Every once in a while I like to re-visit the topic of Kings and Barons (as Mandel calls them) in football. And this time I would like to add a separate listing of Kings and Barons in basketball as well. For the latter I am not including non-FBS playing members suchas Georgetown, Villanova, and Marquette which would all be at least Baron status.
Football
Kings: Alabama, Florida, Florida State, Louisiana State, Miami, Michigan, Nebraska, Notre Dame, Ohio State, Oklahoma, Penn State, Southern Cal, Texas
Barons: Arkansas, Auburn, Clemson, Colorado, Georgia, Georgia Tech, Oregon, Tennessee, Texas A&M, UCLA, Virginia Tech, West Virginia, Wisconsin
Basketball
Kings: Arizona, Connecticut, Duke, Florida, Indiana, Kansas, Kentucky, Louisville, Michigan State, North Carolina, Ohio State, Syracuse, UCLA
Barons: Arkansas, Cincinnati, Illinois, Maryland, Memphis, Michigan, Missouri, North Carolina State, Notre Dame, Oklahoma State, Pittsburgh, Purdue, Stanford, Tennessee, Texas, West Virginia, Wisconsin
I'm sure the above is not a perfect listing, but I believe that it is a solid enough listing that it might give us an insight into how each conference is viewed.
It also gives us insight into why the conferences not named the SEC and the BiG have targeted who they have targeted for any remaining expansion.
The Pac-12 - Texas and Oklahoma
The ACC - Notre Dame
The Big 12 - Florida State and Clemson
Ultimately, for the ACC (since this is an ACC board), the league truly needs FSU and Miami to get back to being Kings on the field as well as off the field. Should that happen the conference will be fine.
Cheers,
Neil
Nice thread. Just some opinions & observations:
Football:
* I'd have to say that if FSU & Miami are still football kings that you have to include Georgia as well.
* Several ACC teams were once Kings but have fallen to baron (Clemson & Ga Tech) or lower (Pittsburgh).
* N. Carolina & N.C. State have both flirted with baron status in the past but don't make the grade now.
Basketball:
* Looks about right. Maybe add Georgetown to the barons list.
* Sadly, it wasn't that long that Ga Tech was a baron on the way to king status. Where are ye', Bobby Cremins?
Neil,
I generally agree with your listing and I agree with HM that a few others have left their former glory for lower status (Pitt, Syracuse). I am more hopeful that the ACC is rising with FSU looking better every year, Syracuse actually playing competitive football again. The listing you have, especially below the Kings, is very fluid and can change in a couple of short years.
As to the target schools, you might be able to expand that to include potential 16 team leagues:
PAC 12: Texas, Oklahoma, tag-alongs accepted as long as Texas is in the package
ACC: Notre Dame, pick-em
Big 12: Florida State, Clemsonm Louisville, Cincy, AFA, BYU
SEC: Florida State, Clemson, WVU, Oklahoma, Texas
B1G: Notre Dame, pick-em (as long as academics are respectable)
Both the PAC 12, B1G and the ACC are more limited by geography, though this limitation is self imposed by the respective conference. The Big 12 and the SEC are more willing to go beyond what would be considered their "region". The B1G did flirt with Texas but rejected any tag-alongs that would tarnish their academic image (OU, TTech, and/or OSU).
(04-08-2012 04:41 PM)HtownOrange Wrote: [ -> ]Neil,
I generally agree with your listing and I agree with HM that a few others have left their former glory for lower status (Pitt, Syracuse). I am more hopeful that the ACC is rising with FSU looking better every year, Syracuse actually playing competitive football again. The listing you have, especially below the Kings, is very fluid and can change in a couple of short years.
As to the target schools, you might be able to expand that to include potential 16 team leagues:
PAC 12: Texas, Oklahoma, tag-alongs accepted as long as Texas is in the package
ACC: Notre Dame, pick-em
Big 12: Florida State, Clemson, Louisville, Cincy, AFA, BYU
SEC: Florida State, Clemson, WVU, Oklahoma, Texas
B1G: Notre Dame, pick-em (as long as academics are respectable)
Both the PAC 12, B1G and the ACC are more limited by geography, though this limitation is self imposed by the respective conference. The Big 12 and the SEC are more willing to go beyond what would be considered their "region". The B1G did flirt with Texas but rejected any tag-alongs that would tarnish their academic image (OU, TTech, and/or OSU).
