn State
Wisconsin, Iowa, Nebraska, Northwestern, Minnesota, Illinois
Oregon, Stanford, Washington, Southern Cal, UCLA and Cal

SEC:
Oklahoma, Oklahoma State, Texas A&M, Missouri, Texas and Kansas
Alabama, LSU, Auburn, Mississippi State, Ole Miss and Arkansas
Georgia, Florida, South Carolina, Tennessee, Kentucky, and Vanderbilt
Clemson, Florida State, Virginia Tech, Miami, Georgia Tech and NC State

That leaves, for a third wheel:

Boise State, Utah, Arizona St, BYU, Arizona, Washington St, San Diego St, Oregon St, Colorado
TCU, Kansas State, Baylor, Texas Tech, Iowa State, Houston, Memphis, SMU
West Virginia, Louisville, UCF, Cincinnati, Boston College, Pitt, Syracuse, Wake Forest, USF

Ken, Duke and Carolina (as well as UVa) have large alumni presence in NYC and also in DC with almost no history with Penn State. Notre Dame may not like being with Rutgers after the Scarlet Knights refused to move scheduled games to the Meadowlands instead of their newly renovated stadium, but Carolina, Duke and UVa would benefit vs. Penn State.

My purpose with that division was to place two strong programs in it for competitive balance across divisions. I would anticipate that there would eventually be a CCT with at least every division champ and possibly even the top two teams from each division. Swapping Rutgers and Penn State severely weakens that division.

(02-26-2022 08:41 AM)ken d Wrote:  

(02-25-2022 11:08 PM)XLance Wrote:  

(02-24-2022 02:40 PM)ken d Wrote:  

(02-23-2022 11:19 PM)SouthEastAlaska Wrote:  Thank you for posting the article, interesting read. Pretty much parrots what JR has been saying on this site for years so good on ya JR.

They dropped my thought on the PAC and Big12 forming a super conference, that's actually one step further than I take it but the point still stands, The PAC/Big12 becomes the tweener conference and the ACC gets eaten by the SEC and B1G.

I had the PAC6 becoming a division of the B1G in a scenario where the B1G and SEC both have four six team divisions.

B!G:
Notre Dame, Penn State Rutgers, North Carolina, Duke, Virginia and Maryland
Ohio State, Michigan, Michigan State, Indiana, Purdue and Rutgers Penn State
Wisconsin, Iowa, Nebraska, Northwestern, Minnesota, Illinois
Oregon, Stanford, Washington, Southern Cal, UCLA and Cal

SEC:
Oklahoma, Oklahoma State, Texas A&M, Missouri, Texas and Kansas
Alabama, LSU, Auburn, Mississippi State, Ole Miss and Arkansas
Georgia, Florida, South Carolina, Tennessee, Kentucky, and Vanderbilt
Clemson, Florida State, Virginia Tech, Miami, Georgia Tech and NC State

That leaves, for a third wheel:

Boise State, Utah, Arizona St, BYU, Arizona, Washington St, San Diego St, Oregon St, Colorado
TCU, Kansas State, Baylor, Texas Tech, Iowa State, Houston, Memphis, SMU
West Virginia, Louisville, UCF, Cincinnati, Boston College, Pitt, Syracuse, Wake Forest, USF

Ken, Duke and Carolina (as well as UVa) have large alumni presence in NYC and also in DC with almost no history with Penn State. Notre Dame may not like being with Rutgers after the Scarlet Knights refused to move scheduled games to the Meadowlands instead of their newly renovated stadium, but Carolina, Duke and UVa would benefit vs. Penn State.

My purpose with that division was to place two strong programs in it for competitive balance across divisions. I would anticipate that there would eventually be a CCT with at least every division champ and possibly even the top two teams from each division. Swapping Rutgers and Penn State severely weakens that division.

