One siginificant benefit of a divisionless model that people don’t talk about much is that the divisionless model works well with an odd numbered football teams.

For example, if the BIG has 15 schools and plays 9 conference games, they can go with 4-5-5, meaning each school plays four permanent rivals every year and non rivals every other year.

Now Kansas has been frequently mentioned as a potential tag along target for the BIG. But there is no other school in the NB12 very desirable to the BIG. The ACC schools many people on this board wanr are not currently available. But the BIG can reach out to KU NOW and will be able to add that school before the new media deal kicks in. Would the BIG will just add KU for now and wait for the ACC GOR expiration?

We all know what KU brings to the table:

* true basketball blue blood
* new state adjacent to the BIG TEN states
* AAU

Cons are

* weak football
* not so big media market

What’s the chance?

Probably about the same as the chance that the Pac 12 adds BYU.

Basketball just doesn't move the financial needle. KU would need a partner with more value.

Now if the Big 10 added a Pacific wing of 5 schools, maybe KU would be #20. But alone, no way.

no

Nah, just like the Big 12 would have never added UC as an eleventh school prior to UT/OU leaving. It’s the same degree of separation respectively.

(04-07-2022 08:42 PM)RUScarlets Wrote:  Nah, just like the Big 12 would have never added UC as an eleventh school prior to UT/OU leaving. It’s the same degree of separation respectively.

Yes, IF they thought it part of their long term plan, and that KU also had value to SEC.

Does the BIG have a long term plan yet?

Much more likely they start with the Pac 12 and see what’s needed afterwards.

I think it more likely that the SEC bring KU in as 17. SEC/ESPN more likely to have a business plan with multiple cycles. KU doesnt cannibalize the football product and would be a peer to UNC, Duke, UVa etc. If ESPN or SEC has aspirations of separating, or using that for CFP leverage, you have to be able to solve the CBB tournament question. KU, UK, UNC, Duke etc is a force in that regard. It also likely helps lower what’s owed to Big 12, which subsidizes the move. I’m surprised they weren’t included in the initial move in order to collapse B12, but KU would likely want to leverage BIG for an offer, so it gets messy

(04-07-2022 08:42 PM)RUScarlets Wrote:  Nah, just like the Big 12 would have never added UC as an eleventh school prior to UT/OU leaving. It’s the same degree of separation respectively.

The funny thing about that is, in 2016, UC (and UCF) were much different.

Both schools hadn't gone through their growth of 2 straight undefeated years and NY6-CFP breakouts.

In fact, both schools were recovering from downturns.

OTOH, Houston was kept out for political (recruiting) concerns and BYU was kept out due to LGBT concerns.

The Big 12 couldn't have expanded at a more perfect time for all of those schools to be on the right side of the fence. The Big 12 was fortunate those P5-quality schools were available at that exact time.

(04-07-2022 08:25 PM)random asian guy Wrote:  One siginificant benefit of a divisionless model that people don’t talk about much is that the divisionless model works well with an odd numbered football teams.

For example, if the BIG has 15 schools and plays 9 conference games, they can go with 4-5-5, meaning each school plays four permanent rivals every year and non rivals every other year.

15 does NOT work with 9 conference games, unless you can figure a way to get 3 teams on the field at once. You'd have to have one team opt for 8 or 10 games, perhaps the same team, alternating years, to simulate your 4-5-5.

(04-07-2022 08:56 PM)Big 12 fan too Wrote:  

(04-07-2022 08:42 PM)RUScarlets Wrote:  Nah, just like the Big 12 would have never added UC as an eleventh school prior to UT/OU leaving. It’s the same degree of separation respectively.

Yes, IF they thought it part of their long term plan, and that KU also had value to SEC.

Does the BIG have a long term plan yet?

Much more likely they start with the Pac 12 and see what’s needed afterwards.

I think it more likely that the SEC bring KU in as 17. SEC/ESPN more likely to have a business plan with multiple cycles. KU doesnt cannibalize the football product and would be a peer to UNC, Duke, UVa etc. If ESPN or SEC has aspirations of separating, or using that for CFP leverage, you have to be able to solve the CBB tournament question. KU, UK, UNC, Duke etc is a force in that regard. It also likely helps lower what’s owed to Big 12, which subsidizes the move. I’m surprised they weren’t included in the initial move in order to collapse B12, but KU would likely want to leverage BIG for an offer, so it gets messy