While I agree the Barons are more fluid than the Kings, I think it's still relatively stable as well. As with the Kings, it is easier for a former Baron to be elevated back to Baron status than it is to become a Baron for the first time.
So Georgia, if it were to go on a hot streak for 5-7 years and win another NC they would quickly be elevated back to King (if they aren't a King already), but Oregon would need probably two decades or more at their current level with at least 2 NCs to reach King level.
Pitt could easily be elevated from what is the Knight level back up to Baron status if they were to have a good 5-7 year run. While a Louisville would need to go two decades of consistently getting to 9-10 wins a year for them to go to the next level.
I think the SEC going into Texas was a natural western extension of their geography since that state borders both Arkansas and Louisiana. I see Missouri as more Big Ten country than SEC, but then it took the SEC some time to decide upon #14 after they couldn't persuade two other logical geographical extensions as takers (a team from Virginia or a team from North Carolina).
I think the Pac-12 desperately wants to extend beyond their current geography to get into both Texas and Oklahoma, moreso the former than the latter. It's just that the feeling isn't mutual, especially by Texas. And the ACC supposedly tested the waters with both Texas and Notre Dame, showing a willingness to go beyond their perceived geography.
Today's landscape pretty much ensures conferences will be looking to extend beyond their supposed geography of yesteryear.
As for expansion targets, I left the SEC and BiG out of it since they don't 'need' to expand. With one league having three Kings and four Barons and the other having four Kings, one Baron, and two Knights that could rise to Baron status in Michigan State and Iowa, they may choose to do so, but they don't need to.
The Pac-12, despite it's great TV contracts knows that it needs to expand at some point since they only have 1 football King. And unless UCLA finds their Pete Carroll that isn't changing in a hurry.
The ACC and Big 12 are in similar situations, although the latter's two Kings are more stable than the ACC's, the ACC's Barons are more plentiful. It's why the FSU and Clemson to the Big 12 is intriguing (even though I don't think it will happen). Both schools have to at least be listening.
Cheers,
Neil
(04-08-2012 03:08 PM)XLance Wrote: [ -> ] (04-08-2012 12:39 PM)omniorange Wrote: [ -> ]Every once in a while I like to re-visit the topic of Kings and Barons (as Mandel calls them) in football. And this time I would like to add a separate listing of Kings and Barons in basketball as well. For the latter I am not including non-FBS playing members suchas Georgetown, Villanova, and Marquette which would all be at least Baron status.
Football
Kings: Alabama, Florida, Florida State, Louisiana State, Miami, Michigan, Nebraska, Notre Dame, Ohio State, Oklahoma, Penn State, Southern Cal, Texas
Barons: Arkansas, Auburn, Clemson, Colorado, Georgia, Georgia Tech, Oregon, Tennessee, Texas A&M, UCLA, Virginia Tech, West Virginia, Wisconsin
Basketball
Kings: Arizona, Connecticut, Duke, Florida, Indiana, Kansas, Kentucky, Louisville, Michigan State, North Carolina, Ohio State, Syracuse, UCLA
Barons: Arkansas, Cincinnati, Illinois, Maryland, Memphis, Michigan, Missouri, North Carolina State, Notre Dame, Oklahoma State, Pittsburgh, Purdue, Stanford, Tennessee, Texas, West Virginia, Wisconsin
I'm sure the above is not a perfect listing, but I believe that it is a solid enough listing that it might give us an insight into how each conference is viewed.
It also gives us insight into why the conferences not named the SEC and the BiG have targeted who they have targeted for any remaining expansion.