I understand your motivation, but there is nothing there for the ACC trio.
The bloom is off of the rose with Notre Dame. The procedure when Notre Dame comes to town is that there are no additional tickets available to season ticket holders for that game, they are all made available to Notre Dame (at least that's true in Chapel Hill). But guess what? More empty seats than if we were playing Wake Forest or Miami.
Duke has never played Penn State, Carolina only once. UVa does have an 8 game history. But if any had wanted to play Penn State in the past, they would have.
I think those of us that have been involved in divisional manipulation (both, to our advantage or not) realize it's not in the best interest of the conference.
It may not be good for strength, but for fit you could remove Notre Dame and Penn State and substitute Indiana and Purdue.

(02-24-2022 11:50 PM)SouthEastAlaska Wrote:  

(02-24-2022 02:40 PM)ken d Wrote:  

(02-23-2022 11:19 PM)SouthEastAlaska Wrote:  Thank you for posting the article, interesting read. Pretty much parrots what JR has been saying on this site for years so good on ya JR.

They dropped my thought on the PAC and Big12 forming a super conference, that's actually one step further than I take it but the point still stands, The PAC/Big12 becomes the tweener conference and the ACC gets eaten by the SEC and B1G.

I had the PAC6 becoming a division of the B1G in a scenario where the B1G and SEC both have four six team divisions.

B!G:
Notre Dame, Penn State, North Carolina, Duke, Virginia and Maryland
Ohio State, Michigan, Michigan State, Indiana, Purdue and Rutgers
Wisconsin, Iowa, Nebraska, Northwestern, Minnesota, Illinois
Oregon, Stanford, Washington, Southern Cal, UCLA and Cal

SEC:
Oklahoma, Oklahoma State, Texas A&M, Missouri, Texas and Kansas
Alabama, LSU, Auburn, Mississippi State, Ole Miss and Arkansas
Georgia, Florida, South Carolina, Tennessee, Kentucky, and Vanderbilt
Clemson, Florida State, Virginia Tech, Miami, Georgia Tech and NC State

That leaves, for a third wheel:

Boise State, Utah, Arizona St, BYU, Arizona, Washington St, San Diego St, Oregon St, Colorado
TCU, Kansas State, Baylor, Texas Tech, Iowa State, Houston, Memphis, SMU
West Virginia, Louisville, UCF, Cincinnati, Boston College, Pitt, Syracuse, Wake Forest, USF

I think your plan could come to fruition if the leaders of these conferences and all of the network executives saw eye to eye. Unfortunately as we just witnessed with the CFP they do not. Also IMO if we go to 3 conferences they will be as regional as possible.

I think we agree that the networks want to consolidate as many of the top products as they can into 3-4 conferences and then create a new level of college football. The ACC after how the CFP was handled will be eaten by the two giants on their borders, and the PAC will be incentivized out of pure survival to prey on the Big12.

For fun here's my take at what I think might happen. Please note I'm basing this off the assumption that all of the schools in the current P conferences are interested in playing at this new level. That might not be reality, we'll see...

This is the 76 team set up. In the pay for play future I don't think we'll see more than this.

B1G
Michigan, Michigan St, Nebraska, Minnesota, Northwestern, Ohio St, Iowa, Illinois, Purdue, Wisconsin, Penn St, Indiana, Maryland, Rutgers
Additions- Notre Dame, Virginia, North Carolina, Duke, Georgia Tech, Miami

SEC
South Carolina, Georgia, Florida, Alabama, Auburn, Tennessee, Vanderbilt, Kentucky, LSU, Arkansas, Ole Miss, Mississippi St, Texas A&M, Missouri, Oklahoma, Texas
Additions- Clemson, FSU, N.C. State, Virginia Tech


PAC
UW, WSU, Oregon, Oregon St, Cal, Stanford, USC, UCLA, Arizona St, Arizona, Utah, Colorado
Additions- Iowa St, Kansas, Oklahoma St, Texas Tech, TCU, Houston

The Coast to Coast Leftovers
Pitt, Boston College, Syracuse, Louisville, Wake Forest, West Virginia, Cincinnati, UCF, Kansas St, Baylor, BYU
Best of G adds- USF, Memphis, SMU, Colorado St, Boise St, San Diego St, ECU

If it's only 3 conferences, it will be 72 or less.