If the SEC decides to go past 16, adding Virginia, Duke, UNC, and Kansas as a preemptive strike against the B1G would be wise. The B1G is going to target Virginia, Duke, Carolina, and Georgia Tech initially and IMHO succeed in eventually pulling those 4 out of the ACC to get to 18. At that point, I think the SEC adds FSU and Clemson get to 18. Then the question becomes whether NC State and/or Virginia Tech can muster the political support to get one or both of them a life raft. If that campaign works, then I foresee both VT and NCSU to the SEC as 19 and 20 since neither of those two are AAU members. If ND then rebuffs the B1G, Pitt and Kansas, as AAU members, then slide into the B1G as schools 19 and 20. The remaining ACC schools - BC, Syracuse, Louisville, Wake, Miami - merge with UCF, Cincinnati, West Virginia, Iowa State, Baylor, TCU, Houston, Texas Tech, Oklahoma State, Kansas State, and BYU to form at 16 team league. ND either places basketball/non-FB in this new league and plays a few of them a year, or it takes all non-FB to the new Big East.

(04-07-2022 09:25 PM)CarlSmithCenter Wrote:  

(04-07-2022 08:56 PM)Big 12 fan too Wrote:  

(04-07-2022 08:42 PM)RUScarlets Wrote:  Nah, just like the Big 12 would have never added UC as an eleventh school prior to UT/OU leaving. It’s the same degree of separation respectively.

Yes, IF they thought it part of their long term plan, and that KU also had value to SEC.

Does the BIG have a long term plan yet?

Much more likely they start with the Pac 12 and see what’s needed afterwards.

I think it more likely that the SEC bring KU in as 17. SEC/ESPN more likely to have a business plan with multiple cycles. KU doesnt cannibalize the football product and would be a peer to UNC, Duke, UVa etc. If ESPN or SEC has aspirations of separating, or using that for CFP leverage, you have to be able to solve the CBB tournament question. KU, UK, UNC, Duke etc is a force in that regard. It also likely helps lower what’s owed to Big 12, which subsidizes the move. I’m surprised they weren’t included in the initial move in order to collapse B12, but KU would likely want to leverage BIG for an offer, so it gets messy

If the SEC decides to go past 16, adding Virginia, Duke, UNC, and Kansas as a preemptive strike against the B1G would be wise. The B1G is going to target Virginia, Duke, Carolina, and Georgia Tech initially and IMHO succeed in eventually pulling those 4 out of the ACC to get to 18. At that point, I think the SEC adds FSU and Clemson get to 18. Then the question becomes whether NC State and/or Virginia Tech can muster the political support to get one or both of them a life raft. If that campaign works, then I foresee both VT and NCSU to the SEC as 19 and 20 since neither of those two are AAU members. If ND then rebuffs the B1G, Pitt and Kansas, as AAU members, then slide into the B1G as schools 19 and 20. The remaining ACC schools - BC, Syracuse, Louisville, Wake, Miami - merge with UCF, Cincinnati, West Virginia, Iowa State, Baylor, TCU, Houston, Texas Tech, Oklahoma State, Kansas State, and BYU to form at 16 team league. ND either places basketball/non-FB in this new league and plays a few of them a year, or it takes all non-FB to the new Big East.

My guess is the ACC top tier would go SEC, but it can’t hurt to have KU. Just much better fit. And also much easier with ESPN owning the two conferences.

Some of you need to quit falling for the AAU red herring. There is no B10 requirement of AAU membership. It is an aspirational statement designed to indicated who the B10 sees as potential peers. If that mattered Nebraska would be kicked out and Notre Dame never pursued.

AAU is about National Sciences Foundation research and development style heavy research. NSF tracks that stuff and other graduate school measures. AAU is about Graduate School not undergrads.

The bottom quartile of the B10 is Nebraska 81, Iowa 52, Purdue 41 and Rutgers 40.

That's an average of the quartile of 54th. Cincy 53, NC State 51, VT 49, and Arizona State 43 all come in under that last quartile average.

Mizzou 78, USF 77, FSU 75, ISU 71, Kanas 70, and Kentucky all get in under Nebraska, but short of Iowa. All 9 of those fit a Big 10/AAU model. Iowa and Ohio State in particular don't want to include Iowa State or Cincy, but they can't write specs for B10 membership and gerrymander those two out. That's why you get the undefined fig leaf - AAU knowing that they can blackball whom they want to blackball for gaining admission since you need only to cobble together 16 votes to blackball.

Nope, they would want to go to 16

(04-07-2022 09:57 PM)SouthEastAlaska Wrote:  Nope, they would want to go to 16

Why?

What makes 16 special?