The Pac-12 - Texas and Oklahoma
The ACC - Notre Dame
The Big 12 - Florida State and Clemson
Ultimately, for the ACC (since this is an ACC board), the league truly needs FSU and Miami to get back to being Kings on the field as well as off the field. Should that happen the conference will be fine.
Cheers,
Neil
Neil,
Interesting isn't it that the PAC 12 and the SEC are targeting the same two schools, and that the B1G is targeting the same school as the ACC.
The Big XII has no place to go if either the SEC or the PAC 12 are successful. The ACC on the otherhand is well positioned as a 12 team league if FSU or Clemson (or both) were to leave. A 12 team ACC might be more attractive to Notre Dame.
If by successful, you mean survive, sure. But it would be a severely weakened ACC which would quickly become the equivalent of the Big East in the current football heirarchy.
Cheers,
Neil
Arizona teetering on the edge...maybe Baron status. Florida as a king too looks suspect.
(04-08-2012 10:00 PM)TexanMark Wrote: [ -> ]Arizona teetering on the edge...maybe Baron status. Florida as a king too looks suspect.
As I said, the list isn't perfect but on the flip side my thinking included the following...
Arizona has a .622 winning % in the NCAAs, 1 NC, 4 FFs, and 8 Elite 8s.
Florida has a .700 winning % in the NCAAs, 2 NCs, 4 FFs, and 6 Elite 8s.
They were the last two to make my Kings bb list, but I think they have enough separation from the other Barons. Also, I tried to balance the two Kings list with 13 programs each. Georgetown probably would have bumped one of them, but I was trying to tie the Kings/Barons list to conference realignment, so ruled out the non-FBS programs from consideration.
Again, anyone who wants to make their own lists, I have no problem with that. Knock yourselves out. My list wasn't meant to be the be-all and end-all on the discussion, just a starting point.
Cheers,
Neil
From an ACC football perspective this makes us LOOK weak... our Kings have seen far better days, our barons can't win their bowl games... I agree, we need to see FSU and Miami to get back to previous program levels of success. Without that, we're no better than the Big East, who will have a regular top ten program among their ranks soon.
As for the basketball list, basketball is such a different mindset - I don't know how you can make a kings and barons list and not include programs like G-town, Butler, Xavier, and Gonzaga... they're programs that are very much a part of the movers and shakers of basketball in the public mind and awareness now.
(04-08-2012 10:28 PM)omniorange Wrote: [ -> ] (04-08-2012 10:00 PM)TexanMark Wrote: [ -> ]Arizona teetering on the edge...maybe Baron status. Florida as a king too looks suspect.
As I said, the list isn't perfect but on the flip side my thinking included the following...
Arizona has a .622 winning % in the NCAAs, 1 NC, 4 FFs, and 8 Elite 8s.
Florida has a .700 winning % in the NCAAs, 2 NCs, 4 FFs, and 6 Elite 8s.
They were the last two to make my Kings bb list, but I think they have enough separation from the other Barons. Also, I tried to balance the two Kings list with 13 programs each. Georgetown probably would have bumped one of them, but I was trying to tie the Kings/Barons list to conference realignment, so ruled out the non-FBS programs from consideration.
Again, anyone who wants to make their own lists, I have no problem with that. Knock yourselves out. My list wasn't meant to be the be-all and end-all on the discussion, just a starting point.
Cheers,
Neil
I think the 5 blue bloods are a step above the rest of the Kings. They should be in a category above the Kings. Also, I'd add Temple to the FBS football fielding basketball barons list. They've been good forever.
(04-08-2012 11:03 PM)ChrisLords Wrote: [ -> ] (04-08-2012 10:28 PM)omniorange Wrote: [ -> ] (04-08-2012 10:00 PM)TexanMark Wrote: [ -> ]Arizona teetering on the edge...maybe Baron status. Florida as a king too looks suspect.
As I said, the list isn't perfect but on the flip side my thinking included the following...
Arizona has a .622 winning % in the NCAAs, 1 NC, 4 FFs, and 8 Elite 8s.
Florida has a .700 winning % in the NCAAs, 2 NCs, 4 FFs, and 6 Elite 8s.