3 conference setting, Add Cincinnati, Pitt, Boston College, and Syracuse to the B1G. Add West Virginia, Louisville, UCF, and Wake Forest to the SEC. For the PAC I don't think they would make it to 24 so add Kansas St, Baylor, BYU, and Colorado St.

Interesting.

In my opinion, I think B10 takes Kansas over Miami - due to AAU if nothing else.

I also think that if SEC takes Clemson and FState, and B10 takes Va/NC/Duke/GT, the AAC will circle the wagons by adding their old rivals from the former version of the Big East: WVa, Cinn, Temple, USF. And probably UCF and Memphis, as well. And since you add ECU as an option, I'll list that here as well. This becomes a bball / fball conference, which aligns more with the B10 (and the Big East) than the SEC.

I also don't think the PAC will expand more unless they have to - I think, in your model, it's more likely we would see the PAC ally with the B10. Separate (mostly due to geography), but allied in scheduling, etc.

And the rest would be in what's left of the B12, which becomes a part of the new G5 (G6 if cusa survives this bloodbath...)

(02-26-2022 09:07 AM)XLance Wrote:  

(02-26-2022 08:41 AM)ken d Wrote:  

(02-25-2022 11:08 PM)XLance Wrote:  

(02-24-2022 02:40 PM)ken d Wrote:  

(02-23-2022 11:19 PM)SouthEastAlaska Wrote:  Thank you for posting the article, interesting read. Pretty much parrots what JR has been saying on this site for years so good on ya JR.

They dropped my thought on the PAC and Big12 forming a super conference, that's actually one step further than I take it but the point still stands, The PAC/Big12 becomes the tweener conference and the ACC gets eaten by the SEC and B1G.

I had the PAC6 becoming a division of the B1G in a scenario where the B1G and SEC both have four six team divisions.

B!G:
Notre Dame, Penn State Rutgers, North Carolina, Duke, Virginia and Maryland
Ohio State, Michigan, Michigan State, Indiana, Purdue and Rutgers Penn State
Wisconsin, Iowa, Nebraska, Northwestern, Minnesota, Illinois
Oregon, Stanford, Washington, Southern Cal, UCLA and Cal

SEC:
Oklahoma, Oklahoma State, Texas A&M, Missouri, Texas and Kansas
Alabama, LSU, Auburn, Mississippi State, Ole Miss and Arkansas
Georgia, Florida, South Carolina, Tennessee, Kentucky, and Vanderbilt
Clemson, Florida State, Virginia Tech, Miami, Georgia Tech and NC State

That leaves, for a third wheel:

Boise State, Utah, Arizona St, BYU, Arizona, Washington St, San Diego St, Oregon St, Colorado
TCU, Kansas State, Baylor, Texas Tech, Iowa State, Houston, Memphis, SMU
West Virginia, Louisville, UCF, Cincinnati, Boston College, Pitt, Syracuse, Wake Forest, USF

Ken, Duke and Carolina (as well as UVa) have large alumni presence in NYC and also in DC with almost no history with Penn State. Notre Dame may not like being with Rutgers after the Scarlet Knights refused to move scheduled games to the Meadowlands instead of their newly renovated stadium, but Carolina, Duke and UVa would benefit vs. Penn State.

My purpose with that division was to place two strong programs in it for competitive balance across divisions. I would anticipate that there would eventually be a CCT with at least every division champ and possibly even the top two teams from each division. Swapping Rutgers and Penn State severely weakens that division.