(04-07-2022 08:40 PM)domer1978 Wrote:  no

This.

(04-07-2022 08:40 PM)domer1978 Wrote:  no

Succinct and correct.

Plus the IARP case hasn't been settled and Kansas isn't getting off unscathed.

(04-07-2022 09:44 PM)Statefan Wrote:  Some of you need to quit falling for the AAU red herring. There is no B10 requirement of AAU membership. It is an aspirational statement designed to indicated who the B10 sees as potential peers. If that mattered Nebraska would be kicked out and Notre Dame never pursued.

AAU is about National Sciences Foundation research and development style heavy research. NSF tracks that stuff and other graduate school measures. AAU is about Graduate School not undergrads.

The bottom quartile of the B10 is Nebraska 81, Iowa 52, Purdue 41 and Rutgers 40.

That's an average of the quartile of 54th. Cincy 53, NC State 51, VT 49, and Arizona State 43 all come in under that last quartile average.

Mizzou 78, USF 77, FSU 75, ISU 71, Kanas 70, and Kentucky all get in under Nebraska, but short of Iowa. All 9 of those fit a Big 10/AAU model. Iowa and Ohio State in particular don't want to include Iowa State or Cincy, but they can't write specs for B10 membership and gerrymander those two out. That's why you get the undefined fig leaf - AAU knowing that they can blackball whom they want to blackball for gaining admission since you need only to cobble together 16 votes to blackball.

One of the Big Ten presidents, can’t recall which one, said in no uncertain terms that Nebraska wouldn’t have been invited if they had been kicked out of the AAU before being invited. So while you’re right to say having AAU membership is somewhat arbitrary, it nonetheless does matter to the presidents. They would say yes to Notre Dame despite not having it but that’s a very unique case, for obvious historical and money-related reasons.

(04-07-2022 10:01 PM)Statefan Wrote:  

(04-07-2022 09:57 PM)SouthEastAlaska Wrote:  Nope, they would want to go to 16

Why?

What makes 16 special?

Easier scheduling, 4x4 pod system is much more manageable than 15.

Sooo the answer to the question of would they take Kansas on their own is no, they would pair them with at least one other team.

For the record, 10 is the perfect conference size IMO but no one is getting smaller so we should probably start coming to grips with conferences that are 16, 18, 20, maybe even 24 schools big.

If the money is close and if they can manage it, the B1G should try for Kansas and Missouri. I think there’s about a 5-10% Missouri would ever leave the SEC. I think it’s a decent chance that Kansas joins the SEC. Just a thought.

(04-07-2022 09:20 PM)Crayton Wrote:  

(04-07-2022 08:25 PM)random asian guy Wrote:  One siginificant benefit of a divisionless model that people don’t talk about much is that the divisionless model works well with an odd numbered football teams.

For example, if the BIG has 15 schools and plays 9 conference games, they can go with 4-5-5, meaning each school plays four permanent rivals every year and non rivals every other year.

15 does NOT work with 9 conference games, unless you can figure a way to get 3 teams on the field at once. You'd have to have one team opt for 8 or 10 games, perhaps the same team, alternating years, to simulate your 4-5-5.

Interesting. Thank you for pointing this out..
I always knew that an 11-team conference can't play a 9 game conference schedule. But the math is still the basically the same for 13 or 15 teams too. A conference with an odd number of teams can not play a conference schedule with an odd number of games.

So in this case 15 teams would need to play 9 conference games. 15 × 9 = 135 games. But since conference schools can only play each other, the total games needed is 135/2 = 67.5 games. You can't play half a game. So at least 1 team would need to play 8 or 10 games instead of 9 games.

But that's just confusing. So odds are the entire 15-team conference would switch to play either 8 or 10 conference games. Which is actually probably better in a divisionless format so that everybody gets an equal number of home and away games. I guess this why a 15-team ACC played 10 conference games in 2020.

So if a 15-team Big Ten switched to 8 conference games, they could go with a 2-6-6 format with 2 permanent rivals and 12 teams they play 50% of the time.

Or if a 15-team Big Ten switched to 10 conference games, they could play a 6-4-4 format. With 6 permanent rivals and 8 teams they play 50% of the time.

(04-07-2022 10:01 PM)Statefan Wrote:  

(04-07-2022 09:57 PM)SouthEastAlaska Wrote:  Nope, they would want to go to 16

Why?

What makes 16 special?

scheduling for football

“We already have to play Rutgers, Maryland, Indiana, Purdue, and Illinois; now you want us to add this football program?”

-Ohio State, Michigan and Penn State