They were the last two to make my Kings bb list, but I think they have enough separation from the other Barons. Also, I tried to balance the two Kings list with 13 programs each. Georgetown probably would have bumped one of them, but I was trying to tie the Kings/Barons list to conference realignment, so ruled out the non-FBS programs from consideration.
Again, anyone who wants to make their own lists, I have no problem with that. Knock yourselves out. My list wasn't meant to be the be-all and end-all on the discussion, just a starting point.
Cheers,
Neil
I think the 5 blue bloods are a step above the rest of the Kings. They should be in a category above the Kings. Also, I'd add Temple to the FBS football fielding basketball barons list. They've been good forever.
Don't disagree about the Blue Bloods, but I think Indiana has to be added to the five. I also think Alabama, Notre Dame, Michigan, and Southern Cal are a cut above the rest of the Kings in football historically as well. But I personally didn't see a need to separate them out. Again, I was trying to translate the Mandel football ranking system and apply it to basketball. But I do understand what you are saying.
And good call on Temple. They should have been on my Baron list.
Cheers,
Neil
(04-08-2012 10:37 PM)IceJus10 Wrote: [ -> ]From an ACC football perspective this makes us LOOK weak... our Kings have seen far better days, our barons can't win their bowl games... I agree, we need to see FSU and Miami to get back to previous program levels of success. Without that, we're no better than the Big East, who will have a regular top ten program among their ranks soon.
As for the basketball list, basketball is such a different mindset - I don't know how you can make a kings and barons list and not include programs like G-town, Butler, Xavier, and Gonzaga... they're programs that are very much a part of the movers and shakers of basketball in the public mind and awareness now.
Agreed that bb is an entirely different animal. And that if I were just focusing on that aspect the likes of G'Town, Nova, Marquette, and Xavier would have made the lists. Gonzaga and Butler probabley would not have made my list since I don't believe they have the historical stature of the others. But since I didn't fully research them, I could be mistaken.
Part of my purpose in creating the basketball Kings/Barons was to help demonstrate what may make a particular program attractive in conference realignment amongst the power conferences. So I excluded those from the discussion.
Cheers,
Neil
(04-08-2012 12:39 PM)omniorange Wrote: [ -> ]Every once in a while I like to re-visit the topic of Kings and Barons (as Mandel calls them) in football. And this time I would like to add a separate listing of Kings and Barons in basketball as well. For the latter I am not including non-FBS playing members suchas Georgetown, Villanova, and Marquette which would all be at least Baron status.
Football
Kings: Alabama, Florida, Florida State, Louisiana State, Miami, Michigan, Nebraska, Notre Dame, Ohio State, Oklahoma, Penn State, Southern Cal, Texas
Barons: Arkansas, Auburn, Clemson, Colorado, Georgia, Georgia Tech, Oregon, Tennessee, Texas A&M, UCLA, Virginia Tech, West Virginia, Wisconsin
Basketball
Kings: Arizona, Connecticut, Duke, Florida, Indiana, Kansas, Kentucky, Louisville, Michigan State, North Carolina, Ohio State, Syracuse, UCLA
Barons: Arkansas, Cincinnati, Illinois, Maryland, Memphis, Michigan, Missouri, North Carolina State, Notre Dame, Oklahoma State, Pittsburgh, Purdue, Stanford, Tennessee, Texas, West Virginia, Wisconsin
I'm sure the above is not a perfect listing, but I believe that it is a solid enough listing that it might give us an insight into how each conference is viewed.
It also gives us insight into why the conferences not named the SEC and the BiG have targeted who they have targeted for any remaining expansion.
The Pac-12 - Texas and Oklahoma
The ACC - Notre Dame
The Big 12 - Florida State and Clemson
Ultimately, for the ACC (since this is an ACC board), the league truly needs FSU and Miami to get back to being Kings on the field as well as off the field. Should that happen the conference will be fine.