I understand your motivation, but there is nothing there for the ACC trio.
The bloom is off of the rose with Notre Dame. The procedure when Notre Dame comes to town is that there are no additional tickets available to season ticket holders for that game, they are all made available to Notre Dame (at least that's true in Chapel Hill). But guess what? More empty seats than if we were playing Wake Forest or Miami.
Duke has never played Penn State, Carolina only once. UVa does have an 8 game history. But if any had wanted to play Penn State in the past, they would have.
I think those of us that have been involved in divisional manipulation (both, to our advantage or not) realize it's not in the best interest of the conference.
It may not be good for strength, but for fit you could remove Notre Dame and Penn State and substitute Indiana and Purdue.

Of the core ACC schools, PSU had a football playing relationship only with NC State. We played in the 20's and then from the late 60's to early 80's. There is a great deal of faculty overlap between the two. I can't see the B10 wanting to add Duke. They would just be a football parasite as bad as Rutgers. UNC without an Engineering or Ag programs skews heavily female and is not going to support football like VT or NC State. UVa and UNC are just not B10 type schools.

(02-27-2022 10:21 PM)Statefan Wrote:  

(02-26-2022 09:07 AM)XLance Wrote:  

(02-26-2022 08:41 AM)ken d Wrote:  

(02-25-2022 11:08 PM)XLance Wrote:  

(02-24-2022 02:40 PM)ken d Wrote:  I had the PAC6 becoming a division of the B1G in a scenario where the B1G and SEC both have four six team divisions.

B!G:
Notre Dame, Penn State Rutgers, North Carolina, Duke, Virginia and Maryland
Ohio State, Michigan, Michigan State, Indiana, Purdue and Rutgers Penn State
Wisconsin, Iowa, Nebraska, Northwestern, Minnesota, Illinois
Oregon, Stanford, Washington, Southern Cal, UCLA and Cal

SEC:
Oklahoma, Oklahoma State, Texas A&M, Missouri, Texas and Kansas
Alabama, LSU, Auburn, Mississippi State, Ole Miss and Arkansas
Georgia, Florida, South Carolina, Tennessee, Kentucky, and Vanderbilt
Clemson, Florida State, Virginia Tech, Miami, Georgia Tech and NC State

That leaves, for a third wheel:

Boise State, Utah, Arizona St, BYU, Arizona, Washington St, San Diego St, Oregon St, Colorado
TCU, Kansas State, Baylor, Texas Tech, Iowa State, Houston, Memphis, SMU
West Virginia, Louisville, UCF, Cincinnati, Boston College, Pitt, Syracuse, Wake Forest, USF

Ken, Duke and Carolina (as well as UVa) have large alumni presence in NYC and also in DC with almost no history with Penn State. Notre Dame may not like being with Rutgers after the Scarlet Knights refused to move scheduled games to the Meadowlands instead of their newly renovated stadium, but Carolina, Duke and UVa would benefit vs. Penn State.

My purpose with that division was to place two strong programs in it for competitive balance across divisions. I would anticipate that there would eventually be a CCT with at least every division champ and possibly even the top two teams from each division. Swapping Rutgers and Penn State severely weakens that division.

I understand your motivation, but there is nothing there for the ACC trio.
The bloom is off of the rose with Notre Dame. The procedure when Notre Dame comes to town is that there are no additional tickets available to season ticket holders for that game, they are all made available to Notre Dame (at least that's true in Chapel Hill). But guess what? More empty seats than if we were playing Wake Forest or Miami.
Duke has never played Penn State, Carolina only once. UVa does have an 8 game history. But if any had wanted to play Penn State in the past, they would have.
I think those of us that have been involved in divisional manipulation (both, to our advantage or not) realize it's not in the best interest of the conference.
It may not be good for strength, but for fit you could remove Notre Dame and Penn State and substitute Indiana and Purdue.