Cheers,
Neil
For football, I would probably put Auburn and Georgia in the Kings. I think Oregon is getting close to joining the Kings (thank you Phil Knight - Nike) but they would have to win a national championship. I would remove Arkansas from the Baron's category in Football. They have been good for a few years but were bad for quite a few years before Bobby Petrino was hired. I have no doubt that Arkansas will keep Bobby Petrino and he will not be fired. He brings in too much money for the university for him to be fired, for his latest infraction. Colorado is close to falling out of the Baron's category.
For basketball, assuming basketball only schools were added to the list Georgetown would definately be a king. For basketball, it is pretty dependant on your coach so right now the schools in the King category: Kentucky, Duke, North Carolina, Syracuse and Kansas are above the rest. Things can change but these schools are really good. I excluded UCLA based on the problems that they have with their existing coach Ben Howlett (see SI article).
(04-08-2012 11:16 PM)omniorange Wrote: [ -> ] (04-08-2012 10:37 PM)IceJus10 Wrote: [ -> ]From an ACC football perspective this makes us LOOK weak... our Kings have seen far better days, our barons can't win their bowl games... I agree, we need to see FSU and Miami to get back to previous program levels of success. Without that, we're no better than the Big East, who will have a regular top ten program among their ranks soon.
As for the basketball list, basketball is such a different mindset - I don't know how you can make a kings and barons list and not include programs like G-town, Butler, Xavier, and Gonzaga... they're programs that are very much a part of the movers and shakers of basketball in the public mind and awareness now.
Agreed that bb is an entirely different animal. And that if I were just focusing on that aspect the likes of G'Town, Nova, Marquette, and Xavier would have made the lists. Gonzaga and Butler probabley would not have made my list since I don't believe they have the historical stature of the others. But since I didn't fully research them, I could be mistaken.
Part of my purpose in creating the basketball Kings/Barons was to help demonstrate what may make a particular program attractive in conference realignment amongst the power conferences. So I excluded those from the discussion.
Cheers,
Neil
Butler and Gonzaga are not there yet...Kings and Barons are built over decades not years. Boise is suspect in my book too if anyone thinks they are a Baron.
Good off-season thread...thanks Omni
(04-08-2012 06:00 PM)omniorange Wrote: [ -> ] (04-08-2012 03:08 PM)XLance Wrote: [ -> ] (04-08-2012 12:39 PM)omniorange Wrote: [ -> ]Every once in a while I like to re-visit the topic of Kings and Barons (as Mandel calls them) in football. And this time I would like to add a separate listing of Kings and Barons in basketball as well. For the latter I am not including non-FBS playing members suchas Georgetown, Villanova, and Marquette which would all be at least Baron status.
Football
Kings: Alabama, Florida, Florida State, Louisiana State, Miami, Michigan, Nebraska, Notre Dame, Ohio State, Oklahoma, Penn State, Southern Cal, Texas
Barons: Arkansas, Auburn, Clemson, Colorado, Georgia, Georgia Tech, Oregon, Tennessee, Texas A&M, UCLA, Virginia Tech, West Virginia, Wisconsin
Basketball
Kings: Arizona, Connecticut, Duke, Florida, Indiana, Kansas, Kentucky, Louisville, Michigan State, North Carolina, Ohio State, Syracuse, UCLA
Barons: Arkansas, Cincinnati, Illinois, Maryland, Memphis, Michigan, Missouri, North Carolina State, Notre Dame, Oklahoma State, Pittsburgh, Purdue, Stanford, Tennessee, Texas, West Virginia, Wisconsin
I'm sure the above is not a perfect listing, but I believe that it is a solid enough listing that it might give us an insight into how each conference is viewed.
It also gives us insight into why the conferences not named the SEC and the BiG have targeted who they have targeted for any remaining expansion.
The Pac-12 - Texas and Oklahoma
The ACC - Notre Dame
The Big 12 - Florida State and Clemson
Ultimately, for the ACC (since this is an ACC board), the league truly needs FSU and Miami to get back to being Kings on the field as well as off the field. Should that happen the conference will be fine.