Of the core ACC schools, PSU had a football playing relationship only with NC State. We played in the 20's and then from the late 60's to early 80's. There is a great deal of faculty overlap between the two. I can't see the B10 wanting to add Duke. They would just be a football parasite as bad as Rutgers. UNC without an Engineering or Ag programs skews heavily female and is not going to support football like VT or NC State. UVa and UNC are just not B10 type schools.

By that logic, the University of Alabama should skew heavily female and therefore wouldn't support football the way Auburn or Georgia would. I just don't see it. 'Bama may skew heavily towards females, but they know how to support football!! UNC would be wise to take notes from them because those Alabama girls know how to support their team!!! (IMHO, <Biden creepy whisper> and this is coming from a Georgia Dawg fan!!! )

(02-23-2022 05:20 PM)XLance Wrote:  If the B1G went west I think they go with Kansas, Colorado, Washington, Oregon, USC, and UCLA/Utah.
If it were me, I'm not sure that I would want to deal with a California state school and Utah would be my pick for #6.

X: If going west, might the B1G also consider Arizona for that sixth school?

(02-28-2022 02:12 PM)EdwordL Wrote:  

(02-23-2022 05:20 PM)XLance Wrote:  If the B1G went west I think they go with Kansas, Colorado, Washington, Oregon, USC, and UCLA/Utah.
If it were me, I'm not sure that I would want to deal with a California state school and Utah would be my pick for #6.

X: If going west, might the B1G also consider Arizona for that sixth school?

Perhaps. Arizona probably has more upside in football than Kansas. Plus it would make the expanded B1G contiguous which may be important to that conference.
Good call.

(02-28-2022 04:45 PM)XLance Wrote:  

(02-28-2022 02:12 PM)EdwordL Wrote:  

(02-23-2022 05:20 PM)XLance Wrote:  If the B1G went west I think they go with Kansas, Colorado, Washington, Oregon, USC, and UCLA/Utah.
If it were me, I'm not sure that I would want to deal with a California state school and Utah would be my pick for #6.

X: If going west, might the B1G also consider Arizona for that sixth school?

Perhaps. Arizona probably has more upside in football than Kansas. Plus it would make the expanded B1G contiguous which may be important to that conference.
Good call.

If the B1G has no shot at the Tree (Stanford), I could see that
However, someone like Frank would prefer Stanford to anyone else.

(02-28-2022 12:42 AM)DawgNBama Wrote:  

(02-27-2022 10:21 PM)Statefan Wrote:  

(02-26-2022 09:07 AM)XLance Wrote:  

(02-26-2022 08:41 AM)ken d Wrote:  

(02-25-2022 11:08 PM)XLance Wrote:  Ken, Duke and Carolina (as well as UVa) have large alumni presence in NYC and also in DC with almost no history with Penn State. Notre Dame may not like being with Rutgers after the Scarlet Knights refused to move scheduled games to the Meadowlands instead of their newly renovated stadium, but Carolina, Duke and UVa would benefit vs. Penn State.

My purpose with that division was to place two strong programs in it for competitive balance across divisions. I would anticipate that there would eventually be a CCT with at least every division champ and possibly even the top two teams from each division. Swapping Rutgers and Penn State severely weakens that division.

I understand your motivation, but there is nothing there for the ACC trio.
The bloom is off of the rose with Notre Dame. The procedure when Notre Dame comes to town is that there are no additional tickets available to season ticket holders for that game, they are all made available to Notre Dame (at least that's true in Chapel Hill). But guess what? More empty seats than if we were playing Wake Forest or Miami.
Duke has never played Penn State, Carolina only once. UVa does have an 8 game history. But if any had wanted to play Penn State in the past, they would have.
I think those of us that have been involved in divisional manipulation (both, to our advantage or not) realize it's not in the best interest of the conference.
It may not be good for strength, but for fit you could remove Notre Dame and Penn State and substitute Indiana and Purdue.