Cheers,
Neil
Neil,
Interesting isn't it that the PAC 12 and the SEC are targeting the same two schools, and that the B1G is targeting the same school as the ACC.
The Big XII has no place to go if either the SEC or the PAC 12 are successful. The ACC on the otherhand is well positioned as a 12 team league if FSU or Clemson (or both) were to leave. A 12 team ACC might be more attractive to Notre Dame.
If by successful, you mean survive, sure. But it would be a severely weakened ACC which would quickly become the equivalent of the Big East in the current football heirarchy.
Cheers,
Neil
If you read anything on the realignment board there are several folks there that have already pegged the ACC as having taken the Big East's place even with Florida State and Clemson.
p.s. Colorado still being listed as a baron is a stretch.
Many people forget simple math. Not every incoming BE team will maintain their winning ways, there will be losses. Besides- BSU is in for a reality check, the BE is bigger and faster than the MWC, playing against teams like that weekly will be different than once or twice a year.
(04-09-2012 03:05 PM)HtownOrange Wrote: [ -> ]Many people forget simple math. Not every incoming BE team will maintain their winning ways, there will be losses. Besides- BSU is in for a reality check, the BE is bigger and faster than the MWC, playing against teams like that weekly will be different than once or twice a year.
Agreed...Boise is going to be in for a rude awakening...one thing to travel once a year across country for a huge game...another thing to do it 3-4 times.
I think SDSU is going to get exposed.
(04-09-2012 02:15 PM)XLance Wrote: [ -> ] (04-08-2012 06:00 PM)omniorange Wrote: [ -> ] (04-08-2012 03:08 PM)XLance Wrote: [ -> ] (04-08-2012 12:39 PM)omniorange Wrote: [ -> ]Every once in a while I like to re-visit the topic of Kings and Barons (as Mandel calls them) in football. And this time I would like to add a separate listing of Kings and Barons in basketball as well. For the latter I am not including non-FBS playing members suchas Georgetown, Villanova, and Marquette which would all be at least Baron status.
Football
Kings: Alabama, Florida, Florida State, Louisiana State, Miami, Michigan, Nebraska, Notre Dame, Ohio State, Oklahoma, Penn State, Southern Cal, Texas
Barons: Arkansas, Auburn, Clemson, Colorado, Georgia, Georgia Tech, Oregon, Tennessee, Texas A&M, UCLA, Virginia Tech, West Virginia, Wisconsin
Basketball
Kings: Arizona, Connecticut, Duke, Florida, Indiana, Kansas, Kentucky, Louisville, Michigan State, North Carolina, Ohio State, Syracuse, UCLA
Barons: Arkansas, Cincinnati, Illinois, Maryland, Memphis, Michigan, Missouri, North Carolina State, Notre Dame, Oklahoma State, Pittsburgh, Purdue, Stanford, Tennessee, Texas, West Virginia, Wisconsin
I'm sure the above is not a perfect listing, but I believe that it is a solid enough listing that it might give us an insight into how each conference is viewed.
It also gives us insight into why the conferences not named the SEC and the BiG have targeted who they have targeted for any remaining expansion.
The Pac-12 - Texas and Oklahoma
The ACC - Notre Dame
The Big 12 - Florida State and Clemson
Ultimately, for the ACC (since this is an ACC board), the league truly needs FSU and Miami to get back to being Kings on the field as well as off the field. Should that happen the conference will be fine.
Cheers,
Neil
Neil,
Interesting isn't it that the PAC 12 and the SEC are targeting the same two schools, and that the B1G is targeting the same school as the ACC.
The Big XII has no place to go if either the SEC or the PAC 12 are successful. The ACC on the otherhand is well positioned as a 12 team league if FSU or Clemson (or both) were to leave. A 12 team ACC might be more attractive to Notre Dame.
If by successful, you mean survive, sure. But it would be a severely weakened ACC which would quickly become the equivalent of the Big East in the current football heirarchy.
Cheers,
Neil
If you read anything on the realignment board there are several folks there that have already pegged the ACC as having taken the Big East's place even with Florida State and Clemson.
Well once the ACC basically destroyed Big East football, ACC fans had to know that was coming. The Big East was your buffer.
Cheers,
Neil
(04-09-2012 05:44 PM)omniorange Wrote: [ -> ] (04-09-2012 02:15 PM)XLance Wrote: [ -> ] (04-08-2012 06:00 PM)omniorange Wrote: [ -> ] (04-08-2012 03:08 PM)XLance Wrote: [ -> ] (04-08-2012 12:39 PM)omniorange Wrote: [ -> ]Every once in a while I like to re-visit the topic of Kings and Barons (as Mandel calls them) in football. And this time I would like to add a separate listing of Kings and Barons in basketball as well. For the latter I am not including non-FBS playing members suchas Georgetown, Villanova, and Marquette which would all be at least Baron status.
Football
Kings: Alabama, Florida, Florida State, Louisiana State, Miami, Michigan, Nebraska, Notre Dame, Ohio State, Oklahoma, Penn State, Southern Cal, Texas
Barons: Arkansas, Auburn, Clemson, Colorado, Georgia, Georgia Tech, Oregon, Tennessee, Texas A&M, UCLA, Virginia Tech, West Virginia, Wisconsin
Basketball
Kings: Arizona, Connecticut, Duke, Florida, Indiana, Kansas, Kentucky, Louisville, Michigan State, North Carolina, Ohio State, Syracuse, UCLA
Barons: Arkansas, Cincinnati, Illinois, Maryland, Memphis, Michigan, Missouri, North Carolina State, Notre Dame, Oklahoma State, Pittsburgh, Purdue, Stanford, Tennessee, Texas, West Virginia, Wisconsin
I'm sure the above is not a perfect listing, but I believe that it is a solid enough listing that it might give us an insight into how each conference is viewed.
It also gives us insight into why the conferences not named the SEC and the BiG have targeted who they have targeted for any remaining expansion.
The Pac-12 - Texas and Oklahoma
The ACC - Notre Dame
The Big 12 - Florida State and Clemson
Ultimately, for the ACC (since this is an ACC board), the league truly needs FSU and Miami to get back to being Kings on the field as well as off the field. Should that happen the conference will be fine.
Cheers,
Neil
Neil,
Interesting isn't it that the PAC 12 and the SEC are targeting the same two schools, and that the B1G is targeting the same school as the ACC.
The Big XII has no place to go if either the SEC or the PAC 12 are successful. The ACC on the otherhand is well positioned as a 12 team league if FSU or Clemson (or both) were to leave. A 12 team ACC might be more attractive to Notre Dame.
If by successful, you mean survive, sure. But it would be a severely weakened ACC which would quickly become the equivalent of the Big East in the current football heirarchy.
Cheers,
Neil
If you read anything on the realignment board there are several folks there that have already pegged the ACC as having taken the Big East's place even with Florida State and Clemson.
Well once the ACC basically destroyed Big East football, ACC fans had to know that was coming. The Big East was your buffer.
Cheers,
Neil
OH! NO!!!
We've become the new Big East.
(04-09-2012 12:19 AM)tj_2009 Wrote: [ -> ]For football, I would probably put Auburn and Georgia in the Kings.
I can't see either one as a king. Clemson, BYU and GT have all won national titles since the mutts. Auburn just won their first since 1957 two years ago.
Quote: I would remove Arkansas from the Baron's category in Football. They have been good for a few years but were bad for quite a few years before Bobby Petrino was hired. I have no doubt that Arkansas will keep Bobby Petrino and he will not be fired. He brings in too much money for the university for him to be fired, for his latest infraction. Colorado is close to falling out of the Baron's category.
They were?
You are aware Houston Nutt won at a .600 clip at Arkansas, and the season before he was let go they won the SEC West right?
Season total wins under Houston Nutt: 9, 8. 6, 7. 9. 9. 5, 4, 10, 8.
You could make a far stronger argument to remove Texas A&M, Colorado, and most certainly UCLA from the Barons list before Arkansas.