Of the core ACC schools, PSU had a football playing relationship only with NC State. We played in the 20's and then from the late 60's to early 80's. There is a great deal of faculty overlap between the two. I can't see the B10 wanting to add Duke. They would just be a football parasite as bad as Rutgers. UNC without an Engineering or Ag programs skews heavily female and is not going to support football like VT or NC State. UVa and UNC are just not B10 type schools.

By that logic, the University of Alabama should skew heavily female and therefore wouldn't support football the way Auburn or Georgia would. I just don't see it. 'Bama may skew heavily towards females, but they know how to support football!! UNC would be wise to take notes from them because those Alabama girls know how to support their team!!! (IMHO, <Biden creepy whisper> and this is coming from a Georgia Dawg fan!!! )

Alabama is not an academic institution like most of the P-5. They are a very, very light research institution and graduate programs that are most important are in Birmingham. What I am talking about are traditional research universities. As they become more female the women give less money and winning a football game becomes less existential. For research universities, the money comes in conjunction with and often due to money made tangential to graduate research. UNC, NC State, GT, Florida, TAMU, VT, Georgia, Kentucky, and Nebraska are all examples of this type. All of the Big 10 is this way. I'm also not talking about next year, I'm talking about 2040, and 2050 and beyond. When JR mentions this he hits from a post Baby Boom alumni drop.

(02-28-2022 06:09 PM)Statefan Wrote:  

(02-28-2022 12:42 AM)DawgNBama Wrote:  

(02-27-2022 10:21 PM)Statefan Wrote:  

(02-26-2022 09:07 AM)XLance Wrote:  

(02-26-2022 08:41 AM)ken d Wrote:  My purpose with that division was to place two strong programs in it for competitive balance across divisions. I would anticipate that there would eventually be a CCT with at least every division champ and possibly even the top two teams from each division. Swapping Rutgers and Penn State severely weakens that division.

I understand your motivation, but there is nothing there for the ACC trio.
The bloom is off of the rose with Notre Dame. The procedure when Notre Dame comes to town is that there are no additional tickets available to season ticket holders for that game, they are all made available to Notre Dame (at least that's true in Chapel Hill). But guess what? More empty seats than if we were playing Wake Forest or Miami.
Duke has never played Penn State, Carolina only once. UVa does have an 8 game history. But if any had wanted to play Penn State in the past, they would have.
I think those of us that have been involved in divisional manipulation (both, to our advantage or not) realize it's not in the best interest of the conference.
It may not be good for strength, but for fit you could remove Notre Dame and Penn State and substitute Indiana and Purdue.

Of the core ACC schools, PSU had a football playing relationship only with NC State. We played in the 20's and then from the late 60's to early 80's. There is a great deal of faculty overlap between the two. I can't see the B10 wanting to add Duke. They would just be a football parasite as bad as Rutgers. UNC without an Engineering or Ag programs skews heavily female and is not going to support football like VT or NC State. UVa and UNC are just not B10 type schools.

By that logic, the University of Alabama should skew heavily female and therefore wouldn't support football the way Auburn or Georgia would. I just don't see it. 'Bama may skew heavily towards females, but they know how to support football!! UNC would be wise to take notes from them because those Alabama girls know how to support their team!!! (IMHO, <Biden creepy whisper> and this is coming from a Georgia Dawg fan!!! )

Alabama is not an academic institution like most of the P-5. They are a very, very light research institution and graduate programs that are most important are in Birmingham. What I am talking about are traditional research universities. As they become more female the women give less money and winning a football game becomes less existential. For research universities, the money comes in conjunction with and often due to money made tangential to graduate research. UNC, NC State, GT, Florida, TAMU, VT, Georgia, Kentucky, and Nebraska are all examples of this type. All of the Big 10 is this way. I'm also not talking about next year, I'm talking about 2040, and 2050 and beyond. When JR mentions this he hits from a post Baby Boom alumni drop.

Ok, so is UGA (Georgia) a traditional research university?? Because if they are, there are more women than men over there as well. And if UGA is not, what about U of O (Oregon)? There's more women than men over there too, and the Ducks do pretty good in football.

Five ways Playoff expansion plays out.

1. A double-secret meeting in the next few months where all sides agree on a 12-team Playoff.

2. The ACC digs in and refuses to budge, the SEC and Big Ten make expansion moves to further weaken the remaining 3 Power 5 conferences.

3. The Pac-12 and Big 12 form a super conference, trying to maximize games that can draw 4 million viewers.

4. The ACC, nearly left for dead during the last round of major expansion before poaching the Big East, can’t fend off the SEC, Big Ten and newly formed Pac-12/Big 12 super conference.





Good luck with that tweener "super conference" drawing the same audiences as the SEC and the B1G.

(02-23-2022 05:20 PM)XLance Wrote:  If the B1G went west I think they go with Kansas, Colorado, Washington, Oregon, USC, and UCLA/Utah.
If it were me, I'm not sure that I would want to deal with a California state school and Utah would be my pick for #6.

The B1G would look to pair USC and Stanford, if no UCLA and Cal. California is a huge market and that move could bring an annual Notre Dame game to the TV contract (@USC or @Stanford).

UCLA and Cal would trump both Kansas and Utah. But, even you forego the California public schools, what about Arizona and ASU? Wouldn't those schools be higher on the B1G board than both Utah and Kansas?

(03-01-2022 02:14 PM)YNot Wrote:  

(02-23-2022 05:20 PM)XLance Wrote:  If the B1G went west I think they go with Kansas, Colorado, Washington, Oregon, USC, and UCLA/Utah.
If it were me, I'm not sure that I would want to deal with a California state school and Utah would be my pick for #6.

The B1G would look to pair USC and Stanford, if no UCLA and Cal. California is a huge market and that move could bring an annual Notre Dame game to the TV contract (@USC or @Stanford).

UCLA and Cal would trump both Kansas and Utah. But, even you forego the California public schools, what about Arizona and ASU? Wouldn't those schools be higher on the B1G board than both Utah and Kansas?

Here's my ranking of Pac 12 schools as Big 10 expansion candidates: https://csnbbs.com/thread-925722.html

Where would Kansas rank?

Geographically they would be better than any Pac 12 school.

Academically they are AAU but sub 100 USN&WR. Plenty of Pac 12 schools rank higher.

Athletic wise they are about as bad in football as you can get but about as good in men's basketball as you can get. I'd rather take them than a school that's mediocre in both sports.

Population wise Kansas is as of the 2020 Census 36th, lower than every Pac 12 state. Kansas City is the 34th ranked Nielsen market according to this source (https://oaaa.org/Portals/0/Public%20PDFs...port.pdf), behind Los Angeles, San Fran, Phoenix, Denver, Sacramento, Portland, San Diego, and Salt Lake City, which is practically the entire Pac-12. Kansas/Kansas City certainly isn't an insignificant market or fan base but they would be small compared to most of the Pac 12 schools. The advantages would be a lot closer to Big Ten schools, especially those in the Western Division, and an amazing men's basketball team. Schools in the West might like an additional drivable opponent but schools in the East would have to fly to Los Angeles or Kansas City/Lawrence anyway and LA is certainly more fun even though it's a longer plane trip and further away.

(02-28-2022 09:54 PM)DawgNBama Wrote:  

(02-28-2022 06:09 PM)Statefan Wrote:  

(02-28-2022 12:42 AM)DawgNBama Wrote:  

(02-27-2022 10:21 PM)Statefan Wrote:  

(02-26-2022 09:07 AM)XLance Wrote:  I understand your motivation, but there is nothing there for the ACC trio.
The bloom is off of the rose with Notre Dame. The procedure when Notre Dame comes to town is that there are no additional tickets available to season ticket holders for that game, they are all made available to Notre Dame (at least that's true in Chapel Hill). But guess what? More empty seats than if we were playing Wake Forest or Miami.
Duke has never played Penn State, Carolina only once. UVa does have an 8 game history. But if any had wanted to play Penn State in the past, they would have.
I think those of us that have been involved in divisional manipulation (both, to our advantage or not) realize it's not in the best interest of the conference.
It may not be good for strength, but for fit you could remove Notre Dame and Penn State and substitute Indiana and Purdue.

Of the core ACC schools, PSU had a football playing relationship only with NC State. We played in the 20's and then from the late 60's to early 80's. There is a great deal of faculty overlap between the two. I can't see the B10 wanting to add Duke. They would just be a football parasite as bad as Rutgers. UNC without an Engineering or Ag programs skews heavily female and is not going to support football like VT or NC State. UVa and UNC are just not B10 type schools.

By that logic, the University of Alabama should skew heavily female and therefore wouldn't support football the way Auburn or Georgia would. I just don't see it. 'Bama may skew heavily towards females, but they know how to support football!! UNC would be wise to take notes from them because those Alabama girls know how to support their team!!! (IMHO, <Biden creepy whisper> and this is coming from a Georgia Dawg fan!!! )

Alabama is not an academic institution like most of the P-5. They are a very, very light research institution and graduate programs that are most important are in Birmingham. What I am talking about are traditional research universities. As they become more female the women give less money and winning a football game becomes less existential. For research universities, the money comes in conjunction with and often due to money made tangential to graduate research. UNC, NC State, GT, Florida, TAMU, VT, Georgia, Kentucky, and Nebraska are all examples of this type. All of the Big 10 is this way. I'm also not talking about next year, I'm talking about 2040, and 2050 and beyond. When JR mentions this he hits from a post Baby Boom alumni drop.

Ok, so is UGA (Georgia) a traditional research university?? Because if they are, there are more women than men over there as well. And if UGA is not, what about U of O (Oregon)? There's more women than men over there too, and the Ducks do pretty good in football.

You are missing my point by looking for gross outliers. Oregon is Nike U. They have a billionaire to back the programs. Bama is a University but it's not graduate research intensive. You can have a lot of women at your university as long as you have a full engineering school, forestry, ag, and professional schools in law, medicine, etc., etc. That will keep you with male students. Now if you have a sugar daddy you don't need graduates do you?

Here's a few National Science Foundation total Research and Development Expenditures at schools playing P-5 football in 2019.

UNC - 1.5 Billion
GT - .96 B
Florida - .93 B
VT - .54 B
NC State .54 B
Georgia .47 B
Kentucky .41 B
Nebraska .31 B (This is the bottom of the B10 and would be 9th in the P12)
Notre Dame and WF .24 B (That's damn high for what are private collages in a sense)
Auburn .23 B
Arkansas .18 B
Mississippi - .15 B
Alabama - .08 B or just $80 Million

The number of girls graduated at UNC versus men over the last 20 is starting to bite the Ram's Club but UNC is 60-40 girls. Despite that they have programs that still graduate wealthy males but many of them are graduate programs.

The 14 Big 10 schools, 9 of the P12, Texas, TAMU, Florida, Georgia, Kentucky, LSU, Mizzou, Vandy, Iowa State, Kansas, Miami, Pitt, NC State, VT, UNC, Duke, and GT are all graduate research intensive. It's where the real money comes from. That's about 40 of the P-5.

ND, WF are small universities overpunching on graduate research.

Auburn, Clemson, Mississippi State, and Kansas State are relatively small land grants running 40-50 years behind others in the grad research dollar track.

Finally you have Alabama, Baylor, Syracuse, BC, Ole Miss, Oregon, and TCU which are just not graduate research dollar intensive. It's at these last outliers that graduating throngs of women will eventually bit the ass of the University (see what I did there?)